.40 or .45???

[chinto]

ok, if this is a defense gun, then .45 cal only! I am an ex EMT and I will state here and now THAT ALL THAT COUNTS IN A PISTOL IS BORE DIAMETER! pistols are not fast enough to do the damage a rifle is, so the larger the hole it makes going in and along its path the more effective it is. ( and yes people this is scientific fact, do not believe me go ask your local ER doctor about Guns Shot Wounds!) so I would suggest the .45 over the .40 cal for self defense use every time.

 

[KenpoTex]

since that extra 1/10" makes that much of a difference...

As I've said before (including in is thread) SHOT PLACEMENT is the only thing that counts.
A good hit is a good hit regardless of caliber. Conversely, a bad hit is a bad hit regardless of caliber. The [slightly] larger diameter of the .45 will not make up for a lousy hit.

 

[Doc]

You know this is an old discussion among military and LEO's and actually all perspectives have validity for the individual. But I've always been taught that the calibre of the round is only one factor. The weapon does play a part, and sometimes this also determines when or if you will carry it for private citizens. Big firearms aren't always carried, but smaller cals give you more rounds of firepower, etc. I carry everywhere, (including a Ziploc bag when I take a shower) so its different for me, because I have to.

Now, we all know that ballistically speaking, a 9 mm and 38 cal are essentially the same, and a 380 is just a 9 mm short. We also know that a 40 cal is really just a 10 mm short. All of them have their more powerful variances in loading. But when I went to FBI Rangemaster School they hammered one thing home.

"You can assassinate someone with a 22 cal if you have the advantage, but when it comes to handguns, I've never heard of a spec op or SWAT unit that carry's anything other than a 45 sidearm." Than they issued us 40 cal as the best compromise between the 9 and 45. The 45 is definitely the man stopper, but is usually a big gun for plain clothes carry all the time, (although there are some smaller 1911's styles on the market), but are not double action, and most have limited capacity. (Once again there are exceptions).

The 9 gives you lots of rounds to play with, and I've heard the shot placement argument that tends to negate it, until you find yourself in a fire-fight with multiple tangos, which today is real possible. Than you'll be looking for all the rounds you can find and those extra mags, we're mandated to carry. The 40 is a good compromise. More rounds, 9 mm size frame for the most part, and near 45 ballistics.

Some have mentioned the cost angle and that makes sense. Never thought about it because they give us all the ammo we ask for just to get us to shoot often. You wouldn't think so, but sometimes you have to threaten guys to make them go qualify.

 

[sjansen]

Thanks guys, maybe I'll just stick with my Ruger P95 in 9mm. I have A LOT of hours of practice with it, I've always felt comfortable carrying it, and I'm quite used to its characteristics. I know that Rugers are frowned upon as cheap guns a lot, but mine has gone BANG! every time I've pulled the trigger. I am certainly not unhappy with it, just thought I should have a bigger bullet coming out of it...maybe I'll spend the extra money on a decent light, or upgrade the sights instead.

That's all that matters. Ruger is one of the best .22 on the market and you will find few detractors. There handguns are well made as well. Whatever you have the most practice with is the best gun for you to carry and use. If you do get a new gun, you shouldn't carry it until you have plenty of practice. Even with the best bullets, the gun won't work if you don't hit the target when needed.

 

[Deaf Smith]

My wife used to work in the ER and OR room at a major hospital that was in, uh, a not so nice place.

She as been in CVICU, CVOR, OR, Truma I, and even director of CV nursing.

Well she told me long time ago that people shot with low powered rounds like .22, .25, .32 most of the time walked in talking! As the round's power increased, more were carried in (like 9mm, .38, .357, .45s) BUT NOT ALL!

The ONLY ones that just about always were carried in were shotgun wounds. Those hit solidy in the chest with a shotgun, even with bird shot, tended to clean up and not look bad until they cracked their chest, then it was evedent many of their organs were hit and bleeding. Very hard to stop.

And then there is David Spaulding. For those who don't know who he is his bio is at the end of this article

http://www.lawofficer.com/news-and-...l;jsessionid=8CD7B6D6383EF557FEA175D40C684C69

Well he wrote that from the many shooting videos he had seen over the years that the larger the round TENDED to give more of a reaction on the person it hit. But he said the difference was not great.

Not saying the .45 is junk, just that such as the 9mm is not all that bad. LIke Ken said, shot placement is the most critical part.

Deaf

 

[7starmarc]

Ok guys,

I know this is probably an old debate, but I wanna know your opinions. I think I'm gonna upgrade the ol' 9mm. And I don't know what caliber is better: .40, or .45.

Let her Rip!

I noitced that you're in San Diego on your profile, is that right?

Don't forget the the magazine capacity argument does not hold as much water here in California, since we're limited to 10 no matter what the caliber (unless you're a LEO).

Assuming the same attention to training, accuracy, etc. You're looking at a pretty close wash between the .40 and .45, IMO. I have chosen the .45 due to feeling of the recoil and slightly better availability of ammo.

I also believe that the .45 does have slightly better "stopping power" and slightly lesser (over)penetration, two things that I like in a self defense round. If you're looking for other characteristics, then your choice might be different. Also, you can adjust this with other calibers by changing the charactersists of your ammo, to some degree.

As one of my instructors has said, accuracy, reliability, confidence. Those are what you need in your firearm. If the number helps your confidence, or if there are other characteristics which push you in one direction, then go with it. Of course, at the end of the day, you really just need to go out and shoot a bunch of pistols and see what you want to take home.

 

[allenjp]

I see what some of you are saying about the magazine capacity being an advantage for the 9mm or .40 over the .45. Unfortunately for me it aint so. See, I live in the great state of Cali(gun control)fornia, and here we have a high capacity magazine ban, that limits pistol magazines to ten rounds for everyone except LEO's. So for me, if I have a 9mm with a ten round mag, or a .45 with 8 rounds, it's not a huge difference.

 

[allenjp]

Sorry 7starmac, I hadn't seen your post before I posted mine. As you can see I have not forgotten that law. It SUCKS!!! Just like most other gun laws in good ol' Cali.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Sorry 7starmac, I hadn't seen your post before I posted mine. As you can see I have not forgotten that law. It SUCKS!!! Just like most other gun laws in good ol' Cali.

Same deal with me in Massachusettstan.

If All I get are 10 rounds, they're damnsure gonna be 10 BIG ones.

 

[HM2PAC]

One last thing about 9 vs 40 vs 45......

If you have any aspiration to putting a suppressor on your pistol, the only of the 3 that can be squelched to any degree is the 45.

 

[allenjp]

Another thing that doesn't apply in CA.

 

[chinto]

My wife used to work in the ER and OR room at a major hospital that was in, uh, a not so nice place.

She as been in CVICU, CVOR, OR, Truma I, and even director of CV nursing.

Well she told me long time ago that people shot with low powered rounds like .22, .25, .32 most of the time walked in talking! As the round's power increased, more were carried in (like 9mm, .38, .357, .45s) BUT NOT ALL!

The ONLY ones that just about always were carried in were shotgun wounds. Those hit solidy in the chest with a shotgun, even with bird shot, tended to clean up and not look bad until they cracked their chest, then it was evedent many of their organs were hit and bleeding. Very hard to stop.

And then there is David Spaulding. For those who don't know who he is his bio is at the end of this article

http://www.lawofficer.com/news-and-...l;jsessionid=8CD7B6D6383EF557FEA175D40C684C69

Well he wrote that from the many shooting videos he had seen over the years that the larger the round TENDED to give more of a reaction on the person it hit. But he said the difference was not great.

Not saying the .45 is junk, just that such as the 9mm is not all that bad. LIke Ken said, shot placement is the most critical part.

Deaf

oh no question that shot placement counts, but that the .45 gives you more damage then the .40, and yes nothing beats a 12 gage except perhaps a 10 or 8 gage shot gun at any thing under about 70 yds! buckshot is for keeps as is even small bird shot at close range!! i agree with your wife.. nasty all .. but the big bore pistols and shotguns for close range are very very much the worst end to be on..... and nothing touches a rifle after about 70yds.. and there bore diameter does make a difference as long as the muzzle volocity is even semi close. ( and yes again shot placement does count! ) head shot with a 25 acp will kill instantly some times.. bounce off some times too lol.. but head hit with a .32 acp is most likely to be instantly lethal..but, with a .45 most of the head is missing! )

 

[Deaf Smith]

oh no question that shot placement counts, but that the .45 gives you more damage then the .40, and yes nothing beats a 12 gage except perhaps a 10 or 8 gage shot gun at any thing under about 70 yds! buckshot is for keeps as is even small bird shot at close range!! i agree with your wife.. nasty all .. but the big bore pistols and shotguns for close range are very very much the worst end to be on..... and nothing touches a rifle after about 70yds.. and there bore diameter does make a difference as long as the muzzle volocity is even semi close. ( and yes again shot placement does count! ) head shot with a 25 acp will kill instantly some times.. bounce off some times too lol.. but head hit with a .32 acp is most likely to be instantly lethal..but, with a .45 most of the head is missing! )

But skill is far more important than any 9mm .vs. .40 .vs. .45. And skill comes through much practice. .45 ammo ain't cheep. .40 is somewhat less expensive, and 9mm somewhat less than either .45 or .40. And with light weight carry guns many people have a hard time with the .45 or .40.

So, I feel one balances out clout, control, and cost. How hard it hits, how easy it is to hit with, and how much practice one an afford. Just what one picks depends how how they balance those three.

Deaf

 

[KenpoTex]

I remain unconvinced that there is a significant advantage with the larger calibers...

Given that there is an 80%+ survival rate among those shot with a handgun, I think it's safe to say that they all make pretty poor manstoppers. This being the case, I would think that logic would dictate having more chances to poke a hole in something that will have the desired effect. Or, for those limited to a certain mag-capacity, cheaper ammo so you can practice more and be more capable of putting the holes in the right places.

 

[Doc]

I remain unconvinced that there is a significant advantage with the larger calibers...

There is a reason law enforcement doesn't carry small caliber weapons. The same reasons exist for tactical units who tend to carry no less than a 45 cal sidearm. Extend that logic to the military, who issue a 9mm but all spec ops, SEALS, Rangers, etc, carry 45. Considering these two entities have more physical life and death encounters and actually shoot more people than any other entities on the planet, I'd pay attention.

 

[KenpoTex]

I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree...

 

[Doc]

I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree...

Well we do agree on one thing.

"keep the change."

nobama.

 

[Frostbite]

There is a reason law enforcement doesn't carry small caliber weapons. The same reasons exist for tactical units who tend to carry no less than a 45 cal sidearm. Extend that logic to the military, who issue a 9mm but all spec ops, SEALS, Rangers, etc, carry 45. Considering these two entities have more physical life and death encounters and actually shoot more people than any other entities on the planet, I'd pay attention.

It's worth mentioning that SEAL candidates actually train with the Sig P226 (there's actually a Naval Special Warfare commemorative edition) in BUD/S and of course the venerable MP5 is chambered for 9mm. It's also my understanding that the choice of sidearm for most special operators is at their discretion. I'm sure though that if you were somehow able to look at the statistics of the calibers used in special operations encounters, you'd find that the 5.56mm round is going to be the clear winner. The sidearm is a last resort.

The last murder statistics I looked at also point to the 9mm as being the leading caliber used in homicides, followed by .38, .357, and .22. There are a lot of factors involved there though. Most gun crimes aren't committed by gun aficionados so they're going to use whatever is cheap and convenient. Being high capacity may come into play as well.

Most of the ballistic gelatin penetration testing I've seen show the most common self defense rounds being pretty comparable. The .357 Sig and .45 seemed to come out on top though. The wound channels for both rounds were pretty comparable as was penetration. Here's a visual reference:

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo325/frostbite77/handgun_gel_comparison.jpg

Notice though that the 9mm and .40S&W aren't that far off from the others. Essentially, you're trading energy (penetration) for channeling (expansion).

I'm not disagreeing that the .45 is a great round but as far as it being more lethal than a 9mm or even a .22... Well, let's just say I'd rather not be the one to test that theory.

 

[allenjp]

Interesting that in that picture the heavier, lower velocity loads for both 9mm, and .40 penetrated farther than the lighter, faster ones...

 

[arnisandyz]

Better for what?

I know most of you guys fall into the "defensive" category being here on MartialTalk, but I've been doing a lot of Practical shooting gun games lately (IDPA, USPSA, 3 gun). Most EVERYBODY shooting in Limited class are using the 40. Why? It makes major power factor easily and gives more capacity than 45. Many experienced shooters prefer the timing of the snappier recoil. If it recoils faster than the 45ACP and you can control it, the sights return faster as well. In addition the 40 is very versatile. It can also be downloaded and be used in Production division or IDPA that have a minimum power floor and have less recoil than a 9mm, provided the gun fits the rules of the class. Even in Open division where the 38 super is king, more people are moving to the 40 for economics (more used brass available for reloading).

While I personally prefer 9mm or 45ACP for CCW, the 40 does have its place. I'm considering picking one up for Limited Division competition and wouldn't hesitate to use it for self-defense!