Preparedness & self-sufficiency community
Which one is better?
Rifle capacity in a pistol is pure sex
Of those, 9mm. Just more practical.
Not pictured, .40 or .357sig. Even more practical, gain a bit of power but lose 2 rounds per mag.
Of all, 10mm.
It just doesn't have the bullet mass to be a duty round. Deflects too much going through a car window or furniture, etc. Cucked out of handgun length barrels anyway.
>only defensive ammo worth buying is grey market milfag/LEO restricted
9mm is cheaper.
Might as well use an airsoft
but it takes at least 4 to do what the .45 can do with 1
Nonsense. None of the skinny men during ww2 had an issue with 45. Perhaps you are a pussy?
WW2 niggas literally shot 1911s slowly with one hand. you'd be laughed out of a competition if you shot like that nowadays. holding it tight with 2 hands mag dumping as fast as you think you can hit the target is the modern shooting technique.
>skinny white boys were combat effective firing .45 acp with one hand
>muh fuddy fi has too much recoil(i have a vagina btw)
many such cases among .45 dissidents.
Every man there was not only skinny, but malnourished from the Depression
Also some of them are likely underaged
And still in vastly better physical than the half-starved Jap soldiers living off a pound of rice a day
9mm and 45 ACP were both designed for shooting 5'4" starving manlets over 100 years ago. It's time to move into the 21st Century where we have to content with silverback pavement apes and high-fructose corn syrup-drinking landwhales.
so what's the caliber for the future? 10mm?
.357 sig obviously.
>It's time to move into the 21st Century where we have to content with silverback pavement apes and high-fructose corn syrup-drinking landwhales.
Fuck it, 12.7mm, we ball
.45 Annihilate Colored People is still the premier choice in self defense.
>hurr durr muh fuddy fahve is just too manly and rugged for you weak sissy boys
This is cope and nothing more. Anyone who can shoot well with more recoil will shoot better with less, so .45 needs to offer some kind of other advantage to offset that. But unfortunately, it just doesn't. It remains the go to choice of fudds stuck in the past and insecure morons trying to compensate, two groups with a surprising amount of overlap.
>It remains the go to choice of fudds stuck in the past and insecure morons trying to compensate, two groups with a surprising amount of overlap.
What if I buy a .45 and a 9x19? Now what you homosexual? I was thinking about buying a .38 after my .45 comes in, now what? Fucking homosexual.
Christ, looks like I really struck a nerve. When you're done seething, wipe the tears off your keyboard and ask me again.
exactly. if those lanklets can win 2 world wars with one handed 1911s then you're a pussy if you can't control recoil with both hands
Meme metric. Use .22LR then.
>but it takes at least 4 to do what the .45 can do with 1
How do 4 shots of 9 mm make them subsonic?
whatever you have access to
By choosing the 9mm you are telling everyone you never shot someone. 9mm won’t do shit
>which one is better?
.45 does more ballistic damage to the body
9mm guns have more capacity
both rounds can kill if you can hit your target
>round designed in 1901
>round designed in 1904
>old and obsolete
They are both old and obsolete grandpa
Pistols outside of magnum velocity do not create substantial secondary or tertiary damage. This gas been shown again and again on live targets. Ballistics gel does not do a good job of representing actual performance on living issue.
A colt walker blackpowder revolver has a velocity of 1240fps with a 143 grain round ball
A +p 45acp has a velocity of 1225fps with a 185g bullet.
A+p+ 9mm has a velocity of 1380 with a 115 grain bullet
That means +p+ 9mm isnt even on par with a Colt Walker.
Hot load 357 mag 125 grain can push 1700fps for a reference. They are usually closer o 15-1600.
The 44 mag can move 200 grain bullets at 1500fps. The difference on target between magnums and regular pistol rounds is the terminal secondary damage.
When you are talking the average regular loads for handguns the colt walker is more powerful than the 9mm or the 45.
Between the 9mm and the 45 the 45 is the clear winner if like always the proper bullet is chosen for the job.
The problem is that most shooters can't manage the recoil of super hot .45 or 10mm rounds. They flinch and have slow follow up shots. If I was Jerry Miculek, I'd probably carry a 10mm loaded with super Hispanicy Buffalo Bore or even hotter hand loads, and still have faster and more accurate follow up shots than most people with a 9mm. Without the proper level of training and practice to handle big recoil, 9mm is a good combination of softer recoil and acceptable performance against a determined attacker.
Anon's point was that the average dude has nowhere near that kind of combat training. Putting 2x9mm in a target is better than putting 1x0.45 then missing the followup shot. The 9mm makes sense for many people
Men in WW2 had very little training anon. Less than you would get in 8 weeks today.
Shooting is a skill. Skills require practice. "Most shooters cant"
ALL shooters can with practice.
A steel framed gun like a USP or a 1911 or a Sig makes .45acp super controllable. Obviously those are larger less concealable guns though. 1911's are very narrow and in commander length they're pretty easy to carry concealed
>The problem is that most shooters can't manage the recoil of super hot .45 or 10mm rounds. They
Joke's on you homosexual, I'm not most shooters.
I flinch and have slow follow up shots with 9mm, so there's no downside.
