In Your Opinion...

[Bowhunter57]

This isn't meant to be a 9mm vs. 45acp question. More of a proper ammunition selection question to "equalize" the two. :)

Could a 9mm have the same killing power as a 45acp....with the proper ammunition?

Your opinions and experiences are appreciated.
Thank you, Bowhunter57

[nate45]

I don't think there is that much difference between them with modern HP ammo.

With FMJ the .45 has a slight edge, but if either one hits the spine, heart or brain, I don't think you could tell much difference.

[Ozzieman]

Energy is energy, and a 9mm will never have as much energy as a 45 ACP and if you can dissipate all the energy in the target then the larger energy will always win.
Does this make a 9mm a useless gun?
No.
Since larger 9mm are easier to shoot accurately than a 45 then that can make a difference.
Look in to the reason that the military went to the 45 from the 38 back a 100 years ago.
It had to do with the 38 not having enough stopping power.
I know that with today’s bullets the difference is less, but the bigger the better IF you can shoot it well.

[Lou22]

I carry sub-compact autos in both calibers. I believe the .45 simply has more ability to stop an assailant, if nothing else because of the larger diameter - more blood loss, greater likehood of hitting a vital spot. But the .45 is harder to conceal carry because of size.

Lou

[Keltyke]

Ozzieman has it right. However, ANY caliber can kill with one shot with PROPER SHOT PLACEMENT.

I'd rather be shot in the arm with a .45 ACP than shot in the eye with a .22 LR.

[Smaug]

All else being equal, a 9mm will never equal the mighty 45.

9mm starts at 0.355" diameter and expands to whatever. (most of the time)

45 ACP starts at 0.451" and expands to whatever. However, it will NEVER be less than 0.451". In that regard, it is like a "pre-expanded 9mm" ;)

I don't find 45 harder to shoot than the 9mm. I don't even find it harder to shoot well than the 9mm. The only thing harder is follow-up shots.

To me, 45 recoil pushes straight back and makes my whole arm rise. 9mm snaps back and makes the barrel rise, but not so much my arm. 9mm has more muzzle flash.

[Jermtheory]

depending on the medium,ive actually seen many examples of 9mm rounds expanding to a larger size than its .45 counterpart(above .70)...although it did come at less penetration.the one example which comes to mind was a test through a car windshield.the 9mm 147 gr HST expanded to a slightly larger size than the .45 HST(230gr IIRC).the .45 did penetrate a few inches further into the gelatin though.

imo the proper ammount/balance of penetration is the most important thing(enough penetration without over penetrating).the 9mm can achieve this balance with very impressive expansion.

the problem with your question is that it seems to assume a single round/shot?that and "killing power"(?) anyway.

if i only had one shot i may have to go with the .45...but thats not a very realistic scenerio.the major advantages of the 9mm over the .45 are follow up shots,capacity,size/weight...

[raimius]

With equal rounds, the .45ACP will always win in the "energy delivered" and size of wound categories.


However, if you want to compare 9mm +p JHPs to .45ACP ball, things get trickier.

9mm also has the advantages of less recoil and smaller size (i.e. easier to conceal in the same style platform).

[fastforty]

After shooting 10's of 1,000's of rounds in each of three calibers (and carrying them full time) you get a pretty good "feel" for "stopping power".

My "feel" is:

9mm: I *hope* that 1-2 shots to COM will stop an attack, & there's a good chance that it will kill the attacker (within a reasonable timeframe).

.40 S&W: 1-2 shots to COM will in all likelihood stop an attacker, it will most likely put him down & it will probably kill him.

.45acp: Unless my attacker is Bigfoot, 1-2 shots to COM *will* stop the attack, he *will* go down & he would be quite fortunate indeed if he survived.

All of the energy & wound ballistic charts are nice to ponder, but I guarantee that 2 hits with 147gr 9mm are going to be a lot easier to "ponder" then 2 hits with 230gr .45

[chris in va]

Could a 9mm have the same killing power as a 45acp

Definitely the wrong word choice.

[DGindlesperger]

I have to go with Smaug with this:
"I don't find 45 harder to shoot than the 9mm. I don't even find it harder to shoot well than the 9mm."

I shoot a 45 better for some odd reason. Everone's different.

[JohnKSa]

I don't find 45 harder to shoot than the 9mm. I don't even find it harder to shoot well than the 9mm. The only thing harder is follow-up shots.If you don't flinch then you can shoot ANY caliber equally well for the first shot. Then again I've never seen anyone recommend carrying a single shot pistol for self-defense--which makes me think that perhaps the first shot is not all that matters...I shoot a 45 better for some odd reason. Everone's different. Go enter an IPSC or USPSA competition and try to convince them to let you shoot a minor caliber scored as major and they'll explain to you why lighter recoil is an advantage. Sure, if you're shooting slow fire it's not an issue. When you start trying to shoot fast while maintaining good accuracy you'll always do better with less recoil. Doesn't matter how different you are, science doesn't play favorites. Even Rob Leatham admits that he's subject to the laws of physics. :DAfter shooting 10's of 1,000's of rounds in each of three calibers (and carrying them full time) you get a pretty good "feel" for "stopping power".I suppose if it were possible to equate recoil or muzzle blast with stopping power (which is not possible, of course) then perhaps shooting a lot might conceivably provide a feel for "stopping power", however I'm really curious how carrying a gun full time would give a person a feel for what kind of stopping power it posesses...

