How effective is the 45 ACP Ball round for self-defense?

what WWII vets had to say about it. 230 gr ball ammo
Click to expand...

Dad served in Europe in WW-2. He said the 45 and 1911 were not well regarded. Most of the hype about both the 45 and 1911 came after the war due to colorful articles written in the gun magazines of the time.

The Army agreed and wanted to replace the 45 in 1946 with a higher capacity 9mm similar to the BHP. Testing after the war showed poor penetration from 45. They used surplus steel helmets as targets and found that at ranges over about 10 yards 45's were bouncing off the helmets. 9mm rounds still penetrated the helmets out past 100 yards. They found no difference in performance on humans between 9mm and 45. The primary reason the Army wanted 9mm over 45 was much better barrier penetration.

Against human threats all FMJ ammo works about 2/3 of the time. Caliber doesn't matter, they have gotten the same results with 45, 9mm and 40 S&W. Quality HP ammo has shown to work around 85-90% of the time. Once again caliber doesn't seem to matter.

Since most of us will never fire a shot at someone, and the handful who ever do the odds of FMJ ammo working are in our favor. You'd have to start shooting a lot of people to see any difference. But given the choice I'll take a decent HP. I have guns in 9mm, 45, and 10mm. I trust all of them to get the job done if needed.
 
jmr40 said:
Dad served in Europe in WW-2. He said the 45 and 1911 were not well regarded. Most of the hype about both the 45 and 1911 came after the war due to colorful articles written in the gun magazines of the time.

The Army agreed and wanted to replace the 45 in 1946 with a higher capacity 9mm similar to the BHP. Testing after the war showed poor penetration from 45. They used surplus steel helmets as targets and found that at ranges over about 10 yards 45's were bouncing off the helmets. 9mm rounds still penetrated the helmets out past 100 yards. They found no difference in performance on humans between 9mm and 45. The primary reason the Army wanted 9mm over 45 was much better barrier penetration.

Against human threats all FMJ ammo works about 2/3 of the time. Caliber doesn't matter, they have gotten the same results with 45, 9mm and 40 S&W. Quality HP ammo has shown to work around 85-90% of the time. Once again caliber doesn't seem to matter.

Since most of us will never fire a shot at someone, and the handful who ever do the odds of FMJ ammo working are in our favor. You'd have to start shooting a lot of people to see any difference. But given the choice I'll take a decent HP. I have guns in 9mm, 45, and 10mm. I trust all of them to get the job done if needed.
Click to expand...

I would not doubt the issue with respect to penetration.

As most people with guns do, I have shot a wide variety of things with all of mine. Everything from paper targets, various critters (game or varmints), different types of wood, fish, and sundry other objects.

One was an aluminum beer keg I found in the weeds at an outdoor gun range.

My 9mm Beretta 92FS poked holes in it every time.

My Colt 1991A1 in .45 acp? Not so much. Lots of dents with splits in the pits of those dents and, once in a while, one would penetrate.
 
BLACKHAWKNJ said:
Jeff Cooper and his acolytes maintained it was THE round for self defense,
Click to expand...

Likely formed that opinion before HP could be counted on to expand reliably? Like maybe during the 70's or 80's or even before?

In 92 I was hired as a cop, the issue round if one carried their own 45 auto was Remington 185+P (If you didn't carry your own approved semi you got a revolver)
At that time, the Remington 185+P was well regarded as was the Hydra-Shok 230.

Cooper did not have HST or Ranger T 230 as a option did he.
 
I’ve read that roughly 12% of the US population was enlisted in the military in 1939-1945. I’ve also read that only 10% of those enlisted were ever engaged in combat. Meaning the rest were Army Air Force, Navy, truck drivers, medical, logistics officers, clerks, cooks, mechanics, training, planning, and on and on and on. The war machine is a BIG machine. That means around 1% of the US population had combat experience other than naval or air combat or from WW1 or other conflicts. I’m sure if you just look at males that were 17-25 during that time period who were prime infantry candidates, that percentage will be much higher, but probably not more than 15 or 20% or so.

I’ve always suspected that some of the people that don’t like to talk about their experiences in military service are because it was traumatic and they don’t like to talk about it, but a lot of them are maybe because they were a rear echelon role and they don’t have much to talk about or feel some guilt that other people were getting maimed or killed and they didn’t.

My wife’s late grandfather was the latter case. He enlisted during the Korean War and was given the choice to join an infantry unit and go to Korea or to be a records clerk at an office in Seattle Washington. He chose records clerk. (So would I!). I only ever heard him say one sentence about his time in the military when he told me how they taught him to shoot with iron sights in the dark during basic. He refused to ever accept any veterans benefits, never went to the VA hospital during his failing health at the end of his life and if anyone refered to him as a veteran he would scoff it off.
 
