New Sig 10 mm coming!

[nightrunner]

I'm sorry but that's a bad analogy. There are turbocharged 4 cylinders that will smoke many V8 vehicles. My bud had a Lancer Evolution that would absolutely haul ass.Smoked many a V8 stangs and others.

Tests have shown that 9mm ammunition has increased so much in the last decade that they are now matching ballistic testing of bigger calibers. That is a fact.

Analogy works. In ballistics, the 9mm has additional velocity and smaller lighter bullets, whereas the 45 has a larger heavier bullet and lower velocity.

Same goes for cars, if you pump 15psi (technically 14.7psi) you are effectively doubling the atmospheric pressure and thereby effectively doubling the displacement of the engine. Now i believe those smaller tuner cars like the evo and sti are pumping around 30psi into a 2.0l engine, approximately, when tuned. Effectively making them equivalent to a 6.0l engine. Now if you apply that to real world, then a tuned evo should be equivalent to a tuned gto( no longer made) with its 6.0l v8. And id wager they would be very close

[Lumber_Jack]

There is law that is hard to ignore, F=MA. Even 9mm has to yield to the law.

Exactly. And this is a 10mm thread. So when M and A and much higher then the 9 can F off ;)

[LagerHead]

Bigger bullets or high velocity perform better. Period.

It has been known forever that 2 calibers stand tall against the others in effectiveness. .45acp and .357mag

If you want to compare a .45fmj vs. a 9mm jhp, yeah it's probably pretty close, but If you put say a Speer Gold Dot in both of them, the .45 will win every time.

If you want to say that a 9mm will probably get the job done and its easier to shoot fast and comes in a smaller package for a certain round count. Ill agree with that, but you will never make me believe that bigger isnt better, given the same bullet. .45acp is better, period. Whether or not it's advantages outweigh its disadvantages depends on the task at hand.

Im plenty proficient with my .45 to feel comfortable with it over a 9mm

 

It was also "known forever" that the earth was flat and that the seas were infested with monsters that would swallow your boat. ;) Observation and testing proved both of those "facts" to be incorrect. And the key word in your sentence was, "or." The .45 excels in one but not the other. 

 

The fact is that modern handgun ammunition tends to perform pretty similarly regardless of caliber because caliber isn't the only factor at play. There is also bullet weight and velocity. As pointed out above, F=MA, therefore simply stating that my caliber beats your caliber ignores 1/2 of the equation. The fact is the .45ACP is a heavier round that moves slower. So while it has the M portion of the equation, it doesn't have the A portion. 9mm is smaller, but it moves much faster. Again, losing in the M portion, but winning in the A portion. 

 

So then, which is better? While your gut may tell you that the .45 beats the 9mm hands down, empirical evidence disagrees with you. The fact is there is very little difference where it counts: penetration.

 

 

 

As you can see from the above picture, the 9mm, .357 Sig, .40S&W and .45 are all pretty close when it comes to penetration. But if you're going to be measuring in millimeters, the fact is you should be carrying a .40 in 180gr or 9mm in 147gr if you want the best penetration, or .40 in 165gr if you want the biggest, nastiest hole (my impressions from the picture above, purely). 

 

Regardless of the above data and arguments, I would argue that 5 well placed shots with a 9mm would beat 3 well placed shots with a .45, assuming that the average shooter would suffer the kind of performance degradation (from an accuracy standpoint) that would cause follow up shots to be approximately 20% slower per shot, that is. My point is of course, I would say that an argument can be made that even if the .45 were better from a ballistic standpoint, that advantage could be outweighed by the fact that a 9mm, on average, is going to exhibit less felt recoil and therefore follow up shots will be made quicker. 

 

However, if you feel the most comfortable with a .45 and the gun you shoot the best with is a .45, then I would argue you would be a fool to carry anything else. In fact, my normal carry gun is a .45ACP, Kimber Ultra Carry II. But I chose that gun not because I believe the .45ACP to be the best thing since sliced bread, but because the Kimber was of such a size and configuration that I am more likely to carry it in more places and regardless of my choice in clothes for the day than, say, my XD, which is a 9mm. The XD is kind of thick and makes it a pain to conceal, particularly in the summer. But I would easily trust my life to either gun without a moment's hesitation. 

Edited October 6, 2014 by LagerHead

[ohell]

I would rather deal with EAA's customer service then Sig's. An admitted ahole is much better then a smug prick in my book.

I figured this thread would be another caliber debate before page one was done.