"Experts" choose 9mm over .45 ACP? Really?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 1, 2014
Messages
1,291
Location
California
Forgive me if this topic has been discussed before, the classic debate about which is better and why, the 9mm versus .45 ACP.

I was reading this article titled ".45 ACP vs 9mm: 14 Experts Give Their Answers" (Source: http://www.tactical-life.com/gear/45-acp-vs-9mm-ammo/#bsum-buffoni), and I have to admit that I was really surprised. Before reading the article, I thought that it would be 50/50 - half of the "Experts" would opt for the 9mm and half for the .45, but that wasn't the case. Only a few said they carry both - most of them said they prefer the 9mm for reasons like the 9mm ammo is cheaper, greater magazine capacity with the 9mm, etc.

I find it humorous that these "experts" all infer or imply the 9mm is better IF your shots are well aimed.

"Current 9 mm ammunition ballistics will do the job, if I do mine."

"I prefer the 9mm, because it is plentiful, cheaper to shoot, easier to make rapid follow-up shots with and is lethal enough when the shooter places the rounds in the proper place in the target."

"There are no magic bullets, so shot placement and accuracy under speed based on your sight package is paramount to your safety as well as the safety of others around you."

"9mm wins my vote on this one. Simple fact that the technology around projectiles has made a smaller caliber even more effective in the real world: better recoil, better penetration and similar stopping power."

I'm sorry. I disagree with the experts. If the .45 is too much for you, maybe you should be eating more Wheaties and practice more.

For home defense, I have a .45ACP in one room, a Redhawk .44 with 300 grain rounds in another and my 12 gauge is in a closet. I don't think the average person wants to worry about shot placement when their life depends on it.

Ed
 
How much easier does shot placement get when going from 9mm to .44 or .45? If you assume a 1.5x expansion ratio, the frontal area of a 9mm is 0.22 sq. in., while .45 goes to 0.36 sq. in. Both are very small compared to a human torso!
 
I am 64 years old and I have been shooting since my dad would hold the rifle and let me pull the trigger. No I do not consider my self an expert. I own 45 acp40 S@W 9mm and 38 / 357 If I were to buy new pistols they would all be 9mm today's ammo is that good and the most important thing is bullet placement. As my dad taught me a miss with a 22 L/R is the same as a miss with a 50 BMG. 9mm are easy to shoot . link The DR. is the real deal for ammo testing
 
Experts!?&% This is why I chose the S&SW .40.
lol.gif
 
quote from expert ...... "I prefer the 9mm, because it is plentiful, cheaper to shoot, easier to make rapid follow-up shots with and is lethal enough when the shooter places the rounds in the proper place in the target."

When your life is on the line, good to know the gun shop has plenty of 9mm ammo, cheap is good (it is only your life), easier for follow-up shots (that you will need with a 9mm) and is lethal enough with proper shot placement. A .22 is lethal enough with proper shot placement! And what is lethal enough? Dead is dead, right?
Bigger is better.....why do ya think Harry carried a .44 Mag?
 
I think the question should not be which you should shoot, it should be which would you rather be shot with. The answer is neither and that ends the debate. They both do the job
 
Originally Posted By: BalticBob
quote from expert ...... "I prefer the 9mm, because it is plentiful, cheaper to shoot, easier to make rapid follow-up shots with and is lethal enough when the shooter places the rounds in the proper place in the target."

When your life is on the line, good to know the gun shop has plenty of 9mm ammo, cheap is good (it is only your life), easier for follow-up shots (that you will need with a 9mm) and is lethal enough with proper shot placement. A .22 is lethal enough with proper shot placement! And what is lethal enough? Dead is dead, right?
Bigger is better.....why do ya think Harry carried a .44 Mag?


Some of us like to spend a lot of time at the range. I target practice as sport. There's a reason why many match pistols are 22LR. I use a Ruger Mark III to compete. That said, I wouldn't use it for home defense...
 
Originally Posted By: derweed
I think the question should not be which you should shoot, it should be which would you rather be shot with. The answer is neither and that ends the debate. They both do the job

I also wouldn't want to be shot with a .177 cal BB, but that certainly doesn't do the job. Just playing Devil's advocate. :)
 
I use both. I like both. Shot placement is paramount. I shoot the same with both calibers, but am partial to my 1911 .45 for whatever reason. However, the argument I always have trouble with is the "technology has made the 9mm more lethal...yada yada" one. The same technology also applies to the .45. So now, we're back to square one. IMHO, the best caliber is simply the one YOU are most comfortable with and can put where you need to put it. A .22 in the left ventricle is better than a miss with anything else.
 
I preface this by saying I have no horse in the race, I have all of the most popular calibers and I like them all in some way or another. But I have seen more than a few articles stating that .45ACP is a deprecated caliber. Many of the LEOs in the US are transitioning from .357SIG, .40S&W, and .45ACP to (or back to) 9MM and the web is full of examples along with the reasons why. Based upon modern bullet construction, nearly all of them perform within a very small percentage of one another so shot placement is a deciding factor. While I have no problem shooting any of the aforementioned calibers, it is VERY easy to see why 9MM is selected these days--after shooting .357SIG and .40S&W if I grab a 9MM it feels like a pop gun in comparison (to me). Cost is another issue for choosing 9MM, I shoot and reload (a lot), but 9MM still wins in the cost war versus .40S&W and .45ACP.

I found this handgun stopping power article online some time ago and though not scientific, it was very interesting to see there is no such thing as a consistent "one shot stop" even from the larger calibers:

Code:
Caliber Average number of rounds until incapacitation

9mm Luger 2.45

357 (Magnum and Sig) 1.7

.40 S&W 2.36

.45 ACP 2.08

.44 Magnum 1.71
 
Originally Posted By: E150GT
I believe shot placement is very important no matter the round. What good does a .45ACP do if you miss?


Oh, I completely agree! I just find it interesting that these experts are indirectly saying that in order for the 9mm to effective at stopping the threat...you better be on target. That's why I personally prefer my .45 - *I* believe the shot placement is not that critical - if the bad guy gets hit at all, I think their fight might be over.

But that's *my* opinion.

Ed
 
Originally Posted By: E150GT
I believe shot placement is very important no matter the round. What good does a .45ACP do if you miss?

Bingo!

Shoot any caliber you choose and practice, practice, practice.
 
Your ability to defend yourself does not depend on the caliber of your pistol..

It is the caliber of your marksmanship that will make a difference. I feel confident with a 9mm and today's ammo.
 
Last edited:
ALL handguns SUCK for "stopping power".

A handgun is only useful for:
1) concealment
2) fighting your way back to get a much better weapon.

I read an article where someone with a 9mm spent all 15 rounds against a mob of 4 or 5 assailants (it's been a while since I read it)

After that, I realized magazine capacity of the 9mm is better than whatever TINY bit more effectiveness you get with .45 ACP.

If .45 was still so good, then it would be STANDARD issue with many police & military all over the world.

It isn't..... for good reason.
It's got nothing to do with eating Wheaties.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top