Do I have to bring this up every time you fags act like 1-200 ft/lbs of extra energy or an extra .1” of expansion actually matters. https://youtu.be/pdjcYjSsIok?si=EwDROyD4-KxQnRn0
Considering you failed at such a mundane task opinion rejected
+- 200 ft lbs is a lot
>A +p 45acp has a velocity of 1225fps with a 185g bullet.
Average 45 acp +p ammo isn't loaded this hot. Even that 9mm is for military with tougher parts.
None of those are military loads.
>terminal secondary damage
you’re almost there
>Hot load 357 mag 125 grain can push 1700fps for a reference. They are usually closer o 15-1600.
Nah, look at lucky gunner 125 is normally 1300-1450 minus online order only loads from Buffalo bore and underwood.
Let everyone know you don't know shit.
Stop shooting like shit
>i carry a revolver because im a good shot!
>what do you mean 'what are your splits?'? thats guccifag john wick shit!
Not him but worry about splits is only acceptable for comp shooters otherwise it's a lame LARP
To expand energy is no longer a real factor at such slow speeds. It becomes a conversation about bullet diameter and momentum. Or how much shit it will blow through before it is stopped and how big the leaky hole is.
If you look closely OP you can see in this vid a 45acp in flight and the subsequent damage.
I will not stand for this slander, that was obviously a 44 magnum. This is actual footage of a 45 ACP firing, please refrain from spreading misinformation in the future
if you can legally carry a pistol with a 17 round magazine, then 9mm is probably the better choice. if you're stuck in a gay state with a 10 round limit on magazines, then .45 ACP becomes more appealing. In most situations, it doesn't really matter.
Most people survive being shot by a pistol, all pistol calibers are shit. Go with whatever you can shoot well with decent capacity.
The only exception might be 357 as it has enough energy to have a real advantage over other pistol calibers but it's up to you if you are willing to sacrifice the capacity for the power.
Skin walker, 7.62x25 gets into the 500ftlb ranges
9mm because the tradeoff between size and weight is considerable while the damage output is quite negligible
45 fags can cope and seethe forever, but it won't change a thing.
Whichever one has the appropriate bullet weight and powder charge for your desired application. Personally I don't use anything under 124g or less than +P
9mm is better overall but they are both good cartridges.
9mm wins in pretty much every aspect but I will give .45 credit where it is due, it’s a more terminally effective round.
I don’t know why 9mm fags can’t give an inch. Yes, the difference is negligible in most applications, but there is still a difference there.
50% more surface area, maintaining a larger surface area throughout the depth of the wound, while typically penetrating the same or even greater on soft targets than 9mm, thanks to the large weight/momentum of the bullet.
>you have to hit a vital anyway so it doesn’t matter
You do, but even then .45 has a larger wound channel.
I like .45 because it makes people seethe, I don't give a shit about instagram meta, and I like reloading it.
You sound like a lonely, unhelpful fag, so yeah like every 45 user
And you didn't post any guns.
to who? who gives a shit? what kind of reddit tranny homosexual insists on everyone being "helpful"
Shut the fuck up lefty tranny homosexual.
what's your loads and price per round? I'm content with paying 45 cpr for .45, but if you're significantly cheaper that'd be what it takes for me to get into reloading.
I found out about a company that made gas delayed blowback conversions of the 1911, they could push a 200 gr projectile at 1450 fps using .45 Super brass through it with zero issue.
I carry a .40 partially for this. Similar effect on target, possibly slightly more than a 9mm depending on bullet selection, similar capacity to 9mm, cheap used guns in good shape, and I can always find ammo even if it is more expensive. I see a similar number of pros and cons as what the others have and people look at me like I’m insane for being okay with .40. I have and shoot 9mm and .45 also and they’re also just fine.
I'd go with 9mm but only marginally. Like I'm perfectly happy with a .45 but give me a choice and I'm taking a 9mm.
Colt 45 is 5 times stronger Luger 9
45 because i'm too lazy to shoot twice
.45 ACP doesn't do anything that 9mm can't. Study after study shows no statistical difference in actual killing potential between every common handgun cartridge and only shot placement matters. There is no reasonable scenario where a non-lethal hit with Common Handgun Cartridge X would have been lethal if the were hit in the same place with Common Handgun Cartridge Y. That said, 9mm has the following advantages over .45 ACP:
>significantly more capacity in a similarly sized gun vs. .45
>decent capacity in compact guns
>easily controllable recoil in compact guns
>faster followup shots
>wider ammo selection
>more commonly available ammo
>better suppression with commonly available 147gr rounds
Meanwhile, .45 has...
>bigger numbers (that don't actually translate to being more deadly)
and that's it.
I mean, yeah, .45 still works just fine and if you just like it, that's cool. But if we're talking which one is better, it's a pretty easy choice. There's a reason why pretty much every military and police agency on the planet has been moving towards 9mm and none are moving to .45.
Not true. You are unknowingly quoting a paper presented as an argument to return to 9mm based off cherry picked and misrepresened data. Presenter was not even an expert.
Data from war, er, hunting show 45 is far more lethal than 9mm
I don't believe you, but I might be willing to change my mind depending on your source.
I'm not quoting any paper homosexual. You can look up video evidence of what 9mm and .45 do yourself and see there is no significant difference. The capacity of 9mm however is a massive benefit.