My opinion?

You don't buy stopping power at the store in a box of 20 or 50. You don't stuff it in a magazine or a cylinder. Stopping power is what you earn at the range or with practice time, what you learn in training. My opinion is that it's more pleasant to agonize over caliber differences than it is to address the reality that one's shooting skills need improvement.

Here's an interesting story from history. W.D.M. Bell (the famous elephant hunter) was once confronted with a sticky situation where he thought a show of force would be to his advantage. He waited until he had an audience and a herd of zebra were passing by and fired 10 quick shots with his .303 rifle killing 10 zebras, one with each shot. The feat was suitably impressive that he and his men, though badly outnumbered, were left unmolested by the natives. So is the lesson that .303 with FMJ bullets (Bell despised expanding bullets) has great stopping/killing power on zebras? I suppose some will leave with that impression, but the real lesson is that a skilled person can use a firearm to great effect even if it is less than ideal for the situation at hand.

Given that it's widely accepted that handguns are underpowered for decisive antipersonnel use, we all find ourselves using a firearm that is less than ideal for the situation at hand. Handguns aren't carried because they're dramatically effective but rather because they're easily concealed and carried. What's really going to make the difference is not what you've got but how well you can shoot what you've got. (I know that this will get a few: "Well then why doesn't everyone just carry a 22LR they shoot well." responses, but PLEASE try to remember that the context is choosing between service pistol calibers.)

Even the author of the FBI's celebrated paper on service pistol stopping power, oft-quoted as justification for picking larger calibers, admits that a heavier caliber might make a difference 1% of the time. So, should we take the 1%? Sure, just as long it doesn't cost you anything useful... Remember that while pretending to operate in a vacuum can make decisions seem easier, it's important to consider that in the real world a decision almost invariably affects more than one thing.

[SiggySan]

The superiority of the .45 round over the 9mm round is a myth. This is the conclusion of the vast majority of police departments and militaries around the world. Many scientific research has been done and I have not seen a single study that indicates that the .45 has any more than a very slight advantage in stopping power.

The difference in stopping power is negligible at best. The .45 is slightly larger, but the 9mm goes slightly faster so it's basically a wash. We're talking about, at most, a very, very small advantage for the .45 in this area.

9mm allows you to carry more rounds. There is just no way this is not a significant advantage over the .45.

9mm rounds can be shot more rapidly with accuracy than .45 rounds. This is simply because of the greater recoil of the .45. It doesn't matter how strong you are, or how much you practice. There is simply no reason you would be faster or more accurate with a .45 round than a 9mm, all things being equal. If you are concerned about stopping power then you must concede that one bullet of any handgun caliber cannot be relied upon to stop an assailant. Multiple shots are required, and they can be delivered more quickly with a 9mm, which more than compensates for whatever slight deficiency it may have in terms of stopping power. If you are so obsessed with stopping power that you consider 9mm unworthy as a defensive weapon, then you have no excuse not to be carrying a .50 Desert Eagle or the like.

The myth of .45 superiority persists because of the general preference of males to equate size with masculinity. We like big muscles, big trucks, big boobs, and big bullets. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, but at the end of the day this particular philosophy just doesnt apply to the 9mm vs. .45 debate.

I have a theory that .45 is preferred also just based on a general suspicion among rednecks of the metric system, but that is a story for another time.

For the record, this is coming from someone who loves .45s. If you love the .45 more than the 9mm then by all means, carry a .45. If the .45 awakens your inner cave man, then that is the way to go. I would no sooner suggest that someone choose a gun based primarily on the round it fires than I would suggest someone choose a wife based primarily on the size of her breasts. Find the gun that when you hold it in your hand seems like a long lost member of your family, then you can't go wrong.

[MTS840]

Could a 9mm have the same killing power as a 45acp....with the proper ammunition?

The short answer is "Yes," but as has been mentioned, this is the wrong question to ask. YOU are the weapon, the gun is just the tool.

How proficient you are with the tool depends on how much you practice and how well you can hit your target and how fast you can do it.

The 9mm has probably dropped more criminals and terrorists all over the world than all other semi-auto service caliber handguns combined, and this has been done mostly with BALL ammo!

The British SAS, the German GSG-9, the US Special Forces and Israeli Commandos all use 9mm pistols to deadly effect, and I wouldn't want to call them a bunch of sissies. It's not so much the hardware they carry, but it's their level of training that makes the 9mm effective. They would be just as deadly if they carried the .45.

Any service caliber will protect you just fine. Pick one you can shoot well and are willing to train with and forget the caliber wars.

Remember, professionals argue tactics; ameteurs argue caliber.

[Jermtheory]

i dont think ive ever seen two more excellent posts in succession ever...in all of my time on message boards.what i always try to say...only concise and articulate(as opposed to my stumbling).

im saving them...

hope you guys dont mind if i quote them from time to time.:D

[SiggySan]

Thanks!

[Jermtheory]

no problem.:)

im sure it doesnt hurt that im in total agreement.

