Posted on 02/01/2006 3:42:08 PM PST by John Jorsett
Why do American troops prefer the century old .45 caliber pistol to lighter 9mm models. It’s all about “stopping power.” As far back as 1900, during the fighting against Moslem rebels in the Philippines, there had been complaints of enemy fighters getting shot and continuing to attack. From this experience, the then standard army pistol, a .38 caliber (9.65mm) weapon, was replaced by a .45 caliber (11.4mm) one. In the 1980s, the .45 was in turn replaced by a 9mm pistol. There were a lot of complaints about that, but 90 years of experience demonstrated that you should not depend on a pistol in the heat of combat. But that was largely European experience, in major wars. In these conditions, pistols were rarely used in desperate battles. The fighting in Iraq reminded everyone that, especially in urban combat, a pistol was still an essential weapon. Going into buildings, troops would often prefer to have one or two guys holding pistols, as these could get into action faster if you were in cramped and crowded conditions. At close range, you didn’t want someone with a gun, or a knife, to require a second shot. And at ranges measured in a few feet, you couldn’t miss. If the enemy was amped up, you wanted to take him down with one shot, because there might not be time for a second. Many police SWAT teams have stayed with the .45 for the same reason.
The M1911 was better at stopping people, and that was mainly due to the size of the bullet. Technically, the “hitting power” of a bullet is determined by the bullet weight and velocity, and is measured in joules. The widely used 9mm Parabellum generated 583 joules, the Russian 7.62mm Tokarev (mainly used to execute cowardly soldiers, POWs or uncooperative civilians) produced 499 joules, while the .45 (11.4mm) only came up with 450 joules. But there's a major problem in just using joules, and that is how much of that energy is actually applied to the person being hit. A smaller, faster bullet has a tendency to just go through someone. This does damage, often fatal damage, but if often does not slow down a highly energized soldier. A larger bullet, especially a blunt one, will be more effective at "stopping" someone. Thus the popularity of the .45 caliber pistol round. Although it has less energy than the 9mm round (450 joules compared to 583), those who have used both insist that the .45 is far more effective than the smaller and faster 9mm. Part of this has to do with the fact that the .45 (11.4mm) bullet hits with a 60 percent larger (as seen head on) area, thus it applied more of that energy to the target. This explains the greater likelihood of the .45 caliber bullet "knocking down" whoever it hits. The same physics applies to rifle bullets (although they tend to have pointy tips, unlike the blunter ones for pistol pullets.) A 7.62mm bullet is 88 percent larger (head on) than a 5.56mm one.
Even before the Department of Defense decided to switch back to the .45, SOCOM (Special Operations Command) and the U.S. Marine Corps went and got .45 caliber pistols for use as an “alternative” to the standard 9mm M9. SOCOM was never happy with the 9mm's pistol's stopping power, even in the very limited scenarios, such as terrorist hostage rescue, where they can legally use 9mm hollow-point ammunition for increased effectiveness. SOCOM went out and developed the HK Mark23 Mod 0 SOCOM "offensive" handgun weapons system. This weapon, based on a popular H&K design, is 1.53 inches wide, 5.9 inches high and 9.65 inches long. It weighs 2.42 pounds empty and uses ten or twelve round magazines. The original M1911 is 8.25 inches long, 5.25 inches high, 1.5 inches wide and weighs 2.44 pounds empty (add .4 pounds for a loaded, seven round, magazine). Some 2.7 million M1911s have been manufactured so far, 1.9 million of them during World War II. Some 650,000 of the new U.S. .45 caliber pistols are expected to be manufactured initially.
The U.S. Marine Corps have been using M1911s rebuilt from the many old ones turned in when everyone switched to the M9. But this supply is running out, and the marines have been eager to see the 9mm M9 pistol replaced with a new .45 caliber model. Some marines (and other troops) buy these newer .45 caliber weapons with their own money. Most American combat units tolerate troops bringing in some additional weapons, especially pistols. Some troops have been buying 10mm pistols, seeing this as a nice cross between the lighter weight of the M9 (2.55 pounds versus three for the .45) and the greater stopping power of the 11.4mm M1911 bullet. But there are new .45 models that weigh as much as the M9, carry more bullets (10) and are easier to repair than the M1911.
