Is Big Bullet Technology Dead?

[jr24]

Capacity and recoil in conjunction with equal to sometimes even better bullet ballistics against the 45 or 40S&W?

Gonna have to disagree with this statement. Objectively, with quality loadings the .40 and .45 are measurably superior by every metric we use.

The question is: are they superior enough to justify the increased recoil and/or reduced capacity.

I go back and forth between the 9mm and .45. In similar platforms (30 vs 26, 21 vs 17 Glocks), at speed I am slightly faster with good hits on my 9mms. Much like the ballistic performance, how much does that couple tenths of a second matter in a defensive situation?

I have no idea, and there's no way to actually know short of first hand experience (which I hope to avoid).

I have confidence in both, and carry both largely based on what I am training with most on any given month. I tend to shoot one caliber pretty much exclusively based on what I am carrying.

[TailGator]

I haven't seen anything credible saying that the 9 mm is superior in its wounding capability. Its popularity rests in allowing greater capacity in similar sized pistols, and in having more easily managed recoil for quicker and more accurate follow-up shots, with wounding capability similar to the larger calibers. The newer bullet technology has improved all calibers, but it seems to have closed the gap because the 9 mm had the most room for improvement when FMJs were compared.

Large calibers obsolete? No. Is the 9mm a better choice for a significant number of people? Probably so.

[OldMarksman]

Objectively, with quality loadings the .40 and .45 are measurably superior by every metric we use.

If and only if "we" are limiting our metrics to certain aspects of terminal ballistics.

And "measurably" dos not mean "significant".

Much like the ballistic performance, how much does that couple tenths of a second matter in a defensive situation?

That will vary according to situation. But consider this:

• An attacker moving at an average "Tueller" pace can move about three feet in two tenths or a second.
• A timely physical stop will depend upon hitting key, hidden, and small internal body parts that are moving quickly in six degrees of freedom; hitting them will be much a matter of serendipity than design, and the likelihood wis increased by hitting with more shots more quickly.
• In a close encounter (ten or twelve feet), a defender will have very little time to effect the stop.

I haven't seen anything credible saying that the 9 mm is superior in its wounding capability. Its popularity rests in allowing greater capacity in similar sized pistols, and in having more easily managed recoil for quicker and more accurate follow-up shots, with wounding capability similar to the larger calibers. The newer bullet technology has improved all calibers, but it seems to have closed the gap because the 9 mm had the most room for improvement when FMJs were compared.

Well put.

And that's true even when older-technology JHPs are considered.

[shafter]

An expanded 45 is still going to be bigger than an expanded 9mm. I like both depending on what I'm carrying and need it for.

[jmr40]

The development of smokeless powder and conical bullets greatly reduced the need for larger caliber bullets in handguns and rifles. Most of the rest of the world figured this out in the 1890's but it took another 110 years here.

I was shooting steel targets at 25 yards with my 9MM and my .45 the other day.

The 9mm was just putting the steel targets down.

The .45 was putting them down with noticeable authority.

If ever attacked by steel plates that is good to know.

It seems to me that we have probably come pretty close to reaching the peak of what can be expected from handgun rounds. With a good hit it seems that all of them are VERY good. You can only kill a man so dead, and bigger bullets don't kill them any deader.

[BigJimP]

No, big bullets ( .45 acp / .44 Mag...etc ) are not obsolete.

9mm ammo has been improved to narrow the gap of effectiveness.
------------------
As I get closer to 70 ( with some arthritis and hand strength issues, etc ), I have given up my 1911 in .45 acp over a full sized 1911 in 9mm as a primary carry gun...and because the ammo has improved so much in 9mm, I don't feel outgunned.

The FBI and a lot of law enforcement picking 9mm over many other calibers, in my view, is more related to capacity....and managing recoil, allowing faster followup shots in their officers ability to execute better follow up shots with a 9mm than with most all of the other calibers. ---- and the improved 9mm ammo has allowed them to make that choice and meet their needs.

[SA1911]

The 16-round 9MM handgun does offer advantage vis-a-vis a 9-round .45 ACP. Not having to reload is a tactical advantage. Of course, a 13 round .45 ACP handgun would negate that advantage.

I'd never bet my life on a bullet expanding like a blossoming mushroom in ammo manufacturers' ads. If a bullet does expand, I'll take it; however, Murphy is always lurking.

