The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

View Poll Results: Shot for shot, assuming reliability is the same, which is more effective for defense?
A .45 ACP 1911 31 67.39%
A .357 magnum 1911 (Coonan) 15 32.61%
Voters: 46. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 15, 2017, 01:10 AM   #26
Damon555
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 11, 2012
Posts: 384
Quote:
I am curious what reviews you read that gives you this opinion
I'm wondering that myself.....Having just researched the Coonan to the ends of the internet I found hundreds of good reviews and maybe a handful of bad ones....and now I can give a first hand review that's all A's.....
Damon555 is offline  
Old October 15, 2017, 07:18 AM   #27
CDW4ME
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2009
Posts: 1,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Model12Win View Post
Thanks gang. No kidding the Coonan is big.

Why do all defensive pistols have to be small and concealed?
1911 (45 acp) is in poll.
1911 (10mm) is same size.
Not necessarily small, but easy to carry concealed.

My chrono averages:
Dan Wesson Valor
Federal 230 HST @ 891 fps / 406# KE
Winchester 230 gr. Ranger T @ 915 fps / 428# KE
Remington Golden Saber 185 +P @ 1,157 fps / 550# KE
Delta Elite
Handload Nosler 150 JHP @ 1,402 fps / 655# KE
Handload Hornady 155 XTP @ 1,400 fps / 675# KE
Hornady 175 Critical Duty @ 1,158 fps / 521# KE
Handload 180 Gold Dot @ 1,152 fps / 531# KE

That 45 acp +P compares to a moderate 10mm load in both power and recoil, (and that level of recoil from a steel 1911 isn't bad).
Which of those is "better" for SD? IDK
Regardless 10mm offers an extra round of capacity, in 1911 platform.

I've chronographed same ammo out of a Glock 20SF, very little difference in 175 & 180 velocities, however 150 & 155 gained quite a bit in the Delta.
Although 3/4 of 10mm listed are handloads, Hornady 155 is near match for factory Hornady velocity out of Glock 20SF.
Nosler 150 handload was essentially same velocity as Corbon 150 JHP out of Glock 20SF.

How does that compare to 357 Sig? I happen to have chronographed that too.
Glock 31:
Speer Gold Dot 125 @ 1,363 fps / 516# KE
Federal HST 125 @ 1,385 fps / 533# KE
Ranger T 125 @ 1,389 fps / 536# KE

Moderate 10mm loads like Critical Duty 175 and my 180 Gold Dot handload easily match the power (KE) of 357 Sig.

Edit:
checked ballistics by the inch:
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html
Real world results 4'' barrel 357 Mag doesn't match the power of 5'' 10mm Delta Elite.
(fair comparison since revolver doesn't include chamber in barrel length, but semi does)
__________________
Strive to carry the handgun you would want anywhere, everywhere; forget that good area bullcrap.
"Wouldn't want to / Nobody volunteer to" get shot by _____ is not indicative of quickly incapacitating.

Last edited by CDW4ME; October 15, 2017 at 07:27 AM.
CDW4ME is offline  
Old October 15, 2017, 11:34 AM   #28
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 12,453
"...the Coonan .357 magnum 1911 style pistol..." Another pistol that requires hands like a monkey to shoot well.
"...10mm out of a CDE..." Is about the same as a factory .45 ACP. If it hurts you, it's likely because it may be too small for your hand.
Anyway, there is no 'vs' or 'more effective.' The best one is the one that fits your hand and you can shoot best.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old October 15, 2017, 12:35 PM   #29
Damon555
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 11, 2012
Posts: 384
Quote:
"...the Coonan .357 magnum 1911 style pistol..." Another pistol that requires hands like a monkey to shoot well
I respectfully disagree. My hands are average size and the Coonan 357's grip fits them just fine. If you feel comfortable with a standard size 1911 grip then the Coonan will compare favorably in my opinion.
Damon555 is offline  
Old October 15, 2017, 01:30 PM   #30
tipoc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
Quote:
The. 357 magnum with 125 gr sjhp was and is the king of one shot stops. It simply is the most effective handgun round available against 2 legged varmints.
That statement is not necessarily true. I'll show you why.

All the research, statistics and opinions on One Shot Stops was done by Edwin Sanow and Evan Marshall. It was summed up in three books, public debates and many articles in guns mags. This going back to the 1990's. I'll leave aside here the validity, or lack of it, of their theories and statistics. The point being that all opinions on what is the best round for OSS goes back to them, originates from them.

