The ideal service pistol cartridge?

[Webley]

What pistol cartridge do you think is the ideal chambering or a service pistol?

[rob]

well i would say .45.

considering all our enemies are poor equiped it wont make much difference if it can pierce armour.

.45 is a fairly good stopper as well.

[Obergefreiter]

.45 acp is my top choice.

9X19 is cheap, but not as effective. It is a better choice for suppression though.

[Catch22]

Id say .40 AUTO...

[rob]

.45 acp is my top choice.

9X19 is cheap, but not as effective. It is a better choice for suppression though.

why is that. actually the .45 is the best for supression as i believe it is already subsonic? even if it isnt is doesnt travel as fast so it would lose less energy in a subsonic round.

[TriggerPuller]

.45 acp is my top choice.

9X19 is cheap, but not as effective. It is a better choice for suppression though.Wrong. .45 is better suppressed because it is subsonic. Thats why the mark 23 mod 0 in .45 is used with a supressor.

TP

[crazyman]

every soldier ive ever talked to who has used one loves the ol' 1911A1 .45. thats enough for me.

[SABER 2-3]

The .45 acp is the best round currently avail. to the military and law enforcement. 9mm is great for high cap. and special purpose but for effective threat stopping the .45 is hard to beat.

[Brozozo]

Gotta love the power of the .45

But if I had to choose a pistol to use overseas on a covert op, it'd be a 9mm since ammo would be easier to come by.

[squeak]

I was watching a SEAL documentary on DVD the other day, the guy saying about all the weapons said "we use the 9mm, alot of people say "well it's only a 9mm", but that won't matter when I put two rounds in the chest and one in the head."

For me I would prefer .45

[James]

Jeez, this AGAIN?

[Gringo]

FFS! Not this **** again!
9mm! :P

[Haiw]

Best service pistol cartridge?
The one that goes trough Sixguns empty skull...

[Tributal]

Best service pistol cartridge?
The one that goes trough Sixguns empty skull...That would be a 6mm plastic BB. rofl

[Tributal]

Oh, are we talking service pistol for LEO or for military?

[Obergefreiter]

.45 acp is my top choice.

9X19 is cheap, but not as effective. It is a better choice for suppression though.Wrong. .45 is better suppressed because it is subsonic. Thats why the mark 23 mod 0 in .45 is used with a supressor.

TP

Trigger puller, you are correct in what you say, but I think you missunderstood or I mis-stated my point.

The .45 is a better combat round, but 9X19 is better for full auto suppression of enemy soldiers. (Machine pistol round). Less recoil and lighter weight makes it easier to use off setting its lack of power.

Not that I would really like to be hit by either round.

[FinnishMF]

.50 of cource !! :lol:

no..

Good old 9mm ;)

[MolliG]

9x19mm Para' :)

Most soldiers don't carry pistols, well at least here, so the 9mm 'softness' is an advantage over the bigger, 'harder' and 'nastier' cartridges, when it comes to just picking it up and firing. Kind of a **** explanation, sorry :|.

[cavtroop4]

i'd go with the .45 acp, no doubt about it.

[rob]

.45 acp is my top choice.

9X19 is cheap, but not as effective. It is a better choice for suppression though.Wrong. .45 is better suppressed because it is subsonic. Thats why the mark 23 mod 0 in .45 is used with a supressor.

TP

Trigger puller, you are correct in what you say, but I think you missunderstood or I mis-stated my point.

The .45 is a better combat round, but 9X19 is better for full auto suppression of enemy soldiers. (Machine pistol round). Less recoil and lighter weight makes it easier to use off setting its lack of power.

Not that I would really like to be hit by either round.

but why the hell would you use a pistol round for supression like that?
5.56 would work much better.

[tacticalmanta]

.45 is just not practical. It's too heavy and offers very small loudouts.

9mm has very poor stopping power. Especially when compared to .40 cal.

.40 and 9mm both can be deflected off of a windshield.

The FBI and other government agencies went from 9mm to .40 to .357 sig just recently.

9, .40, and .357 sig are all respectable choices.. a lot depeds on the mission and duty.

[EchoSierra2]

Every Marine that I know that was issued a .45 ACP loved it. The ones that I know that served during the transition wanted the .45 ACP back. The current service members don't know any better. LOL!

[Ratamacue]

Every Marine that I know that was issued a .45 ACP loved it. The ones that I know that servered during the transition wanted the .45 ACP back. The current service members don't know any better. LOL!

I'm pretty sure that Force Recon uses a modified Colt 1911 and DET1 uses a Kimber 1911.

[EchoSierra2]

Every Marine that I know that was issued a .45 ACP loved it. The ones that I know that servered during the transition wanted the .45 ACP back. The current service members don't know any better. LOL!

I'm pretty sure that Force Recon uses a modified Colt 1911 and DET1 uses a Kimber 1911. Corect me if I am wrong while it is true that MCSOCOM Det-1 does use a Kimber 911 it is still chambered in a .45 ACP Config. I believe that there is talk about changing it to a 9mm.

[Brozozo]

Every Marine that I know that was issued a .45 ACP loved it. The ones that I know that servered during the transition wanted the .45 ACP back. The current service members don't know any better. LOL!

I'm pretty sure that Force Recon uses a modified Colt 1911 and DET1 uses a Kimber 1911. Corect me if I am wrong while it is true that MCSOCOM Det-1 does use a Kimber 911 it is still chambered in a .45 ACP Config. I believe that there is talk about changing it to a 9mm.