The .45 ACP's HUGE advantages are bullet weight and diameter. Bullet weight is a component of momentum. Momentum is an excellent predictor of penetration. Without penetration, a bullet is close to useless. That's why Big 5 hunters use use large diameter, heavy bullets. You'll never see a Big 5 hunter wielding a .300 Wby Mag.

Handguns have minimal-to-no utility for military applications. Tremendous technological improvements in battle rifles have made handguns just about obsolete. When the Garand was king of battle fields, the 1911-A1 was an essential complement, especially in jungles of Pacific islands. It took too long to reload 8 '06 rounds in a Garand, which left American soldiers vulnerable to Japanese suicide attacks. Now a soldier can reload 30 more rounds in his battle rifle in less time than it would take him to bring a handgun to battery.

For self-defense, the 9MM will never equal the .45 ACP.

I have no idea why the FBI has selected the 9MM as its issued handgun cartridge. However, issued does not mean that FBI cops have to carry a 9MM. They can carry handguns from an approved list. My guess is that most of the FBI's cops will not be carrying the FBI's issued handgun cartridge. Furthermore, while I cannot definitively write that this is true, my guess is that FBI SWAT and specialized teams will continue to use their 1911-A1's chambered for .45 ACP.

[TunnelRat]

The 16-round 9MM handgun does offer advantage vis-a-vis a 9-round .45 ACP. Not having to reload is a tactical advantage. Of course, a 13 round .45 ACP handgun would negate that advantage.

It's more 17 rds of 9mm vs. 13 rds of 45ACP, but more than that the 45ACP pistol will do that in a frame with both a wider grip side to side and a grip that is wider front to back. So in comparing capacity between the two you have to be aware that they are dimensionally different and have to be dimensionally different to close that capacity gap.

Bullet weight is a component of momentum. Momentum is an excellent predictor of penetration. Without penetration, a bullet is close to useless.

What's also a component to momentum is velocity, momentum is literally m*v. You can't ignore that component just because it doesn't emphasize the mass of the 45ACP. Moreso when we look at the muzzle energy, the factor most commonly advertised by the manufacturers of cartridges themselves, the differences between 9mm and 45ACP are no where near as dramatic as the differences between certain hunting cartridges or most rifle cartridges in general.

When the Garand was king of battle fields, the 1911-A1 was an essential complement, especially in jungles of Pacific islands. It took too long to reload 8 '06 rounds in a Garand, which left American soldiers vulnerable to Japanese suicide attacks.

I honestly think the role of the 1911 in WWII, or any handgun for that matter, is overplayed. While there are excellent examples of bravery with sidearms, that doesn't make an entire war. We didn't win WWII because of 1911 and the Axis didn't lose because they had the Luger and P-38. For that matter, while magazine capacity was limited with the Garand, reloading en-bloc clips isn't that slow and there were also firearms such as the Carbine, Thompson, Grease Gun, and more than any of those belt fed machine guns that were part of a company for a reason. Are human wave attacks hard to counter? Absolutely, but we didn't end up stopping those by issuing more pistols. We stopped them with overlapping fields of fire from multiple machine gun emplacements. And if that failed we retreated back to the next trench line and repeated the process.

However, issued does not mean that FBI cops have to carry a 9MM. They can carry handguns from an approved list. My guess is that most of the FBI's cops will not be carrying the FBI's issued handgun cartridge.

I have to be honest and say that this makes little to no sense to me. I completely agree that the FBI HRT will always do whatever it feels best, but the standard issue cartridge will go with the standard issue pistol, which current evidence says is going to be a Glock made to the FBI's standards and in 9mm. The FBI isn't going to award that contract and buy those pistols for them not to be used.

I'll also add again that the FBI is not the only national level police agency in the world. There are plenty of very well respected agencies with their own special teams elsewhere in the world and to my knowledge they are not dominated by the use of 45ACP.

There's a difference between liking and appreciating a cartridge and recognizing its current usage and placement in the world. Unless the majority of the world lives in utter denial of the all powerful 45ACP or there is some grand conspiracy stopping us from using it, at some point you have to ask why many people, including people who shoot for a living (both figuratively and literally), seem to predominantly use 9mm. None of this, once again, means the 45ACP is "bad".