[IanS]

There are moments of clarity amid all the chest beating in these discussion boards and the previous posts by JohnKSa and SiggySan are both examples of that.

Originally Posted By JohnKSa:

You don't buy stopping power at the store in a box of 20 or 50. You don't stuff it in a magazine or a cylinder. Stopping power is what you earn at the range or with practice time, what you learn in training. My opinion is that it's more pleasant to agonize over caliber differences than it is to address the reality that one's shooting skills need improvement

I believe this not only applies to caliber choice but choice in handguns as well.

[HKFan9]

John and Siggy hit the nail square on the head.:)

[Stone Cold]

I don't know all the fancy-smancy physics of the discussion, but I do know that ER doctors save thousands of gang bangers shot up with 9s. They brandish their pock scars like badges of courage. Funny thing, you don't see 45 acp scars. ER doctors will tell you that heavier calibers have a higher mortality. Bigger holes cause more tissue damage and more engergy spread out over a larger area screws up more necessary stuff too. If they made a 44 mag in a 1911 platform, then I'd probably have one. But an itty bitty 9mm? Maybe if I take up hunting rodents some day.

[JohnKSa]

I do know that ER doctors save thousands of gang bangers shot up with 9s. They brandish their pock scars like badges of courage. Funny thing, you don't see 45 acp scars. ER doctors will tell you that heavier calibers have a higher mortality. Bigger holes cause more tissue damage and more engergy spread out over a larger area screws up more necessary stuff too. If they made a 44 mag in a 1911 platform, then I'd probably have one. But an itty bitty 9mm? Maybe if I take up hunting rodents some day.With all due respect, your comments directly contradict what I've seen posted by people who actually work with gunshot wounds or who hunt with handguns.

Some interesting posts I've seen over the years. Click on the text to see the rest of the posts.

Post 1: I've worked on a lot of handgun killings. I've seen people shot in the liver, kidneys or lungs, fatal wounds, who eventually died but were not "stopped." I've seen people who were shot several times, with several wounds that would have been fatal, but who were stopped only when the aorta was nicked. I've worked on cases in which people were killed with .22s, .25s, .32s, .380s, 9mm Maks, 9x19s, .40s, .38 spls, .357s, .44s, and .45s. I've yet to see someone fall over dead who wasn't hit in a vital structure.

Shot placement (and, of course, adequate penetration) are what stop people. Bullet design plays a part in ensuring adequate penetration and in trying to prevent overpenetration. If it makes a bigger permanent wound channel, great - better chance of nicking something vital. But unless you hit "the good stuff," he ain't gonna stop - I don't care what kind of bullet you've got in there. (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2929384&postcount=43)

Post 2: Sorry, but a nationally known (renowned) pathologist we hired on a case told me that he can't tell the difference in the wound channels left by .38s, 9mms, .40s, .357s or .45s - whether FMJ or JHP. I don't know what sort of wound channel you're imagining is left in a dead body by the fatter rounds, but this guy's done thousands of bullet-wound-killing autopsies and he says there's no difference evident. Since we were paying him and I've seen his CV, I take his opinion on this seriously. (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2232819&postcount=55)

Post 3: I've treated many gunshots wounds. We can generally tell small caliber pistol vs. large caliber pistol vs shotgun vs. rifle damage. Anyone (doctor, nurse, medic, whatever) who tells you they can look at a wound and tell if it is a .355 Parabellum, 40 S&W, or a .45 ACP full of shiite. (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2950063&postcount=75)

Post 4: While I heven't used a pistol to shoot people I have used them for many years gathering meat for the table and eliminating varmints. I have used all three of the major calibers 9mm, .40 and .45. I can tell you from stacking deer on the farm that all three performed the same. If you were to look at the actual wound creatred there was no way to tell what caliber caused the damage and wounds were always the worst when a bone was hit. I even used ball ammo on very close shots on feeding deer shot in the neck breaking the spine. I only used 9x19mm NATO ball and the exit wound from bone fragments was unreal and the damage done after the spine was the same a JHP would make with more than one hole out the other side due to many bone fragments exiting.

After about 4 years of owning all 3 calibers I started to use the 9mm more and more. It killed just as well as the one shot stoppers (more on that in a bit) and did it cheaper with less recoil and more ammo in the weapon. (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2592320&postcount=28)

Post 5: What it turned out to be was these two guys had just shot it out in the streets not more than a couple of blocks from the Hospital. One shot the other with 7 rounds of .45 Ball and the other shot him with 5 rounds of .25 ACP. The both emptied their guns into each other and then ran in seperate directions. Both of them wound up at the ER at the same time, recognized each other and resumed the fight, without guns this time. They were both eventually sedated and removed to surgery. The guns were never recovered, I was told that the guys refused to press charges against each other. They eventually recovered and were free to roam our great land. The thing that always stuck with me being interested in guns was that the guy shot with 7 rounds of .45 was just as able to fight as the guy shot with 5 rounds of .25. Opposite ends of the handgun sprectrum and both ineffective in this case. I have no moral to this story other than to say I came away realizing that one has to hit a vital organ, nerve center or the spinal cord. (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=3012714&postcount=301)

[Bowhunter57]

i dont think ive ever seen two more excellent posts in succession ever....in all of my time being on message boards. what i always try to say...only concise and articulate(as opposed to my stumblings).

