9mm vs. 45 cal.
This is a discussion on 9mm vs. 45 cal. within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; My opinion is to go w/ the 9mm. I carry a Glock 26. Easy to shoot. Accurate. Easy to carry and conceal.
9mm is cheaper ...
January 24th, 2009 05:46 PM
My opinion is to go w/ the 9mm. I carry a Glock 26. Easy to shoot. Accurate. Easy to carry and conceal.
9mm is cheaper to shoot than 40 S&W or 45 acp. Cheaper is good! You'll want to shoot a lot and the 9 will let you shoot a lot more for the same money. You notice I didn't say you would save money? You will just shoot more!
Go 9mm and have lots of fun.
January 24th, 2009 05:46 PM
January 24th, 2009 05:48 PM
Okay Brothers, I'm sure it's obvious that I'm new here, but now the 40S&W is in the mix? At my age, it's hard to remember where my car is parked! I truly appreciate the help (honesty inserted here), but I've never considered a 40, and a previous thread suggested a 357. Again, (sincerity) thank you for your opinions. This is my first carry weapon, and hopefully, not my last.
January 24th, 2009 05:55 PM
[QUOTE=cvhoss;996426]Your friends are right. The 9mm doesn't have the energy (I don't subscribe to any "stopping power" theory) of a 9mm. That doesn't mean it won't do the job effectively. A 45 doesn't have the energy of a 500 S&W, but it comes down to what you're comfortable with, can shoot well, and what you will carry. Don't let anyone move you into a gun, caliber or make, that you're not comfortable with. It will end up sitting at home in the safe instead of on your hip and it's great "stopping power" won't do you any good then. 25 years ago, I'd have been on the "9mm is worthless" bandwagon but advances in bullet design and technology have made the 9mm a very effective choice for a defensive handgun.
All the advice you will ever need right there. ^
Remember #1 rule---have a gun!!!!!!
Last edited by SleepingZ; January 24th, 2009 at 05:56 PM.
Reason: Fixed a problem that I don't know how it got there
An ounce of lead is worth 200lbs of cop.
January 24th, 2009 06:09 PM
Sorry SleepingZ, I kind'a got confused. You mean the 9mm doesn't have the eneray of the 45 right? My mistake. Your point is that I need to be able to shoot it well (range tests before I purchase right?) and it's small enough to carry, right? Do you have any 9mm vs. 40S&W vs. 357? I will definately purchase more than one weapon, but the first should definately provide the feeling of protection that I'm looking for....
January 24th, 2009 06:10 PM
Opinions.... I mean 9mm vs. 40S&W vs. 357 Opinions....
January 24th, 2009 07:56 PM
It's really between 9mm, .40 and .45. The .357 is a very powerful round that is generally more expensive, has more recoil, is less available, etc. For the most commonly carried calibers, see the first sentence.
Now it comes down to finding the pistol and the round that you can shoot most accurately with. There is no universal solution. You may shoot a 9mm Smith & Wesson M&P and a .40 SIG and a .45 HK45 all extremely well. Or one may stand out from the rest. It's what feels best to you. If you're going to do a lot of range shooting, ammo cost might be important. .40 is about midway between 9 and .45 in cost.
You may just take a page from the many LE agencies (incl. FBI) that have standardized on the .40 caliber. They have to balance power, availability, cost and accuracy for a whole workforce. If you think that's a good reason to settle on that bullet, then "just" find the pistol in that caliber that feels and shoots best for you.
My personal favorite is the HK P2000sk, .40 with the light LEM trigger. Extremely accurate, powerful and after upwards of 5000 rounds, flawless performance. Eats any ammo too! (But I won't let steel-cased ammo near it. Too rough on any hardware.)
January 24th, 2009 08:16 PM
This forum member is obviously new to handguns for concealed carry.
Try not to post confusing or rambling garbage.
He is asking serious questions.
Please give him serious answers.
Please refrain from "Just Kidding" posts - This is not the Humor & Off Topic section of the forum.
Be a teacher and help the member out - or don't post anything at all and just move on to another thread.
January 24th, 2009 08:58 PM
Either one is fine. What do you shoot better? Some days I carry a 9 some I carry a .45. Doesn't make a difference to me either way, it's still only a pistol.
Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis
January 24th, 2009 09:07 PM
Remember the .357mag is a revolver.
January 24th, 2009 09:08 PM
Well, now you've gone and done it....
The 9mm vs. .45 debate has been raging for decades. It was going hot and heavy when I got into shooting in the beginning of the 1980's. I've gone back and forth myself twice in main carry weapons over the years.
My first handgun was 9mm (Smith and Wesson 59). The 9mm is very popular worldwide (the most common major caliber for handguns in the world). Ammo is as reasonably priced as any these days. You'll be able to afford to practice more (assumes you have budget constraints, and will not reload). These pistols often carry a huge number of rounds per magazine (15 or more is not uncommon).
My second major caliber handgun was a Colt Combat Commander (mid sized 1911) in .45 ACP. I carried the 'ol .45 once I got my first "real" carry license in the mid 1980's. It carried 7 rounds in the magazine, 7 rounds of large hard hitting ammo (plus one in the chamber). After a time, 8 round mags began to become available.
After a time, I tired of the weight of lugging it around, and opted for a more modern Glock 17 (back to 9mm). I followed this with the new smaller Glock 19, then again with the 26. I've always felt best with the caliber a weapon was initially designed for for some reason, and 9mm for the next Glocks just made sense as the previous pistols still remained with me.
But something was nagging at me. Truth to tell, I'd always felt better armed with a .45. Not sure why, small and fast vs. big and slow, they deliver similar energy at the target, just have different characteristics. But I'd sold my Combat Commander when money was tight, so no longer had the .45 ACP option.
That changed a few years ago. I bought a lightweight compact 1911 in .45 (don't recommend these, especially as a first handgun). Then, I got a full sized 1911. Then I got another, with a rail this time. Finally, I bought "my dream gun", a very expensive semi custom 1911. And I picked up a vintage Colt 1911 Government model to go with the growing collection...
My most recent handgun purchase? A subcompact 9mm (pocketable) in the form of a Kahr PM9. This leaves me with a tie, 5 handguns in each, .45 ACP and 9mm.
I still feel better armed with the .45. But only marginally so. And the high capacity of the 9mm pistols is nothing to sneeze at.
My recommendation for someone new, depends partly on what feels right and draws them. But the 1911 IMHO is a bit of an aficionado's weapon. I'd very likely lean towards a Glock 19 for the new shooter/potential CC'er. It is one of the finest fighting handguns ever produced. It would be hard to imagine a better first choice for anyone. But then, some people just hate Glocks. Or "plastic" guns. Or striker fired weapons. Or they hate the feel, or grip angle of the Glock.
I'd say try the 19, and consider it seriously. If it doesn't present any major objections to you, I say go for it.
But then, I've completely jumped beyond your initial query of .45 vs. 9mm, and gone straight to your follow up question of which weapon . For good reason. The .45 vs. 9mm debate will continue to rage for as long as both are produced (I certainly hope a GOOD LONG time). The real reason is, there is no correct answer. Only the correct answer for you. Which of course is subject to change.
Stick with a major, common caliber. And buy a high quality firearm (don't skimp, don't go for the budget pieces avaialble- there is plenty of time for cheap guns later if you decide to go that route, for now, buy something that won't frustrate you).
Yep, Glock 19 in 9mm. That's my suggestion. You'll hear many others, many of which will be very good options also. But the 19 combines a high quality, reliable, reasonably priced, reasonably compact easy to conceal package with a large round count (15+1 or better with extensions) of a serious caliber that is commonly available the world over (most common military pistol cartridge in the world). Hard to beat that!
Regards, T Bone.
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety".
January 24th, 2009 09:35 PM
Beg to differ . . .
Remember the .357mag is a revolver.
F Y I - several manufacturers offer semi-auto pistols in .357.
. . . if ya don't savvy Tex-Mex
I very well may be too old to be as good as I once was . . . but . . . don't make the the mistake of thinkin' I'm not as good once as I ever was . . .& . . . never forget - it only takes once to get the job done
January 24th, 2009 09:40 PM
I was trying to quote post # 12 , don't know what happened, but Hoss is giving good advice.
Originally Posted by Kaneco
I have 2) 9-mm's and 2)380's. I don't shoot 40's very well, too much recoil for me.
I would approach this a little different now that I have some time under my belt carrying. I would first decide how I wanted to carry, and buy the gun that fit that criteria. If you get something that you will carry, whether it be a full size Sig or a LCP having the gun will be of more importance than the caliber you choose.
Me, I like small, discrete weapons, easy to do, easy to have all the time. While the 40's & 45's will make big holes, I do not ever remember a DC member posting that they could not defend themselves with the gun they carried, what ever that may be.
Personal opinion----easy 9-mm. ample power, easy to shoot, large selection of guns, and about the lowest price ammo.
An ounce of lead is worth 200lbs of cop.
January 24th, 2009 09:44 PM
most 9mm considered for ccw will be slimmer and lighter than their comparable 45 counterpart which is what I would want for a ccw. I would suggest going with the 9mm with a good leather holster. And I would not be too concerned with the arguments about the stopping power of a 45 vs a 9mm. For the most part, in my opinion presentation of the weapon for personal defense is the greatest deterrent and any BG looking down the wrong end of your weapon is not going to notice if it is a 9 or a 45
January 24th, 2009 10:01 PM
Just today I took the Kimber CDP Pro and the Sig 226 9mm to the range. It's been a while since I shot anything but .45 and I carry the CDP most of the time and I wear fitted pants and dress shirts untucked and occasionally t-shirts.
I was never out of the 10 ring with the Kimber, but I was all over the place with the Sig. Also, and this is completely my opinion, there wasn't that much more recoil out of the 45 and with the proper grip, it's not bad at all. Now, I'm sure there was more recoil, but I'm just more used to the push of the 45 maybe?
Now, someone made the comment about winter clothing. It can go either way. With HST, I doubt anything will plug that up. Also, 9mm is more likely to deflect of of bone or the chest plate, where slow and heavy is like a wrecking ball and will crash right through it in most cases.
For me, I shoot 1911 in .45 the best and would trust my life to it any day. I own everything from .22 up and enjoy shooting them all, I just think the .45 is best for me.
Oh, I carried a full size M&P 45 for some time without ever being made, as far as I know. Now, it's my 1911 and it's the same deal. It's the right holster that makes all the difference.
January 24th, 2009 11:29 PM
Consider .40 in a Glock. The ammo is pricier than 9mm but the stopping power seems to be quite sufficient for many law enforcement agencies.
Search tags for this page
.45 cal vs 9mm
45 cal versus 9mm
45 cal vs 9 mm
45 cal vs 9mm
45 cal. vs 9mm
45cal vs 9mm
9mm vs .45 cal
9mm vs 45
9mm vs 45 cal
9mm vs 45cal
cal. 45 vs. 9mm
proper use of cal 45.
Click on a term to search for related topics.