[Hawg]

9MM died for me in the early 80's. I haven't owned one since .45 ACP rules my world.

[john in jax]

Every design and performance enhancement out there for the 9mm cartridge is available for the big bullets too! Just shop a little harder and you will find the same "latest and greatest" technological innovations also on top of that fat stubby .45acp brass case. As for popularity, all the major manufacturers are making and selling pistols in .45acp. And don't even get me started on how everybody and their brothers are making 1911's in 45acp these days. The 1911 may be more popular now than it has ever been.

However, as the popularity of revolvers continues to decline I think .44spl is going to become harder and hard to find.

[SA1911]

Hi TunnelRat,

I do agree with your take on double stack .45 ACP handguns. The last handgun I was forced to carry was an H&K USP double stack .45 ACP. It was a beautiful gun with flawless operation. It was incredibly accurate. But I did not like it. It was huge and heavy. I begged to go back to my Sig P229 .40 S&W, which was the best and most reliable handgun I've carried, and that includes S&W revolvers. Nope. When administrators make dumb decisions, they'll rationalize dumb with extreme stupidity.

I've always believed and still believe that a good-quality 1911-A1 in .45 ACP sits alone at the top of the self-defense handgun pinnacle. I'm aware that others have different opinions.

I've carried a 1911-A1 with W-W white box 230 grain ball ammo and never felt the least bit slighted.

I've never held any other handgun that has the almost perfect natural point of a full-size 1911-A1. In fact, I'd opine that a full-size 1911-A1 has a perfect natural point.

I was new to the gig when the Model 59 had established its mediocre reputation as a cop handgun. I can't tell you of how many accounts I was told (direct evidence of primary sources) of its abysmal performance. The then state-of-the-art ammo might have been causal. Regardless, I was comforted by the fact that I wasn't carrying a 9MM. I did switch to a 9MM in the early 90's when W-W came up with the 147 grain Black Talon round. It did propel the 9MM into a category far above its previous status.

Self-defense is personal. What works for one might be all wrong for another. I'm a big, heavy bullet dude. But I also want a 100% reliable handgun that has tactical application. If I could, I'd carry a full-size 1911-A1 loaded with any quality 230 grain ammo, including ball. But it is a heavy weapon. It's surprisingly easy to conceal, but it is heavy.

I rarely carry a handgun even though I can. When I wasn't on the clock, I used to carry a Model 60 loaded with the FBI load. But it is a widow maker. I call it a neck and up gun. God forbid, were I in a gunfight (it'd be because a bad guy wanted me dead), if I didn't hit neck or above, the odds of my taking rounds (never a good thing) would be high. If there were more than one bad guy who wanted me to star at my wake, I'd of been in some serious peril. So I sought the best self-defense handgun for me. I'd of gone with my Sig P229 with 13 rounds in the gun and another 12 ready to go within a couple seconds. But it is on the difficult side of concealment. So I bought a Sig P239 .40 S&W, which is an exact replica of my P229 only smaller, which means muscle memory transfer. I've yet to carry it. But it is easy to conceal. It's far more powerful than the FBI load. It's 100% reliable. I use 180 grain Federal HST Tactical ammo. With two spare magazines, I have 22 rounds to get me out of trouble if I'm unable to avoid it, avoidance being my primary self-defense strategy.

Make no mistake, the .40 S&W performs just as was predicted. It is a darn powerful cartridge.

I have no qualms with anyone going with a 9MM. However, one should think it over very carefully if they live in CA. We have a mag restriction of 10 rounds.

Gelatin tests and other ammo tests are decent references, but they're far from definitive. There are too many variables in a self-defense scenario to isolate bullet design as predictive of performance.

My opinion is the 9MM would be my absolute minimum cartridge for saving lives of my loved ones and my life. Were I to go with a 9MM, it'd be a Sig P226 or similar handgun with standard capacity (15 round) magazines.

I've not read why the FBI has gone with the 9MM as its issued cartridge. I'm assuming its issued gun will be Glock. I am curious to learn of how many of its cops will carry either the .40 S&W or .45 ACP instead of the agency's issued gun. Were it me, I'd carry either a full-size 1911-A1 in .45 ACP or my Sig P229 in .40 S&W. But that's just me. Others would assuredly choose a different combo.