Force Recon uses the .45ACP M1911 MEU(SOC). Basically a M1911 with ambidextrous safety, precision barrel and trigger assembly, extra-wide rubber coated grips and high profile combat sights.

[Webley]

Best service pistol cartridge?
The one that goes trough Sixguns empty skull...

In your dreams,

You would be so outclassed if it were a real fight.

[SABER 2-3]

.45 acp is my top choice.

9X19 is cheap, but not as effective. It is a better choice for suppression though.Wrong. .45 is better suppressed because it is subsonic. Thats why the mark 23 mod 0 in .45 is used with a supressor.

TP

Trigger puller, you are correct in what you say, but I think you missunderstood or I mis-stated my point.

The .45 is a better combat round, but 9X19 is better for full auto suppression of enemy soldiers. (Machine pistol round). Less recoil and lighter weight makes it easier to use off setting its lack of power.

Not that I would really like to be hit by either round.

The 9mm round would NOT be better for suppression of enemy soldiers (unless your version of suppression is just to keep their heads down) due to the lack of consistant terminal effect. If this was the case the Thompson and the M-3 Grease gun would be chambered in 9x19.

[Tributal]

If this was the case the Thompson and the M-3 Grease gun would be chambered in 9x19.Duh! Wait just a minute.

The 9x19mm round (also known as 9mm Parabellum or the 9mm Luger) was introduced in Germany for use in handguns in the early 20th century (around 1904 I think.) During WWI Germany decided they needed a more efficient weapon for use in the trenches, thus the development of the Bergmann Maschinenpistole 18 (MP18) - one of the very first submachine guns to be widely issued by any army. The 9mm MP18 SMG was so succesfull that Germany was banned from producing it after the end of WWI.

Taking a few steps back, in the U.S. the trials for a new sidearm was concluded by the decision to field the Colt model 1911 in (ta-daa) 1911. The U.S. had alreasy decided that they wanted a .45-caliber handgun based on previous good and bad experiences. At this time there was no such thing as a submachinegun in the U.S. armory.

General Thompson designed his submachine gun to be used specifically with the .45ACP cartridge (being a former military man himself he knew the round well, and it would make his firearm easier to sell to the military if it was in an already standardized caliber.) Also, the Grease Gun didn't enter the system until 1942.

As you can see these two calibers were adopted in each country solely for the use in handguns, but they were both later used in submachine gun systems.

So my question to you is why would the U.S., in the middle of the war, switch to a caliber not in their system, which (to boot) was developed and used by the enemy?

Even if the 9mm is better for full auto suppression (not saying it is, but for argument's sake) it wouldn't have made a lick of difference for the U.S. military back when the Tommy gun and the Grease gun were introduced.

[EchoSierra2]

If this was the case the Thompson and the M-3 Grease gun would be chambered in 9x19.Duh! Wait just a minute.

The 9x19mm round (also known as 9mm Parabellum or the 9mm Luger) was introduced in Germany for use in handguns in the early 20th century (around 1904 I think.)

The trials for a new U.S. sidearm was concluded by the decision to field the Colt model 1911 in (ta-daa) 1911. The U.S. had alreasy decided that they wanted a .45-caliber handgun based on previous good and bad experiences. At this time there was no such thing as a submachinegun in the U.S. armory.

General Thompson designed his submachine gun to be used specifically with the .45ACP cartridge (being a former military man himself he know the round well, and it would make his firearm easier to sell to the military if it was in an already standardized caliber.) And the Grease Gun didn't enter the system until 1942.

So my question to you is why would the U.S., in the middle of the war, switch to a caliber not in their system, which (to boot) was developed and used by the enemy?

Even if the 9mm is better for full auto suppression (not saying it is, but for argument's sake) it wouldn't have made a lick of difference for the U.S. military back when the Tommy gun and the Grease gun were introduced. The .45 ACP had already been in use heavily since the late 1800s, with the S&W Model 2 or 3 and the Colt Peace Maker. For some odd reason they decided that a .38 was going to be the calibver of choice but that quicly changed and went back to the .45 and the Colt M1911 was born. and was used until the trials in 1985 when the Barretta M9 won. I still say you ask any Marine that has been ariound and they would probably chose the .45 over the 9mm

[Tributal]

I did a major re-write of my previous post while you posted your reply, so maybe my point was clearer in the latest version.

The .45 ACP had already been in use heavily since the late 1800s, with the S&W Model 2 or 3 and the Colt Peace Maker.No sir, you are dead wrong. The .45 Colt (also known today as the .45 Long Colt) had been in heavy use (hence the decision to stick with that diameter bullet for the automatic pistol trials), but the .45ACP (ACP=Automatic Colt Pistol) wasn't introduced until the Colt Automatic Pistol was introduced in that caliber.

The Smith & Wesson Model 2 was a .32 Rimfire and the Model 3 (which was made in 5 different versions - the American, Russian, Schofield, New Model 3, and the .44 DA) was chambered in .44S&W, .32-44, .38-44, .48-40, and .38 Winchester but not in .45 Colt.

I still say you ask any Marine that has been ariound and they would probably chose the .45 over the 9mmI do not disagree with that statement. I personally think the M9 is a POS.

However, I think many U.S. service men (and women) would have been quite happy using the 9mm had it been fielded with a better pistol. Of course, I do know there are cases where the 9mm will overpenetrate without stopping the target, but most of the situations of this kind that I have heard of has been SOCOM units taking on irregular forces. The 9mm offers better penetration of flakvests etc than the .45ACP does, and is therefore more suited for use against regular enemy units than the .45ACP. Against non-armor wearing enemies I do agree that the .45ACP is more reliable.

