What's the real reason 9mm is so popular?

[Freq18Hz]

Anyone? Try almost any medical examiner or coroner worth their salt. That's a LOT of somebodies, and specifically somebodies who are in a unique position to know what the heck they are talking about.

Please cite your references. Thanks.


-Freq

[Freq18Hz]

I love people who say 9mm isn't strong enough, despite the fact that it is used internationally in police agencies and militaries probably more than any other round. The primary sidearm of the us army is a 9mm. Major police agencies still use the 9mm. Yet some people claim it won't do the job. The high end ammo you can buy is probably better than what they are issued.

Again this really doesn't apply to civilian life, especially in California where handguns are for defense and target practice.

Military and police persons have the ability to carry more rounds for less weight, and are far more likely to get in a gunfight requiring a high ROF. The US military knows that placing more rounds on target, faster, is how you overcome an opposing force. If your rounds are lighter, you can carry more.

I'm really not understanding this debate here. It's common knowledge that bullets fired from guns kill people. It's also common knowledge that .45 ACP is far more likely to kill hitting center mass than a 9mm. .357 magnum seems to be a good compromise between velocity and diameter, as is .40 smith and wesson. I'm confused how this is a mystery to you folks, since people have been hunting with larger, slower cartridges for over a 100 years to bring down big game. People aren't killing bears (easily) with a 9mm. Also, not to quote the military, but SOP exist for snipers to increase distance in order to maximize fatally wounding targets. This may not apply here though, because even though large rounds are traveling at slower velocities, you probably don't get the "wobble" effect/expansion you get from a rifle cartridge at long distances.

Not really sure how this is even under debate, considering the obvious and well tested ballistics of all these cartridges...
People cite inconclusive studies on this stuff etc...

I would guess people buy 9mm because it's cheap, is lighter to carry more rounds, and is easier to shoot.

In a defensive situation, I'd think it would be better to take the bigger round that does more damage in one shot. I don't want to explain to a jury why I dumped several rounds of my preban mag into the bad guy, two in the chest one in the head...

1 shot of .357, .45 acp. Tried and tested.

Again, I'm speaking from everything I've read. I don't have experience hitting center mass, and killing several hundred people with each type of cartridge to speak first hand. I'm pretty sure none of you folks have either.

But sincerely, if I'm off base here, feel free to correct me.

Also this topic has surely been beaten to death in the past, so apologies if I'm getting the thread off track.

-Freq

[Ergo the Qualmed]

To me, 45ACP recoil isn't exactly MORE recoil, it's just a different feel that some people prefer. The 9mm recoil is snappy, violent, and fast. The .45ACP recoil is noticeably slower, and is more of a push than a snap. I "prefer" the recoil of the .45ACP over my 9mm, but I can shoot both equally well.

THIS (for me anyway).

When I shoot pistols at the range, I invariably shoot 9mm and .45ACP out of a variety of pistols (just rentals for another year and change...)

I find 9mm to be snappier, and somehow that bothers me. I find .45 ACP easier to shoot, whether it be from a G21 or a 1911 of some sort or from an M&P .45

So, am I weird in thinking that the .45 is lighter recoiling

[Trendkill]

It's cheap, and it puts holes in things and/or people.

Best response I've seen.....bravo.

[DannyZRC]

Again this really doesn't apply to civilian life, especially in California where handguns are for defense and target practice.

Military and police persons have the ability to carry more rounds for less weight, and are far more likely to get in a gunfight requiring a high ROF. The US military knows that placing more rounds on target, faster, is how you overcome an opposing force. If your rounds are lighter, you can carry more.

I'm really not understanding this debate here. It's common knowledge that bullets fired from guns kill people. It's also common knowledge that .45 ACP is far more likely to kill hitting center mass than a 9mm. .357 magnum seems to be a good compromise between velocity and diameter, as is .40 smith and wesson. I'm confused how this is a mystery to you folks, since people have been hunting with larger, slower cartridges for over a 100 years to bring down big game. People aren't killing bears (easily) with a 9mm. Also, not to quote the military, but SOP exist for snipers to increase distance in order to maximize fatally wounding targets. This may not apply here though, because even though large rounds are traveling at slower velocities, you probably don't get the "wobble" effect/expansion you get from a rifle cartridge at long distances.

Not really sure how this is even under debate, considering the obvious and well tested ballistics of all these cartridges...
People cite inconclusive studies on this stuff etc...

I would guess people buy 9mm because it's cheap, is lighter to carry more rounds, and is easier to shoot.

In a defensive situation, I'd think it would be better to take the bigger round that does more damage in one shot. I don't want to explain to a jury why I dumped several rounds of my preban mag into the bad guy, two in the chest one in the head...

1 shot of .357, .45 acp. Tried and tested.

Again, I'm speaking from everything I've read. I don't have experience hitting center mass, and killing several hundred people with each type of cartridge to speak first hand. I'm pretty sure none of you folks have either.

But sincerely, if I'm off base here, feel free to correct me.

Also this topic has surely been beaten to death in the past, so apologies if I'm getting the thread off track.

-Freq

if you miss vitals, neither 9mm nor 45 nor .357 will stop an attacker with any reasonable speed.

if you hit vitals, neither 45 nor .357 will stop an attacker appreciably faster than a 9mm.

people are not big game, we do not have hitpoints, something that kills a bear cannot be said to by definition kill a person any more effectively than any other round.

you shoot a pistol to droll holes into your target, if your target is a person, that hole has to be put into the correct spot to reach a vital structure, and it has to drill deep enough to do so. no kill factor, no wounding factor, no ft-lbs, no nothing. holes. in stuff. important stuff.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19887

http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm

[Voo]

I like the 9mm cause it's cheap.. If .40, .45 or 10mm ended up somehow being magically cheaper, I'd switch..

