RE: http://tech.military.com/equipment/view/89059/m1911a1-....tol.html?eq_id=89059

Oh yeah! She'll "get 'er done!"

I'll take it over the 9mm anyday and 2x on Sunday.

the colt 1911 45acp is a graet gun I think one of the best gun in the world I have shot the 9mm to I dont like them I have a 1911 45acp I like it alot it is a graet gun

I AM A IRAQ VET AND ALSO A VETNAM VET W/A TOUR W/ MACVSOG. I BELIVE THAT WE NEED THE 45 CAL INTO OUR ****NAL AGAIN. I STILL OWN A 45 AND BELIVE IN ITS STOPPING POWER MORE SO THAN THE PIECE OF ****9MM WE HAD IN IRAQ.OLD SOLIDERS DONT DIE US AND OUR WEAPONS FADE AWAY.

quote:

Originally posted by 12857114:
I AM A IRAQ VET AND ALSO A VETNAM VET W/A TOUR W/ MACVSOG. I BELIVE THAT WE NEED THE 45 CAL INTO OUR ****NAL AGAIN. I STILL OWN A 45 AND BELIVE IN ITS STOPPING POWER MORE SO THAN THE PIECE OF ****9MM WE HAD IN IRAQ.OLD SOLIDERS DONT DIE US AND OUR WEAPONS FADE AWAY.

Just curious where you got your combat jump, and your second CIB?

Not to call you a liar....but according to your profile, you are a liar.

MAC-V was downsized in '72, and completely disbanded in '73. ALL Rangers were out of Vietnam by '72. Yet, you claim Vietnam combat service with 1st Batt/75th AND MAC-V in 1974-1976. Lie #1

You say you did not serve in Desert Storm ("era" vet saying you were in Korea), which leaves OIF to stand in the door. But there was only one OIF combat jump.....in 2003. You claim OIF-4('05-'06). Only the 173 Airborne jumped (with a few AF personnel, and the 250th FST). The 101 (again, your profile) has NOT jumped in Iraq. Lie #2

Very curious as to the second CIB. You obviously didn't serve in combat operations in Vietnam, nor would even be eligible as an MP in the 1980's Korea. Which leaves only OIF...a single operation...Without multiple operations, only a single CIB could be awarded to you, regardless of how many times you get sent over. Since you claim only one tour (OIF-4), it would be impossible for you to have a second CIB anyway. Lie #3

I put great doubt on your claimed Soldiers Medal, and Purple Heart too, since the rest of your profile is full of lies.

Care to soothe my mind? If you want to deny any of it, I've got your profile saved just in case there is a "fire in St Louis"...or something.

Oopsy....

Hey, at least my supa-lame profile is clean...

Have to agree that a .45 round is better than a 9mm...

I carried a 1911 in Korea. Fell in love with it.

Been on some shootings, and the 9mm does not impress me.

In doing some ballistics research, I have found that there are some 9mm +p's that come close to the .357 Sig ( A 9mm bullet in a necked down .40 cal case - .355 diameter bullet ).

I had a realtive that deer hunted and actually shot deer with a .357 revolver. He placed the bullet in teh vital areas, and I don't recall any one shot stops.

Point being, Size of bullet - size of target. .357 probably had too much velocity and did not have enough time to expand. I would expect the same in the case of the 9mm. I am only aware of "1" one shot stop, a officer involved shooting, and the load was Black Talons. There are some frangible loads on gteh market that have more energy than conventional hollowpoint or ball ammo.

As Greenhat said some years ago here on the boards " Pick the right weapon for the job." I believe it was a favorite rifle discussion, comabt rifle argument. I very much believe he was right.


Firefighter /Paramedic
NC1911 !!!

