Considering Switching from .45 Auto to 9mm

[Drm50]

Skill with handgun under fire is a plus but if the bad guy has a rifle your in deep do do. The
FBI Miami shoot out was a failure before it started. The big bank shootout in California was
proof of this again. These perps were on a much higher level that hood rats. Cops need to
be armed with weapons that will defeat body armor.

[lee n. field]

Originally Posted by 30-06 Rifleman

https://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Se...Comparison.htm

This test does give me pause. The 147gr HST is supposed to be one of the top-performing 9mm rounds, and it failed to reach the FBI's minimum penetration of 12 inches in bare gel in this test. I know it's only .10" short, but that's still a fail and the .45 did not. I've always respected Dr. Roberts' work in this field.

That's pretty much what I took away from Lucky Gunner's ammunition test. Certain 9mm loads meet that standard, .40 and .45 meet that standard much more easily.

[30-06 Rifleman]

One test of one 9mm load gives you pause about an entire caliber? Good grief, in that case just carry the 45ACP. You're looking for definitive proof on a nuanced subject. Here's a test that has a different result.

If it was a cheap or gimmicky lightweight 9mm round I wouldn't think much of it, but the HSTs, in my understanding, are cream of the crop in 9mm. It doesn't get much better.

Most of the tests of the 147gr HST I've seen, including the LuckyGunner one linked, show it penetrating at least 12 inches, but I wonder if it's less consistent about reaching that minimum.

People love worrying about the hardware for what is at its core a mostly software problem.

I admit I'm definitely overthinking this. While I shoot .45 Auto very well, I've pretty much maxed out my proficiency with it, which is why I'm considering switching to 9mm since I objectively have faster split times with it. Just want to make sure I can count on it to penetrate reliably.

[TunnelRat]

Unless you're willing to go out and purchase hundreds of rounds of defensive ammo, get dozens of gel blocks and calibrate them, and shoot all of them from the pistol you choose to carry, and do your damndest to control all other factors, you're not going to have definitive proof. There will always be a test that shows an exception and provides conflicting results. This is the nature of statistics. You use the data available and make a decision based on the average. This whole thread seems to be you looking for the one test that will decide this for you by providing irrefutable proof. There is no such test, that's why this debate goes on.

I repeat what I said, if one load from one manufacturer in one bullet weight in one test not performing as desired is enough to give you significant pause about a caliber as a whole, you should not change calibers. That wasn't me being facetious. That's me saying you're not in the mindset to make that change. Sure as hell don't replace what you know to be a system that works for you. At most get another gun at some point if you want to, even if it takes the time to save the money to do that. You're not going to be at some significant disadvantage with a Glock 21, certainly not compared to what some are willing to carry. Your skill with the weapon will be far more relevant.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Cosmodragoon]

Silly you! Then they could NOT have been shot with a .45!

Everyone knows that people hit with the .45 simply cease to exist. Their corporeal being is blown into a dimension in between universes, and their souls are simply eliminated.

It happens all the time but we don't know about it because the people hit with it are totally erased from the time line. They vanish from history and memory completely.

Seriously though, I think it's pretty well settled that any cartridge capable of getting to one of those definite stop points (brain, spinal cord, etc.) will do the job. For hits that open up a less than definite potential to stop an attacker, or at least give you a little space to escape (pain, realization of being shot, mechanical damage to muscle or bone, etc.), I think there are two valuable resources:

1. Actual footage of violent crime and defensive encounters. I strongly recommend the Active Self Protection Channel on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsE...rvF2ImeNWh84mw

2. Meat targets. It's not just silly fun for the boys when you've got expired meat or a rotten carcass hanging about. Gel is awesome for comparing cartridges on a standardized medium. We can learn a lot from gel but it isn't the whole picture. There is much that can be learned about how particular cartridges perform by seeing them perform in a medium that more closely resembles bad guys and dangerous animals. This is obviously cost prohibitive but here is a YouTube channel that has done a bunch of it:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6Q...68zynSa0hZy9uQ

[30-06 Rifleman]

Unless you're willing to go out and purchase hundreds of rounds of defensive ammo, get dozens of gel blocks and calibrate them, and shoot all of them from the pistol you choose to carry, and do your damndest to control all other factors, you're not going to have definitive proof. There will always be a test that shows an exception and provides conflicting results. This is the nature of statustics. You use the data available and make a decision based on the average. This whole thread seems to be you looking for the one test that will decide this for you by providing irrefutable proof. There is no such test, that's why this debate goes on.

