Considering Switching from .45 Auto to 9mm

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by T. O'Heir

The difference between 9mm and the .45 out of like pistols(barrel lengths) isn't enough to matter.
"...Arthritis in my wrists and thumb joint..." Using 9mm isn't going to help.

I think this is a huge YMMV..I tried a 1911(all metal).45 and also G26, G43, Ruger LC9S, S&W 642 and Ruger LCP and have settled on a G19, G17 and G42..all but the 3 Glocks I have now actually 'hurt' my wrist and thumb, particularly the .45..in spite of it being the heaviest of the bunch.

YMMV and all that but my wrist/thumb certainly puts me in the 'recoil sensitive' crowd.

[lunger]

I am a little confused about the Jesus and clowns reference

That Went over my head also.

I was going to say Caliber wars are boring. But hey I read two pages of this

[Cosmodragoon]

Since this always seems to come up, please understand that attacks end for various reasons. Some are more definite than others but here are a few common reasons:

- Disruption of central nervous system
- Reaction to pain
- Reaction to realization of being shot
- Mechanical damage to involved body parts
- Disconnection of nerves to involved body parts
- Failure of circulatory system

Yes, shot placement is king. Yes, you can get better at that with stress training, shooting from different positions, and practicing against moving targets. However, it won't always be possible and we all need to understand that reality. Real-life defensive situations can be chaotic and downright messy. You might be tangled up with an attacker, a group of attackers, or an aggressive animal. You might be lucky to get one into a pelvic girdle, a thigh, or even just a bicep. So while good shot placement towards a definite end is ideal, sometimes it will come down to things like breaking bones or ripping a good hole.

Let's all be humble in not knowing the future and just doing what we can to reasonably prepare for possibilities.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Cosmodragoon

Since this always seems to come up, please understand that attacks end for various reasons. Some are more definite than others but here are a few common reasons:

- Disruption of central nervous system
- Reaction to pain
- Reaction to realization of being shot
- Mechanical damage to involved body parts
- Disconnection of nerves to involved body parts
- Failure of circulatory system

Yes, shot placement is king. Yes, you can get better at that with stress training, shooting from different positions, and practicing against moving targets. However, it won't always be possible and we all need to understand that reality. Real-life defensive situations can be chaotic and downright messy. You might be tangled up with an attacker, a group of attackers, or an aggressive animal. You might be lucky to get one into a pelvic girdle, a thigh, or even just a bicep. So while good shot placement towards a definite end is ideal, sometimes it will come down to things like breaking bones or ripping a good hole.

Let's all be humble in not knowing the future and just doing what we can to reasonably prepare for possibilities.

I feel pretty humble. I've done force on force and seen both myself and others miss at distances I would laugh at normally. I'm aware that getting a shot on target at all, much less an ideal shot, is far from a given. That said, my own deficiencies do not change what will forcibly remove a person from a fight. And yes some people will absolutely react from the shock and the pain and stop the fight. And others like Platt in that Miami shootout will keep fighting while blood is filling their lungs. Given that I most likely don't know the mentality of a person I'm fighting in a life or death situation, physiology is really what I have to work with.

I am not convinced that there is a dramatic difference between 9mm and 45ACP when it does just come to inflicting trauma, and that's really the key. As you stated above, all else being equal a 9mm holds more and for most people involves less felt recoil. Does the destructive potential of 45ACP make up for those differences. That's been debated and will be debated forever it seems.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Shot placement is king. You can shoot 9mm twice as often as .45 for the same money. If you shoot twice as often, you’re likely to have better shot placement. If you shoot 100 rounds four times a year, it makes no difference.

[Mike Irwin]

" .45 ACP, putting down bad guys since 1905. Good enough for me. I've had several 9 MM's over the years. Never kept one for long."

9mm Parabellum. Putting bad guys down since 1902.

Not exactly sure when the first .45 ACP chambered handguns were sold commercially... It might have been around 1907 as the first Model 1905s went to the military for testing and the patent on the 1905's locking modifications wasn't issued until late December of 1905.

As someone else has mentioned, if you're limited to hardball, then .45 may be the more logical choice.

But we're no longer limited to hardball.