TunnelRat, I'm good with your cartridge opinions. But that doesn't mean that I concur. I'll go with science every time, and in this case, science does not agree with you. The 9MM is inferior to the .40 S&W and .45 ACP. There is just no way that the 9MM equals either the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP. But I'm more than good with your choice of what works best for you.

Momentum Indices using Federal HST Tactical ammo:

9MM 124 grains 1150 FPS Momentum Index: 20
.40 S&W 180 grains 1000 FPS Momentum Index: 25
.45 ACP +P 230 grains 950 FPS Momentum Index: 31

Sources:

Federal Law Enforcement ammo: http://www.le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammun...n/default.aspx

Momentum Calculator: http://handloads.com/calc/quick.asp

If you're in to laboratory testing, this supports the inferiority of the 9MM to both the .40 S&W and .45 ACP:

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/sel...llistic-tests/

The problem with laboratory testing is that gunfights don't occur in laboratories.

TunnelRat, I do wish you the absolute best. And I do respect your opinions. I might not agree with you, but I do respect you.

[TunnelRat]

TunnelRat, I'm good with your cartridge opinions. But that doesn't mean that I concur. I'll go with science every time, and in this case, science does not agree with you. The 9MM is inferior to the .40 S&W and .45 ACP. There is just no way that the 9MM equals either the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP. But I'm more than good with your choice of what works best for you.

It just so happens I have a degree in interdisciplinary mathematics and took a year of collegiate physics. So I feel like I do have a good understanding of the science. I've never seen momentum indices used as some definitive proof of anything. I also noticed you chose a +P load for the 45 ACP and a standard pressure load for the 9mm, which seems a bit biased.

You can literally come up with a measure to support just about any opinion and we've seen that on this forum. Muzzle energy is far more reported than a momentum index, including at the Federal website at the link you provide (those velocities from Federal also come from a 5" 45ACP and a 4" 9mm, not really apples to apples). Comparing standard pressure to standard pressure, even with a 1" shorter barrel the 9mm has 90% of the muzzle energy of the 45ACP.
http://www.le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammun...pare=579%2C574
That's less no doubt. But my argument isn't that shot for shot 9mm provides more muzzle energy than 45 ACP. It's that the differences aren't as dramatic as people seem to believe.

I've also looked at the lucky gunner tests and quite frankly come to the conclusion that the differences there are also not dramatic as some people, such as yourself here, seem to make them. Both cartridges are capable of penetrating to the requisite depth with enough mass to disable the CNS or cause enough damage to the heart and major blood vessels to cause a sudden and dramatic loss of blood. The goal in a gun fight, as you alluded to above, is to stop the threat. Ideally you do that by hitting a switch such as the CNS or major blood vessels. The goal isn't to poke holes until the person slowly bleeds out, as that timer might see you dead too.

I never questioned your respect for me or lack thereof. To be honest I'm not overly concerned if you do or don't respect me. I'm presenting my point of view not only for you but for others reading.

Edit: I clicked the link. I see that link also covers the Taylor "Knock Out" Factor. It comes up at least once a year here. I leave it to people to Google that calculation and decide for themselves, though I will point out this.

A 55 gr 5.56mm NATO bullet moving at 3000 FPS only has a TKOF of 5 whereas a 230 gr .45 ACP bullet at 750 FPS has a TKOF of 11.

[SA1911]

Hi TunnelRat,

I didn't see a +P load for the 9MM at the Federal Website.

Believe me, I wasn't trying to deceive anyone. That would be tantamount to lying, and lying will destroy a person's character.

Again, I'm more that good with your going with the 9MM. The self in self-defense is literal. If it works for you, that's what you should use.

Take care

[JohnKSa]

I didn't see a +P load for the 9MM at the Federal Website.

Federal's standard website doesn't list any +P loads for the .45ACP either.

They have a separate website for law enforcement ammo where they do list +P loads for both 9mm and .45 Auto.

http://www.le.vistaoutdoor.com/

[TunnelRat]

The LE site is the site in his original link.

I believe him when he says he didn't see it.

[Zorro]

Thing is Handguns are not a weapon of choice when you know there will be a fight.

So they get used because you didn't bring a rifle or shotgun.

Thing is you are unlikely to unload the entire magazine. More likely you will get one to three shots off.

This makes a Magnum revolver round sort of a better choice?

For YEARS I carried a S&W .41 Magnum snub nose, and It had full power magnum loads in it always.

If I get just one shot bigger is better. Or is that wrong?

[44 AMP]

but the light and fast moving 9mm still penetrates deeper that the others with a comparable or equal load.

MAYBE...

The big problem with statements like this is that while the rounds best performance is very good, the statement doesn't allow for what happens often in the real world, where each round may not deliver its best performance.

Not all that long ago, NYC police shot a fellow with their 9mms, they got something like 7 hits, and 4 of the rounds were stopped by the heavy Carhartt coat the guy was wearing. Or so it was reported. The point it that while the round (a well known tested and approved one) shouldn't have done that, it did. There are no guarantees.

Handguns have minimal-to-no utility for military applications. Tremendous technological improvements in battle rifles have made handguns just about obsolete. When the Garand was king of battle fields, the 1911-A1 was an essential complement, especially in jungles of Pacific islands. It took too long to reload 8 '06 rounds in a Garand, which left American soldiers vulnerable to Japanese suicide attacks. Now a soldier can reload 30 more rounds in his battle rifle in less time than it would take him to bring a handgun to battery.

I'm afraid I just have to take some of these statements to task.

Handguns have minimal-to-no utility for military applications.

IF you exclude personal self defense of the individual solder as a military application, I could agree. Otherwise, no. Certainly a handgun isn't the best choice for many things, but there is more in war than fire and maneuver infantry combat, or stopping a human wave attack.

It's been said, and I agree, that "a handgun won't win a battle, but it could save the life of the guy who does win the battle".

From personal experience I will say that I would feel much better with a handgun (and about any handgun) with me, inside my sleeping bag, than an M16. No, the military doesn't put a high priority on the handgun, but it also doesn't put the highest priority on the lives of individual troops. Mission is their priority.

Tremendous technological improvements in battle rifles have made handguns just about obsolete.

Again, same thing, handguns are a personal weapon. Defense of the individual in situations where the rifle is not able to be used.

It took too long to reload 8 '06 rounds in a Garand, which left American soldiers vulnerable to Japanese suicide attacks

Really? How long do you think it takes?? The 8 round enbloc clip goes into the rifle pretty fast, about as fast as any magazine fed weapon, and faster than some (want bet you can slam 8 rounds into a Garand faster than you can get a 20 or 30 round stick into a tommygun?) The Enbloc doesn't give up any speed to a 5 rnd stripper clip used in a Mauser or Arisaka. In most hands, its faster.

Now a soldier can reload 30 more rounds in his battle rifle in less time than it would take him to bring a handgun to battery.

Not sure I can agree with this. Starting at the same place, gun in your hands, empty, action open, it takes the same exact actions to bring the piece into action, insert magazine and close the action.

[Zorro]

https://www.grandviewoutdoors.com/gu...-pistol-round/

And YES I DO remember the part when a mortally wounded bad guy lived long enough to kill the agent anyways.

[briandg]

Regardless of technology and bullet design the 9mm is going to continue to increase in market share. I can't even count the number of advantages that the 9mm as a combined weapon system provides compared to the 1911 and other 45 based systems. The revolver will probably never recover any of its lost share, either.

The greatest uses for guns now are military or police operations, hobby shooting, and personal defense. The reality of the situation is that the .45 does not provide any advantage.

The simple to understand fact is this. A .45 has absolutely no advantage until you pull the trigger, and even in that very unlikely situation, it's not at all likely that it will perform significantly better than the 9mm.

Usually, you should not accept the will of the masses as evidence, but it's very clear that the overwhelming majority of the entire population of the world rejects the argument that the .45 is the smart thing to use as a combat pistol.

[Psychedelic Bang]

Originally Posted by briandg

Regardless of technology and bullet design the 9mm is going to continue to increase in market share. I can't even count the number of advantages that the 9mm as a combined weapon system provides compared to the 1911 and other 45 based systems. The revolver will probably never recover any of its lost share, either.

As far as I can tell, the biggest advantages are cost related.

"Ammo is cheaper, less wear on the guns, people can deal with recoil better."

Concerning recoil, that is a training issue. You can be trained to handle recoil, again relates to cost.

