9mm vs 45. M&P 2.0
- Thread starter MP1518
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
I daily carry my S&W M&P45. The recoil is not as sharp as a 1911 pistol.
I think the 45 has more stopping power than the 9mm. Why shoot as adversary multiple times when one 45 round will put them down no matter where you hit them!
I think the 45 has more stopping power than the 9mm. Why shoot as adversary multiple times when one 45 round will put them down no matter where you hit them!
Fastbolt
Member
Which caliber do you prefer to shoot, 9 or .45?
When I was ordering my full-size M&P, I went with the M&P 45 instead of the .40 or 9. Suit yourself.
If you're a capacity aficionado, the 9 fills the bill ... but if you're a caliber aficionado, then .45 might float your boat.
Ammunition-wise, my choices are T-Series, Golden Sabre or HST, in no particular order. Whatever is most easily at hand. I've haven't used Gold Dot for some years because it's become more costly than the others, and has been less easily available in my area.
I seldom carry my full-size M&P 45 anymore, simply because of its size. More often than not, if I decide to carry a belt gun (versus a pocket-holstered retirement weapon), I usually go with one of my compact or subcompact 9's or .40's, with my smaller .45's being in 3rd place (simply due to size/weight).
Suit yourself. It might pay for you to try and find representative samples of each that may interest you, so you can see how you like them during live-fire on a range.
When I was ordering my full-size M&P, I went with the M&P 45 instead of the .40 or 9. Suit yourself.
If you're a capacity aficionado, the 9 fills the bill ... but if you're a caliber aficionado, then .45 might float your boat.
Ammunition-wise, my choices are T-Series, Golden Sabre or HST, in no particular order. Whatever is most easily at hand. I've haven't used Gold Dot for some years because it's become more costly than the others, and has been less easily available in my area.
I seldom carry my full-size M&P 45 anymore, simply because of its size. More often than not, if I decide to carry a belt gun (versus a pocket-holstered retirement weapon), I usually go with one of my compact or subcompact 9's or .40's, with my smaller .45's being in 3rd place (simply due to size/weight).
Suit yourself. It might pay for you to try and find representative samples of each that may interest you, so you can see how you like them during live-fire on a range.
Fastbolt
Member
Oh yeah, although you didn't ask ...
The last issued weapon I carried (post-retirement, in my later reserve capacity) was a late production M&P 40 (original model). Same production period as those chosen by the CHP here, even though the 2.0 models were coming online and were offered to them. I was told they went with the original model because it had been in-production for 10 years by that point, and had benefited from 10 years of refinement. I was pleasantly surprised by it, all the way around.
It shot more like a 9 than a .40, and it was a tack-driver with the duty ammo we were carrying at that time, which as I recall was 180gr HST, although we also had some 180gr RA40T (T-Series) left in inventory. Nice gun.
The last issued weapon I carried (post-retirement, in my later reserve capacity) was a late production M&P 40 (original model). Same production period as those chosen by the CHP here, even though the 2.0 models were coming online and were offered to them. I was told they went with the original model because it had been in-production for 10 years by that point, and had benefited from 10 years of refinement. I was pleasantly surprised by it, all the way around.
It shot more like a 9 than a .40, and it was a tack-driver with the duty ammo we were carrying at that time, which as I recall was 180gr HST, although we also had some 180gr RA40T (T-Series) left in inventory. Nice gun.
I would choose the 9mm. Easier to shoot and adequate with a well placed hit.
Since your ability to incapacitate an attacker depends upon where you put the bullet rather than any bullet characteristic, go with what you shoot best.
If 9 is your choice, I'd go with 124 gr Gold Dot or HST rather than 147. But, it's your potential gunfight.
If those are your potential duty gun choices, go to Police One and read about the guy who carried 147 total rounds of 9mm after an incident where he was using a .45. BTW, he had excellent shot placement. The incident was several years ago. IIRC, Sgt. Tim Gramin.
If 9 is your choice, I'd go with 124 gr Gold Dot or HST rather than 147. But, it's your potential gunfight.
If those are your potential duty gun choices, go to Police One and read about the guy who carried 147 total rounds of 9mm after an incident where he was using a .45. BTW, he had excellent shot placement. The incident was several years ago. IIRC, Sgt. Tim Gramin.
Last edited:
I'd go with the 45. I like the 45 and being a civilian now I don't feel the need for 17 rounds. But then I felt fine with 6 and then 7 when still working.
Either one would be fine. I prefer .45 caliber, in general, but the size of the grip of the M&P9 does feel better to me, and it is a slightly smaller gun, overall. It would be a hard choice, but I guess the .45 might prevail.
I agree that the M&P45 is a soft recoiling pistol. In the 9mm pistol, I like the model with the 5-inch barrel and find it easier to shoot well than the standard model.
I agree that the M&P45 is a soft recoiling pistol. In the 9mm pistol, I like the model with the 5-inch barrel and find it easier to shoot well than the standard model.
Are you carrying concealed or open, what is the weight of each when fully loaded. not easy carrying a heavy gun all day.
One shot with a 45 no matter where you hit them, not 100% true.
The thugs are changing their M.O. they hang together in groups, sometimes big groups. One might need a few extra rounds.
A lot to think about when betting your life on your decisions.
I carry a 9mm its smaller and lighter so it comes with me instead of staying home, but you can bet its a 45 for my bedside gun.