I have to agree, 100% with JohnKSa and SiggySan. I've enjoyed and have been educated with all of these replies.

MTS840, makes a good point about there being no replacement for good training....irreguardless of the weapon. I particularly like your statement:
Remember, professionals argue tactics; ameteurs argue caliber. Very true!

I would go so far as to say that the replies in this thread "should" end all caliber debates. :rolleyes: The reality of what can/could/would happen in any given scenario is overwhelming, but it all comes back to the training. :cool:

Good hunting, Bowhunter57

[King Ghidora]

With this sort of thing you really need to go to a source that has done significant research into the issue. There's all sorts of speculation around. Only real research done well can give you definitive answers.

For this question the source would be the FBI and the trials they did a few years back. Their conclusion was that the .45 and even better, the 10mm were head and shoulders better than a 9mm. In fact they did the study because one of their agents shot a BG in an area that should have penetrated his heart. But it didn't because the agent was shooting 9mm. The agent was then shot by the BG and killed. This made the FBI really want to know what caliber works best. The data is getting pretty old now and better bullet technology has narrowed the gap considerably but still it's hard to argue with their conclusions. .45's are much more effective than 9mm's and that's all there is to it.

Here's a summary of the results (http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf) they came up with. Notice that the data is 20 years old. Bullet technology has improved but the laws of physics haven't changed. People tend to forget that the same improvements made in 9mm can be applied to .45's. And from what I see .45's have made a big leap in double stack technology that wasn't around just a few years ago for that round while it has been around for 9mm for quite a while. I have a .45 that holds 11 rounds that fits in my pocket. I don't know of any .45 that could do that 20 years ago.

The major improvements in bullet tech over the past 20 years have been in armor piercing rounds and better hollow point designs. Both of those things have improved both the 9mm and the .45. Of course it would take the same kind of research to give a solid answer about cartridges today but until I see some well researched data I will assume the laws of physics haven't been superceded in the past 20 years.

[IanS]

http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000964

DocGKR is a ballistician for his Law Enforcement Agency.

His conclusion

Basically all the standard service calibers work when fed good quality ammunition. The platform picked tends to dictate the caliber. For example, Glocks and Sigs tend to run best in 9 mm; the S&W M&P is the first .40 S&W pistol that seems to offer an ideal ergonomic and shooter friendly package; while a properly customized 5" steel-frame single-stack 1911 in .45 ACP is a superb, unparalleled choice for the dedicated user willing to spend a significant amount of money to get it properly initially set-up and considerable time to maintain it. For folks who want a .45 ACP pistol, but don't want to invest the funds and effort into getting a good 1911, they would be better served with a S&W .45 ACP M&P, HK45, S&W 4566, or possibly the SA .45 ACP XD.

Whatever you choose, make sure you fire at least 500 and preferably 1000 failure free shots through your pistol prior to using it for duty. If your pistol cannot fire at least 1000 consecutive shots without a malfunction, something is wrong and it is not suitable for duty/self-defense use.

------------------------------------------

The keys are:

-- Cultivate a warrior mindset
-- Invest in competent, thorough initial training and then maintain skills with regular ongoing practice
-- Acquire a reliable and durable weapon system
-- Purchase a consistent, robust performing duty/self-defense load in sufficient quantities (at least 1000 rounds) then STOP worrying about the nuances of handgun ammunition terminal performance.

[nate45]

Basically all the standard service calibers work when fed good quality ammunition.

.38 Special to .45 Colt, j-frame to Single Action Army, Rorbaugh and Kahr to full size 1911s, HKs and Glocks. They are all deadly and viable SD weapons.

The only secret is, if there is one, is to thoroughly familiarize yourself with your weapon, select ammunition that is known to preform well and most importantly that functions well in your pistol. Then practice, practice, practice.

Jeff Cooper made an often repeated comment that 'Owning a firearm, doesn't make one armed, anymore that owning a guitar makes one a musician'. Not everyone can be a musician, but with enough practice, most of us can become proficient enough to be considered armed.

As far as giving advice to the young and/or inexperienced, on how they should go about it. I think IanS's advice is about as good as any of us could give.

The keys are:

-- Cultivate a warrior mindset
-- Invest in competent, thorough initial training and then maintain skills with regular ongoing practice
-- Acquire a reliable and durable weapon system
-- Purchase a consistent, robust performing duty/self-defense load in sufficient quantities (at least 1000 rounds) then STOP worrying about the nuances of handgun ammunition terminal performance.


I'll only add.

Try several different handguns of different platforms and calibers and pick the one you feel most comfortable with.

Also if someone is getting a handgun strictly for home defense, get a shotgun and use the pistol as a secondary weapon. 'Service' caliber handguns are puny and much harder to shoot under stress, when compared to a shotgun.

[IanS]

The keys are:

-- Cultivate a warrior mindset
-- Invest in competent, thorough initial training and then maintain skills with regular ongoing practice
-- Acquire a reliable and durable weapon system
-- Purchase a consistent, robust performing duty/self-defense load in sufficient quantities (at least 1000 rounds) then STOP worrying about the nuances of handgun ammunition terminal performance.