[EchoSierra2]

I did a major re-write of my post while you posted this reply, so maybe my point was clearer in the latest version.

[quote=EchoSierra2]The .45 ACP had already been in use heavily since the late 1800s, with the S&W Model 2 or 3 and the Colt Peace Maker.No sir, you are dead wrong. The .45 Colt had been in heavy use (hence the decision to stick with that diameter bullet for the automatic pistol trials), but the .45ACP (ACP=Automatic Colt Pistol) wasn't introduced until the Colt Automatic Pistol was introduced in that caliber.

I do not disagree with that statement. I personally think the M9 is a POS. I think many U.S. service men (and women) would have been quite happy using the 9mm had it been fielded with a better pistol. Of course, I do know there are cases where the 9mm will overpenetrate without stopping the target, but most of the situations of this kind that I have heard of has been SOCOM units taking on irregular forces. The 9mm offers better penetration of flakvests etc than the .45ACP does, and is therefore more suited for use against regular enemy units than the .45ACP. Against non-armor wearing enemies I do agree that the .45ACP is more reliable.

I stand corrected Thanks Tributal


Hey what happened? LOL!

[Tributal]

I'm more or less infamous for my numerous re-writes of my posts. Anyway, I just wanted to correct you on the factual errors, but I believe we see eye to eye on the issue of the M9. :hug:

[EchoSierra2]

I'm more or less infamous for my numerous re-writes of my posts. Anyway, I just wanted to correct you on the factual errors, but I believe we see eye to eye on the issue of the M9. :hug: No doubt about that brother.

[Tributal]

Just wanted to add that I love my Glock 19, but I also love my Kimber TLE/RL II. I just love them for different reasons. :lol:

[TriggerPuller]

The .45 was developed in direct response to the .38 not having the stopping power to kill the Moro Muslims of the Phillipines. The 1911-1911A1 is slim and will fit all hands and points very naturally when brought up to line of sight. In combat where all we have are NATO ball rounds the .45 is best. It worked in WWI,WWII,Korea, Vietnam and should have never been changed to the anemic 9mm. I was in the Marines in 85 and used the .45 then they switched to the Beretta 9mm and none of us were happy at all. Fuuckin politics. The Beretta is/was horrible and when the SEALs switched over to the Sig P226 it was a much more reliable gun. Ever heard the old saying"you are not a Navy SEAL until you've tasted Beretta steel". This was in direct response to the slides coming back and slamming into your face. With respect to Beretta they did at least fix that problem. The .45 ACP worked for over 80 years in every major conflict we had and it served our men very well,thank god we are going back to it.

TP

[EchoSierra2]

Just wanted to add that I love my Glock 19, but I also love my Kimber TLE/RL II. I just love them for different reasons. :lol: That is a VERY SWEET Side arm.

[TriggerPuller]

Remember that a pistol is secondary weapon and that all pistols rounds are inherently weak when comparing to rifle rounds. You will only use your pistol to fight you way back to a rifle. If you have to use your handgun against an enemy using body armor than you are already dead!!!

TP

[EchoSierra2]

Remember that a pistol is secondary weapon and that all pistols rounds are inherently weak when comparing to rifle rounds. You will only use your pistol to fight you way back to a rifle. If you have to use your handgun against an enemy using body armor than you are already dead!!!

TP Point taken TP. But in CQB (I don't have to tell you) it's what you need unless you have a M4 Shorty. ;)

[TriggerPuller]

Remember that a pistol is secondary weapon and that all pistols rounds are inherently weak when comparing to rifle rounds. You will only use your pistol to fight you way back to a rifle. If you have to use your handgun against an enemy using body armor than you are already dead!!!

TP Point taken TP. But in CQB (I don't have to tell you) it's what you need unless you have a M4 Shorty. ;) CT or HRT units will never go in a stuation armed only with a handgun. I do know of some fellas that went cave hunting with only MK 23 Mod 0's but pretty rare.

TP

[Tributal]

Yup, heard the SEAL saying, and we had the same thing happen to the Beretta 92F at our field trials (ended up with the Glock 17 & 19 instead.) Also, it would be interesting to see a comparison between the 9mm ball ammo issued in the U.S. and the 9mm ball ammo issued here in Sweden. Our Swedish ammo (my apologies to all of you who have heard me ramble about this elsewhere) is rated as +P+ and was designed for the use in the Swedish K SMG (known around these parts as the kpist m/45B.) It got heat, and it does an outstanding job of penetration.

I'm getting the feeling, though I have no documentation to support this, that the 9mm ammo issued in the U.S. is too weak. Kinda like you took a weak handgun and then adjusted the power of the cartridge to the the POS handgun instead of taking a reliable handgun and then match it with the very best ball ammo you can find. Since you can't go by expansion then maybe higher penetration is prefereable (mind you, this is for military applications.)

I do agree with TP about the pistol primarily being a secondary firearm though (no pun intended.)

[tacticalmanta]

I would not call the Sig 226 a weak gun.. The Beretta isn't wonderful, but ..

[Tributal]

I would not call the Sig 226 a weak gun.. The Beretta isn't wonderful, but ..Well, the Beretta was issued before the SIG (Beretta is as you know the M9, SIG is the M11.) So the ammo was already there when the SIG was adopted (kinda like how the Tommy gun and the M3 used the .45ACP ammo already in the system.)

The SIG will handle the Swedish ammo I mentioned earlier without any problems. Can't say the same for the Beretta.

