Why the attitude between single stack .45 and 9mm?

[HammsBeer]

UHG, I should have figured this would dissolve into the 5 millionth 9 vs 45 debate.

We know it's considerably harder to cram more 45's into a typical pistol. My main point is, by carrying a single stack 9mm, am I doing myself a disservice when the crowning benefit of 9mm is it's ability to have a high capacity mag in a normal pistol grip?

 

[Fiv3r]

Carry what you shoot best. I prefer a thin light 9mm single stack when I can't carry a double stack .40.

I think the .45 acp is fantastic, but I prefer it out of a 1911. For a carry piece, a slim 9mm is easier to tuck and go. For a high cap weapon, I'm one of the few remaining knuckle heads who like the fast hard hitting .40.

I don't see a real issue here. All handguns are a compromise. I'd rather have a 12g or Ar over a pistol, but for what they are most any handgun is going to improve your odds over a stink-eye and salty language.

 

[rcmodel]

The Army's biased testing in the early 1900's showed a preference for 45 caliber.

That bias in the early 1900's might have something to do with the fact they had to shoot horses out from under riders.

By the time the 9mm was chosen as the new service cartridge, they didnt!

rc

 

[1911 guy]

Quote:
am I doing myself a disservice when the crowning benefit of 9mm is it's ability to have a high capacity mag in a normal pistol grip?

IMO, no. Performance of any commercially available JHP will be approximately equivalent between 9mm and any other "normal" SD caliber. I'd worry more about finding a pistol that fits your hands than focusing on capacity.

If i had it to do over again and wasn't so heavily invested in .45, I'd be very tempted to go with 9mm. single stack guns.

 

[Old Dog]

Sorry, but from where I sit, I just don't see any "attitude" between the proponents of either the 9mm or the .45 ACP anymore. Up here, the hoopla pretty much died down in the 90s (regardless of what those gun magazines are still saying).

Even Pat Rogers came clean about switching to the 9mm ("Putting down the Man Gun"). Some of us old dudes figured out we could shoot a lotta fast-moving high-tech bullets easier'n shootin' a few .45s ...

Seems to me that the big bullet crowd has accepted the double-stack 9 gang; really, the only 'tude I detect these days is still the plastic gun crowd vs. us blue steel and walnut dinosaurs.

 

[USAF_Vet]

Meh.

I have two carry pistols, and one usually stays in the sock drawer. The one I carry is a single stack 9mm compact. The one in the drawer is a double stack 9mm compact with a full sized grip that is simply uncomfortable to carry in most circumstances.

Sure, I'd be okay with carrying a single stack .45 if I had one, but I'm not really a big fan of compact .45's so I'd still probably carry in small single stack 9.

Am I doing myself a disservice? I'll let you know after my next gun fight.

 

[Sam1911]

Carry what you shoot best.

You know, a perfect analogy comes to mind, from something I've been learning about recently.

In the wild world of guitarists, there is a sizzling hot debate, raging on for decades now, about what makes the perfect tone come out of an electric guitar.
What kind of pickups? Single-coil or humbucking? Over-wound or traditional strength? Ceramic magnets or Alnico? Active or passive? What scale length? 25" 24.75?" 25.5?" Bolt-on neck or "set" neck? What capacitors in the tone circuit? Does the wood the instrument is made of make any difference at all? (This is the ultimate 9mm -vs.- .45 argument!) If so, what woods are best? Swamp ash, mahogany, ebony, maple, basswood, plywood, poplar? What about acrylic and carbon fiber instruments? Or ones with metal parts? Strings? Nickle, cobalt, stainless? Flatwound, round-wound, ground? And on and on and on. Guys LOATHE each other for taking this side or that. Much anger and vitriol expended. And that's before they even start to argue over AMPS!

And the one thing they'll each and every one say is this: "Well, yeah, tone comes from the artist's hands and technique..."

And the truth is, most of that other stuff matters a little ... tiny ... bit. And the huge HUGE driving force is the one thing that you can't go buy: the hands of the artist and his technique. The decades of practice that goes into building the sound you can get out of pretty much any quality instrument.

You can't go buy that at Guitar Center, so we'll argue to the death over the little niggling details that we CAN improve simply with money.

...

The same thing applies to guns and shooting. We rant and rave and fuss and argue (less now than in decades past, but still...) over .40 vs. 9 vs. 45, and revolvers vs. autos, and high-cap vs. single-stack, and this and that and the other...