One shot with a 45 no matter where you hit them, not 100% true.
The thugs are changing their M.O. they hang together in groups, sometimes big groups. One might need a few extra rounds.
A lot to think about when betting your life on your decisions.
I carry a 9mm its smaller and lighter so it comes with me instead of staying home, but you can bet its a 45 for my bedside gun.
imakmst
Member
Go with the 45 since they don't make a 46
Well Armed
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,108
- Reaction score
- 1,364
There is no such thing as "knock down power" with handgun rounds. Handgun rounds simple poke holes. Foot pounds, muzzle energy, etc. at low handgun speeds do anything to stop a threat despite the internet folklore that claims otherwise. That's just the result of uneducated on the topic, regurgitating what they heard other uneducated saying. A hit to a vital with a 9mm or 45acp will equally stop a threat. A hit but miss to a vital (arm, buttocks, hand, etc) will equally not kill or necessarily stop a threat unless they bleed out significantly several minutes to hours later. No one is going to be more dead with a 45acp vs. 9mm to the heart, head, lungs, etc.... It's all about shot placement and penetration, and it's has nothing to do with caliber.
Other members have made the false claim and assumption that they felt recoil will be less with 45acp. The facts are that the 45acp 230HST will have more muzzle energy than the 9mm 147HST.
Next, others have claimed the 45 will be noticeably heavier. The fact is thar the loaded and unloaded weights are within 3 oz of each other. You're not going to notice that on the belt.
My personal opinion? I'd go with 9mm. The ammo will be much cheaper. You get almost twice as many rounds in a smaller package. You get better intermediate barrier penetration. I don't see any benefits of going with 45acp or 9mm.
As another member mentioned, the 124gr HST will perform better or very similar to the 147gr. I would go with the 124 grain if it were me.
Last edited:
gwpercle
Member
I tend to go with the " Bigger is Better" concept .
Maybe not correct in every instance ... but three out of four ain't bad .
I will take the 45 acp every time .
Reading too much Elmer Keith skews your mindset .
Gary
Maybe not correct in every instance ... but three out of four ain't bad .
I will take the 45 acp every time .
Reading too much Elmer Keith skews your mindset .
Gary
pantannojack
US Veteran
In the western cowboy days were there discussions of weather to use 38 cal or 45 Colt? Did Wild Bill carry 36 cal? When I train I never imagine shooting or killing someone. I only work on performing with the tool. The old "This my rifle, there are many like it but this one is mine..." prayer consoles me sufficiently.
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
- Messages
- 19,659
- Reaction score
- 31,273
Back in the day, 10 rounds of 45 acp would solve pretty much any situation. With gangs and other groups roaming the streets, 17 rounds seems much more comforting. 9mm has come a long long way over the past decade and it is now a serious cartridge. If the two guns you described above are your only choices, I'd pick the 9mm. If you have another choice and are not a uniformed LEO, one of the 9mm Micro pistols would be a lot better IMO. 10+ 1, 11 + 1 and 12 + 1 are readily available. Half the weight, half the size and half bulk and most have great sights and are quite reliable. For uniformed LEO's who are carrying OWB exposed on a duty belt, the size and weight is a bit less important.
Well Armed
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,108
- Reaction score
- 1,364
Both 9mm and 45acp will equally stop a threat via open shot. When there's car doors, windshields, or other objects in the way, 45acp may very well not make it to it's intended target and still penetrate well.
I own and shoot both. Out of the same size platform a .45 will make a steel plate move a great deal more than a 9 will-that’s energy. In an emergency the more energy on target the better. That said I typically carry a subcompact 9 or a .38 J frame-for the simple reason they’re easier to carry concealed. At home it’s a .45 (and a 12 bore��
. I find the recoil impulse of a .45 o be easier for ME than a 9. The .45 feels like a shove while the nine has a “snap”. YMMV
. I find the recoil impulse of a .45 o be easier for ME than a 9. The .45 feels like a shove while the nine has a “snap”. YMMVIvan the Butcher
Member
I own M&P 9c and have the necessary accessories for carry. But 40 years of 45 carry makes me go with the "Bigger is Gooder" mentality.
In single stacks, 9 or 10 9mm's don't fill the shortcomings of 7 or 8 45's. Double stacks don't do that much better.
Ivan
In single stacks, 9 or 10 9mm's don't fill the shortcomings of 7 or 8 45's. Double stacks don't do that much better.
Ivan
Well Armed
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,108
- Reaction score
- 1,364
How does more energy equate to more damage? There is more energy at the muzzle, but more energy is being used and released in order to push the larger/heaveir round. The extra energy used to push the larger and heavier round is only going to help it penetrate further, but it's NOT going to cause more damage to the target otherwise. 9mm has less energy, but it takes less energy to push 9mm bullet 16" into a target. 45 has more energy and that energy is simply used to help overcome the resistance of pushing a slightly bigger and heavier bullet 16". Again, the energy isn't going to necessarily cause more damage especially with the slow moving 45 ACP. It's the penetration and the bullet piercing vitals that will incapacitate a human being. As long as there's enough energy to get the bullet to it's destination is what matters most.
The smaller 9mm will be able to penetrate further and expand more reliablely with it's energy vs the bigger 45acp even those the 45acp has more energy. That's because the 45acp expends it's energy at a faster rate than 9mm.
Last edited:
