If someone doesn't like .45acp them why not .40S&W? I have guns in both and like the .45acp a little better. The gentle push of the .45acp versus the more "snappy" .40. Still, regular practice with just about any round will make you skilled with it. Of course, you can stuff more forties into a regular sized magazine than forty-fives.
What can handle .45 Super?
- Thread starter NeedsMoreMillimeters
- Start date
- Status
Ive got an Xd im looking at adding a heavier recoil spring to and running supers for short range hunting. From all the research ive done it seems like this is probably the best option for me as im not inclined to go full 460 rowland, and i want to be able to plink with standard acp rounds.
OP
OP
NeedsMoreMillimeters
Member
Well, I feel like this thread has wandered a little off my initial question (I really was just looking for gun suggestions/experience), but WTH.
And the Battle of Crecy was fought with longbows, and the French were annihilated! I understand your point, but it's not accurate. Rifled muskets, etc were certainly state of the art and adequate for the time, but to imagine that tech hasn't changed or that we have greater expectations today is a little silly
I was referring to rifle rounds (SCHV is usually used in that context)
I certainly don't claim to have ever fired on a man (thankfully), but I have shot a fair number of things in the deer and wolf family with revolvers and autoloader (my twin cousins are big handgun hunters, though I don't personally own any of that kind of hardware myself), as well as a couple of pig carcasses, courtesy of my neighbor. Now, I'm no trauma surgeon, but the 10mm seemed to do consistently more damage in terms of wound size, shredding of tissue, and cracking bones and such, than the .45ACP. It also does better in gel tests (though some people consider that neither here nor there). General ballistic calculations also support this (which should of course be taken with a grain of salt, but aren't necessarily wrong)
I think we are very much in agreement here. Perhaps I made a mistake earlier when I waded into the definitions of "stopping power" and "knockdown power" and kind of mixed signals. What I was really trying to get at is your earlier comment:
- This is simply not true. A 200g .338 Lapua (3300 fps) is going to do a hell of a lot more damage to a human than a 405g .45-70 (1395 fps). Why? Energy. This is a pretty basic concept of physics. This is not to say that slow & heavy doesn't have it's uses. And of course bullet construction, angle, target and situational specifics all matter, but energy kills. Even in handguns, were the velocity range is much smaller than rifles, this can come in to play: A 210g .41 magnum at 1550 fps is going to do things to a man that a 255g .45 ACP +P at 925 fps just cant. So your statement that energy never makes for diameter and mass is backwards; diameter and mass can occasionally make up for lower energy.
I have, and it looks like a good round, but not for a carry gun (a little too much pop and blast). Also, the conversion process is very involved, and then you're stuck with just that caliber.
And the Battle of Crecy was fought with longbows, and the French were annihilated! I understand your point, but it's not accurate. Rifled muskets, etc were certainly state of the art and adequate for the time, but to imagine that tech hasn't changed or that we have greater expectations today is a little silly
I was referring to rifle rounds (SCHV is usually used in that context)
I certainly don't claim to have ever fired on a man (thankfully), but I have shot a fair number of things in the deer and wolf family with revolvers and autoloader (my twin cousins are big handgun hunters, though I don't personally own any of that kind of hardware myself), as well as a couple of pig carcasses, courtesy of my neighbor. Now, I'm no trauma surgeon, but the 10mm seemed to do consistently more damage in terms of wound size, shredding of tissue, and cracking bones and such, than the .45ACP. It also does better in gel tests (though some people consider that neither here nor there). General ballistic calculations also support this (which should of course be taken with a grain of salt, but aren't necessarily wrong)
I think we are very much in agreement here. Perhaps I made a mistake earlier when I waded into the definitions of "stopping power" and "knockdown power" and kind of mixed signals. What I was really trying to get at is your earlier comment:
- This is simply not true. A 200g .338 Lapua (3300 fps) is going to do a hell of a lot more damage to a human than a 405g .45-70 (1395 fps). Why? Energy. This is a pretty basic concept of physics. This is not to say that slow & heavy doesn't have it's uses. And of course bullet construction, angle, target and situational specifics all matter, but energy kills. Even in handguns, were the velocity range is much smaller than rifles, this can come in to play: A 210g .41 magnum at 1550 fps is going to do things to a man that a 255g .45 ACP +P at 925 fps just cant. So your statement that energy never makes for diameter and mass is backwards; diameter and mass can occasionally make up for lower energy.