I remember watching The Replacement Killers with a couple of friends of mine - one used to be with a California SWAT team and used to be in the Special Forces. Anyway, in the movie there's a scene where Chow Yun Fat pulls out a pair of Berettas, promptly emptying them into the nearest bad guy (going for slide lock on both) after which he throws them away. "That's the only good thing he's done so far..." the SWAT guy commented. :lol:

[rob]

us ammo is indeed weaker.

but remember if you compare 9mm +p or +p+ then you should compare it to .45 =p and .45 super.

just a thought

[SABER 2-3]

Remember that a pistol is secondary weapon and that all pistols rounds are inherently weak when comparing to rifle rounds. You will only use your pistol to fight you way back to a rifle. If you have to use your handgun against an enemy using body armor than you are already dead!!!

TP Point taken TP. But in CQB (I don't have to tell you) it's what you need unless you have a M4 Shorty. ;)

TRIGGER PULLER is exactly right. Your pistol is your secondary weapon in combat action. Almost any long arm can be used in CQB you should never purposely choose a pistol when going to a gun-fight.

[Tony Williams]

A couple of comments (I used to own a 9mm Husqvarna but of course all handguns are now illegal in the UK...):

I have read that the Beretta slide problem was due to a manufacturing defect in the initial US-made ones rather than a design fault, but once a gun gets a bad name...

In selecting any gun or cartridge, the key questions are: "What do you want it for? What's it expected to do?" In the case of a military pistol, with the exception of some Special Forces purposes, it is a last-ditch self-defence weapon for people whose jobs make it difficult to carry a rifle, and who probably don't expect to be caught in a fire-fight. It is notoriously difficult for people to shoot accurately with a pistol in the stress of combat, and most pistol carriers would have practiced very little. Another point; one British General who served through WW2 said that he had seen 33 people killed with handguns, and 32 of them were friendlies shot by accident. No surprise that the US Army introduced the M1 Carbine in WW2 - it was seen as more of a replacement for a pistol than a rival for the rifle.

So, a service pistol (or PDW in modern terms) should be easy to carry, easy for the non-expert to score hits with, and very safe to avoid accidents. I can see the attraction of a fully-automatic small-calibre gun like the HK MP-7 in 4.6mm calibre. It's not much bigger than a pistol, and in semi-skilled hands stands more chance of hitting the target. The bullets also go through body armour a lot better than the big pistol calibres. It may not have the 'knock-down' ability of a .45, but a hit with the 4.6mm is worth a lot more than a miss with the .45. I don't know how safe it is, though :)

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

[tacticalmanta]

Well, the Beretta was issued before the SIG (Beretta is as you know the M9, SIG is the M11.) So the ammo was already there when the SIG was adopted (kinda like how the Tommy gun and the M3 used the .45ACP ammo already in the system.)

Um... both weapons are still in use in the US military. Both are currently being issued. The US picked the 9 because of NATO and for no other reason.

[Tributal]

us ammo is indeed weaker.

but remember if you compare 9mm +p or +p+ then you should compare it to .45 =p and .45 super.I believe the .45 Super has different dimensions, so it wouldn't be an equal comparison.

[Tributal]

Well, the Beretta was issued before the SIG (Beretta is as you know the M9, SIG is the M11.) So the ammo was already there when the SIG was adopted (kinda like how the Tommy gun and the M3 used the .45ACP ammo already in the system.)Um... both weapons are still in use in the US military. Both are currently being issued. I never stated otherwise. You missed my point though - the US 9mm ammo was tailored to the Beretta M9. Once the M11 (which is able to handle heavier loads) came into service the weak ammo was already in issue.

The US picked the 9 because of NATO and for no other reason.Yeah, but the US 9mm ammo is weaker than other NATO lods such as the German 9mm ammo (according to a friend of mine who served in the German army and got to try both.) Can't say about the British ammo though.

[tacticalmanta]

I don't believe that to be true. One of the requirements of a 9mm pistol in US service is to be able to handle NATO ammo. I would not recommend shooting +P and so on regularly, but it can be done. Generally, 135 grain can be shot through no problem, though 115 grain is often issued.

[rob]

us ammo is indeed weaker.

but remember if you compare 9mm +p or +p+ then you should compare it to .45 =p and .45 super.I believe the .45 Super has different dimensions, so it wouldn't be an equal comparison.
well considering it fire fine from an mk23 and only requirs the recoil spring to be changed in many other autos if i remember correctly.

it a very heavily loaded .45 acp cartridge.

[Tributal]

I don't believe that to be true. One of the requirements of a 9mm pistol in US service is to be able to handle NATO ammo. I would not recommend shooting +P and so on regularly, but it can be done. Generally, 135 grain can be shot through no problem, though 115 grain is often issued.Being "able to handle" and "shooting regularly" is, as you stated, two different things. The Glock 17 for example can handle +P+ as its standard ammo without any problems.
Anyway, I stand by my statement that the M9 is a POS for military purposes (might work fine for LEOs who don't abuse them as badly, but I personally would rather carry a Glock 17 as long as we're talking 9mm handguns.)

[Tributal]

us ammo is indeed weaker.

but remember if you compare 9mm +p or +p+ then you should compare it to .45 =p and .45 super.I believe the .45 Super has different dimensions, so it wouldn't be an equal comparison.
well considering it fire fine from an mk23 and only requirs the recoil spring to be changed in many other autos if i remember correctly.After doing some research I stand corrected in regards to the dimensions of the .45 Super - the exterior dimensions of the .45ACP and the .45 Super are the same.

However, the Mk23 is one beefed up handgun, kinda like they took a normal sized handgun and just made everything except the chamber and bore bigger. So I understand why it would be able to handle the .45 Super without any problems.

