.45 for C/C?

[JC420IN]

I'm thinking of looking for a .45 for my C/C and wondered if you could give me a few suggestions of some of the better ones I might want to check out. Thanks.

[devilfish]

It's hard to beat the stopping power of the 45. I sometimes carry my H&K USP 45 compact. Its been a long time since I carried my Combat Commander but i would again without a second thought. I personally shoot better with the Commander but it does have a bit more weight and I prefer to go light. A 40 is also a good caliber. A Glock 23 is my main carry and you can carry it all day without wearing you out. It's also a plus that ammo has been easy to find for it at the Wal-mart on Fredrick Blvd.

[gregj]

On occasion I'll carry my Kimber Tactical Ultra II, though it's quickly becoming my primary CC.

[gunderwood]

I'm thinking of looking for a .45 for my C/C and wondered if you could give me a few suggestions of some of the better ones I might want to check out. Thanks.

I think any of the four common self-defence calibers will do fine if you do your part. (9mm, .357SIG, .40SW, and .45ACP) That being said my two favorite self defence rounds are .357SIG and .45ACP. My favorite CC gun is my full sized Wilson Combat CQB in .45ACP. How much money are you looking to spend? If $2.5-3k is within your budget, I don't think you can get any better than a CQB. Sure there are tighter match pistols (not by much mind you), but the CQB is awesome.

Generally, my research on defence ammo/guns has shown .45 is best served out of 5" barrels and in 230gr sittings. .45 performance tends to drop off faster than the other three defence rounds when you start chopping off barrel. If I am carrying a full size I carry .45, but if I carry a compact or smaller I carry .357SIG. Don't know what I would do if Wilson Combat made the CQB in .357SIG...

[WRW]

Generally, my research on defence ammo/guns has shown .45 is best served out of 5" barrels and in 230gr sittings. .45 performance tends to drop off faster than the other three defence rounds when you start chopping off barrel.

[/quote]

I agree...but. +P loads in shorter barrels bring performance back to the same ballpark as standard loads in the 5" barrel. It does accelerate wear in alloy frames, but standard loads can be used for target.

[RocKor]

.45 performance tends to drop off faster than the other three defense rounds when you start chopping off barrel.

I'm no expert but if you're worried about less performance out of the shorter barrel try out some 185gr JHP +P (~1140 FPS). The extra velocity will make up for the short barrel, but your gun will kick harder. If you're packing a 1911 I'd try the 185gr ammo out at the range before carrying it, since some 1911s can be picky.

I myself utilize the 5" 1911, so 230gr is what I prefer.

[zephyp]

The .45 auto is a great defense weapon. Regarding pistol selection you should first consider your preferences for SA only or DA/SA and mag capacity. That will help you narrow the field...

[OakRidgeStars]

A compact 1911 with a lightweight aluminum frame will get the job done.

[zephyp]

A compact 1911 with a lightweight aluminum frame will get the job done.

Yep. I love my Col XSE Commander - Lightweight with AL frame...

Picture 004.jpg (59.89 KiB) Viewed 4005 times

[viiiball]

Have you considered the Glock 36? With its slimline build its easier to conceal than a standard 1911 and they are relatively inexpensive at around $550

[gunderwood]

.45 performance tends to drop off faster than the other three defense rounds when you start chopping off barrel.

I'm no expert but if you're worried about less performance out of the shorter barrel try out some 185gr JHP +P (~1140 FPS). The extra velocity will make up for the short barrel, but your gun will kick harder. If you're packing a 1911 I'd try the 185gr ammo out at the range before carrying it, since some 1911s can be picky.

I myself utilize the 5" 1911, so 230gr is what I prefer.

Some of the data *suggests* that those lighter .45 bullets, +P or otherwise, don't penetrate enough. I.e. fail to penetrate to 12" Are they bad, no, but they don't seem to be as good as other options within the caliber and others. Generally, any of the premium HPs sold today are good, but there are differences. My preference is for Gold Dots then Rangers then HST.