You are quoting a paper, you are just ignorant.
YouTube videos? What? Depth and temporary cavitation in ballistics gel? Lol. The creator of ballistics gel himself explained it is not a good analog for human tissue. It is only to compare one bullet to another in a similar medium.
>There's a reason why pretty much every military and police agency on the planet has been moving towards 9mm and none are moving to .45.
Because 9mm is cheap and the lowest common denominator with small hands can shoot a box of it every 6 months and be proficient. Stop pretending like milfags and law enforcement are the arbiters of the "best" small arms when their only concerns are buying things from the lowest bidder and qualifying as many recruits as humanly possible.
I guess I should add another bullet point to that list then:
>much easier to train new shooters on
You're not really making any arguments against 9mm or in favor of .45 here.
But I don't care about new shooters. The whole "9mm is better because muh recoil muh follow-up shots" argument kind of falls flat when everything has red dot optics and threaded barrels now anyway. Comps work. Recoil is a choice.
Yeah, but they work better for 9mm.
Comp on a .45:
>recoil -> less recoil
Comp on a 9mm:
>less recoil -> almost no recoil
Have you tried being a man and just holding the pistol on the target? It's not terribly difficult.
It's not difficult, but why make things harder if you don't have to and you gain nothing from it? That's not manly, it's just stupid.
>everything has red dot optics and threaded barrels now anyway.
Not IRL. This is just a view skewed by fags posting their purchases on the internet for likes. Most people do not have red dots on their pistols, nor do most people have suppressors.
>make good argument
>fuck it all up and undermine it at the end by retarded appeal to authority
anon, you were so close. I see people make this exact mistake on this board so often.
Like it or not it's still valid. There's a multitude of reasons why they choose 9mm, but if .45 were better at killing you'd think at least a few of the groups of people who regularly shoot at other humans with pistols would pick it over 9mm, but most don't. Lots have gone from .45 to 9mm but I can't think of a single one where the reverse is true. It only goes one way and never the other. It happens often enough to be considered data.
45 has less deflection and more energy going through barriers like walls and auto glass
Shooting through walls is generally undesirable anyway and issues with shooting through auto glass can be mitigated with the right ammo.
Wait. We DON’T want to penetrate walls and auto glass? Well shit.
Depends on how you feel about your neighbors I guess.
Does this answer how much I care about my neighbors?
Depends on what you're doing, I guess. I'm more concerned with stopping a driver than accidentally hitting my asshole neighbor.
45 ACP is a manstopper, simple as. I have never seen a shooting on video where somebody shot with 45 ACP gets back up and keeps on going.
On the other hand, I have seen many a video where multiple 9mm rounds fail to incapacitate the target in a reasonable timeframe.
This is fuddlore. I saw a video here from earlier last year where an officer got hit point blank to the head by .45 but survived
BS, post the video.
Caliber wars are gay
Shoot more, get good, and you won’t have to worry about it
.45 if you're stronger
9mm if you're more accurate
overall they average out to the same thing performance-wise, .40 S&W as well
Always hated .40s&w, fucking useless in-between caliber that motherfuckers keep pushing saying. "It's like the perfect caliber between 9mm and .45!" like they fucking need one, why don't we make a fucking .42 caliber or a .39 caliber and say "it's le perfect in between for 9mm and .40s&w!". Plus .40 being around the same price as .45 is retarded as fuck, get a 9mm it's better overall.
.40 was made because abc found 9mm failed in the field repeatedly. So abc did the real reaserch and found outside the revolver cals that had been proven manstoppers (357-44) 10mm was vastly superior to all others. To the point of being reliable through sheet metal and glass. 10mm is .....40.
Turns out non field types struggled with 10mm. It was also expensive. They found people using loaded down ammo. So they chopped the 10mm case down and created the .40. Causing new issues like non expanding because of the lower velocity of the .40. All in all .40 was better than 9mm, not as good as .45. The real issue being due to logistics and financial they made some bogus claims about new powders and bullets making 9mm as good as everything else and abc switched back.
Those in the know understand those advancements are across the board.
In the end nothing has changed since Sam Colt was pumping out BP revolvers. .36 is a naval cal good enough for man. .45 is an army caliber good for man and horse.
The advancements in 9mm make .40 obsolete, it's sticking around because for some reason motherfuckers have the idea that 9mm isnt good enough and .45 is too much which is wrong. It's just like all the other retarded in-between calibers that have faded over the years. Like .32S&W, 16ga, .32acp and not to mention all those fucking gay deer cartridges between .243 and .308. 10mm shouldve been chosen, if you can't handle 10mm just to get through training then you are weaker than a child.
I hate .40 S&W because .41 AE was the perfect intermediate caliber but .40 got shilled harder
all memes and principles aside though .40 is at least no worse than 9mm nor .45 performance-wise
I can't really notice the difference between 9mm and 40s&w. Both are manageable. I was thinking about a Glock in .357 sig.
.357 sig is just hard to find +p 9mm. Same exact bullets.
if you get +P .357 SIG then it's like +++P 9mm
No such thing. 357 sig already falls short of velocity claims. Its just .40s&w necked down to take 9mm bullets loaded to higher pressures.
