Besides the stopping power of the .45  why is it better than the .40.  I'm in between the .45 and the .40 for my next  pistol.
If I'll get  the Springfield 1911-A1 TRP in .45 can I converted to the .40?

The more info I'll get from you will be appreciated. Thanks.

You answered your own question. STOPPING POWER. I bought my Springfield 45 for home protection. I want them to drop on the first shot.

You summed it pretty much up:
Springfield + .45acp = A great combination

Now a question,
Why would want to convert it?

IMO - dosen't make sense.  You got a proven catridge, on a proven platform.  What more is needed?

I will admit, I like the .40 also and don't have a problem carrying one.  I have one and will own another VERY soon.  So no problems there.  My own carry gun is .45 Kimber with a G27 as my soon to be backup.

If you are going to spend the big bucks to buy such a beautiful weapon as the TRP, stay with a proven battle round.  You can't beat NINETY YEARS service record.

BTW, a tad bit jealous, I am.  I would love to have a TRP as my carry gun.  In time. ;)

What more reason do you need?

I concur with Dale007, I have a .45 for just that but the tradeoff is accuracy after 21ft for me (maybe I just haven't learned to compenate the drop well enough yet)... but then, that is why I have my Bushy ak shorty as well... anything over that 21.ft limit!

You need to hit what you are shooting at to stop it. If you can hit with a .45, all the better, but some can't, therefore the .40. I find the .45 to be more accurate, but some can't handle the recoil (especially in a light frame gun likr the Glock). That said, I prefer to carry my Browning Hi-Power .40, but use my 1911 for competition.

Pakrat,

Don't be jealous...My wife confiscated my brand new Ruger GP 100 3" SS .357 Magnum and now I need one for myself.

I never shot a .45 and I need input of how is it compared to the .38 and .357M.

.38 and .357, being revolvers, have a different type of felt recoil than a .45. I would classify the .45 as about the same felt recoil as a .38+P, but less than the .357. The .45 has a "smoother" felt recoil (for lack of a better term) than the "snap" recoil of the .357. Hope this makes sense.

The .45 is WAY more powerfull than a .38, and not quite as powerfull as a .357.  But some of the +P .45 ACP loads are HOT!!!  I don't have a table detailing the velocity and energy handy, but I'm sure some one else does.

45 Pros: 1)better stopping power, 2)mild mannered/operates on roughly half the pressure of a hot 40 load, 3)ideal for use in the 1911 platform (duh) where the 40's short OAL is usually the source of feed problems, 4) very accurate, 5) confidence inspiring  

40 Pros: 1)fits in 9mm format guns, 2)not as much velocity loss in short barrels due to high chamber pressures

well before Klinton there was the capacity advantige  there still is thu if your willling to shell out 60+ for magazine

in recorded shootings the .40 is a good preformer. the .45 is of course legendary. you will have to decide for yourself what the most important aspects you want are. do you want more rounds or that flying ashtray hitting them. if you compromise on the 2 then there are guns like the .357sig, which is turning out to be a phenominal round. stopping power of a .357 mag in a .40 cal gun. but the recoil is a bit stiff.  just my .02 worth..

I chose the Beretta .40 Centurion and a 96FS as it's back-up for my two .40 "Smith&Wesson" pistols.
                    It turned out to be a good choice, as the Border Patrol and the Postal Police also have these (Beretta
                    .40's) as their issue weapons, which in my case is really good because I live in an area where if it were
                    necessary to exchange parts or ammunition, they would be close by. Also, the local Police Dept. uses
                    the .40, except they use Glocks. All this made for great "Y2K" scenario justification when that was going
                    on, yet, the fact remains that IF something were to happen, I have the ammo, and maybe, the gun
                    commonality factor to my advantage. In my case, here, etc.

                    As far as the viablity or reason for existence of the .40 S&W (Ruger calls it the .40 Auto; Beretta called
                    it the Cal. .40, for a while), it was INTENDED to be a "compromise" in power, capacity, platform size,
                    bullet weight, etc.

