In the handgun forums and magazines, a new narrative holds that .45 and 9mm are virtually the same in “stopping power,” so we should all carry the 9mm for its (relatively) lighter recoil and larger cartridge capacity. While lighter recoil and more ammo are certainly good reasons to go to a 9mm instead of something larger, are smaller bullets really as good as bigger bullets?
The answer, of course, is “it depends on the bullets.” Historically, it takes superior bullet design and/or higher velocity for the smaller bullet to do as much damage as the larger. The smaller round is much more demanding of careful ammo selection, in my experience. Any deer hunter will tell you that you have to carefully select .243 loads for quick, humane kills on deer, while there is a broader spectrum of .308 loads that will do the job. Any soldier with a specialty in small arms will tell you that much more money and research has gone into making effective anti-personnel ammo in 5.56mm NATO than was ever needed for effective 7.62mm NATO. In the same vein, while I’m usually perfectly comfortable carrying a 9mm for personal protection, I’ve found myself having to be MUCH more picky to find street proven ammo for that chambering than for my old favorite .45.
I’m not alone in that. A fellow writer, Charlie Petty, wrote 25 years ago in American Rifleman magazine of FBI’s research at the time, “As the testing progressed, another factor became obvious. No 9mm loads came close to the 10 mm and .45. ‘We expected that there would be a gap,’ said (FBI’s Urey) Patrick, ‘but we didn’t expect it to be so large.’ In the first series of tests, the best a 9 mm could do was 67.5%. The .38 Spl. fared just as poorly, and the standard FBI-issue .38 Spl. (158-gr. lead hollow-point +P) also achieved a 67.5% success rate. Among the initial rounds tested, only the 10 -mm, .45 ACP and a single .357 Mag. round were able to score consistently above 90%.”
Time went on. Ammo got better, and the new designs probably benefitted the 9mm proportionally more than the bigger calibers, but all were made better. A famous wound ballistics specialist whose work was pivotal to the FBI’s testing protocols was Dr. Martin Fackler, who died last month. In a 2012 interview Dr. Fackler said, “The size of the hole the bullet makes, the .45 is bigger than a nine-mill. But how much bigger, by diameter, it really doesn’t give you the measure of how much tissue it disrupts. What does is the area of a circle. Area of a circle, it was pi-r-squared. It’s the radius squared. So, if you take your .45, your point four-five-one and your nine-millimeter as your point three-five-five, take half, take the radius, square that, and what you’ll find is that the volume, or the area, of damaged tissue made by the .45 is about sixty percent more than made by the nine.”
Another recognized authority, Dick Fairburn, recently wrote in Police One.com, “I will always carry the largest drill I can, so my choice for open/duty carry is either a .45 for social work or a full-power 10mm in the boondocks. When I need a small pistol for concealment, a 9mm with high-tech ammo will do.”
Bearing in mind that where the bullet strikes is probably more important than anything else, and there is a wide range of experience and ability to control rapid pistol fire, I’d be curious to hear what all y’all think about this. Since this tends to be a very contentious topic on the gun related internet, I’ll remind everyone that informed opinion, experience, and facts are welcome here, and ad hominem argument is not.
I am firmly a 45-caliber 1911 fan, but have a little Sig 380 as a back-up, “always carry” gun. As a court officer, I carried my duty 1911 loaded with RBCD 100-gr Total Fragmenting ammo (2500 FPS). No worries about over-penetration. One point in the “ammo capacity” argument that should be mentioned: If you know you have fewer shots available, you tend to place them more effectively. How many times have you seen where a panicked officer emptied a 17-round mag at short range and got only one or two peripheral hits? Hunters should be taught to hunt with single-shot rifles for similar reasons. I only carry my Colt CCO (with Hornady CD ammo) when I go into town. In the woods it is a similar Kimber Custom Compact originally made in 460 Rowland. In big bear country, my choice would be my 5-inch 500 S&W revolver with a full-size 1911 460 as back-up..
This is the 1st forum I have read where the .357 (SIG or Magnum) was not said to be the ultimate manstopper (at least in the majority, here). Each time I would read that in the past, I would ask the obvious: “If it’s that good, why doesn’t everyone carry it?” I just want to have the very best tool available for the task. One of the things we CAN control – is the ammo. If a round has exhibited the ability to BE that ammo, I want it. Here I go again: IS the .357 the dominant manstopper, provided it can be brought on target consistently?
Another issue that keeps coming up seems to be more than a few folks having trouble concealing a .45. I have been carrying a Glock 30 S for well over a year and just do not see what the problem is. For myself, I will continue to carry the .45 (Speer Gold Dot or Federal’s HydraShok or HST/both in 230 grain) until I have problems with control, which will determine what I carry.
Liberal non-uncle Dave, you asked my opinion of the .357 SIG. It delivers .357 Magnum performance with much less recoil, and much more capacity. I’d use it a lot more than I do if it was popular enough to be well-stocked in gun shops, so I could replenish ammo when on the road. It IS tough on the guns, requiring frequent recoil spring replacement.
Liberal non-uncle Dave, you asked my opinion of the .357 SIG. It delivers .357 Magnum performance with much less recoil, and much more capacity. I’d use it a lot more than I do if it was popular enough to be well-stocked in gun shops, so I could replenish ammo when on the road. It IS tough on the guns, requiring frequent recoil spring replacement. The departments using it rave about its performance in the field.
Come on now, every serious study of this issue will show that the 38 Super is the true Hammer Of Thor.
