Well that's the title, but I think the discussion would be more appropriately "Why the .45 ACP offers the least advantage over all the other common self defense cartridges"

This is a subject that will sure enough start a Holy War, but It's interesting that 25 years ago this would be an absolutely preposterous discussion, as back then it was arguably "the best" of the lot. But things have changed and now, whether you agree with it or not, the discussion at least does have some merits.

I have always said I don't carry any gun because of the cartridge, but because of the gun. I know they all work, and I know they all work pretty much just as well. I just don't go in for, or find anything useful in worrying about one cartridge over another. Just like I don't find any meaningful difference in the .270 vs. .30-06 debate; waste of time.

Anyhow, enjoy the Holy War this thread is likely to kick off.

Sounds to me like you're just trolling for an argument, rather than a serious discussion. Eliminating the value of the cartridge used for self defense up front shows you to be either young or foolish - maybe both.

Don

If we didn't have "better bullets and powders" , I would be happy with just a 45.

Not for an argument, but I've been a member of the campfire at least 10x as long as you have, and I know there are those here who will argue that a 1% difference in anything is worth agonizing over.

I bring it up because the guy on the video's position would have been preposterous 25 years ago, but actually does have some merit today.

Now on to the second half of your statement. I wish I were young, but I am foolish; many here will attest to that.

But I've also treated more gunshot wounds than most military medics who have been to war, and I've seen first hand what handguns do and don't do. Coupled with hunting experience, I've learned that what may look like a big difference on paper, often times means absolutely nothing in the field. Things such as the difference in the size of a fully expanded 9mm vs. a fully expanded .45 ACP. On paper when you do the math, as a % increase in size, the difference looks big and impressive. But when both bullets hit a living being, that living being doesn't do the math, and you have to search long to find some extreme example where that difference in expanded diameter was THE one and only issue that carried the day. Yet examples of bullet placement carrying the day (or ruining someone's day) can be found in pretty much every incident.

From 9mm-.45 ACP and everything in between, the difference in ACTUAL performance on human beings just isn't big enough to agonize over. I used to...I not only agonized over caliber, but I was very specific about which load I carried; I sweated EVERY detail. Only to learn that your choice in caliber or load being the deciding factor in a gun fight is statistically outside the realm of what's reasonable to worry over. (or what I personally find reasonable, you may disagree)

My chances of being in a gunfight are about the same as getting hit by lightning. Now the chance that I'm actually in a gun fight, but the ONE thing I needed in that gunfight was the flatter trajectory of the 9mm, or that somehow in this particular gunfight NO JHP bullet would expand regardless of cartridge/bullet combination, so starting out with a .45 caliber hole is the only reason I survived. Or the only reason I survived is because I had an 18 round magazine, or I'm alive because only a 180 grain .40 S&W round would have penetrated enough to stop the goblin I was facing.

In the realm of gunfights, there are always incidents you can point to for the purposes of justifying some particular choice in equipment. And those examples are almost always some sort of extreme circumstance.

But in EVERY gun fight, and EVERY shooting scene that I've ever responded to personally, or have heard about, shot placement or lack thereof has been a key factor.

And I KNOW that when reasonable choices are made in firearm, cartridge, and ammunition...followed by good shot placement, in the vast majority of shootings, just that was sufficient. Because shot placement can cover a LOT of sins in your choices. But caliber, capacity, bullet choice, etc...rarely, are those choices sufficient to cover the sin of not being able to place rounds where they'll do you any good.

So I choose my firearms not because of caliber, but for me it's more about how well I and that particular gun get along in the scoring department. Do I shoot it well trumps just about everything...and the other factors come in behind that one criteria (within reason of course).

But hey, according to you I'm young and foolish; so for God's sake, don't listen to me.

The guy on the video is a polemicist, and not a good one at that. His arguments are circular sophistry. Anyone could prove anything if he sets parameters that define his previously stated conclusion.

BTW, it's very telling that he qualified his position as "my opinion," so no counter argument is possible.

All the advanced bullet technology arguments made for the smaller caliber semi-auto rounds also enhance the 45 ACP's performance. Penetration testing with bullets like the Federal 230 HST fired at +P velocities show same penetration as the commonly cited smaller caliber SD cartridges.

I haven't found any of the few Yankee Marshall videos I've seen to be worth a 2nd viewing or of much value. YMMV

I'll take the 45 load with a big cast bullet over a 9mm for self-defense against 4 legged critters.

YM was a regular on several forums I used to frequent... anything for attention. From my recollection, it would be hard to infer that his use of the word 'sucks' wasn't a compliment. At any rate I didn't waste time on the video because his opinion on defense cartridges--or anything else--is of no value to me.

I agree.

Nothing but an attention whore.

He clearly intended the title to be inflammatory, because he immediately states that the .45 doesn't suck. He just said it has the "least advantages" of any of the common combat cartridges. And while there is "some logic" to what he says, you have to split to prety fine hairs to acknowledge said logic.

To me, the whole cartridge debate is about splitting pretty fine hairs. I mean, you just can't dispute the performance record of the .45 ACP. Sure, on paper you can find some imperfections...you can also find that with any other cartridge. But CLEARLY not only does the .45 ACP get the job done, but it has done it so well that to many the .45 ACP's performance is THE benchmark of what you would want in a self defense cartridge. Is it perfect? Nope, but neither is any other cartridge. So I guess we'll have to settle for DAMN GOOD.

So while I see no point in arguing "best", I will take issue if people actually said the .45 ACP is a bad cartridge.

But all this is splitting very fine hairs. By ANY measure, the .45 ACP is an excellent self defense cartridge.

+1 also just posting something to start an argument was kind of juvenile

There are few men here that know exactly what the .45 ACP (or variant) will do and will not do. The same know what a steel frame 1911 will do to a man's skull. They are not all dead yet.

No, we aren't.

I was raised by old Korea and WWII combat vets, two of whom had used the issue 1911 and ammo on men a total of seven times between them. All but one recipient was Done Right Now and the other one required a second dose and that was all.

