TexasCHLforum.com

how about 50AE or 454 C

krieghoff wrote:Give it a try Trakinpat. Ya never know, she might like it and then you might have a shooting partner. Years ago in my younger days, I did just that. As time progressed, she took up shotguns and had a blast at it. Many times when I was out of town and returned, she would have loaded several buckets of 12 gauge AA's for me. Those were the days!!

I'm trying to get her into it now, she has gone shooting with me several times and enjoyed it, her family likes guns and all they just prefer fishing. Haha that does sound great!

9mm and 357 sig. regardless of which caliber, always loaded with Gold Dots

Nice to see the 9mm love. Figured a lot of folks here would be .45ers.

Carry a lot of things except .380. 10mm at this moment.

nyj wrote:Nice to see the 9mm love.

means more .40 on the shelf for me.

jmra wrote:

nyj wrote:Nice to see the 9mm love.

means more .40 on the shelf for me.

No no no! I want that .40!

I believe that the popularity of the .45acp comes from the old military issued firearms. I talk to the guys at my local VFW hall regularly and .45 is still the preferred caliber for most vets. I prefer the combination of the ballistics and magazine capacity of he .40 s&w. On average, 92% of the power of the .45 but twice the magazine capacity. If the need to use my carry gun presents itself, nothing like a few extra rounds to make sure I don't have to reload.

Trilogy wrote:I believe that the popularity of the .45acp comes from the old military issued firearms. I talk to the guys at my local VFW hall regularly and .45 is still the preferred caliber for most vets. I prefer the combination of the ballistics and magazine capacity of he .40 s&w. On average, 92% of the power of the .45 but twice the magazine capacity. If the need to use my carry gun presents itself, nothing like a few extra rounds to make sure I don't have to reload.

I think the comparison of military use and civilian self defense use of the .45 pistol is quite different. When it comes to to the "effectiveness" of the .45 in combat, in 1941 the U.S. Army R&D section had a pretty dim view of the .45 after WWI (which was an up close and personal war) when they published the following:

“This weapon (the M1911) was primarily for defensive purposes since its effective range is limited to not more than 25 yards, except when handled by an expert. Its ineffectiveness was well proven by the amazingly small number of casualties it inflicted upon enemy troops during WWI as revealed by post-war inspection of German casualty lists and hospital records.”

Now again, I believe most civilian self defense encounters occur well within 25 yards, and the statement above might not apply. But the statement illustrates that pistols in military combat (at least in WWI) didn't inflict a whole lot of damage, regardless of caliber. If I were in combat again, my vote would be for a pistol that was the most accurate, with an acceptable caliber and capacity, not just caliber alone. The 1911s I carried in the military were usually old, worn, rattled, and far from the accuracy of modern 1911s. Your experience, and the vets at the VFW might be different though. Just MHO.

G26ster wrote:

Trilogy wrote:I believe that the popularity of the .45acp comes from the old military issued firearms. I talk to the guys at my local VFW hall regularly and .45 is still the preferred caliber for most vets. I prefer the combination of the ballistics and magazine capacity of he .40 s&w. On average, 92% of the power of the .45 but twice the magazine capacity. If the need to use my carry gun presents itself, nothing like a few extra rounds to make sure I don't have to reload.

I think the comparison of military use and civilian self defense use of the .45 pistol is quite different. When it comes to to the "effectiveness" of the .45 in combat, in 1941 the U.S. Army R&D section had a pretty dim view of the .45 after WWI (which was an up close and personal war) when they published the following:

“This weapon (the M1911) was primarily for defensive purposes since its effective range is limited to not more than 25 yards, except when handled by an expert. Its ineffectiveness was well proven by the amazingly small number of casualties it inflicted upon enemy troops during WWI as revealed by post-war inspection of German casualty lists and hospital records.”

Now again, I believe most civilian self defense encounters occur well within 25 yards, and the statement above might not apply. But the statement illustrates that pistols in military combat (at least in WWI) didn't inflict a whole lot of damage, regardless of caliber. If I were in combat again, my vote would be for a pistol that was the most accurate, with an acceptable caliber and capacity, not just caliber alone. The 1911s I carried in the military were usually old, worn, rattled, and far from the accuracy of modern 1911s. Your experience, and the vets at the VFW might be different though. Just MHO.

Yeah, most of the guys I know that were fortunate enough to carry a sidearm in combat (which is pretty much restricted to SNCOs and Officers now.) preferred 9MM.. they carried SIG 226's and hell I even saw New Zealanders with G19's.

G26ster wrote:
“This weapon (the M1911) was primarily for defensive purposes since its effective range is limited to not more than 25 yards, except when handled by an expert. Its ineffectiveness was well proven by the amazingly small number of casualties it inflicted upon enemy troops during WWI as revealed by post-war inspection of German casualty lists and hospital records.”

Part of that is because the standard .45acp military round is the round-nose FMJ ball bullet. It penetrates well, of course, but tends to just slip through tissue without doing much damage, with the exception of head shots. That's totally different from today's +P JHP ammo.

Just switched primary from 40 to 9mm.

Ranked most often to least: 9mm, 38spl +P, .45 ACP

38spl is usually with snake shot for weekend yardwork

357 Sig