Humorous thread on US Army ammo contract

[fpgt72]

Lots of funny posts, but does anyone really.....logically......think that the .45 should make a comeback as a duty caliber? In today’s combat and law enforcement environment?

Ballistically similar, neither the .40 nor .45 offers much advantage on human targets, if any, over the 9MM. It is easier to carry more rounds, easier to handle, easier to shoot.

The fact that the Marines ditched that Colt 1911 in about 2 hot minutes should tell you something...tells me that even our most traditional and history loving military forces realize in a combat situation, more bullets means you last longer in a gunfight. More bullets = more better.

Ask a cop, armed with a .45 ACP, who survived a helluva gunfight with a single bad guy, whathes carrying now?

Spoiler.....more rounds,

https://www.policeone.com/patrol-is...ne-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job/

I’m no hater of the .40 or .45, I own guns and ammo of both calibers. Love shooting my .4’s, but as with the 5.56 in the rifle, it simply makes sense logistically.

More bullets mean ________. If it gets to the point you need your side arm things are already bad....do not believe the movies.

They ditched it because of logistics.

 

[Mauser lover]

Actually none of that is correct. The .45 ACP bullet is 27% larger (0.451/0.356=1.266) than the 9 mm bullet. The 9 mm bullet is 21% smaller than the .45 ACP (0.356/0.451=0.789). There are no 63%ages involved in the unexpanded bullet comparisons either way. Let's not quibble over a thousandth here or there. I'm just doing this off the top of my head. Actually you don't even have to calculate to get into the ballpark. Every common caliber from .32 to .50 is roughly 10% larger than the one below it. .32, .356 or 9mm, .40 or 10mm, .45, .50. Steps of approximately 10%. It is a little more compact below .32.

There are a bunch of ways to calculate bigness. Perhaps the first poster was dealing with surface area instead of diameter?

 

[crestoncowboy]

Or weight/mass?

 

[rpenmanparker]

There are a bunch of ways to calculate bigness. Perhaps the first poster was dealing with surface area instead of diameter?

Actually that comes out about right. Area of the hole. Who knew? Well, you did.

 

[FlSwampRat]

The Army doesn't have the option of "modern bullet design."

Someone in my platoon at Ft Carson where I was an MP had his .45 inspected by the duty lieutenant. Slide pulled back and a round popped out. Round was a civvy hollow point, as were the rest of the rounds in the magazine. Looey handed back the sidearm and said he was going to the latrine and would be back in 5 to finish the inspection. When the butter bar got back and reinspected there were standard US Army issue ball rounds in the weapons miraculously. I was, er, very present to witness this.

 

[Stope Rat]

There are a bunch of ways to calculate bigness. Perhaps the first poster was dealing with surface area instead of diameter?

BINGO. Area of a circle is proportional to the SQUARE of the radius. A 0.45 inch projectile makes a hole that is 63% larger than a 0.35 inch projectile.

Not sure if this an example of innumeracy, or just how willing we are to say someone is wrong without bothering to ask them to explain their reasoning.

 

[<*(((><]

Someone in my platoon at Ft Carson where I was an MP had his .45 inspected by the duty lieutenant. Slide pulled back and a round popped out. Round was a civvy hollow point, as were the rest of the rounds in the magazine. Looey handed back the sidearm and said he was going to the latrine and would be back in 5 to finish the inspection. When the butter bar got back and reinspected there were standard US Army issue ball rounds in the weapons miraculously. I was, er, very present to witness this.

At least you....errrr..I mean the MP caught the Lieutenant's drift that something better be different when he gets back from the latrine. Sounds like a good Lieutenant.

 

[<*(((><]

I moved from .40 to 9mm and still think it was the right choice after looking at ballistics for a while. Shooting 9mm affords me more opportunities moneywise to train, with a family of 5 and all the expenses it makes a difference. Still have one .40 in case of a run on 9mm.

