Frame Evolution

[Redacted]

From one of the last all steel framed S&W 645's to the Polymer Glock switch-over. One big difference...ammo capacity. Yes the .45 ACP has more "stopping power." But with 17+1 on tap of 9mm hydroshock hollow-points...does it really matter? I don't know about you, but 17+1 sure feels a lot better in my palms. This would be great for the LEO's out there with multiple assailants calls. I voted for both of them, all though I opted for the 645 instead of 1911. I think it was a smart decision, wouldn't you agree?
If you had both in your squad car, the 645 could be an emergency back up if you cant reach that rifle in time. Or have to run quick after an assailant heading in tight quarters.

 

[Texas Star]

Well, neither of the above, where I live. If I was a cop here, I'd be carrying a SIG-Sauer in any of several approved models. It'd probably be a P-226 in .357 SIG. (No .45 is approved.)

But if the issue 9mm load wasn't a subsonic 147 grain, I'd probably carry a 9mm, if I had the option of the Speer Gold Dot 124 grain HST load that I keep in my Beretta M-92FS.

BTW, this "hydroshock" ammo you mention is a copyrighted name. "Hydra-Shok" is registered to Federal Ctg. Corp, and it should be be spelled right and capitalized. I load some of their ammo in my revolvers.

As for trying to reach a backup handgun in a patrol car, I doubt that happens much. May even be against regs on most forces. If you can reach your car, you can probably reach the shotgun in the dash or the rifle in the trunk.

How do others with police service feel about the OP's comments? I'm curious. Maybe a rural deputy might keep a spare handgun in the car, although it's subject to theft when he's out of the vehicle. Backup pistols are usually small, and hidden on the person.

A spare handgun in the trunk is another matter, and I know that some have carried them there. When Skeeter Skelton was a US Customs agent, he often carried a Walther PP .380, with a S&W M-19 .357 in a Border Patrol rig in his trunk. Also sometimes stashed a Thompson SMG there. The .357 was in case he was involved in a rural pursuit or search or if he knew in advance that he might get into a gunfight. The .380 let him work low profile in plain clothes.

 

[williamlayton]

Very good discussion----also----very opinionated result that will vary.
STI makes and markets a wide variety of such weapons.
I realy do not care for the way a Glock or wide body feels in my hand so I avoid them--way too bulky and square.
That said, capacity is very important--or availability to reload very quickly.
While I do carry a revolver on some ocasions, for the point of this discussion, they are incapable of either of the desired results + they are rather bulky and hard to conceal for those that are speaking from a self-defense point of view.
Frames are rather cotroversial---old school steel to the modern frames of various materials.
I think there are two views on caliber and they both are good and lacking in some/various ways.
.45 has been proven to be the best arguement stopper that has been developed for a weapon that is capacity sufficient. It can be had in wide bodies but is most efficent to be reloaded quickly.
There have been calibers developed for self-defense in variations of the 9MM. The .357 mag has long been a good choice for whallop and penetration--it has been marketed in a semi, though somewhat unsuccsefully.
Hollow points and wad cutters are some of the early attempts to provide more whallop for the 9MM/.38 and its variations.
From my experience, these may be somewhat problimatic in a semi platform (my Sigs are the exception to this rule,out of the box) but can be overcome with great results when a good Smith gets his hands on a 1911 configuration gun.
Some of the better options for .38 and 9MM in a semi are .38super and 9X23.
personally---I feel very comfortable with my carry in a 1911 platform with either .45, .38super or 9x23--and-- at least one reload.
The chance of a prolonged firefight are practically nil--but there is always Murphy.
Blessings

 

[Redacted]

BTW, this "hydroshock" ammo you mention is a copyrighted name. "Hydra-Shok" is registered to Federal Ctg. Corp, and it should be be spelled right and capitalized. I load some of their ammo in my revolvers.

Thanks for clearing that up, I bought some but have never used them before. Im pretty sure they would feed reliably in the Glock, just haven't gotten around to testing it yet. Little buggers are expensive, im not really in a hurry to shoot them just yet. Mine are the 135 grain:

 

[Cyrano]

Redacted: If you're carrying the Hydra-Shoks, it'sa very good idea to test them in the using gun. I had a a real 'shok' once when I went through a lot of trouble to get some of the then brand-new Corbons for my Glock 17. It wouldn't feed them through either magazine! The time to find that out is not when you're in a gunfight.

I gave them to a friend who had a S&W 39; they worked just fine in it They also worked just fine in another Glock 17 I had later. But my first Glock 17 sure would gag on them.