www.sightm1911.com/lib/other/jh_45acp.htm

Blah Blah Blah Blah....

Although the 45 ACP is a my favorite handgun cartridge, I don't buy the argument of this article.  When you are talking about quality JHP ammunition how can you claim that 16-18  rounds of 9mm or 15-17 roduns of 40 SW are less effective than 8-9 rounds of 45ACP.

Sure you can get a Para P-14, but my hands aren't that big...

I took it to mean ONE shot stops, not 16-18 rds.

There is no such thing as a ONE SHOT STOP unless you disconnect the central nervous system from the rest of the body!

Quoted: There is no such thing as a ONE SHOT STOP unless you disconnect the central nervous system from the rest of the body!

Which is easy to do if you can hit that area while getting shot at.

Though I own a .45 (what handgun collection is complete without one?) I have full confidence in the 9MM, mainly because if John Browning (who, by the way, invented the 1911 model .45) chose to build a handgun that he himself felt was a better design than the .45 around the 9MM, it's good enough for me.

ok, i am going to regret this in the morning but.
i have shot lot's of deer with handguns.
i realize a human is not a deer but .45 ACP and .44 magnums. hammer the shit out of a deer.  it looks like you pinned him to the ground with a speer.  no hope of finding his feet, getting up or running off.  this with 125, 230 and with the .44 240g JHP ammo

the few deer i have shot with a 9mm didn't even act like they got shot.  they spooked at the noise and they needed to be tracked between about 50 and several hundred yards.  this from solid chest shots.

based on this i feel the extra diameter is more of a value than speed or quantity.  and 7 rounds is a long time to be "banging away" at someone.  i can't imagine shooting something 12-18 times.  just sounds like a good way to miss, endanger others and make a lot of noise.  

Quoted: ok, i am going to regret this in the morning but. i have shot lot's of deer with handguns. i realize a human is not a deer but .45 ACP and .44 magnums. hammer the shit out of a deer.  it looks like you pinned him to the ground with a speer.  no hope of finding his feet, getting up or running off.  this with 125, 230 and with the .44 240g JHP ammo

It sounds like your .45 has better stopping power than my 30-06.  After all, even with the '06, they sometimes will run a bit.  Maybe I ought to switch calibers.

NOT!

I think I'll stick with my .270 for deer.

just my experience.
my .444 marlin, .45-70 and 12gauge with full bore slugs are also better close range deer guns than my .308 and 30-06.  my point is below about 2500-3000 fps diameter kills.  to be honest these were all single shots.  i haven't had the opportunity to shoot a deer 3 times with a 9mm to see if it is as good as 1 round of .45

i can say a 9mm was designed to be a submachine gun round and supposedly works will if you shoot someone 3-5 times.  i would rather carry a pistol in a big pistol caliber than relying on 3-5 solid hits.
now if i had a primary CCl piece like a micro UZI then i would have a back up in 9mm.

I agree with 308wood. At close range, velocity is no substitute for diameter, regardless of bullet construction.
I'd rather shoot a bear (close range) with a .480 Ruger than I would with a .223.
Legal defensive shooting situations all occur at close range...where diameter is king.
Shot placement is difficult under stress, so bigger wound cavities just make sense.  

The pro 45 arguments here seem to be based on a false premise IMHO.  If there is only one attacker 7 rounds may plenty.  For multiple attackers is another story.  For an gunfight involving one or more attackers I would prefer a lot more than 7 rounds.

Even against a determined attacker who is moving and bobbing 7 rounds can run out darn quick.  As stated earlier one shot stops require a CNS hit and that can be very tricky against a moving target.

I'm not saying that 45ACP isn't a great caliber (it's my personal favorite) I'm just saying I don't see how one can argue its superiority over the other options especially when discussing modern JHP ammo.  

Take your pick between 9mm, 40 SW, 357 sig, 10mm and 45 ACP.  All of these caliber will do the job so it's your preference.  I don't think any one is superior to another.  What you gain in power you lose in capacity and follow up shot ability so it's really just a matter of taste in my mind.