What M and S were looking for was the best bullet and load that produced OSS. So in their opinion it wasn't that the 357 Mag was "King of the OSS" it was a particular load and bullet in .357 was.

In their first book from 1992 they say that the Federal 125 gr. JHP produced 96.96% OSS. More than any other load for the .357 Mag. Some of those other loads same weight but different bullet produced only about 80% OSS. So they claimed.

Same book, 1992, they state that the Federal 230 gr. Hydra-Shok produced a 90.56 % OSS. Not that far behind and well ahead of many of the 125 gr. JHP loads for the .357 Mag.

In their 2001 book they claim the same Federal load for the .357 Mag produced 96%. Better than other loads and bullets for the .357 again.

For the 45 acp the same Federal Hydra-Shok had improved to 96%. The same as the .357 Mag.

They also state that a load for the 9mm does 91%, for the 357 Sig 92%, for the 40 S&W 94%, for the 10mm 90%, for the 44 Mag 92%, 41 Mag 91%, 45 Colt 81%, 44 Spl. 76%, etc.

Oh and in case you'r keeping track for the 308 Win from a rifle 98% same for the .223 Rem. Oh and some 12 gauge #4 buck shot only 94%---that's just a bit less than the top .357 or 45acp handgun rounds. So a shot gun blast to the the COM, anywhere from the hips up to the collarbone, was just as effective at OSS as some rounds from the 9mm. So they said.

So by 2001 the title "King of the One Shot Stops" was shared by the 45acp and the 357 mag. This under M and S criteria for a OSS. Oh, and that was just a tad behind one hit from a shot gun of 12 gauge and one round from a 308 Win. So anyone who thinks a shot from your AR10 or AR15 is more effective than a round from your old model 19, well think again fellas!

Of course none of it made much sense, but why and how, is another discussion.

It means that there are a lot of very good handgun rounds out there and that the one you shoot best, with a good bullet and round that you shoot well from it, is the way to go.

tipoc
tipoc is offline  
Old October 15, 2017, 05:55 PM   #31
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Tipoc, if you take the numbers at face value they are nothing but averages. The more numbers one has the more statistical relevance one has. If 50,000 hits with the 357 magnum averages 95% and 16 hits a 308 equal 80% see the problem?
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old October 15, 2017, 09:27 PM   #32
tipoc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
Thanks.

I'm well aware of that. It is one of the central weaknesses of their statistics. I did not go into that, or other weaknesses, because it wasn't relevant to the point I was making. The OSS figures and conclusions are deeply flawed for a number of reasons.

But, even if we go by their figures and conclusions the OSS percentages, by 2001, showed the 357 magnum with a 125 gr. pill by Federal as the best and that it was in a dead heat with the 230 gr. Hydra-Shok 45acp. So, as far as the "king of the OSS" the .357 Mag in a 125 gr. Federal JHP shares that position with the 45acp. Federal Hydra-Shok. This according to the folks who compiled the OSS statistics and developed the concept.

That's the point I was trying to make. Which led to the main point. It's not the round or the gun, it's how the shooter balances the round, gun and the job you want it for, that matters.

tipoc
tipoc is offline  
Old October 16, 2017, 12:02 AM   #33
Sevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 11,755
Quote:
That said the Coonan holds six rounds 7 if you go plus one which personally I wouldn't do on a 1911 platform.
If it matters... this isn't correct information. The full-size Coonan magazines hold 7, so you'd be at 8 if you wanted to run+1.

Also not so sure why everyone thinks the Coonan is "so large"

It's long, from the MSH to the front of the grip, and the length of grip itself certainly isn't small, but the pistol isn't particularly fat, there isn't some ridiculous reach to the trigger or the other controls and the pistol runs very well and quite reliably.

I suppose you can make any handgun a "defensive tool" if having some laundry list of different carry guns is your thing. It isn't my thing. I love to shoot the Coonan because it's a lot of fun. Ugly, predictable tupperware is what I carry.
__________________
Attention Brass rats and other reloaders: I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.
Sevens is offline  
Old October 16, 2017, 12:27 PM   #34
Damon555
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 11, 2012
Posts: 384
Quote:
Ugly, predictable tupperware is what I carry
Agreed.....it's much more practical compared to an all steel 1911 sized gun....but if you only have 1 choice then carry what ya got and be proficient with it.
Damon555 is offline  
Old October 16, 2017, 12:43 PM   #35
RickB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2000
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 8,511
The classic "stopping power" calculators - Hatcher, Taylor - were based on momentum, favoring big bullets over velocity and energy.
They weren't hypothetical, they reflected observations made in the field.
I want a big hole and lots of penetration, and a big, heavy bullet best ensures that.
__________________
Runs off at the mouth about anything 1911 related on this site and half the time is flat out wrong.
RickB is offline  
Old October 17, 2017, 07:51 PM   #36
lechiffre
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 3, 2008
Location: phoenix,az
Posts: 513
Quote:
Shot for shot, assuming reliability is the same, which is more effective for defense?
That assumption is a tough swallow.
__________________
if God hadn't meant us to shoot he wouldn't have given us trigger fingers