And each point could be important, maybe, IF you're granting yourself the benefit of assuming that your measurements START with:
1) I had a gun with me when I needed it, and carried in a way I could access quickly
2) I've identified a threat in a timely way
3) I've cleared my cover garment, acquired a firing grip
4) I've drawn the weapon and presented it cleanly
5) I've achieved whatever sighting index or sight picture I should be using under these conditions
6) I've targeted a vital part of the attacker's body
7) I've pressed the trigger smoothly and repeatedly
8) and my shots are landing on-target...

So basically, once 97-98% of the job is performed correctly -- the hard work is done -- then we can argue over the importance of this or that bullet size or weight.

And by that point, the differences just aren't that big a deal.

 

[edmo01]

You new boys and your fancy, smancy 7 & 8 round auto guns!

Back in the day we got it done with a 5 shot J-frame in 38 Special. None of those new-fangled hollow points, but just a 158 grain glob of lead.

That's a real gun...

Edmo

 

[Walt Sherrill]

And the one thing they'll each and every one say is this: "Well, yeah, tone comes from the artist's hands and technique..."

They've had the same sort of discussion about the renowned Stradivarius violins. In blind tests, the experts (music critics, musicians, music school professors and the performers themselves -- couldn't tell (as listeners) whether the violin was a $million Strad or a high-quality ($2K-$3) instrument.

It was the hands and technique of the performer that made the difference. As with shooting in general, it was the indian, not the bow and arrow that made the difference.

Just hope I can still carry a tune if I ever need to play...

 

[mavracer]

All guitars sound like crap in my hands, but I can shoot ok I have 45s and 9mms and carry either indiscriminatly because ultimatly I won't know if I needed bigger holes or more holes until after the shooting stops.
The difference between 5 and 8 rounds in the gun isn't much time added before your empty and dead so better focus on making them count.

 

[Sam1911]

The difference between 5 and 8 rounds in the gun isn't much time added before your empty and dead so better focus on making them count.

And the corollary to that is, whether you have 5 or 50 rounds in the gun, there's never any guarantee you'll have time to get off even the first five, so better focus on making EVERY ONE count.

 

[MIL-DOT]

FWIW, I found this "9 vs.45" debate to be considerably more useful, and entertaining, than most of them tend to be.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

A deep and cosmic appreciation for the underlying equivalence of apples and oranges.
Unseemly and self-indulgent flagellation of the ancient steed who, alas, shuffed off this mortal coil at such remove that desiccated sinews and fragments of bone are all that remain in the empty hame, the load of wisdom it once drew long, long abandoned.

*prostrates self in the dirt at Sam1911's feet*

We're not worthy! We're not worthy!




Seriously, that whole posting was well stated.

 

[Sam1911]

<Grin.>

 

[psyopspec]

Without rehashing points already made, and with full acknowledgement that in the end it's a subjective decision: I agree with much of what used to be "conventional wisdom" being put forth in this thread, but when the facts change I change my mind.

Service caliber handguns suck. With that as a baseline, I'll take more rounds that can be delivered more quickly. This will give me the potential to stay in the fight longer, and potentially have more chances to stop it.

 

[JDR]

What Sam1911 said goes double for me. Put in scientific and theoretical terms, the .45 shoots bigger holes in stuff, but you shoot fewer holes. The 9mm shoots smaller holes in stuff but you can shoot more holes. The more you get to practice the more capable you can become to put the holes where you want them to go. Shot placement capability beats caliber advantage every day of the week. A reliable gun with good sights and a smooth trigger will work well for you. Practice with every caliber you can get your hands on, but carry the gun you shoot the best regardless of its size or caliber.

 

[jmorris]

I figure attitudes against "other" firearms that some have are a psychological way of saving money.

 

[huntsman]

99% of the time I carry an LCP

+1 when I carry anything bigger it's a full size .45 forgoing that whole best pseudo-small gun debate.

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

I think what he is trying to say is while JHP 9 is more effective, the same can be said for JHP 45.

Back to my original concern, specifically I have been looking at SIGs. The P220 is touted as a robust accurate reliable pistol in 45 caliber, and is often a top suggestion to anyone looking for a 45. The P225 (which fits my smaller hands perfectly) gets decent remarks, but they always seem the need to complain about it's 8 round mags, the same capacity as the P220. I've tried P226 and P228, and they feel like a fat chunk in my hand.

Am I making much-a-do about nothing? Or is there some validity that if it's just 7 or 8 rounds I might as well go big or stay home?

239, Bro.

Its a single stack 9mm. It shoots well and conceals well.

It has been my choice for 3 years now.

 

[Hookeye]

Like to see the Strasbourg tests done with the newer ammo/bullets.
And using lions

 

[BSA1]

Bowling pins, wooden blocks, livestock and cadavers are not living humans. A 45 ACP has more momentum and does a much better job of knocking down bowling pins, steel plates and causing dead animals to move when hit.

That, however has nothing to do with what happens when bullets strike living humans or animals. This debate has been raging for 100 years and there has never been a study, test, or research showing either has a significant advantage. Depending on the way the data was collected some give a slight edge either way. Comparing FMJ vs FMJ or if you compare the best HP loads in either the end results always come out a virtual tie.

The Army's biased testing in the early 1900's showed a preference for 45 caliber. After fighting 2 world wars and further testing in 1946 they changed their minds and concluded the 9mm was the better round. The only reason we didn't make the change in 1946 was because they had millions of perfectly good 45's in stock and a new handgun was a very low priority in the cold war.

The short answer to your question is a couple of generations of shooters who read Jeff Coopers fictional writings and fell for it.

Good summary.

The reality of the 1911 was prior to WWII the Army had recognized the need to adopt a different handgun that was easier to use. This was one of the reasons for development of the M-1 Carbine. The Great Depression of the 1930's and the overwhelming public attitude of not getting involved in Europe's problems kept the defense budget small and as a result severely restricted development of all types of weapons.

After Pearl Harbor our nation needed vast numbers of small arms of types thus creating the need for mass production on a scale never seen before. Mass production does not lend itself to changes in the product being produced and the demands of wartime did not justify shutting down and retooling plants to manufacture a totally new handgun.

45 fanboys that cite it's use in WWII overlook the production and use of millions of Smith & Wesson K-Frame Military and Police 38 Special (Victory Model).

Incidently 9mm FMJ penetrates bullet proof (resistant) vest that LEO's typically wear better than 45.

 

[mavracer]

so better focus on making EVERY ONE count.

Which leads us back to make as large of hole as possible.
Somebody put another quarter in the merry go round.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Back to my original concern, specifically I have been looking at SIGs. The P220 is touted as a robust accurate reliable pistol in 45 caliber, and is often a top suggestion to anyone looking for a 45.

I'm a 45 acp guy. I don't own any 9 mm but that's because I only reload for one pistol cartridge (45 acp). Cartridge debates bore me, 9, 40, 45, they all work. I have both 1911's and Sig P-220. A number of my used mags won't hold 8 so I just go with 7. I always carry a spare. P-220 and P-6/P-226 are the guns that made Sig the company it is today. Both single stack.

Gun has to fit and you need to feel comfortable with it. It that means single stack then go with it. Large capacity is over rated in my opinion. Most people don't need LC, they just need more practice.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

...Shot placement capability beats caliber advantage every day of the week. A reliable gun with good sights and a smooth trigger will work well for you. Practice with every caliber you can get your hands on, but carry the gun you shoot the best regardless of its size or caliber.

Same idea but said a different way: unless those bigger holes or more holes include some central nervous system strikes, it may all be irrelevant, because it can take so long for someone to bleed out that they can be KILLING you while they bleed out. In one sense, at least, holes are arguably holes -- WHERE they are located matters more than their size (when doing 9mm or .40 or .45).

And for those who say extra rounds may not be as important as we think -- perhaps, but that assumes you're facing just one opponent.

 

[Sunray]

The U.S. Army Ordnance Board's conclusion was that, "Any testing we do will give us the results we want 'em to give us." The animal tests(no human cadavers, as I recall.) were heavily biased.
Most of the time between .45 and 9mm the argument has nothing to do with mag capacity or how the mag functions. Single stack or not. Totally irrelevant anyway. A double stack .45 pistol would never fit my hand, for example. Mind you, neither do most newish DA 9mm's. A BHP is a double stack. Fits perfectly.
Gun shops are trying to get you to buy what they have in stock.
And Jeff Coopers fictional writings. Silly ideas like a bolt action "Scout" rifle with the optic sight on the barrel.
Bowling pin shoots for 9mm's did not compete with .45's. Different games altogether. A 9mm only had to knock the pin over. Not off the table.