To clarify the above quote is DocGKR's. I'm just quoting him.

So, why do I still sometimes rely on a 1911 when my Glock 9mm can do the job just as well or that I might possibly be more effective with it? No other reason than I love the 1911 platform and shooting the .45 ACP cartridge. I have no illusion its a death ray or its "better" than 9mm. (Same came be said for some who prefer a .40 or .357 SIG handgun.) Sometimes my choices don't have to be purely rational.:)

[Jermtheory]

With this sort of thing you really need to go to a source that has done significant research into the issue. There's all sorts of speculation around. Only real research done well can give you definitive answers.

For this question the source would be the FBI and the trials they did a few years back. Their conclusion was that the .45 and even better, the 10mm were head and shoulders better than a 9mm. In fact they did the study because one of their agents shot a BG in an area that should have penetrated his heart. But it didn't because the agent was shooting 9mm. The agent was then shot by the BG and killed. This made the FBI really want to know what caliber works best. The data is getting pretty old now and better bullet technology has narrowed the gap considerably but still it's hard to argue with their conclusions. .45's are much more effective than 9mm's and that's all there is to it.

Here's a summary of the results they came up with. Notice that the data is 20 years old. Bullet technology has improved but the laws of physics haven't changed. People tend to forget that the same improvements made in 9mm can be applied to .45's. And from what I see .45's have made a big leap in double stack technology that wasn't around just a few years ago for that round while it has been around for 9mm for quite a while. I have a .45 that holds 11 rounds that fits in my pocket. I don't know of any .45 that could do that 20 years ago.

The major improvements in bullet tech over the past 20 years have been in armor piercing rounds and better hollow point designs. Both of those things have improved both the 9mm and the .45. Of course it would take the same kind of research to give a solid answer about cartridges today but until I see some well researched data I will assume the laws of physics haven't been superceded in the past 20 years.

the laws of physics may not change,but bullet design sure has.its not hard to imagine that the newer bullet designs would favor velocity over mass in regards to the ammount and reliability of expansion.im no expert,but the results ive seen seem to suggest just that.

either way...think thats missing the point.

once you get in the range of "acceptable SD rounds"(9mm,.45,.40,etc)...

shot placement is king.

if you're comfortable with making a slightly larger hole,which may or may not provide a practical advantage...in exchange for the definite advantages of size/weight,follow-up shots,and capacity....

[Magyar]

This has become a caliber war...I really feel well-armed with both calibers and carry both equally. I feel though that many 9mm aficionado's have somewhat of an inferiority complex or overcompensate since that is the group most often look to the "magic mushroom or harpoon affect" to make up in size using exotic ammo. IMHO:)

[TDrift]

One example that I shoot .45ACP better than 9mm:
1911 vs. Glock 17.
It is because of the trigger!:D

[Saab1911]

One example that I shoot .45ACP better than 9mm:
1911 vs. Glock 17.
It is because of the trigger!


Nobody appreciates the 45 ACP and 1911 as much as I do.

But, for me the Glock 17 is more accurate. I get all my shots within the
10 ring with the Glock 17, and with a stock 1911 in 45 ACP, my shots
wander into the 9 ring as well as the 10 ring. :o


"magic mushroom or harpoon affect"


Translated "Hydro-static shock" or "expansion"

[fastforty]

John and Siggy hit the nail square on the head.
Yes, but sadly, it was the wrong nail & it was hammered all the way to China- I fail to see how it related to the OP's question:
Could a 9mm have the same killing power as a 45acp....with the proper ammunition?

This has become a caliber war...
I knew it was gonna happen (always does) even though the OP stated:
This isn't meant to be a 9mm vs. 45acp question. More of a proper ammunition selection question to "equalize" the two.
I guess it's never too late to abide by one's original gut feeling & :x

:x

[IanS]

Yes, but sadly, it was the wrong nail & it was hammered all the way to China- I fail to see how it related to the OP's question:


I guess in your case not quite hard enough.:confused: How many times do they have to say, "Little to no difference" between the two and "Shot placement"? I think the OP's question was sufficiently answered.

[Magyar]

Translated "Hydro-static shock" or "expansion"

Call it anything you like...No doubt this is a caliber war!:eek: The only real, genuine study ever done on real live animal flesh, and yes some cadavers was the Thompson-LaGarde report over a 100 yrs ago. Many don't know about it or care since it's so old...Like, "What did they know?"
Not gelatin, water, sand, a telephone book, and any other junk....:rolleyes:
Bottom line: Bigger was better...
BTW, it was this report that swung the pendulum in favor of adopting the 1911.
http://i37.tinypic.com/33jsnqo.jpg

[King Ghidora]

My Sig .45 does exceptionally well in both reliability and accuracy. I don't see how anyone could dismiss it as a less than first rate handgun as was suggested by the person who wrote that Sig's were better in 9mm (the original writer - not the poster on this board).

And just because people keep saying something it doesn't make it true. That's how liberals think. They bash Bush when their hero Bill Clinton did some of the exact same things they bash Bush over. They think if you say it often enough it becomes true. That's hype and not reality.