do the interns get glocks ?
lechiffre is offline  
Old October 17, 2017, 07:56 PM   #37
fourbore
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2015
Location: new england
Posts: 1,159
That is the flaw with this poll. It should simply ask which is more effect the 357 or 45 and not mention the gun. That way things are on a more equal footing.

The coonan part totally skews the result.
fourbore is offline  
Old October 17, 2017, 10:10 PM   #38
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,675
Quote:
That assumption is a tough swallow.
why???

Quote:
The coonan part totally skews the result.
and again, why??
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old October 17, 2017, 10:33 PM   #39
Onward Allusion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2009
Location: Back in a Non-Free State
Posts: 3,133
I voted for the 357, but it would have to be an 8 shot revolver.

Either the Taurus 608 or S&W 627. I mean you gotta go +P on the 45 to get close to 357.
__________________
Simple as ABC . . . Always Be Carrying
Onward Allusion is offline  
Old October 18, 2017, 06:03 AM   #40
fourbore
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2015
Location: new england
Posts: 1,159
Why? Because you mix two questions into a single pole. The Coonan is a dismal last place to a 1911. The 357 is massively effective round. The question is all screwed up.

Remember you asked for "opinions". If you solicit opinions and leave it open to everyone. You get what you get and take those views for what they are worth. Maybe my comments on the poll are out of line. I believe you would see a different result if you just put it as 357 vs 45. Some responses maybe confusing the question as a ballistic comparison and miss the pistol part. Or others focus on the guns. Its a mess.

The coonan vs 1911. The 1911 includes 9&10mm&45, single and double stack. Votes 100 to 1, all day long. My guess. The coonan is a monstrosity, my opinion and vote.

A big plus for the 45 was in the military the restriction against expanding ammo. The 45 makes a big hole and effective stopper. Civilian ammo is not limited and can take advantage of the 357 energy levels. I still kinda like the 45, but, now we can have debate and if someone likes the 357 ballistics he can go 10mm.

If I had to do a 357 or anything else from a coonan, I will take a pass.

Last edited by fourbore; October 18, 2017 at 06:21 AM.
fourbore is offline  
Old October 18, 2017, 07:44 AM   #41
jimjc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2010
Posts: 166
It's commonly said the 357 will take just about any animal in North America including the 2 legged ones. These days over penetration makes some bullets not as effective as others that are designed and tested to penetrate to the correct depth. What may be more important is can the shooter handle a 357 accurately. A accurately placed 380 will be more effective than a inaccurate 45 or 357. The designer bullets today make many calibers effective so it's more about what bullet can you effectually place where it needs to be placed. The 357 isn't easy to control for the average guy, which rarely practices with it. For the majority I would say a well designed 45 defense round will be more successful. This is not about me but my bullet is a well designed 9mm in a good gun.
jimjc is offline  
Old October 18, 2017, 12:40 PM   #42
pblanc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 23, 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 697
I have never shot a Coonan 357 Magnum model 1911. I do shoot 357 Magnum out of a full size revolver (Ruger GP 100 4") reasonably often.

I have two model 1911s, both chambered in .45 ACP.

I find 45 ACP very pleasant to shoot out of a government size model 1911. I find shooting 357 Magnum from my GP 100 mildly unpleasant with the first cylinder and progressively less pleasant from there on. I can control my .45 ACP 1911s much better than my 357 Magnum revolver.

I don't know how much having the inertia of a slide and recoil spring absorbing recoil in an auto-loader would tame 357 Magnum, but unless it was very substantial there is no doubt which caliber I would feel better able to defend myself with.

If you absolutely had to have something more powerful than .45 ACP in a model 1911 I would go with 10 mm before I would choose 357 Magnum. Either 10 mm or .45 ACP will make bigger holes than 357 Magnum.
pblanc is offline  
Old October 18, 2017, 01:09 PM   #43
UncleEd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 13, 2013
Location: N. Georgia
Posts: 1,150
"....hands like a monkey...." to shoot well.

I do take objection.

Some monkeys have big hands but some have small hands.

They must be just as selective in choosing a firearm that fits
well as we humans.
UncleEd is offline  
Old October 18, 2017, 01:26 PM   #44
481
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Posts: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by tipoc View Post
Thanks.

I'm well aware of that. It is one of the central weaknesses of their statistics. I did not go into that, or other weaknesses, because it wasn't relevant to the point I was making. The OSS figures and conclusions are deeply flawed for a number of reasons.

But, even if we go by their figures and conclusions the OSS percentages, by 2001, showed the 357 magnum with a 125 gr. pill by Federal as the best and that it was in a dead heat with the 230 gr. Hydra-Shok 45acp. So, as far as the "king of the OSS" the .357 Mag in a 125 gr. Federal JHP shares that position with the 45acp. Federal Hydra-Shok. This according to the folks who compiled the OSS statistics and developed the concept.

That's the point I was trying to make. Which led to the main point. It's not the round or the gun, it's how the shooter balances the round, gun and the job you want it for, that matters.

tipoc
Well stated.

When discussing a complex multi-variate event (in this case, terminal performance in the human body) using poorly defined terminology like, ''King of the One Shot Stops'', always leads to confusion and ultimately, disagreement because the debate is set up for failure from the very start.

Setting aside for the time being the numerous flaws and issues surrounding the M&S data―and there are many―M&S (perhaps unknowingly?) attempted to replicate the methodology for predictions of the probability of incapacitation by ammunition that were already in existence in the 1960s and 1970s by researchers like A J Dziemian, L M Sturdivan and T E Sterne at the US Army BRL at Aberdeen Proving Grounds. These researchers, along with quite a few others, relied upon thousands of wound data found within the WDMET project obtained during the Viet Nam war and evaluated them within Gould's Groups for the purpose of predicting lethality/incapacitation across all calibers and various time frames.

Unlike later, poorly executed attempts to do so, the BRL predictive instruments are well-developed, coherent examples of the way in which such analyses should be undertaken.

Last edited by 481; October 18, 2017 at 05:07 PM.
481 is offline  
Old October 18, 2017, 02:17 PM   #45
Damon555
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 11, 2012
Posts: 384
I can say for certain that the recoil from the Coonan Classic 357 is only slightly more than the recoil of the Government model 1911 45 ACP shooting 230 grain ball ammo. I agree with the above statement about shooting a GP100 with full power loads too....it gets unpleasant in a hurry. For me any way, the Coonan can be shot for hundreds of rounds in one range session.....the muzzle blast and concussion is what dissuades most shooters.

Really the size and weight of the Coonan Classic are the big detractors. It's not all that practical to lug around all day.....Or course that is the Classic model....they make a smaller, more compact version that is probably more concealable....but I've not shot one of them so I can't speak for the performance.

If I were to choose between the Coonan or Government model 1911 for my first 1911 it would definitely be the 45 ACP all the way.....plus you can get a very nice 1911 for 1/2 the price of the Coonan.
Damon555 is offline  
Old October 18, 2017, 07:37 PM   #46
otasan
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 17, 2005
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 519
I'd count on the 1911 .45 ACP. From the trench warfare of WWI thru the central American conflicts, around the world in WWII, to Korea and Vietnam, and now the Middle East. The M1911A1 .45 ACP has served with great distinction.
otasan is offline  
Old October 18, 2017, 08:38 PM   #47
lechiffre
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 3, 2008
Location: phoenix,az
Posts: 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP View Post
why???



and again, why??
I just can't imagine a semi-auto handgun can feed a rimmed cartridge as reliably as a rimless one. Even dinky rims like those on the .38 super, and .32 ACP can cause problems.
__________________
if God hadn't meant us to shoot he wouldn't have given us trigger fingers

do the interns get glocks ?
lechiffre is offline  
Old October 19, 2017, 09:11 AM   #48
otasan
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 17, 2005
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by lechiffre View Post
I just can't imagine a semi-auto handgun can feed a rimmed cartridge as reliably as a rimless one. Even dinky rims like those on the .38 super, and .32 ACP can cause problems.
So true. The semi-rimmed .38 Supers and .32 autos should have been made with rimless cartridge cases. John Browning let us down here.
otasan is offline  
Old October 19, 2017, 01:58 PM   #49
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,675
Quote:
John Browning let us down here.
That's hardly a fair statement. You may think Browning "dropped the ball" with semi rimmed cases, but are you aware that at the time, nobody knew what the best shape for the ball was, nor were they even certain of the rules of the game!