The SOCOM Mk 23 may not be a prime candidate for the new standard pistol. That’s because the Mk 23 is a large weapon. A new “standard .45” will be used by a wide variety of troops, including women (who have smaller hands.) It is possible to make smaller .45s. One of the smallest currently available is the Glock Model 37. This .45 caliber pistol is 7.32 inches long, 5.51 inches high and 1.18 inches wide. It’s 1.63 pounds empty, and 2.22 pounds with a ten round magazine. Glock began making .45 caliber pistols in the early 1990s, and has steadily improved that design. There are smaller .45s than these Glocks, but none that are as sturdy and reliable. So it is possible to get a smaller .45 design that will be as robust as the original M1911.
I think he just assumed that .38 caliber meant O.3800".
Mine is also black.
The one shown was made for Army trials.
I've seen one I did not like it's looks..
I love my G30; it is a very sweet shooter.
Great for carry.
Sometimes in hot weather I switch to my G27.
I noticed the error but wasn't sure exactly how close to 9mm a .357 diameter bullet was. Turns out it is 9.067mm. He may have meant to say 9.065mm and left out a zero.
155 posted on 02/02/2006 6:55:05 AM MST by yarddog
9mm is .355
.38 is .357
9mm mak is .365
10mm is .40
THink...pistol weight.....The Glock kicks because it is so light....
On the other hand, my pants sometimes fall to the floor at the unrinal...due to the weight of my 45....GRIN.
Terrorists, however, don't stop for their brothers, but keep coming at us like rabid dogs. And, as you know, the only way to deal with a rabid dog is to kill it.
Smartest thing the military could do is be flexible, and always arm according to the enemy's techniques.
Yeah, I was giving him too much credit. I plugged .38 into my converter and sure enough, it is .965 .
I probably wont be popular for saying this but here goes.
From '87 to '91 I was an armorer in the Marine Corps. I was stationed on Okinawa during the transition from the 1911A1 to the M9. Range time with the .45 was a constant fight to keep the shooters in action, with most of the guns malfunctioning at least some of the time. This changed with the introduction of the Beretta. I personally witnessed at least a million rounds go through the M9 with exactly one failure, and that was with a round so malformed that no pistol could chamber it. Granted, the .45s were old, the newest being made in 1945, but they weren't worn out. Anyone who has put alot (10,000 rnds +) through a 1911 knows that the low pressure .45 ACP round doesn't really stress the gun.
Fast forward. In 2000 I really began shooting pistol in earnest. That year I fired a little over 5000 rounds in practice and competition and saw the exact same thing. Shooters with 1911s (myself included) fought with failure rates that made winning very difficult if the competition was armed with more modern pistols. I continued with the .45, convinced that if one wants to shoot a real gun it has to be a 1911 of some kind. Last year I finally gave in and bought a Glock. I now have 6445 documented rounds through this pistol with zero failures. I never came close to that kind of reliability with 1911s and I have become convinced that if someone tells me they have a 100% reliable 1911, either they don't really shoot it or they are lying to me. After hearing my whole life that the 1911 is THE handgun to be armed with it was hard to give them up but reality is hard to overcome. I still own and shoot 3 different 1911's but I don't compete with or carry them anymore. Flame on..
I have never understood that as of the maybe dozen or more I have owned, they have all been totally reliable with any normal ammo. I shot everything including my own handloads with no problems.
Now there were occassional problems but they were always the fault of the ammo, not the pistol. By that, I mean bullets seated so lightly that they were forced into the case when they struck the ramp, etc.
I do agree that the Beretta is more reliable. In fact as I said earlier on this thread, it is likely the most reliable pistol made with the possible exception of the Sig P226.
It sounds like you have done more shooting with the .45 than me so I will defer to your experience but still think you are overstating the reliability problems.
BTW, my Father worked at Eglin for 35 years and spent a lot of time at the test facility where the first round of JSP testing was done. The Beretta was the clear winner. The Army couldn't stand for the air force to be testing pistols so insisted that the tests were not valid. They redid the tests with the same outcome. The Beretta (and Sig) beat everything else.