Testing of the 45+p HST meets FBI/LE standards. But as an example, testing of the latest FBI/LE 9mm load, bests that 45+p HST in every category: bare, heavy clothing, steel, wallboard, safety glass, and iwba heavy clothing.

So, a center mass hit w/ this 45, has no advantage over the 9. But the 9 is easier to get faster paced hits, better against barriers, etc.

This is why hammer fired 45s, and the heavier recoiling chamberings are going away, while striker fired 9s are the trend in the LE community. The latest FBI/LE 9, even bests the 357sig.

45 ACP can be loaded and deployed to produce way more energy than 9mmP.
What "sucks" are large guns that aren't strong enough to handle powerful loads.

Frankly, I don't give a crap about "available bullets" etc. I shoot my guns at reactive targets.

No, reactive targets don't necessarily equate to how a living target will "react" to being struck by a bullet, but when it comes to delivering mass, I prefer a bullet that starts out with some mass.

I can shoot a 9 very well.

I can shoot a .45acp equally well.

My .45 holds 10 shots

It doesn't need to expand from .356 to .452. It's already at .452!

I'm satisfied.

If I'm feeling a little weak and debilitated and I'm not sure I can crawl out of bed. I'll tote a 9.

Dan

Another wannabe internet fee-nom stirring the pot to get his hit-count up.

Can anyone post a link to the video?

Thank you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NR3roFBYNU

a 124 HST at 1200 out penetrates a 230HST at 950 in "wood, metal, etc.??

A 124 grain XTP +P in 9mm dose not out penetrate 220 Critical Duty 45 ACP +P in wood or 55 gallon steel drums. Al least not the ones I've shot.

The current best performance in FBI/LE 9mm duty pistol ammo is the latest 147 GDHP, it has been thoroughly tested, and bests the 45 +p HST in every FBI test category. It has been tested and proven in use, with the latest FBI/LE approved handgun loads, a 45acp offers no advantage to the 9mm. If forced to shoot ball, it has an advantage. FBI/LE ammo, it has no performance gain with added baggage.

There is no magic pill. Repeated center mass hits, fast and accurate, until threat stopped. Regardless skill, obtaining multiple accurate hits at speed, is easier obtain with a 9mm vs 45acp.

I have to ask, WTF actually watches these videos?

I listened to that idiot for 5 seconds and turned it off.




Dave

Having to break through the ice to fish is going above and beyond!

I can tell you after watching for 10 seconds, that pussy would readily assume fetal coupled with uncontrollable pissing.

Reduced flash and blast vs 10mm. Lower likelihood of kabooms vs a .40 S&W.

Love the .45, would carry it more often but size and weight exclude it from my choice for concealed carry.
With that in mind even with lower round capacity if you were to give me a choice in a gun fight I would pick the .45. Hollow points no matter how good do not always open up. The .45 is always gonna leave a .45 hole if it opens up or not.
If I am not mistaken didn't Sanow and Marshall give the second spot with hydrashocks to it, behind the venerable 125 grain .357 ranking something in the mid 90 percentile "One shot stopper". I know this was back in the 90's and a lot has changed since then, but the .45 is still gonna leave a .45 hole.
I have tried several combo's for .45 ccw even the small Kahr P45, and the light weight aluminum framed 1911's, they all seem to pull on my britches to much, and I was constantly jerking everything up. If it came down to it I would pickup my FNX .45 before I would a 9, does not mean I wouldn't use a 9, and carry a 9.

My fault for posting before I watched the video, I am at work and they had the video blocked, so I went to my PC and watched it. That guy is an idiot..............

The more cavernous the wound channel, the more room there is for internal bleeding, thus the faster the drop in human blood pressure and incapacitation.

Law enforcement has different needs than a Civilian with a carry permit.
We are taught that using a firearm is a last resort.
I can't imagine being in a situation where flat trajectory
is an advantage.
What I want is a way for me to protect myself from a guy with a knife or getting knocked down and kicked in the head.

That's 5 sec longer than I did. If I thought my 45 wasn't up to the task I'd grab a rifle or shotgun!

Yes it typically has greater penetration, but not by much. Not enough that I would ever feel like I was gaining some significant edge.

But there's a difference between paper "more" and living tissue "more". A difference in bullet diameter of .60 to .70 looks significant on paper, and the number looks even greater as a % increase. But in living tissue, it's no where near enough of a difference that it would decrease incapacitation time from hypovolemic shock. Again, you would have to have some extreme/rare instance where by some miracle a .10 change in diameter saved the day, and I would say the odds on that would be a number with a LOT of digits..

I wonder if the military will return to the much maligned 9mm FMJ, for it's poor performance on the battle field.
Or will they choose a larger caliber either .40 or .45 FMJ.

So if your going to carry a larger gun you may as well carry a 10mm with a 180 grain GDHP???

That is where the SBR, carbine, and shotgun come into play.

Both of these are .45s. The Mod 2 holds 10 rounds and still weighs less than a Commander.

The Mod 2 is a bit thicker than a Commander but not much.

Please explain the difference in need.

At some point you begin to think that official handgun cartridge selection is like the latest diet fads. 9 no good, 10 good, no wait short 10 good, no wait 9 good. Personally I like the 45 ACP and the 9mm but the 45 does not ring my ears as bad should I have to dispatch a pig, copperhead or hole digging turkey egg eating armadillo under foot. Naturally I only use cheap 230 grain ball ammo for these chores. I did find that the 230 grain GD would not shoot through a pigs head at almost contact range, but the pig stopped moving, I saw no exit.

They all have well designed self defense ammo available today, so all could be good.

I carried a 1911 around the farm, checking fences, stand sights, etc. Would plink with the 45 using ball. Kept running into the same sow and cubs. Decided to look for a std vel flat nose fmj load to plink, that would drive straight through her skull, should she decide to bowl me over. Winchester marketed a 1911 practice load that was flat nosed. I tested it against ball, shooting through skulls and shoulders of cattle, pails of water, wet phonebooks, etc. It worked, where ball would not work.

Not a dedicated hunting load, but great plinker that penetrates.

Good info!

I have no interest in placing anyone under arrest.