Browning designed the .32ACP in 1899. The .38 Auto in 1900. A bit BEFORE the 9mm Parabellum. A time when no one was certain that a case headspacing on the case mouth would reliably work. Browning knew the semi-rimmed case would WORK, and work in an autoloader better than the fully rimmed case. So, that's what he designed.

A few years later, when Browning designed the .45ACP, in 1905, he did make it a rimless case, because the concept had been proven to work. (9mm Parabellum, 1902)

The .38 Super came along in 1929, and I suppose you could say we were let down on that one, because it was semi-rimmed, but that's really just 20/20 hindsight. The Super kept its "parent" case. The only change from the .38ACP was an increased pressure loading, the name, and the marking on the case head. And usually nickel plated cases for the Super.

Quote:
I just can't imagine a semi-auto handgun can feed a rimmed cartridge as reliably as a rimless one.
Perhaps not, but its not because of the fact that rimmed rounds won't work in autos. Rimmed rounds work fine in autos, PROVIDED the guns are properly built for them. There are literally dozens of designs of machine guns made to use rimmed rounds. The two biggies are .303 British and 7.62x54R Russian.

And then there is every single semi auto .22LR in the world, all using a rimmed round. There are two main factors at work determining the reliability of a semi (or full auto) running a rimmed round. First is the design itself, and second is the execution of the design. Which is where most have their failures, if they have failures.

The action might be perfectly fine with rimmed rounds, but if the maker pairs it with a cheap piece of crap magazine, problems happen. And when problems happen, its the rimmed round that gets the blame.

I've heard about issues with rimlock in .32acp, and while just as possible, I've never seen any reports of this trouble in the .38 Super. It could happen, but no body has made a big deal out of it, as far as I can tell, in all the decades since the round was introduced. The only thing that seems to be in the old literature is how the Super's accuracy was spotty, and when barrel makers began headspacing the Super on the case mouth instead of the traditional method using the tiny rim, complaints about the Super's accuracy basically went away.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old October 19, 2017, 04:42 PM   #50
otasan
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 17, 2005
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP View Post
That's hardly a fair statement. You may think Browning "dropped the ball" with semi rimmed cases, but are you aware that at the time, nobody knew what the best shape for the ball was, nor were they even certain of the rules of the game!

Browning designed the .32ACP in 1899. The .38 Auto in 1900. A bit BEFORE the 9mm Parabellum. A time when no one was certain that a case headspacing on the case mouth would reliably work. Browning knew the semi-rimmed case would WORK, and work in an autoloader better than the fully rimmed case. So, that's what he designed.

A few years later, when Browning designed the .45ACP, in 1905, he did make it a rimless case, because the concept had been proven to work. (9mm Parabellum, 1902)

The .38 Super came along in 1929, and I suppose you could say we were let down on that one, because it was semi-rimmed, but that's really just 20/20 hindsight. The Super kept its "parent" case. The only change from the .38ACP was an increased pressure loading, the name, and the marking on the case head. And usually nickel plated cases for the Super.



Perhaps not, but its not because of the fact that rimmed rounds won't work in autos. Rimmed rounds work fine in autos, PROVIDED the guns are properly built for them. There are literally dozens of designs of machine guns made to use rimmed rounds. The two biggies are .303 British and 7.62x54R Russian.

And then there is every single semi auto .22LR in the world, all using a rimmed round. There are two main factors at work determining the reliability of a semi (or full auto) running a rimmed round. First is the design itself, and second is the execution of the design. Which is where most have their failures, if they have failures.

The action might be perfectly fine with rimmed rounds, but if the maker pairs it with a cheap piece of crap magazine, problems happen. And when problems happen, its the rimmed round that gets the blame.

I've heard about issues with rimlock in .32acp, and while just as possible, I've never seen any reports of this trouble in the .38 Super. It could happen, but no body has made a big deal out of it, as far as I can tell, in all the decades since the round was introduced. The only thing that seems to be in the old literature is how the Super's accuracy was spotty, and when barrel makers began headspacing the Super on the case mouth instead of the traditional method using the tiny rim, complaints about the Super's accuracy basically went away.
Thanks for the good history lesson.
otasan is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.12896 seconds with 10 queries