The Beretta would be ideal if it had two improvements, One the grip is just a little too thick, and the trigger pull is heavy.
"Actually the .45 has an undeserved reputation for jams in my opinion."
It's been my experience that that reputation is well deserved. And it pains me to say that. It's like insulting the Pope, but the truth is just that.
you also forgot capacity. same reason why they went with 5.56 over 7.62. you can carry more smaller bullets at the same weight.
No matter what it's reputation, whether good or bad, a gun does not last a hundred years and remain more popular than ever without being reliable.
"No matter what it's reputation, whether good or bad, a gun does not last a hundred years and remain more popular than ever without being reliable"
Well, I'm not quite ready to get rid of mine. Maybe just a few thousand more rounds and I'll discover what I'm doing wrong.
This is an age-old issue, these days usually described as the "fast and small" versus "slow and big" positions, So, a few thoughts from an ex-15 year cop and forensic expert:
1. No handgun bullet can ever be counted on to absolutely stop an attacker, especially with "one shot," as a few current, opportunistic gun writers like to expound upon. This is a matter of basic physics - for every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction - and if a handgun were capable of literally knocking down the attacker, the shooter would be on their butt also.
2. That said, since incapacitating an attacker is partly due to the amount of damage done to vital tissue/organs/arteries, etc., a bigger bullet:
a. will have a better chance of hitting something more vital than a smaller one, especially if it's a hollow point that penetrates deeply and expands reliably at a wide range of velocities, which today's bullets by major manufacturers are designed to do;
b. will be heavier, and the extra weight (i.e. a 230 grain bullet in a .45 versus a 124 grain bullet in a 9mm) will have a greater ...er..."impact" on the attacker than the smaller one.
3. The .45 has proven over about 100 years that it offers the 'best chance' of stopping an attacker as quickly as possible compared to other rounds; even .45 ball ammo (non-hollow-point) has proven effective in combat, if for no other reason, because of its size.
4. As is correctly asserted by knowledgeable authors and gun pundits, accurate shooting, via PRACTICE, so one can place shots where they will most quickly incapacitate the attacker, is the most important facet of all this: after all, even a .45 through soft tissue that does no real damage is not as useful as a 9mm through the heart.
5. Nonetheless, as a former police officer, and current CHL holder myself, I carry either a .40 caliber Glock (23) or a .45 (Ruger P-345D), because, all things being equal and assuming a reasonably accurate shot with any bullet used, those cailbers give, in my opinion, a much better chance of quickly stopping the attacker.
6. And remember...a determined, or drug influenced, attacker may certainly NOT be stopped by one shot of any caliber - even a shot through the heart, which can still allow them nearly a minute to function before collapse. Therefore, if your life is truly threatened and you have to use deadly force, keep shooting until they stop.
- knightshadow.
It's been said here before....... A 9mm is a .45 set on stun.
"Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it; those who fail to learn history correctly -- why, they are simply doomed."
Cool. Does it have the heel clip style mag release?
"Its a damn shame that US soldiers carry a weapon not even made in the USA. Its a Beretta if I'm not mistaken. "
Beretta 92 and 96 models are made in Maryland.
The M16's 5.56mm bullet was deemed to be less lethal. Thus it was more desirable for the effect of draining enemy personnel because of the resources needed to keep a wounded man alive on the battlefield, versus simply documenting a KIA.
I stated the NATO requirements, but failed to mention the Vietnam scenario. We "needed" a smaller battle rifle since our allies in 'Nam were of a smaller stature and thus unable to master the M14 due to it's overall size and recoil. But there is no doubt that the adoption of the M16 was a financial boondoggle for the entire military industrial complex. Every bit as bad as the conversion from 45 to 9mm. I'd like to see a return to the M14 as well. For awhile the 6.8mm looked to be a step in the right direction, but I think that has pretty much died away now.
yep. supposedly was originally released in germany. that style make reloads a bit slower, and mags are really expensive -have seen them for $60 used, glad it came with 4!
but i love the gun.. 4" groups at 50.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.