Paul Gomez on 9mm vs .45
- Thread starter snake eater 332
- Start date
- Status
Loosedhorse
member
Your point is well taken. The numbers you cite: are they all divisions? Just the production division? My guess is that the caliber break-down for the single-stack division might be different.
In any case, we should realized that USPSA pistol choice is governed by USPSA rules regarding major and minor calibers, scoring of targets, courses of fire requiring multiple target engagement, etc.
The rules seem also to favor carrying, what, four double-stack mags?
We cannot be sure that the "rules" of real gunfights--especially regarding "scoring" of hits--are the same.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Wow! Talk about misrepresenting information to make your point!!
Which Nationals are these Stats from? Let me guess: Limited/Production.
Why is the .40 King in Limited? Because it scores "major" while allowing high capacity. .45 also scores "major," but the guns don't hold as many rounds as a .40
The 111 9mm shooters were shooting Production division where ALL calibers score "minor," so there's no point in dealing with more kick.
Cite the caliber stats from the Single Stack Nationals where, to score major, mags can't hold more than 8 rds. The .45 is well represented, altho the .40 is establishing itself there, too. Probably due to cheaper ammo, shooter convenience, etc. But you'll discover the minor scoring 9mm/.38 Super barely used, even tho mags for those calibers can hold 10 rds in the Single Stack division.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
I guess I must be non-serious.
The first step to recovery is acknowledging you have a problem....
That's a very interesting comment, and I would not have grasped the meaning some years ago.
The person who has only one or two magazines for his or her SD semi-auto certainly has not taken it to a good high performance defensive pistol class, and attending classes of that kind is a very good idea for anyone who is serious about self defense.
When I bought my .45 semi-auto, I had two magazines for it. A friend recommended that I take a course he had taken in high performance defensive pistol shooting conducted by several ranked IPSA and IDPA competitors.
I signed up, and among the list of "what to bring" items were several magazines and belt mounted magazine holders.
I bought them and I sure used them.
The topic of this thread is not about how many magazines one should own, but since the subject has come up in the discussion, it is helpful to explain why it is important.
Skribs: Reread paragraph two of my post. You and I (paragraph two) are saying the same thing as my reply in paragraph one was to a 1911 reference from an earlier post. When comparing by capacity, the correct comparison is "high capacity" in 9mm and .45acp (e.g. Glock 17 vs. Glock 21). IMO, you gotta read a post as a whole not break it into parts.
Last edited:
Once again, taking such a course is a very good idea for anyone who is serious about developing skills that could prove essential in an armed defensive encounter.
Personally, I learned a lot. Some of it involved improvement in technique. The most eye opening aspect for me, and I had been either ignorant or naive or both, was gaining an understanding of the need for shooting very quickly and forgetting about group size. That is germane to the subject of this thread.
The thing that such a course can provide that one cannot acquire by oneself at the range is an evaluation of what one is doing right and wrong, so that one does not continue to practice bad habits. I strongly recommend that people avail themselves of such training.
Those courses are certainly not the only courses from which one can benefit. Some good training in tactics, including FoF, and a course in the legal aspects of the defensive use of force, such as MAG-20, can be very valuable also.
I cannot speak to the Glock examples, but I can tell you that for me, a double-column 9MM can be concealed comfortably and carried all day, and while a single-column Commander size .45 is also a reasonable choice, a full-size loaded double-column .45 is not.
The purpose of the comparison is not to evaluate the differences between two calibers, but to evaluate different weapons that one might select for SD.
For the person who can reasonably carry a loaded high capacity .45 and who would include one among the candidates, it is reasonable to include one among the comparisons.
But not for me. And I think that it is implicit among Mr. Gomez' assumptions that that will apply to many others.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Dang, thought we had a break through...
It's a good indicator, but not the only one.
I'm reminded of a friends father who never shot his handgun, despite being invited to the range many times. Why should he go? I mean, after all, he bragged, "I already know I can cut a man in 1/2" with his hicap 9mm.
Years later, I did get him to the range. I hoped my prediction would be wrong, but he didn't know which lever was the safety, which was the slide stop, etc.