Quoted: There is no such thing as a ONE SHOT STOP unless you disconnect the central nervous system from the rest of the body!

Don't you think this is more likely with a single shot from a .45 than smaller handgun calibers.

No flames, just a question.

Quoted: I think I'll stick with my .270 for deer.

Me too.

Handguns are for fighting you way back to your rifle, or fighting your way to a new rifle.

Slacker and 308wood:  With all due respect, y'all are talking crazy.  I have a 44 mag, have shot game with it, and the effect is totally pathetic compared to a 30-06.  And, like I said, even the '06 does not drop them instantly all of the time.  I have never shot a person, but my expectations, given my experience with mule deer and the .44, is that it would not be wise to expect instant kills with a .45.  It is a real question in my mind whether the .44 is even better than a 5.56.  In terms of wound cavaties, with a 5.56 you get explosive fragmentation and a 2" hole; the .44 is only going to mushroom a bit.

I dont ever plan on testing the one shot stop theory.

I am not enthusiastic about fighting with a handgun, but in my mind, bigger is better until you reach the point where you cant accurately control the gun in rapid fire.  In the end, its hits to vitals that count.  I just want them to be big hits

Quoted: i can say a 9mm was designed to be a submachine gun round and supposedly works will if you shoot someone 3-5 times.

I believe the 9x19 was originally designed for the Luger pistol.  The first Luger (1900) was chambered for 7.65mm; the case was widened somewhat to 9mm in 1902.  The German army adopted the pistol in 1908.

The first submachinegun was indeed in 9mm, but it was not introduced until 1918.

Hmmmmm....

So using a 9mm upper to hunt wild hogs might be exciting.

Gotta try that.

TRG

Ok, I must Rant...

I'm am SO tired of the 45 vs. 9mm Debate.

Unless you are talking about ball, ie., FMJ ammo its a waste of breath.

A little background:  Ive seen humans killed all manner of ways. I spent 3 years as a ER doc.  Of those killed with handguns .22 were the majority.  What? You say.  That's right the deuce deuce.  Why, they are cheap and come in shiny colors with pearl grips - these things are appealling to gang bangers, I guess.  I have seen BG's shot with 9mm, 45 and 40.  Some died with only one well placed round.  Still others survived multiple shots to the torso with the magic, kills the best, blah, blah .45 ACP.

Here's what you need to remember:  Handguns dont kill humans well so get over the magic caliber debate.  Handguns kill by hemorrhage or by shutting off the nervous system.  Nervous system hits are tough for most to make and hemorrhage takes time to happen - that means eventhough a fatal hit has been scored the BG may not know he's dead (and still kill you.)

I am a 4 gun master in IDPA.  I rountinely shoot with other master and grand master shooters in both IPSC and IDPA.  Mr. Higgbtham's statement,

"However, in trained hands, at normal defense ranges (about 10 feet or less) a .45 Auto can be fired as fast and accurately as a .22 auto."  

Is bullshit.  None of us can do it consistantly and we're better than most.  We can get close using caliber conversions on 1911 but close aint the same as doing it.  

So are my experiences to be taken as fact?

NO!  They are simply my experiences as Mr. Higgenbothams are his.  They are not generalizable to the rest of the world. Remember, we are not deer.  Humans can be wired on crack, meth, etc.  Dont get caught in the trap that you or a bad guy will act the same as a rutting buck when shot or shot at.

The best DATA on killing people - not cows, sheep, deer, etc. - comes from Ed Sannow.  His methodolgy isnt perfect, but lets face it setting up experiments in which you shoot people and carefully controll the experiment went out with the nazis (thank God).  If you look at Sannow's stuff, using defensive handgun ammo, statistically, the 45 and the 9mm are equal.  Yes there is a few percentage point advantage to the 45 but the difference is not statistcally significant.  In other words the difference between the 2 calibers could have occured by chance alone.  

Get a pistol that you can shoot 9, 40, 45 - I dont care.  Practice, Practice, Practice.  Get some training - not from the Police.  Afterall, they hit what they shoot at less than 25% of the time.  Maybe that's why high cap are so popular...