As for the recoil in 9mm or .45 acp.. Take a 1911 in 9mm and a 1911 in .45 and see which gun shoots flatter and causes the front sight to move less... It'll be the 9mm.. I've done the Pepsi challenge and it's not a debate as to which one has less recoil..

You can do the same for a P226 in 9mm and a P220 in .45 acp.. It wont be quite the same, but it'll be close.. The P220 will simply KICK a lot more, whether you're talking "push" or "snap".. The gun moves much more on a .45 acp

[23 Blast]

I find it funny when some people say their .45's kick less than their 9mm pistols. A larger round with a bigger powder charge is going to kick more than a smaller one. It's that simple. It's almost as silly as someone claiming that their .44Magnum recoils less than their .357 Magnum.

A 10-pound hunting rig chambered in 30-06 is going to kick more than a similar 10-pound hunting rig chambered in .243. I think the problem is people comparing their 40-ounce 1911's against a compact polymer 24-ounce 9mm.

Between my 1911 (.45) and my CZ (9mm) - my CZ, BY FAR kicks less. Those pistols weigh about the same when empty.

Between my G21 and G34, the G34 kicks a lot less.

I can more easily put rounds on target with a 9mm than I can with a .45.

[glock7]

Price to shoot.
Capacity
Low recoil
Easy to shoot well
Accurate
Good Self Def. Rounds make it better.
Large Variety of Guns offered in it.

Thats my take on it.

^this says it all

[sonnyt650]

I'm one of those guys who would own a gun in every caliber if possible.

*cough* Yeah I'm there too.

Of the three common semi-auto handgun calibers 9mm, 40S&W, and 45Auto I don't yet have a 9mm -- maybe soon with all the "cheaper to shoot" remarks in this thread.

[shooterdude]

I'm really not understanding this debate here. .... It's also common knowledge that .45 ACP is far more likely to kill hitting center mass than a 9mm. .357 magnum seems to be a good compromise between velocity and diameter, as is .40 smith and wesson. I'm confused how this is a mystery to you folks, since people have been hunting with larger, slower cartridges for over a 100 years to bring down big game. ....

In a defensive situation, I'd think it would be better to take the bigger round that does more damage in one shot. I don't want to explain to a jury why I dumped several rounds of my preban mag into the bad guy, two in the chest one in the head...

1 shot of .357, .45 acp. Tried and tested.


-Freq

You know that you can't make a statement like this without backing it up with sources for where this "common knowledge" comes from.

Have you read this: http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/9mm%20vs%2045.htm

From what I have read one can conclude that 9mm ball was not as effective as .45 ball but modern 9mm hp rounds compare to .45 ball.

I don't believe in caliber or the mythical one-shot stop, I believe in accuracy and follow-up shots as needed, and IMO 15-18 9mm +P JHP's is more firepower than 8 or 9 .45's (whether FMJ or JHP) in the hands of someone who knows how to use 'em. In fact, if you miss, they're exactly the same.

[tonelar]

...Military and police persons have the ability to carry more rounds for less weight, and are far more likely to get in a gunfight requiring a high ROF. The US military knows that placing more rounds on target, faster, is how you overcome an opposing force. If your rounds are lighter, you can carry more...

the "one shot kill" handgun ethos is an urban myth that most likely carried over from hollywood but could just as easily been influenced by long gun hunting

i'm an eleven year veteran of responding to handgun shootings in san francisco. if a vic has only one or two holes in their torso (regardless of caliber) they are almost guaranteed to survive. the ones that didn't make it had 3 or more holes in the kill zone. my two exceptions are headshots (shotgun blast to the head and a handgun suicide).

i own many calibers. i gotta admit, my bedside pistol is a 220 in .45, but its only 3 feet away from my Benelli M1 Super 90. however on the occasional outing where a long gun is too far away, i'm super confident with my 228 and a couple spare mags of subsonic 147grn bonded hp. i'm fortunate enough that this setup gives me close to 50 rounds of 9mm (but the post caliban shooter can have even more by carrying 4 x 10rnd mags in reserve).

[Shenaniguns]

What does a swat team with an MP5 have to do with a discussion about handgun calibers? Most folks arent going to be dumping 30 rounds on full auto, or 3 round burst at someone.

Limited to 10+1, semi auto, I really don't think anyone would consider the 9mm as deadly of a round compared to .40 etc. Sure they kick a bit less, but assuming you are using it for defense or target shooting, who cares? You are either defending yourself in a situation where you have to kill another human being in self defense at short distances, or you are target shooting. 9mm ammo is cheaper. And it's cheaper for a reason.

Who cares about special forces or swat teams or the FBI? As a civilian, you are either killing someone is self defense, or shooting at a range. The likelyhood of being involved in a shootout is almost non existant. Personal defense has almost nothing in common with the needs of a government operator or soldier. This is why many folks use a .357, 44 mag, or .45 at home.

-Freq

Sorry, but you are incorrect... There are plenty of people that know there's a marginal difference between the two calibers, it's you that doesn't believe it

[filetitan]

To me, 45ACP recoil isn't exactly MORE recoil, it's just a different feel that some people prefer. The 9mm recoil is snappy, violent, and fast. The .45ACP recoil is noticeably slower, and is more of a push than a snap. I "prefer" the recoil of the .45ACP over my 9mm, but I can shoot both equally well.

This!

[gorenut]

All around, 9mm is popular due to price, ease of use, and with modern ammo tech - it is more than adequate as a self defense round.

In other parts, its obviously popular due to capacity as one of the factors.

[Festus]

Because its a nato round and the ability to strip it off someones body in a shtf situation is more likely

Well, I hadn't thought of that! There's another reason I like 9mm. And it's cheaper, since I don't do my own reloads.