[30-06 Rifleman]

The military was disappointed in the performance of 45 ACP at the end of WW-2 and spent considerable time in 1946 testing 9mm vs 45 side by side. They concluded back then that 9mm was the clear winner and wanted to dump both the 1911 and 45 ACP in favor of a modern high capacity 9mm pistol then.

I've heard of this 1946 test a few times, and I've been trying to find the results of it with no luck. Does anyone know if these results are on the interwebs, and if so, where? I don't doubt that it really happened, I'm just curious to see what they had to say in 1946. Might find some interesting food for thought.

[Mike Irwin]

My understanding is that the military wasn't really disappointed with the performance of the .45, it was that that the 9mm gave better ballistic performance out of submachine guns and was easier for semi-trained troops to shoot out of a handgun.

[Hawg]

To each his own. I'm perfectly comfortable with .45 ACP, I'm not overly fond of the 9MM. Mike Irwin, my comment about 1905 was meant to be tongue in cheek. The date has no bearing on anything.

[jr24]

Originally Posted by Mike Irwin

My understanding is that the military wasn't really disappointed with the performance of the .45, it was that that the 9mm gave better ballistic performance out of submachine guns and was easier for semi-trained troops to shoot out of a handgun.

I do know that my Grandfather had nothing good to say about his Thompson he carried in the Pacific. Between weight, recoil and inaccuracy (rate of fire related I guess, he didnt talk about the war often and we didnt press).

[Red Devil]

LEO's/Military - Shoot their way Into Trouble.
Civilians - Shoot their way Out of Trouble.

For an EDC/SD round:

Bigger is better, and fewer is OK.

So carry the biggest pistol you can (and will), and that you can shoot smoothly and accurately.

For me, that's a GLOCK G36 6+1 .45 ACP in an IWB holster.

Red

[30-06 Rifleman]

I'm fortunate enough to have the ability to carry a full sized .45 that mitigates recoil well. I suspect that my split times would become unacceptable to me in a compact or subcompact .45. However, I objectively shoot a 9mm faster with the same amount of accuracy, thus I must consider switching to give myself every advantage I can.

It sounds like 9mm really is close enough in effectiveness to the larger calibers that the advantages of my old .45 may not make enough difference to be worth the slower split times, lower capacity, and increased expense of practice ammunition. I'm going to have to seriously consider getting a Glock 9mm to replace my G21 as an every day carry gun, as much as I have an emotional attachment to the .45 Auto cartridge and shoot it well.

I've heard many say that Law Enforcement Agencies that switch to 9mm are reporting great results in officer involves shootings on par with .40 and .45. I'm trying to find direct sources to corroborate this and find more details.

[41 Magnum]

Quote: (HAWG) - To each his own. I'm perfectly comfortable with .45 ACP, I'm not overly fond of the 9MM.


I need to do a +1 to this post ! I own only one 9MM, and that is a Sig P226 my Son gave me for my birthday a few years ago. The sig is an outstanding weapon, and extremely accurate, but has not been out of the safe in close to 10 years except for cleaning !!
Confidence in your choice is important, & my 1911 gets my vote every time.

[JERRYS.]

I've seen people shot with both and it wasn't until the slug was dug out of them (though most times a pass through) that I could tell what they were shot with.

[mr bolo]

the chances are so slim that I dont worry about what caliber I use, 9mm or 45 is fine

I wouldnt bother switching to 9mm if you are good with a .45 just use what your good with and stick with it.

I would use a G21 for home defense

[Red Devil]

Originally Posted by JERRYS.

I've seen people shot with both and it wasn't until the slug was dug out of them (though most times a pass through) that I could tell what they were shot with.

But that doesn't tell you how long, or at what point, it stopped the fight.




Red

[5whiskey]

My take, as a guy originally enamored with the 45, is this...

Lots of arguments spend a great deal of bandwidth arguing whether 45acp as a wounding capacity advantage over 9mm (1 round for 1 round). I contend that it is highly likely that it does have some advantage, especially since I believe momentum does a little bit more than knock bowling pins over with greater authority. Be that as it may, I do not contend that there is any radical terminal ballistic advantage to 45 or 40 over 9mm. Slight advantages... yes. Big ones, no.