He only had a pair of magazines, too. For him, a hicap 9mm made sense...
What does this have to do with you? Perhaps nothing, but most folks that consider themselves to be "serious" about their defensive gun skills discover early on the value of having more than 1-2 magazines for their serious guns.
Best of luck to you.
You gotta keep in mind the objective for many in these debates is trying to (appear to) win the debate by sounding right not actually being right. Also, if they've selected 9mm already I've found that greatly influences their perspective. It's likewise humors to me how stuff we accept or dismiss in all other contexts goes right out the window in a caliber debate. Where else is it argued that bigger/heavier = smaller/lighter? There is a size reason why linebackers are linebackers and wide receviers are wide receivers. There is a reason a Ford Focus will not haul the 5th wheel. A reason you don't use a tack hammer to build a house. Why there are difference weight classes in boxing. And so on...
You also have to remember that these "high quality defensive courses" require time and money that not everyone can spend on them. I'd rather go to the range here and there and have a few backup guns in case one goes out of commission (which is why I recently bought my second shotgun) instead of saving up for the ammo cost and training dues that I'd have to pay in order to go through a course.
You don't have to go through an advanced course to know where stuff is on your weapon. Drawing the line between a man who never went to the range and someone who regularly attends advanced courses is a very big line, with a lot of range in between for people who know the basics, but may not have the "advanced" course. I'm not saying that a class wouldn't help, but it doesn't make me any less serious.
The purpose of this thread, I believe, was to compare the two calibers. That is information you would use when selecting for SD, but you're adding in more factors when you start doing that. Like I said, you were the first person to say "I can comfortably carry single-column .45 or double-column 9," as opposed to everyone else who seemed to look at two guns (most people associate the Glock or Beretta with 9mm and the 1911 platform with .45) and then make the extrapolation that because a Beretta holds 15+1 and a 1911 holds 7+1, you can hold double in 9mm.
You don't have to go through an advanced course to know where stuff is on your weapon. Drawing the line between a man who never went to the range and someone who regularly attends advanced courses is a very big line, with a lot of range in between for people who know the basics, but may not have the "advanced" course. I'm not saying that a class wouldn't help, but it doesn't make me any less serious.
The purpose of this thread, I believe, was to compare the two calibers. That is information you would use when selecting for SD, but you're adding in more factors when you start doing that. Like I said, you were the first person to say "I can comfortably carry single-column .45 or double-column 9," as opposed to everyone else who seemed to look at two guns (most people associate the Glock or Beretta with 9mm and the 1911 platform with .45) and then make the extrapolation that because a Beretta holds 15+1 and a 1911 holds 7+1, you can hold double in 9mm.
Exact opposite for me. My slimmer compact 1911 is more comfy than my Glock 19. Keep in mind that the 1911 comes in many different flavors, too, as all are not the all-steel variety. Regardless, I find the shorter grip of my Glock 30 more comfy than my Glock 19. I use a heavy gun belt, thin low profile holsters, allow extra size in my pant waist and have a more lean build suitable to IWB. Different strokes...
p.s. And, I did address the different reasons for selecting a caliber (aside from performance) in my earlier post. Gun size, control and cost matter, too. But, these considerations are different than a focused discussion on caliber performance x vs. caliber performance y as I interpret most/this caliber discussions. The "caliber debate" question is whether the two things being compared are equal in comparative/relative performance, not whether a given shooter is equal with them or if individual considerations makes one better than the other. IMO, failing to appreciate this, in addition to personal bias, causes much derailment to caliber discussions. It's silly IMO to select 9mm because you think it's "equal" (i.e. the same) in relative performance as .45acp. It's just not. It is however very wise to select 9mm because, given your needs and/or skill, or preference/need for capacity, smaller/lighter gun size and/or cost for practice, it's superior to .45acp. If I could have only one caliber it would be 9mm.
Last edited:
Andrew Wyatt
Member
If you don't seek out every available chance to expand your knowledge, you're not serious, Bubba613.
True, they do const money. And if you have to travel somewhere and stay overnight, the cost is even higher. Best to find one locally if possible.
Personally, I got a lot more benefit out of taking a nine-hour course that cost in the low hundreds than I would have by buying another gun for the safe.
I tell the people the same thing about MAG-20, which required me to spend three nights out of town.
Let's add one other point of comparison--MAG-20, with travel and per diem included, cost me the same as around three billable hours from an experienced criminal defense attorney, and I would recommend spending that much up front to obviate the need to spend a whole lot more later.
Of course not. I've been firing handguns for over fifty years. I can still pick up a Luger or a Radom and use it. But that's not all one should be able to do for self defense.
Had a friend not recommended a high performance pistol course, I'm sure I would never have attended one. And frankly, i would never have learned what it was that I did not know.
I don't think that one needs to attend the advanced courses regularly. If you have a range that permits very rapid fire, you can practice to maintain the perishable skills learned in the class itself; otherwise it would pay to find one. Still better if drawing from concealment is permitted.
What constitutes the "basics" for one person may not be the same as for someone else.
For me, the "basics" include grip, sight picture, and trigger control. I gained a lot from having several qualified instructors evaluate my technique and teach me proper techniques.
The other really important things that I learned was that one will not shoot for groups or for hits in any particular part of the body. Rather, the key is to get the gun into action from concealment very quickly and to get multiple hits as quickly as possible anywhere on the largest area presented by what is likely to be a very quickly moving target until the target stops.
Now, for many that may be plainly obvious without their having to be told, but for whatever reason it was not obvious for me at the outset. It was necessary for me to take a course involving shooting at steel targets before I really understood why my CCW instructor had recommended practicing on a blank piece of notebook paper.
By the way, the drill we practiced involved shooting two shots into each of three steel targets very quickly, dropping and replacing the magazine as quickly as possible to address that skill, and repeating the cycle. The experienced participants could do that in a little over four seconds--twelve hits with a reload.
The guys and gals with 9s and .40s seemed to have quite an advantage.
And that is directly relevant to the point of Mr. Gomez' presentation.
I said "I'd like to see somebody survive a 45 in the head"...
N' then Kleanbore said "Just what does that have with the discussion of Mr. Gomez' presentation?"
Just an observation, considering a highly publicized shooting of a politician type person that was recently in the news. Mr. Gomez is trying to make an argument for the 9mm over the .45, so I figured my post was sort of relevant anyway.
N' then Kleanbore said "Just what does that have with the discussion of Mr. Gomez' presentation?"
Just an observation, considering a highly publicized shooting of a politician type person that was recently in the news. Mr. Gomez is trying to make an argument for the 9mm over the .45, so I figured my post was sort of relevant anyway.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Who said anything about "advanced?" there areore training opportunities available than most people realize and they don't all cost $500 or more, take 3-7 days or require 2000 rds of ammo. Some are $50, last 4 hours and require only 50-100 rds.
You keep repeating the word "advanced," but that may indicate part of the problem: the word "advanced" intimidates people ("I'm not ready for that, yet!") and implies it costs more than "basic" or "intermediate" classes.
This is the opposite effect the word "basic" imparts: ("I already know that stuff, so I'm not going to pay someone else money for stuff I already know!")
This is why many classes are called "intermediate!"
It was a long time before I was able to take my first class, yet I considered myself serious before that. I oracticed, both live and dry-fire, bought the essential associated gear and set targets up that improved defensive handgun skills. I started shooting matches, which further increased my skill, pointed out shortcomings in gear, technique and weak areas that needed more practice.
I mastered all the handgun action types, including single stack .45's and hicap 9mm....all before I took my first formal class.
Regardless of your preferred caliber, 9mm, .40 or .45 (see? Thread related!) to be serious, you need to practice with it regularly. When that practice is at the range, serious folks know the value of having more than 1-2 magazines to practice with.
I really disagree with that. We are speaking here of the firearm as part of a man-machine system, and part of what is important is how the same person performs with different tools.
And the purpose of such a limited discussion would be....?