Either of these fits the LWT 45ACP EDC slot. The nod, on weight alone, goes to the 45 Shield, but with a good IWB holster, either is an easy all day carry.



The pic has the 6 round mag in the Shield for when maximum concealability is the goal. The 7 round +1 chambered equals the OM 1911s or the original GM capacity.

Can you explain how the difference between arrest or not has any bearing on firearms choices for carry?

I'll bet you are no fun at parties.

I don't believe for a moment, that a 230 grain .45 HP sucks for defense purposes (or for offence either)
End of discussion.

I did not ask if you intend to place anyone under arrest. There is actually no difference in the need as I see it.

It would be really interesting to learn what load and where it hit, in that shooting video that Bristoe posted yesterday.

If Jeff Cooper could come back he would kick the Yankee Marshall in the balls for saying anything bad about the 45 ACP

I've watched exactly "1" of that guy's vids before and turned it off before he was done. It's not difficult to tell he's someone who probably becomes more eloquent with each beer.

I watched a few of TYM's youtube videos and even subscribed briefly. He isn't someone I have interest in listening to.

There are some great choices of ammo for the .45. Corbon has a 165 gr. 1250fps @ 575ft lbs. energy, Liberty has a 78gr. 1900fps @ 600 ft. lbs. I'll take these over a 9mm any day but that too is just my opinion.

.45 Federal 230 grain HST, Colt lightweight commander, he was hit twice.

1911/45 is obsolete but I guess nobody this guy.

https://youtu.be/K2bXNg7ooAI

A little research on the internet of 9mm 124 & 147 gr. HST vs .45 230 gr. HST in ballistic gel yields the following avg. results:

9mm 124 gr. HST 15" penetration, .55" final expanded diameter
9mm 147 gr. HST 13" penetration, .63" final expanded diameter
.45 230 gr. HST 13" penetration, .88" final expanded diameter

All rounds meet the 12" to 18" penetration criteria set by the FBI for defensive use. So all rounds in the vitals = dead, dead & dead. Though 13" @ .88" diameter is a pretty big hole that is long enough to get to where it needs to go. Suck??? Hardly.

Did any of the shots hit him in the pumpkin?

that sure was a smokey round. I cannot recollect the 230 grain HST smokin like that but have not fired them in front of a camera to record the smoke. That one and the 230 grain Gold dot I like, but again I am all about equal opportunity so the 147 grain HST I carry a lot as well.

My brother, who spoke with the owner, shooter, asked him how many shots he fired he said five. He didn't ask him where he hit the guy. Three at the first guy, hit him twice two at the second guy. It looks like one shot possibly hit in the abdomen area? You can see him bend over slightly. , Second shot looks like chest, maybe face? If someone could Zoom in and slow the video down I'm sure it would give you a better perspective on where he got hit.

If you're talking about the video Sarge posted, I noticed that too, although maybe it's dust from bullets hitting that column? Sure looks like gun smoke though; I wondered if the guy was using cast target bullet handloads or something. Not that it matters, just seems odd to have that much smoke, unless it's dust.

I thought maybe a fluorescent light got busted during the melee. Those things make a cloud that looks similar to what's seen in the vid.

I have been in a few small spaces where multiple shots were fired and I never saw anything quite like the 'smoke' depicted late in the video.

That makes sense Sarge, I didn't think of a fluorescent light.

I sat in on a 'community college' academy firearms class with a couple of my recruits a few years ago. I did this because the dufus instructor kept 'adjusting' the sights on my deputies guns.

Got that fixed PDQ, but the high point of the day was when Instructor Assclown (who had never been anywhere but Hootervile) was trying to demonstrate 'skip-fire' with buckshot and failed to note an uneven seam in the concrete floor. It must have sheared 4-5 pellets because the fragments took out a big four-tube overhead light fixture about 10' in front of him. This big cloud of glowing pixie dust appeared with the sound of falling glass, and just sorta enveloped him. The sight of this combined with his coughing and trying to evade the cloud is forever burned in my memory.

I can't think about it, even today, without laughing a little.

Dust from the concussions. Not smoke.

Barrel length and placement matters, but this might help. Also, there may be some difference in how soon one stops with xyz, but it's hard to quantify, and one will never know, unless they have an event.........

I do feel ammo matters - a good bit.....as well as placement.

http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/article_archive/results/details?id=4593

Wonder if he hit the other Nigerian..

Good read. I used to carry the Remington GS load in my 45.

I am a novice with handguns and CCW. Didn't see any need before but am getting more education.

I have read countless info as to what is better than what and I correlate it back to hunting. Shot placement is KEY!

However,

Back in the days of party hunting with 10 or so people, I've seen a couple deer full of adrenaline from being driven/jumped, take chitt loads of hits in the vitals and everywhere else in the body with 12ga slugs and keep going like they haven't been touched. You find them later full of holes.

I equate this to a human on drugs/bath salts etc. If they don't go down right away, you better be aiming between the eyes or behind the ear.

Its called a CNS hit or basically a structural bone hit, besides the central nervous system.

Cant tell you how many heart or lung shot deer Ive seen go past the 200 yard mark with a 50-72 caliber hole in them.

The ones that collect shoulder, backbone, neck or rear shoulders, even when non vital, can be incapacitated.

Works the same way with two legged varmints. I've treated MANY chest shot patients. Even got to a couple quick enough before they coded. Shot through the heart and lasted a minute or two after the fact. With a loaded gun, you can do a LOT of bad things in just 30 seconds.

I have always considered it the benchmark for self defense performance. No it's not perfect, but it ain't far from it either.

So you choose a .45 ACP and then go with high velocity lightweight loads? Seems a bit counter intuitive.

GG, I agree a bit, but if you drive a larger caliber (already expanded) to similar velocities, it can't hurt - pardon the pun.

I prefer 230 grains, but since a 124 grain 9mm hits the bricks at about 1200 to 1300, why shouldn't a 160 grain .45 at similar velocities be - at a minimum - just as good?