It use to be that manufacturers "scaled" a bullet design up and down a calibers weight range. Generally, this is no longer true, but it did cause performance issues. Today if I buy different weights within the same family line (or even short barrel stuff) you can look at the bullet and see they are different. They were designed for different impact velocities. To what extent there are different designs varies by manufacturer.

.45 due the larger bore area and its lower pressures will always fall off quicker than the other defence calibers...at least until we create a radically different powder. Take Speer's GD line.
230gr: 890fps, 404fpe
230gr-SB: 820fps, 343fpe

Doesn't look like much until you notice that "short barrel" is 4" vice 5". Firing up QL.

5.6gr Hodgdon Universal, 230gr GD, 17283psi
5": 883fps, 398fpe
4": 836fps, 357fpe
Pretty close to Speers data, but how about some of those real short .45s?

3.5": 806fps, 331fpe
3": 768fps, 301fpe

To put this in perspective, a 3.5" .45 MV is like a 5" at 100 yards (standard pressure all around). All of the "short barrel" .45s have fallen well below even short barrel 9mm energy levels, if that is your sort of thing. I don't need to remind you how horrible 9mm is for stopping a threat (/sarcasm). Take a look:

Speer GD data, test barrel 4"
115gr: 1210fps, 374fpe
124gr: 1150fps, 364fpe
124+P: 1220fps, 410fpe

HS-6, 124gr GD, 31444psi
5": 1226fps, 414fpe (just for fun)
4": 1164fps, 373fpe
3.5": 1123fps, 347fpe
3": 1074fps, 317fpe

Again, to put this in perspective, 3" (vice the 3.5" I used for .45 above) has a MV equal to 4" barrel at 40 yards. Or for the worst case against +P, 55 yards. Put a different way, the difference between a Glock 19 and the 26 is 25 yards; or a Glock 19 and the smallest 9mms is 50 yards. Problem is that nearly all of the .45 testing data is done with 1911s with 5" barrels. Find some tests using 3-4" barrel .45s and the results aren't great.

Conclusion
.45 is a great round, but with it's large bore area and lower pressures (even for +P) its' self-defence performance falls off faster than the other rounds when shortening the barrel. This is especially true against the more modern cartridges like .357SIG and .40SW which are more or less optimal considering the current state of powders, bore area, and common barrel lengths. Lighter .45 bullets don't seem to have the same magic that the 230grs do. Their expansion and penetration against even 9mm is not impressive out of short barrel. My two cents. YMMV.

[Palladin]

Now run tell that!

[SgtBill]

This is very well put together and very informative write up. The only problem I have is the testing is done at X yards with X slug. and it seem's that all testing starts out at as little as 15 yard's and out to 100 yard's. To be honest I don't think there are that many people on this forum thay can shoot any type of handgun in any calibre in a shoot out at 100 yard's and hit what they are shooting at. Real life shoot out's take place a lot closer and no one that I know of show testing for the close combat performance of handgun's. I carry a .380 with 9 Speer Gold Dot's in it and I know what they will do in real life shooting range when the weapon is in my hand's. I think it boil's down to how much you shoot for practice and how comfortable you are with both yourself and the weapon that you are carrying and your ability to not fall apart during the shooting of the weapon in a life or death situation.
Bill

[gunderwood]

This is very well put together and very informative write up. The only problem I have is the testing is done at X yards with X slug. and it seem's that all testing starts out at as little as 15 yard's and out to 100 yard's. To be honest I don't think there are that many people on this forum thay can shoot any type of handgun in any calibre in a shoot out at 100 yard's and hit what they are shooting at. Real life shoot out's take place a lot closer and no one that I know of show testing for the close combat performance of handgun's. I carry a .380 with 9 Speer Gold Dot's in it and I know what they will do in real life shooting range when the weapon is in my hand's. I think it boil's down to how much you shoot for practice and how comfortable you are with both yourself and the weapon that you are carrying and your ability to not fall apart during the shooting of the weapon in a life or death situation.
Bill

You are correct that there are few 100 yard handgun shootings (I know of none that were justifiable). The point of the distance was simply to show the information a different way.

