.45 acp in 2023/24

[Spartan1980]

I'm not sure if I should make a thread specifically to discuss the Gen 5 Glock 21 or not, but since this thread is about .45 ACP in the current age and I just shot mine again today, I wanted to talk about it.

Since the original pre-SF Gen 3, the Glock 21 has been the one handgun I've been able to put the bullets exactly where I want them to go with frightening repeatability with even just a minimum of effort. One 13rd magazine = 1 ragged hole out to 25 yards. When doing Bill Drills, my splits are about .06-.08 slower than a G19 loaded with standard pressure 9mm, but my accuracy is noticeably better. Even when I try my best to slow down with my G19 and G17, my accuracy is still better with the G21.

This has translated over to the Gen 5, perhaps even more so. Shooting my G21 Gen 5 loaded with HST 230gr standard pressure next to my Glock 19 loaded with Hornady Critical Duty 135gr +P, subjectively the recoil feels about the same with the G21 having a little less snap to it. Objectively, my accuracy is better with the G21, both equipped with Dawson sights.

I could go on and on, but I guess my point is that regardless of any potential increase in effectiveness .45 ACP may have over 9mm, the fact that I shoot the G21 so well makes it extremely relevant to me in 2023/2024 and beyond. There are some side things and concerns about the Gen 5 G21 I have, but that is specific enough to be outside the realm of this thread's subject. Suffice it to say, I love my G21s and might add a G30 Gen 5 if my G21 Gen 5 examples continue to be reliable.

Considering I also just got a new old stock 1973-made S&W Model 25-2 in .45 ACP that shoots well, this caliber isn't going anywhere for me.

From what I've read, it seems that both the G21 and the M&P45 are the most accurate versions of their respective platforms.

My experience with the G21.3 is the same. I consistently shoot better scores in GSSF matches with it and the gun feels like a brick to me. I wonder why this is? I hear it told that the Swiss Sig P210s had no issues with accuracy so I've not been inclined to think 9mm was all that different from .45ACP as to "inherent accuracy". But does the .45 actually have an edge?

ETA: I also have heard that the M&P 45 was originally designed to compete for the military's replacement of the 1911 and that they tightened up the tolerances to comply with the accuracy requirements. If this is true I could see S&W just running with it once in production. Can anyone confirm this?

[revchuck38]

I also have heard that the M&P 45 was originally designed to compete for the military's replacement of the 1911 and that they tightened up the tolerances to comply with the accuracy requirements. If this is true I could see S&W just running with it once in production. Can anyone confirm this?

I highly doubt this. The competition to replace the 1911 was in the mid-80s and one of the requirements was that it be in 9x19 for purposes of NATO interoperability. The M&P45 came out in the mid-00s after the 9x19 and .40 S&W versions. The M&Ps came out after the Sigma disaster and were a new design.

The version I've heard is that Ernest Langdon was at that time employed by S&W and was heavily involved in the development of the M&P45. That might explain why that gun fits the hand as well as it does; I'm not sure it would explain the gun's accuracy because I don't think that Ernest, as talented as he is, has those engineering chops...but I might be wrong here.

[Trooper224]

My experience with the G21.3 is the same. I consistently shoot better scores in GSSF matches with it and the gun feels like a brick to me. I wonder why this is? I hear it told that the Swiss Sig P210s had no issues with accuracy so I've not been inclined to think 9mm was all that different from .45ACP as to "inherent accuracy". But does the .45 actually have an edge?

ETA: I also have heard that the M&P 45 was originally designed to compete for the military's replacement of the 1911 and that they tightened up the tolerances to comply with the accuracy requirements. If this is true I could see S&W just running with it once in production. Can anyone confirm this?

The P210 was designed to shoot one particular load with great accuracy, and that one load only. All other 9mm loads will show typical service pistol accuracy. Good, but not legendary.

Some rounds have greater accuracy potential due to things like the ballistic coefficient of their projectile, etc. In the end though, the real key to accuracy is consistency. Consistency in the individual components making up the ammo, consistency in bore diameter in the barrel, etc. Being the most widespread service pistol cartridge in the world, this is detrimental to the 9mm. Due to variances in the aforementioned things, a load may shoot with great accuracy in one pistol, and terribly in another.

The 9mm can exhibit fine accuracy, it's just much harder to find it.

[reno92]

I have used a handgun on all animals from 2lbs to 1000lbs in somewhat controlled instances, my absolute favorite across the board is 45 colt, loaded moderately with a Keith type bullet. 45acp with a swc works very well too. At that diameter, a sharp shoulder meplat is what kills. In 9 or357. Bullet design is way more critical. These bullets have to expand to some degree. I have had too many instances of circa 90’s bullet technology failing miserably. But that was the best we had at the time. I cast my own, so the 45 is the cheapest way to get the results I need.I am a huge believer in Elmers thoughts when it comes to handguns. Unfortunately most pistol carriers that I know of, still carry the cheapest bulk pack hollow point ammunition they can find. In which case I would prefer they bumped up cartridge size. Of course I tend to switch to a 40 or 45 when the carhartts come out. 9 in T shirt weather.

