9mm or 45cal

[Blackadder]

Personally, I like shooting the 45, it feels much more substantial but I can get more rounds out of a 9mm in a more controlled grouping. For me, autos are great for rapid firing but revolvers will always have their places at the range.

 

[DeaconKC]

An interesting note to this. The FBI just released new studies involving their new choice for a duty handgun. They are going with the 9mm due to the improvements in JHP performance and reliability in the last 25 years, since the Miami Shootout.

 

[Renault]

I still need to sit down and fabricate some cartridges for this "45".

 

[pawineguy]

An interesting note to this. The FBI just released new studies involving their new choice for a duty handgun. They are going with the 9mm due to the improvements in JHP performance and reliability in the last 25 years, since the Miami Shootout.

Their report is a very interesting read, even if you don't get past the summary.

 

[jkingrph]

A couple of weeks a my wife and I met up with a cousin and his wife from Nashville, over in N Louisiana. He wanted my opinion as to what type handgun to get for home defense and wanted to try a few, so I carried some. I took a S&W M 41 ( 22 LR) so she could see the drill in operating a semi auto, my Cold Gold Cup and a S&W K frame with 4"heavy barrel/fixed sights .357 for them to try We only had 38 special ammo for the .357. I had really only been shooting semi autos for the last few years, but when I picked up that revolver everything came back and I was stacking the shots into about a 3" group at 25 yards.

I recommended the revolver for it's simplicity saying if they were not going to practice and become really familiar with the mechanics of the semi auto , the revolver would be the way to go, and I think I got my point across. They did say an indoor range was being built near their home and they might take up a bit of shooting in a recreational manner, so they may be on the fence as to the type firearm for an initial purchase.

I liked shooting my revolver so much I ordered a thousand rounds of 38 special and will drag out my old K 38 and my dads old Model 10 for the wife to shoot some as soon as we get a little cooler weather.

 

[DesertDan]

A revolver is my EDC choice. I have a couple of autos and enjoy them very much, but I have used revolvers for so long that is what I would be most proficent with under duress.

 

[Renault]

Y'all will think me silly, but most all the handguns I own are simply for the novelty of what they are (see photo posted above). However I suppose I do have one "serious" handgun and it's one of those alleged Cimarron 1911's. Which are basically not a true 1911 but simply an A1 on a 1911 frame.

After a bit of alteration, parts changeout, I have converted mine to as close to a real 1911 as I care to do. Only thing really not 1911 now are the sights. They are still the thick A1 sights. Otherwise it's a 1911 now.

So I suppose if I needed to utilize a handgun to get me to that Model 12 riot gun by the bed stand, that would be my handgun of choice!

 

[ingineer]

Renault;
The pistol in post 343 ; is that French?

 

[Renault]

Renault;
The pistol in post 343 ; is that French?

No sir. English. It's a Webley & Scott Royal Irish Constibulary model #1 , in .450 Boxer cartridge.

 

[jkingrph]

A revolver is my EDC choice. I have a couple of autos and enjoy them very much, but I have used revolvers for so long that is what I would be most proficent with under duress.

I am beginning to think the same way. The range I use is almost 50 miles one way, so I do not shoot as much as I like, and prefer rifles to handguns any day. While I consider myself moderately proficient with semi auto's, if using a revolver under duress I do not have to think about safeties, is the gun cocked and ready to use, my revolver is simply an aim (or point) and shoot

 

[Renault]

I am beginning to think the same way. The range I use is almost 50 miles one way, so I do not shoot as much as I like, and prefer rifles to handguns any day. While I consider myself moderately proficient with semi auto's, if using a revolver under duress I do not have to think about safeties, is the gun cocked and ready to use, my revolver is simply an aim (or point) and shoot

LOL! I always take the "Quigley " approach to handguns! . I do not have an EDC. But I agree. I like revolvers. And there certainly is nothing wrong with a 38 Spl. I just don't happen to own one at this time!

 

[jkingrph]

I have 4 38 Spl revolvers, the first a 6" K 38 that was a college graduation present to myself back in '68. A couple of years later I picked up a matching K 22 and will never let those two go. The other is a 4" model 10 that was my fathers . My wife has a Stainless J frame and I have one of the Titanium light hammerless double action only for my pocket carry. Dad had a 2" Model 10 that I really liked. He forgot that I wanted it and sold it while I was overseas. Most of the time I shoot 38 Spl ammo in my .357 and get my wife to shoot it as the extra weight helps recoil which is much better for her arthritic hands.