Jeff – the word is “regardless ” or its “irrespective ” . No word as “irregardless “.
The FBI issued their ‘study’ not a while ago. They said there was no such thing as stopping power and then, in a 180 degree turn, listed several factors that tended to make the bullets more effective.
A. Penetration, supposedly at 12 to 18 inches (but what if they are obese?)
B. Permanent Cavity –
C. Temporary Cavity
D. Fragmentation
Now if there was no ‘stopping power’ why the list of factors?
What we do know is larger bullets TEND to stop better, faster bullets TEND to stop better, properly constructed bullets (read hollowpoints) TEND to stop better. And of course, good shot placement TENDS to stop better.
Nothing surprising here except the concept that stopping power is a myth. It’s real, but it’s not an absolute, at least for the handgun rounds.
Yes a .45 hits harder than a 9mm. Not a shocking thing to learn.
The FBI did a ‘study’ and ended up with the S&W 13 using .38 ammo. Later they did a ‘study’ and ended up with the 10mm ‘lite’. Then later a study and they get the .40 S&W. And now another ‘study’ and they go to the 9mm.
It’s just a cost cutting thing people. Just cost cutting.
In my opinion, all caliber effectiveness conclusions are the result of a little bit of science and a whole lot of speculation.
I suppose under ideal circumstances; ideal shot placement, ideal expansion, ideal penetration, the ability to get off as many rounds as needed before being shot or stabbed myself… , that all combat calibers are in the same ballpark. In a dynamic and mortal combat situation, I am going to hope for ideal results, but plan for the worst.
That being said, I choose 30-60 percent larger holes and higher mass projectiles and gamble that I won’t need more than 27 shots or 2/100 second faster split times to solve said problem.
I find no fault with anyone that chooses a 9mm, but for now, make mine a Glock 21 or 23 with one extra magazine.
Mas, I had “heard” that the Texas highway patrol (Texas DPS) liked the .357 Sig because it was so loud. When a gun fight started with 9’s, 40’s, or 45’s, the innocent bystanders in the vicinity tended to stop and look around to see what was going on. When the .357 Sig goes off those same people have their “curiosity” satisfied immediately and hit the ground. the .357 Sig shares the flame and thunder with its cousin the .357 magnum.
Lots of interesting comments in this thread. Many people saying “Shot Placement”, “Lots of range time”. LEO I’d guess gets on average more trigger time than the rest of us. Quoting some post here the LEO has a missed shot rate of about 30%. There is something missing in the training, you know what it is?? The target is not shooting back. If you are going for a spinal cord or brain hit you may want to do some hunting with the gun you’ll be severing the cerebral cortex with. If you can’t take down Bambi with a vertebrae hit while Bambi is not shooting at you I doubt you’ll fare well at all against a moving target determined to make you become dead. I shoot armadillos with my SIG P232, I have a near 100% on those guys, that will change drastically when they return fire with a chrome plated, pearl handled Raven .25, ya think?
Given the percentages of shots on target, it would seem that increasing accuracy would be at least as effective as increasing wound size per hit.
“John C. Cerar, a retired deputy inspector who was the commander of the Police Department’s firearms training section from 1985 to 1994, said the accuracy rate is comparable to that of many other major police departments. In some cases, it is better.
In Los Angeles, which has 9,699 officers, the police fired 283 rounds in 2006, hitting their target 77 times, for a hit ratio of 27 percent, said Officer Ana Aguirre, a spokeswoman. Last year, they fired 264 rounds, hitting 76 times, for a 29 percent hit ratio, she said.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
“During a 13-year span, the Baltimore County PD, which Aveni regards as one of the best trained in the country, achieved an average hit ratio of 64 percent in daylight shootings – not ideal, but clearly much better than commonly believed. In shootings that occurred in low-light surroundings, however, average hits dropped to 45 percent, a 30 percent decline. The data from Los Angeles County (LAC) reveals a somewhat comparable 24 percent decline.”
http://www.policeone.com/officer-shootings/articles/117909-Study-reveals-important-truths-hidden-in-the-details-of-officer-involved-shootings/
Has the internet famous “FBI Switching To 9mm” document ever been vetted?
I have seen it cited hundreds of times, yet the only source for this supposed FBI Training Division Document seems to be an anonymous and questionable email posted on one Gun Blog.
It reads like a poorly done “cut and paste” piece of all the same pro 9mm information we’ve all been reading and discussing for the past five or ten years. Can it be merely a hoax?
Regardless, call me when the FBI’s “Shooters” officially make the switch.
It interesting, the same thing comes up with dangerous game calibers. There are three things that are the same in hunting that I think apply here:
1. Shot placement is paramount.
2. Bigger is better but not at the cost of accuracy.
3. Quality ammo is a must.
Mas – thanks fo much for the info on the .357 SIG – I must do some research on prices to see how .357 ammo stacks up against the .45 ACP I’m using now. I don’t travel as you do, so availability shouldn’t be a factor. And, because I don’t shoot as much as you do, wear and tear shouldn’t be a big problem. Just one last question: How would the recoil of a G32 with its longer barrel: (4.01-32) or G33 (3.42 barrel) compare to my 30 S (3.78)?
Are we assuming a one-shot stop? And are we assuming we need to only stop one perp? On even I’d say yes to the bigger bullet. Otherwise, I’d be inclined to have a G19 filled with GD ammo. It’s presumptuous to think we can know what we will face.
I was deliberately derided on this site (by a poster, not Mr. Ayoob) for stating my choice of carrying a 1911 loaded with high velocity (high velocity being a relative term, here) CorBon ammo. Seems like some posters have validated my choices.