I have, and it looks like a good round, but not for a carry gun (a little too much pop and blast). Also, the conversion process is very involved, and then you're stuck with just that caliber.
MachIVshooter
Member
Likewise, diameter and mass don't make up for inadequate penetration. Among commercial cartridges that will fit in normal sized autoloaders, the 10mm is at the top of the heap for penetration.
ironworkerwill
Member
[QUOTE="
Well, in truth, both are myths. The idea that any of the standard semi-auto handgun rounds will reliably incapacitate a man in one shot (CNS hits excluded) has been thoroughly disproven. I agree that in a more general sense stopping power can be discussed, but, in my experience, 99% of the time I hear guys talk about .45 "stopping power" the mean the same thing as "knockdown power".[/QUOTE]
I would say stopping power would be the rounds usefulness in stopping the BG. I can see how it is terribly difficult to disprove. Unless someone could supply numerous BG's for some "scientific testing".
Well, in truth, both are myths. The idea that any of the standard semi-auto handgun rounds will reliably incapacitate a man in one shot (CNS hits excluded) has been thoroughly disproven. I agree that in a more general sense stopping power can be discussed, but, in my experience, 99% of the time I hear guys talk about .45 "stopping power" the mean the same thing as "knockdown power".[/QUOTE]
I would say stopping power would be the rounds usefulness in stopping the BG. I can see how it is terribly difficult to disprove. Unless someone could supply numerous BG's for some "scientific testing".
Glock Doctor
Member
Don't agree! Furthermore, and with the Battle of Crecy set aside, (I mean who cares? Crecy is a total non-sequitur.) Like some of the other thoughts expressed in this thread, the reasoning is, both, SOPHISTIC and AMATEURISH. I honestly truly believe that for general everyday use and, in particular, for CQB pistol combat use: The 45 Super is a difficult-to-control, very tough cartridge to shoot: quickly, accurately, and well — Especially during rapid fire events! Most (like 98 or 99 percent) of even experienced pistol shooters will handle 45 ACP infinitely faster and more accurately than 45 Super.
I'm not saying it's not a 'fun round' or that it doesn't have a useful place inside the universe of larger centerfire cartridges. It's powerful, all right; and, when heavier bullets are used I'd give the edge in both operating pressure AND performance to the 45 Super over the more common and popular 10mm. 45 Super is not a pleasant round to use indoors, either. On those occasions when I've used 45 Super indoors, the percussion has been magnified and all sorts of dust and overhead litter has come falling down off the rafters.
(You know the 'Dirty Harry' movies were surrealistic Hollywood 'Big Gun' myths — Myths! Nobody in his right mind would deliberately attempt to CQB pistol gunfight with anything larger than, say, 44 Special; and, even then, a 44 Special can be tough to use well.)
I actually own both 45 ACP, and 45 Super pistols; so, between the two of us, who do you think might be offering the more relevant and realistic comments? I also used to shoot PPC events with a 44 Special revolver. That didn't last long! I quickly learned that there was no way I was ever going to beat a good man with a 38 Special. Why? For the same reason that I wouldn't recommend replacing 45 ACP with a humongous and difficult-to-control, comparatively slow firing 45 Super. THAT is 'Why'.
Last edited:
JR24
Member
For the OP, I have eyed the .45 Super for a woods gun and think the Glock 21 seems pretty easy to convert, I even already have a ported 6 inch barrel.
As for the caliber debate, all I have to say is I can get more .45 ACP on target, faster than I can with full power 10mm (and if it ain't full power, I might as well be shooting .40). So for anything short of hunting, I don't see the need to "upgrade" to .45 super. HST and my practice handloads send 230 grains just under 900 fps, good enough for me.
