[Jeffvn]

I thought I would open the door on this topic.

Being and "old guy" my current preference is for the 1911, specifically the Kimber Gold Combat II. Incredibly accurate, and its reliability is top notch.

I've shot the .40 cal. in both Glock (I think 23 but not sure) and Beretta (Elite II and Elite I), very nice, but still seem to gravitate back to Mr 1911. What's your preference?

 

[Nekekami]

I'm happy with my Pistol 88(A Glock 17 adopted by the Swedish army). It's accurate, it's light, recoil dampening works extremely well, it's durable, and it can handle M39/B 9x19. If I'd choose another gun, I'd go with a SIG Pro, either a SP2340 chambered for .357 SIG or the SP2009. Both are incredibly nice, and the .357 SIG is a wonderful bullet.

 

[Guest]

All 1911 models are magnificent weapons, but in combat more rounds you got bigger the chances to stay alive. Also the weigt of personal sidearm is important for me. Trust me you take notice to it after 40 kilometars of forced march.
My weapon of choice is HS2000 9mmPARA caliber (cheaper than GLOCK but same quality). I feel safer when i know that i got 15 rounds in one clip.

 

[FLEA]

!

Ill go with a HK USP or a 1911 both are double action and trigger pull friendly. I have always sucked with GLOCK's or similar handguns.

 

[morpheus]

I have my 1911 and IMI Baby Eagle in .45 they are really nice pistols. But if I were in a combat I think I would like SIG P226 9mm. While I prefer the .40 S&W the 9mm is easier to get a hold of. And While the .45 is fun to shoot 7 rounds is very limiting, I hope the Brady Bill doesn't get passed again, so we can have high capacity 9mm and .40s. In the future some time I might get SIG's P226 out that has Navy SEAL specs. That would be a nice pistol

 

[Guest]

This would be the perfect place to start the 9mm vs .45 argument...but I'm not going to be the one to do it! What you should really worry about is finding a handgun that you shoot well with. A missed shot with a .45 is a missed shot with a 9mm- they are both misses. And you will probably shoot better knowing you are limited to 8 rounds from your .45, as opposed to knowing you have 16 rounds of on-tap 9mm, but I am certainly no psychology expert! Also, it usually only takes one .45 slug to put someone to sleep, and more often than not two from your 9, so capacity is roughly equal, theoretically.
And speaking of backup guns and sidearms, anyone have experience with the Walther P99 in either 9mm or .40? I hear its a nice piece of firepower.

 

[FLEA]

anyone have experience with the Walther P99 in either 9mm or .40? I hear its a nice piece of firepower.

Yeah you can see my p99 40 in my pic under the gallery section. It shoots really good and has different handgrip peices so that you can customize the grip for your hand.....very nice feature.

P.S. my USP .45 holds 12 rounds :wink:

 

[Jeffvn]

Double stack .45 nicely done.


Have you ever pulled the trigger on a .460 Rowland. True land cannon shoot the standard 230 grain .45 bullet at more than 1,300 fps.

 

[FLEA]

Have you ever pulled the trigger on a .460 Rowland. True land cannon shoot the standard 230 grain .45 bullet at more than 1,300 fps.

Can't say I have. I try not to shoot anything bigger than a .45....too much recoil...a 1911 and my USP are very shooter friendly (thanks to the recoil buffer in the USP)

 

[Nekekami]

Jake:

A miss with a .45 does not necessarily mean a miss with a 9x19, since you have less recoil as well as an easier time aiming with a lighter 9x19 pistol(all the .45's I've tested have weighed more than the 9x19's I've tested). Also, the .45 has a more distinct and disturbing noise, which also affects the shooter.

As for the argument between 9x19 and .45, the ballistics are roughly the same if you use the same kind of bullet, with just a minor edge against unarmoured for the .45, but a definitive edge against armoured for the 9x19. Besides, if you judge incapacitation as the primary factor for consideration, for a shot through the heart, the 9x19 is also more likely to be able to penetrate to the spine also.

Besides that, it's not just random occurences that have made SAS, KSK, 1st SFOD-D, Royal Dutch Marines, SBS and a lot of other well-known SF/SO units of high skill to use and keep using the 9x19 as their pistol and SMG caliber.

*Corrected a spelling error*

 

[Jeff_850]

ive herd a lot of things about the 9mm being underpowered and the .45 being a legendary manstopper
im sure that shots to the center of mass would stop you weather its a 9mm or a .45, your still not going to have much of a heart or lungs left
not saying the .45 is bad, but the 9mm is much lighter recoil so you could get off more shots quickly should you have to, and a larger magazine too

 

[Nekekami]

If the modern 9x19 bullets have a problem, it's probably that they pack more kinetic energy for their diameter than the .45's do, i.e they penetrate too easily sometimes.