I’ve never shot a human being or been in a gunfight, but I have had more experience than most with using a firearm to put meat on the table. This is what I KNOW:
High velocity produces instant results. I’ve shot a tremendous amount of game with a .300 and a .257 Weatherby. Nothing I’ve shot has ever had to be tracked or finished off.
I have assisted hunting partners (who made fun of my, “elephant gun” .300 Wby.) track animals they shot with lesser weapons (see Ruarks, “Use enough gun” or Elmer Keith’s statement when chided about using his wildcat .338 to shoot Pronghorn, “I prefer to do my hunting BEFORE I pull the trigger). I’ve also produced one shot, instant, dead in their tracks kills with VERY hot loaded .243 ammo. Opening up a lung shot Pronghorn revealed a chest cavity that looked like a grenade had detonated inside, with no exit wound.
This is all simple physics. Doubling velocity squares energy. But these situations involved firing a scoped rifle, not a handgun. By comparison a pedestrian .30-30 Winchester produces much more muzzle energy than the vaunted .44 Magnum. If you are limited to using a handgun it makes sense to put the biggest bullet downrange, at the highest velocity possible.
This is exactly why the 1911 Colt .45 was developed in the first place. And probably why the folks at Thompson decided on the .45 instead of the 9mm round for their sub-machine gun. And why Marines in the early years of Viet Nam held on to their M14 rifles over the newly introduced M16. You shoot someone with a .308 round, they stay shot. I discussed this with a Afghanistan war vet who worked for me one afternoon. We were having a friendly, enjoyable conversation about a topic we both enjoyed, rifles, shooting etc. I mentioned the lack of stopping power of the solid ball military 5.56 round. Like night and day his entire demeanor changed as he replied, “You just keep shooting them until they stay down.” This was quite sobering to me as I watched the change come over him. You could tell he had, “been there, done that,” at maybe 23 years old.
A lot of ink and air time (from the clueless media) has been consumed talking about how deadly hollow point ammo is. When propelled fast enough (as with my handloaded 150 grain match hollow point ammo from my .300 Wby. or the Pronghorn I shot with my .243) it certainly is. But fired from a pistol, with a handgun’s relatively mild velocity, a hollow point upon impact cuts a plug of clothing or flesh and effectively becomes a solid. You are much better off producing the largest hole you can and delivering all the energy possible into the target with the biggest bullet available. A bullet that passes through the target carries it’s energy out the other side with it. This is what happened to a very nice whitetail buck I shot through the heart with my Smith .41 Mag. The hollow point bullet cut the heart in half and shed it’s jacket in the skin of the far side as the lead continued on it’s way. This deer was not shooting back at me, the only thing he had on his mind was the doe he was chasing, poor guy. But even so, shooting at flesh and blood with an iron sighted pistol up close and personal is MUCH different from punching holes in paper in a relaxed, no stress situation.
Practice beats, “Spray and pray” every time, although I don’t know how you practice someone shooting back at you.
Remember Wyatt Earp’s advice: “Fast is fine, accuracy is final. You have to learn to be slow in a hurry.”
Several years ago in an article in the same gun magazine that prints one of Mr. Ayoob’s columns, they told a story of a DEA agent entering a hotel where an arrest was to be made of a high level drug dealer. The scenario was that the agents were to take the room next to the dealer and then burst through the door at the opportune moment.
The agent entered the hotel, went to the elevators and pushed the button for the appropriate floor. A few moments later the doors opened. Lo and behold here was the very drug dealer they were to arrest later that night. The agent stepped into the elevator and at that moment the dealer and agent recognized each other. Each drew identical high cap Glock autos and opened fire as the doors closed. When the doors opened (according to the article, I make no claim to accuracy or truth), the floor of the elevator was littered with spent shell casings, two Glock pistols with slides locked back over empty mags, and the agent and dealer were fighting, unwounded, on the floor.
So much for spray and pray. What I learned from the deer: Front sight, front sight, ignore the entire target, rear sight, trigger.
Add in a target shooting back, and it’s an entirely new ballgame. This is where you need to have range time, muscle memory and training (plus the advice of Marshall Earp) on your side.
My opinion is worth what it’s worth, i.e. not much, but here it is. The amount of BS surrounding all martial matters is unbelievable. Whether talking about the best gun, the best caliber, the best shooting technique or the best fighting style, way too much male ego is invested and too many people either take money from corporations/sponsors or from unsuspecting suckers (students) who desperately need to believe that hardware solves software problems and that they own the bestest gun and ammo.
Has anyone noticed how cyclic fads and theories (sometimes indistinguishable) can be over time? That’s enough to make a cynic out of anyone too. Is this calculated to keep moving product off the shelves? And why does someone’s death (Cooper, Fackler) always seem to embolden the other faction as if the controversy was about men instead of ideas all along?
So I have watched with some amusement the recently renewed interest in the 9mm. Especially since it seems to have come from the FBI, the agency that could not admit that it had selected it by mistake and then had to create a brand new caliber ballistically roughly equivalent (only at much higher pressures and with a weight and size handicap) to the .45 that had existed all along. Now that most LEAs and much of the public bought its 1989 study hook, line and sinker (I still do, although I decided to follow their recommendations to the letter and go with .45, for a bigger, deeper hole), they reverse themselves. Since I don’t recall the invention of some newfangled super-duper round only available in 9mm, what suddenly makes the 9mm acceptable again if it’s not politics?