I didn't get to fire the .45 in my short time in the Army, but I was always intrigued with it, and acquired one of my own after leaving the service. It was made by Norinco, a Chinese company, but was supposedly one of the best 'imitations' available. (Yeah, I know, but I couldn't afford a real Colt!)
Anyway, I later began collecting firearms, and would often take several pistols at a time out to the desert to shoot. (I was living just outside Phoenix at the time..lots of places to shoot...)
One of my favorite targets was to take pieces of wood, (2x4s, pieces of packing crates or loading pallets etc...) sharpen one end and drive them into the ground. I also had several 9mms, ( a Ruger P89(good gun) and a Llama (piece of ****))
The difference in what the .45 rounds did to those targets compared to the 9mm convinced me that if I were ever in combat, or a self-defense situation ( a daily reality in Phx) while it would be advantageous to have the 9mm's higher capacity, I wouldn't want to trust my life on it's stopping power.
My late stepfather was a decorated WWII, Korea and 'Nam vet, and a CSM when he retired.
He didn't talk much about his experiences, but he did mention once or twice the difference between shooting enemies with an old .38 that he carried as a belly-gun/backup and with the .45. His comment? "When you hit 'em with the .45, they go down and STAY down."
I always thought that was " 'nuff said".

I own a 1911A1, and have been issued an M-9 before. I've shot both extensively.

The 1911A1 is a top notch firearm, with a long history of service, it's got knock down power. It does however have a limited capacity, and though it's design has stood the test of time, is now well outdated.

The M-9 is a top notch firearm, it's been proven in battle as well, just not to the extent the 1911A1 has. The problem with the M-9 is the round, the 9mm round leaves a lot to be desired.

There are several excellent high capacity pistols availible now that are chambered for the .45 ACP round. Two that come to mind, the Glock 30 and Springfield Armory XD-45. I have shot both extensively and they are accurate and reliable. My personal favorite is the XD-45.

In my humble opinion, there is no real need for pistols in combat. Accordingly, I don't see a clear justification for a mass replacement of the M-9's with a larger caliber pistol. But when the M-9's service life is near, it would be good to see the .45 ACP come back in a modern high capacity design. Maybe issue them to first line combat units right now, both for evaluation, and better abilities in the current war.

SCOUTS OUT
SGT U.S.ARMY, Infantry Sniper, Iraq Combat Veteran

The ballistics of the .45ACP round just aren't impressive. Yeah, it's a big 'ol hunk of lead-230 grains! But it's so SLOOOOOW. It has major issues penetrating automobile glass and car doors because of this. The 9mm does not, it has the velocity to penetrate many parts of the vehicle that the .45 won't. Also, there are issues with the .45 being able to penetrate heavy clothing on people, wool coats,belt buckles,canteens, and such. Again, not an issue with the 9mm. As far as 1 shot stops go, the 9mm+P HP is equal to the .45ACP HP as well as the .357SIG and not too far behind the 357 mag. It is a formidable round when it's loaded right. The Army doesen't need a new pistol, most definitly not one that's 100 years old and limited to 8 rounds. It needs to start sending those M9's out on patrol with Ranger 124gr +P JHP's, or Sierra gold dot JHP's. I guarantee you that it would be known as a brutal manstopper then.

Thats intresting because I've perfomed automobile penetration demonstrations, and the .45ACP regularly outperforms 9mm, and 9mm+P's. The side windows wont even stop a .22LR, the .45ACP will penetrate the front windshield with very little deflection, as opposed to the 9mm which will deflect up to 3 to 4 inches per foot after going through a windshield. Car doors are again no problem for the .45ACP, even penetrating the door on the opposite side of the vehicleon occasion, which the 9mm won't do. As for issuing the military JHP ammunition, good luck on getting that through congress. The only real downside of the .45ACP is it's recoil impulse, making fast followup shots more difficult than a 9mm.

So other than demonstrating your ignorance about what real bullets do in the real world, what acually is your point?

Stormcharger-you are talking about windshield shots from directly in front of the vehicle. When the .45ACP round makes it through, it does deflect less, you're right. It's heavier. Simple physics. But you are dead wrong about the steel/car door penetration. A FMJ 9mm simply penetrates obstacles better than a .45 ACP. The .45ACP is just too darn slow to punch through much. There are many 115gr 9mm FMJ commercial loads that top 1200 FPS. Some even hit 1300 FPS. That's nearly twice the velocity of a factory FMJ .45ACP round. I was chronoing some Winchester white box .45 acp from my kimber ultra carry(3.5 in barell) And was getting 15 foot velocities of 730 FPS. That's pathetic. On a cludy day, you can SEE the bullet fly downrange. No thanks.

Well of course i'm right about the windshield shots, as I have tested firing rounds through them at various distances and seen the results myself. However discounting my own testing of car door shoots is annoying at best. The problem with car doors and hence a given bullets inability to penetrate is whats inside the door. The mechanisms and cross members and power window motors are all very good at stopping bullets. However, since they cannot be seen, it is understandable that a bullet stopped by a crossmember five times thicker than the skin of the door can be misconstued as one calibers failure to penetrate over another that does not hit the same crossmember.

The reason for penetration of hard obstacles like car doors is energy, not simply velocity. Simple physics, a 230 grain .45ACP at 850fps generates about 400 ft/lbs of energy. It takes that same amount of energy to stop it. Only until a 9mm can be brought to more than 1250fps can it equal the .45ACP in penetration. The M855 9mm load that is used in the M9 pistol does this, at about 1250fps and 399ft/lbs. The 9mm +P+ loaded to 1300fps can generate 465ft/lbs with a 124 grain bullet, but needs to be pushed to more than 1500fps to get the same energy with a 115 grain bullet.

Now, if you want a '9mm' round that outperforms the .45ACP in penetration, you need to bump up to the .357Sig. The .357Sig is a high pressure round 35000 to 40000psi, compared to the 9mm at 22000 to 28000psi. This allows more velocity from shorter barrels, and will send a 125 grain bullet downrange at about 1330fps from a 3.5" barrel. This round easily makes 500ft/lbs from a 4" barrel, and thats just the standard commercial round.

As to your last comment about seeing a 'slow moving' .45ACP, I hope you aren't going to next state that you can jump out of the way of a .45ACP.

Had a Rookie Officer, after seeing a .45 in flight, made the statement he thought he could dodge one. We promptly nicknamed him Dodger.
He declined an offer to stand downrange while someone launched 230gr rounds at him.

AND, if seeing a round in flight means it's not powerful, you haven't seen the video of a .338 Magnum round, in flight. I believe the .338 moves a whole lot faster and is quite a bit more powerful than a 9mm.

quote:

Originally posted by Stormcharger:
Well of course i'm right about the windshield shots, as I have tested firing rounds through them at various distances and seen the results myself. However discounting my own testing of car door shoots is annoying at best. The problem with car doors and hence a given bullets inability to penetrate is whats inside the door. The mechanisms and cross members and power window motors are all very good at stopping bullets. However, since they cannot be seen, it is understandable that a bullet stopped by a crossmember five times thicker than the skin of the door can be misconstued as one calibers failure to penetrate over another that does not hit the same crossmember.

The reason for penetration of hard obstacles like car doors is energy, not simply velocity. Simple physics, a 230 grain .45ACP at 850fps generates about 400 ft/lbs of energy. It takes that same amount of energy to stop it. Only until a 9mm can be brought to more than 1250fps can it equal the .45ACP in penetration. The M855 9mm load that is used in the M9 pistol does this, at about 1250fps and 399ft/lbs. The 9mm +P+ loaded to 1300fps can generate 465ft/lbs with a 124 grain bullet, but needs to be pushed to more than 1500fps to get the same energy with a 115 grain bullet.

Now, if you want a '9mm' round that outperforms the .45ACP in penetration, you need to bump up to the .357Sig. The .357Sig is a high pressure round 35000 to 40000psi, compared to the 9mm at 22000 to 28000psi. This allows more velocity from shorter barrels, and will send a 125 grain bullet downrange at about 1330fps from a 3.5" barrel. This round easily makes 500ft/lbs from a 4" barrel, and thats just the standard commercial round.

As to your last comment about seeing a 'slow moving' .45ACP, I hope you aren't going to next state that you can jump out of the way of a .45ACP.

As far as being able to jump out of the way........not likely! It's just disconcerting to me to be able to see a bullet in flight. And your comments about penetration vs. energy are applicable to soft tissue, but don't take into account the way steel behaves when hit by a projectile. Simply put, speed punches steel. Not mass. Better yet, speed combined with mass. Also sectional density comes into play. A .45 has a lot more surface area contacting the barrier, it's energy is spread out over a greater area than a 9mm's. Personally, I like the 1911. I like the .45ACP for a self/home defense round. Loaded HOT with a 185 grain bullet it's a formidable round. But if my attacker were heavily clothed, obese, or hiding behind something hard, like a car door, I'd opt for a fast-stepping FMJ 9mm. Against an average sized human, wearing light clothing, a .45 230gr JHP and a 9mm+P 124gr JHP both have a one shot stop percentage that's pretty high for a handgun. Around 96% I believe, with a slight edge to the 9mm. I'm comfortable carrying either, but the 1911 is severely handicapped by it's 7-8 round capacity. Especially when the round it shoots is no more effective than a hot 9mm, which has over twice the capacity.

Nice pistol. Still the first choice of many individuals and units if not armies.

I was issued the M15 (.38), M1911A1 (.45), M9 and M11 (9mm). Liked 'em all.

The Army generated a lot of paper on the way to switching from the 45 to the 9, and a lot of that is getting in the way of switching back.
IMO, they will switch to a .40/.45 eventually, but the road has been rocky so far: SOF-CP, FHS, JCP, CP, AFH, AFFH, and now the MHS...

Lots of things being looked at and evaluated here and there by just about everybody, but we are a way from getting anything done soon.

Penetration?

From way back in August of 1948 when the US Army did some penetration tests w the 9x19 and the old M1 helmet:

SUBJECT:
Effective Penetration Range of 9mm Parabellum Ammunition.

OBJECT:
To determine the greatest range at which the subject ammunition will penetrate the M1 helmet.

SUMMARY:
M1 helmets were fired at using different 9mm ammunition to determine the greatest penetration range. A Canadian 9mm Parabellum ammunition having a velocity of 1250 f/s penetrated the M1 helmet at 130 yards, which was further than any of the other ammunition tested.

1. Weapons
a. Browning FN 9mm Pistol, HP Inglis-Canada, Serial Number 8T2367
b. Colt Automatic Pistol, Cal .45, 1911A1, Serial Number 1651407

2. Ammunition
a. Special 9mm Parabellum cases and Cal .38 S&W Special Bullets (Metal clad, 158 grains) and loaded to a velocity of 850 f/s.
b. Winchester 9mm Parabellum, 116 grain bullet, Lot WRA22026, 1,150 f/s instrumental velocity at 53 feet.
c. Cartridges, Ball, 9mm M1, 116 grain bullet (Parabellum) (Code T2CAB) Lot DIL- 617 (Canadian) 1,250 f/s instrumental velocity at 53 feet.
d. Pistol Ball Cal .45 M1911, Lot E C S25250.

3. M1 Helmets

4. Outdoor range facilities

RESULTS:
1. The special 9mm Parabellum case with a Cal 38 S&W bullet penetrated the M1 helmet at 50 yards, but not 60 yards.
2. The Winchester 9mm Parabellum (1,150 f/s velocity) penetrated the M1 helmet at 120 yards, but not at 130 yards.
3. The Canadian 9mm Parabellum (1,250 f/s velocity) penetrated the M1 helmet at 130 yards, but due to lack of longer range facilities was not fired beyond this point.
4. The Cal .45 ammunition penetrated the helmet at 30 yards, but not at 35 yards.

Not that the above means anything today, but one of the justifications (among many) for switching from the 45 to the 9 was better penetration through wood and steel w FMJ.

Whatever the military decides it wants it will justify. Took 'em almost 35 yrs to go from 45 to 9, may take a few yrs to go back or in between.

JHPs are another story, as is how much penetration you get in gel after X amount of commom tactical barriers, and how much of the common tactical barrier you can penetrate before getting to the gel...

In gel through auto glass, 5 round avgs:

Rem 124/9 +P Golden Saber bonded 10.5 inches/.55 caliber
Rem 147/9 GSB 11.3/.54
Rem 180/40 GSB 11.2/.62
Rem 230/45 GSB 12.5/.63

Speer 124/9 +P GD 11.5/.52
Speer 125/357 GD 13.8/.50
Speer 155/40 12/.55
Speer 230/45 GD 11.5/.66

Then again, not all gel tests/testers are equal. From the San Angelo TX wound ballistic workshop hosted by ATK (Speer/Federal) in 2007:

Through auto glass: Speer 230/45 GD 15.5/.65

From NYPD tests:

Through auto glass: Speer 124/9 +P GD 14.5/.67

Round n round w ego?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BrokenArrows,

quote:

Originally posted by STARSnBARS:

quote:

Originally posted by 12857114:
I AM A IRAQ VET AND ALSO A VETNAM VET W/A TOUR W/ MACVSOG. I BELIVE THAT WE NEED THE 45 CAL INTO OUR ****NAL AGAIN. I STILL OWN A 45 AND BELIVE IN ITS STOPPING POWER MORE SO THAN THE PIECE OF ****9MM WE HAD IN IRAQ.OLD SOLIDERS DONT DIE US AND OUR WEAPONS FADE AWAY.

Just curious where you got your combat jump, and your second CIB?

Not to call you a liar....but according to your profile, you are a liar.

MAC-V was downsized in '72, and completely disbanded in '73. ALL Rangers were out of Vietnam by '72. Yet, you claim Vietnam combat service with 1st Batt/75th AND MAC-V in 1974-1976. Lie #1

You say you did not serve in Desert Storm ("era" vet saying you were in Korea), which leaves OIF to stand in the door. But there was only one OIF combat jump.....in 2003. You claim OIF-4('05-'06). Only the 173 Airborne jumped (with a few AF personnel, and the 250th FST). The 101 (again, your profile) has NOT jumped in Iraq. Lie #2

Very curious as to the second CIB. You obviously didn't serve in combat operations in Vietnam, nor would even be eligible as an MP in the 1980's Korea. Which leaves only OIF...a single operation...Without multiple operations, only a single CIB could be awarded to you, regardless of how many times you get sent over. Since you claim only one tour (OIF-4), it would be impossible for you to have a second CIB anyway. Lie #3

I put great doubt on your claimed Soldiers Medal, and Purple Heart too, since the rest of your profile is full of lies.

Care to soothe my mind? If you want to deny any of it, I've got your profile saved just in case there is a "fire in St Louis"...or something.

One when did you join the Guard. Two you had to of gotten out some time, because up to that time the Military was down sizing and you had to be a E-5 or on the standing list with 10 years and E-6 you had to be a E-6 or on the standing list to go pass 13 years. For Active Duty that was the stander in 86 when I got out with Ten years.
What class was you in Ranger School?
What School did you go to for Path Finder?
OH, what Guard unit were you with?

When I was in the Corps 75-77 at the stumps,my MOS was a cannon Cocker and I spent a short time with MP. I got to fire the 45 Cal. and I love it. I just wish I had more time to shot it. I still think the Military should go back with the 45 Cal.Because of it stopping power.

I've carried 1911A1, the Beretta 92SB (civilian M9)and an HK 40 on duty as an MP and Civilian LEO. All are adequate handgun rounds. Heck now in my near old age I carry my old backup 380 all the time. The real life results of gunshots with the topic rounds are that the differance in marginal. The bigger issue is proper training and fire control. Good solid double taps with a 22 is better than spray and pray with a cannon.