                    Most .45's were of the 1911 variety at the time of introduction for the .40. That changed, but the usual
                    capacity of 7 or 8 didn't. Eventually, that, too, changed, but the guns were a bit large and most Law
                    Enforcement Agencies didn't condone the cocked-n-locked 1911 platform as a duty gun, ALTHOUGH it is
                    without a doubt the BEST COMBAT HANDGUN ever devised. That said, the LEO isn't in combat. And, it
                    IS disconcerting for the average UN-gun citizen to see the hammer back on the nice officer's gun...
                    The 9MM Parabellum cartridge, being available in distinct levels of power, can be a wimp or not.
                    Standard; +P; +P+; NATO; Sub-machine Gun; probably a couple more we don't generally know about
                    or acknowledge. Some guns can handle the hard stuff, some can't.

The .40 was pushed hard into Life after the "Miami Shootout", where the 9MM was officially crowned
                    as a wimp. After testing the 10MM and declaring it to be TOO much of a good thing, and too much for
                    most available handgun platforms to handle, an equivalent "lighter load 10MM", aka, the .40 Caliber
                    was decided upon as just right. Short enough to fit into the existing 9MM platforms, and the springs
                    and sometimes slides, were beefed up to accomodate the higher intensity cartridge, which threw a
                    heavier bullet, and maintained a satisfactory capacity for LE. Not as many bullets to "spray and pray" (I
                    HATE THAT TERM, BTW...), yet more capacity than the .45, in some cases, double.
                    We ought to consider the environments in which each caliber may excel. Depending on the situation,
                    any one of the 9MM, .40, or .45 may be the right choice. Either for a civilian, or LEO.
                    Most of you guys already have read the gunwriters' opinions to death and beyond. Most of you already
                    know the story. Most of you have made your choices for whatever reason you have conjured up.
                    Whether or not you are convinced of the superiority of one cartridge over another is best left to your
                    own judgement of your circumstances.
                    I have my own reasons for choosing the Beretta 96 platform as my "fun guns". What IS important, if
                    you must be convinced of anything, is that it works for ME, I can SUPPORT that statement, and that IS
                    the advantage over the .45 in MY case.
                    IT IS WHAT IT IS.

Testimonial: More people have "Met Their Maker" from being at the wrong end of a .45 ACP slug than from a .40 Caliber slug.

I have both the Colt and USGI Remington Rand .45 Pistols. For defense rounds I use the Remington "Golden Saber" and Federal "Hydra-Shok". For general wasting of ammunition (target shooting) I use the Federal "American Eagle".

If you are getting the  Springfield 1911-A1 TRP It would be a true shame to chamber it for a 40 Short and Weak :)It was designed for the 45 and works flawless. Anyone that has used a hammer (the kind for nails) has felt more recoil then the 45 produces. You only need 2-finger to shoot the 1911 platform in the 45 with full loads. So the recoil argument against the 45 is, well weak. The only plus I see for 40SW is in a different platform you can have high cap mags.

Clinth

That's why a lot of guys call the .40 S&W the 40 Short&Weak.

crash

Dacon,

Here are a few obervations from someone who shoots both 40S&W and 45acp quite a bit.

1)"stopping power" is a misnomer when you're talking about handguns.  None of the majors really give up anything to any of the others when we're talking about high quality factory hollow points.  i.e. a 9 is a 40 is a 45 when you're not using ball.  If for some crazy reason you want to use ball,  get a .45 and have fun.