I repeat what I said, if one load from one manufacturer in one bullet weight in one test not performing as desired is enough to give you significant pause about a caliber as a whole, you should not change calibers. That wasn't me being facetious. That's me saying you're not in the mindset to make that change. Sure as hell don't replace what you know to be a system that works for you. At most get another gun at some point if you want to, even if it takes the time to save the money to do that. You're not going to be at some significant disadvantage with a Glock 21, certainly not compared to what some are willing to carry. Your skill with the weapon will be far more relevant.

Understood. If I may ask, what load do you prefer in 9mm?

[JERRYS.]

Everyone knows that people hit with the .45 simply cease to exist. Their corporeal being is blown into a dimension in between universes, and their souls are simply eliminated.

Mike Irwin, you're confusing such piddlely rounds with the 10mm.

[hounddog409]

"Unless you're willing to go out and purchase hundreds of rounds of defensive ammo, get dozens of gel blocks and calibrate them, and shoot all of them from the pistol you choose to carry, and do your damndest to control all other factors, you're not going to have definitive proof. There will always be a test that shows an exception and provides conflicting results. This is the nature of statustics. You use the data available and make a decision based on the average. This whole thread seems to be you looking for the one test that will decide this for you by providing irrefutable proof. There is no such test, that's why this debate goes on."


And the only thing this will tell you is how you perform in gel......

The findings from a look at ALL actual shootings is far more relevant. These are real work results from actual human beings being shot. Wearing varying clothes, from varying distances and angles, etc

And these results tell us that while handguns are far less effective than shotguns and rifles ( duh), there is no distinguishable difference in the results between the 45 or 9mm.

[Cosmodragoon]

hounddog409, some of this has already come up but let me answer...

And the only thing this will tell you is how you perform in gel......

Gel is great for comparing cartridges on a standardized medium. We can learn a lot from gel but it isn't the whole picture.

The findings from a look at ALL actual shootings is far more relevant. These are real work results from actual human beings being shot. Wearing varying clothes, from varying distances and angles, etc

You can't actually look at ALL actual shootings. Any supposed "findings" hoping to approximate that will be limited to what shootings were recorded, what details were recorded in those, under the assumption that they were recorded accurately, subject to what gets selected or rejected among them by the particular researchers performing the study and also subject to whatever statistical processing they perform.

Have you ever seen or heard about a study that was either agenda driven or just plain bad? Putting all your faith in this one is at least as bad as putting all your faith in gel tests. Some studies are decent. Learn what you can from the good ones. Just understand that like gel, it's only part of the story.

As I said previously, meat targets can add to that story (in addition to being fun). So can hunting with a handgun (within humane limits). What you'll see is that there is some difference between different loads in different calibers. It might not be a big difference between 9mm and .45acp. I personally think it is small enough that I'll choose the size and capacity benefits of 9mm over it. However, it is real and should not be ignored.

Look, we all carry guns for the same reasons that people have fire extinguishers in their homes. We are preparing for a serious but hopefully rare event. In the rarer case that we're really stuck and maybe putting one into someone's arm or leg or whatever is the only chance we've got, then it might matter. Is it enough of a chance for you to care? That's up to you.

[Cirdan]

Hounddog's right. In real world data, the 9, 40, 357, and 45 all have about the same results. One shot stops range from ~32% - 35%.

[30-06 Rifleman]

I've been seeing some good things about the Hornady Critical Duty 9mm 135gr +P. The FBI apparently awarded a contract for it not too long ago when the G2 Gold Dot continued to have problems.

I've seen some criticisms though, namely that the Hornady load hasn't had much of a street record, but most of that talk is from the 2012-2013 era.

Anyone know of any Law Enforcement agencies that've reported results on it from the street?

[USNRet93]

Pick something and train with it. People love worrying about the hardware for what is at its core a mostly software problem.

Thumb's up..

[AK103K]

^^^^^ What he said.


No one seems to want to answer the question either. How many rounds of any of them does it take to solve the problem? Come on, its a simple question.

The answer is just as simple too. And its also the "correct" answer, for "anything".

All the arguing over caliber is pointless, and in many cases, childish. Learn to shoot what you have, and as realistically as possible (just dont stand there and think those tight, slowfire bullseye groups make you a good shot), be realistic in your expectations and your skills, and ... you shoot them to the ground, and continue to do so, until they are no longer a threat.

