# 9mm vs .45



## ARMARIN (Apr 8, 2017)

(Picture tacticalshirts.com)

the 45 is always the best. That is why the US Army developed the 45 for stopping power. Just think your enemy is charging with a rifle with a bayonet and you shoot him with a 38, the rounds go eight through him and he guts you with his bayonet. The 45 will stop him in his tracks and knock him back. Very heavy and a slow slug v a very high speed round the will go right through your enemy

At handgun velocities, hydrostatic shock is not a factor. Therefore stopping power depends primarily on larger bullet cross section and heavier bullet weight. That means the .45 ACP trumps the .40 S&W trumps the 9mm Luger.

Regards
ARMARIN


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

I have always carried a .45, either as a "shortie" in a belt holster, or as a mini-pistol in my pocket.
(But since the onset of arthritis, that has changed. See below.)
In general, I agree with your basic thesis on why the .45 is better than the 9mm. Your position on the subject has real-life testing behind it.

*However*...

There are modern 9mm bullets which do expand enough to stop within the, um, target, and which do deliver all of their energy to the, um, target's tissues.
This tends to eliminate the ballistic difference which had always existed in the past, and can now put the 9mm on par with the .45 ACP.

And then, of course, there is the very basic issue that "accurate hit placement trumps ballistics, every time."
I am now reduced to carrying a .380 ACP pistol, and yet I am fully confident that my well-practiced accurate shooting will be able to solve any problem which might come up.

It pays not to be too doctrinaire on the subject.


----------



## cclaxton (Jul 10, 2011)

I want to be the last guy to run out of ammo. That is why I shoot 9mm.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

I'm one of those bigger is always better kinda' guys. I feel naked without a .45 semi auto. But as Steve said: "accurate hit placement trumps ballistics, every time." I've got a few .44 Magnums but they're too bulky and heavy for everyday carry. Not only that quick follow up shots are more difficult because of the recoil. Of course I could always use .44 Specials but why have six rounds in a heavy revolver instead of ten rounds of .45 ACP in a compact semi auto? Two of my .44 Magnums have 2 3/4 inch barrels. One a Ruger Redhawk "Talo" the other an S&W 629 "Performance Center". Firing them is like having someone hitting the palm of your hand with a sledgehammer. Just the concussion alone is enough to rattle your teeth. Not at all very practical. They were more of a gotta' have 'em type of thing.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

desertman said:


> I'm one of those bigger is always better kinda' guys. I feel naked without a .45 semi auto. But as Steve said: "accurate hit placement trumps ballistics, every time." I've got a few .44 Magnums but they're too bulky and heavy for everyday carry. Not only that quick follow up shots are more difficult because of the recoil. Of course I could always use .44 Specials but why have six rounds in a heavy revolver instead of ten rounds of .45 ACP in a compact semi auto? Two of my .44 Magnums have 2 3/4 inch barrels. One a Ruger Redhawk "Talo" the other an S&W 629 "Performance Center". Firing them is like having someone hitting the palm of your hand with a sledgehammer. Just the concussion alone is enough to rattle your teeth. Not at all very practical. They were more of a gotta' have 'em type of thing.


A 2 3/4" barrel in a .44 Magnum is not going to be pleasant to the ears... especially in tight confines. I well remember the first time I fired my first .44 Magnum without ear protection. It was a New Model Ruger Super Blackhawk which, of course, had a 7 1/2" barrel. The muzzle blast was deafening, to say the least. I have had two other .44 Magnums since then and still have one of those. It's a Ruger Redhawk (circa 1984) with the 5 1/2" barrel. The balance is fabulous with that barrel length on that gun.


----------



## rustygun (Apr 8, 2013)

I like .45. I would say the big advantage 9mm has would be capacity. I really don't find .45 much more difficult to shoot.



desertman said:


> Two of my .44 Magnums have 2 3/4 inch barrels. One a Ruger Redhawk "Talo" the other an S&W 629 "Performance Center". Firing them is like having someone hitting the palm of your hand with a sledgehammer. Just the concussion alone is enough to rattle your teeth. Not at all very practical. They were more of a gotta' have 'em type of thing.


I have the S&W 627 (.357) "performance center " with 2 5/8' barrel. I put a set of Altamont combat super grips on it really made shooting it more pleasant filled my hand better than stock grips. I have eyed the 629 many times I will probably end up with one some day.


----------



## Babbalou1956 (Sep 2, 2014)

I have both & have no strong preference but something I noticed in ammo tests online is that out of short barrels the fp of energy is about the same & the stretch cavities in gel look about the same. But in longer barrels the .45 has a little more energy & makes a little larger stretch cavity. For whatever that may be worth. My house gun is a full size .45 but I have a subcompact 9mm for carry. The .45 holds 10, the 9mm carries 12.


----------



## SamBond (Aug 30, 2016)

9mm vs 45 .... Again ....

ARMARIN,
It's my understanding that the US Army is required to use FMC bullets.
Bigger is better every time when using non expanding FMC bullets and that's been proven on the battlefield.
Most of us in the USA are not limited to non expanding bullets. (Anybody from NJ here)?
Those 'in the know' claim today's 9mm HP bullets make the nine as effective as any bullet the 40 or 45 has to offer. 