As for the caliber debate, all I have to say is I can get more .45 ACP on target, faster than I can with full power 10mm (and if it ain't full power, I might as well be shooting .40). So for anything short of hunting, I don't see the need to "upgrade" to .45 super. HST and my practice handloads send 230 grains just under 900 fps, good enough for me.
TRX
Member
If you look around, you'll find that some "defensive" .45 ACP is loaded well up into .45 Super territory.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
How is that relevant?
The results are always subject to interpretation. Problem is that most folks look at it the same way they do with rifle cartridges.
That's the issue is that people tend to act as if "stopping power" and "knockdown power" are the same. They are not. Knockdown power is easy to refute. Whereas it should be equally obvious that stopping power is a valid concept. Otherwise, what makes one cartridge or bullet better than any other?
Whoah hoss! I will respond to your comment but let us not completely derail the discussion by muddying the water with rifle references. Or pretending that any discussion of terminal ballistics can be handled with notions of "basic physics". Energy has nothing to do with. Drive an FMJ at the same speed, or simply alter bullet construction in any way, energy is the same but all you'r're gonna do is poke a hole. Use a heavily constructed bullet and expansion will be minimal. Use a lightly constructed bullet and you're going to create a nasty, yet shallow wound. All that has to do with bullet construction, relative to impact speed. What if the target is a moose? That unimpressive 405gr .45-70 is going to smash bones and full penetrate. A 200gr .338, not so much. Same for the .41 vs .45 example, which is also completely dependent on bullet construction, not energy. Energy doesn't tell us anything useful and we can have a more productive discussion without it.
Diameter and sufficient mass ensure penetration. Velocity does not. The 10mm is doing its best with the heaviest bullets (220-230gr), not the fastest. Penetration with anything less is anything but impressive.
gotboostvr
Member
I bought some 45 Super cartridges from Buffalo Bore when we were having a bear problem.
They worked just fine in my S&W M625.
Betcha didn't hafta worry about buffers and springs either!
I keep considering loading some up for my 625. I think I'd just like to push a 250gr WFN boolit about 900-950fps.
Pete D.
Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2010
- Messages
- 2,659
Another option....if you are looking for alternate cartridges that work in a 1911 and pack some punch is the .400 Corbon.
It is easily made by running (preferably new) .45 ACP brass into a .400 Corbon sizing die. Gotta buy a barrel for it, though.
Pete
It is easily made by running (preferably new) .45 ACP brass into a .400 Corbon sizing die. Gotta buy a barrel for it, though.
Pete
Lycidas Janwor
Member
I wonder what type of ammo this cop was firing. Was it FMJ or hollow point? Some ammunition is more effective than others.
gotboostvr
Member
If I remember correctly it was 230gr Hydrashoks.
Edit: it was 230gr Golddots per this article
https://americanhandgunner.com/the-lessons-of-tim-gramins/
Few would suggest that Speer Golddots are a under performing round. One of the better offerings on the market.
Last edited:
Lycidas Janwor
Member
That's good ammo, big and heavy hollow points. Amazing the perp lasted as long as he did. Proves that you just never know when it comes to a bullets effectiveness.
gotboostvr
Member
It sounds like the majority of the hits were on the gang members extremities. He did receive a hit to his heart and was "dead without knowing it"
Lycidas Janwor
Member
Yes, he would have died... eventually. He had a bullet in each lung and in the heart and kidney. Basically, he was a dead man walking, all before he was shot in the head, and EVEN THEN, HE REFUSED TO DIE. Not sure what elevated this perps ability to function. All I know is, I carry the best ammo available with high capacity magazines. Because you never know....
I have a Kimber 1911 that I converted to 45 super. I am a reloader And use starline 45 super brass without issue. It is not any more expensive then reloading for 45 ACP and the pistol shoots regular 45 just fine. 1300 ft./s with 185 Jhp is just great. Shoots Just as flat as my 10 mm does. Recoil about the same as full house 10 mm. I have a very heavy wolf recoil spring so racking the slide is a little more difficult.
- Status