[fatdog]

...also have heard that the M&P 45 was originally designed to compete for the military's replacement of the 1911

Not the '84 1911 replacement, but I think it was entered into the Joint Combat Pistol (JCP) System solicitation which was late 2005 or early 2006 where they wanted an off the shelf system so to speak, specifically in .45 ACP. I don't know if that was ever awarded to anybody as a contract.

[TGS]

ETA: I also have heard that the M&P 45 was originally designed to compete for the military's replacement of the 1911 and that they tightened up the tolerances to comply with the accuracy requirements. If this is true I could see S&W just running with it once in production. Can anyone confirm this?

I don't think that highlighted part is correct, either.

JCP required a mean radius at 50m of 3.15". I'm not an engineer, but my Marine Math tells me that would be a group no larger than 6.3" at 50m, which is easily achievable at 50m by properly designed/functioning service pistols of any service caliber.

[Bucky]

Not the '84 1911 replacement, but I think it was entered into the Joint Combat Pistol (JCP) System solicitation which was late 2005 or early 2006 where they wanted an off the shelf system so to speak, specifically in .45 ACP. I don't know if that was ever awarded to anybody as a contract.

I don’t think they ever chose a pistol, but we benefitted from a slew of new fohty fives coming on the market.

[HCM]

My experience with the G21.3 is the same. I consistently shoot better scores in GSSF matches with it and the gun feels like a brick to me. I wonder why this is? I hear it told that the Swiss Sig P210s had no issues with accuracy so I've not been inclined to think 9mm was all that different from .45ACP as to "inherent accuracy". But does the .45 actually have an edge?

ETA: I also have heard that the M&P 45 was originally designed to compete for the military's replacement of the 1911 and that they tightened up the tolerances to comply with the accuracy requirements. If this is true I could see S&W just running with it once in production. Can anyone confirm this?

Not the '84 1911 replacement, but I think it was entered into the Joint Combat Pistol (JCP) System solicitation which was late 2005 or early 2006 where they wanted an off the shelf system so to speak, specifically in .45 ACP. I don't know if that was ever awarded to anybody as a contract.

I don't think that highlighted part is correct, either.

JCP required a mean radius at 50m of 3.15". I'm not an engineer, but my Marine Math tells me that would be a group no larger than 6.3" at 50m, which is easily achievable at 50m by properly designed/functioning service pistols of any service caliber.

I don’t think they ever chose a pistol, but we benefitted from a slew of new fohty fives coming on the market.

TGS and Fat Dog are correct.

The Accuracy of the M&P .45 is a combination of luck and the fact that .45 versions of many polymer service pistols tend to be the most accurate.

As I recall S&W did submit an M&P 45 variant to the JCP trials in the mid 2000’s. The same trials that resulted in the creation of the HK45/45C and the PX4 .45. No contract was ever awarded.

At the time, the trend towards the Glock 19 was already well underway in the wider SOF community. My understanding is the JCP was primarily part of the “boys at Bragg’s” efforts to move from 1911s to a more modern platform. The JCP never went anywhere because those people wound up moving on to .40 cal. Adopting .40 cal Glocks after an unsuccessful experiment with .40 cal STIs.

[PD Sgt.]

TGS and Fat Dog are correct.

The Accuracy of the M&P .45 is a combination of luck and the fact that .45 versions of many polymer service pistols tend to be the most accurate.

As I recall S&W did submit an M&P 45 variant to the JCP trials in the mid 2000’s. The same trials that resulted in the creation of the HK45/45C and the PX4 .45. No contract was ever awarded.

At the time, the trend towards the Glock 19 was already well underway in the wider SOF community. My understanding is the JCP was primarily part of the “boys at Bragg’s” efforts to move from 1911s to a more modern platform. The JCP never went anywhere because those people wound up moving on to .40 cal. Adopting .40 cal Glocks after an unsuccessful experiment with .40 cal STIs.

This is pretty much what I heard as well from someone who was familiar with the testing.

I will add that I always felt the 45 M&Ps were the best of the bunch, accuracy wise. I have several Gen1 compacts as well as a mid size and they are all very accurate pistols. I also had excellent experience with G3 Glock 21s as well, they just don’t conceal as well for me.

[Spartan1980]

Not the '84 1911 replacement, but I think it was entered into the Joint Combat Pistol (JCP) System solicitation which was late 2005 or early 2006 where they wanted an off the shelf system so to speak, specifically in .45 ACP. I don't know if that was ever awarded to anybody as a contract.

This is it, that's what I was thinking of.

I don't think that highlighted part is correct, either.

JCP required a mean radius at 50m of 3.15". I'm not an engineer, but my Marine Math tells me that would be a group no larger than 6.3" at 50m, which is easily achievable at 50m by properly designed/functioning service pistols of any service caliber.

One would think so for sure, but some of the early 4.25" & especially the 5" 9mm guns were atrocious. Not all certainly, just some. Those would hold this 6.3" at 25 meters only if it was a good day. I had a friend at a department that had some pissed off officers because they could qual better with their Shields than their issue weapon. They've long since went Glock. It was sad because other than piss poor accuracy, they were a solid gun.