It's called a Mozambique drill, or at least it was called that back when I started playing at IPSC back in 1980. Now I think it's called a failure drill.
Draw and fire 2 rounds CoM, stop just long enough to peek over the sights, and if the target is not collapsing, put round no. 3 between the eyes.

Do you understand the effects of sectional density and frontal area?

butter is bad for you, no wait margarine is worse, don't eat no bacon, nor drink no Oban scotch all deadly, again the 40 is what we been looking for, no its the 9mm. Wait a day and the weather will change.

Bryce says the 9mm sucks, but operators say its just the best? Do I carry one of each???
Cartridge selection for those with sensitive skins

How about you enlighten us doctor?

History’s Best Handgun Stopped Attackers Cold
The M1911 killed bad guys, made history

https://warisboring.com/the-best-handgun-ever-stopped-attackers-cold-b4cc0c0dae1c#.ogqy7t9ot

If this is a repost, pleae forgive.......

it's good enough that I usually have a .45 ACP with me.. That said, there are many days when I carry a .38 S&W, a .357, a 9MM, .44 Mag or a .45 Colt.

He never mentions the ability to place a shot accurately under pressure. Very telling. Notable that he advocates a six shot 380, but not a 45 of any kind. Just wow.

A few years ago, I happened to have both a 9mm loaded with 124 gr Gold Dots and a 1911 loaded with 200 gr XTP's, while picking up some pigs I shot.

Decided to run an informal test. Pulled the 9mm and shot a dead pig in the head from about 5 - 6 feet. The bullet ricocheted off of the skull. Pulled the 1911 in 45 and tried the same shot from the same distance. The 45/200 XTP produced a hole a bit bigger than a golf ball, penetrating well into the brain cavity.

That was enough to settle the question to my mind.

Sectional density sir.

124gr XTP: .141
185gr XTP: .130

That's comparing a 185 and it's still markedly less sectional density. What that gives you is a VERY large wound, but not a deep one.

I personally think trading expansion for penetration is not a great idea (all within reason of course).

Yep, they all work!

The only real factor is the loose nut behind the trigger.

I would not be predicting penetration on SD alone, seen it not work that way many times.

That's a good link to have.

9mm has four loads at 90% or above

357 Mag has two loads at 90% or above

357 Sig has three loads at 90% or above

40 S&W has seven loads at 90% or above

45 ACP has eight loads at 90% or above

Hmmm......

Hmmm indeed.

I get that, but look at ballistic gel tests.

No it's not. Marshall And Sanow's work, or more correctly their conclusions are complete bunk.

Why is it that otherwise reletively intelligent people lose all common sense and critical thinking skills as soon as cartridges and killing come up? 100 pound deer take 150gr Ballistic Tips from a 300mag to the chest and run 100 yards, yet people think ANY pistol chambering is "powerful".


Here's a couple of clues-

ALL pistol chamberings poke holes. Those holes are not as big as the bullet diameter.

There are places and organizations that kill/killed more people before sunup in a single night than all of American LE will combined..... and they did/have done it for 15 years. There were literally only two that used something other than 9mm. Both have/are transitioning to 9mm.



Want some real info on terminal ballistics by someone that actually knows what they are doing?

Terminal Ballistic Performance Facts


Military Wound Ballistic History



Service Caliber Duty and Self Defense Handgun Ammo

If you think ANY handgun cartridge gives you a 90% chance of stopping someone in one round, you're going to be in a world of hurt if you find yourself in a gun fight.

No major LE agency in the world takes Evan marshals methodology seriously. In my opinion it's a highly flawed methodology.

I've looked at them and I've looked at the game I've taken and sectional density leaves a lot to be desired in predicting penetration. For instance the 185 grain XTP expands well it also does not expand as wide as does the 230 grain XTP. That matters in how far they penetrate.
Another example is the Hornady 220 grain Critical Duty load that out penetrates most if not all 230 grain JHPs.

Funny schit right there.

Please feel free to quote where I said I think that?

I did not link the paper, someone else did, I just read it with the data reported. Seemed interesting. Sorry it upsets you so much. By all means, carry what you like.

I'll say here what I always say about rifle bullets and hunting - shot placement is the single most important factor above all others.

Reliable shot placement is most dependent on practice and whether the shooter is comfortable with the pistol.

As for highly flawed ideas in this thread, sectional density is irrelevant now, if it ever was relevant at all. SD is meaningless with today's bullet options. Bullet design and construction are far more relevant.

Also, my simple test of shooting pigs in the head from very close range caused the 9mm Gold Dot to ricochet, while the 45/200 XTP produced deep penetration and a major wound. After seeing that with my own two eyes, I could care less how many sectional density numbers are put up, I know which one of those two is more likely to penetrate a skull.

They did not list the S&W 500. Not trustworthy information.

All pistol bullets can and will fail to penetrate skulls when impacting on anything other than a 90 degree angle. Ironically- 45 Auto as much as any of them. While you may have had that one time experience, a one off occurrence is meaningless. It happens often, even with 45 Auto.

I guess current theory is that it is possible due to reduced recoil to put 2-3 of the Euro pellets into the bad guys carcass, plus the newer euro pellets work "ok", plus you can have more of them at your disposal without reloading.

So one solid euro pellet hit is almost as good (based on the docgkr gel shooting and you might get two or three while having 12 spares. It is solid mathematics.

Form,

without doubt, pistols are weak.

The info shared is anecdotal data, nothing more nor less. Sharing anecdotal data sometimes reveals patterns or points to areas meriting further inquiry, sometimes not.

Bullet performance on animals is evidence to consider, not definitive, but certainly not to be ignored either. Just my perspective.

I'm not taking sides, but your tenure here is over 20x greater.

Yes, I like watching military videos of them woodpeckering the hell outta concrete walls with their 17 cal Gatling guns.

Seriously, I gotta believe a crackhead would "feel" a 45 ACP more than the smaller bore semi autos.

I think the larger bores/heavier bullets work better on oblique angle shots or those were major skeletal structures are hit.