Based on this I would suggest that you look at this link (http://www.acecustom45.com/gunsmith.htm)* about the suggested list of parts to replace on several .45ACP hanguns for them to handle the .45 Super. Seeing this list reasserts my claim that the comparison of .45ACP and .45 Super would not be equal to the comparison of a U.S. 9mm NATO load and a 9mm +P+ as there are several standard handguns that can handle +P+ without problems, whereas most production made .45ACP handguns need special parts to handle the .45 Super. So as I said; there are several standard handguns that can handle +P+ without problems - the Beretta 92-design just doesn't happen to be one of them.

*The linked page is that of Ace Custom 45's - whose proprietor is one of the main guys behind the development of the .45 Super.

[Korth]

The Smith & Wesson Model 2 was a .32 Rimfire and the Model 3 (which was made in 5 different versions - the American, Russian, Schofield, New Model 3, and the .44 DA) was chambered in .44S&W, .32-44, .38-44, .48-40, and .38 Winchester but not in .45 Colt.

I think you mean .32-40 (.32 WCF), .38-40 (.38 WCF), and .44-40 (.44 WCF) rather than .32-44, .38-44, and .48-40.

The S&W revolver was also produced in .45 S&W, a shorter cartridge than the .45 Colt. Which is why the term ".45 Long Colt" was used to describe the .45 Colt cartridge.

Anyway, since all handgun cartridges have such low velocity, I would opt for the larger calibers. Bigger bullets make bigger holes when expanding bullets are not allowed.

I would just order up the Colt 1911 or the Glock 21 and .45 ACP ammunition. That new HK UMP 45. would be good too for those units that still have use for the SMG.

The M9 pistols and the 9mm ammo can be given to the new Iraqi police or surplused out.

[Backis]

Also, it would be interesting to see a comparison between the 9mm ball ammo issued in the U.S. and the 9mm ball ammo issued here in Sweden. Our Swedish ammo (my apologies to all of you who have heard me ramble about this elsewhere) is rated as +P+ and was designed for the use in the Swedish K SMG (known around these parts as the kpist m/45B.) It got heat, and it does an outstanding job of penetration.

The m/39B is not a hotter load than the m/39, and both are normally loaded 9mm Parabellums... in fact, the only thing different between the makes are the bullet and the markings. Many in Sweden think that it is a hot load since the police for a long time used underloaded 9mmP in their service pistols.

The m/39B uses a thicker mantle of harder material (tombakstål), i e a pretty normal AP bullet. It was developed after the UN mission in Kongo ('62-'63), where it was deemed that the standard ball wouldn't penetrate magazine pouches and helmets reliably.

The funny thing is that some of the early mantle failures of the US M9 is connected to the m/39B, since the SEAL's were evaluating it at the time (I don't remember if it was adopted after the "disintegrate Berettas" trick it pulled there.

Apparently the less plastic bullet increased the stress put on the mantle to a level the gun wasn't designed for. The only handgun I know of that can take the m/39B reliably is the Glock (the m/40 pistol never used the m/39B that I know of since it seems to have had a lifetime of 500-1000 shots with it).

And you guys who claim the .45acp is a "more powerfull" round than 9mmP, check that belief out, because facts doesn't support it... a normal 9mm packs more zip than a normal .45acp... The problem for the 9 is overpenetration and failure to dump that energy into its target. But ALL handgun rounds are heavily dependant on shot placement, including the venerable .45.

Penetrating power is however very important in a military situation, where opponents carry a lot of stuff like helmets, magazine pouches and much more... By far more important than for example LE tasks.

[Tributal]

Also, it would be interesting to see a comparison between the 9mm ball ammo issued in the U.S. and the 9mm ball ammo issued here in Sweden. Our Swedish ammo (my apologies to all of you who have heard me ramble about this elsewhere) is rated as +P+ and was designed for the use in the Swedish K SMG (known around these parts as the kpist m/45B.) It got heat, and it does an outstanding job of penetration.The m/39B is not a hotter load than the m/39, and both are normally loaded 9mm Parabellums...I disagree with the second part of that statement - the m/39 and m/39B are hotter than "normal" loads, and are therefore rated as +P+ loads.

However, as you stated, the the jackets differ between the two. The tombak jacket of the m/39B makes, as you correctly stated, the bullet less plastic which increases wear on the pistol, in particular the bore. And, in agreement with what you already said - it's the plasticity (or lack thereof) of the bullet that makes this cartridge so special, but it's still based on a +P+ load.

[Backis]

Also, it would be interesting to see a comparison between the 9mm ball ammo issued in the U.S. and the 9mm ball ammo issued here in Sweden. Our Swedish ammo (my apologies to all of you who have heard me ramble about this elsewhere) is rated as +P+ and was designed for the use in the Swedish K SMG (known around these parts as the kpist m/45B.) It got heat, and it does an outstanding job of penetration.The m/39B is not a hotter load than the m/39, and both are normally loaded 9mm Parabellums...I disagree with the second part of that statement - the m/39 and m/39B are hotter than "normal" loads, and are therefore rated as +P+ loads.

However, as you stated, the the jackets differ between the two. The tombak jacket of the m/39B makes, as you correctly stated, the bullet less plastic which increases wear on the pistol, in particular the bore. And, in agreement with what you already said - it's the plasticity (or lack thereof) of the bullet that makes this cartridge so special, but it's still based on a +P+ load.

Hm.