 

[pawineguy]

I am beginning to think the same way. The range I use is almost 50 miles one way, so I do not shoot as much as I like, and prefer rifles to handguns any day. While I consider myself moderately proficient with semi auto's, if using a revolver under duress I do not have to think about safeties, is the gun cocked and ready to use, my revolver is simply an aim (or point) and shoot

I have always been a semi-auto guy, and I like a DA/SA at the range, but for EDC I much prefer not worrying about a safety also. Not having ever owned a revolver, I carry a Kahr PM9, DA only, aim and shoot just like a revolver. It does give me the option to carry without one in the chamber, and have to rack the slide though before I can fire. (which I practice at the range)

 

[MikePotts]

Y'all will think me silly, but most all the handguns I own are simply for the novelty of what they are (see photo posted above). However I suppose I do have one "serious" handgun and it's one of those alleged Cimarron 1911's. Which are basically not a true 1911 but simply an A1 on a 1911 frame.

After a bit of alteration, parts changeout, I have converted mine to as close to a real 1911 as I care to do. Only thing really not 1911 now are the sights. They are still the thick A1 sights. Otherwise it's a 1911 now.

So I suppose if I needed to utilize a handgun to get me to that Model 12 riot gun by the bed stand, that would be my handgun of choice!

Here's a blogger with something similar:

http://looserounds.com/2015/06/11/modern-retro-hybrid-colt-1911-project/

 

[TarHeel1911]

With proper ammo, a 9mm is an adequate defensive caliber. The military ammo is not too good for personal defense; you definitely need a hollowpoint, like Federal Hydra-Shock, or Speer Gold Dot.

The .45 is a fabulous weapon; I love my 1911. The caveat is that you need to put a lot of rounds downrange to become proficient with one, and .45 ACP ammo is not cheap. Are you set up to reload? That's pretty much a given if you want to get proficient with a .45 ACP. A good reloading setup, including scale and other accessories, will run you about as much as buying another pistol.

You can always buy the 9 now, and get a .45 later.....

 

[Peacoat]

The safety is the most dangerous feature of the semi automatic pistol. I carry a semi automatic most of the time and was taught at the police range to never use it. That way it is a non issue.

My main carry pistols are DA/SA. Carry one in the chamber, safety off. Point and shoot. Just as simple as a revolver. And just as safe.

 

[pawineguy]

The safety is the most dangerous feature of the semi automatic pistol. I carry a semi automatic most of the time and was taught at the police range to never use it. That way it is a non issue.

My main carry pistols are DA/SA. Carry one in the chamber, safety off. Point and shoot. Just as simple as a revolver. And just as safe.

This is a very good point. I think the key is practicing at the range for that first DA trigger pull so that you are proficient. I see a lot of guys at the range who only ever fire in SA mode, because they load a mag and then rack the slide and beginning firing from there. In a high pressure situation you don't want to be surprised by a trigger pull that you're not used to and send your first shot way off target. (which can then throw off any subsequent rounds)

A de-cocker comes in very handy on a DA/SA for carry.

 

[ingineer]

Renault;
Thanks for the response on the Constable's revolver.
Thought I knew my Curio&Relics.
Guess not.
I admire those old firearms and used to own several BP revolvers.
Not possible here to have the Big Brown Truck deliver to me anymore as in OHten.
I love the 1911 and had quite a few because it was possible to build them frame up and customize them as I felt fit. They don't have to be 45. put a 22 kit on them for the indoor range. 9mm slide,38super etc.
Nowlin barrel for lead 45 target work. The larger hole in paper made it easier to see.
Would not use one as a carry weapon, just a bad grip makes it useless.
In bad places the old model 66 was my choice. KISS
I Always remember my brothers advice for pistols in Alaska.
“File the front sights down that way when the bear sticks it up your dupa it will not hurt so much.”
"Quigley " approach LOL

 

[Peacoat]

This is a very good point. I think the key is practicing at the range for that first DA trigger pull so that you are proficient. I see a lot of guys at the range who only ever fire in SA mode, because they load a mag and then rack the slide and beginning firing from there. In a high pressure situation you don't want to be surprised by a trigger pull that you're not used to and send your first shot way off target. (which can then throw off any subsequent rounds)

A de-cocker comes in very handy on a DA/SA for carry.

Obviously the guys you saw at the range have never had formal training, nor have they read any of the articles on self defense carry. We were trained the way you describe: Load and insert the magazine, pull the slide back placing a round in the chamber, de-cock the hammer, insert the weapon into the holster (safety off) and always draw and fire from that position. To this day, I can't go to the range without taking a holster so I can draw and fire from it. Seldom carry in a holster anymore, but that is the way I was trained.

We also spent a lot of time on transitioning from the first shot S/A to the subsequent shots D/A. That can initially be difficult for many shooters, but I never had a problem with it after the first few magazines. I have now shot the drill so many times, it is a natural process. But with the spamming of the Glocks in most police departments in this country, that training is now unnecessary.

Those of you who went through training back in the 60s/70s will remember the "tap two at center mass and assess the threat" training. This protocol was abandoned after too many officers were firing their required two shots, and lowering their weapon to assess the threat. Unfortunately, that is when they would get shot by the bad guy. The tap two philosophy was brought about, in part, in an attempt to lessen the liability of the local governments.

The next protocol I remember was to fire as many rounds center mass as it took to neutralize the threat. The thinking here was that if the officer was right with the first round, he would be right with the last round, and it would be categorized as a "good shooting," irrespective of the number of rounds fired. Thus, the inevitable lawsuit would be easier to defend, and the officer would be better able to protect himself in the field.

At some point, the "two to the body, one to the head" was implemented (this was after my time). This is may be good if the threat is very close (and that is when the head shot is needed the most), but in other situations, the scene is so dynamic as to make the head shot problematic (and that round is going to terminate somewhere). Anyone who has been involved in a real life gunfight (I have not), seen videos of real life gunfights (I have) or gone through a laser "shoot no shoot" course (I have), or something similar, will know how quickly the bad guys move and how dynamic the shooting scene actually is. For my money, I will keep the shots center mass (just the way I was trained) unless the threat is right on top of me, then I might go for the head shot, after the center mass shots.

But back to the .45 vs. 9mm controversy. The 1911 .45 was the first pistol I ever shot, so it is a natural for me, and I shoot very well with it. But is a bit heavy and bulky, so I stay with the S&W Chief's Special, 9mm. Loaded with Corbon 115 JHP +P it comes out at 1350 fps, probably a bit slower with the Chief's shorter barrel, but still plenty fast. I shot it through my chronograph several years ago, but I have forgotten the actual speed.

I think much of the confusion in the debate comes in when we compare the .45 ball ammo to the 9mm ball ammo. The .45 was developed to have more "stopping power" using military ball ammo than the .38 which was woefully underpowered. If we compare the .45 to the 9mm with both using ball ammo, there is no real comparison. But we don't shoot ball ammo in our 9mm for self defense; we use the modern high speed JHP that almost always expands upon impact.

Of course modern ammo is available for the .45 as well. The CorBon +P 185 g. bullet will come out at about 1150 fps and the 165 g. will come out at about 1250 fps, if I remember my speeds correctly. Don't think the older 1911 .45s can handle a steady diet of the +P load, but a few rounds may be OK. I wouldn't want to shoot them in my .45s, however. I will take the old and slow 800 to 950 fps loads.

Where does all of this get us? Not sure. We know the 9mm in a +P is probably about as effective as the ball .45 in a standard loading. But what about the higher pressure hollow points for the .45? There may have been studies done in the last 10 years or so, but I haven't been reading up on the subject. I need to check my Springfield Armory 1911 and see if it is +P rated. I doubt that it is. I know my Colt Commander is not. I have had it for over 35 years.

So, because of the weight and bulk of the .45, although I have a natural affinity for the weapon, I will stick to the 9mm +P for my carry weapon. I shoot it very well, and according to the FBI report, bullet placement is a large part of the equation.

 

[Inusuit]

I carry everything from a .22 Magnum KelTec PMR 30, very lethal on feral cats and ground squirrels to a full size 1911 depending on the circumstances. Often a Kahr .380 as a pocket gun, either primary in situations where a full sized pistol is difficult to conceal or a as back up to a larger handgun. I often carry a Kahr P9 - light and flat and easy to conceal. I'm just breaking in a S&W Shield with my first ever laser sight, a green Trijicon. Eyes at 71 aren't what they once were. I agree with Peacoat that modern ammunition has in my opinon rendered much of the 9mm/.45 debate moot. Although I heard someone opine that while a good 9mm will expand, a good .45 will never shrink. Sort of like the old saw: A good big man will alwlays defeat a good small man.