I've had occasion to 'officially' shoot several dozen deer (and have witnessed about that many more) with various service calibers, from 38's through the 45 Auto. Many of these had been injured by autos, were caught in fences etc and when you walk up on them they get an adrenaline dump that makes crack look like cotton candy. Guess I have shot another dozen while hunting with 357, 44 Mags and the 45 Colt. They were generally unaware of danger unless I was running one down and finishing it after someone else didn't kill it outright with a rifle.

No question in my mind that big heavy handgun bullets will put one on the ground substantially fast than light/fast ones, all things being equal.

No doubt in my mind either and opinion come from shooting game over decades. Gel tests are fine for starters but hardly the definitive last word.

I've had the opportunity to see a lot of people who were shot and look at autopsy reports from folks who were shot while doing bad things. Handgun rounds from most legit defensive calibers suck. That being said, they tend to suck about the same. They are also very unpredictable. What I mean is they tend to take paths that no one could predict. Unless you make good contact with the central nervous system, there is no gaurantee of quick stops. Shots that create massive blood loss can be show stoppers, just not immediately.

Gunfights are won because we break the body or break there will to fight. 100ths of an inch in a projectile is way down on the list of what is important.

Agreed gents, always thought if I had the choice, I'd rather be hit with a fast golf ball than a medium speed red brick.

I like the 45ACP a lot because it is bigger! Sadly all the info seems to show that an imaginary bad guy holding his pistol pointed at you and ready to fire and you fire a shot "if" he is shot in exactly the same place with a 230 grain 45 caliber GDHP or the 147 grain 9mm GDHP he will have the same 4-5 seconds to try and kill you regardless of which caliber. I am not selling my 45's but am thinking of trading a model 17 for a VP9 and a few spare magazines.

Cartridge is as important as platform is.
The design and performance of the projectile is all that matters..
38SPL, 357MAG, 9MM Luger, .380acp, 38 super all throw an identical projectile and could be confused with each other post mortem.

You feel the .380 performs as well as the others on your list?

I also question the wisdom of including the .380 ACP in with the other cartridges mentioned. As I tell anyone considering the .380 for self defense, "You shoot somebody with that and you're gonna piss them off".

Don

I'm not a fan of the .380, but I'm starting to doubt the wisdom of those who discount it immediately.

There was a time when the .36 Navy was considered to be a pretty good manstopper. Of course, the .44 Army was better, but that's because the .50 Air Force hadn't been invented yet.

Anyway, when you have slower projectiles like the Navy and the Army, the profile of that projectile is more important than the velocity. I'm thinking the leading edge of a round ball profile is pretty good for transferring shock. That's why the older .380 projectiles that were pretty blunt, may have been pretty good for letting people know they'd been shot.

i have always thought some of this was funny. I.E. a 38special 158grain doing about 850-900fps. Not good in some circles.
a 9mm 147grain doing about the same velocity, wonderful.
a 38 diameter .357
a 9mm diameter .355
yeah okay.
or, in a more enlightened age:
a 45 colt diameter .454 250 grain at about 950fps.
Say, this was figured out around 1873.

Kind of like a 44magnum is more than a 41magnum.
lets see:
.429
.410
big difference huh?

A LOT has changed since the days when the .38 Special was considered marginal.

yep, among them being bullet construction.

135 gr spear gold dot

I always thought the 38 Special got a bad name from use in small snub revolvers, since that's what used to be "the thing" for concealed carry. That's not 850-900 fps, more like 650-700 fps if we're talking factory 158gr. A 9mm is generally a significant step up in that comparison.

There were a number of things in the past that gave the .38 Special a bad rep as a man stopper. Round nose bullets and the above mentioned low velocities in short barreled revolvers. With the advent of the 158gr SWCHP bullet in .38 Special +P loads (i.e. the FBI load), these changes IMHO made the .38 Special a very respectable choice for self defense. Personally I would and do take it over the faster and lighter 9mm loads that are available.

Don

You want to catch a couple in the shirt pocket and tell me?
9x17 vs 9x19?
Yeah...I think that when I put a couple 9MM bullets from a PPK center mass, they are going to be as effective as if they came out of a G26.

wait be very careful! only the 9 millimeter was found to be the best for Law Enforcement this time. Reminds me of the Holy Hand Grenade skit.

Have seen deer killed with a .22 rimfire. That doesn't make it a deer cartridge or particularly "effective".

Don

You want to catch a couple .177 BB's in the eye and tell me how that goes? Doesn't mean a BB gun is a good choice for carry.

There's a lot more difference than just 2mm of case capacity, but I'm sure you know that.

Primarily, our obsession over it.

One thing I rarely see mentioned in these discussions (including this particular one) is the effect of firing any particular load on the shooter himself.

I think pretty much everyone agrees that while "one shot stops" with handgun cartridges are possible, they can't be counted on to consistently happen, not to mention immediately incapacitate the hobgoblin being shot. The ability to fire a second (or third, or fourth) shot accurately could be critical to ending a threat. Thus when assessing a defensive round's effectiveness, one has to take into consideration muzzle flash and concussive effect of the round.

Many defensive shootings by civilians are in the dark (bad guys like to work at night) and in enclosed or semi-enclosed areas (inside a house, a parking ramp, or an alley). Bright muzzle flash in a dark room can temporarily blind the shooter. The bad guy might not be affected as badly due to him not looking directly at the firearm, whereas the shooter is always looking at the end of the barrel. For this reason, any rounds for defensive purposes should be test fired under low light conditions, with the load giving the least amount of muzzle flash being more desirable in that regard.

Rare is the time when a defensive shooting occurs and the shooter is wearing ear protection. The louder the blast, the more intense the concussive effects of the noise on the eardrums, and the more the shooter's ability to effectively react to the situation is hampered. If one has ever fired a high velocity 125 grain .357 magnum load from a 2" barreled revolver in an enclosed space, they know what I'm talking about. The blast is so ferocious that it can momentarily stun one's senses.


It is for these reasons that my defensive round choices tend to be subsonic, heavy for caliber bullets. They are hand loaded and tested with various powder/primer combinations that render the lowest amount of flash and muzzle blast, while achieving the desired velocities (under 1,150 fps).