Sometimes it's more than shot placement. Everyone knows you have to hit the target with whatever you choose. I carried a .25 into bad situations knowing I could hit important areas with it and make it effective. But given equal expertise at shot placement there is a difference in cartridges. Repeating that it's all about shot placement doesn't change that. I'm sure most wouldn't feel that safe carrying a .22 a .25 like I carried for years. But with proper shot placement you can kill someone just as dead.

Obviously different guns have different strengths. And assuming that all 9mm's are more easily fired repeatedly than all .45's is a fact not in evidence. And again I could certainly shoot a .22 more accurate repeatedly than I could most 9mm's.

But the question of whether a 9mm is as adequate as a .45 is easily summed up like this. You can make the same arguments about a .22 as you can a 9mm. You can get off more shots more accurately. It's all about shot placement. Etc. I'll still take a .45 any day of the week just like I would still take a shotgun over a .45 for most situations and I'd take a MOAB over a shotgun if I could.

More energy delivered is more energy delivered and that is the plain fact of the matter. Unless you want to strap a 12 ga. to your leg then the more powerful handgun is always going to be better no matter how many ways people try to argue otherwise. If you can hold it in your hand and fire it without breaking your arm and hit what you point it at then a gun that delivers a bigger round with more energy is going to be better.

Yes 9mm's have closed the gap mainly because they have overcome the problems with surface tension that were once the bane of faster rounds. By having the bullet spread out more it has less tendency to go in and out without doing significant damage which was the knock on 9mm in the old days. But when it comes to penetrating the chest cavity (where the heart and lungs are - you know - the vital organs you aim for) a 9mm still won't work as well as a .45. And if you hit someone's chest at an angle a faster moving bullet has more of a tendency to ricochet than a slower, heavier object. You can prove that by skipping rocks over water. Try skipping something like a heavy washer. It's round and flat but it won't skip as well because it's heavier. A 9mm can penetrate well if you get a good shot and don't hit your target at an angle. A .45 will penetrate better if you hit someone's chest at an angle.

9mm's have improved for sure. So have .45's. Have 9mm's caught up with .45's? They have their advantages but IMO the .45 is still the clear winner by a big margin. That 20 year old FBI study that everyone knocks because it pre-dates big improvements in bullet tech showed that the .45 wasn't just a little better than a 9mm. It shows it is a lot better than a 9mm. I seriously doubt that 9mm's have made up that much ground despite the improvements.

Lectures on shot placement have no bearing on this question friends. Given equal proficiency a .45 is going to be a more effective round than a 9mm. Second shot ability is also a matter of speculation as to how much it makes a difference. Until I see a well documented research effort on the subject I won't be convinced it overcomes the advantages of a more powerful cartridge. I've owned 9mm's and I've owned .45's. I can get off multiple rounds with a .45 pretty quick. The half second advantage a 9mm has in that aspect is of questionable benefit IMO. It takes time to locate a moving target and I can put my .45 back in shooting position while I'm doing that.

Again absent a complete and thorough test showing all aspects of both cartridges I see no reason to discard the last such test done and the data they produced.

[longeyes]

A lot of great posts...

But most people aren't well-trained and a whole lot never get a second shot...

[Jermtheory]

fastforty-how could it have went in any other direction?


assuming that all 9mm's are more easily fired repeatedly than all .45's is a fact not in evidence.

has anyone claimed as much?

the fact resides in two comparable pistols.comparing a 1911 to a Glock 26 for example is completely irrelevent.

You can make the same arguments about a .22 as you can a 9mm.

no you cant,because the .22 doesnt meet the necessary standards for a SD round...the 9mm meets or exceeds them.


More energy delivered is more energy delivered and that is the plain fact of the matter.

IIRC a baseball moving at arround 40mph has as much "energy" as a 9mm round moving at 1000fps.i suppose that means a baseball thrown at 80mph is twice as effective of a weapon?

Given equal proficiency a .45 is going to be a more effective round than a 9mm.

i have a hard time believing theres any "equal proficiency" in the same individual using comparable pistols.physics dictates that the 9mm is easier to shoot.

The half second advantage a 9mm has in that aspect is of questionable benefit IMO

how about a half second X 6?...10?...17?

[IanS]

King Ghidora,

I think its generally accepted that we're talking service cartrdiges 9mm and up here. I don't think people were advocating .22 or .25 autos.

Something is true when its backed up with the kind of evidence previous posters presented (even if its repeated)

You use the analogy of rocks skipping over water to compare the relative effect of 9mm vs. .45? Keep saying it maybe it will come true.:rolleyes: Its generally well accepted 9mm rounds have a better chance penetrating Kevlar helmets and car doors than .45 ACP.

Here's another saying.

Pistols poke holes. Rifles rip **** up.

As I've said previously, I won't argue with someone who chooses to use a .45, .40, .357 SIG. I like my 1911 too.

BTW if you were referring to DocGKR saying SIG's are better in 9mm he's referring to long term durability and reliability as a hard use weapon. And please don't bring up that magazine article that tested 10,000 rounds through a P220. Any decent service pistol should last 10,000 rounds bare minimum. Lots of P220's can go for much more than 10,000 of course but statistically speaking 9mm SIG Sauer P series guns tend to last longer and are more reliable in the long term. For someone in SWAT who shoots tens of thousands of rounds a year its something to consider. For most civilians and uniformed LEO who don't shoot much it may not matter.