The (now old) argument that bullet technology has evolved to the point of negating all caliber differences is a joke to me. Just like that photo passed around among internet experts that shows all modern loads performing roughly the same IN GELATIN. It’s like an aerial shot of a freeway showing all vehicles (big rigs, minivans, motorcycles) getting from A to B, seemingly all the same, and it reveals little more than a case of tunnel vision to me. Because sometimes it’s about how you get there and how reliably you do so under difficult conditions. Big bullets can be placed in the same exact spot as small ones and modern designs benefit all calibers, not just the small one. If “a hit with a .22 beats a miss with a .44”, should we all get .22s or go to the range more? And if the latest HP du jour (funny how every large agency has to have its own, huh?) is made in 9mm, well, it also comes in .45.
Look, that people want to carry small calibers is completely fine with me, especially if they’re going to shoot at me (!). More .45s on the shelves for me too. That they justify their choice to themselves any dubious way they can doesn’t hurt my feelings either. I’m much more comfortable using a caliber that’s not nearly as load-dependent, but it’s a free country. I would just prefer not to be called a dinosaur or an ignoramus in person or online in every YouTube comment or on every discussion board (we know how many experts write on there) simply because this old dog is not giving into the current dogma and believes that bigger is generally better. I see the same bad faith, short memory and neomania poison discussions about the 1911, by the way.
All my life, until retirement, I have firmly believed that size, weight, and speed, governed the most effective weapon desired, assuming of course, that the projectile could accurately, and rapidly, be delivered to the center of mass, or any other vital area of the body.
Beyond that, it has to be considered exactly how that varies for each individual person, their size, strength, physical ability to absorb recoil, etc. For instance, I was able to shoot hot .44 Mag. Rounds from Ruger SA Blacks Hawks, or similar, due to their grip shape, and that the recoil pivoted the grip in my hand, whereas the same round fired from a S&W DA revolver, or similar, would concentrate the recoil directly backwards into my wrist, and forearm, causing pain, flinching, and jerking, within a single box of ammo.
Even for twenty, or so, years after retirement, my life long firearms training, and quarterly qualifications, falsely kept me of that opinion.
Now, about 80 YOA, wheelchair bound, and of much lessor capability, I have come believe that “Any gun, is far better than None”.
For a while, I resorted to carrying .44 Spl. Derringer, for it’s small size, and concealability, despite it’s short range, two shot, then try to re-load, if you can, shortcomings.
I have since reconsidered, and obtained an FN 5.7 (.224 Cal.) auto, for it’s high speed projectiles, low recoil, and 20/30 round Magazine capabilities.
Mas, I respectfully submit the caliber wars will never end.
Would you write an article on storage of ammo and how long ammo is good for?
Thanks Ever So Much
Karl, key thing with ammo storage is keep it cool if possible, but most important, keep it DRY. (There was truth in that old “keep your powder dry” saying!)
In theory, ammo is supposed to have a ten year shelf life, but many of us have shot ammo which was older than we are, and it worked fine.
I <3 my old .45s, but they set in reserve now. While 9mm ammo is better than it used to be, I still can't see a buck and a half a round for latest unproven load. I've done my time on the cutting edge and am tired of trying to find band aids. I have 2 9mm for carry, because they are more carry friendly. They are loaded with reasonable loads, based on what is locally avaliable. The .40 S&W I bought when I could find ammo only in .40 inspires more confidence, but is not as carry friendly. The bigger Flatter fronted .40 bullet .driven at higher speeds is more forgiving in the basic loads. In short "magic bullets" my hairy backside… I've had failures from the latest magic bullets in all calibers. This stuff sounds great until you shoot some living critter and see what it really does… The possum in the dogs feed pan does not read all the latest gun rags, to know how impressed they should be with the magic bullet that just hit them. Now compare cost and performance of the middle of the road loads and see if the .165 or 155 grain .40 S&W does not make you re-examine what you carry.
I have more experience shooting .45 acp. I’m not sure why I do worse on the range with 9mm. Probably it’s psychological. Anyway, I do better, hitting what I’m shooting at, with .45acp no matter the pistol(1911, plastic wonder, others) so I will stay with it.
I also think that what you’re able to hit with, plus shot placement, are the two biggest factors in this debate.
Long Island Mike-you are probably right about “irregardless.’ As an attorney, II’ve used that word at least a hundred times in court. Going to get up with an English professor buddy of mine to get his opinion……….I’m not real smart and, thank goodness, most of the people I deal with are no smarter than I am. Half the time I could probably speak Russian ’cause no one is paying attention anyway.
Mas, you should have supplied popcorn for this topic. I’ve been collecting paychecks for being armed since 1969. This makes the topic somewhat of a groaner.
That said, I carried a 1911 for 19 years in the pre-expanding bullet (that actually worked) era. I’ve since carried .357 Magnum, 10mm and 9mm.
BTW, the FBI ammo study really requires that one read and study the thing, not just look at charts. Many of the “failures” were in the tests on auto glass and other chance barriers. One shouldn’t worry about obstacles one isn’t likely to encounter-unless one really expects to have to shoot and intruder in an automobile in the living room.
Given the bullets available today, honest coroners/medical examiners/forensic pathologists can’t tell the caliber by the wound cavity. They have to measure the bullet they find at the end of the cavity.
That corroborates the message of the 1970s era “computer man” study (not to mention hundreds of years of hunting experience) that where you put the bullet is much more important than what the bullet is. However, it’s much easier to sit at a keyboard and swap electrons about magic bullets (and hope that your favorite really is magic) than it is to gain the skills necessary to successfully resolve a potentially deadly force encounter.