It is a joke. Get 357 magnum that is far superior or 9mm that can match sig in hot loads.
When will people stop chasing the new hotness and just use what works
Why is the gun community bigger consoooooooomers than funko pop collectors
all that capitalist innovation, gotta see how many times we re-invent the 9mm because it works so fucking well but no one enjoys admitting it.
>because it works so fucking well
It really doesn't considering the current "best practice" is to magdump into an assailant's chest until you destroy his heart or he loses too much blood. Maybe that wouldn't be necessary if you used something more potent and bigger in the first place. I don't want to have to explain in court why I thought it was necessary to shoot an unarmed teenager 17 times.
so your issue with it is that it's difficult to defend in court?
There are cameras everywhere now. What looks better to a jury? Shooting someone 5 times or shooting someone 10 times? Even putting that aside, I would rather potentially end a gunfight in one minute rather than two or three. Bigger, faster bullets make bigger, deeper permanent wound channels.
9mmfags who can't handle the gargantuan recoil of 45 ACP (preferred caliber of Medicare recipients) are the ones with the skill issue.
>What looks better to a jury?
not shooting teenagers.
>I don't want to have to explain in court why I thought it was necessary to shoot an unarmed teenager 17 times.
I do, it’s why I carry a .45acp with 17 round mags!
>why don't we make a fucking .42 caliber or a .39 caliber and say "it's le perfect in between for 9mm and .40s&w!"
We did, it's called .38 super. You know the cartridge the Browning pistols were actually designed for before ordnance fudds demanded .45acp.
ordinance fudds shot live animals and it took significantly more shots every time from the smaller calibers than it did the fuddy five
Show me that data for .38 special vs .45acp. Not .38 long colt which is a different thing entirely.
Sorry .38 super not .38 special. Got my .38s mixed up which is arguably a giant problem with that style of cartridge naming but there you go.
This is an example of a bad experiment. They were shooting at cattle, which have a much larger cross section than a human and much thicker bones. The experiment favors the larger, heavier round that can expend all of its energy in a larger body, but doesn't necessarily translate to better effect in humans.
It reminds me of something I saw in a Paul Harrel video where he shot at a cinder block with 5.7 and .45. The 5.7 took little chips off of it while the .45 shattered it. Problem is, humans aren't made of concrete. All this test proves is which weapon is superior at breaking concrete blocks. It's like if you chipped at the cinder block with a dagger, then smashed it with a rock, and concluded the rock was the superior weapon for fighting people.
Shooting live animals has shown beyond the shadows of a doubt that they are capable of killing said animal.
Your comparison is silly. Paul uses tissue from animals and oranges as a stand in in his own tests. And every one of those has shown when it comes to damage more powerful=more damage.
>And every one of those has shown when it comes to damage more powerful=more damage.
Now tell me which out of .38 super and .45acp are more powerful.
>Shooting live animals has shown beyond the shadows of a doubt that they are capable of killing said animal.
And that's great if you're being attacked by a cow, but it doesn't tell you much about fighting a human that can shoot back at you. In that case your gun's ability to kill cows standing still from point blank range is kind of meaningless. That exact same test would also tell you that the rock was superior to the dagger because the dagger is too short to reach a cow's vital organs but the rock can bludgeon it to death. Now, say you're going to be in a fight to the death with another man and you can choose to fight with the rock or the dagger. Which one do you choose? Does proof of the rock's ability to bludgeon cattle who don't fight back factor into this decision?
The rock given you used it to bludgeon a cow to death with its thicker skull would therefore be sufficient to bludgeon a human to death.
A firearm that can incapacitate an animal larger and tougher than us across the board will be better on humans than a firearms that took more shots to incapacitate the tougher animal.
These tests go all the way neck to blackpowder. Soldiers (TR was one of them) needed a pistol being calvary that could stop both a human AND a horse. The testing done was exactly the type done to definitively tell what could and could not get the job done. Those test are the reason the Navy designation was given to the .36, and the Army designation the 44. Literally Navy= sufficient for killing men, Army=Men and horses.
If it can go through horse or cow bone and open up a channel big enough to kill then it will open us up for sure.
And pistols do not kill by "energy transfer" as we discuss it and the secondary wounding you see from rifles. Pistols below the magnum calibers kill by blood loss and organ damage if you poked a hole in it. The survival rate from being shot by a pistol is so high I'm not sure why people carry them outside of magnum calibers. It's a crazy high survival rate. Up in the 80% range I believe.
German field manuals indicate that this 9mm is sufficient at 1,000m to penetrate a horse’s skull or a french helmet, so I don’t really see where you’re going with your ramble about guns and calibers that haven’t been in widespread use since the 1860s.
Try reading it again with your mommy.
I’ll definitely read it before bed if this thread is still up, you write like a spastic boomer with too much caffeine coursing through your plaque encrusted veins.
>The rock given you used it to bludgeon a cow to death with its thicker skull would therefore be sufficient to bludgeon a human to death.
Okay, but does that make it superior to the dagger for fighting other humans? You typed a whole lot of shit to answer every question except the one simple question I asked. I wonder why.
He’s just doing the old fall back of spouting a bunch of barely related shit to distract from the fact that he’s wrong and can’t dig himself out of the hole he’s dug.
Yeah, that's pretty clear, but I'm enjoying watching him twist his brain into knots trying.
You never provided the data on the dagger to make a comparison.
Did the rock disable the cow faster than slitting its throat did? The only data you gave was the dagger was insufficient to reach the organs of the cow.
Can't really make a comparison there.
However the two pistol rounds were both shot into an animal with bones harder than ours, according to you organs deeper than ours, and that have a larger volume of blood and are generally tougher than we are when it comes to being incapacitated.
So by all metrics the .45 was proven to be more capable of incapacitating living targets up to and including cows and horses, also pigs, than the 9mm
What even is your argument? Two leaky holes instead of one? Bigger would cavities aren't better?
What is it when it comes to this you thing you know that every military, fish and game, preserve, and the doesn't.
Ever seen a you can't hunt with a .22 and also don't use that 300wm it might blow clean through the deer because it's too powerful and the deer will just walk off.
This is incoherent nonsense, so I'm not even going to bother responding.
The simple answer is your argument is moronic. You know the 9mm and the .45 are both under the best circumstances capable of reaching human organs.
So you have been shown that as soon as you start adding variables the .45 is more capable of overcoming them through these tests. More clothing and jackets. Less than optimal angles. Hits on joints.
Again, what the fuck is even your argument? When it comes to lethality more is better.
>When it comes to lethality more is better.
What you're failing to understand is that "more lethality" is a metric that's so subjective and poorly defined as to be basically meaningless. The whole purpose of the analogy with the dagger and the rock is that under this one very specific scenario (bludgeoning a cow standing still), the rock appears to be "more lethal." You reason you refuse to answer the simple question of "in a fight with another man, would you rather have a rock or a dagger?" is because in order to not look like a complete moron, you'd have to pick the dagger despite claiming the rock to be "more lethal." And why? It's because the dagger provides several advantages in combat that the rock does not: It's faster, it's lighter, it has and actual handle to hold onto, it's more versatile, etc. etc., and ignoring all of those in favor of one single poorly-defined criterion of "more lethal" is idiotic.
If you haven't connected the dots yet, 9mm is the dagger and .45 is the rock in this analogy. Both are lethal, obviously, but one offers advantages that the other doesn't.
Your metaphor is stupid as shit.
A .45 is a hell if a lot better than a rock and would have no problems in dealing with an "urban youth" since the .45 Anti-Colored Person was literally designed to kill brown "people" following the Moro Revolt.
I will trust to the experience of those dealing with brownoids directly over those trying to emulate euros and furthe NATO standardization.
>since the .45 Anti-Colored Person was literally designed to kill brown "people" following the Moro Revolt.
this is why I come here. I'm going to repeat this 1000 times not even knowing what the Moro is, but people will think I'm smart and shit.
People get stabbed 20 times and not only don't die, they often don't even realize it and keep fighting for a while.
People who get skull fucked with a rock big enough to smash a cows head in I would go out on a limb and assume do not.
>>more lethality is subjective
It's not "more lethality" you fucking child. It's more energy. More momentum. More diameter. More tissue damage. More blood loss.
Your analogy doesn't do you any favors.
You have a dagger. Are you really going to get into a fight with a guy who has a big rock in his hands? That doesn't end well for you. He goes to the er to get sewn up. You have your brains scraped up with a shovel.
.45 has more energy, more momentum, makes bigger holes, than 9mm.
.95 has more energy, more momentum, makes bigger holes than 9mm
You don't have an argument. You are a limp wristed pussy that flinched from recoil trying to justify your pink glock.
Why you so mad bro?
Man, I really fuckin' called it with this post
>hurr durr muh fuddy fahve is just too manly and rugged for you weak sissy boys
This is cope and nothing more. Anyone who can shoot well with more recoil will shoot better with less, so .45 needs to offer some kind of other advantage to offset that. But unfortunately, it just doesn't. It remains the go to choice of fudds stuck in the past and insecure morons trying to compensate, two groups with a surprising amount of overlap.
. .45 fudds always default to that same lame cope. If you constantly feel the need to go around telling people on an anonymous Tibetan sand painting forum how tough and manly you are, you're neither tough nor manly. You're an insecure overgrown child trying to compensate.
Bigger bullet make deader.
If you can't grasp that, then it's a personal problem.
>Bigger bullet make deader.
Except when we're talking common handgun cartridges, it doesn't. They all just poke holes. All that matters is where those holes are poked. Poke that hole trough a vital organ, major blood vessel, or spinal column, then they're dead regardless of the size of the hole. That hole being a tiny fraction of an inch bigger doesn't change that. At best, you're looking at the difference between them bleeding out in 5 minutes vs. bleeding out in 4 minutes and 50 seconds. In the context of stopping an attack, it's not enough of a difference to make a difference.
>They all just poke holes. All that matters is where those holes are poked. Poke that hole trough a vital organ, major blood vessel, or spinal column, then they're dead regardless of the size of the hole
By that logic 9mm is still a shitty cartridge
I don't follow. If they all just poke holes, how would the one that gives you more opportunities to put those holes in the right places and makes it easier to do so be shitty?
Because 30 SC and 5.7 do that even better.
Based and true, but we're talking about 9mm vs. .45 here.
>>all just poke holes
And all of human history has shown a bigger hole is better to kill you with.
Significantly bigger hole, sure. Hole that's only a few hundredths of an inch bigger, no.
Except the fact that even in its most basic form a round ball no expansion or deformity at all a smaller diameter .36 takes more shots and much longer to incapacitate a living animal than a larger .45 round ball. The velocities were 300+/- fps in favor of the smaller round.
All improvements work up. With modern expanding bullets like the ranger/black talon or the underwood designed for damage the gap significantly grows in favor of larger calibers.
That's great and all, but it's not enough to overcome the fact that shot placement is the single most important factor, enough penetration to reach vital organs second, and everything else you might as well be discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. They both have enough penetration, so the one that's more conducive to better shot placement (more ammo + less recoil for better follow up shots) is superior.
Shot placement is achievable with any pistol caliber by almost any sized adult in a properly designed firearm.
We are not discussing your inability to shoot. We are discussing the lethality of the rounds. Women shoot very well every day with 44 mag, 10mm, 45, 9mm and on and on.
The fabled head shot aside heart and lung, liver and other organ shots have proven time and time again they do not stop a man with normal pistol rounds.
The question is literally what caliber will take the least shots to incapacitate the human. The answer is .45 in this conversation. By a significant amount. Several shots. Making "faster follow up shots" a moot point.
Drop the cope already
Anyone who can shoot well with more recoil can shoot better with less, that's just a fact.
>We are not discussing your inability to shoot.
Funny you should say that when I'm the one who's confident I can make good shots even with a smaller caliber, and you're the one who's trying to compensate with bigger rounds.
I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your post because it's all bullshit based on nothing but fuddlore.
Your argument could be used to claim a 22lr is better than a 9mm. In that showing its not a real position. It's just you and your cope.
"The gun you can shoot well".
Any gun can be shot well by anyone within the range of "normal" calibers. Making your argument again, nonsense.
So many kids grew up learning on single shot shotguns and magnum caliber revolvers in the country it's silly.
YOU are saying you need more shots of a less effective caliber to be able to stay on target.
I am saying that were a 300lb man running at you from 20 feet he very well may reach you still fighting if you are armed with a 9mm. Tests have shown with .45 he will not, and with less shots.
It's pretty simple. Unless you really weally weally want to discount science.
>Your argument could be used to claim a 22lr is better than a 9mm
If you remember earlier, I said
>shot placement is the single most important factor, enough penetration to reach vital organs second, and everything else you might as well be discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
.22 lacks penetration and has all of the typical issues that come with rimfire rounds and 9mm doesn't. My argument holds up just fine, which is why you felt the need to make up a new argument for me.
>I am saying that were a 300lb man running at you from 20 feet he very well may reach you still fighting if you are armed with a 9mm. Tests have shown with .45 he will not, and with less shots.
I guarantee you do not have a source to back this up.
Bigger holes are better.
Sorry dude, but size matters.
Even the capcha says that's joy.
>Bigger holes are better.
I prefer a tighter hole, myself.
>Sorry dude, but size matters.
You know I never really understood the whole guns = small dicks thing that anti-gunners spout, but listening to the fuddy five fags ITT, I kinda get it. You all sound like you're trying to compensate for something.
>You all sound like you're trying to compensate for something.
Your wife didn't seem to mind.
Said she always fakes it with (you).
Samefag was wrong and is now samefag
Ok, lets go over the pros:
>Therefore more shots on target
>Therefore easier to hit moving targets with
>2mm larger diameter which doesn't translate to larger cavity because it doesn't generate enough energy
>More material that outside of top-end expanding cartridges just passes straight through like the 9mm
>Overcompensates for your lack of actual 'manhood'
Hmmm.... Idk Anon. It looks like a close race to me.
147gr 9mm is widely available, is subsonic, and is quieter than .45 due to being smaller in diameter.
>answer the question
it's like the 2000's all over again....
tree fiddy seben swagnum 😀
16rds of 9mm
13rds of .45acp
17 rounds of .45
33 rounds of 9mm
but thats a crazy extended magazine, not suitable for carrying even in a warzone
you can get 17rds of 45 in a FNX45 and 20-22rds in new full sized 9mm handguns
Yeah not practical to carry unless you’re carrying a backpack, so at that point just carry a SBR in a real (rifle) caliber.
Both are solid choices. Personally .45 is more fun because more boom& more recoil, but not unmanageable recoil in a full-sized or steel-framed gun.
Arguing about calibers is retarded though, unless you're telling 10mm guys they're gay
.45 acp is the ballistic equivalent of subsonic .300 memeout. same weight and velocity. no reason to get a .300 blacked gayr 15.
>spitzer vs round nose bullet
i dont think hollow points are round idiot.
>mf learned what spitzer is and just wants to bring up the fact he knows
Spitzer bullets have a better ballistic coefficient than roundnose bullets. Just because you can get 300 BLK and 45 ACP in similar weights doesn't mean they're equal.
balistic coefficient doesnt matter at the distances you'll be shooting subsonic ammunition at. make up a better excuse to justify the existence of a retarded cartridge like .300 blacked.
A better BC/SD also has an effect on the terminal end.