Gotta check that out since it contradicts what I've heard/read about it. What are your sources? :)

[Tributal]

The m/39B is not a hotter load than the m/39, and both are normally loaded 9mm Parabellums...I disagree with the second part of that statement - the m/39 and m/39B are hotter than "normal" loads, and are therefore rated as +P+ loads.

However, as you stated, the the jackets differ between the two. The tombak jacket of the m/39B makes, as you correctly stated, the bullet less plastic which increases wear on the pistol, in particular the bore. And, in agreement with what you already said - it's the plasticity (or lack thereof) of the bullet that makes this cartridge so special, but it's still based on a +P+ load.Hm.

Gotta check that out since it contradicts what I've heard/read about it. What are your sources? :)You started it - what's your sources? ;) Sorry, couldn't help myself. rofl

Anyway, my primary source was a Lt during parade training - since we didn't have bayonet mounts for our AK5's (got them later) we had to do parade duty with the m/45B. Naturally we had to go through some quick training with the weapon in question prior to carrying'em, and during that training the Lt told us about the ammo.

But I've also read it online at various places, I'll look and see if I can find a good source for you.

[Backis]

You started it - what's your sources? ;)

My primary source was a Lt during parade training - since we didn't have bayonet mounts for our AK5's (got them later) we had to do parade duty with the m/45B. Naturally we had to go through some quick training with the weapon in question prior to carrying'em, and during that training the Lt told us about the ammo.

But I've also read it online at various places, I'll look and see if I can find a good source for you.

Same here, working with the stuff and listening. Although as doghandler I carried the gun (by choice, it's just hell lugging 1 metre of AK4 when you have 50 kilos of rumbunctious alsatian to control).

We drew our gear from the navy (closest base by far was KA3), so we didn't get any AK5's back in '95... =/

I've just never heard that the m/39 and 39b was of anything but standard load anywhere, so I wondered if you had a source.

Gonna ask around for specs on SOLDF tomorrow.

[Tributal]

You started it - what's your sources? ;)

My primary source was a Lt during parade training - since we didn't have bayonet mounts for our AK5's (got them later) we had to do parade duty with the m/45B. Naturally we had to go through some quick training with the weapon in question prior to carrying'em, and during that training the Lt told us about the ammo.

But I've also read it online at various places, I'll look and see if I can find a good source for you.Same here, working with the stuff and listening. Although as doghandler I carried the gun (by choice, it's just hell lugging 1 metre of AK4 when you have 50 kilos of rumbunctious alsatian to control).We had K9's in my unit as well. Never heard any of the guys complain about the AK5 (the dog on the other hand...) Though the weight are about the same the m45 must have been easier to run around with than an AK5 would've. Of course, once you need to use your firearm...

We drew our gear from the navy (closest base by far was KA3), so we didn't get any AK5's back in '95... =/I was navy in '93 and we got AK5's (and AK5B, m203 and ksp90's). Of course, we got ours from KA1. ;)

I've just never heard that the m/39 and 39b was of anything but standard load anywhere, so I wondered if you had a source.

Gonna ask around for specs on SOLDF tomorrow.I was just looking over there.

Also remembered another thing - both the 39 and the 39B have tombac plated steel jackets, only the 29b jacket is thicker - making the bullet 0.5 grams lighter = faster.

Here's one source for bullet weight (with pics): 9x19 (http://medlem.spray.se/coonan/9x19/9x19.html)
Here's (http://www.shellkonto.nu/bluenine/soldf/index.php?showtopic=6023&view=findpost&p=124678) one from SoldF in regards to the load. I'll be right back with an apology if further research proves me wrong.

Realized we've hi-jacked this thread something fierce! My apologies.

[Tributal]

Okay, after doing some research I have to confess that I've overstated the velocity of the m/39B - it is not a +P+ load. It's a +P load.

Here's how I did it:
1. From this (http://www.shellkonto.nu/bluenine/soldf/index.php?showtopic=6023&st=0&#entry111557) statement at SoldF.com I got the max pressure of the m/39 & the m/39B - 2,500atm.
2. I then went to this (http://www.tdiclub.com/misc/conversions.html) online conversion page to convert the 2,500atm to PSI. 2,500atm=PSI 36,750.
3. Finally I went to Handloads.com (http://www.handloads.com/misc/saami.htm) that had the SAAMI specs for P (PSI 35,000)and +P loads (PSI 38,500).I might want to add that there are no official specs for +P+ - any 9mm that is over PSI 38,500 is considered +P+.

So, I apologize for my incorrect statement about the Swedish 9mm m/39 and m/39B being +P+ loads - they are "only" +P loads.
:oops: :cantbeli:

[ogukuo72]

I seem to recall that the Germans used the 9mm Parabellum for both world wars, and seemed to have no complaints about their "stopping power".

In fact, both the Germans and the Russians used a round of even smaller calibre, the 7.62mm, during WW II. And certainly, both sides did not seem to have any complaints about this round.

There was an observation above that a rifle calibre round would be better. I have my doubts. For CQB, firing a rifle calibre round from a short carbine inside a building - especially inside a small room - is not a present proposition. This is especially if rapid shots are fired. You would need to wear ear plugs if you want to retain your hearing for the next few hours. Firing an MP5 is loud, but not as bad as a CAR15. This is an important consideration during CP duty.

I believe that there's also a misconception that a 9mm can NEVER penetrate a bullet proof vest. I've seen a test conducted using a MP5K fired from 3 metres (CQB range) using 124 grain ball (FMJ) at a Level III vest. Three out of five rapid shots fired at the same POA on the vest successfully penetrated it and entered the mannequin the vest was put on. One bullet was found on the floor, flattened, and there was some speculation that this was the first round to hit the vest. One bullet could not be accounted for.