2)a 40 will generally recoil "more" than a .45. The reason for the quotes is that I don't know what the ft/lbs recoil figures are from either gun, they might be the same,  but I know that the .40 is harder to control than the .45 from similar platforms.  Another poster nailed it when he said the recoil impulse from the .45 is "smoother".  It's more of a push while the .40 will give you a violent "snap".  This is not my observation only but lots and lots of the people I take shooting who shoot both.  I shoot 40's from a G23 and .45's from both a kimber Ultra Carry and a G30.  Neither of my .45's recoils quite as violently as my .40.  None of them hurt or are uncomfortable in any way,  you just get more rotation or muzzle rise from the .40.  It takes just a split second longer to stop the recoil and get it back down on target.  My wife and some of her friends don't like shooting the .40 because it's painful to them while the .45's don't bother them.  I'm not sure where the "Ah those 45's kick like  MULE" quotes come from.  .45's are very easy to control.

3)You will be just as happy with a .40 as you will with a .45 as long as you like the gun and shoot it enough to be proficient with it.  Shoot as much as possible and if you have to use it to defend yourself you'll be best off with a gun that you've shot a lot and can shoot instinctively.  There is a lot of BS about "1 shot stops" and "knockdown power" and stuff like that.  Don't let it get to you too much.  YOu can vastly overcomplicate this kind of decision.  Just get a major caliber in a very reliable gun and shoot it a lot.  If you want knockdown power get a BAR or a 12Gauge.  If you want to win a gunfight, buy a gun in any major caliber that you are a)comfortable shooting b)you're good with and c)Is light and comfortable enough that YOU'LL ACTUALLY CARRY IT.  It's surprising how many guys who will tear you to pieces over your handgun choice that don't have one within a hundred yards of themselves. As if anything bad that happens to them will only happen in their car or in their bedroom.

If you absolutely can't make up your mind after all this good advice I and all the others have given you,  chose which gun you like the best and then buy one in .40short&weak and one in .45acp.  Then you can chose for yourself.


Have fun with your new gun(s).  Be safe, shoot a lot,  VOTE and recruit more shooters and JOIN the NRA or GOA or JPFO or any of the above.

Crash.

Do any of you referring to the .40S&W as "Short and Weak" wish to volunteer to be shot with one?

No, I didn't think so. [;)]

We all know that .45ACP has a relgious following, which is obviously well deserved.  It's an excellent round.  That being said, I carry .40S&W and have no problems with it whatsovever.

One shot drops and stopping power are relative between the .45ACP and .40S&W, and anyone who's looked at the veolicty and kinetic energy charts based on various ammo loads will know tha there's very little differnce between the two.

230 gr. (largest bullet size listed) Federal Hydrashoks for the .45ACP travel at 840fps with kinetic energy of 360 ft-lbs.  180gr (once again, largest bullet size) Federal Hydrashoks travel at 930fps with 346ft-lbs of kinetic energy.  It doesn't sound like much of a difference in "stopping power" to me.

God Bless Texas

Maybe it's just me, but ALl of the .40s&w 's ihave shot have been more accurate than the .45acp . if you really cared about stopping power we would all strap .50BMG's to our back and cars, but others of us care about accuracy. I have no problems with someone carrying a .22lr if they are the most profecient with it(meaning they can put it in between the assailant's eyes every time). I would carry a .40s&w b/c I am more accurate with them generally speaking. Too bad I am not 21 and they deny 18-20 year olds the right to self defense. But that is another issue.
-Chuck

This is my opinion and an opinion only. You will have to see what floats your boat. I shoot a Kimber .45 and love it and carry it and use it for IDPA. I also have a Glock 22 and like it alot. I prefer the .45. I think the .45 is alot easier to control than the Glock. A .45 (1911 model) is heavier and takes alot of the recoil out of the gun. The Glock is light and has more recoil to me. But like I said this is my opinion, and from what Ive seen on this thread, most people like the .45 as well....

Get a 10mm and get more stopping power and velocity than the 40, which is just a shortened 10mm.  The 10mm is harder to control with full blown loads than the 40 or 45 though.  My brother-in-law recently got a Springfield Armory Fully-Loaded M1911, and I have to say, I shot better groups with it the first time I shot it than I can do with my Glock.  I want one!  I'm not real excited about the lock and key thing, but I can unlock it and lose the key, I guess.  
Whatever you get, put a lot of rounds though it.  Put em in the right place and the perp won't know whether he's been hit with a 40, 10mm, or 45.  