And if you do have to shoot someone, shoot them alot.

Ok I feel better - flame suit on.

No flame on this one.  Im not concerned with what kills better, if I was, I'd carry ball ammo and make a hole on both sides.  Im concerned with what stops.  Theres a difference.

My Glock 17 holds 21 rounds of Winchester Ranger RA9T.  My Glock 21 holds 14 rounds of CCI 230GN  Gold Dot.  My 1911 holds 9 Rounds of CCI 230Gn Golt Dot.  They are all roughly the same size. 9 rounds isnt vey many when dealing with mutiple attackers, so I'm not sold on the 1911.

AR15fan, You said it for me.

I also have a G17 and G21 though I shoot Winchester Ranger-T in both of them.

I tend to carry my G17 and keep my G21 for home defense along with two loaded Marlin Camp carbines with the same ammo (9mm & .45 acp).

People think they will only need one or two shots in a violent encounter because of what they read in some gun magazine. They don’t stop to think that there are good reasons why there are so many rounds expended in many police shootings and shootings where both the attacker and the defender are both armed.

Roger That...aim small miss small.

Marshell and Sanow have been discreteded numerous times.



On the 1911 versus everything else--CARRY MORE MAGS.-- CARRY.  MORE.  MAGS.

And would somebody please explain to me what advantage(besides mag capacity) a DA semi-auto offers.

As was stated in a previous post most thugs are killed/injured with .22 LONG RIFLE. My dad was a doctor in a major city and can testify to this.

Maybe that's why my grandpa bought a .22 LR revolver for home defense.

Shot placement is it and .22 LR will definitely kill. So who needs a .45 or 9mm? Anybody?

CRC

Shot placement is it and .22 LR will definitely kill. So who needs a .45 or 9mm? Anybody?

Uhhh....

USMC
USARMY
USNAVY
USAIRFORCE
USCOASTGAURD
..............
.........
....ME !!!!



.....and lets not forget that Sgt. Alvin York took down 7 attacking enemy slodiers with 7 rounds of .45acp. with ball ammo.

Yeah, but they lived to see the ER and died there according to your story.  BFD.  Thats no clue as to whether they were stopped from being aggressive.  You want to be arms length from an enraged substance abuser with nothing to lose,and you armed with a .22, you go for it.  You're a better man than me.

I never said I was a better man, you did.

And yes I own a .22 LR and I would have don't have a problem using it for home defense.

CRC

Quoted: Yeah, but they lived to see the ER and died there according to your story.  BFD.  Thats no clue as to whether they were stopped from being aggressive.  You want to be arms length from an enraged substance abuser with nothing to lose,and you armed with a .22, you go for it.  You're a better man than me.

Yeah but so did people shot with 9mms and 45s. It jus that MORE people were shot with .22s that visited the ER.

CRC

Allow me to correct myself.....BRAVER would have been the better word.

Quoted: Allow me to correct myself.....BRAVER would have been the better word.

Lumpy,

If they get past my dog, I don't think even a .50 BMG will help me. Really I prefer a shotgun for defense anyway. I juat mean that with any pistol at close range in my house, I'd consider a .22 LR as good as any. I would use mine. My grandpa used it.

CRC

And I intend no offense, but I myself will continue to hedge my bets and stick with a caliber of substance.  

In the end, its not the gun, its the user that matters.

Quoted: And I intend no offense, but I myself will continue to hedge my bets and stick with a caliber of substance.   In the end, its not the gun, its the user that matters.

Truer words never spoken.

>>.....and lets not forget that Sgt. Alvin York took down 7 attacking enemy slodiers with 7 rounds of .45acp. with ball ammo.<<
And let's also not forget that that record is beat hands down by a young fellow in the South African Army who took down 9 attacking enemy soldiers with 9 rounds of 9mm with ball ammo.  He was using a Star, btw.  So, should everyone go get a 9mm Star now?  ALso, for the record, there is great disagreement among military historians as to whether York used a 1911 or a 9mm Luger.