We all know the 357 Magnum is better than the 9mm, 40 or 45 anyway.



Sam


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

We are told again and again that with modern JHP ammo, 9 mm Luger has "caught up" with .45 ACP. But consider the following: many would consider that when it comes to non-expanding FMJ ammunition, .45 ACP is superior to 9 mm Luger. The difference in projectile diameter is .45" -.355" = .095". But if you look at the performance of top quality JHP ammunition in ballistic gel, and compare the same maker's 9 mm with ,45 ACP you find the following differences in expanded diameters:

Federal HST 230 grain .45 ACP - 124 grain 9 mm Luger = .85" - .61" = .24"
Speer Gold Dot 230 grain .45 ACP - 124 grain 9 mm Luger = .71" - .54" = .16"
Winchester Ranger-T 230 grain .45 ACP - 147 grain 9 mm Luger = 1.00" - .74" = .26"
Hornady Critical Duty 220 grain +P .45 ACP - 135 grain +P 9 mm Luger = .58" - .47" = .11"
Remington Golden Saber 230 grain .45 ACP - 124 grain 9 mm Luger = .74" - .43" = .31"

All of this data comes from the Lucky Gunner ballistic tests which use a uniform testing protocol. I have tried to compare JHP ammunition from the same maker using the same projectile technology and comparing standard pressure to standard pressure, and +P to +P, selecting loads that have been historically well-regarded for SD use. All of the above loads showed adequate penetration.

So in each case the expanded projectile for .45 ACP is larger than that of 9 mm Luger (as expected) with expanded diameters anywhere from .16" to .31" greater, on average. Even the smallest of these differences is significantly greater than the difference in diameter between non-expanded FMJ .45 ACP and 9 mm Luger, and in one case the difference is more than three-fold greater.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

I don't know? Just go out with a .45 and a 9mm and shoot at some of those plastic 2 liter soda bottles filled with sand. You'll then see the difference between a .45 and a "nine". Or shoot at some of those steel plates the "nines" go ding, ding, ding. The .45's go *CLANG, CLANG, CLANG*. It's my opinion that bullet weight makes a big difference, a real big difference.


----------



## Kennydale (Jun 10, 2013)

I'll stick with 9mm and .40S&W for handguns


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> *A 2 3/4" barrel in a .44 Magnum is not going to be pleasant to the ears*... especially in tight confines. I well remember the first time I fired my first .44 Magnum without ear protection. It was a New Model Ruger Super Blackhawk which, of course, had a 7 1/2" barrel. The muzzle blast was deafening, to say the least. I have had two other .44 Magnums since then and still have one of those. It's a Ruger Redhawk (circa 1984) with the 5 1/2" barrel. The balance is fabulous with that barrel length on that gun.


Or the hands. My first .44 Magnum was a Model 29 with an 8 3/8 inch. barrel. I put so many rounds through that thing that I wore out the forcing cone. I replaced that barrel with a 4 inch. My next was a Redhawk with a 7 1/2 inch barrel. After that an S&W 629 with a 3 inch barrel. Followed by the 2 3/4 Redhawk "Talo" then a Super Blackhawk "Bisley" with a 3.75 inch barrel and last the S&W 629 "Performance Center" 2 3/4 inch. I still have all of them. I've only fired the "29" with both barrels the Redhawk 7 1/2 and it's counterpart the 2 3/4 inch "Talo". I doubt that I'll ever fire the shorties again. It was anything but pleasant. I can handle anything over 4 inches. But those short little bastard's are brutal! I just couldn't imagine firing 340 grain "Buffalo Bore" out of that Redhawk "Talo". The Ruger's are the only .44's capable of handling that type of ammunition.

Even though I'll never get rid of them, I don't know why I even bought them in the first place? Other than to have some of the most powerful handguns available. No, I won't be buying a .460 or a .500 anytime soon. If you need something that powerful you're better off with a rifle.


----------



## SamBond (Aug 30, 2016)

pblanc said:


> All of the above loads showed adequate penetration.


I believe I mostly agree with bigger is better even with the latest HP bullets.
But how much difference in penetration was there between the 9mm and 45 loads?

Sam


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Ford or Chevy..........


----------



## rustygun (Apr 8, 2013)

pblanc said:


> We are told again and again that with modern JHP ammo, 9 mm Luger has "caught up" with .45 ACP. But consider the following: many would consider that when it comes to non-expanding FMJ ammunition, .45 ACP is superior to 9 mm Luger. The difference in projectile diameter is .45" -.355" = .095". But if you look at the performance of top quality JHP ammunition in ballistic gel, and compare the same maker's 9 mm with ,45 ACP you find the following differences in expanded diameters:
> 
> Federal HST 230 grain .45 ACP - 124 grain 9 mm Luger = .85" - .61" = .24"
> Speer Gold Dot 230 grain .45 ACP - 124 grain 9 mm Luger = .71" - .54" = .16"
> ...


Diameter only tells part of the story when you solve for area (pie r sq ) .85" = .56 sq. inches , .61" = .29 sq. inches. One .45 hole is almost like 2 9mm holes.


----------



## TAPnRACK (Jan 30, 2013)

I made my decision based on double the capacity and faster follow-up shots... 9mm all day for me.

If "bigger were better" we'd all be carrying Desert Eagle's... at least we should if bullet size & weight make that big of a difference.









To each his own though, everybody has to decide what makes sense to them... This clash of ballistics will never end as long as there are multiple calibers to choose from.

The bottom line...









Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

TAPnRACK said:


> I made my decision based on double the capacity and faster follow-up shots... 9mm all day for me.
> 
> *If "bigger were better" we'd all be carrying Desert Eagle's... at least we should if bullet size & weight make that big of a difference.*
> 
> ...


Not necessarily. A compact .45ACP semi auto is a lot easier to shoot and control than the let's say a .44 Magnum. That's why I don't carry my .44 Magnums. Then there's the issue of being able to conceal such a large handgun. The .44 Magnum was primarily designed by Elmer Keith as a back up weapon while hunting deer sized game. Not as a personal self defense weapon. Because of "Dirty Harry" it's popularity soared. Everybody hadda' have one, including yours truly. I've got six of them. I still prefer the largest caliber handgun in a concealable size that can be easily controlled for both the first and follow up shots. For that the .45ACP easily fits the bill. There are handguns that come in all shapes and sizes for that caliber. I've never owned nor fired a Desert Eagle so I can only guess that it's recoil would be less than a .44 Magnum revolver because it's a semi auto and the slide movement and recoil springs should dampen the recoil?

Next down the line I like the .40 as there are even smaller handguns available for that caliber. I regularly pocket carry a Glock G27. I also have a Kahr MK40 which is a little smaller but because of it's all stainless steel construction it's heavy and only holds 5+1 rounds as opposed to the Glock's 9+1.

I have nothing against the 9mm. I have quite a few "nines" too. Some double stack, some single. The double stacks are large handguns almost as large as a full sized .45 especially the Beretta 92FS. If I'm going to tote around a handgun that large it may as well be a .45. I have a Springfield XDM .45 Compact 3.8 and two Glock G30's both have 9+1 and 12+1 extended magazines if extra capacity is desired. The G30's also have 10+1 magazines. All three are easy to conceal and shoot.

My favorite of the "nines" are my Glock G43, Sig P290RS and a Kimber Solo. Mostly because they are about the size of a .380. The Kimber Solo being the smallest, however it has reliability issues.

I'm not a ballistics expert but based on my own observations while shooting both the "nines" and .45's that the larger heavier bullet of the .45 has more kinetic energy when hitting targets. There's no mistake when you hit your target with a .45! Especially those big soda bottles filled with water or sand. Kinda' like being hit with either a pebble or a rock.

As you say though: "to each his own".


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

SamBond said:


> I believe I mostly agree with bigger is better even with the latest HP bullets.
> But how much difference in penetration was there between the 9mm and 45 loads?
> 
> Sam


All of the above loads had average penetration depths between 12.9" and 21.3". So all met the FBI standards for minimum penetration depth. The 9 mm Luger loads tended to have somewhat deeper penetration, but not always. Two loads exceeded the FBI recommended maximum penetration depth of 18", although in one case only barely. The Federal HST 124 grain 9 mm had an average penetration depth of 18.3". The Hornady Critical Duty +P 220 grain .45 ACP had an average penetration depth of 21.3".


----------



## SamBond (Aug 30, 2016)

Hey desertman,

I've fired a Desert Eagle in 50 AE, felt recoil was less than my 7.5" barrel 44 mag shooting 240 gr / H110 max loads.



Sam


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

TAPnRACK said:


> The bottom line...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


:smt046


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SamBond said:


> Hey desertman,
> 
> I've fired a Desert Eagle in 50 AE, felt recoil was less than my 7.5" barrel 44 mag shooting 240 gr / H110 max loads.
> 
> Sam


I thought so, they are big heavy guns with a heavy slide. It just makes sense. Thanks for the info!


----------



## econdreras (Apr 11, 2017)

I rented one in North Carolina and I thought it had one hell of a kick. I did it just to say I shot one.









Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

The main incentive for having a .45 ACP, instead of a 9mm is that it seriously outperforms the 9mm with ball ammo. Before the development of very good expanding bullet ammo, the 9mm had been pretty much abandoned by law enforcement, because of it's comparatively poor terminal effect with FMJ or other poorly expanding ammo.


----------



## bluewave (Mar 29, 2016)

.45 ACP ammo is considerably more expensive that 9mm. I shoot a lot and don't reload, so with .45 ACP I have to reduce the number of rds. I shoot.


----------



## Blackhawkman (Apr 9, 2014)

It's what I shoot most accurately for me and the winner is>9mm! Sure I have several 45's and I like the big hole. My 9mm carry piece has 15 rounds of HST's. Spare mags, too. My pillow gun is a glock 21> 32 round mags. Hmmm.......


----------