The 9mm Parabellum has been around forever, and is still relevant and departments, countries, and persons in general still come back to it. With today's bullet technology it gave the 9mm a real leg up in performance. Obviously, the .40 and .45 gained from bullet technology as well (don't be naive and say it was one sided improvements), however it took some deficiencies of the 9mm and really improved the performance. I for one appreciate the added rounds in my magazines given the type of terrorist acts and lone wolf attacks we have going on from time to time.

 

[theotherwaldo]

It's the same old argument.
A perfect shot with a .45 does not kill any deader than a perfect shot with a 9mm.
A follow-up shot after a less-than-perfect shot with a .45 is usually a little slower than a similar follow-up shot with a 9mm.
A .45 usually carries less follow-up shots than a 9mm.
I like them both, and use either of them almost interchangeably.

 

[kcofohio]

Okay, not the entire article- a bland report of Winchester winning the contract for 9mm ammo for the Army. I just thought this part was funny:

With the FBI and Department of Defense leaning in hard on 9mm (as well as the myth of “stopping power” having been put to rest), antiquated cartridges such as .45 ACP and dated interim rounds such as .40 S&W may be seeing the sunset on the horizon- at least in terms of duty application.

The .45 ACP is "antiquated" and the .40 is "dated"...what does that make the 9mm Parabellum which is older than both?

How about vintage cartridge? Sounds better than antiquated.

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

How about vintage cartridge? Sounds better than antiquated.

They use the term "Heirloom" with fruit and vegetables down at the greenhouse and seed store. Maybe we should adopt that term..?

 

[rpenmanparker]

They use the term "Heirloom" with fruit and vegetables down at the greenhouse and seed store. Maybe we should adopt that term..?

And retro. Don't forget retro.

 

[scuba_ed1911]

I suspect the other consideration towards smaller rounds may be due to budgets as well. Less expensive training / bulk purchase costs.

 

[bearcreek]

Actually none of that is correct. The .45 ACP bullet is 27% larger (0.451/0.356=1.266) than the 9 mm bullet. The 9 mm bullet is 21% smaller than the .45 ACP (0.356/0.451=0.789). There are no 63%ages involved in the unexpanded bullet comparisons either way.

You're using diameter. Stope Rat and I were using frontal area.

 

[rpenmanparker]

You're using diameter. Stope Rat and I were using frontal area.

Right. Apologies.

 

[paulsj]

I don't buy that 147gr or 150gr slug is equal to 230gr, but darn it the 9x19 can be squizzed into a small gun package like the R9 pistol. If large quantity is carried then 115gr 9x19 ammo weighs considerably less than .45 ammo.

 

[Sistema1927]

Someone in my platoon at Ft Carson where I was an MP had his .45 inspected by the duty lieutenant. Slide pulled back and a round popped out. Round was a civvy hollow point, as were the rest of the rounds in the magazine. Looey handed back the sidearm and said he was going to the latrine and would be back in 5 to finish the inspection. When the butter bar got back and reinspected there were standard US Army issue ball rounds in the weapons miraculously. I was, er, very present to witness this.

I don't imagine that I would have gotten off so easy had the .38 Super Series 70 1911 I would occasionally carry to guard money at Ft. Knox been discovered.

(Yes, I took a risk, but it was easier than checking out a ratty .45 1911A1 from the arms room.)

 

[Buzznrose]

There is no reason whatsoever that a 1911 duty pistol could not be configured to carry 16-18 rounds. Several if not many examples exist. When I say 1911, I mean the operating systems for loading, ejecting and firing. And no reason the frame could not be polymer. Switching to double-stack, poly, striker-fired pistols was not about capacity or weight. It was about lower complexity and cost as well as avoidance of the “condition 1” phobia.

Why go with a less reliable action? What could be the point of a poly 1911 replacing a Glock or Sig P320, other than “because JMB designed it...”

Guys who like 1911’s don’t want plastic guns. Guys who carry guns for long hours don’t want heavy guns.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Why go with a less reliable action? What could be the point of a poly 1911 replacing a Glock or Sig P320, other than “because JMB designed it...”