The only shot I’ve ever fired to protect my own skin was on 5 July 11. A single 32 ACP from my Kel-Tec P32 backup delivered to the head of an attacking, average sized female pit bull. A “Stop” was immediate, as claws could be heard digging into asphalt as the pooch fled the church parking lot. Found out later, ball round followed the skull just under the hide form between the eyes to the exit point at the back of the skull.
What the above incident reinforced to me was what I’ve experienced myself. Though I spent twenty years in Uncle Sam’s service, the only shots I’ve received have been with steel and plastic BBs; they hurt like hell and unless I was motivated, not very many would be required to get me to change what I was doing that got me shot in the first place (see above).
However, as Mr. de Bethencourt has pointed out in the past, it would require a .50 BMG to get past a daddy at the top of his family’s staircase.
The bad guys in my more personal experience have gotten quicker and more definite results with heavier calibers and bullets than 9mm. 45 ACP tended to be about as quickly fatal as 12 gauge, and even more effective than a 7×57 Mauser rifle cartridge, or a .30-30 carbine. The old .38 special round nose lead worked OK for a warning shot into a belligerent drunk’s upper leg, back in the day of wounding tactics.
If the FBI believed that it’s original decision to adopt 9mm was a mistake & that their decision to adopt 10mm was a mistake & that their decision to adopt .40 S&W was a mistake, why should anyone believe that their decision to re-adopt the 9mm isn’t another in an ongoing series of bad decisions? Despite their testing protocols, their decision makers clearly are not people who should be emulated.
There have been a lot of very interesting & insightful comments posted here which I have enjoyed reading very much. Several of you have already said everything that I was going to say, better than I could have written it, so I’m not going to say much on this subject except to add that I own a lot of handguns in a lot of different calibers & I have practiced with them all enough over the years to feel confident defending myself with almost all of them under most foreseeable circumstances. Each of them may be better than other guns/calibers in some ways & worse in other ways, but I don’t worry about that, especially since no gun or caliber is perfect for every situation. Instead, I will just try to prepare to defend myself with whatever I have at hand, which I can assure you will be something good.
Like many of you, I am old enough to remember that for several decades the most frequently repeated article in general interest gun magazines like “Guns & Ammo”, “Shooting Times”, and “American Rifleman” was “Which Is Better: 9mm or .45 ACP?” Other times it would be “Which Is Better: .357 Magnum or .45 ACP?” Those articles would appear in almost every gun magazine at least once every year & none of them were ever conclusive. They must have noticeably increased newsstand sales or they wouldn’t have been so common. Judging from the number of comments this topic has generated here, opinions on this subject haven’t changed very much, so it encourages a lot of debate & Mas knows it. Hell, he may even have been forced to write some of those magazine articles himself.
Jeff,
Long Island Mike is right about “irregardless.” There is no such word. Use “regardless” or “irrespective.” I believe “irregardless” would be a double negative. Spanish uses double negatives, but not English. Sorry to be the schoolmarm, but I remember an English teacher stressing this. You don’t want to appear unlearned in front of a snobby liberal.
English is complicated. Shouldn’t a language we all use, and one that is spoken by many as their second or third language, be simple? A language for everyone should not be complicated. There are no spelling bees in Spanish because spelling is not difficult in that language. Oh well.
After reading and rereading other comments I realized that I had not chimed in on my earlier comment as to whether bigger bullets are better.
The answer, of course, is bigger and heavier. I equate the 9mm (.380, 38 super, .357sig etc) with the same disdain as I do the gadgets they try to sell on TV. You know, the new magic chopper or cooker that cuts your cooking and preparation time in half?
Depending on bullet performance to get the job done can be hazardous to your health. However, I must soften my disdain because all the people in the household must be able to effectively handle the firearm. I know, I know, some women are able to handle a 1911 better than me. In my case, I think my wife has more of a psychological problem than physical ability.
During night time hours I will have a Glock 17 with a light and laser on the rail. It is loaded with Critical Defense Duty ammo. My wife regularly shoots a G17 in GSSF matches, so she is confidant in her ability to handle it. Daytime hours will also have an M&P Compact 9 within reach (usually).
I would like to see more manufacturers produce pistols scaled down and chambering the .45GAP (Glock Automatic Pistol). I did a size comparison between a Glock 37 (45 gap) and a Glock 30S (.45acp) using calipers (No Fudging).
Width of grip just above the mag catch in the finger groove (37) 1.150” (30S) 1.180”,
Width of grip below mag catch (37) 1.175” (30S) 1.280”
Shortest distance from backstrap without filler to trigger safety pivot point (37) 2.750” (30S)2.870”.
Since the 2 cartridges are ballistically similar, this difference in firearm size can mean a real difference in controllability for people with small hands especially with double column magazines.
Ammo, of course, presents a problem as to availability, just like the .357sig. However, Mas is a special case requiring him to travel a lot. For me a box or 2 on hand will do me nicely. If my home is attacked by a horde of bikers I will reach for the AR with 55gr soft points.
Jeff, in your defense, I have used “irregardless” in conversation going back 60+ years, as do most folks in my part of the country. I was surprised when others attacked its usage. A short search reveals it is a word actually, just one that’s frowned upon by some.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless
This reminds me of when I was going through Basic Training and a young trainee from Philadelphia commented to me ” youse guys from Texas just slay me when youse say ya’ll “. He couldn’t understand my laughing at his comment. He failed to see the irony.