E.g. my latest varmint gun build (the 300 Varminter) can push a 125gr Bosler BT to approx. 4000fps, but that gets hard on brass. 3800-3900fps is abtainable with reasonable brass life. That turns out to be approx. 50 yards. Certainly, a groundhog won't care about the velocity loss and my max range (approx. determined by sub-sonic trassition) is only 50 yards less. Since the transsonic reagion is past 1k yards, why would I care about losing 50 yards? I don't, I like reloading my brass more.

Edit: Varminters generally care more about the flatness of the round vice max range, the danger space calcs change nothing and max range is easier to understand for most people.

The point is not the distance, but rather that a big bore, low pressure round like .45s performance falls off faster than the others. The handful of tests I have seen with short barrel .45s (sub 4") weren't impressive. They weren't bad and probably were still better than lots of other stuff people CC in that size.

My only point was that I prefer to carry a sub-compact .357SIG (or .40SW for those of you who prefer that) vice a subcompact .45 as I loose less performance with those rounds. That doesn't mean .45 out of the sub-compact is bad.

[WRW]

The .45 has a long, well documented history as being an adequate handgun round (possibly slightly bettered by the .357 Magnum) with muzzle velocities of around 830-860 fps for 230gr. With the 3" barrel, the muzzle velocity of the 230gr. does drop into the 700's of fps, but if the +P rated loads are used, the muzzle velocity comes back up to within 20 fps of the 5" barrel.

Now, if performance is the sole concern, then yes there may be better rounds available, but I'm reminded of the cold war era description of "overkill" (Nuclear weapons had the capacity to kill everyone on earth 3 times, but they wouldn't be any more dead).

[BluemontGlock]

This is why i read this forum...

GREAT STUFF GUYS! thank you for the inforamation and *so* approciaite the differnent views, and the multiple angles of explanation...

great question, great responses, excellent points...

more of this, please!

[JC420IN]

This is why i read this forum...

GREAT STUFF GUYS! thank you for the inforamation and *so* approciaite the differnent views, and the multiple angles of explanation...

great question, great responses, excellent points...

more of this, please!

I agree I found this forum cause I was looking for an answer and like it so much I joined and whenever I have a question I get several good answers to consider and it so far has always helped me make a decision or lead me somewhere else to get info to make my decision.

[gunderwood]

The .45 has a long, well documented history as being an adequate handgun round (possibly slightly bettered by the .357 Magnum) with muzzle velocities of around 830-860 fps for 230gr. With the 3" barrel, the muzzle velocity of the 230gr. does drop into the 700's of fps, but if the +P rated loads are used, the muzzle velocity comes back up to within 20 fps of the 5" barrel.

Now, if performance is the sole concern, then yes there may be better rounds available, but I'm reminded of the cold war era description of "overkill" (Nuclear weapons had the capacity to kill everyone on earth 3 times, but they wouldn't be any more dead).

I am aware of 230gr .45ACP +P ammo. I am unaware of anyone making short barrel +P ammo. The two primary changes for short barrel ammo usually are redesigned HP and a powder change so you don't get a massive fireball. Self defense ammo is never loaded to the absolute max by the big manufacturers for a reason. I have no problem shooting +P in a short barrel or any other gun as long as the tradeoffs are understood.