Last edited:
I’ve read that roughly 12% of the US population was enlisted in the military in 1939-1945. I’ve also read that only 10% of those enlisted were ever engaged in combat. Meaning the rest were Army Air Force, Navy, truck drivers, medical, logistics officers, clerks, cooks, mechanics, training, planning, and on and on and on. The war machine is a BIG machine. That means around 1% of the US population had combat experience other than naval or air combat or from WW1 or other conflicts. I’m sure if you just look at males that were 17-25 during that time period who were prime infantry candidates, that percentage will be much higher, but probably not more than 15 or 20% or so.

I’ve always suspected that some of the people that don’t like to talk about their experiences in military service are because it was traumatic and they don’t like to talk about it, but a lot of them are maybe because they were a rear echelon role and they don’t have much to talk about or feel some guilt that other people were getting maimed or killed and they didn’t.
Click to expand...
From that relatively small population, it would be interesting to see how many of them actually shot a combatant with 1911. I suspect that a lot of the confidence in the .45ACP in combat had to do with stories that soldiers heard and very little to do with shooting combatants and gauging the actual effectiveness.
 
JohnKSa said:
From that relatively small population, it would be interesting to see how many of them actually shot a combatant with 1911. I suspect that a lot of the confidence in the .45ACP in combat had to do with stories that soldiers heard and very little to do with shooting combatants and gauging the actual effectiveness.
Click to expand...
And some of us won't talk about it either. Yes I have fired my issued weapons at enemy combatants.
 
It's an interesting discussion 🤔

I just came from a thread where the topic was 22lr as an SD/HD gun. I didn't think it was a good idea but there was a lot of support for going this route.

Somehow, using a 45 with ball ammo is not a good idea but using a 22 lr with rn solids is?

Folks will believe what they want to believe. I won't say anything against peoples personal opinions so I have nothing more to add to this discussion.
 
Even a non-CNS shot w/ a 22LR will kill you deader than a doornail . . . .
. . . . after a while.

I'd suggest not giving too much credit to those who would espouse it
for general situations -- much less 'in extremis.'
 
someguy2800 said:
I’ve read that roughly 12% of the US population was enlisted in the military in 1939-1945. I’ve also read that only 10% of those enlisted were ever engaged in combat. Meaning the rest were Army Air Force, Navy, truck drivers, medical, logistics officers, clerks, cooks, mechanics, training, planning, and on and on and on. The war machine is a BIG machine. That means around 1% of the US population had combat experience other than naval or air combat or from WW1 or other conflicts. I’m sure if you just look at males that were 17-25 during that time period who were prime infantry candidates, that percentage will be much higher, but probably not more than 15 or 20% or so.

I’ve always suspected that some of the people that don’t like to talk about their experiences in military service are because it was traumatic and they don’t like to talk about it, but a lot of them are maybe because they were a rear echelon role and they don’t have much to talk about or feel some guilt that other people were getting maimed or killed and they didn’t.

My wife’s late grandfather was the latter case. He enlisted during the Korean War and was given the choice to join an infantry unit and go to Korea or to be a records clerk at an office in Seattle Washington. He chose records clerk. (So would I!). I only ever heard him say one sentence about his time in the military when he told me how they taught him to shoot with iron sights in the dark during basic. He refused to ever accept any veterans benefits, never went to the VA hospital during his failing health at the end of his life and if anyone refered to him as a veteran he would scoff it off.
Click to expand...
Your first paragraph seems to suggest that Army Air Corps and Navy were not engaged in combat. Considering that US bomber command in the European theatre lost more men than all Marine casualties combined during WW2, for example, that might be problematic 😆
 
Roverguy said:
Your first paragraph seems to suggest that Army Air Corps and Navy were not engaged in combat. Considering that US bomber command in the European theatre lost more men than all Marine casualties combined during WW2, for example, that might be problematic 😆
Click to expand...

Didn’t mean to suggest that they didn’t, but bomber crews and navy seaman likely have little experience with shooting people with a 1911.
 
UncleEd said:
Well, a long time ago I did read this: "Shoot a ground hog with a 9mm
and it runs to its hole and dies. Shoot a ground hog with a .45 ACP
and it walks to its hole and dies. "
Click to expand...
In other words, a 45 acp can't quickly incapacitate a groundhog. ;) 😆
 
Ive seen a lot of people shot with 9mm ball ammo. Only a few with 45 ball ammo. Ball ammo works with good shot placement. Same with hollow points.

That being said, I would always carry a good hollow point over ball ammo unless there is a specific reason you cant. Outside of increased cost there is no downside to a quality hollow point in the duty calibers.
 
If you land 45 ACP between the shirt pockets, whatever you shot gonna be DRT.

Doesn't matter the bullet.
Doesn't matter much the caliber, or style of bullet, really.
If you get an EXIT WOUND whatever is ultimately gonna happen will usually happen faster if you got two holes instead of one.

Shoot 'em somewhere else, you might oughta shoot 'em again to get it done right.

Not rocket science.

Just simple hydraulics.
And to some degree pneumatics (collapsed lung is game over real fast - seen deer go down from 10-pumps .177 steel BB lung shot in seconds. More than once.)