Gentlemen, go to Merriam Webster to settle the “regardless/irregardless” thing.
As a yoot I was instructed on how to talk good. I was told that I ain’t talking to my buddies on the street corner. I had to clean up my words and speak right. The rule was that when I was taking to people in suits and ties I had to talk like a human.
OED calls the shots on the English language. It’s “nonstandard “. Case closed.
http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/99668?redirectedFrom=irregardless#eid
A caliber wars discussion morphs into a discussion on semantics…and since the discussion was discussed in English in the first place, is it “thread drift,” or not?
Hell, I oughta be able to get another blog post out of this…if “oughta” is really a word…and what about whether there should be spaces on either side of the elipses or not …
The “irregardless” thing pops up far too often!
Yes, irregardless IS a word that is directly synonymous with regardless. It has simply fallen out of favor over the decades and is now entirely antiquated. It is still an entirely valid word! Just not currently in fashion.
No- English shall not be stripped of its heritage for the of simpletons or inept. First, second or third – learn the language… Sorry folks, I couldn’t resist!
Than You Mas, this is a highly entertaining blog. For those who couldn’t tell from my earlier comment – I love all cartridges and can’t choose! So I’d go with what I had on me if needs be. If I knew it was a fight I’d face, then my weapon of choice be to bring a platoon of Marines. That right there is surely of undebatable caliber!
I wish to thank all of you posters for your contributions. Much appreciated and enjoyed, I hope to read more from you all.
Mas –
If a person were to create a facetious comment prefaced on grammer and appropriate English and subsequently mangle said comment on a lark, would it be blog worthy? I think not by your fine standards!
Let’s stick to guns and leave grammar in other classrooms.
Go .45 ACP!
😀
OMG Mas! Your editor must have a nervous breakdown when you submit a book draft. You MISSPELLED ELLIPSES with one “el “.
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/ellipses.asp
P.s. On a gun note, did you happen to see the news yesterday that President Reagan carried a handgun while President and in retirement? While I have seen criticism of him by the iPhone generation for his 2A stance they forget something. He was of a different age. Growing up in the 1920’s and 30’s. Way prior to all our highly sensitized 2A thinking. I would take him over our current occupant in a New York minute !
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/06/15/ronald-reagan-pistol-packin-prez/#undefined
I was raised to not point out other’s shortcomings unless I wanted to be constantly reminded of my own, that there was only one perfect person in history and I wasn’t Him, and He died for my shortcomings.
Besides, I thought those of us on this blog were “buddies talking” on a figurative “street corner”.
Sheesh! (is that a real word?)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sheesh
Long Island Mike: You see what happens when I’m left alone without editorial supervision?
But, I ain’t gonna worry about grammar here, and neither should youse all.
Posters have mentioned that the 9mm versus .45 ACP argument refuses to die, like a zombie. I think Jeff Cooper would say the issue was settled in 1898, when Marines were fighting Moro tribesmen in the Philippines.
The fact that we have so many cartridges from which to choose shows that we are a rich country. Karl Marx would probably see so many choices as a waste of productivity. He might recommend one or two cartridges for handguns, one or two for shotguns, and one or two for rifles. Neat, tidy, economical, bureaucratic………..and boring.
Mas – I apologize for my part in the “thread drift.” It seems my attempt at placating folks – didn’t. I wouldn’t change a thing about the atmosphere on this blog – it does feel, as Dennis says, like “buddies talking.”
As long as we are airing dirty laundry, can we please get away from the Twitter shorthand. I just skip whatever the writer is trying to say. I figure if the writer is too lazy to write it out properly, then I am too lazy to look it up.
So, the FBI and many police agencies are downsizing to the 9mm because a one or two millimeter gain in projectile diameter is insignificant, while the US Army is “reportedly???” considering up-sizing to the 40 or 45 because apparently one or two millimeters “is” significant to them.
I realize that military is limited to FMJ and OTM but, why are a couple of millimeters significant with FMJ and of little significance with a hopefully expanded HP projectile? A millimeter is still a millimeter, and of course it’s really all about shot placement anyway.
Is moving from .35cal to .45cal in FMJ significant, but insignificant when a civilian or policeman’s expanded 9mm projectile is .10 to .20 inches less in diameter than an expanded .45 projectile? Is the “alleged” Army consideration just plain wrong?
I can see where the law of diminishing returns might come into play, but is there a definitive break-even point in projectile diameter where a 2mm gain (as much as 60% as pointed out by Mas) goes from being significant to being insignificant? I certainly don’t claim to know the answer.
Well, if the FBI thinks penetration is everything, go with FMJ 22 magnums, they enough penetration to go through a cow’s skull. And just think about the magazine capacity!
More seriously, there are two points to keep in mind:
1. Advanced bullets probably do not perform to their full potential 100% of the time. Maybe the lead did not bond to the copper just right that day. Maybe the blades on the gizmo that serrates the jacket are dull. Maybe a slightly weak powder charge. It is one thing to say that a small bullet can perform as well as a new one, but what % of the time is everything not just right? Would be keep a pistol that jammed 5% of the time? Well what % of the time does a high-tech bullet not perform? I’ve seen pictures of hollow points, dug out of animals and humans, that did not expand. I’ve never seen a bullet that contracted.
