45 cal as EDC and Personal Defense weapon?
- Thread starter dben002
- Start date
or have hips that get in the way. I love my new 1911, full size SPringfield with several customizations to make it fit me. I shoot it far better than my normal EDC J-Frame but I haven't yet figured out how to conceal the thing or I'd be carrying it all the time.
PS OTOH it's perfectly fine for around the farm where I don't have to worry about concealment at all. I use an offset OWB holster the "Lady Holster" at 4 o'clock for both.
Last edited:
Wouldn't advancements in modern ammunition apply to all calibers?
Kind of like a rising tide lifts all boats?
LimaCharlie
US Veteran
There has been some improvement in bullet technology and powder composition since I started shooting in the 1950s. The improvements apply to all calibers. It still doesn't make a .22 short equal to a 500 S&W. I have always been a go big or stay home guy.
I prefer a 5" government model 1911 because it is what I shoot most accurately under stress. I have several in both .45 ACP and 10 mm that I routinely carry concealed cocked and locked. I also pocket carry a Sig P938 9 mm as a BUG.
I prefer a 5" government model 1911 because it is what I shoot most accurately under stress. I have several in both .45 ACP and 10 mm that I routinely carry concealed cocked and locked. I also pocket carry a Sig P938 9 mm as a BUG.
That's exactly my argument. The 230 grain HST +P is a pretty hard round to be (Not to mention the Win SXT)
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 7,798
- Reaction score
- 7,229
Those who note that where you put the bullet is more important than caliber, design, velocity or phase of the moon are correct. Honest coroners/forensic pathologists/medical examiners can't tell the difference in wound tracks given similar bullets.
I'll also point out that recent research indicates that despite considerable training and experience, fingers get on triggers when they really shouldn't to a surprising degree. The researchers came up with an acronym I can't recall (something like trigger position reference reflex), but they suspect a deep seated need to make sure the trigger hasn't moved and that the trigger finger can still reach it.
Now I know there's a lot of folks out there saying "NOT ME! I don't do those things"! You may well be wrong- review the comment above about highly trained and experienced. This suggests that short, light trigger pulls on serious guns aren't the best choice.
I'll also point out that recent research indicates that despite considerable training and experience, fingers get on triggers when they really shouldn't to a surprising degree. The researchers came up with an acronym I can't recall (something like trigger position reference reflex), but they suspect a deep seated need to make sure the trigger hasn't moved and that the trigger finger can still reach it.
Now I know there's a lot of folks out there saying "NOT ME! I don't do those things"! You may well be wrong- review the comment above about highly trained and experienced. This suggests that short, light trigger pulls on serious guns aren't the best choice.
Rastoff
US Veteran
Anyone who says, "That will never happen to me" is only fooling themselves. Complacency gets us all at one point or another.
I like at least a 4lb trigger on a defensive gun.
Handgunner454
Member
You don't have to push a 9mm faster anymore they open just fine.
The caliber argument is not as great as it once was with the advancements of modern ammunition. Personally, I am a fan of the 1911. I've shot and carried them for many years. Twenty years ago, we could argue over capacity and round counts vs. caliber and "stopping power". Today, the playing field is very equal. Here in California, we have been restricted to magazines with a 10-round maximum capacity. That said, a Glock 9mm will hold 10+1 vs. my 1911 .45 8+1.....now that isn't as hard of a discussion any more.
If I need something smaller and lighter, I grab my alloy framed Colt CCO Lightweight........
Round counts aside, I'll never turn down a short K-Frame either.....
Love the Yosemite grips
shooter1911
Member
Great statement you made there. I'm always amazed at the people who quote advancements in the 9mm, but feel the 40 cal and 45 ACP were frozen in time. HST, Gold Dot, and Ranger T are testament to that technology. I carry HST in all of my 45s. Thanks for sharing your experience.
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2012
- Messages
- 3,349
- Reaction score
- 5,577
This is what I keep saying. Obviously, according to the internet, all of the ballistic experts worked tirelessly to improve the 9mm, while completely ignoring everything else!
Sol-Invictus
Member
- Joined
- May 22, 2016
- Messages
- 227
- Reaction score
- 291
Use what you can shoot confidently and draw quickly. The 45 ACP is certainly adequate as is any handgun........to fight your way to a long gun......The light trigger on the 1911 is a concern based on my human factor research if used for civilian self defense. A longer double action pull has many advantages. It may not be as tacti-cool.
Sent from my SM-T520 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-T520 using Tapatalk
Great round if you're going to carry it all the time..... The smallest .45 acp I have is a lightweight Colt Officer's model and I still keep going back to my J-Frames. In fact, might be purchasing a 340PD because of the light weight.
Well, while I often think to shy away from nibbling on this caliber bait ... I'll offer this, though ...
Whenever one of our folks used to come to me with this question (in my role as firearms instructor), I often pointed out a couple of things to them.
Firstly, I've carried both issued and personally-owned pistols chambered in 9, .40 & .45 ACP, and I couldn't have carried any of them if I didn't think they were more than adequate for the intended tasks.
Secondly, I invited them to try the different caliber they were considering, taking them downrange and letting them try a choice or two of whatever "caliber" they were thinking about switching to for duty or off-duty usage.
That little bit of self demonstration more often than not opened their eyes to things they might not have been considering, like whether a heavier recoiling caliber might work for them? Or, if they were still interested in going to a heavier caliber, were they interested in working to increase their skills to accurately and effectively use it?
Running someone through some normal drills (for familiarization), and then perhaps some faster paced and more demanding drills (to let them self-assess their ability to run the new caliber/gun against their existing one), better let them decide if changing calibers was a decision they really wanted to make.
Not everyone wants to put in the work that may be needed to run a harder recoiling gun, especially at speed and in demanding conditions.
As a matter of fact, the last couple of times we've allowed people to "pre-select" their new duty weapons (meaning caliber), we've seen a lot of folks express a desire to carry a .45 (last estimate I was told was the .45 was selected close to 70% of the time). Then, of course, once the guns were actually being fired for transition & quals courses, people were wanting to change over to lesser recoiling calibers (like 9's).
Don't get me wrong. I'm a long time owner and shooter of .45 ACP. I've always liked the low-power, but big-bore ACP round.
I've carried it as issued and personally-owned off-duty choices.
It's just that I've also found the 9mm and the .40 S&W to be fine for my use in the same circumstances.
For me ... learning to run and master the .40 made it much easier to run my 9's and .45's. The better I became with my .40's (issued and personally-owned), the better I shot my 9's & .45's
Before I started to acclimate myself to the .40, I found it easier to shoot my 9's after spending time shooting my .45's ... but range time using my 9's didn't really seem to help me improve shooting my .45's.
Nowadays, shooting my .40's a lot seems to make me a better shooter of both 9 & .45 ... and I've invested so much time shooting my .40's that I often have trouble distinguishing their felt recoil and muzzle whip from shooting my 9's. I couldn't say that 10 years ago. Back then the .40's felt like they had more snap & muzzle whip. (Well, having access to an agency's ammunition inventory, as an instructor, made everything a lot easier.
)
My .45's? Just a nice controllable push/shove and slower muzzle whip.
I tell people to suit themselves ... but remember that the "proof" of the appropriateness of their choice is still often found downrange, using a timer and considering the arrangement of holes in the intended threat targets.
Choose wisely ... for yourself. If you're willing to fool yourself about your ability to controllably and effectively run any particular caliber? You won't have to look far to find someone to blame.
Whenever one of our folks used to come to me with this question (in my role as firearms instructor), I often pointed out a couple of things to them.
Firstly, I've carried both issued and personally-owned pistols chambered in 9, .40 & .45 ACP, and I couldn't have carried any of them if I didn't think they were more than adequate for the intended tasks.
Secondly, I invited them to try the different caliber they were considering, taking them downrange and letting them try a choice or two of whatever "caliber" they were thinking about switching to for duty or off-duty usage.
That little bit of self demonstration more often than not opened their eyes to things they might not have been considering, like whether a heavier recoiling caliber might work for them? Or, if they were still interested in going to a heavier caliber, were they interested in working to increase their skills to accurately and effectively use it?
Running someone through some normal drills (for familiarization), and then perhaps some faster paced and more demanding drills (to let them self-assess their ability to run the new caliber/gun against their existing one), better let them decide if changing calibers was a decision they really wanted to make.
Not everyone wants to put in the work that may be needed to run a harder recoiling gun, especially at speed and in demanding conditions.
As a matter of fact, the last couple of times we've allowed people to "pre-select" their new duty weapons (meaning caliber), we've seen a lot of folks express a desire to carry a .45 (last estimate I was told was the .45 was selected close to 70% of the time). Then, of course, once the guns were actually being fired for transition & quals courses, people were wanting to change over to lesser recoiling calibers (like 9's).
Don't get me wrong. I'm a long time owner and shooter of .45 ACP. I've always liked the low-power, but big-bore ACP round.
I've carried it as issued and personally-owned off-duty choices.
It's just that I've also found the 9mm and the .40 S&W to be fine for my use in the same circumstances.
For me ... learning to run and master the .40 made it much easier to run my 9's and .45's. The better I became with my .40's (issued and personally-owned), the better I shot my 9's & .45's
Before I started to acclimate myself to the .40, I found it easier to shoot my 9's after spending time shooting my .45's ... but range time using my 9's didn't really seem to help me improve shooting my .45's.
Nowadays, shooting my .40's a lot seems to make me a better shooter of both 9 & .45 ... and I've invested so much time shooting my .40's that I often have trouble distinguishing their felt recoil and muzzle whip from shooting my 9's. I couldn't say that 10 years ago. Back then the .40's felt like they had more snap & muzzle whip. (Well, having access to an agency's ammunition inventory, as an instructor, made everything a lot easier.
)My .45's? Just a nice controllable push/shove and slower muzzle whip.
I tell people to suit themselves ... but remember that the "proof" of the appropriateness of their choice is still often found downrange, using a timer and considering the arrangement of holes in the intended threat targets.
Choose wisely ... for yourself. If you're willing to fool yourself about your ability to controllably and effectively run any particular caliber? You won't have to look far to find someone to blame.
Fastbolt:
Well thought out thesis. I think that you hit on some important issues that many folks overlook. There are many different body types and strength ranges, and the ability to practice adequately is really important. and you are right about having access to the department ammo supply!
Best Regards, Les
Well thought out thesis. I think that you hit on some important issues that many folks overlook. There are many different body types and strength ranges, and the ability to practice adequately is really important. and you are right about having access to the department ammo supply!
Best Regards, Les
Similar threads