The .40 is a solution to a law enforcement problem. If you can carry and shoot a .45 accurately, go with the .45.

The .40 was developed because while autoloaders, particularly the pistols that Jeff Cooper liked to call "crunchentickers" (or something like that) became reliable enough and popular enough that the venerable old .38 Special revolver was no longer an adequate weapon for LE work.

Enter the brief golden age of the Wondernine. The problem was that the the 9mm pistols were not stopping bad guys well enough. The FBI tried with the 10mm, but it was doing a number on their chosen platform, the Smith 1006. It was just too hot.

The .45 was too big of a round for the "one-size fits all" approach that LE agencies unfortunately have to take when selecting duty weapons. Many officers had hands that were too small to effectively use .45 pistols, and could not be trained well enough with the limited amounts of time and capital available to shoot the bigger weapons well.

The .40 was a compromise. It could fit on the 9mm frame weapons. It offered a substantial increase in the ability to cause first shot stops over 9mm and it wasn't as big as .45.

I carry an issued .40, and I do not feel poorly armed. I also carry a .45 as a back-up (and carried one as a duty weapon when I had a choice) but that is more because my wife won't let me buy more guns than anything else.

The bottom line, .45 has better terminal ballistics (in general). The .40 will give you more rounds and maybe better concealability. Both are good, solid performers.

Another thought, when LE gets really serious, they go with .45s. It is what most of your SWAT teams, including the FBIs Hostage Rescue Team, carry for their jobs. They arrived at their decisions to do that after a large amount of thought, research and testing. The military does the same thing, both with the customized 1911s of years past, that wee still in use well after the Beretta came on board, and with the SOCOM pistol, the Mk23.

After the North Hollywood shootout what did cops start asking for?  Semi-auto rifles in patrol cars and .45s

The .45 won't do the "one-stop shot" every time, and it won't take off a limb or decapitate anybody, but it will put a very heavy slug into bad guy's body at a fair velocity and that slug will stay there.  The .45 has a following because it will stop quickly.  You don't need 15 shots with a .45 if you aim the damn thing.

INFO BASED ON PERSONAL EXPERIENCE:  No bad guy in the world, no matter what kind of drug or religion he is hopped-up on will survive more than 3 .45 230 gr. ball slugs to the chest.  Performance can be drmatically improved with 230 gr hollow points like the Hydra-Shok or SXT.




"Do what you will,
just don't believe the fast and light bullet myth."

I'm small and I find shooting my fiance's .45 a blast, both literally and figuratively.  I enjoy it's weight because I feel it makes me pay more attention to how I hold the gun.  Granted, sometimes my hand aches after I'm done shooting, but about six or seven years ago I broke the hand I use to shoot.  I would like to think that has something to do with it.  I don't really know.  I hope the more I shoot the easier it will be, and that I can one day own a pair of my own.  I think I want H&K's.  What does everyone here think of their pistols?

H&Ks are decent pistols, but way way way way overpriced.

Edited to add another "way."



"Do what you will,
just buy stuff that will get you something for your money."

Here we go again.  This topic has been beaten way beyond death.  There's not a lot of practical difference between the best .45 and .40 loads.  .40 works better for some folks with smaller hands who like the 9mm size frame better.  Neither one is a 'death ray', contrary to what some .45 fans think.  

You'd be nuts to convert that TRP to .40.  It can be done, but you'd need a new slide and barrel at minimum, as the .40 slide face is smaller.  If the TRP is what you really want, let that make your caliber decision for you and stick with the .45.