[trivia)I've read that the US Army tested a Luger in .45 ACP before adopting the 1911.[/trivia]

>And let's also not forget that that record is beat hands down by a young fellow in the South African Army who took down 9 attacking enemy soldiers with 9 rounds of 9mm with ball ammo.<

Never heard of him............sure he wasn't using a .22lr?

>So, should everyone go get a 9mm Star now? <

If that's what floats you boat.

>ALso, for the record, there is great disagreement among military historians as to whether York used a 1911 or a 9mm Luger<

Do they claim he used a 1898 mauser as well?

ALso, for the record, there is great disagreement among military historians as to whether York used a 1911 or a 9mm Luger.

Oh Belsiles made a book on Alvin York too?
York had a 1911. He was a automatic rifleman and carried one of those evil Chauchats. When it jammed he discarded it and took a dead mans Enfield.

All Automatic Riflemen were issued handguns as backup during WWII. The automatic riflemans web belts in both the Chauchat and BAR versions came with a holster attached. A 1911 was part of the kit, just like the cleaning tools.

The pro 45 arguments here seem to be based on a false premise IMHO. If there is only one attacker 7 rounds may plenty. For multiple attackers is another story. For an gunfight involving one or more attackers I would prefer a lot more than 7 rounds.

This is backwards. What the high capacity, small bore fans fail to note are the time/speed/distance factors in being attacked. The normal engagment ranges found in handgun shootings there isnt enough time to shoot that many rounds. If you engage 3 determined attackers at 7yds (NOT ones who break off as soon as they see or hear your gun) and double tap each while making a effort to try to hit something important whoever you engage last is going to fall at your feet, or knock you down.

Gunfights where everyone gets behind the cover at hand and shoots at each others heads as they pop over and around cover or run between cover are rare. And when they do occur you are still left with pleanty of time and space to reload if you don't have a high capacity gun.

While it is vital to learn failure drills. You have to understand that with multiple targets if you have to use a failure drill on one, his homies are going to smoke you.

And this is really why so many Counter Terror/Hostage Rescue types use the .45. Its the cartridge that is the least dependant on everything working perfectly that will still drop someone with the first or second shot. They don't usually bother with high cap .45s, even though in theory that would solve the debate, because of the grip size issue which effects their accuracy and because they know that if they need to use the handgun they will not have time to expend more than 8 rounds in one encounter.

Its not perfect, that is why they learn failure drills, work in pairs or larger groups, and whenever possible try to use a carbine or shotgun instead of a handgun-and understand that even the long arms sometimes fail too.

ArmdLbrl, I love my .45 acp but I also love my 9mm.

LEO’s and Anti-Terrorist squads can carry as much ammo in their assault vests as they like and be backed up by many other officers when they reload.

I read all the time about shootings involving well trained officers where large amounts of ammo are expended. I don’t think many of us are going to do much better. Bad guys don’t always stand there and present a target while they are shooting at you.

In an Indoor encounter you could fined yourself being shot at through walls and too defend yourself/friends and family you will shoot back (empty a mag and reload) even though you cannot see your attacker who ran with his gun and started shooting when he saw that you where armed. Outdoors an attacker could be behind a bush or other visual or physical obstruction and you will do what you have to do when you have too.

Auto’s and glass and auto glass eat up and deflect bullets and the stopping power of projectiles diminishes after penetrating even light obstructions.

I don’t care about normal ranges of most attacks or what some LEO’s carry who have 50 other officers with them when they move in. I want to have enough ammo for the more unusual situations and I never ever want to hear click click click when I should be hearing Bang Bang Bang when my life or the life of one of my loved ones depends on it. Also vision can be damaged by debris from a near miss and most of us will still want to defend ourselves and loved ones even if we are partially impaired.

Is the .45 acp a better shot per shot stopper than the 9mm? I believe it is and that’s why I own one. But because of the size/weight and capacity differences of the guns and their ammo I always grab my 9mm with Winchester Ranger SXT 127gr +P+ on the way out the door and at home I always grab my G21 loaded with Winchester Ranger 230gr SXT law enforcement ammunition. You see, as much as I like my 9mm I like my 45 acp just a little more when I have backup and lots of other ammunition and loaded backups around.