To the follow up shots are quicker with a 9mm crowd... a shot timer tells me that this advantage is way overplayed. Im better with my 1911 than with my CZ P07 on a dueling tree... so long as I don't need more than 8 rounds. I'm much better with both than I am with a glock 19. I personally believe the follow up shots are much faster argument is frequently touted by caliber defenders who have never actually measured their shots with a timer.

Where 9mm shines is platform size and capacity. I can carry a 16 rounds of 9mm for less size and weight than 9 rounds of 45. Small, reliable 9mm pistols that are easy to carry are common. You can only reduce size in 45 so much, and the sub compact 45 carry pieces usually are more problematic. Take kahrs cw series. Their cw9 gets rave reviews and few complaints. For this reason, I now mostly carry 9mm.

[Cosmodragoon]

I am not convinced that there is a dramatic difference between 9mm and 45ACP when it does just come to inflicting trauma

TunnelRat, I hope my point was clear that while shot placement to a definite reason generally trumps caliber difference, sometimes we are dealt a bad hand and a less definite reason could be our only hope. That's when the caliber wars become relevant. There are cases where we see a big difference in destructive capability, which is why I've personally given up on .380 and .38 special in favor of 9mm, .327 Federal, .40 S&W, etc. However, the difference between good defensive ammo in some of those uncontroversially non-marginal calibers can be less substantial.

Comparing the destructive capabilities to flesh and bone for good defensive ammo in 9mm and .45 acp, I'd generally prefer .45 acp. The problem is that's not our only variable. At least for me, the amount better that .45 acp can be in that department isn't enough to get over all the other advantages that 9mm brings to the table. I'll take 9mm over .45 acp in almost every situation.

If we are comparing full-sized pistols that are comfortable to shoot, I will however take .40 S&W over 9mm. That's because there is a noticeable increase in destructive capability and it comes with less of a trade-off.

[JERRYS.]

But that doesn't tell you how long, or at what point, it stopped the fight.




Red

I counted on witness testimony, blood trail if any, and the "victim's" actions after being shot. some ran a short distance from the scene, some were FRT.

[Mike Irwin]

"I've seen people shot with both and it wasn't until the slug was dug out of them (though most times a pass through) that I could tell what they were shot with."

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.

Or so many would have us believe...

[lunger]

"I've seen people shot with both and it wasn't until the slug was dug out of them (though most times a pass through) that I could tell what they were shot with."

And the ones hit with a 9 must had been hit with so many follow up shots there wouldn't be much left of them

[rodfac]

30-06, keep your .45's and buy the 9mm, as I predict the 9 is just a passing fad for you, an impulse to the dark side if you will...

Your long experience with the grand old master of all pistol cartridges, the .45 ACP will win out. You'll be back!

I'll add these lines from a long-forgotten piece I memorized as a teen in the 60's (slightly modified).

For wide open spaces a ?9's? all right,
Where there's time, space, and distance, with plenty of light,
But for work on the instant, when shooting is tight,
You can't get the slant with a ?9?.

So, I'll say at times it is all very well,
But for deviltry, death, and the raising of hell,
The Colt .45 is unusually swell
And will go wh you can't with a ?9?.

You can splatter a dollar at seventy feet
With a stunning precision that's pleasing and neat;
So I'll still make the claim that the Colt .45 can't be beat
And will do what you can't with a ?9?.

For when something is crashing the alders ahead,
And it's death to that brute, or you in its stead,
Let the Colt automat, the fist-filling gat, the chunky blue cat,
Chuck its competent lead.

PS: loose the Glock wanna-be's.

Best advice I can come up with after 53 years with the .45.

Best Regards, Rod

[rodfac]

LEO's/Military - Shoot their way Into Trouble.
Civilians - Shoot their way Out of Trouble.

For an EDC/SD round: Bigger is better, and fewer is OK.

So carry the biggest pistol you can (and will), and that you can shoot smoothly and accurately.

Excellent advice, Red Devil Best Regards, Rod

[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.

[TunnelRat]

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.

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/sel...tic-tests/#9mm

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

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk