9mm 13 Rd or 45 8rd

Status
Not open for further replies.
My two reactions to this thread (having not read all 4 pages) would be somewhat contradictory.

First, for civilian defensive purposes I tend to think capacity is really an overrated concern. It's extremely unlikely any of us will never need to actually use a firearm to defend ourselves. Within the very small subset who ever do, it's extremely unlikely the scenario would require more than something like a J-Frame with five rounds. Yes there are times when more rounds may be necessary, but after the first few rounds think the need for each additional round starts to drop pretty dramatically. I don't think this is necessarily true for law enforcement, but I'm talking about defensive concealed carry.

Second, I don't think there's a practical difference in effectiveness between the mainline service calibers. So despite the previous paragraph, I'd opt for the higher capacity that 9mm offers (because why not) and also enjoy the lower cost for ammunition. Shooting is fun and I can do more of it when it costs less.
 
I couldn't think of a single shooting where the person or animal was shot with a 9mm and lived, but would have died if the round would have been a .40S&W or a .45acp. And I could not think of a single shooting where a person or animal was shot with a .40S&W or a .45acp and died, but would have survived if the round would have been a 9mm.

I realize this is a quote from the article.

I wonder how one would go about proving that a larger caliber would have done it when 9mm didn't, or that 9mm wouldn't have when a larger caliber did?

I suppose there's always the 1986 FBI Miami-Dade shootout to consider. That might be the closest we get to being able to say a heavier or bigger bullet might have done it.

But I'm on a .357 Sig trip right now. So if that kinda 9mm is an option, I'd like to change my answer.
 
17 rounds is usually enough.....until it isn't. I've never been in a gunfight and thought "I wish I brought less ammo". (Actually I have never been in a gun fight)
I think it is now time we all just move to the 5.7. Why are we even talking 17 rds? More is always better. The very least I will now carry is a 5.7 with 20 rds and a few spare mags.(6 mags to be exact, actually add one more for lucky 7 and a even 160 rd total carry)


View attachment 882863

Talking with SWAT guys that have used the 5.7 I won't be switching anytime soon. It's developed a track record of poor performance during LE gunfights
 
Talking with SWAT guys that have used the 5.7 I won't be switching anytime soon. It's developed a track record of poor performance during LE gunfights

Be interesting to know what autopsy reports showed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jhb
On a tangential note, I'd consider two smaller capacity magazines ( one in the pistol plus a backup ) to be a superior choice over one higher capacity mag in the pistol.

( this does assume that any gear carried is well tested and reliable )
 
I wonder how one would go about proving that a larger caliber would have done it when 9mm didn't, or that 9mm wouldn't have when a larger caliber did?

I suppose there's always the 1986 FBI Miami-Dade shootout to consider. That might be the closest we get to being able to say a heavier or bigger bullet might have done it.

1) What happened is what happened. What didn't happen didn't. There's no way to "prove" either way. Too many people want to ask for "proof " of things that can't be proven. Many are uncomfortable with uncertainty and are looking for definitive answers when none are possible.

2)The 1986 FBI Miami-Dade shootout happened in 1986. During the intervening 34 years, there have been massive advances in bullet design that have overcome the limitations of what the FBI was using at the time.

Regardless, what happened, happened and what didn't, didn't. Speculation about all this woulda, coulda, shoulda is just that, speculation.

What we do know is that experience has demonstrated the increased efficacy of the 9mm round with modern bullet designs.
 
Problem is, 1911’s are heavy to carry. Having weighed probable need, to pain in belt line, I have gone with 8 rounds of 9mm. Sad, I know. :(

Nah, not sad. Like a lot of cops (as they age), I've experienced easily aggravated 'hot spots' on my hip and glute from too many years of wearing OWB/IWB holsters and full-size guns. Holster, gun weight and belt tightness (as well as how high/low the waist rides) can take their toll over time.

Since I carried my fair share of hi-cap duty & off-duty weapons over the years, when it came to carrying off-duty I eventually gravitated to smaller and lighter weapons. I mean, I could only carry a K/L/N-frame, my Redhawk, 1911's and my P90DC in IWB holsters for so many years, off-duty.

Nowadays, if I'm not pocket-holstering one of my assorted 5-shot snubs (or a LCP for really tight & short pockets), I'm belting on one of my compact or subcompact lightweight 9, .40 or .45 pistols. I'm fine with 6rd .45's; 7-10rd 9's; and 7-9rd .40's. For colder weather, when the hot spots haven't been aggravated, I still don't mind belting on a mid-size 3-4" .357 Wheelgun. ;)

Capacity and caliber don't rate quite as high on my own priority list as they may for some other folks. ;) Have a gun. Be very familiar with it. Be able to run it hard, fast and accurately. The rest are more or less nuances of gear attributes.
 
I suppose there's always the 1986 FBI Miami-Dade shootout to consider. That might be the closest we get to being able to say a heavier or bigger bullet might have done it.

If you're talking about the bullet that went through Platt's arm, that shot severed his brachial artery and would have killed him it was just a matter of how soon.
 
If you're talking about the bullet that went through Platt's arm, that shot severed his brachial artery and would have killed him it was just a matter of how soon.

That's what I was referring to.

I agree, it would have killed him, certainly without medical attention. But not quite as soon as a lot of people would have liked. And of course the point isn't to kill eventually, the point is to stop the threat right now.
 
Capacity and caliber don't rate quite as high on my own priority list as they may for some other folks. ;) Have a gun. Be very familiar with it. Be able to run it hard, fast and accurately. The rest are more or less nuances of gear attributes.

I wish we had something superior to the like button!
 
That's what I was referring to.

I agree, it would have killed him, certainly without medical attention. But not quite as soon as a lot of people would have liked. And of course the point isn't to kill eventually, the point is to stop the threat right now.

The time it takes for someone to be incapacitated from a wound like that is going to vary depending on many factors up to and including the persons will to continue fighting.

A few years back my department had a detective killed by a murder suspect they were trying to catch. He sprung an ambush on them.

As the detectives pulled up to the scene in their car the bad guy opened fire on them with a 357 magnum. One round hit the plain clothes detective square in the chest and right through his heart. The detective got out of his car, and shot the bad guy 11 times with his rifle before succumbing to his wounds.

The moral of the story is people dont just drop dead unless you destroy the upper central nervous system.
 
The time it takes for someone to be incapacitated from a wound like that is going to vary depending on many factors up to and including the persons will to continue fighting.

A few years back my department had a detective killed by a murder suspect they were trying to catch. He sprung an ambush on them.

As the detectives pulled up to the scene in their car the bad guy opened fire on them with a 357 magnum. One round hit the plain clothes detective square in the chest and right through his heart. The detective got out of his car, and shot the bad guy 11 times with his rifle before succumbing to his wounds.

The moral of the story is people dont just drop dead unless you destroy the upper central nervous system.

I agree. You point is well taken. But I think it misses the original intention of me bringing up the Miami-Dade shootout. Which was simple that it is one of probably very few situations where we can even speculate on whether a larger caliber would have made a difference.
 
Capacity and caliber don't rate quite as high on my own priority list as they may for some other folks
Agreed, a whole lot of other things have to go right first.

Mindset (readiness/willingness)
Situational awareness.......see it coming
Ability .......to put a shot on target under severe pressure (No, not a range shot, but when someone might kill you first)
Training........to stay competent.

Pick a gun that works every time, that you handle and shoot ell, and train.

Caliber.
 
If I could handle the recoil of a 45 well, I would carry my Ruger American compact in 45 instead of my 9mm.
 
I don’t totally believe that service calibers are very similar in performance. I do believe in size efficiency. A 39 oz empty 1911 vs a 23 oz empty G19 - 8 vs 15 rds. Or a .45 Shield vs a 365. With the evolution of all ammo in the past 10 yrs I think that 9mm has improved proportionally more than .45. I like and own .40s and .45s but prefer to carry 16 rds of 9mm in the gun and a spare 17 rd mag.
That brings us to shooter ability. In a dynamic gunfight will you be able to score 100% hits on the multiple gangbangers attacking you? They will be moving - as will you. Those 8 rds MIGHT be enough - or not.
 
Last edited:
Which would be your choice to conceal. Size is the same.
All other things being equal ...... sigh They never are....

13 rounds of 9mm vs. 8 rounds of .45..... Hard to say. You said size is the same, but what about pistol weight? I went from a gov't length 1911 in .45 (8 rounds of .45) to a G19 (15 rounds of 9mm) to a Shield (8 rounds of 9mm). Plus backup mags, putting me at either 24 or 30 rounds of something. When I phrase it like that, it sounds like I almost went to the worst of all worlds. But my Shield is a fantastic carry gun, and I rarely have any excuse not to carry it.

To be honest, I'm seriously considering going back to .45 for carry. Does 9mm allow for faster follow-up shots? Yeah, probably, in comparable pistols. But does a 9mm Shield allow for faster follow-up shots compared to an all-steel 1911? I haven't timed it, but I'm not sure it does. (If anyone has timed it, I'd be curious as to the results.) I must admit that I do prefer the .45 1911 recoil impulse to that of the 9mm Shield.
 
I don’t totally believe that service calibers are very similar in performance.

I believe the decision was made that they were similar enough that given the cost.

9mm = More Practice, Higher Average Proficiency, Higher Capacity

Over

.40 S&W or .45 ACP = Higher effectiveness per hit.
Similar does not mean the indistinguishable.
Ask officers that have put down both which does a better job and I don't think most will say 9mm.

If your name Miculek you might want to consider staying with .40.

If your name is ME you might want to consider the 9mm.

I said consider I didn't make any recommendations.

Someone mentioned DocGKR and prior to the FBI decision he stated he carried a 9mm as a Civilian but would carry a .40 S&W if allowed as a Uniformed Police Officer. My perception was he believed in a Compact 9mm advantage out weighed any minor disadvantage. In a Full Size Duty Gun the reverse.

PS I carry a .45 Shield not because it's a .45 but because that's what comes in that platform (9mm is not the same).
 
Last edited:
Someone mentioned DocGKR and prior to the FBI decision he stated he carried a 9mm as a Civilian but would carry a .40 S&W if allowed as a Uniformed Police Officer. My perception was he believed in a Compact 9mm advantage out weighed any minor disadvantage. In a Full Size Duty Gun the reverse.

If I remember right he said that had to do with barrier penetration because as a cop he would be more likely to have to be shooting at people that were behind cars
 
In a perfect world, I'd pick the .45... but I live in the Real World, and the size and weight of my Kimber .45 was a distraction... so much so that I was leaving it in the truck or on the dresser. Completely departing from the OP... maybe the 'evil of 2 lessers...' I carry a 7rd 9mm daily. Key phrase is 'I carry;' which translates to I have it on me... not in the truck or on the dresser. Rule #1: Bring a gun.
 
If I remember right he said that had to do with barrier penetration because as a cop he would be more likely to have to be shooting at people that were behind cars

I will take your word for it. It's been a while.
 
In a perfect world, I'd pick the .45... but I live in the Real World, and the size and weight of my Kimber .45 was a distraction... so much so that I was leaving it in the truck or on the dresser. Completely departing from the OP... maybe the 'evil of 2 lessers...' I carry a 7rd 9mm daily. Key phrase is 'I carry;' which translates to I have it on me... not in the truck or on the dresser. Rule #1: Bring a gun.

I've already admitted to carrying an LCP .380 at times for the same reason. I'm afraid they wouldn't take a rain check while I ran home.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top