If you wish to carry a .45 because you feel you will never be involved in an extreme shooting that requires more ammo that’s fine with me and odds are you will never need to draw it to defend yourself or others.

I just happen to believe the 9mm or .40 with the right ammo can be good choices for good reasons too. After all in the average shooting where both parties are up close and personal shot placement and bullet configuration are more important than caliber and in a more extreme situation they often hold more rounds.  

I can see both sides of the argument and can see why a shooter would choose one and not the other caliber. I don’t necessarily think either argument is wrong. It’s just that some people want everyone to see things the same way they do and will argue till the cows come home in order to make their point.

But for me guns and calibers have a reason and the 9mm and the .45 both have their place in my arsenal.  

Sorry for the long post guys

So....? The question is...........

How many real life-----* civilian *defending him/herself against multiple assailant with say......... more than 10 rounds expended can anyone document for us?

SGB, I don’t think there is a place where such statistics are kept but I have read about such things happening.

I remember two that where analyzed in the gun mags where jewelry stores where being robbed. In both cases the owners kept a lot of loaded guns handy. I seam to remember in one of them the six employees fired well in over 100rds defending themselves and both the perps took cover during the shootout.

Quoted: So....? The question is........... How many real life-----* civilian *defending him/herself against multiple assailant with say......... more than 10 rounds expended can anyone document for us?

Korean shop keepers during the LA riots.


Additionally, there was a recent home invasion robbery where the homeowner defended himself with a 5 shot revolver. He scored the first hits, but ran out of ammo and was killed. Plenty here would argue you'll never need more than 5,7,10, rounds.

I want enought that I can put two rounds in ever attacker, and still have ammo left for folow up shots.

Bad guys don’t always stand there and present a target while they are shooting at you.

Since I set out to get my permit, I started looking this stuff up. And from what I have seen, and my CCW instructor agreed when I mentioned this, is that most gunfights between civilians and criminals and criminals and patrol and plainclothes officers, start at conversational distance. Both sides pretty much DO just stand there and shoot at each other. The range does not give you enough time to do anything else. Even when one or both sides try to get under cover, the fight is usually over by the time they get there, if they get there.

And sill only 15 percent of the rounds hit. But carrying the greater number of rounds is a false economy. 5 shots however is too little fire power, especially in such a weak cartridge as .38spl.

The LA Riots were really a unusual situation. Normal handgun use is in close quarters. The more distance between the person defending and his attacker the more equal all things become. 9mm's have more time to fire off their strings, but .45 owners, if they remembered to bring enough mags, have pleanty of time to reload.

And a lot of the Koreans were using shotguns and high cap rifles to fire that many rounds.

I wouldn't look at Police shootings as a model.  Generally speaking they are very poorly trained at best.

ArmdLbrl, In the jewelry shops mentioned by me they where not in the LA riots. In the one where over 100rds where fired most of the rounds where fired from the twenty revolvers spaced every two feet behind the counters.

Quoted: ArmdLbrl, In the jewelry shops mentioned by me they where not in the LA riots. In the one where over 100rds where fired most of the rounds where fired from the twenty revolvers spaced every two feet behind the counters.

20 REVOLVERS.........

What Jewelry store does that !!!

SGB, One that never wants to have a hand gun out or reach.

At our house we have about the same number of loaded firearms on top of cabinets and behind doors and in drawers or on my desk. I can reach two where I’m sitting and if I turn around there are two more pistols and a loaded rifle.

Here’s a picture of one of my kids



Look! No finger on the trigger.

Then how did the US Army get away with using a 8 round pistol for over half a century?

CRC

CRC, For several hundred years soldiers carried single shot rifles and if they where lucky they had a single shot pistol to go along with it. Does that make them better than what we have today because they got along with them for so long?

Just an attempt to follow your reasoning to an obvious conclusion.

I remember this from a magazine fromt he early 80s calle dHANDGUN TEST.  " hit w/ a .22 is better than a miss w/ a .44 magnum".

I agree with the bigger is better theory and I would rather use a rifle or shotgun before a pistol.