9 vs .45

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Yournamehere

We've already discussed this at length so I don't know why we brought it up again, but I feel that 9mm overall is the better cartridge from a civilian's economic point of view. You can argue velocity and ballistics and whatever all day, but overall the 9mm is cheaper, more common, and it's easier to find high capacity firearms chambered for it. I like .45 ACP and my 1911 but I like shooting my 9mms more because I can get more rounds for my money (and my magazines). In the military or a few years ago, ballistics might come into play, but then there's modern bullet designs so on and so forth. Overall, 9mm is better for what I do.

Amen. I think that's a perfectly reasonable argument, too. As a "plinking" caliber for pistols, 9mm is unbeatable, as far as I'm concerned. For home defense, it may not have the performance characteristics of .40 or .45, but it still performs perfectly fine. I'm not the least bit worried that if I shot an intruder with my SIG 226 (9mm), he wouldn't go down. A lot of the rumors about 9mm being insufficient to stop drugged-up BGs are mostly just that...rumors.

Also, one other thing about .45 ACP...I don't know how many people here keep and reload their brass, but .45 ACP is a real pain in the ass to get right. Most .45 ACP pistols are pretty finicky about powder content, including my S&W 4506. So doing reloads is pretty hard. My Dad and I have had almost no problems with 9mm reloads in either my Taurus PT92 (when I still owned it) or my SIG 226. Whereas the .45 ACP reloads we did caused stovepipes in my Smithy almost every time we tried them. We used to joke that you had to be accurate to within a few grains of powder.

[k9870]

I think the "9mm is weak" thing comes from the military use of FMJ, which is pretty much useless. A modern hollowpoint (Federal HST, speer gold dot) will wreck people. Besides, hitting targets is wayyyy more important than what caliber you use.

[Excalibur]

Well the military compensates for bullet power with training. A well trained soldier would put two to the chest and one to the head. Doesn't matter what kind of bullet.

[Mazryonh]

I don't want to derail the thread, but I'm surprised no mention has been made of the various other cartridges that attempt to combine the "best of both worlds" between high capacity and low stopping power in FMJ vs. low capacity and high stopping power in FMJ. There's plenty of these, from the .40 S&W, the .357 SIG, even the 10mm Auto, and these are just the ones with diameters between 9x19mm and .45 ACP. I'm somewhat partial to the 10mm auto myself, but its military use has been extremely limited. Search this page for "sirius" and you'll find it:

http://www.specialoperations.com/Foreign/Denmark/

I know pistols, being secondary weapons, are largely an afterthought in military operations, but I think practicing more often with them can't hurt. After all, if you were in a bad situation and had to rely on your pistol, you'd want to be damn certain you could make your shots count.

[Yournamehere]

I addressed my theory/opinion on the .40 S&Ws adoption and the 10mm's phase out in another thread:

http://www.imfdb.org/forum/showthread.php?t=756

.357 SIG is just .40 S&W bottlenecked down to 9mm caliber. Ballistically speaking they are about the same, with some .357 SIG loads being more powerful and faster, but the ammo cost, the limited choices of firearms chambered in the round, and the argument that it's a "step back" from a .40, being ballistically similar but a smaller slug, kind of kills it's reputation. Like the 10mm, I think it's a great round, but it still has major drawbacks and in the end isn't as desireable as 9mm.

10mm was really just ill-fated because the original firearm it was chambered in was quickly phased out, and it wouldn't be known today if not for the Glock 20 and the Delta Elite (and the fact that it's a decent cartridge). Still, it's no more cut out for military use than any of the other compromise or higher-powered cartridges that have been recently introduced.

[k9870]

10mm is always availible around here, just a very low variety of loadings.

[Mazryonh]

Back on topic:

I hear that the Russians have overloaded the 9x19mm cartridge to achieve PDW levels of penetration--probably because they came to their senses and realized that the 9x18mm Makarov cartridge was obsolete from the moment it was designed, and decided to do the "pistol cartridge of the free world" one better. world.guns.ru mentions it here, supposedly for use with their new PP-2000 SMG, though I'm sure they could use it with their own purchased MP5s or Bizon SMGs.

http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg61-e.htm

Such a development strikes me as somewhat redundant, however, since the Russians already have the 9x39mm cartridge for compact and subsonic armour-piercing firearms. They also have lots of old stores of the 7.62x25 Tokarev round which has good armour-piercing potential as well as proven stopping power, and can be used in a handgun platform (which the 9x39mm round is too long to).

I wonder if an "Offensive Handgun Weapon System" could be designed around this new 7N31 version of 9x19mm. I also wonder what could be done with the 10x25mm round, if the 9x19mm round could be turned into a PDW round with enough tinkering.

[S&Wshooter]

9mm would be alot better if it hadn't been toned down after WW2 (too many rattletrap Luger bring-backs kB'ing)

[k9870]

A 124 gr +p JHp like a hst or gold dot is a good round.

[Nyles]

Actually, most soldier's training with a handgun tends to range from insufficient to non-existent. If you fight with small armS, you fight with a rifle (or maybe a machine gun). If you're an artilleryman or a vehicle crewman, you fight with that. Handgun training, if it happens at all, tends to be an afterthought. In both time and budget. In fact more support troops than infantryman carry pistols - an infantryman has enough shit to carry as it is, and someone who spends most of their time inside the wire does not need to spend it carrying a rifle.