And people have survived more than 3 .45 ball rounds to the chest- I know of 2 incidents where bad guys took 4 and 6 rounds of said ammo to the chest and were able to transport themselves to the hospital with no problem.  There's a lot of bullshit floating around about the 'lengendary manstopping .45' that people accept as gospel.  It's a handgun cartridge, and therefore inherently underpowered.  "Stopping power" is a myth.  Pick a good quality, reliable handgun in 9mm or larger, feed it factory hollowpoints that cycle your gun reliably, and practice your butt off.  This silly debate about what handgun caliber is 'best' is a waste of time.

.45 Does The Job
No reason for any other calibers to exist...
That is for Serious Social Encounters....
That they do, is just a testimonial
To the marketing flacks...

M16 and a .45, that's the tools that we live by.......

 I find the recoil of a hot .357 load is more "violent" (takes longer to regain sight picture) than the .45 auto.  But, then I'm comparing a revolver to an auto. If you wanted to, you could try a .400 COR-BON barrel in your .45 and have 1450fps at your disposal.  I have one for my Springfield and it's as simple as switching barrels.  Kind'a spices things up once in a while.
Check it out.[url]www.cor-bon.com/400.html[/url]
If you decided to load your own, Dillon Precision carries the bullets and brass.
coyote3

Thanks guys for all the helpfull input on the matter. I have decided to get the Springfield 1911-A1 TRP and keep it as is. Now I have to be nice to my wife

[img]http://home.earthlink.net/~dalecon/_uimages/1911-A1.jpg[/img]

Good choice.  I don't think you will be sorry.
And while I love the looks of those wood grips, a set of Hogue grips will make it fit like a glove in your hand and give you better control. (my opinion)
Congrats.

Drop!?! 21ft limit!?! (7yards !?!) WTF are you talking about? Have you ever shot that .45 that you "have"? The legendary drop of the .45ACP is total B.S. It is as accurate as any hand gun round within effective hand gun range.

shot placement is the key

weither its a 22 or a 45 it wont do shit unless you hit the guy!!!!

I did not see too many people talking about the .357 Sig.  I have shot 9MM, .40, 10MM, .45ACP, but I have to say that as far as auto pistols, the .357 Sig hits the hardest.  The .45ACP is easier to shoot.   But after several rounds fired of the other calibers listed and then one from the .357 Sig the shooter knows it as well as those around him.  

Oh well, just my .02

The .357 Sig is a good round.  It is a .40 S&W necked down to take .357 bullets.  It uses the same mags as the .40.  Get the Sig pistol with interchangeable barrels and you can use both.  The 10mm, when loaded to its full potential, has has an edge over the .357Sig when it comes to energy.  Both have about the same or better energy level as a .357 magnum, the longtime standard man stopper.  There are some good .45+P loads that also have pretty good energy levels, especially with lighter bullet weights.   But accuracy is more important than caliber selection.  

just read an article on the differences between ammo types (yes, this included all types of ammo as well...) anyway, it was based on the FBI WV (wound value) ratings of the tested ammo...ill try and find the article again but i remember the 9mm (hollow point, i forget if it was Speer, hydra-shok) was given a 2.4ish,  the 40 (same type of bullet) was a 2.7...

the 45 ball was 3.3 and 45 (hollow) was 4.5

take this as you will...

I too read the 'article' comparing rounds based on the FBI's 'wound value' rating system.  I thought the article was so vague and lacking in specifics as to be a joke.  The methodology was not clearly explained, it was just a kind of random presentation of results.  The author didn't tell us that the 'wound value' was based largely on getting a minimum pentration depth, and rounds that didn't get that depth were awarded a wound  value of ZERO!  So according to this study the Cor-bon 115-grain +P load has a zero wound value.  Right.  

So much for "short and weak". If it's so weak, what does that make the .45, #3?

[url]http://www.evanmarshall.com/towert/topshotsinternational.htm[/url]

I would presume that .357 sig would have the same ballistics as the .357 mag if the bullet weight and speed are the same.

For more the rest of the research:
[url]http://www.evanmarshall.com/towert/[/url]