2. The assumption that small bullet means more accuracy needs to be examined. A lot of the accuracy depends on the pistol. Does it have good sights, does it have a good trigger, is the stock ergonomic? I like the 1911, because it has the best trigger. I would not feel under-gunned with one in 9mm or 38 super, but it is sized for the 45 so why not? When I introduced a couple of friends to pistol shooting they tried out their newly bought modern 9’s and 40’s and missed the whole target. They tried out my 1911 and got in the black. People have said to get a lot of practice–how about getting a lot of practice with the gun that one can most easily hit with the first place? I imagine the large-caliber-misses-more claim, if it has any truth, were from departments that issued the very same gun in different calibers. My wife has a 9mm, and honestly, I can’t tell any difference in recoil between it and a 45. Within bounds, I think recoil is felt differently by different people. I think people have to try them out themselves.
Don’t have much to add but as I have learned after being diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis and it is currently starting on my hands and sometimes my feet (feels like your hand being crushed in a vise on a bad day), I am glad that I have accumulated a variety of calibers at my disposal. I also have went as high capacity as I can because I cannot count on being able to reload effectively as you have a tendency to drop and fumble small objects.
On my good days, .45’s don’t hurt as much as .40’s as to me the .45 is more like a long push back versus a sharp quick push. On my bad days, a sedate nine is about all I want to handle. If nothing else, reloading has helped with my revolver calibers (harder to go to light loads without affecting function on semi’s). I am even taking a second look at .32’s and .22’s albeit .22 WMR if my condition worsens. I have also transitioned from shotguns to an AR for home defense because that I fear future recoil issues down the road with this disability.
Mr. Ayoob, I have seen periodic mentions of the challenges that the disabled have in training, firearms, and ammunition but I have been unable to find an overall guide to disabled concealed carry and home defense options. How do trainers handle people with problems? Just wondered if you have any references to any authors and/or trainers that deal with disabilities like arthritis, joint loss, etc.
Well, me’s, myself’s, and I’s all agree that it’s crazy to think the larger bullet to be as (in)effective as the smaller bullet. But, progress being what it is, as is placement of said bullets, the smaller bullets are OK.
OK vs. slightly better OK, shot per shot, is one thing. OK, shot per multiple shots while living in a border state while ISIS threatens the entire globe, I’m OK with smaller OK bullets, given that they require a more particular methodology of selection.
In other words, I love the 1911 and think the .45ACP does more damage round for round, but I’ll carry a Glock 19 to cover more bases and focus on my shot placement. FWIW, I like light to mid-range weight 9mm, and think velocity is really needed to make the most of the round. Gold Dot 124grn +P is my favorite, but I am happy to go with a life-long standby of Federal 9BPLE.
Thanks you for posting this. Like you, I keep reading that modern 9mm ammo is as good as .45 ACP ammo. There is a lot of discussion of hydrostatic shock, but I’ve also read that it’s really only significant with the high velocities of rifle ammunition, and that what really matters with a handgun is what you hit. You can talk “shot placement” all you want, but you simply cannot control exactly where you hit and the exactly layout of the target’s biology. After all, veins and artery patterns and locations actually do vary, as do internal organs. There are even people whose internal organ placement is reversed (situs inversus).
With a handgun, what matters is the diameter of the actual wound channel; that is, the actual tissue destruction, and that is virtually entirely defined by the diameter of the projectile as it travels through the body. Do the math. Unexpanded, the .45 ACP is .451″ in diameter and the 9mm is .355″. That means the unexpanded .45 projectile is 27% bigger in diameter (61% larger in area) than the 9mm. When the technologies are equal, the expanded size differences are even more stark. Consider the Cor-Bon DPX rounds. Their 115 grain 9mm expanded to .57″ while their 185 grain .45 expanded to .80″. That .45 cuts a hole 40% larger in diameter (97% larger in area) than the 9mm.
When it comes to shot placement, it is entirely a matter of luck. No matter how good you are, measurable, finite time passes between the moment your brain sends the signals to squeeze the trigger and the moment the projectile strikes the target. Unless you’re doing a execution-style killing, during that time the target’s movements – walking, running, diving for cover, shifting for a better view, a muscle twitch, or even the inhalation or exhalation of breath – and any intervening factors – a twig, clothing, heavy wind, rain, window, car door, a signpost, etc. – will change exactly what the bullet strikes as it penetrates the target. That’s why we are trained to aim for center of mass. That is also why you should use the largest-diameter bullet you can shoot comfortably.
If you can handle shooting the .45 ACP, including being able to place follow-up shots accurately, then it is a better choice than the 9mm. If you cannot, then the 9mm or even the .380 is a better choice for you. But don’t kid yourself, when the technology of the round is the same, the 9mm is just not as effective as the larger .45 ACP. Of course, the size and weight of the handgun is important as well – if you don’t have the firearm when you need it, it doesn’t matter how big of a bullet it shoots.
Through luck of the genetic lottery, I’m a big guy (these days, a little bigger than I’d prefer), and can empty a 14-round Para Ordnance .45 ACP as rapidly and accurately as I can any 9mm, yet I have carried a little .380 instead because I could just put it into my jacket pocket as I headed out the door for an impromptu visit to a nearby store.
If you can do so, carry a handgun and a spare magazine. Yes, a bigger diameter bullet really does matter, but if you can’t shoot that firearm accurately or the loaded handgun is too heavy to carry comfortably, then it’s too big for you. Life isn’t fair. Not everyone CAN carry larger-caliber handguns. But, again, don’t kid yourself and pretend the 9mm is “as good” as the .45 or the 10mm when it hits. It just isn’t. But even that 8-shot .380 is infinitely better than a big handgun that’s still sitting in the top dresser drawer because it was too heavy for you to carry today.