As far as stopping power goes the FBI said, "forget it, doesn't exist from handguns."

As far as capacity goes, the FBI said, "we tend to miss 70-80% of the time." LOL, good thing the 9mm ammo is cheaper

As far as penetration goes the FBI said, "falls within excepted range."


This is a big huge government agency. There have budgets, training programs, standards to conform too.

I understand why they chose 9mm, and for them it probably makes a ton of sense. However, the reasoning behind their choosing 9mm is hardly a substantiated argument for, "9mm is the best bullet ever.:"

[Spats McGee]

Two caveats: (1) I went to law school because I can't do math. (2) It's been a while since I read any of the studies on ballistics.

With those said, and generally speaking, I think that bigger bullets make bigger holes. Smaller bullets let me make more holes without reloading. If I'm ever (God forbid) in a gunfight, I'll do my damnedest not to miss. I cannot count on that, though. I also know that it's cheaper to practice with smaller bullets. Thus, I have elected to go with "more smaller bullets" over "fewer larger bullets."

As far as the FBI, I find their tests useful, when I get time to read them. I haven't read the latest ones yet. The FBI (and the federal gov't generally) has a much larger ammo testing budget than I do, so I turn to them for information. Not necessarily for guidance, but for information. Government acquisitions are done by committee, the result of a long, tedious process of requests for qualifications, testing, bidding, and finally, selection. I don't have to worry about the added cost of maintaining 23,000* firearms chambered in .45 acp over the baseline cost of maintaining those same firearms chambered in 9mm. I do have to worry about the cost of ammo going through two 9mm firearms. IOW, I like the fact that the FBI tests ammo and that I get to read the results. I also know that my considerations may lead to a different result in the Spats McGee Firearms Acquisition Process.

* = I pulled this number out of thin air, so let's not argue about its accuracy.

[OldMarksman]

Concerning recoil, that is a training issue. You can be trained to handle recoil, again relates to cost.

Not really. It is not a matter of whether one can "handle" recoil.

Iy isa matter of the moment of the firearm, which is governed by the laws of physics, and the time it takes to get back on target for subsequent shots.

Yes, training and practice can help, as they can in evetything else--grip, sight picture, trigger control, and so forth--but they cannot negate the laws of physics...specifically, Newton's Third Law of Motion.

The velocity and mass of the bullet and other ejecta result in the movement of the gun, unless it is in a machine rest, and the mass of the gun, along with the bore axis and the grip angle, determine how.

This is a big huge government agency. There have budgets, training programs, standards to conform too. ...I understand why they chose 9mm, and for them it probably makes a ton of sense.

The FBI didn't "choose" the 9mm solely for themselves. They recommended it for their law enforcement partners.

There are fewer than 14,000 FBI Special Agents; those are the ones who carry weapons as part of their jobs.

There are around 765,000 full time sworn officers in police departments in the US; those are the ones with arrest powers. That's 55 times the number of FBI Special Agents.

There are also Treasury and Border Patrol agents.

There are thought to be around 15,000,000 concealed carriers in the US. That's 20 times the number of sworn officers.

FBI Special Agents are not major users of handguns or handgun ammunition in this country, but the FBI Training Division has been providing all kinds of support, including research and testing, to the much wider law enforcement community for decades. If I were a police chief or commissioner, I would certainly take advantage of that.

Two interesting tid-biits from Tom Givens: civilian use of force encounters tend to have a lot more in common with those involving FBI Special Agents (and treasury agents) than with those of sworn police officers: and (2) the marked differences between the duties of sworn officers and the responsibilities, and those differences greatly influence the nature or armed encounters experienced.

[SA1911]

44AMP,


Are you telling me that an M-1 Garand can be reloaded more quickly than a H&K 416?

A GI could go through an entire H&K 416 mag before a GI could get an M-1 clip out of a belt pouch preparatory to inserting it very carefully into a Garand.

I'm good with what you want to believe.

[44 AMP]

I can't even count the number of advantages that the 9mm as a combined weapon system provides...

This seem to be where we always wind up. Questions about CARTRIDGE performance, or bullet performance get asked, and we wind up getting beat about the head and shoulders with people telling us how good the 9mm weapons system is.

