October 12th, 2007 11:35 PM
Another 9mm - .45 question
I currently carry a Para Comapanion (.45) 4" at 38ozs. loaded. I have been considering going to a smaller/lighter gun; and although I was considering staying with the .45 caliber, I am now wondering if it is worth going to a 9mm.
Reasons being - I shoot the Para well (two handed) and as all know the .45 has a pretty good kick to it. My concern is that in a defensive situation where you might have to shoot one hand only, the .45 is more difficult to get back on target (again one handed). Would a 9mm get back on target quicker and more accurately.
But then you could argue about stopping power. Are my concerns valid or am I being overly-concerned?
October 12th, 2007 11:39 PM
I find the 9mm to be faster than any other caliber- which is one reason it is what I carry. However, only you know if it is a valid concern for you. Head to a range that rents guns and try some out to see how much it matters to you.
"The only people I like besides my wife and children are Marines."
- Lt. Col. Oliver North
October 12th, 2007 11:40 PM
If you do your part, the caliber will do it's, will a 9mm come back on target quicker one handed? I'd almost guarantee it.
October 13th, 2007 01:03 AM
A common contention among the 9mm fans is that a 9mm +P hollowpoint is indeed a great manstopping round, and that the marginal increase in power (up to .45 standard) isn't worth the big increase in recoil.
I agree with this. I'd much rather 17 rounds of +P 9mm, over 8-9 rounds of .45.
October 13th, 2007 07:09 AM
Sorry guys, I gotta disagree. There will be very little,if any, difference in recovery time between shots if you are a dire emergency situation.
Personally, I would rather stop the bad guy with one well placed .45 slug than have to wait around to see if I even hit him with 9mm.
I own and have carried both. The .45 is a superior manstopper.
October 13th, 2007 07:22 AM
I also own and have carried both.
Originally Posted by coffeecup
I feel it is just a matter of preference but I prefer the .45acp
PC has become the term for Political Cowardice.
October 13th, 2007 07:50 AM
It can be different answers for different people. I've seen well trained people with a .45 who can place 8 rounds in the kill zone of a target in under 3 seconds. I've seen people with a 9mm who can't hit two shots in row. The answer is what will work best for you with the amount of training you're willing to put in. There are no magic answers that fit all people.
Personally I find the recoil of a .45 very manageable and controllable.
If you stand up and be counted, from time to time you may get yourself knocked down. But remember this: A man flattened by an opponent can get up again. A man flattened by conformity stays down for good. ~ Thomas J. Watson, Jr.
October 13th, 2007 08:07 AM
First shot advocate
I believe the first defensive shot is the most important one, because if it hits the target and does sufficient damage to the attacker, the fight might be over.
Originally Posted by Chase2b
If you are shooting a person in defense, it is because he is somehow trying to kill you. You want to stop him as quickly as possible to preserve your own life. Therefore you would prefer to stop him with the first shot if possible, and minimize his chances of killing you.
Ask yourself which gun and caliber give you the best chance of doing that, rather than which gun and caliber can get off a string of shots most rapidly. Maybe the .45 caliber gun you now use is the best choice for delivering that critical first shot.
If your gun is too heavy, you can find a similar one with aluminum or polymer frame to make it easier to carry, and not change the caliber or operating characteristics.
October 13th, 2007 08:17 AM
-SIG , it's What's for Dinner-
know your rights!
"If I walk in the woods, I feel much more comfortable carrying a gun. What if you meet a bear in the woods that's going to attack you? You shoot it."
October 13th, 2007 08:41 AM
I own and have carried both over many years . My conclusion is that what you hit them with dont really amount to a hill of beans , where and how many times you hit them is what takes them down . No matter the cal you need to " shoot them down " , shoot until they are no longer a threat since there is not a pistol caliber that is a reliable stopper . I now select carry guns for formfactor ( the footprint of the pistol ) and ergonomics ( what points well and shoots well for ME ) . To date i have found nothing better than Kahr pistols for my needs . A p9 for primary every day carry and a pm9 as a bug/deep conceal pistol . This isnt a screed for Kahr, but for me they are reliable, light, compact ( thin being more important to me than put it in a box dementions ) pistols that " shoot where they look ". Try out some various pistols to see what will work for you , but Caliber should be the last factor in pistol selection .
Make sure you get full value out of today , Do something worthwhile, because what you do today will cost you one day off the rest of your life .
We only begin to understand folks after we stop and think .
Criminals are looking for victims, not opponents.
October 13th, 2007 10:09 AM
Originally Posted by ELCruisr
With ammo selections these day's, there is nothing wrong with either caliber. Carry what you shoot best, and don't worry about what others use/think is best.
October 13th, 2007 10:41 AM
I carry both 9mm and .45, and I don't know that I agree with the follow up shot theory. To me the .45 round has a kick that is more of a dull thud, straight back and predictable. I believe that to many this is preferable to the hard snap of a .40 or .357 Sig (or other more hot rounds).
I carry the 9mm most of the time because I require a smaller pistol for deep concealment purposes, but as soon as the environment permits it I carry my .45. This sounds a lot like your situation.
"When among wild beasts, if they menace you, be a wild beast."
October 13th, 2007 11:03 AM
If I carry a semi-auto then it's the .45 for me. I don't much hold with this "follow-up shot recovery time" business either.
I've heard other people who like footslogger prefer the .45's shove to the sharp jolt of the 9mm or .357 SIG. They say the smaller cartridges are unpleasant. Enough folks feel this way that it's valid perception.
The .45 thumps me harder or so I perceive. Perhaps that's ingrained in me since I was a kid when my elders said that the .45 was such a thumper.
October 13th, 2007 12:06 PM
I have often wondered in a defense situation how much recoil would really be a factor. If that time happens your adrenaline is going to be through the roof and you will have strength way beyond normal. Unlike at the range were you are relaxed and enjoying yourself.
October 13th, 2007 12:09 PM
I not going to get in the caliber debate as I carry both.I think as long as you are proficient with what you are carrying it doesn't matter if
you are carrying 9 mm or 45.Most deadly encounters are not one
shot events.Look at police departments they went to 9mm and some
are going back to 45.How about a 357mag in a semi auto? I guess if
I had to pick it wouldn't matter .The bottom line is I need to go to the range more and keep my skills sharp.
By NCConcealed in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: July 4th, 2009, 11:15 PM
By ripntear in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: September 3rd, 2008, 06:23 PM
Search tags for this page
9mm backstop construction
shooting 45 and 9mm muscle transition
shootings involving corbon powerball
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors