The debate between 9mm and .45 has raged for years, and I am not foolish enough to think that I can settle it for everyone, but I would like to weigh in. Some of you may be complaining already ‘Not this again,’ but from the point of view of a former .45acp-only guy, let me tell you where my experiences have led me and why I’ve changed my opinion on the matter completely.
I carried full size Colt 1911 .45acp pistols exclusively for most of my armed history. That was the round my Dad said was the best, so that was that for me. Over the years whenever the 9mm was mentioned as a defensive round, my position was always: “If you have nothing else, a 9mm is better than nothing. However, 9mm is the weakest round I recommend for self- defense.” This was based mostly upon what I’d always believed and the stories from GI’s reporting multiple shots needed to bring down an enemy combatant when using the Beretta M9 9mm pistol. What more do you need? Actual battlefield reports brought the matter to a close as far as I was concerned.
When Trigger Time with Joe Barrett was born I began working on a list topics of conversation for the show. I thought the 9mm debate would be a good one. However, since I knew I would actually be talking on air and not just at my kitchen table, I wanted to do some up to date research to support my .45 acp superiority, just in case I met with any opposition. And, I did just that, I researched and right about the time this research was all but complete I enrolled in Handgun 1-5 at Tactical Defense Institute in West Union Ohio. There I was able to use my 1911 .45′s and Glock .40 cals in actual real-world shooting scenarios to see how they would perform for me when and if I ever needed them.
One thing I learned quickly is that when you are under stress and shooting, you tend to fire more rounds. In fact, many people forced to defend themselves with a gun empty their first mag in the initial exchange. My 8 round 1911 had me making mag changes nearly 3 times as often as others shooting alongside me. I didn’t like that at all, so I switched to my .40 caliber glock for the next two days of class. That took care of the frequent reloading, but I noticed a difficulty in staying on target with rapid follow-up shots. I found that most .40 cal pistols are just frames for a 9mm with a barrel that allows for the larger round. So, unlike the heavy 1911, you have less weight to absorb the added recoil you get with a .40 over a 9mm.
This training taught me that you need to shoot fast and accurate under less than perfect conditions, such as moving, with a flashlight in hand to see, and with people shooting back. They don’t call them “desperate circumstances” for nothing. A well lit firing range is probably not where you’re really going to need your pistol skills and the training I took foccused on preparing me for things like moving through my house at night and dealing with armed intruders. My goal during these exercises was to get as many rounds into vital areas as I could. When you consider that the average gunfight is over in less than 3 seconds, how many ½ seconds can you to lose to re-acquiring your sight picture? More recoil means more time re-acquiring your sight picture. Math has never been my strong suit but it didn’t take me long to realize that fast and accurate is easier with less recoil. So, when I finished Handgun 1-3 and returned a couple of weeks later for Handgun 4 and 5, I brought a 9mm.
My eyes were opened. I found I could fire faster and keep all my rounds in a very confined space much better with the 9mm than I could the .40 or the .45. No doubt, as far as performance went, the 9mm was the gun for me. The only problem was that voice in the back of my mind, my voice saying, “But what about the weaker stopping power of the 9mm?” I spent a lot of years listening to that voice and shooting .40 & .45 almost exclusively. I was a firm believer in the notions that “With a .45 or .40 you only need to hit once,” and “You want to stop an aggressor, not just make him angry.” Besides, would Harry Callahan’s words “Go ahead, make my day” have had the same impact if he had been holding a 9mm? If you’re a .45 or .40 cal person you probably have a similar voice that’s been keeping your hands off the 9mm for protection.
Well, I decided to do a strange thing; I decided to ignore that voice for long enough to listen to the men who actually rely upon their guns to stay alive. SWAT operatives and Police trainers had actually done a considerable amount of research. I took advantage of their research based upon hundreds of autopsies attended, hundreds of interviews with persons who’ve actually been involved in shootings, and studies done where various rounds were fired into animals with similar tissue and bone density to humans. It was more than talk, it was real-life experience, I just needed to listen.
Then I did my own research and found something amazing: A 127 grain Winchester Ranger +P+ fired into bare ballistic gelatin will impact at 1210 feet per second, penetrate 12-14 inches, and expand to right around .70 inches. My favorite .45 ammo, Federal Hydra-shocks, will impact the same gelatin at a slower 800 feet per second, penetrate 12-14 inches and expand to right around .70 inches. Wait a minute, it sounds like these two rounds would pretty much cut the same wound path, right? This information supported what I’d been told by another group that conducted ammo test of pigs: You cannot tell a decent 9mm wound path from a decent .45 wound path.
If the rounds are going to do the same damage, why not use the one that affords me 19 pulls of the trigger without a reload instead of 8? As it turns out, those battlefield reports from ex-military guys using the 9mm in combat actually tell me more about military pistol training than the power of the 9mm. The Army does not give the soldier nearly the pistol training that they do the rifle, so the problem is that many of these reported hits are not in vital areas and that is the problem, not the size of the ammunition itself. On top of that, the standard military 9mm ammo is what you and I use for target practice, NOT self-defense. That’s right, soldiers are issued standard FMJ hardball; now the clouds are really beginning to part!
The fact of the matter is that the 9mm vs .45 debate will rage on because we have science battling tradition, and neither will ever give up. For me, I concluded that it just comes down to a question of ammunition and shot placement. If you use the right 9mm ammo, you’ll get as much tissue damage as you would from a similar .45acp. That means my 9mm, if used correctly, will have the same stopping power as my old .40 cal. In fact, since I now know that I can shoot faster and more accurately with my 9mm, my stopping power is greater with a 9mm and that is what I really care about. But, if you are most comfortable and can perform to your satisfaction with a .40 or.45, then use them. Both are a fine round. For me, I found that I could do better with a 9mm, have more rounds at hand and expect the same results with well-placed shots, so I made the leap.
Maybe it’s just that there is no “better” round in the 9mm vs .45 arenas, and we all just love a good debate. But, one thing we all know for sure is that if you’re ever in a position to have to defend yourself or others you’re going to have seconds to respond and there will be no time for debate. So, get the training necessary to allow you to get your rounds, whatever they are, on target fast. Do that and the caliber of your pistol really won’t matter as much as you think.
Retired after 40 years. Carried the 9mm and the .40 S&W. All points made are valid and yes, “training” is the key word. Enough training with a .22 would present a formidable force. The recoil IS the problem with most .40′s in a combat situation. My advice to young Officers is practice, practice, practice until you know that you’ve “got it”, with whatever you’re assigned to carry. If the option is yours, I’d recommend the 9mm but again, if you can practice with all three, you’ll know what you feel comfortable with and that goes a long way on the confidence scale and that scale is the one that gives you an edge….Best wishes to the good guys !
what a great info, everyone should read this…
I liked your article, but you should have looked more at the shock value caused to the body by a hit from the two rounds. I think getting hit by a cinder block is more effective then a hit from a golf ball. Your group of military people are right regardless of how they are trained on pistols. It does take less shots from a .45 to stop someone. I always thought people that carried 9′s with high capacity mags were doing so to make up for not being able to hit their target such as people that use .45′s. But, like you said, you need to train, and that it the heart of the matter. Most people are lazy and won’t train as they need to. But, the price of ammo lately doesn’t help either.
I like your article I recently traded my 9mm in for a service 40. The question I have is were you using ht +p+ when you did your class how was the recoil of the +p+ compared to the 40 with regular charge?
As a rule I do not train with the Ranger 127 grain +P+, just due to availability. However, because I was doing this blog topic, I did shoot 500 of the Ranger +P+ rounds during one of my handgun classes at TDI. I could tell the difference only in the first few minutes of the exercise, because I was “feeling” for a difference. After those few minutes, I completely forgot I was using different ammo. I didn’t notice any issues at all as I proceeded with those rounds in that class. You bring up an EXCELLENT point, however. We need to be using those rounds we’re carrying for self defense, at least SOME of the time we are training. There are those semi-autos that have “issues” with hollowpoints; one needs to know that BEFORE attempting to use them for self defense. I understand this can be expensive, but think of the potential cost if we do not do this? This is one issue I have with “steel shoots.” I’ve spoken to guys who rely on their competition in steel shoots as their “training,” and then learned they use a pistol and ammo for those shoots that they do NOT carry for self defense. HUGE mistake! Thanks for asking this, I believe it is a VERY wothwhile point.
Great to see that my initial thoughts on ammo have been verified. When selecting my first firearm I opted for a 9mm Glock 19. My choice was based primarily on concealability, capacity, and being able to afford to practice often. I had read alot of debate about .45 vs 9mm but decided that most attackers aren’t going to know what caliber you are packing unless they are shot and live to tell the tale. Over months of shooting and comparing my 9mm to various .40′s and .45′s I also concluded that while a .45 may be more capable of producing a one-shot-stop, I am far more capable of putting two rounds in the chest and one in the head in 3 seconds with my 9mm (which should be more than plenty).
Great read! I’ve owned rifles and shotguns for quite a while now, I’m looking to purchase my first pistol and was torn. I wanted a 9mm for concealed carry and possibly a .45 for in the home. I think I’m opting for several hidden 9mms in the home along with an easy access short barrel 12 guage with 00 buck shot. 9mm ammo is much cheaper and I can stock up on it much cheaper now for when they decide to take our guns away.
Sounds like you are the perfect customer for the Beretta Px4 pistol and Cx4 carbine. They come in 9mm. .40 and .45, and all have interchangeable magazines.
I have a 9mm with Hydra Shok ammo and love it! I would take 14 shots with my M9 over 8 shots
with a 45 that doe’s the SAME damage (12″-14″ deep with a .70″ hole ) any day because, like they said 2 shots in the chest and one in the head, or one shot one kill should do it in the head!
Gun Control means using both hands!!
When they come for your GUNS……..
Give them your Hydra Shok Bullets!!
With proper ammo, the expansion of a .45 will be slightly larger than a 9mm, but that’s assuming both have ideal ammo, and that’s purely gel, because it’s controlled. In bodies it really has more to do with what the round comes in contact with, so it’s really hard to compare the two in any scientific sense. I also think there’s a lot more to the debate. For instance, the momentum and/or kinetic energy can vary greatly dependent on the velocity, and the mass. You also can’t discount extraneous factors to the ability to stop the person in front of you, such as liability for collateral damage, contact negotiations, or standardization (like the military does with NATO over 9mm’s). None of those things have to do with the actual effectiveness for self defense, but are effecting the choice of rounds, as well as what they test to begin with.
I’m not saying you’re wrong. I would feel safe with either, and I think whatever difference there is, it’s small enough that you can swing it in either favor based on ammo, weapon quality, maintenance , etc.
oh, and I forgot to mention, the ammo thing, I 100% agree with you there. The .45′s just don’t have an answer for that one.
The soldiers who used .45 and swore by it and protested the change to 9mm all mentioned that the value of the .45 1911 was that they could hit the enemy anywhere even in the shoulder or arm and they would go down and not pose a threat. In close quarter combat its better to see the guy drop with the first shot anywhere so you can move on to the next threat rather than focus on hitting one threat in the vitals multiple times. The people who swore by the .45 dealt with multiple assailants who if they had to aim at the vitals of each attacker to drop them would not be alive today. You can have all the training in the world but when 4-5 viet-cong sappers are rushing you in the dark with explosive strapped to their chests you just want to drop them fast, it is not important how many shots you get into their vitals. The vets reported even an arm shot could almost rip the attackers arm off…so sloppy, panicked shooting could still get results.
[...] [...]
I have been contemplating a 1911 45 cal for my home security. Your article is tilting me toward a 9mm (92FS) Another advantage of the 9 is that the ammo is less so I would practice more. I am nostalgic about the ACP 1911 because I carried one in the service. But I like DA/SA on the 92FS because I think my wife would be served best with the gun kept with one in the chamber and the safety on. So with DA she could just flip the safety off point it in the direction of the subject and pull the trigger.
[...] [...]
I like going as simple as possible. If I’m getting a semi-auto, it is a 9mm. If I’m going with a revolver, it is a .357 / .38. Rifles are great in .22 or .556 or .308. Shotguns in 12 or 20 ga – that’s it.
Sticking with a few basic calibers makes shopping and range time easy. I know people who swear by their 10mm or .41 mag or 10 or 16 gauge shotgun but if I can’t find the ammo at Wally World I just don’t see the point.
I’m a mechanical engineer and very knowledgeable about physics. 9mm and .45acp rounds vary in their respective groups depending on bullet weight and powder. The energy of the round is going to be a function of its weight multiplied by the square of the velocity, m*v^2. Some 9mm rounds have similar energy ratings to those of .45acp. In this case, both rounds (depending on the design of the bullet, JHP/FMJ) will have very similar ballistics.
A guy that bench presses 500 lbs, but can barely move his arms is not likely to deliver a punch with nearly as much energy as a guy that can bench press 200 lbs and throw a 100mph fastball. I notice that most 9mm rounds deliver between 300 to 500 ft-lbf while most .45acp rounds deliver between 400 to 600 ft-lbf (depending on the design). This means that while some 9mm rounds perform as well as some .45acp rounds, the .45acp is a statistically more effective round.