"Why the .45 ACP Failed"

[GJM]

I still think one reason people lean towards “forty-five is better” is because the most common .45s are 1911s. And the 1911, particularly Government Model is stupid easy to shoot. STUPID EASY.

Particularly ones with modern sights.

People talk about “recoil” with a .45. I’ve introduced dozens of people to shooting with a .22 and then gone to .45. No trouble with the transition at all. It’s easy damn gun to shoot and if someone can hold it up and rack the slide, it works well.

I have heard that said many times, but the high hit factors on USPSA classifiers don’t seem to support that belief.

[Robinson]

I have heard that said many times, but the high hit factors on USPSA classifiers don’t seem to support that belief.

I carry a 1911 so it follows that I believe it has some benefits -- for me. But when I spend time shooting a Glock 9mm I can shoot it just as good as the 1911, except for 9mm guns. I shoot Glocks better than 9mm 1911s.

The trigger is the thing everyone always talks about when it comes to 1911s -- and I do like the trigger -- but once you get to a certain point it doesn't make that much of a difference. My favorite things about the 1911 are its ergonomics and thin profile. Plus I'm old and I just like them.

[spinmove_]

I carry a 1911 so it follows that I believe it has some benefits -- for me. But when I spend time shooting a Glock 9mm I can shoot it just as good as the 1911, except for 9mm guns. I shoot Glocks better than 9mm 1911s.

The trigger is the thing everyone always talks about when it comes to 1911s -- and I do like the trigger -- but once you get to a certain point it doesn't make that much of a difference. My favorite things about the 1911 are its ergonomics and thin profile. Plus I'm old and I just like them.

My personal experience does not reflect that. I’ve found that, in general, over time and multiple days, drills, and/or matches, I will shoot a decent single action trigger better than a Glock trigger.

Where the Glock trigger kneecaps you and the 1911 or most other single action triggers help you is when you’re NOT totally on your game. You can get away with a less perfect trigger press and be penalized less for it downrange. If I’m off with a Glock, it’s pretty obvious and the results at 25 yds and beyond speak volumes. If I’m off with a 1911 or a Beretta 92, it’s less obvious and I’m less of a train wreck at 25 yards and beyond.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

All the service calibers work adequately:



Use the one you want.

However, at this time 9 mm offers several advantages. In the last decade or so, ammo engineers have produced a superb generation of 9 mm projectiles that offer penetration in the ideal range and that are capable of good performance after common intermediate barriers. As many agencies are discovering, when looked at in aggregate, modern robust expanding, barrier blind 9 mm ammunition is performing on par with larger caliber handgun loads. As an added benefit, 9 mm offers substantial fiscal and training benefits. In test after test, most officers demonstrate a higher qualification score when shooting 9 mm compared to other common service calibers. Smaller statured officers and those with small hands tend to shoot better with 9 mm. Service pistols tend to be more durable in 9 mm than those in .357 Sig and .40 S&W. In a time of fiscal austerity, 9 mm ammunition is certainly less expensive. For most LE duties, there are a lot of advantages in carrying a 9 mm: easy to shoot--especially one handed, relatively inexpensive to practice with, lots of bullets immediately on tap. (When I injured my strong hand a few years ago and lost its use for several months, I found out how much more effective I was using a G19 weak handed compared to a .45 Auto 1911). In addition, 9 mm tends to be easier on the body (hands, wrists, elbows, etc...) than larger calibers during high volume practice sessions.

[jd950]

1) ...I will, and have, confront determined and deadly enemies with any of the common duty calibers because they all work and they all work in a measure so equal that the differences aren't even quite angels on pinheads.

I try to avoid caliber discussions, but that is as simple and accurate as it gets and I could not resist chiming in.

[RevolverRob]

I have heard that said many times, but the high hit factors on USPSA classifiers don’t seem to support that belief.

Maybe. I'm not sure that's the best way to go. I guess one could argue that the highest averages in Single Stack should be with major caliber guns, since Major scoring gives you a bit of a leg-up and Single Stack is still about 75% .45 guns. But I think the best comparison would be comparing hit factors for Single Stack Minor and Production Minor, if you want to get at the 1911-trigger/ergonomics question.

But to be fair - I'm not really talking about USPSA shooters here, who are a different kind of person and shooter. I'm talking about the person at the range shooting for the first or second time. I looked and saw USPSA updated the 2018 High Hit Factors based on a total sample size of 1133 individual classifier scores. In my opinion that's not a sufficient sample size to draw any conclusions from, even if it's the only good data we have. According to the BATF(U), in 2015, just over 3.6 million handguns were sold.

3,600,000 handguns sold in 2015
1133 classifier scores in 2018.

Assuming each of those 1133 classifiers were shot with a unique handgun (probably not) - that's 0.0003% of handguns sold in 2015 used to shoot classifiers in 2017 (to be used in 2018 updates).

I have to be entirely honest, I like USPSA classifying and scoring and matches, and the data USPSA collects. But I do not think USPSA Members let alone match shooters are representative of the general population of gun owners. You're looking at a statistical outlier of outliers here. A B-Class shooter in USPSA is probably, on average, in the top 5% of all pistol shooters in the United States, while only being in the roughly top 30% of USPSA.

[Jared]

Maybe. I'm not sure that's the best way to go. I guess one could argue that the highest averages in Single Stack should be with major caliber guns, since Major scoring gives you a bit of a leg-up and Single Stack is still about 75% .45 guns. But I think the best comparison would be comparing hit factors for Single Stack Minor and Production Minor, if you want to get at the 1911-trigger/ergonomics question.

But to be fair - I'm not really talking about USPSA shooters here, who are a different kind of person and shooter. I'm talking about the person at the range shooting for the first or second time. I looked and saw USPSA updated the 2018 High Hit Factors based on a total sample size of 1133 individual classifier scores. In my opinion that's not a sufficient sample size to draw any conclusions from, even if it's the only good data we have. According to the BATF(U), in 2015, just over 3.6 million handguns were sold.

3,600,000 handguns sold in 2015
1133 classifier scores in 2018.

Assuming each of those 1133 classifiers were shot with a unique handgun (probably not) - that's 0.0003% of handguns sold in 2015 used to shoot classifiers in 2017 (to be used in 2018 updates).

I have to be entirely honest, I like USPSA classifying and scoring and matches, and the data USPSA collects. But I do not think USPSA Members let alone match shooters are representative of the general population of gun owners. You're looking at a statistical outlier of outliers here. A B-Class shooter in USPSA is probably, on average, in the top 5% of all pistol shooters in the United States, while only being in the roughly top 30% of USPSA.

Rob, if you successfully steer this thread from a caliber debate to a merits/relevance of competition debate, this thread will be two legs into the ultimate gun forum thread

[RevolverRob]

Rob, if you successfully steer this thread from a caliber debate to a merits/relevance of competition debate, this thread will be two legs into the ultimate gun forum thread

Right?

Since I haven't posted this in awhile - it needs to be used here. The real reason why .45 is superior to 9mm is simple. It was designed by Moses, John Moses Browning, and is -by God- American. And therefore all others should be viewed as inferior foreign metric shit.

[Mjolnir]

While it varies from person to person, for easy figuring let's say people lose the ability to fight back effectively at 30% total blood loss. This is about when people feel weak, dizzy, may pass out, etc. Note this in the real world this isn't a hard and fast rule and completely ignores that people can and have fought well past this mark, but to simplify this conversation we're going to treat it as a bright line and give the .45 as much advantage as possible:

Even if your statement is true, it's irrelevant in the following scenarios:

1) A psychological stop occurs.
2) Neither bullet will cause an injury resulting in more than 30% blood loss.
3) Both bullets will cause an injury resulting in more than 30% blood loss.

It is relevant only in the following scenario:

4) The .45 will cause an injury that will result in more than 30% blood loss while the 9mm causes an injury that results in less than 30% blood loss.

Now, let's add in the following facts:

1) The body has the ability to shunt blood away from the extremities.
2) The largest blood vessels in the arm are significantly smaller than even bullets of either caliber.
3) A severed blood vessel isn't going to be more severed by a larger bullet.
4) A broken bone is going to cause blood loss and either caliber will break bone.

So let's give the .45 the best crack at this possible. Let's say the wound tract is juuuust outside clipping the brachial artery enough to rupture it. Let's even assume that LL has been hitting the weights and his massive tree trunk arms let the bullet fully expand prior to getting to the artery in order to further the larger bullet's advantage. Taking picture perfect HST ammo you have .07" increased radius for fully expanded bullets. .07" If the stars aligned in such a way that the 9mm wound tract was within .07" of causing a major blood vessel to rupture the .45 has the potential to make a difference in the outcome. And even this ignores a host of real world factors in order to simply and present the .45's "advantage" in the best possible light.

So even if the statement is true, is it relevant if the question concerns "which caliber is more effective at stopping bad guy's actions?"

I’m well aware of this. I was in the minority back in the early 2000s. People looked at me as if I had three heads and 9 eyes.

I’m agnostic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

Targeting is pretty simple, for immediate incapacitation the only option is CNS:





For Center of Mass and pelvis, there is not a lot there that will cause immediate incapacitation:



Probably the simplest, least expensive way to practice is to use an upper horizontal 3x5 card and a vertical center 4x6 card, as this is what must be hit with a handgun to achieve reasonably rapid physiologic incapacitation:



I would love to see LE agencies use this target system for quals as it would lead to much more proficient and effective officers in lethal force encounters, with less risk to the public from missed shots--of course most agencies would have very few officers left on the force if this was the standard.....