Almost every armed profession has gone 9mm
where is arnold???
if youre an amerimutt then get a .22
Against paper targets its just as effective as .45 and it still looks like a cool le gun
Alone, I'd take 45, with a team I'd take 9.
.45 because it isn't some gay ass eurotard metric homosexual bullshit
A slight variation of this thread has been posted at least once a month since about 2012. Same retards spewing the same lame arguments on both sides and never changing anybody's mind.
Shit thread, OP, but I'm glad it's not a Ukraine or Gaza thread
Surprised no one linked this video that uses identical glocks and similar loads of the two calibers with professional slow-mo cams. It's literally the perfect video example to demonstrate both rounds.
Theres so many 9mm copers who purposefully ignore wound cavities then back pedal saying 'They're the same bro 9mm bullet technology bro' then completely ignore that .45 recieved the same developments.
They both have their pros and cons but if I had to choose only 1 it would be .45 also it's objectively the superior round to suppress so that's another W for 45.
>inb4 9fags showing retarded noncontrolled vids
>inb4 muh capacity
>inb4 muh recoil
>muh temporary cavity, look how much the gel moooves bro!
you're a fucking retard, grab your fat gut and push it. Notice how it can move all around? Does that hurt? No. Neither does the jiggle from a bullet. That's literally all it is.
>muh vids muh
Here's FBI testing on properly calibrated gel as well as animal flesh.
Results: .45 ACP does have a slightly larger permanent cavity all around. Hollowpoints are mostly mediocre with many having a permanent wound cavity on par with FMJ. The top performer across the board regardless of caliber are Underwood XDs, those little meme copper corkscrews are making permanent wound cavities double or triple the size of most hollowpoints. The only hollowpoints that seem to have significant expansion are the solid copper Underwood Maximum Expansion. Here's an excerpt.
Well little homosexual if you wanna use animal corpses for test results then sorry Charlie but .45 was born into service due to cow killing.
Ain't no gut here you little twink. Stick to 9 limp wrist.
>>muh temporary cavity, look how much the gel moooves bro!
That's called shockwave by the way, you fucking idiot.
Carry what you feel comfortable carrying and shooting. Fucking fairies.
It doesn't do any shock any more than slapping your stomach does. It doesn't cause any trauma, at all. It's jiggle physics.
>a gunshot doesn't cause any trauma at all
The bullet passing through you does cause trauma. Your squishy bits getting pushed around causes absolutely zero trauma.
A normal pistol caliber only generates as much energy as a decent punch from a heavyweight. Because it's not spread out over the size of a fist it just pokes a hole in you. It does cause bruising of muscle tissues. It can show up after several hours. But it does not actually destroy large amounts of tissue like a high velocity rifle does.
With a pistol you are dependent on the size of the hole. That varies greatly skin is very elastic, so the hole may be small. Muscle tends to tear more easily. Certain organs almost fall apart it seems when hit. You really don't see the whole picture until you have had hands on experience with game or human tissues after a being shot. Ballistics gelatin is nothing like human tissues. Making the biggest hole is truly the best way. It's why spears are wide bladed, and why hunting arrows have wide blades.
To add to this.
The British used a large caliber pistol bullet at low velocity. The bullets either expanded quite a bit and were called manstoppers. When they had to go to non expanding bullets they made them unstable so they tumbled and caused the same massive wound channel.
9mm is for Black folks and women
.45 beats 9mm in their respective "max potential" iterations which is enough to sway me. .460 Rowland kicks the living shit out of 9mm Major.
They both better at different things, if we are talking about standard fmj rounds
But these days it literally doesnt matter, you can get +p 185grain 45 acp rounds that flies at 1200fps
9mm and its not even close when it comes to the real world of pistol calibers. unless you are going up to 10mm or .357/.44 or .50, then the different between 9mm and .45 caliber "wound" or "stopping power" is so minimal that at the end of the day being able to dump more rounds is objectively goong to win everytime.
9mm is good but its pretty limited in its format
Its a very fast straight traveling small bullet.
There are tons of different types of specialized 45 acp rounds you can get one specifically tailored for what you need.
You can even get 185g +p 45 that travels at 1200 fps like a 9mm round
9mm is for trans that cannot handle the completely manageable recoil of a steel framed .45 in their frail nutrient and hormone deprived wrists.
>powder of the blesseth flame, devoid of unholy smoke and sulfur.
>A lead vessel, holds the banishement of evils
>with quick deliverance, the vessel shall allow thine hallowed point exaltation
>percing path of the heart equals thumbs of twelve
> the milenium measure is the twisted 6
>Parts of the thumb 36, the 6 by 6
>the vessle numbers the beast, the 666.
His vessle may not be the same as the vessle beast for His instrument must banish the beast.
>His instrument of justice and mercy hath been made by one of the chosen of god.
>Parts of the thumb, 45
>and 7 are the vessles of his divine for
>7th is the day of the lord
>7 are the mans ribs of thruth
>7 is the day of rest
>and for the wicked there shall be no rest
>hold his instrument and his glory,
> for in the 11th year, fore the milenium fell
>He sent down His gaze ,
>For it could not be resisted ,
>The holy instrument sent to raze,
>The rome pretender,
>and the cross twisted.
Only one answer holds true, child of god, and in your heart you know what prayer must be made.
this post is so gay that it made me an atheist.
>Acp stands for Anti Christ Punishement you godless cur.
Curses be upon ye, you sodomite
Pupet of satan
Servant of the antichrist.
Repent and your soul may still find mercy
To hell with you all. I'm going to make a new caliber. With blackjack. And hookers.
10.26×21mm or .404, dimensionally perfect middle ground and objectively superior to both
Same as 7.62 vs 5.56. In highly practised hands against non-military opponents or in specific use cases like suppressed weapons the .45acp. For a lowest common denominator round given that even trained people will panic and magdump in many real life situations the 9mm is better.
If by 7.62 you are referring to x51 then there is no comparison. 5.56 or 223 is simply a compromise for weight, volume, price. Period. The 7.62x51 is hands down worlds better all the way around in every metric besides the forementioned and recoil. To the point that with decent shot placement and the right bullet you can take down any living thing on earth confidently. 5.56 lacks too many things to even come close. Even on human subjects in combat it has shown to be less than desirable.
Yes that's exactly what I said. In the hands of the average human and even the average soldier 5.56 is a better compromise because they probably won't fire their weapon in anger that often and if they do they will forget their training and spam shots at their target instead of risking getting hit. There's the theoretical capability of the round in a vacuum and there's the effectiveness of it in the hands of an actual non-autistic human. Remember the US Army was literally considering giving the average soldier a weapon that shot 2-3 times per trigger pull just to increase hit chance.
I don't know I carry a .22lr
I just aim for the head, so. Fuck if I care
>At the core of his desperate firefight was a murderous attacker who simply would not go down, even though he was shot 14 times with .45-cal. ammunition – six of those hits in supposedly fatal locations.
>In this free-for-all, the assailant had, in fact, been struck 14 times. Any one of six of these wounds – in the heart, right lung, left lung, liver, diaphragm, and right kidney – could have produced fatal consequences, “in time,” Gramins emphasizes.
>Remarkably, the gunman was still showing vital signs when EMS arrived. Sheer determination, it seemed, kept him going, for no evidence of drugs or alcohol was found in his system.
Umm, 45 sisters? Our response?
outliers do not make good arguments.
.45 has a much larger data set to draw from and a higher kill percentage than 9mm. Period.
>.45 has a much larger data set to draw from and a higher kill percentage than 9mm. Period.
May I see this data? Because all the data I've seen shows that .45 really isn't any more or less effective than 9mm, .38, .40, or anything else comparable.
What data have you seen? The one report that everyone posts and made all the gun rags that is just cherrypicked data and misrepresented findings that ABC used to justify going back to 9mm from .40?
>muh anecdote outlier disprooooves your controlled experiments
>muh controlled experiments
You mean shooting jello? The truth of the matter is that both 9mm and 45 ACP are dinosaur cartridges designed for shooting manlets back back when people were still using the horse and buggy. Smart people are upgrading to modern cartridges like 10mm and 5.7x28 now.
The .45 just because it makes capacitynigs seethe.
Besides the zoomer seethe, it performs well enough to do the job, I like the 1911 and I already have one in Commander length, so I may as well use it.
The 9mm might expand, but a .45 never shrinks.
>I base my choices on whether or not I think it will make some hypothetical group of people I don't actually know angry
Contrarianism is a mental illness. Seek help.
>Contrarianism is a mental illness.
It's called "Oppositional Defiance Disorder" which is only one of several diagnosis I have.
> Seek help.
I don't even take my meds.
Damn so you're just hopeless then. GG.
A soldier who can't even follow an order is useless at best and a liability at worse.
I actually did alright.
Was a pretty decent Ammunition Team Chief in my arty unit, but in the end I just didn't like it and ETSed after 8 years.
It turns out that with a sense of self-control one can overcome perceived "defects" in one's personality.
So, Oppositional Defiance Disorder?
Borderline Personality Disorder?
Intermittent Explosive Disorder?
Not a problem unless I let it become one.
Are you that fucking homosexual in the other thread that said the shadow 2 fag had that for not agreeing with you? Jesus, shut the fuck up retard.
No, but the other dude is probably a lot cooler than (you).
That time some Flips thought Uncle Sam was just bluffing about them being a colony, and decided to get that smoke.
With exception of the heart and upper aorta practically every blood vessel youd hit is highly pressurized and thumb width or smaller. Doesnt matter whether the hole punch is .62 or .72" when the thing they're punching a hole in is 1" wide, youre talking about whether theres barely anything holding it together still or literally nothing.
>muh more blood out
Learn what a body cavity is, you've got enough spare empty space in your thoracic cavity for an aortic dissection to kill you in a couple seconds via bloodloss, a commonly studied cause of death in car accidents, entry/exit hole size dont matter for anything other than tracking game.
Same fag and wrong still
9mm is better. The amount of damage they do compared to each other is negligible. Recoil and ammo capacity win the day. People like the .45 like how people like the AK to the AR15. It’s grittier, has a more rugged history, and has more of a kick. Therefore it’s manly and tough. The AR is better though and that’s why even Russian spec op units pay with their own money to have them. For the record though, I like the AK and AR both.
None. Choose Wildey.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save name for the next time I post.