Would a single stack, Commander sized 45 ACP Glock make any sense in today’s America?

[rob_s]

I agree, but here's where I fundamentally differ today: Today, if I shoot better/best with, say a G17, I woulld stick with that platform regardless of the mandated magazine diminishment from 17 to 10 rounds. While such legal capacity restriction may be viewed as nothing less than a platfor emasculation by many, to me the key determnants are 1) Which platform do I shoot the best with, and 2), even with the diinished ammunition capacity, do I still have sufficient capacity to perform within my venues of use.

Which was part of the argument in the 90s as well, particularly if you think about what was even available in terms of semi-auto handguns at the time. The argument, I believe, was that a fullsize 1911 was about the same size as a Glock 17, and in that case you "might as well" have 9 rounds of .45 as 11 rounds of 9mm. it wasn't even about what you shoot better, but strictly what was even available.

[Inkwell 41]

It seems to me that self-defense shootings are rather rare. Isn't this like owning a second car in case you crack up the daily driver?

There is truth in what you are saying. However, I rather have something and not need it, than need something and not have it.

[JonInWA]

Which was part of the argument in the 90s as well, particularly if you think about what was even available in terms of semi-auto handguns at the time. The argument, I believe, was that a fullsize 1911 was about the same size as a Glock 17, and in that case you "might as well" have 9 rounds of .45 as 11 rounds of 9mm. it wasn't even about what you shoot better, but strictly what was even available.

Another arguably key difference today is that 9mm cartridge performance is truly on parity with .40 and .45ACP. In the 1990s, the prevailing reaction to 9mm was that you needed to have a disproportionate amount of cartridge capacity to make up for the comparative inferiority of the 9mm's performance capabilities at the time.

My thought currently is that .40 provides increased penetration and .45 CP can perform with continued adequacy even if the hollow point bullet's expansion capabilities are hindered by being clogged by multiple layers of clothing needing to be penetrated, but otherwise 9mm (quality, vetted 9mm) provides equivelant performances with less weight, less recoil, and, in the case of .40, less demands on the platform's material strength. In other words, 9mm is easier to carry, easier to use, less expensive, and provides greater compatative longevity to its platforms.

These days, what also drives my personal train is what cartridridges do I have on hand, and which can I reasonably expect to be able to replenish with use. In 2020 and 2021, that means simply that I'm more likely to be able to get .40 and .45 ACP, so that's what I've been predominantly using. I'll switch to 9mm in late April through June, as I'm comitted to use my P320RX X-Carry in 9mm in our State IDPA Championship match, and continue with long-term Check-Mate magazine evaluations with it-I've got an available stock oof 9mm on hand for that. While I've got some .38 Special +P and .357 magnum on hand, it's in limited quantities, so I haven't used my revolvers at all since last year...

For duty use, this year I qualified with my Glock G19, G22 and G21, pretty much covering all my cartridge bases...

And, if I hunt this year, I'll carry either my G22 or G21 with Underwood Lehigh (or in the case of the G21, I also have some Buffalo Bore) cartridges for back-up.

Best, Jon

[rob_s]

Another arguably key difference today is that 9mm cartridge performance is truly on parity with .40 and .45ACP. In the 1990s, the prevailing reaction to 9mm was that you needed to have a disproportionate amount of cartridge capacity to make up for the comparative inferiority of the 9mm's performance capabilities at the time.

My thought currently is that .40 provides increased penetration and .45 CP can perform with continued adequacy even if the hollow point bullet's expansion capabilities are hindered by being clogged by multiple layers of clothing needing to be penetrated, but otherwise 9mm (quality, vetted 9mm) provides equivelant performances with less weight, less recoil, and, in the case of .40, less demands on the platform's material strength. In other words, 9mm is easier to carry, easier to use, less expensive, and provides greater compatative longevity to its platforms.

These days, what also drives my personal train is what cartridridges do I have on hand, and which can I reasonably expect to be able to replenish with use. In 2020 and 2021, that means simply that I'm more likely to be able to get .40 and .45 ACP, so that's what I've been predominantly using. I'll switch to 9mm in late April through June, as I'm comitted to use my P320RX X-Carry in 9mm in our State IDPA Championship match, and continue with long-term Check-Mate magazine evaluations with it-I've got an available stock oof 9mm on hand for that. While I've got some .38 Special +P and .357 magnum on hand, it's in limited quantities, so I haven't used my revolvers at all since last year...

Ammo tech of the '90s vs ammo availability today and beyond are definitely very real aspects of the discussion. Then there's the future-proofing as well of ammo availability today vs ten years from now, assuming a long-term, if not permanent, ban. Of course, if the .45 craze takes on in the coming months or year, does .45 remain as available? Does .40 or even .357sig have a resurgence?

I personally have stuck with 9mm for the last decade plus, and I'm really still ok with that, but I do get a twinge thinking I wish I had invested in other calibers, particularly those that don't require an adjusted form-factor (e.g. a Glock 23 that would fit in my Glock 19 holster, if need be).

Which, to the OP, is one challenge related to a complete platform change. New mags, holster, mag pouches, possible carry styles, spare parts...

maybe Glock makes a G19-sized .45, at least insomuch as the elements that fit within a holster. Probably not feasible, but still... Maybe a .40 version of the G48...

[David S.]

It seems to me that self-defense shootings are rather rare. Isn't this like owning a second car in case you crack up the daily driver?