For .38 Special/.357 Magnum, 160 grain SWCHP are my choice. For .45 ACP, I use 230 grain Gold Dots, and for 10mm, 180 Grain XTPs are my go-to bullets.

Which gun I select depends upon the situation. The 3" barreled GP100 .357 Magnum sits on my nightstand, the .45 acp Colt Defender is my concealed carry weapon, and the S&W 1006 10mm is in my glovebox in the truck. When I'm afield out in the sticks, a 7 1/2" Redhawk in either .44 Magnum or .45 Colt is on my hip, loaded with 300 grain SWCHPs.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

Defensive handguns caliber choice is a relative choice. It would/should be be different to different people.

A Trooper might be best suited with a 357 Sig. A store clerk a 45, a hiker in bear country a 10mm on up to 454 or such. A 9mm or 40 problably are great choices for a lot of people.

I have most of them except the Sig. I started with the 45&357 magnum, and 44 magnum. I got into the 40 cal, because that's what we where later issued. The 10 mm was actually the first Glock that I bought and then later traded for my 45. I got the 9mm for the kids to shoot and practice with.

Each to his own.

So, by that logic, we should all carry 50AE?
I assure you...I am quite confident in a .380s ability to stop a threat at a reasonable distance.
I'm not carrying a weapon on the thin chance I'm confronted by a 6-4", PCP smoking, Samoan wearing a leather coat charging at me from 20 yards away.
I also don't wear neck knives, photojournalist vestsr or carry a "CCW badge".
Reality got to me early I guess.

You maybe quite confident, but I wouldn't be.

If you actually ever shot anything but paper with it, reality might get to your confidence.

What would you suggest I shoot to simulate an armed response?
Please... Feel free to list the multitude of shootings you've been involved in for us , Harry.

Who said I ever shot paper?
I just fill it up with ball and toss it in my purse.... Yawn.

Feel free to list the multitude of shootings you've been involved in as well. Also how many were with the 380.

My 28 years toting a pistol concealed and 8 in a duty rig would surely bore this salty crowd.
I obviously have much to learn hereon the internet... since I've made it this far on pure luck.

With many documented instances of bad guys being shot multiple times with 9mm, 40 S&W, 45, etc and even AR-15's,. That would indicate this statement to be hopefull, more so than definitive.

We're not talking tactics here, just effectiveness of a handgun. You could start with trying to kill something bigger than a cat with it. Multitude of shootings? Yeah, I've killed a multitude of living things with handguns. Mostly not bigger than a jackrabbit. I got rid of my one and only .380 many moons ago. No confidence in it here after seeing its lack of penetration. If it's all one can carry, it beats a pointy stick. But confidence inspiring, it is not.

Some of us live where there is a good chance of being confronted with a 6'-4" Samoan wearing a winter coat, though PCP doesn't seem to be much of an issue.

I think most rational people realize there is a minimum amount of penetration required to reliable hit the vitals. Also most rational people realize the 22rf, 25 acp, 32 acp and 380 just don't have enough power to reliable achieve that goal in real world situations.

If you're going to sneak up and slip one behind the ear, then those rounds are fine. But that use doesn't fall under a typical DLP shooting, in fact it would most likely be considered murder.

I've seen 22LR out penetrate a 380 before, they aren't much but better than nothing. Can't understand why anyone without physical limitations would choose one for his primary weapon.

Mental limitations?

Beg to differ. Ball from a 380 is quite deadly and capable of punching the spine and large vessels alongside it, on frontal shots.

Maybe, we have a member here that was shot at point blank range in the chest with a 6" 38 special and the bullet cracked his chest bone but did not make it inside the chest cavity. He grabbed the revolver and hit the guy over the head hard enough to crack his skull open.
I've shift ball Ammo from a 380 and was not impressed at all with the penetration.

380 and even good 32ACP BALL penetrates well enough to be effective for defense.
The Germans and later the Russians with the Makarov proved it.
All you need is reasonably hot ammo.

That's why they are still preferred, by most law enforcement agencies and militaries?

Selling weapons to military and law enforcement is a business. For many decades American cops carried weak 38 Special RN rounds in nice quality revolvers - good guns and usually effective.
Hot 380 ball probably penetrates better than those old 38s.

If you think that is effective, you're probably interested in ocean front property in Nevada.

So all the police departments who carried 38 SPL from the 1920's through the 1980's were being slaughtered on account of the wimpy 38 Special?

The human body is not particularly strong and a well-placed 380 or 38 Special round will do quite a number on the receiving end.

They learned and moved on, requirements changed as did the bad guys.

Most police sidearms are carried and not put into service. Most police officers are very poor shots with hand guns. Most police sidearms are carried for deterrence. Most cops that die on the job do so because they were killed before they could put their sidearm into action.

None of those factors address whether or not the 32 acp, 380 auto or 38 special are good man stoppers.

During the revolver era in American law enforcement, cartridges (much) more powerful than 38 Special were readily available for the police revolver. That the 38 Special predominated suggests that it was considered adequate.

Uh, NO! There's a little thing called SD (Sectional Density). It's a really simple calculation that compares a bullet's weight to its diameter and is a huge determinate of penetration. Here, the .380 fails miserably. A 90 grain .355" bullet has a SD of .102, while a 95 grain bullet is only .108. By comparison, a 40 grain .22 bullet is .115 and the "lowly" 158 grain .357" bullet has a respectable SD of .177. You guys carry a .380 if you are so inclined, but just don't fool yourself into thinking it's more than a mediocre choice for self defense. Just MHO.

Don

My grandfather was the Sherrifs for 28 years back the the revolver heyday and the 38 special was considered minimal and nothing more.

Police were not involved in nearly shootings as they are today and were not targeted by radical groups like they are today.

actually I think there is a number of recorded in did encryption where the 158 RN 38 load failed miserably

SD does not take bullet shape into consideration. So, a .357" round nose 158 grain bullet has the exact same SD as a 158 grain SWC bullet. Since the round nose bullet in .38 Special has been supplanted for all practical purposes by the SWC and other designs, that's just one more reason why today's .38 Special is a better choice than the .380 for self defense.

Don

never had to deal with police budget meetings huh?

The 9mm is much better than the 380 and small 9's are marginally larger. I'll never understand a 380 over a 9mm as primary weapon.

I am aware of three shootings involving the 38 Special and plain lead bullets. Two were 38 RNL, 1 and 2 round each, and the the other involved two rounds of 148 grain target wadcutter, applied to a big drunk a-hole who was advancing on the shooter with a knife.

Common to them was that they were all face-on shootings, the rounds landed between the navel and clavicular notch all were within a couple inches of the centerline. Oh, and none of the recipients traveled more than about six feet before they face planted.

I'm not so sure bad guys have changed much. Back when all revolver rounds were RNL or RNFP, men wrangled horses, chopped wood, shoveled coal or carried railroad ties. They drank rotgut whiskey, warm beer and some used/abused the drugs of their day. They roved in predatory gangs, recognized no law, stayed on the run longer and perpetrated acts every it bit as sick as what you see today. Does anybody here think those SOB's were less tough/easier to stop than today's average man?

I think not. They still have the same anatomy. You punch one or two large, heavy pistol bullets through the middle torso and you are going put the man down- perhaps not as quickly as you'd like, but avoid incoming for a bit and he won't be a problem for long.

Having seen he results of way too much mayhem over the years, I am certain of one thing. This obsession over bullet construction is foolishness. Use enough gun and concentrate on punching the middle. Gunfights are uncertain. You can shoot well and still get killed, but you don't have to go alone.

Let's not over look these,



The Smith County Sheriff's Office is investigating after a woman was fatally shot after shooting her ex-husband several times Friday afternoon.

According to Sheriff Larry Smith, deputies were called to the 12900 block of Philpot Rd., near Farm-to-Market 1252, in Smith County after reports of gunshots in the area.

Smith says the incident began after a man visited a home his ex-wife was at to deliver food to her. The woman allegedly met the man at the door with a gun and shot him several times before fleeing the scene.

Smith says after the woman fled the home, she crashed her truck into a tree down the street, walked back to find her ex-husband who was lying in a yard, and shot him several more times. The sheriff says the man somehow crawled back to his own vehicle, retrieved a weapon, and shot his ex-wife twice, killing her.

Sheriff Smith says the man was taken to the hospital, where he is in critical condition at this time. Authorities have not identified either the man or woman involved at this time.

It's unclear whether the man will face any charges. Smith says the sheriff's office will continue investigating the case and will decide at a later time.

Copyright 2015 KLTV. All rights reserved.

http://www.kltv.com/story/30394941/...-ex-wife-after-being-shot-multiple-times

There are many more

As a New York City detective, back in the mid-80s to early 90s in Brooklyn New York my brother, had a total of six shoot outs, on the books, four hits 3DOA,158 federal/Winchester swchp. At the time that round worked for him, as [bleep] as it was.

The 158swc has no flies on it. it was a huge step up from the lrn

Big difference from a .380.

Take a look around you. See any size difference from 100 years ago? No? I see multitudes of people who outweigh the average early 20th century man by 100 lbs or more. Many with fat, and some with muscle. There is very likely to be considerably more flesh to penetrate.

...and the part of my post you did not quote, covers that.

Americans have, on average, gained about 30 pounds of weight and 4" of height since the Civil War. There have always been people substantially larger/heavier than average. The idea is to use something that will work on any of them. You punch one or two large, heavy pistol bullets through the middle torso, between the navel and clavicular and within a couple inches of the centerline- and the results will be the same regardless.

Pistol wounds roughly equate punching a rod through the body and withdrawing it in milliseconds. You want a 3/8 rod or a 1/2" one? Round end or square? You want an 8" rod or a three-footer?

Obsession over trick bullets only confuses what post-mortem makes clear.

"but I've also treated more gunshot wounds than most military medics that have been to war" states GG.

Of all the ignorant, self aggrandizing statements that you have made this tops the list.


mike r

As I have noted before Kevin is full of crap.

You were and are, correct.

Chit stirer extraodinare.

As many jobs as that guys had he must be at least 137 years old, we're spose to be kind to the elderly.

Cocked and Locked. I like that.

Oh, I don't know. I've been a police officer, Chief of Police, Federal Agent (retired), Director of Security for a multinational company and finally a registered nurse. Seems like there's a lot to be said for upward and onward and then back to service. Some people do things in their lives.

I've only been a farmer and a janitor for near 35 years of work, I'm easy I guess.

Well, your resume isn't as long...but I'd bet you have more calluses than I do. Maybe a few more scars.

I have been carrying a gun for a living since 1988. I am all ears, ready to listen about your actual experience being personally involved in gunfights.

BTW, I know plenty of actual cops, versus MPs who have carried a gun in a duty rig for far more than 8 years and never once fired a shot in anger, so please elaborate.

Exactly.

I always get the twp "rings" confused....which ones the idoot?

What state allows LE to use deadly force in anything but a "last resort"

Nowhere have I ever seen a state or federal code that says "Deadly force is authorized in defense of self or others, against threat of death, or grave bodily injury, except for cops, who can do whatever they feel like, because it doesn't have to be a last resort."

Dammit!!! NOW you tell me, after I'm retired!!

Oh yes, I see (now) that we are actually in agreement.

Please expand, why is that statement ignorant and self aggrandizing?

My 25 year medical career started as an army combat medic in 1966 w/ 27 months in Vietnam w/ several units regularly engaged in heavy combat. The next 21 years were spent as an UC cop, an EMT, paramedic and PA. I worked for the first 9 years as a street medic in LA and Las Vegas, both intense environments w/ high call volumes. I then spent 2.5 years working 12 hour days in trauma centers in Denver and Las Vegas. The next 12 years I was a vetted govt. contractor working on SRT units worldwide.

I saw far more GSWs in the 1st 2 years than all the rest of a rather event filled career.

You talk crap that you can't back up. Which hard core ghetto was it that produced such a huge percentage of GSW calls? Let's hear it.


mike r

In terms of exposure to combat, Vietnam is an anomaly. Never before or since has US soldiers been exposed to so many days in combat; we learned a lot of lessons from that war and we don't do that to soldiers anymore.

