Cocked _and_Locked
Banned
Yeah, can I get that in HE or incendiary? :biggrin:
Got a Bofors out in the barn I might just have to break out one of these days....
Why is .45 the new 9mm?
- Thread starter Daven
- Start date
Got a Bofors out in the barn I might just have to break out one of these days....
Treo
Bullet Proof
Is this observation made as a result of all your "Military / Biker" experience?
enquiring minds want to know
hp-hobo
New member
Citation please.
Treo
Bullet Proof
I was wondering the same thing
S&W645
NRA Life Member
I'd worry about the intent of the person even having them. Bofors are rather large to carry around.:biggrin:
S&W645
NRA Life Member
PMC gives lousy info. Even though I use their 230gr FMJ .45 ACP for target ammo.
How about comparing ammo that I have. Hornady .45ACP +P 200 gr XTP vs .45ACP 185 gr FTX vs 9mm 115 gr FTX or XTP where they publish the ft/lb at all tested distances?
Test Barrel (5") Velocity (fps) / Energy (ft-lbs)
.45ACP+P 200gr XTP
Muzzle 50 100
1055/494 982/428 925/380
= 87.6% of velocity at 100yds
.45ACP 185gr FTX
Muzzle 50 100
1000/411 936/360 883/321
= 88% of velocity at 100yds
Test Barrel (4") Velocity (fps) / Energy (ft-lbs)
9mm 115 gr FTX
Muzzle 50 100
1140/332 1030/271 954/232
= 83.6% of velocity at 100yds
9mm 115gr XTP
Muzzle 50 100
1155/341 1047/280 971/241
= 84.0% of velocity at 100yds
Yes, I got the velocity mixed up with the force.
Speed drop is greater in 9 mm in the same type bullet. Force of the .45ACP +P XTP is greater at 100yds than either 9 mm is at the barrel. Force of the .45 FTX is almost the same at 100yds as either 9mm at the barrels.http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/48717-The-truth-about-handgun-knockdown-power
And in the link for the article, force of the 9mm = 1 lb dropped 6 ft while the .45 was = 1 lb dropped from 11.4 ft. Or nearly double.
Treo
Bullet Proof
Could be a M203
Jay
New member
brolin1911a1
New member
<chuckle>. You must be a young man. I can remember when the .45ACP was considered the only serious semi-auto round and 9mm handguns were relatively scarce and hard to sell. It wasn't until I was in my thirties, in the mid-nineteen-eighties, that the US military's adoption of the Beretta 9mm pistol and the Glock's acceptance by police agencies as a replacement for the .38/.357 Magnum revolvers that the 9mm started to become popular.
Suddenly, 9mm pistols with relatively large capacity magazines compared to the 1911a1 .45ACP or the 6 shots offered by traditional police revolvers were available. With adoption by the US military 9mm ammo became less expensive and more readily available. Suddenly, by the nineties, 9mm was popular and the .45ACP outdated. But that perception didn't affect the fact that the .45ACP was and is still a very, very good defensive cartridge.
Now, with modern alloys and polymers, the .45ACP is available in pistols with higher capacity magazines than the original 1911a1 7rd mag and frames of much lighter weight than the old Government .45. Polymer frames in guns like the BUL M5 or Taurus PT-145 allow double-stack magazines in grips not much more, if any, larger than many of the earlier 9mm pistols. Alloy frames in guns like the Kimber Ultra-Carry models allow weights in the mid-twenty ounce range for 1911-style pistols making them more comfortable to carry than in the past.
Honestly, given a choice between a bullet weighing 115gr and 9mm in diameter or a bullet weighing 230gr and 11.5mm in diameter, which would you prefer to defend yourself with?
Cocked _and_Locked
Banned
Which in non-technical terms is exactly why it doesn't knock you on your ass like hp-hobo suggests - the weapon absorbs the energy in the form of felt recoil.
I do. I also think for myself and try to unerstand what I read. You might consider trying that "your"self sometime. :biggrin:
brolin1911a1
New member
I think that's probably the most accurate answer to the original subject of this thread -- warm fuzzies. Both cartridges are more than capable of doing the job for which they're intended. Both are capable of more accuracy than 99.9% of the people shooting them are capable of using, certainly more accuracy than a person in a self-defense scenario with its accompanying adrenalin overload is going to be capable of utilizing. Hydrostatic shock at handgun velocities is pretty much a non-issue so it boils down to wound channel size, penetration, and the fit of the gun to the hand of the shooter.
All else being equal, wound channel size goes to the .45ACP. But all is not equal. Penetration goes to the 9mm; the .45ACP is one of the easier rounds for ballistic vests to stop. OTOH, assuming the use of a ballistic vest that stops both rounds, the blunt trauma, bruise, if any from the .45 will be larger because of the greater momentum.
I like the .45ACP because it's accurate and the guns that I have that are chambered for it are single-action, thin and easy to carry, and the cartridge is easy to reload with inexpensive cast bullets. I also like the 9mm because it, also, is accurate and available in a wide variety of handguns. My JMB-designed Hi-Power is every bit as accurate as its fellow single-action JMB-designed 1911 brother. At this time, factory 9mm ammo is quite a bit less expensive than .45ACP so practice is easy. My DAO Steyr 9S in 9mm is also accurate, lightweight, and a good instinctive-pointing handgun. I don't feel inadequately armed with any of the guns I have in either caliber.
I think, ultimately, the reason for the resurging popularity of the .45ACP is due more to the same reason that wide lapels, wide or narrow ties, or platform shoes go in and out of style. Whim, fad, and fashion have more to do with it than any practical considerations.
Cocked _and_Locked
Banned
I'll go along with that! That's kinda what I was alluding to with the groupthink, herd mentality comment earlier.
Bighouse Doc
New member
Look at this:
LiveLeak.com - Shot in the Chest
Near contact 12 gauge hit in center of chest.
No Hollywood blasted through the air.
It even took a few seconds for him to bleed down enough to stop.
Sorry, the "blown off his feet" Myth is totally wrong.
-Doc
LiveLeak.com - Shot in the Chest
Near contact 12 gauge hit in center of chest.
No Hollywood blasted through the air.
It even took a few seconds for him to bleed down enough to stop.
Sorry, the "blown off his feet" Myth is totally wrong.
-Doc
PMC gives lousy info. Even though I use their 230gr FMJ .45 ACP for target ammo.
How about comparing ammo that I have. Hornady .45ACP +P 200 gr XTP vs .45ACP 185 gr FTX vs 9mm 115 gr FTX or XTP where they publish the ft/lb at all tested distances?
Test Barrel (5") Velocity (fps) / Energy (ft-lbs)
.45ACP+P 200gr XTP
Muzzle 50 100
1055/494 982/428 925/380
= 87.6% of velocity at 100yds
.45ACP 185gr FTX
Muzzle 50 100
1000/411 936/360 883/321
= 88% of velocity at 100yds
Test Barrel (4") Velocity (fps) / Energy (ft-lbs)
9mm 115 gr FTX
Muzzle 50 100
1140/332 1030/271 954/232
= 83.6% of velocity at 100yds
9mm 115gr XTP
Muzzle 50 100
1155/341 1047/280 971/241
= 84.0% of velocity at 100yds
Yes, I got the velocity mixed up with the force.
The truth about handgun knockdown power
And in the link for the article, force of the 9mm = 1 lb dropped 6 ft while the .45 was = 1 lb dropped from 11.4 ft. Or nearly double.
This statement in red may not be correct. This is not directed at this poster so don't take it personally. The OP of that info may be incorrect.
Energy (E) is 1/2 * Mass * Velocity * Velocity. Taking the 45 ACP FTX above as an example, the Velocity is 1000 fps. The bullet weight is 185 grains. Which is 185/7000 pounds. Pounds is force, in this case the force of gravity on the mass, so from Force = Mass * Acceleration, 185/7000 = Mass * 32.2 (which is the approximate gravitational acceleration near the surface). The mass is then 185/7000/32.2. So if you multiply this out Energy = 1/2 * 185/7000/32.2 * 1000 * 1000 = 401.38 - which is the energy reported above for that bullet.