Otoh, I've seen what a single 9x19 FMJ can do to even a huge man(195cm and 125kg), and it's not pretty. He was down and out, but not dead.

 

[Guest]

I've never had a reason to regret carrying a 1911 in over 35 years of doing so. 15 rounds of 9mm is nice, provided that the bad guys give you time to bust that many caps, but a well-placed round from a .45 is going to end the argument right then and there. The same can't be said for the 9mm, just ask the FBI. I've also watched a couple of "subjects" get away after getting popped multiple times with the 9mm MK22 (any of you guys remember the Hush Puppy with any fondness). The aftermath was NOT pleasant. My current 1911 is a Springfield TRP and I don't think I'll ever carry anything else from now on. It's dead reliable and the accuracy is incredible. Give me a 1911 in .45 anytime over a 9mm. Am I just old-fashioned, or experienced? You decide.

K2

 

[Guest]

Every man whos job description involves carying guns must chose a gun that suits him best. Loks are not important.
For me the primary weapon is my M76, and for 0-800m is fairly good. I picked my backup weapon from the folowing criteria:
- ligntnes
-durability
- abyliti to function after exposure to hard enviorment (mud, sand, salt water etc)
-sensitivity to mechanical damage
- size (weight)
-number of rounds
and 9mm HS was the best gun ofered to me. Now for somebody who comes in contact with his target in distances less then 100m (cops, agents etc.) and in that moment his pistol (revolver) is his primary weapon is logical to chose a wepon of superior stoping power. .45 caliber weapons are the logical choice. Ofcourse also it all depens whitc type of bullet you youse. Nekakami said that there is wery small diference in eficency at the target between 9mm and .45 cal. Honestly i dont have any exspirience (in action) with .45 . We yust dont use it.
But i have another question.Is the reason for al the comotion geograficly orientated. After all the Europieans always prefered the use of 9mm. Does this question has influence on professionals? Could this be the reason for so meny oposite opinions in this subject?


ps: i apologise if i made few spelling mistakes )

 

[FLEA]

45

Personally I have seen a .45 pick a 250 pound man off the ground with one round and I have seen a similar thing happen with a 9mm.

If i was in close range with someone who possibly might have body armor I will take a .45......more chance of knocking them off thier feet. For distance I would take a 9mm.

 

[Nekekami]

FLEA:

.45 is mostly useless against body armour, due to a far lower energe for it's diameter than the 9x19. How many rounds do you want to flatten today? :wink:

And no, you won't knock them off their feet if you hit the armour. The bullet has way too low mass and momentum for that. Shotgun slugs against armour can do it at times, and that's because they weigh a lot and have some momentum.

K2:

As for well-placed, the same argument applies to all ammo. With the FBI, choosing .45ACP was a political decision. If you're only going to look at it from a US centric point of view, you could just as well look at the Secret Service, which selected 9x19 for it's claimed ballistics. But on a global scale, 9x19 is far more used for police/SWAT and military purposes, even though .45ACP is just as widely available, and the same goes for private bodyguards internationally.

 

[badpig121]

In law enforcement, we have seen excellent results with the .40 S&W. In real life shootings (what better to use as data? Gelitan only tells half the story) the .40 has a higher one shot stop rate than the 9mm or .45 ACP. Additionally, it has shown to cause more damage than the 9mm or .45 ACP. Plus, you can still carry a decent amount of firepower.

Personally, I chose to carry a Glock 22 ( full size .40 S&W) with 15 round mags. I have Meprolight novak style sights on it and a Streamlight M3 tactical light (for building searches). My backup is a Glock 27 (sub-compact .40 S&W), also with Meprolight novak style sights, that accepts the mags from it's big brother. So if my G22 breaks or malfunctions in a manner to difficult or time consuming to clear with a tap-roll-rack drill, my backup will assure me I won't lose any of my 155 grain Hydrashocks.

 

[FLEA]

.40

Nekekami:

On a decent level 111 vest both 9mm and .45 are going to have little effect but I have seen both knock someone off thier feet. Granted there are always different circumstances that can assist in this.

badpig121:

I'm a big fan of the .40 as well and love my P99. Personally I would love a 9x21mm so I can run some armor peircing steel core sp-10 rounds. But thats just me.

P.S. I wish more gun makers would do like Glock does so it doesn't matter what gun you use (full size, compact, sub-compact) all full size mags will still fit. Why other manufacturers don't do this is beyond me.

 

[Jeffvn]

I've seen the data. The .45 is at 94% and the .40S&W at 97% - nothing else over 91% (9 mil is at 91%). Having shot the 40S&W in a beretta Elite II and a Vertec, I think they are great sidearms. Forced into a choice I would probably still take my .45 the comfort zone ultimately controls.

 

[Jeff_850]

.45 ACP is more recoil, and doesnt has about the same chance as the .40 S&W to knock someone down, i think i would still take the 1911 because i have shot it more than any other pistol