[Stone Cold]

Anybody who argues that all calibers are created equal in terms of killing people haven't seen enough corpses or gutted enough animals. This is a tiresome argument made mostly by guys who can't shoot big guns. Every hunting guide worth his salt knows that bigger animals take bigger, faster cartridges, and fast doesn't always replace big. With most human animals being relatively the same size, a big caliber will do the job better most of the time. Since many of my clients were ER doctors, I know what they've told me about patching up wounded people. I was also an army medic many, many years ago and I know that smaller pills do less damage and smaller wounds respond better to pressure. Less air escapes from a sucking chest wound with a smaller hole. Less surrounding tissue is damaged with a smaller, faster projectile. If I had to have a hole punched in my lung (the largest vital organ), I'd much rather that be a .357 hole than a .451 hole. Even better, please use a .22 tool to do the punching. Just do me a favor and make sure I have a standard issue dressing with the plastic wrapper. Also, please make sure there are some nice looking nurses at the hospital where I'm taken. That .22 hole may knock me out of action for a while, but not that long!:D

[ImDisaster]

And if you hit someone's chest at an angle a faster moving bullet has more of a tendency to ricochet than a slower, heavier object. You can prove that by skipping rocks over water. Try skipping something like a heavy washer. It's round and flat but it won't skip as well because it's heavier. A 9mm can penetrate well if you get a good shot and don't hit your target at an angle. A .45 will penetrate better if you hit someone's chest at an angle.

Most of your argument was good...until that statement. Try skipping a .223 (aka NATO 5.56x45) off your chest when hit at an angle. It should skip right? It is light and fast (62 gr. at 3,100 fps.) Better dump that NATO round for a 90mph fastball. A fastball is much heavier and slower.

There was just an article about a women who was hit square between the eyes with a .44. It split in half and the pieces lodged in her forehead just above her ear.

The reality is a little more complicated when you hit at an oblique angle or hit a rib. Weight helps. A bullet that stays together vs. fracturing helps. Velocity helps.

[MikeOrick]

"Could a 9mm have the same killing power as a 45acp....with the proper ammunition?"

Yes/No/Maybe. Depends on lottsa different things.

SPRINGFIELD ARMORY
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
MEMORANDUM REPORT SA-MR 20-2100

L O Spaulding/lv

24 August 1948

SUBJECT:
Effective Penetration Range of 9mm Parabellum Ammunition.

OBJECT:
To determine the greatest range at which the subject ammunition will
penetrate the M1 helmet.

SUMMARY:
M1 helmets were fired at using different 9mm ammunition to determine the
greatest penetration range. A Canadian 9mm Parabellum ammunition having a
velocity of 1250 f/s penetrated the M1 helmet at 130 yards, which was
further than any of the other ammunition tested.

REFERENCE:
Project TS2-7875-2024 J O 7875-6160

MATERIAL:

1. Weapons
a. Browning FN 9mm Pistol, HP Inglis-Canada, Serial Number 8T2367
b. Colt Automatic Pistol, Cal .45, 1911A1, Serial Number 1651407

2. Ammunition
a. Special 9mm Parabellum cases and Cal .38 S&W Special Bullets (Metal clad,
158 grains) and loaded to a velocity of 850 f/s.
b. Winchester 9mm Parabellum, 116 grain bullet, Lot WRA22026, 1,150 f/s
instrumental velocity at 53 feet.
c. Cartridges, Ball, 9mm M1, 116 grain bullet (Parabellum) (Code T2CAB) Lot
DIL- 617 (Canadian) 1,250 f/s instrumental velocity at 53 feet.
d. Pistol Ball Cal .45 M1911, Lot E C S25250.

3. M1 Helmets

4. Outdoor range facilities

PROCEDURE:
An M1 helmet was placed on top of a stake, back of which a target was set up to facilitate aiming and to lend support to the helmet. The 9mm Canadian pistol was then fired from a muzzle and elbow rest at the helmet. In the event the helmet was pierced, it was moved away from the shooter 10 yards and the procedure repeated until failure to pierce the helmet resulted. This procedure was followed with the special 9mm ammunition and with the high and low velocity 9mm ammunition. A similar test was run using a Colt Cal .45.

RESULTS:
1. The special 9mm Parabellum case with a Cal 38 S&W bullet penetrated the M1 helmet at 50 yards, but not 60 yards.
2. The Winchester 9mm Parabellum (1,150 f/s velocity) penetrated the M1 helmet at 120 yards, but not at 130 yards.
3. The Canadian 9mm Parabellum (1,250 f/s velocity) penetrated the M1helmet at 130 yards, but due to lack of longer range facilities was not fired beyond this point.
4. The Cal .45 ammunition penetrated the helmet at 30 yards, but not at 35 yards.

CONCLUSION:
It is concluded that the Canadian 9mm Parabellum ammunition with the 1250
f/s velocity, had a longer range penetration power than any of the other
ammunition tested.