——————————
Cor-Bon DPX diameters from this article:
http://handguncombatives.blogspot.com/2015/04/decision-made-all-copper-hollow-point.html
I don’t know what’s at the root of this FBI reversal on the 9mm. I only suspect that it has to do with helping non-dedicated shooters and small-statured ones get higher qualification scores rather than with some new development in terminal ballistics. As for what the military has been doing, my head is spinning and I’m not trying to keep up. One thing’s for sure, my current personal threat assessment hasn’t changed one bit in years, and is pretty different from our .gov and .mil boys’, especially in the sandbox. So I’m sticking to my guns, pun fully intended, when it comes to capacity (not that critical) and caliber (bigger is better).
One thing I’ve observed in the past few years is shooting schools moving drastically away from the classic (rigid?) stand and deliver style (and controlled sequences of fire) to adopt a much more dynamic one. Everybody seems to be preparing for taking on an army. In most online posters and even shooters I encounter, there is an obvious obsession with capacity at all cost and muzzle rise during rapid fire. I’m frankly wondering whether this is a side-effect of the shoot-’em up action flicks of the ’80s when the Beretta 92 was so in vogue (and things only got crazier and crazier). Hollywood has a way of impacting the culture even in realms where pragmatism and reason should prevail.
People, and I’m not talking about HSLD types or competitive gamers, apparently figure that their use of a firearm, if it ever comes, will look like Last Man Standing or The Matrix, running and gunning all over the place indiscriminately… as though we didn’t operate in environments rich with innocent and litigious bystanders, on top of often hostile local and even national politicians in the justice system.
What I mean is that when people demand that their CCW be able to go thousands of rounds without cleaning and to be shootable while doing back flips and cartwheels, I suddenly understand why the 9mm (and Glock pistols) is suddenly so attractive. Meanwhile, the reality that the gun will probably not even be fired, and if it is, only a few rounds will do, has been replaced by visions of apocalypse (multiple active shooters and all manners of SHTF scenarios where guns have to withstand drops from aircraft) in the name of absolute preparedness. But life ain’t a video game and if I’m unlucky enough to end up in such a situation, I’m prepared to use my brain and discretion a lot more than my gun!
And for what I expect to face, a few hard-hitting rounds placed on target before the other side can shoot back still (yes, in 2015!) seem to me like the prescribed medicine. Then again I haven’t been watching TV since the ’08 elections, and probably not enough movies either, so I may have missed a memo or two. lol
And now another true story from my former department….
1: One armed bad guy.
2: Three deputies.
3: One high capacity 9mm each.
4: Fifteen feet between the four.
5: Deputies fire. Armed bad guy does not.
6: 45 rounds later we have three locked back slides.
7: And one armed bad guy without a single hole in his skin.
8: A single steel toe to the groin renders bad guy incapacitated.
9: Deputies’ Lieutenant refers to deputies as “Calvary Horses”.
Caliber size doesn’t make a difference to two kinds of people – those who miss what they are shooting at and those who don’t miss. Caliber size only matters to those who hit the target but miss their point of aim.
Illinois Bob, your last comment reminded me of a post I read on a bodyguard forum once. The gist of it was that amateurs talk gear and pros talk training. And it was highly ironic because I knew the guy in real life and he was a ‘gear queer’, like most!
But when it comes to gear talk, what would there be to talk about if it always came to, “it’s not the bow, it’s the Indian”? And don’t they say that “one can tell a pro by his tools”? We’re all looking for an edge, small as it may be. The fact that too many focus on the hardware while neglecting the software entirely (a sad fact) doesn’t mean that hardware doesn’t matter at all.
I truly believe that all the cliches brandished to promote smaller calibers (bullet placement is everything, surgeons can’t tell the difference, if the 9mm is so ineffective stand in front of mine, look at that chart prepared by a self-proclaimed internet expert, etc.), while valid in general, are mostly used to mask the real reasons people have for favoring them. As comedian Bill Burr said on gun statistics: “You already have your mind made up, then you go to imright.com, you start memorizing a bunch of shit, then you throw it out at people”. The same could be said of the other side.
I like large calibers because they fit my notion of what a man, an American male at that, should carry, for example. The fact that they are harder to control and that the platforms are heavy is not really a negative, but a challenge and a validation to me. Guns should be like that in my worldview: comforting – not comfortable, to borrow from Clint Smith, and dangerous, and somewhat hard to master. Then once I looked into the pressure levels, noise, terminal ballistics, tests and street stats, I concluded that they were the best choice for me, but that’s all it is, a worldview. Same with the 1911.
Now when non-gun people ask me about the subject I usually tell them that all guns work out about the same and that they should get a Glock. I don’t personally buy it, but it’s personal taste and bias, and I’m honest enough to recognize and admit it.
The original Sophists (Greek philosophers), who ended up paving the way for the Cynics, if I’m not mistaken, had it right: men have no access to any absolute, objective truth. We can argue each side of every issue equally successfully if open-minded enough. So what we’re left with is basing our choices on our true subjective nature. Oh, we can rationalize all we want after the fact, carefully quoting the trainers or elite warriors who support our views, but this doesn’t change the fact that we’re all just arguing over how many angels can dance on a pin head in the end. None of those discussions should be taken too seriously, and I’m back full circle to my original comment about egos and machismo getting the best of us.
After all of the reading, all of the research, looking at all of the FBI data, and listening to my gut, I carry the .45 always and everywhere. I have the right holsters, right belts, and dress around the gun whether it’s January or July.
Comments are closed.