That last part is as good as an "open book" for the answer to the quiz above.

[hounddog409]

"u can't actually look at ALL actual shootings. Any supposed "findings" hoping to approximate that will be limited to what shootings were recorded, what details were recorded in those, under the assumption that they were recorded accurately, subject to what gets selected or rejected among them by the particular researchers performing the study and also subject to whatever statistical processing they perform. "


But the report did research and report on ALL police shootings over a 15 year window. at least I think it was 15 years, if I remember correctly. It was a pretty extensive research.

I really need to dig this up again. it was a facinating read. plus my memory sucks....

The report did note "one shot stops" and "multiple shot stops".....

the point was neither the 45 or 9 is better or worse than the other. shoot what you want and are comfy with.....but a riffle is better.

[USNRet93]

In real world data, the 9, 40, 357, and 45 all have about the same results. One shot stops range from ~32% - 35%.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nycYxb-zNwc&t=519s

2:49 in..I know 'studies' and statistics can vary but

[5whiskey]

I know 'studies' and statistics can vary but

The problems with "studies and statistics" regarding the effectiveness of calibers in a real world shooting is... there are too many variables in each and every shooting. Each and every shooting that occurs is nothing but an anecdote. SC Trooper Mark Coates (God rest his sole) shot Richard Blackburn (who had pulled a pistol on him) with 5 rounds of .357 in the chest. Richard Blackburn went down, but shot Trooper Coates under the arm pit (right above the vest) with that .22lr. Trooper Coates died from his injuries, while Richard Blackburn lived (surviving 5 COM hits with .357) and was sentenced to life without parole.

Each and every shooting is nothing but one anecdote. Clothing worn, path of bullet travel, fitness of the victim, and any potential bullet anomaly's are all factors that cannot be accounted for. We know that .22lr is not "better" than .357. But this instance shows how difficult it is to draw inferences from "studies and statistics" compiled from shooting data.

I still believe capacity and platform advantages of 9mm gives it the edge for many, but I certainly don't feel like .45acp is inadequate.

[peterg7]

I switched

EDC, went from a .380acp to 9mm.

Sidearm went from .45acp to .40 S&W

Neither was about the caliber but capacity and shoot ability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tahunua001]

new bullet construction methods and propellants have really allowed the 9mm to shine. it has closed the gap with 40 cal and given the fact that prices have remained more stable with 9mm than just about any other cartridge throughout the ammo shortages of the last half decade, it has a lot of appeal to a lot of people. I am having to remind myself to stop hoarding ammo for it as I am finally getting a decent stockpile raised, but still, old habits die hard.

I personally have liquidated my collection to nearly all 9mm. I have one 22 handgun, which I keep mostly for utility and grouse hunting (legal in my state, please don't start anything). I am down to a single 45ACP handgun and it is my 1911 which I love and will hopefully never part with. everything else is 9mm. I have had good luck with 9mm, it is familiar to me, it is cheap, it is more available than most, I can hunt with it if necessary(again, legal in my state), and if I ever have to use it to defend myself, it will have less of a flashbang effect than the 45 which I cannot bear to shoot without earmuffs. also as has been stated, on average you get better ammo cap out of the 9mm.

that is not to say that 45 has no purpose. out of a carbine, 45 is quiet as a mouse, and I have chosen to retain the 1911 and a 45 carbine for the utility of a rifle/pistol combo, and for the fact that 45 makes a great close range deer carbine. however I also do the same for 9mm and 22lr, as I have rifle/pistol combos for both. what can I say, I'm a stickler for utility.

[Cosmodragoon]

new bullet construction methods and propellants have really allowed the 9mm to shine. it has closed the gap with 40 cal

However much 9mm has benefited from advancement, has it really "closed the gap" with .40 S&W? If we listen to the guys who say there is no "real world" difference in any of these cartridges, there was no gap to close. If you listen to guys like me who say there is a real but relatively small gap, I'm not so sure.

Check out this video from our pal, Paul Harrell. There is a lot of backstory on .40 S&W and you might already know some of the things discussed, but see what differences come up in the testing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTTDgZZZFa0

(If he had a 9mm vs .45 acp, I would have posted it pages ago.)

... and yes, .45 acp is good in carbines. That's where the +p can really shine. It's also a good choice for people using suppressors.

[Spats McGee]

From the very beginning, I figured this would turn into another caliber war, and it has. Accordingly, I'm going to shut it down. Thanks to everyone for keeping it civil.