Me and my friends had a conversation the other days and used to “fight” about what would be the best caliber for a pistol ??? So today i searched in the database of this forum but i found nothing about this so desided to post this to you and hope you help with this .
Also i dont know if i should post this here in “Off Topic - Militaria”
Im sure some other members know about this, but wont it depend on the gun as well?
The argument over which round is better dates back to the introduction of the .45 ACP but when it comes down to it is truly personal preference.
The .45 has more stopping power than the 9mm, but handguns tend to hold fewer rounds of .45 so you generally have more shots with a 9mm.
.45 ACP tend to have more muzzle blast and recoil so they can be harder to get accustom to for inexperienced shooters but once you do the .45 is just as accurate as the 9mm.
I personally prefer .45s for personal defense simply because my goal is to stop the first attacker as fast as possible but I am sure you will find just as many people that favor the 9mm because they like having more ammo.
Schmidt is right that the gun tends to be more important than the caliber too.
I recall something of an argument breaking out over “stopping power” in the .45ACP vs. the 9X19mm in another thread, but I can’t find it at the moment…
In any case, both can be made into fine weapons and I think the consensus is that maybe regular troops are better off with a 9mm pistol while the .45ACP has its niche with specialists…
Of course schmidt’s right . But should we take the abillity of aiming into acount ???
Certainly. The person is the most important piece of the puzzle. The reliability of the firearm would be a close second with caliber actually being the least important factor.
That is pretty much what Nick was stating. The better trained shooter has a better chance of hitting his target with the first shot so it is more beneficial to stop someone with that first round. Someone who is less proficient of a shooter may miss or not make as good of a hit so they are more likely to need follow up rounds, which is where the high capacity of a 9mm is beneficial.
Now the .40 cal was an attempt to get a pistol with more stopping power than a 9mm but have a higher magazine capacity than most .45s so it could be argued that it or a similar round like a 10mm is the ‘best’ pistol cartridge.
What about the Tokarev, Mauser and Bordchardt 7.92mm rounds?
Well Dixie Devil i was going to ask about the the .40 but for the things you said i couldn’t agree more .
And Schmidt from what i know about the tokarev was called the russian .45 , and officers who used to use it sometimes said the that it was a very good pistol with a good stoping power but i think it was in 7,62 mm . And about the mauser i dont know
7.62x25mm Tokarev
7.63x25mm Mauser
7.65x25mm Borchardt
All these rounds are bottleneck rounds so despite the smaller bullet diameter they really don’t take up any less space in a magazine than a 9mm. The do have a more penetrating power than a 9x19mm, just as the 9mm has more than the .45, but they have very little stopping power. You either have to make a head or spine shot or use multiple rounds.
Well about that i am trying to imagine how someone in combat could “easily” achieve a spine or headshot . I think this was kind of difficult maybe not impossible …
I’d go 9mm by virtue of ammo accessibility/replace-ability.
Having said that : Radom, or Astra.
Having said that : I’d also make/modify the rounds… load them with mercury behind a thin copper disc. And have them as dum-dum cross-cut cupped heads.
You’d only have to hit your assailant once, with that type of round.
The rest, I leave to your collective imaginations.
Regards, Uyraell.
Well no shots are easy to make in combat situations. The general consensus it to shoot until the threat stops. 
I am not sure how things are in other nations but in the U.S. military there tend to be two different theories behind the employment of pistols and two different calibers issued. The berretta 9mm that is issued to general troops is commonly viewed as more of a defensive last ditch weapon where the high mag capacity comes in handy. More highly trained formations that train much more in using their pistols in offensive roles such as room clearing and other close quarters combat tend to use .45s such as the H&K and 1911A1 where the first priority is to put someone down as fast as possible and a high capacity isn’t viewed as important as stopping power.
Uyraell brought up a good point on availability of ammunition. Here in the States .45 ACP ammo is just as common as 9mm or .40 cal but I didn’t think that may not be the case across the pond.
In NZ we don’t even have the right to bear arms, let alone pistols.
What few rights a person has are so boxed-in and limited as to be all but non-existent.
As I have said in another thread on this forum:
We are supposed to call the Police for assistance, and hope they actually arrive before we’re beaten to death. Yet, at the same time, defending oneself can also get one jailed, even while awaiting the Police to arrive, which they only ever do after consuming their cups of tea, and eating the donuts and creamcakes, and re-polishing their shoes.
Regards, Uyraell.
When I was sent to Norway, (I’m not writing this, and you’re not reading it) I carried a 1911-A1 under my field jacket, in a shoulder holster, but one day, an English colleague noticed it, and said that he hoped we would never go to the 9mm, as it just didnt measure up in his opinion. A number of soldiers from other nations shared this man’s opinion, so I thought that would jinx it for the 1911. well, it did I guess, even though the 1911 comes in 9mm, they bought the Barretta. A poor move on the U.S.'s part, but NATO uses it, so for the sake of unity, they dropped the wonderful, always effective .45. Jesus wept.
Aiming you’re joking right? Anything over 40m and with most pistols you’re better off throwing them!! Plus if the bad guys have got within 40m of you, then you’re pretty much up sh*t creek, best bet is to fit your bayonet switch to full auto and crack on.
Well that’s what I was always told anyway.
yeah man , but if you are going to use the pistol i think the bad guy should in this 40 metres , doesn’t he ???
If I was firing at someone 40m away with a pistol, the only risk to him would be the noise.
I heard the mauser C96 can shoot somewhat effectively up to 500? or was it 50…metres. The sights had it up to 1000 metres, but thats ridiculous.
Yes that is ridiculous. Pistols are very useful for making noise and firing at someone who is about 10m away, but even then you’re better of with an assault rife imho. However, in the case of .45 vs 9mm i’d go for 9mm, you’ve got more bullets hopefully giving you more chance to hit something!
Even though it may be outside the “normal parameters” of military pistol use, at 40 yds, /mtrs a decently trained soldier with just a bit of discipline can make hits with a pistol, especially if there are a number of enemy approaching, better to take them on at 40 yds, than 20, This is assuming there is no one else with a more effective weapon along.