True. The .45 is slightly superior in wound ballistics. The 9MM beats the .45 in magazine capacity (usually, anyway) and in rapidity of hits.
I tend to agree---I think.
I bought my .45 (1) before doing any serious study of the its relative performance vs the 9MM, which I later did before the Gomez video became available, and while laboring under a lot of misconceptions borne of myth and folklore; and (2) before I ever tried to use it in a pistol class.
It is a high-end 1911 type. There are some things I really like about it.
I am astounded that even here on THR the instant we speak of caliber everyone picks a side. I don't post often because someone usually says it better sooner than I could,but I have a few pointson this one:
The OP was passing along an expert opinion, not a fact
We all seem to assume that although westudy, practice, and simulate using our guns that the bad guys can outdo us, why?
I have from 380 to 45, somewith 7 rds some with 17 and ill trust any ofthem becausethey are mine
FWIW I like .40
The OP was passing along an expert opinion, not a fact
We all seem to assume that although westudy, practice, and simulate using our guns that the bad guys can outdo us, why?
I have from 380 to 45, somewith 7 rds some with 17 and ill trust any ofthem becausethey are mine
FWIW I like .40
Last edited:
Do those beginner courses that only require 50-100 rounds require you to have 6 magazines? That was what I was referring to, was about being serious without having 6 magazines.
Then again, I do have 6 for my primary handgun. But I'd have 3 if I didn't have two sets (one set of 11-round compact and one set of 16-round full magazines).
Then again, I do have 6 for my primary handgun. But I'd have 3 if I didn't have two sets (one set of 11-round compact and one set of 16-round full magazines).
Kleanbore - Short list of reasons to select a caliber IN NO ORDER:
1) Performance of caliber regardless of shooter
2) Control of caliber by shooter relative to #3
3) Gun Size
4) Capacity of caliber relative to #3
5) Cost of ammo
There are those that truly believe (e.g. convinced themselve because they own 9mm?) that 9mm and .45acp are equal in #1. They are not relative to #1. But, 9mm is superior in #2-#5 which may wisely outweigh #1 for a shooter. Can for me. However, none of this changes #1 for the purpose of a caliber performance debate relative to just #1. My main point is the error in believing 9mm and .45acp are "equal" in #1. They just aren't.
1) Performance of caliber regardless of shooter
2) Control of caliber by shooter relative to #3
3) Gun Size
4) Capacity of caliber relative to #3
5) Cost of ammo
There are those that truly believe (e.g. convinced themselve because they own 9mm?) that 9mm and .45acp are equal in #1. They are not relative to #1. But, 9mm is superior in #2-#5 which may wisely outweigh #1 for a shooter. Can for me. However, none of this changes #1 for the purpose of a caliber performance debate relative to just #1. My main point is the error in believing 9mm and .45acp are "equal" in #1. They just aren't.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Most require a MINIMUM of 3. (keyword: minimum)
That still holds true. 6 mags isn't very many, but it allows you to have 2 sets of three. Once you verify their reliability, one set can become your "carry" set, while the other 3 take the wear and tear and abuse of being a range/practice mag. This method would be included in my previous post about spreading the wear and tear among many mags, not just one or two.
If I were starting over and had to pick one semi-auto caliber to do all _I_ want to do, I'd choose .40
I'd argue that a 9mm means more shots on target in the same time frame, all else being equal. It's a matter of technique. What matters more in rapid fire is action type.
Then why are you sitting there posting on this forum? You must not be serious.
Many of the "high level" handgun courses are taught by people with no understanding of teaching. Some are downright charlatans.
As to finding out that speed beats pinpoint accuracy, Fairbairn/Sykes made that point 70 years ago. I didn't need a "high level" pistol class to learn that.
Hence why I'm looking for a new trigger for my XDm
. I would argue that you could do 3 for range/carry. Just empty them before you load the others at the range, and then load them back up when you're done.Coalman, very good breakdown. For example, my Mom cannot shoot anything above a 9mm well (your #2), so the caliber war is easy for her to pick a side on.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