So with the exception of a Vietnam medic, my statement stands. My cousin was a medic in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and he told me that he encountered GSW victims about 2-4 per week per 6 month tour. Using that as an average, I've treated MUCH more GSW victims.

I averaged 2-4 GSW victims per month working full time as a paramedic, and I was a paramedic for 16 years. So do the math.

I guess you are forgetting WW1 & WW2. as well as other conflicts around the world that weren't as publicized.

According to statistics, a combat soldier in WWII saw 40 days in combat in 4 years. It was less in WW I as we were only there for 1 year.

http://www.uswings.com/about-us-wings/vietnam-war-facts/

I've never cared much for "The Yankee Marshal" on Youtube. He's very opinionated, just not very bright. I will say that in terms of "advantages" NOT performance, his argument has some merit..not much at all.. but some.

What I am curious about is if any testing of value has been done with the newer, light for caliber solid copper bullets for the .45acp. I met a retired cop at the range a few months ago who was shooting a full size Glock 21 (13+1 capcity) of 78gr copper HP at 1900 fps. I've seen no data on this load, but my immediate reaction was.. WOW..huh??

Your response, w/ its'sample of one, proves you are an idiot. Again, which major metro area produced the high volume of GSW calls and were you the only medic responding in your community?

Keep digging.


mike r

If you do some research, my "sample of one" is pretty much typical.

Sacramento CA, specifically South Sacramento. And that's not a real high number of GSW's. On your average day in Sacto (when I was a medic) I would hear about 3 or 4 shooting calls go out. Of that typically one or two would be hit. On the weekend shooting calls were 8-10, and about half would be hit.

Sacramento even today has a high crime rate, but back in the '80's they were near the top (and sometimes at the top) for highest murder rate in the nation.

But it's not so much a high GSW volume as it was 16 years on the job.

Fire fights lasted months and the Marines took islands and had a very high casualty rate. Too many fought more than one campaign and I'm calling BS on 40 days in 4 years.

1,076,245 Soldiers were wounded in WW11 and 291,557 killed in action.

Profile of US Servicemen (1941-1945)
38.8% (6,332,000) of U.S. servicemen and all servicewomen were volunteers
61.2% (11,535,000) were draftees
Average duration of service: 33 months
Overseas service: 73% served overseas, with an average of 16 months abroad
Combat survivability (out of 1,000): 8.6 were killed in action, 3 died from other causes, and 17.7 received non-fatal combat wounds
Non-combat jobs: 38.8% of enlisted personnel had rear echelon assignments—administrative, support, or manual labor.
Average base pay: enlisted—$71.33 per month; officer—$203.50 per month

I guess you were the only 1st responder sent to GSW calls 24 hrs/day and 365 days a year. Give it up.


mike r

LOL.

Kevin was in the twin towers before they were hit as well.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/10416518/1

Kevin is the Brian Williams of the campfire.



give it up Kevin, you don't have to pretend to be all this stuff, just be yourself.

What sucks about the 45 acp to me is that handguns that use double stack mag are too thick/fat in the grip for my hand and that the factory ammo is about 50% more than 9mm. Handloading the 45 acp helps mitigate the cost some but 9mm is still cheaper.

I like that the 9mm can have high capacity due to their double stack mags and still have a reasonably grip thickness. Compound this with cheap & economical to shoot, shines favorably on the 9mm.

From what I read and pulling out of the gun mag, is that for the 9mm to have comparable performance to 45acp is that the 9mm needs to use premium, bonded bullets. Whereas the 45 acp, you got much more leniency with your jhp ammo.

With the trend of going to smaller & trimmer 9mms result in single stack for better conceal drops in it's capacity and lighter recoil advantage.

In two words, "It doesn't"...

Whether one is choosing a 9mm, a .40 S&W, or a .45 ACP, each offers something to fit the needs of potential handgunners. I believe they are all three fairly capable rounds--and any one of them is a good choice.

The 9mm has always been my favorite centerfire handgun round--for reasons obvious to anyone who shoots on a regular basis.

When I first began comparing times between the 9mm and the .45 ACP when firing specific stages--the results were fairly depressing. My times with the .45 were too slow by contrast. Consistent practice over the past 30 years has narrowed that gap. The last five times I've been out at the range, four of those five times have been very cold, right close to zero, or right at zero degrees. The last time out last week, the temperature was about 12 above, but with the wind it was quite a bit colder--likely right at zero degrees--calling for firing with gloves on. I made a half day of it.

These sets were fired with a second gen Glock 21 with Trijicons dated 1992, the pistol bought new in 1993 (as an aside, they still have fairly decent glow). The rounds were Federal 230 gr FMJ full power rounds with aluminum cases. Standing one yard in front of target, facing 180 degrees away. At beep, turn 180 and fire five shots while retreating straight back, or retreating at an angle, to about four yards distance. Pics of three of those sets--all fired with thin gloves on.








Tobacco Root mountains in the distance--a great day:




Reasonable skill can be achieved with full power .45 ACP rounds, and it is a great round for carry--my favorite for everyday carry, and it only "sucks" when the one doing the firing sucks. Presenting the rig on demand--and getting rounds off fast--and accurately--is much of the crux of the matter, and debating between these 3 cartridges is something that can go on endlessly.

These types of topics baffle me, and really remind me of the notion of couples taking Lamaze classes to have a child. Ridiculous. Imagine critters "not knowing", stressing, wondering about that which comes naturally...

Folks need only pick a cartridge and platform that works for a particular need, and go forth and practice with it--which soon confirms one's choices...

I think Hi-Vel summed it up well with the quote above. Pick the cartridge in the platform that you like and practice with it

Agreed, it's really as simple as that.

Yes. As in they both are.

Well I learned a lot reading all this. guess I need to toss my 1911 as the 45 ACP round will not penetrate wet TP. I need to just use my old single six and find some 22 shorts.





















Or not!

Watch tossing your .45, Scott. I understand you have one of those "warm chocolate" ones, and you might splatter *useless .45* all over the place....(grin)

I'll wait for a real cold day.