Prepared By: L O Spaulding, Ordnance Engineer
H F Hawthorne, Ordnance Engineer
E W Hopkins, Head Ordnance Engineer

Does a smaller hole beat no hole? Beats me.

The military had lots of info on why the 45 was better up until about 1946 when they started building the case for the switch to 9mm. Took 'em until 1985 to get that done. Now they are in retro mode. They can justify whatever they want whenever they want it.

From FBI tests, in bare gel and through heavy cloth:

124/9 +P GD 13.4/.68 and 20.25/.53
125/357 GD 16/.60 and 19/.54
155/40 GD 10.7.84 and 18.1/.57
200/45 +P GD 11.7/.75 and 18.8/.55

One may be better this time, another another time... may need to go deeper ths time, bigger that time... or not. Clear as mud, eh?

The city issues 9s (allows 357/40/45 too), the county 40s, the state 357s. All seem to work as well as the officer behind them.

"To clarify the above quote is DocGKR's. I'm just quoting him."

I'm w him (Doc):

-- Cultivate a warrior mindset
-- Invest in competent, thorough initial training and then maintain skills with regular ongoing practice
-- Acquire a reliable and durable weapon system
-- Purchase a consistent, robust performing duty/self-defense load in sufficient quantities (at least 1000 rounds) then STOP worrying about the nuances of handgun ammunition terminal performance.

Of all the things that do matter, your gun and ammo matter the least. ;)

[nate45]

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii296/nate45auto/100_0445.jpg
Speer .357 135 gr GD SB, .357 173 gr Keith Type, .410 230 gr KT, .429 250 gr KT, .452 265 gr KT, Speer .451 250 gr Gold Dot

I am certain that any one of those through the wish bone would all have the same effect, a trip to the morgue.

I was reading an article sometime back, in G&A I think, about the LAPD F(felony)-Car detectives of the late 50s and 60s. They carried 6 inch S&W Model 14s and 6 inch Colt Officer Models, in cross draw holsters and loaded with standard velocity 158 gr RNL ammo.

They were not concerned with the 'effectiveness' of the ammo. Why you ask, because they were all marksmen. They all shot regularly at the range and most were on the pistol team.

I would feel will armed with my K-38 loaded with 158 gr. RNL. A couple in the wishbone and one in the teeth and it would all be over, for the BG that is.

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii296/nate45auto/100_0405.jpg

[kraigwy]

Is the 9 better then the 45, is the 45 better then the 9.

Its my opinion we are:

http://photos.imageevent.com/kraigwy/mode/Beating%20a%20dead%20horse.gif

[Saab1911]

http://photos.imageevent.com/kraigwy/mode/Beating%20a%20dead%20horse.gif

Beating a dead baby camel?

[JAYBIRD78]

You have 8 fingers to plug those little 9mm holes in someones body. You only have 2 BIG THUMBS to plug the .45 ACP hole. Do the math! :)


Disclaimer: I own both 9mm and 45 Acp and like them both.

[Stone Cold]

I propose we settle this once and for all. The most avid 9mm supporter shoots himself on the left side of the rib cage, between the 2nd and 3rd rib with a 45 acp. At the same time, the most avid 45 ACP supporter shoots himself in the same place with with a 9mm. We then time the bleed out and see who wins by living the longest. Winner gets prompt medical attention. Any volunteers?

[fastforty]

Would it be unsportsmanlike to make a few nominations? :D

[Jermtheory]

to be fair...

the 9mm should get two shots...it does have the advantage in capacity,"shootability" and follow-up after all.:p

[JohnKSa]

Yes, but sadly, it was the wrong nail & it was hammered all the way to China- I fail to see how it related to the OP's question:When the FBI's expert says that there "might be" a difference due to caliber 1% of the time then the question as to whether they COULD have the same killing power is moot, is it not?

If there "might be" a difference 1% of the time then it follows that there isn't a difference at least 99% of the time. And if there's no difference 99% of the time then asking about whether you could do something to one to make them have the same killing power doesn't make much sense. Sometimes before an accurate answer can be given the question needs to be reworked.

If that's not enough of an answer, look at the section in my second post to this thread that's called "Post 4" and tell me if it doesn't directly answer the question asked. Here's the pertinent part of the quote. "I have used all three of the major calibers 9mm, .40 and .45. I can tell you from stacking deer on the farm that all three performed the same. If you were to look at the actual wound creatred there was no way to tell what caliber caused the damage..."Anybody who argues that all calibers are created equal in terms of killing people haven't seen enough corpses or gutted enough animals. This is what is called a strawman argument. NO ONE has said that all calibers are created equal, we're talking about choosing one of two handgun calibers out of the service pistol class. CERTAINLY if you expand the discussion to "all calibers" there are significant differences.

As far as the accuracy of the comments I made, since they're in part taken from an FBI study, I imagine that there were sufficient corpses studied in arriving at the conclusion given...And again I could certainly shoot a .22 more accurate repeatedly than I could most 9mm's.I very carefully stated that my comments were meant to apply ONLY to choosing calibers from the service pistol class. Since that's what the thread is about, it seems a reasonable restriction....PLEASE try to remember that the context is choosing between service pistol calibers.)

Thanks to those who posted kind words.