The tests I found weren't impressive because the +P ammo available at the time was designed for 5" +P. I.e. they did the opposite of short barrel ammo, they made the bullet stronger. Just like .357SIG *can* shoot 9mm as they are otherwise identical. However, the .357SIG bullets have thicker jackets, etc. so they don't fragment like a 9mm would if pushed to those velocities. These bullets shot out of short barrels tend not to expand fully. The opposite would occur if you shot short barrel ammo, +P or otherwise, out of a 5". Given the increased popularity of 3-3.5" .45 1911's, perhaps someone is making such ammo or redesigned their product line to accout for the lower impact velocities.

The tests showed that .45ACP short barrel ammo didn't penetrate to teh suggested 12". Sure +P solves this, but only if the bullet isn't redesigned to be stronger. Ammo designs are changing so fast even data from a year or two ago is out of date. Please point me to someone making short barrel .45ACP +P ammo.

I would love to CC a .45ACP 3" gun, but I don't due to ammo concnens. My opinion of available data, nothign else. If you can show me that things have changed, I would be very happy. I would have to add a 3-3.5" 1911 to the list.

[gunderwood]

Now, if performance is the sole concern, then yes there may be better rounds available, but I'm reminded of the cold war era description of "overkill" (Nuclear weapons had the capacity to kill everyone on earth 3 times, but they wouldn't be any more dead).

Anything you can CC is underpowered. A .22lr can stop a threat, but we all know that it isn't ideal. FMJ has been used to kill lots of people, but again it isn't ideal for CC as it takes too long to stop the threat. None of these guns/calibers/bullts consistantly stop threats immediately with a single shot delivered to the torso. Until then I don't think I can consider any of them "overkill."

We have these debates because even a 1% increase in the likelihood of successfully defending your self and family is huge benefit. Consider just how many threats guns stop when properly deployed, 1% is a huge number of people still alive or unharmed. Granted, the difference between the best and worst of 9mm/.45/40/357 isn't very much, but the data suggests it is a lot more than 1%. Practice can account for much more than caliber selection. That is why I recommend 9mm for a first CC gun. Cheap ammo, lighter recoil, more practice. The tool can only save your life if you properly deploy it.

Edit: Full sized pistols are always better than the sub-compacts, unless you won't carry a full sized. Better to have something, anything, than leave it at home. If I knew I was going to get into a fight and couldn't avoid it, I wouldn't be reaching for my handgun...if I could deploy it, I would grab the .50bmg; and no it wouldn't be overkill either.

[SgtBill]

I suppose that I am one of the few on this board that carry's a Walther PK380 .380 cal. I have over the past 40 years carried just about ever cal. that is made to include .45 ACP Colt 1911 A-1 full size and Combat Commander, Smith & Wesson Model 39 and 59 and 469 all in 9 MM and a S&W model 645 in 45 ACP, several Smith & Wesson 2 1/2" model 19 and 66 in .357 Mag. Several Glock's in both 9 MM and 40 cal. all of the above I can no longer shoot due to physical limitations for any long period of time but I can still shoot them all well enough to put down a bad guy with the first several shot's if I had to.

I use the Walther .380 all the time now and I am more the confident with it but I have had over 40 year's of practice shooting with handguns and teaching people how to shoot. I don't believe in just putting 1 shot on target. I will shoot untill the target is down on the ground and stops moveing. Been there done that. It boils down to shot placement and speed. If you are looking for the sights in a close enconter shoot out you will most likely be hit prior to being able to put them on target. Look at what you want to shoot and shoot it forget the sights.
In all the years that I was involved in shootings and investigations that I completed it always turned out that the bad guy that made hits on who he was shooting at at close range had NO TRAINING at all they just pointed the weapon and pulled the trigger . It is called instinct shooting and it work's very well. I was never going for a nice tight group or high score I was in fact trying to kill the other guy before he killed me. Yes I can shoot a high score or shoot a tight group, I did it for many years in handgun competition and even managed to make state High Master Champion a few times along with being a member of the Govenors Twenty several times but that won't keep you alive in a shoot out trying to look at sight's when the adrenlin is pumping.Ok, I am starting to have flash backs time for me to go.
Bill