If you happen to hit the right nerve, they'll just fall right over immediately.
But unless the hydraulic thing is in play, they might get back up. So be sure.

Most pistol bullets will through-and-through two legged targets if the bullet has enough horsepower to actually penetrate muscle. Or bone.
Which is almost anything. Usually.
Don't count too much on .22 rimfire or 25 ACP to make two holes.

Did see a trick shot (I mean a "trick" - not a "trick-shot") in the neck by a pimp with 25 ACP. Bullet didn't penetrate muscle. Instead, bullet entered the skin, at the neck, and ran between the skin and the muscle, from the neck, across the shoulder, then down the bicep, and barely past the elbow. Bullet was lodged just under the skin. The trick had disrespected the pimp's woman. So the pimp did what pimps have to do. The trick didn't want to press charges. So we collected the bullet, and went back in service with no report.

Had another case, the reporting party answered a knock at his front door. Uninvited guest at front door was angry drug dealer wanting to get paid. Payment was not received, so drug dealer shot homeowner between the eyes (a bit high actually - not quite between the eyes) with 9mm. Bullet entered the flesh of the homeowner's forehead, and ran between the skin, and along the top of the scalp, and exited at the back of the head. Never penetrated bone. Fire department treated the wound with band-aid to the front of the head and band-aid to the back of the head. Homeowner refused transport. Turned out the homeowner was wanted for an administrative probation violation (administrative "positive" for failure to report for piss test). Homeowner was arrested and taken to jail. With his band-aids. Homeowner caught a break of sorts by agreeing to testify against the shooter. If the shooter was ever caught. Which he wasn't.

One more case with angry drug dealer collecting. Homeowner couldn't pay, but did have a .30 carbine with a full magazine. Assuming FMJ. I didn't work the case personally, so I'm not sure how many rounds were fired, or how many hits were achieved. Drug dealer brought one more dude with him as added persuasion. Homeowner emptied the magazine on the two. Assume it had to be several hits since the shooting all occurred in the homeowner's living room. Drug dealer died. So I guess that makes it a DYING ROOM too. Added-persuasion guy was shot-up, but survived. Jury found homeowner guilty of manslaugter. In Virginia, jury recommends sentence, and judge cannot exceed jury recommendation. Jury recommended six months in jail. Homeowner had prior felony conviction. Cruelty to animals. A possum was eating the cherries in his cherry tree. So he put a steel trap in the tree, and the possom got caught in it. That upset the neighbors. So he got six months for the possum thing too.

I guess 45 ACP could do some sort of funny stuff too. Especially if the hollow-point clogs with something on the way in.

I guess moral of the story is shoot them between the shirt pockets if you want guaranteed terminal effect. I'm pretty sure a through-and-through in the thoracic cavity is a done deal, whether its FMJ or Black Talon. Probably anything from .32 to .50. Maybe if it happened in the parking lot of the ER, might save some percentage. But I expect most would still be dunfer.
 
Last edited:
Its far from useless. Hp is better for terminal performance. If the pistol in question doesn't work reliably with what is loaded in it, then both the pistol and the ammo are worthless, because the gun isn't even firing- no one cares what that round would do "if it was fired". Have you shopped around and tested a 45 HP with a rounder profile on the projuctile? Not a flat-nosed HP like hydra shock, something a little more round on the end like the less glamorous named offering from Winchester or Remington. Also, I think the idea that normal clothes (even leather "biker clothing") stopping a bullet is ridiculous.
 
C-grunt said:
Ball ammo works with good shot placement. Same with hollow points.

That being said, I would always carry a good hollow point over ball ammo unless there is a specific reason you cant. Outside of increased cost there is no downside to a quality hollow point in the duty calibers.
Click to expand...

That.

I carry HP ammo because I can, but if all I could get is ball ammos... that's fine, too. I spend more time working on my shooting skills than watching bullets blow up ballistic gel... I consider it better time spent.
 
W.E.G. said:
If you land 45 ACP between the shirt pockets, whatever you shot gonna be DRT.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, then you don't even need .45 acp, right? The problem is, particularly for self defense shootings, shot placement is often sub optimal. You may be on the move. The bad guy may be on the move as well. You are trying to stop him. He is trying to kill you. There is a good chance your aim will be less then square range quality. So it is better to shoot a bullet that does more tissue damage overall (expanding bullets) than one that doesn't. That way if you don't hit them between the pockets, you are doing as much damage as you can to what you hit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
  • Locked
45acp for personal defense
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
Vern Humphrey
V
Craig_AR
  • Locked
Auto-Ordnance 1911BKO - Ball Only?
Replies
11
Views
3K
bikergeo
bikergeo
L
  • Locked
Best self defense 45 ammo ?
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
Kingofthehill
K
SteadyD
  • Locked
How many defensive rounds do you test in your handgun?
2 3
Replies
70
Views
3K
Garandimal
Garandimal
A
  • Locked
Hatcher Rating of caliber effectiveness
Replies
22
Views
5K
LightningJoe
L
Back
Top