Lets take a moment and level the playing field, so we concentrate JUST on cartridge & bullet performance. (and yes, I do realize that is not what happens in the real world)

Here's your weapon, a T/C Contender, and two barrels of the same length, one in 9mm Luger, the other in .45ACP. Which do you choose, and why???

OR, any other caliber barrel, and why? I'm willing to bet that many if not most people won't choose the 9mm over everything else, in that scenario.

You only get ONE shot. So all the pros and cons about capacity, and recoil management are irrelevant. Only the performance of the cartridge counts. Do you still choose the 9mm as the "best"?

next point..

Usually, you should not accept the will of the masses as evidence, but it's very clear that the overwhelming majority of the entire population of the world rejects the argument that the .45 is the smart thing to use as a combat pistol.

Yes, the rest of the world uses 9mm overwhelmingly. But that means what, exactly?? That they think the .45 isn't good enough?? I rather doubt it's quite that simple. Cost, and tradition play a big part, I think. Tradition, in the sense that if what you use works reasonably well for you, you tend to stick with it, particularly when you factor in the cost of changing to a different caliber.

From its earliest days (1902) the 9mm Luger was marketed to the world. And, rather effectively. Both the Luger pistol and the round. MANY countries bought them, and that established the 9mm Luger round as a baseline standard.

Our .45ACP (1911) never was marketed to the world, in the same way. Not even close. I think that's more than a small part of it. Countries don't change what they have that works well enough, unless the advantage of the change clearly outweighs the cost or they believe it does. (look up why the M1 Garand was .30-06, )

Last point (for now )
9mm is cheaper.

Yep, most of the time, but not always. I just checked over at Midway, since, being a handloader, the price of factory ammo isn't on the tip of my tongue...

It was ..interesting. The cheapest stuff, in both calibers, 9mm is much cheaper, running aound $0.25-27 per round, on sale. FMJ. .45ACP FMJ was $0.38-40 per round. 9mm clearly wins for being cheaper.

BUT, when you take a look at the high performance rounds, the JHPs that are the reason the 9mm is now so effective and well regarded, and its a different story.

In BOTH 9mm and .45acp high end JHP ammo costs in the $0.80-1.20 range, per round! Simply put, ball ammo 9mm costs much less than ball ammo .45, but good JHP ammo in both calibers costs about the SAME!!!

(At least if you buy it from Midway, )

[44 AMP]

44AMP,


Are you telling me that an M-1 Garand can be reloaded more quickly than a H&K 416?

A GI could go through an entire H&K 416 mag before a GI could get an M-1 clip out of a belt pouch preparatory to inserting it very carefully into a Garand.

I don't have any personal experience with the HK 416, but if its anything like the HK 91 /93 then no, I am not telling you the M1 Garand can be loaded faster, I'm telling you its about the same. The "care" needed to insert the enbloc clip is the same care needed to insert most box magazines. One could even make the point that the enbloc is actually slightly less demanding than the rifles that use the "rock and lock" magazine system, but its a very small difference. And there is also the point that with everything else, you have to eject/remove the empty magazine, before putting in a full one, where the Garand automatically ejects the spent clip.

OK, if one guy has a loaded HK and the other an empty M1, then yes, the HK guy could go through his mag before the M1 guy gets loaded (especially if the HK is select fire). But that's hardly a fair comparison, isn't it??

Again, start with both empty. The same tasks are applied. Getting the enbloc clip out of a belt pouch, getting a 30 rnd stick out of a belt pouch, "carefully" inserting either into the weapon. Same task, same relative complexity, same approximate speed, depending on the skill level of the user.

Certainly having 30 rnds on tap with one reload is a desirable and important thing, and one of the reasons we don't still field the Garand. But, CAPACITY of the reload is not the same as speed of the reload. And the guys shooting Garands are essentially on par with other guns, when it comes to the SPEED of the reload. I don't really see your point that we were at a disadvantage because the Garand was "slow" to reload. It's not.

And, considering the fact that the bulk of the enemies the Garand faced were using 5 shot bolt actions, the M1 Garand comes out ahead of them, in both speed of reload and also, capacity.

And another point, how it is fair to compare a rifle designed before WWII with one designed over a half century later, where the experience of WWII combat (and everything since) is there to be drawn on, and applied to the benefit of the newer design? If the newer design isn't better in at least some ways, the designers failed to use the lessons of history available to them.