Now a 1 lb weight has a mass of 1/32.2. So if this free falling mass impacts at the same energy of 401 ft-lbs, then 401 = 1/2 * (1/32.2) * v * v or v = 160 fps.
For the 9mm FTX, 332 = 1/2 * (1/32.2) * V * V = 146 fps.
For a Hornady 45 ACP TAP +P 230 gr JHP has a muzzle velocity of 950 and energy if 461 ft-lbs. That same mass would be 461 = 1/2 * (1/32.2) * v * v or 172 fps.
Another example that might make the point more clear is a baseball - which officially weighs between 5 and 5.25 oz (or 5/16 lb). Taking the energy of the 9mm example, 332 = 1/2 (5/16/32.2) * v * v or v = 261 fps.
Now being hit by a baseball going 261 fps (178 mph) is going to hurt and it's going to knock me on my a$$. Why doesn't the 9mm knock me on down? Because the baseball expends all it's energy in the impact on my chest and imparts is momentum into me (some energy is also lost in deformation of the baseball and my chest). The bullet on the other hand, enters my chest, losing energy tearing flesh, creating the temporary wound channel , breaking bones, and heating things up. Energy is also lost when the bullet deforms during impact and within the body. So the energy is lost to heat mainly and tearing flesh rather than transferring its momentum to my body. The transfer of momentum to my body is what would knock me down.
I'll bet that anyone that's been hit by a round while wearing a bullet proof vest will attest that they were pushed back some and might be knocked down. The vest deforms as does the bullet generating heat. Less energy is spent in heat and more is spent in momentum transfer (compared to not wearing the vest) so the person reels back some. He only get a fraction of the momentum and his mass, being much larger than the bullet, the speed he reels back is much less than the bullet speed. (FYI - Momentum = Mass * velocity).
I think the original author may have forgotten to convert from weight to mass and forgot the 1/32.2 factor. I got impact speeds that are much closer to each other for the same 1 lb weight, mainly since the energies are fairly close to each other for all the bullets. Hence you'd expect the 1 lb weight to have similar velocities with similar energies. Or they were taking the residual energy after the tearing of flesh, etc. - that would make more sense. I can't explain the factor of 2 between the 9mm and 45 unless they were taking the residual energy. If they are using the residual energy then I want the 45 since it will tear a lot of flesh and push the BG back some.
I don't want to be hit any of these things at these speeds.
Pardon the physics lesson.
Bighouse Doc
New member
Test with live subjects and hard body armor dispel all of the "Blown off the feet" nonsense.
It has been demonstrated numerous times that even with rifle caliber rounds, impacting real people wearing proper armor that THERE IS NO KNOCKDOWN!
The slug is stopped completely and the person still stands!
-Doc
It has been demonstrated numerous times that even with rifle caliber rounds, impacting real people wearing proper armor that THERE IS NO KNOCKDOWN!
The slug is stopped completely and the person still stands!
-Doc
Rocketgeezer
New member
:sarcastic:
B2Tall
Stirrer of the Pot
The pistol I use for home defense is a full-sized .45. Being a large gun, the recoil is manageable and I can get pretty accurate double-taps out of it. Living in S. Florida where light clothing is the norm most of the time, a big .45 isn't always the most appropriate or convenient choice for CC. I have a subcompact .45 but the recoil is much more harsh than the full-size and as a result any follow-up shots aren't nearly as accurate. Because of this I usually carry a 9mm sub or sometimes a .380 pocket gun. For me they're far more accurate than a .45 when it comes to subcompacts. I'm of the school that smaller, well-placed shots are better than larger, less accurate ones.
S&W645
NRA Life Member
True about the size for most. I'm one who can carry a full size 1911 IWB with a typical t-shirt on and shorts like the Coast Guard uses and not show it. Advantage of being a little overweight?