I'm sure you have read this argument here. In case it wasn't a rhetorical question.

Historically, the P-F position on multiple copies of the same (or very similar) guns.
- One carry gun.
- One practice/training gun that matches the carry gun so you don't wear out your carry gun and ammo.
- One spare gun incase the training gun goes hard down or your primary carry gun gets held by police after a use of force scenario.

I suspect the third (or more) copy is probably more important for those with a high training volume, and more or less a luxury for those with a relatively low training volume.

[JAH 3rd]

Due to the ammo situation of the past year or so, I was looking at caliber options. I started to look at additional calibers, settling on the 10mm. I purchased a Glock 20 gen 4 last year. I like the additions to the grip surface as compared to my Gen 3 Glock 21. I may get a Glock 21 gen 4 at some time in the future.

I also look at platform/caliber sharing. A 44 magnum or 45LC revolver and lever rifle. A Beretta 92 with a magazine compatible CX4. Just an option to keep the long guns stoked with pistol caliber cartridges.

Since no one can predict the future, forward thinking is more crucial than ever. The wealth of info and experience on this website is valuable since someone usually has "been there, done that" on whatever the subject matter!!!

[rob_s]

It seems to me that self-defense shootings are rather rare. Isn't this like owning a second car in case you crack up the daily driver?

I'm sure you have read this argument here. In case it wasn't a rhetorical question.

Historically, the P-F position on multiple copies of the same (or very similar) guns.
- One carry gun.
- One practice/training gun that matches the carry gun so you don't wear out your carry gun and ammo.
- One spare gun incase the training gun goes hard down or your primary carry gun gets held by police after a use of force scenario.

I suspect the third (or more) copy is probably more important for those with a high training volume, and more or less a luxury for those with a relatively low training volume.

For me it's always been far more practical.

One copy that I carry.
One that I compete with so as to not have to unload/reload/re-holster, or generally munge around with the carry gun
One copy in the nightstand
maybe one in the truckvault
one in the office
one near the front door...

so putting it in car terms, while I might drive a Mustang to work every day, it's impractical to have that also be my race car, and it certainly would be nice to also have one at my vacation house so that when I fly into town I can have something to drive.

I'm too fucking bougie to have one copy of any one gun.

[Rex G]

I do not remember a time when I did not like the concept of the Colt Commander, but I had a run of bad functional-reliability luck with them. One of them, which was reliable, was my 24/7/365 duty and personal-time pistol, until it decided to stop being reliable. It was succeeded by a SIG P220, and I loved it, as my 24/7/365 duty and personal-time pistol, except that the heel-clip mag release would occasionally snag on car seat upholstery, causing partial mag drops, which I decided to stop tolerating, after a couple of years, prompting a several-year return to revolvers for duty and most personal personal carry. Those Commanders, and that P220, preceded the 1994 AWB. I had little interest in double-column-magazine pistols, until affected by my employer’s duty pistol policy, when double-column-mag .40 pistols became the thing, for a while.

So, yes, I might well like a .45 ACP Glock-ish Commander-ish pistol, if it is a good, ergonomic fit, for my personal, individual hands. Emphasis on “IF.” I have stopped questing for next-new-thing auto-pistol holy grails, but am not immune to taking a look at something new, from a reputable maker. I would rather that it use a proven RSA, already proven in other .45 ACP Glocks. If it uses a newly-designed RSA, I am going to be waiting quite a while, while others do long-term guinea pigging.

A full-Commander-height grip is necessary, as I have aged-out of handguns that fire duty-level cartridges, unless they have full-duty-pistol-height grips. That is why I traded-away my G19 pistols, canceled plans to acquire a G30 or G29, and have not considered buying G43/G48 pistols.

[Nephrology]

I personally have stuck with 9mm for the last decade plus, and I'm really still ok with that, but I do get a twinge thinking I wish I had invested in other calibers, particularly those that don't require an adjusted form-factor (e.g. a Glock 23 that would fit in my Glock 19 holster, if need be).

I tried doing this. Bought a Glock 23 and a Glock 35, both gen 4. The glock 23 was a dog - it was unpleasant to shoot and refused to feed 180gr Federal HSTs, wand so it was sold with extreme prejudice. The Glock 35 I still own, but with the most recent panic, .40 vanished just about as fast as 9 did. Basically a failure.

I actually opted for the M&P45 as my .45 pistol of choice. Had two, but sold my spare. Doesn't have the advantage of shared holsters etc, but then again, neither would the Glock 21, and the M&P has the advantage of native 10rd capacity. It's a nice gun, but had same problem as .40 - gone in a flash. I might pick up another M&P45 down the line, but its low on my list of priorities.

Also, to be clear, my "investment" in both platforms was pretty minimal. I think I had/have under a case of .40 and .45 left at this point. Not likely to buy more of that either any time soon.

[OlongJohnson]

I'm trying to sell my second to last .40. The keeper is a USP .40 FS that I got for stupid cheap. It is old enough to have actual lands and grooves in its barrel, so I could shoot lead if I had to. Probably have enough jacketed stuff I'll never buy more. First time I took it to the range, I was asking myself, "Why do I have all that other stuff?" USPs just seem to work for me. I've replaced the recoil springs and have another set in stock, in case I do go another 25k (HKCS' recommended interval). Not bad for a forever gun.