[Korth]

I seem to recall that the Germans used the 9mm Parabellum for both world wars, and seemed to have no complaints about their "stopping power".

In fact, both the Germans and the Russians used a round of even smaller calibre, the 7.62mm, during WW II. And certainly, both sides did not seem to have any complaints about this round.


Most users of pistols in European armies are officers who carry them as a badge of rank. Many Europeans were even using the 7.65 Browning (.32 ACP) which is a very weak cartridge and still no complaints. Again, it is more of an ornament worn by officers in European armies to denote rank.

It is my observation that American forces will actually use the pistols, far more than most European armies. Both American officers and enlisted personel are seen with pistols, usually worn as a sidearm.

[ogukuo72]

Both the 9mm Parabellum and the 7.62mm (or the 7.63mm Mauser in German service) are used in SMG's as well. The famous PPsH 41 is a 7.62mm calibre SMG, while the MP40 is a 9mm SMG.

The PPsH 41 is a favoured weapon of assault troops in both the German and Russian armies, particularly with its 71 round drum magazine.

Perhaps you confused the 7.62mm (or 7.63mm Mauser) round with the 7.65mm (0.32 ACP) round. The 7.62mm is a necked cartridge, whose rim diameter is similar to the 9mm Parabellum's. Muzzle velocity out of a TT33 is supposed to be 450m/s (1350 f/s!). As you can see, it's a pretty potent cartridge.

[Backis]

Most users of pistols in European armies are officers who carry them as a badge of rank. Many Europeans were even using the 7.65 Browning (.32 ACP) which is a very weak cartridge and still no complaints. Again, it is more of an ornament worn by officers in European armies to denote rank.

It is my observation that American forces will actually use the pistols, far more than most European armies. Both American officers and enlisted personel are seen with pistols, usually worn as a sidearm.

Officers in Sweden do not automatically get a sidearm any more, so they're not issued as a "badge of rank" over here. :)

In Sweden pistols are issued to people with a MOS that requires a sidearm, for example pilots, naval boarding parties and doghandlers (I myself carried an old Smith & Wesson M&P m/58 sixshooter). The issuing of pistols is however a lot more generous for abroad duties (exemplified by UN service).

[Backis]

Okay, after doing some research I have to confess that I've overstated the velocity of the m/39B - it is not a +P+ load. It's a +P load.


But chamber pressure doesn't dictate the actual ME. The pressure ought to be higher since the stiffer projectile will give higher friction and initially provide higher resistance while passing down the barrel.

While the higher pressure require a +P tolerant weapon, this does not translate into "+P ME".

The bullet weight I found is 6.5 grams, but the V0 of 360 m/s out of the 114mm barrel of the P88 I found on Soldf.com seems very low even for a standard load at that weight...

Any ME figures?

[Tributal]

Okay, after doing some research I have to confess that I've overstated the velocity of the m/39B - it is not a +P+ load. It's a +P load.
But chamber pressure doesn't dictate the actual ME.Hate to ask, but what do you mean by ME?

The pressure ought to be higher since the stiffer projectile will give higher friction and initially provide higher resistance while passing down the barrel.

While the higher pressure require a +P tolerant weapon, this does not translate into "+P ME".

The bullet weight I found is 6.5 grams, but the V0 of 360 m/s out of the 114mm barrel of the P88 I found on Soldf.com seems very low even for a standard load at that weight...

Any ME figures?Seeing as though the quoted pressure of 2,500atm was for the m/39, which has a more plastic projecile, and the m/39B was supposed to has a little more powder plus the less plastic projectile, the pressure for the m/39B should (if I followed your argument correctly) be higher than the 2,500atm of the m/39. Of course, since the projectile is less plastic it might possibly allow more gases to pass on the sides of the projectile as it travels down the bore, thus providing less pressure than a more plastic projectile.

Also, I believe that the 360 m/s is straight out of the Glock spec sheet and is not V0 with m/39B ammo. (This seems to be supported by this page (http://www.levelrating.com/weapons/thread221WE.asp).

[Backis]

ME= Muzzle Energy (I'm used to using ME and MV, but I guess the logical conclusion is that the parther to V0 is E0?)

This is an individual value for just about every weapon of course...

I don't remember the formula for counting it from V0 and mass, but I have it lying around here somewhere. ;)

[Tributal]

ME= Muzzle Energy :cantbeli:

This is an individual value for just about every weapon of course...Of course.

I don't remember the formula for counting it from V0 and mass, but I have it lying around here somewhere. ;)Actually, velocity and/or muzzle energy is of no interest for this discussion since SAAMI looks at PSI of the load, not the ballistic end result (which V0 and ME would fall under.)

[Backis]

Actually, velocity and/or muzzle energy is of no interest for this discussion since SAAMI looks at PSI of the load, not the ballistic end result (which V0 and ME would fall under.)

Not for the +P or not discussion certainly, but I'm still wondering if the round is "hotter" in what comes out of the barrel too! ;)

I knew of a great site on Swedish service cartridges, but its not around any more... should have copied it to the HD... =/

[Tributal]

Actually, velocity and/or muzzle energy is of no interest for this discussion since SAAMI looks at PSI of the load, not the ballistic end result (which V0 and ME would fall under.)

Not for the +P or not discussion certainly, but I'm still wondering if the round is "hotter" in what comes out of the barrel too! ;)Well, if you give me a few weeks (or more) I'll try to do some empirical testing for you.
I have a Glock 19, and I know someone who has some m/39 and m/39B, and I have yet another friend who has a chronograph. That should give us some number to play with.

[Backis]

Well, if you give me a few weeks (or more) I'll try to do some empirical testing for you.
I have a Glock 19, and I know someone who has some m/39 and m/39B, and I have yet another friend who has a chronograph. That should give us some number to play with.

Sir!

I would appreciate that very much, even if I probably will have dug up those figures by then (or my "network" may have done it for me).

It'd be very nice to double check any way. p-)

[Tributal]

Well, if you give me a few weeks (or more) I'll try to do some empirical testing for you.
I have a Glock 19, and I know someone who has some m/39 and m/39B, and I have yet another friend who has a chronograph. That should give us some number to play with.

Sir!

I would appreciate that very much, even if I probably will have dug up those figures by then (or my "network" may have done it for me).

It'd be very nice to double check any way. p-)I'll probably do it just to satisfy my own curiosity. That way if I ever get into this argument/discussion again I can state the facts:
SAAMI +P
2,500atm
Difference in velocity between m/39 and m/39B is...

[Red]

.45 rules all the way,hot damn.

[Tributal]

Just for the hell of it, and I know this proves nothing, I went back to the SAAMI spec sheet and looked up the PSI for the .45ACP. The .45ACP is PSI 21,000. .45ACP +P is 23,000.
So the PSI in a .45ACP is 60% that of a 9x19mm, and a .45ACP +P load is still only 65.7% of a standard 9x19 load.

Also noticed that the original SAAMI for .45 Colt is PSI 14,000, but if you shoot it through a Ruger (ie using smokeless powder) it's PSI 22,013. Damn I miss my ol' Ruger Blackhawk! :(

[injetores que chamejam]

Try a .45 ACP 230gr FMJ, a .44 Spl 240gr LRN, and a .45 Colt 255gr flat point through a good sized telephone directory book and compare to smaller and mid size calibers.

Look at the FBI SWAT and LAPD SWAT - they see more handgun combat than the US military on a daily basis - they carry the .45 ACP.

[Tributal]

Like I said in my previous post:

Just for the hell of it, and I know this proves nothing...

[Tributal]

Try a .45 ACP 230gr FMJ, a .44 Spl 240gr LRN, and a .45 Colt 255gr flat point through a good sized telephone directory book and compare to smaller and mid size calibers.

Look at the FBI SWAT and LAPD SWAT - they see more handgun combat than the US military on a daily basis - they carry the .45 ACP.But, as you said before you edited this post - the .45 was designed for use against people not wearing vest etc. That is what the LE mostly deal with. Do keep in mind that they, just as the military guys, carry 9mm MP5's, 5.56 rifles, and 12GA shotguns as primary.

What can we learn from this? Well, that from the getgo mil and LE like the same normal hardware, but for the times when your down to using handguns LE will use .45's as their target usually have less "padding" and the mil guys get 9mm's because their targets have more padding. And when you deal with padding penetration is king.

[Korth]

If you want penetration, go with 7.62x25mm. The CZ-52 is a decent pistol, the Tokarev is good too.

[ogukuo72]

Actually, given its extensive usage during WW II and in the Korean War, I'm surprised that the 7.62x25mm fell so quickly out of favour. By all accounts, it wasn't that bad a round.

[snake_eater]

Another vote for the 1911A1 .45 caliber pistol.

http://www.virginia.edu/arotc/Alumni/(M1911A1)%20.45%20pistol.jpg

http://www.ammo-one.com/45ACP11.jpg

[snake_eater]

My second choice would be a personally owned Colt Python .357 Magnum revolver. It is a very accurate weapon.

[Backis]

And besides being accurate, it is also a weapon that reloads only slightly faster than a pre-Minié rifle musket! ;)

Speedloaders are pretty bulky, and half-moon ones just don't speed up things enough...

.357SiG would be interesting though... The question is how many people quickly can become accustomed to the recoil and shoot accurately under stress with it. :|

[SABER 2-3]

I own a 7 rd. .357Mag. that I feel is more suited than a 15 rd., 9mm.

And there are not many shooters who could not easily adjust to the recoil of a .357Sig.

[SABER 2-3]

I own a 7 rd. .357Mag. that I feel is more suited than a 15 rd., 9mm.

And there are not many shooters who could not easily adjust to the recoil of a .357Sig.

[Korth]

I would feel very comfortable with a .357 Magnum revolver for a sidearm. Very accurate past 100yds with a some practice, I know of competition shooters that hit steel rams at 200yd distance with their .357 magnum revolvers. It hits knocks 'em over too.

http://www.ihmsa.org/

It seems incredible, but you can see for yourself by clicking on the link above.

[Tony Williams]

There is an ENORMOUS difference between being able to hit at long range in competitions, and being able to fire accurately in the extreme stress of combat with people shooting back at you. Also, do not forget that apart from officers using them as 'badges of office', pistols are generally carried by people who do not expect to fight, and who will not be expert in their use.

I have read that the average distance at which soldiers have been shot with pistols in combat is less than ten yards, and I can believe it.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

[ogukuo72]

There is an ENORMOUS difference between being able to hit at long range in competitions, and being able to fire accurately in the extreme stress of combat with people shooting back at you. Also, do not forget that apart from officers using them as 'badges of office', pistols are generally carried by people who do not expect to fight, and who will not be expert in their use.

I have read that the average distance at which soldiers have been shot with pistols in combat is less than ten yards, and I can believe it.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

Not to mention fumbling with ammunition in the thick of combat. Ammunition in magazines are easier to manage for less well trained personnel.