Guys who like 1911’s don’t want plastic guns. Guys who carry guns for long hours don’t want heavy guns. Let it go, Bro.

You are awfully sure of all that. I don’t have to let anything go. I have what I want, a little of everything.

 

[Bruce D Pease]

As a “vintage” shooter I prefer the “vintage” 45, but my “vintage arthritic wrists” prefer 9 mm and/or black powder sa cap and ball.

 

[WestTexShooter]

I suspect the other consideration towards smaller rounds may be due to budgets as well. Less expensive training / bulk purchase costs.

I suspect you are correct.

Hopefully I may ask a question of the board that in no way is intended to be disrespectful.

That is, could the wider adaption of 9mm (especially in LEO circles) also have something to do with the addition (justifiably so in my opinion) of more “non-traditional candidates and officers than many decades ago?

 

[Kaybee]

A thought: An advantage of .45 as a home defense round is that it is a subsonic round with a lower decibel level then 9mm. If you fire it indoors without hearing protection it may do less hearing damage.

Another: In states with magazine capacity restrictions, regular citizen lose the capacity advantage of 9mm. 10 rounds of .45 may sound more appealing to those folk.

 

[GAF]

Antiquated is in the eye of the beholder. Useful tools are useful no matter how old or when they were invented.

 

[FlSwampRat]

I remember when I first got my pre-owned Anaconda in the early 90's and went to the range to sight it in. I have a Bushnell spotting scope and I'd pop off a couple of rounds and check, make an adjustment and recheck. Sadly I'm left eye dominant and right handed so almost any gun I start sighting in needs some pretty rough adjusting at first.
Anyway, there were a couple of guys down the other end of the otherwise empty range just blasting away at some silhouette targets, or should I say target as they were both shooting at the same one. The salesman up front must have been giggling at the amount of ammo they were going through. Out of curiosity I turned my scope down to their target, about 15' in front of them, and there were almost no holes I could see in the black image of the "opponent". While I was watching I saw "snow" fall down from the ceiling they hit a few times.
I remember talking to an infantry sergeant about a statistic I'd read where it took signicicantly more rounds in recent combat to produce a kill with modern more accurate weapons than in the past. His answer was twofold. One, in the past common infantry weapons weren't fully automatic, or further back, even semi automatic, second that small arms fire today is used to pin and enemy in place while some sort of artillery is called in, either launched grenades, mortar fire or even an airstrike. Not having been in infantry school I don't know if he was accurate or not. Whether he was is completely moot in a civilian self defense situation, an A-10 isn't coming to your aid in dealing with a home invasion. What is going to come to someone's aid is training and most people forget that little part of it all.
I sell inexpensive Hi Points to the people who want to own a gun "for self protection" but don't want to spend a whole bunch of money on even an M&P Shield or similar price pointed gun. They tell me they aren't going to go to the range much when I try to sell them some ammo "Since we're way cheaper than a gun range". I started a long while ago calling such gun purchases as night table guns.
Supervised, professional training and continued practice, IMHO, are more important than a few more rounds in the magazine for a defensive shooter's survival probability.

 

[theotherwaldo]

My experience in introducing noobs to shooting is that most of them make a very good shot on the first round. If the gun is unpleasant to shoot then the next shot (and most of those thereafter) might go anywhere - if they don't just set the gun down and back away.
I've had pretty good luck at introducing folks to use moderate to large small-bore pistols and carbines because they are pleasant to shoot and continue to produce fair to good accuracy and positive feelings of success.
The Hi-Point pistols in .380 and 9mm and carbines in 9mm have joined the .22s on my beginner's rack and have introduced many starting shooters to the craft.
The lack of heavy recoil, muzzle flash and other unpleasantness leads to reduced flinch, reduced trigger jerking, reduced anxiety and increased positive feelings about shooting in general.
Yes, the much-derided cheapies and small-bores serve a very positive purpose in starting and retaining beginning and occasional shooters.