National Gun Forum banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello!

Just made an account to ask some people's opinion, since it's been bothering me for a while now.

In short, this is what I would like to "decide", if it's even possible. I would like to know whether or not I should stay with my current pistol. Before I get to the story, I'm going to have to apologize for the post being quite long, but it's necessary to explain it thoroughly.

Here's the deal - the pistol that I currently own is a Sig Sauer 1911 TacOps. A nice gun, don't really have anything bad to say about it, most of it hand fit, reliable etc...
My thoughts have been... will it pay off to have a .45 caliber over a 9 mm? And before you answer, here are some things to consider.

First and foremost, believe it or not, but in the country that I live in, hollow-point ammo is completely illegal in civil use, regardless of it being for self defence or training, it's illegal, period. So in a sense, this is my first question. Will it benefit to have a .45 FMJ over a 9 mm FMJ in a self defence situation? I can't comment much on the ballistics, sure, the .45 will make a bigger hole but will not penetrate as much as a 9 mm (or maybe it will, since it's an FMJ?). What kind of difference in damage are we talking about if both are FMJs?

Secondly, don't suggest me to buy a second gun, having one for home defence and another one for CC. I do not need two guns, I prefer having just one that I can carry at all times, the other one would be gathering dust most of the time, so it would be a waste of money.

I probably can't really express clearly what I mean(English is not my native, sorry), but my main problem is, whether a .45 caliber gun will benefit me more than a 9 mm (considering those factors that I named above).

To those who are willing to share opinions - think about it a bit before you answer, don't go off saying but a 9 mm to get more rounds or stay with .45 since it has more stopping power etc etc. There are so many things to take into account.

One more important thing: The choice is between a 1911 and a Glock 19. Don't suggest other pistols, I have done some research about many others and they are just not my cup of tea for various reasons. Also, don't suggest an FN-45 instead of a 1911 to get both ammo capacity and stopping power (it's a good gun, no doubt, but...) guns are not very common here, plus I haven't seen any on sale in this country either.

I chose the 1911 because of it's slimness (easier to carry IWB), bigger caliber (I know 9 mm is pretty much as effective as a 45 with good hollow points, but as I mentioned above, no hollowpoints for me), it looks good and I'm pretty accurate with it.
My first choice was actually a glock 19 since I wasn't financially willing to pay 1500 € for a gun, but things changed and I took it.

Glock, as you know it, well, a glock is a glock, the Toyota of the gun world, reliable, lightweight and so on. But the caliber (especially in the FMJ) kinda left me doubting it, so I went with the 1911.

The main thing I want to know about is the ballistics of the .45 vs 9 mm. The rest is not very important, the debate will never end between capacity and stopping power etc. I need some facts, so anyone who is knowledgeable and willing to share ideas is appreciated.

Thanks for reading.

TM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,316 Posts
You don't say which country, but the ban on JHP sounds like eurozone. Not all that relevant. My opinion, stick with what you've got. The difference between 9mm and .45 in the real world isn't a real driver. Shot placement is equally if not more important. Putting a bigger hole in a non critical spot doesn't help as much as putting a smaller hole right where it's needed. So spend the extra money on range time and ammo.

I remember seeing the phrase "beware a man that only owns one gun. He probably knows how to use it"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 · (Edited)
You don't say which country, but the ban on JHP sounds like eurozone. Not all that relevant. My opinion, stick with what you've got. The difference between 9mm and .45 in the real world isn't a real driver. Shot placement is equally if not more important. Putting a bigger hole in a non critical spot doesn't help as much as putting a smaller hole right where it's needed. So spend the extra money on range time and ammo.

I remember seeing the phrase "beware a man that only owns one gun. He probably knows how to use it"

Hi!

The country is indeed in Europe. Estonia, if it rings any bells.

I agree that the shot placement is everything, but since you said that the difference between those two calibers in FMJ is minimal then doesn't the 9 mm outperform the .45? Not with the ballistics, but with the ammo capacity and being able to have a lighter pistol and so on? I know I asked not to mention capacity and other factors, but if we have established that the ballistical differences are minimal, then isn't it worth to "upgrade" to the 9 mm? You know, to have bigger capacity in order to have a better chance to have that CNS hit etc? I know you can carry an extra mag with a 1911 too, but still, what's your opinion? Do you think the extra ammo and smaller size and weight is worth it to switch? Or would you stay with it?

As a sidenote, I would say that our police here is carrying Makarovs (8 rounds I think it is?) and they don't really use them, maybe 20 or more warning shots a year, it seems it is enough for them. Not many guns in this country as I mentioned, let alone gunfights, so the chances of needing a lot of ammo is way less than needing a gun at all. But then again, who knows...

I'd like to hear more of your thoughts if it's okay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,403 Posts
Forget the Glock. The 1911 platform is available in a wide variety of calibers - your favorites of .45ACP or 9mmx19 are included. As you mentioned, stopping power and capacity are meaningless to me. FMJ bullets in both calibers have accounted for countless lives. Both work just fine. If the weapon is to be carried concealed, concealability is the first consideration. After solving the wardrobe-weapon interface, the next step is weapon and you interface. Which caliber do you shoot best with? Which are you most confident, effective, comfortable and happy with? Nobody here can advise you about those aspects of your dilemma - only you can speak for you. Relax - either caliber is an excellent choice, you can't go wrong between those two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,316 Posts
Yes, Estonia rings a bell. One of my former jobs involved software destined for Tallinn. There's a few other connections to that part of the world as well... foreign exchange students, touristy stuff, an interest in the Viking era and so on.

That also explains something that puzzled me. In parts of Europe, I've heard that "military" calibers are prohibited to civilians. Both 9mm and .45 are considered military. Apparently Estonia does not have that quaint law?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Forget the Glock. The 1911 platform is available in a wide variety of calibers - your favorites of .45ACP or 9mmx19 are included. As you mentioned, stopping power and capacity are meaningless to me. FMJ bullets in both calibers have accounted for countless lives. Both work just fine. If the weapon is to be carried concealed, concealability is the first consideration. After solving the wardrobe-weapon interface, the next step is weapon and you interface. Which caliber do you shoot best with? Which are you most confident, effective, comfortable and happy with? Nobody here can advise you about those aspects of your dilemma - only you can speak for you. Relax - either caliber is an excellent choice, you can't go wrong between those two.
Hi!

I've heard that the 9 mm 1911s have some reliability problems. If I have a 1911, then it better be in its true form - 45 ACP. No point in having a 9mm 1911, there are better choices for 9mm. But otherwise, 9mm was in my mind because if assuming that stopping power is nearly identical in FMJ, doesn't then the capacity and other factors make it worth the upgrade.
I haven't been able to try to carry a glock IWB. 1911 is very thin gun, 23 mm and a glock 19 is like 30 mm, I think it's quite a lot actually, if you carry it IWB.
As far as carrying the 1911 is, it's not that bad, the weight is nothing, at work I completely forget that I wear it, it's just that its size is what sometimes makes it unconfortable. Especially if you have to do some acrobatic movements so to speak, like bend when lifting objects and so on. Regular walking on the street is not a problem, just have to carry it on 7-9 o'clock (leftie). Appendix carry is impossible, especially when driving, otherwise it's okay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
Yes, Estonia rings a bell. One of my former jobs involved software destined for Tallinn. There's a few other connections to that part of the world as well... foreign exchange students, touristy stuff, an interest in the Viking era and so on.

That also explains something that puzzled me. In parts of Europe, I've heard that "military" calibers are prohibited to civilians. Both 9mm and .45 are considered military. Apparently Estonia does not have that quaint law?
I see, glad knowing foreigners still come here.

Is that true about the military calibers? So if let's say 9 and .45 are banned to civilians in some parts, then what do they use for self defence there anyway? .22 LR's? Never heard of it, but might be true, wouldn't be surprised.

In Estonia, both calibers are allowed though. Not allowed (for civilians) are the cartridges that contain harmful chemicals, armor piercing rounds, explosive rounds, hollow points. I'm not sure about the tracer rounds, might be them too, but don't quote me on that.

For self defence, you can have pretty much any type of weapon, a pistol, a rifle, a shotgun and so on. But in public areas it has to be concealed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
388 Posts
If you're choosing between the 1911 and the glock 19 and you haven't shot the 19 you will be in for a surprise.. The grip is different and there is a world of difference between the 2 triggers. Also if you are used to the safety on the 1911 you will not have it on the glock. Are you willing to stick a loaded pistol with one in the chamber and no safety in your pants? You should shoot both before you decide anything but if you are happy with the 1911 then the glock wil be the one that gets dusty...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,316 Posts
Is that true about the military calibers? So if let's say 9 and .45 are banned to civilians in some parts, then what do they use for self defence there anyway? .22 LR's? Never heard of it, but might be true, wouldn't be surprised.]
It was my understanding that the .40 (10mm) round was the work around for that restriction. I have never bought into the notion of the Euro folks banning hollow points. I know they consider them "hunting" ammo where the purpose is to put the game animal down and dead as fast, and hence humanely as possible. What I've never understood is why I shouldn't put the bad guy trying to kill me down as fast and humanely as possible. Why treat the criminal worse than you would a deer?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
If you're choosing between the 1911 and the glock 19 and you haven't shot the 19 you will be in for a surprise.. The grip is different and there is a world of difference between the 2 triggers. Also if you are used to the safety on the 1911 you will not have it on the glock. Are you willing to stick a loaded pistol with one in the chamber and no safety in your pants? You should shoot both before you decide anything but if you are happy with the 1911 then the glock wil be the one that gets dusty...
I have shot both extensively, started with the Glock, just haven't carried Glock in my pants. Tried some other guns too, like Sig's P226, Makarov and few others. I have experience with the Glock's grip and trigger. Didn't like the sight placement though, had to aim down a bit, I prefer the center mass aim or whatever it's called which my 1911 has. I know you can change sight placement but it was at the range, so...

As far as the safety goes, one thing I already mentioned, that hollow points are not allowed in this ridiculous country, but lo and behold, legally speaking, when publicly carring, there can be no round in the chamber, unless it is a revolver, where the tumbler is considered as the round's chamber...

I've heard how people say that 1911 in condition 1 (cocked and locked) is dangerous, I disagree, I would claim that even condition zero on a 1911 is safer than a glock ready to fire is. I would back up my claim with the fact that even when you have a round in the chamber on a 1911 and thumb safety off, you still have the grip safety which is way further away from the trigger. Meaning it is easier to accidentally disegage the Glock's safe action trigger since the safety is right on the trigger, than it is for the 1911 to go off on it's own. A piece of thread might still catch a Glock's safety lever and pull the trigger but it takes quite some doing to get a 1911 off. But that's just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
It was my understanding that the .40 (10mm) round was the work around for that restriction. I have never bought into the notion of the Euro folks banning hollow points. I know they consider them "hunting" ammo where the purpose is to put the game animal down and dead as fast, and hence humanely as possible. What I've never understood is why I shouldn't put the bad guy trying to kill me down as fast and humanely as possible. Why treat the criminal worse than you would a deer?
I see. Well, if my memory serves me, then hollow points are prohibited even for hunting. They are illegal in civil use, so I assume it includes hunters too.

One thing is exactly what you said - why not have as effective ammo as possible for self defence, that is hollow points, but the other thing is, it's way safer ammo too. FMJs are more prone to ricochet and overpenetrate. Don't know why they banned it here...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,676 Posts
I chose the 1911 because of it's slimness (easier to carry IWB), bigger caliber (I know 9 mm is pretty much as effective as a 45 with good hollow points, but as I mentioned above, no hollowpoints for me), it looks good and I'm pretty accurate with it.
i believe the above statement probably answers most of what works for you...........



The main thing I want to know about is the ballistics of the .45 vs 9 mm. The rest is not very important, the debate will never end between capacity and stopping power etc. I need some facts, so anyone who is knowledgeable and willing to share ideas is appreciated.
i would not pay a whole lot of attention to what is on paper.... ballistic wise in this case You are going to have various arguments about velocity vs weight vs caliber in any caliber that will have its ballistic champions. Add to the fact that we are talking FMJ only and for me the only viable choice would be the 45.

On another side note, the U.S. Military along with various war stories from the past and present might shed some light on this subject. As far as i know in the vast majority of cases, the 45 is the preferred round due to its excellent actual history in combat. While the 9mm.....while effective, has not the same colorful reputation for getting the job done with FMJ as the 45 does. The 9mm advantage rests with capacity and recoil management to supplement where it is lacking compared to the 45.

I know you do not want to discuss the capacity argument and remove capacity from consideration......but level the playing field for one moment.....ask this question to yourself. Using only FMJ ammunition, would you chose a Glock 9mm that only had a capacity of 8 rounds......or would you chose that 1911 in 45 that had a capacity of 8 rounds?.......ballistics be damned in this case.....i will take the 45.....especially if it is offered in a top of the line 1911 like what you have and especially if i am already comfortable with the system and the method of carry.

Plus i am not a fan of the glock passive safety system......and would be more paranoid about it using IWB carry.
 

·
Awesome
Joined
·
800 Posts
Ever considered a good Revolver? A .357 Mag loaded with Semi Wadcutters is quite formidable on most things two legged and four.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
79 Posts
Concealed carry is 99.9% carry and .1% shooting at best. Have something that you can carry concealed or open and is not too heavy or bulky, so that you will carry it. There are many small 9mm's out there now. They are most sufficient for self defense. I have in the past, used 9mm ball ammo with success. I am still here.

I do not like the Glock or any of that "safe trigger" ilk. Give me a double action only trigger and that is fine. I have a Ruger LC9 which is safe and shoots quite well. It is concealable and easy to shoot.

Personally I think the 1911 is moribund and not really the best idea for most people to carry; especially loaded and cocked. Remember, the military did not allow cocked and locked carry. Too much can go wrong. If one is carrying for protection, carry something that will work but that is comfortable and safe. Good luck!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,399 Posts
I have to agree with the "stick with what you already have".

Here's why. Full metal jacket bullets penetrate farther than hollow-points.

Now, what we are looking at here, between the 9mm, and the 45ACP, is size and

power, but it's deceptive. If you reload, you know the 45ACP takes @5.3 grains

of powder, approximately, on average. The 9mm takes almost as much [email protected] to 4.7 grains

powder, approximately, on average. So the 9mm bullet has about half the surface area, with a much higher

proportion of powder to it's bullet size and weight. This is going to cause a smaller hole in the bad guy, then

by over penetration, do far more damage to unintended things in the backdrop of your self defense shooting field.


The 45ACP is going to be much more effective in placing the power of the round in the intended place.

And stick with the pistol you have, too. After handling a Sig's quality, IMHO, you would probably find Glock a big

disappointment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
I will offer my personal thought. One thought you might want to think about is ammunition availability. I don't know what is available locally as to .45acp or 9MM, or how easy it is to get in your country now or in the future. As 9MM is the universal round for NATO and would be easier to find if the world went up side down. On the other hand you already own the Sig in .45acp, why spend the cash to buy another firearm and sell the one you have at a loss. My thought from my way of thinking, is as you can is start buying ammo and setting is aside for the rainy day that will come sooner than later. I don't know if you are allowed, but I would stockpile several thousand rounds in a safe place and rotate your stockpile as you can.

Just a thought.
 

·
Grand Imperial Poobah
Joined
·
24,361 Posts
I'm on the "stick with what you have" side of the fence. A FMJ 9mm will have more penetration, but you'll also have a greater chance of a bullet going through and through the perpetrator and traveling on to damage something or someone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: therewolf

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
i believe the above statement probably answers most of what works for you...........





i would not pay a whole lot of attention to what is on paper.... ballistic wise in this case You are going to have various arguments about velocity vs weight vs caliber in any caliber that will have its ballistic champions. Add to the fact that we are talking FMJ only and for me the only viable choice would be the 45.

On another side note, the U.S. Military along with various war stories from the past and present might shed some light on this subject. As far as i know in the vast majority of cases, the 45 is the preferred round due to its excellent actual history in combat. While the 9mm.....while effective, has not the same colorful reputation for getting the job done with FMJ as the 45 does. The 9mm advantage rests with capacity and recoil management to supplement where it is lacking compared to the 45.

I know you do not want to discuss the capacity argument and remove capacity from consideration......but level the playing field for one moment.....ask this question to yourself. Using only FMJ ammunition, would you chose a Glock 9mm that only had a capacity of 8 rounds......or would you chose that 1911 in 45 that had a capacity of 8 rounds?.......ballistics be damned in this case.....i will take the 45.....especially if it is offered in a top of the line 1911 like what you have and especially if i am already comfortable with the system and the method of carry.

Plus i am not a fan of the glock passive safety system......and would be more paranoid about it using IWB carry.
I agree with you on that, I would rather go for a 45 8 rounds than 9mm 8 rounds. The quality of the gun is indeed good, haven't had any malfunctions yet, not even feeding/extracting problems. I've heard about few stories from 1911 era, how some guy shot down a Zero (can't really say it was due to caliber, just had to penetrate a layer of glass), and the second story which is a bit more into the caliber stuff, how they tested it on different animals and (dead) humans and concluded that this is the smallest caliber that is effective enough (no hollow points were around at that time of history). And also about the Moro tribesmen, but you all probably know that already...

Anyway, I think I'm getting a clearer picture now and I can safely say I'm in better hands with the 1911 than I would be with the Glock. Quoting therewolf whom I agree with that 9 mm has more overpenetration that 45. And with FMJs, overpenetration is not good at all in self defence situation.

At first I thought that if ballistics were nearly identical, then it would be tempting to have those extra rounds and lightweight, but now I'm seeing that it's not as simple as that, 45 is still, in my opinion more effective than a 9 in FMJ, it carries more kinetic energy with it and makes a bit bigger hole, but I guess that's another debate, and the overpenetration is also something I wouldn't want.

Thanks for your response.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Concealed carry is 99.9% carry and .1% shooting at best. Have something that you can carry concealed or open and is not too heavy or bulky, so that you will carry it. There are many small 9mm's out there now. They are most sufficient for self defense. I have in the past, used 9mm ball ammo with success. I am still here.

I do not like the Glock or any of that "safe trigger" ilk. Give me a double action only trigger and that is fine. I have a Ruger LC9 which is safe and shoots quite well. It is concealable and easy to shoot.

Personally I think the 1911 is moribund and not really the best idea for most people to carry; especially loaded and cocked. Remember, the military did not allow cocked and locked carry. Too much can go wrong. If one is carrying for protection, carry something that will work but that is comfortable and safe. Good luck!
Thanks for sharing. I'm the type of the person who wants the gun to look good too, some designs are just unacceptable to me, like a walther P22Q. I don't know whether it's a reliable pistol or not, but I just couldn't buy something like that, it looks like a toy bb gun, but that's just me. Glocks are called ugly too, but not as ugly, I see some beauty in them too...maybe.

In my case, I would have to "israeli carry" my 1911, meaning no round in the chamber, since that's what the law says.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 · (Edited)
"I'm on the "stick with what you have" side of the fence. A FMJ 9mm will have more penetration, but you'll also have a greater chance of a bullet going through and through the perpetrator and traveling on to damage something or someone else."

Gotta agree with you and therewolf​ on that matter.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top