Guns & Outdoors Forum

I have a lot of guns.

But sometimes, I like to carry light and flat.

So, I have a couple choices for "light" carry.

A Springfield DX-S 6+1 in .45acp
A Kahr CW-9 7+1 in 9mm

I have a 7+1 mag for the XD-S and an 8+1 for the Kahr.

Given the age old discussion of 9 vs 45 what would be your choice of the two?

Yes, I know there are newer guns that have greater capacity in identical sizes. But given the two choices I mentioned I'm interested in everyone's opinion.

From purely a "reactive target" point of view, I love how the .45 knocks over the plates as opposed to the 9mm that "tips" them over.
Controllability is not an issue and follow up shots are pretty much identical.

The heavy .45 ACP loads have disenchanted me. If I carry a .45 ACP these days, it’s with 185gr Speer GD pushed as fast as able.

If all that was available was FMJ, I would pick the .45.
But its not. Hollow points are a thing.
So, I'm picking 9mm on the "stopping power" (made up bull poop term) front.

Given the same capacity argument, I am also going with the 9 because its smaller and lighter to carry. And FAR cheaper to practice with.


.45 was the king for a time because of..... "TWO WORLD WARS! My Grandpa blew the arm of a Nazi CLEAN OFF with one shot of .45!"
and other old guy tall tales and bull poop.

Of those 2, I'd take the 9mm, chock full of either 115-124gr Speer golddots or fed HSTs, +ps if possible.

Of all the SD bullets I've tested in wet newsprint, or cleargel, I've yet to see either of those bullets fail to perform as advertised in any caliber I've tested. That includes taking "38 special" specific bullets and pushing them at full house, 6" 357 mag velocities.

For the 45, I carry Fed 230gr HST +p in my commander

And, for the record, other than the "heavy clothing" one, I could NOT care less about "it doesn't meet FBI protocol" Other than our brief winter here, I see the most likely SD scenarios being closer to a bare gel test.
Also, as a "civilian" I see most of the other items of the FBI protocol being more difficult to justify in a CIVILIAN SD scenario.

Feel free to disagree, Unless/until I am in a position of being dependent on you for the self defense of me and mine, carry a slingshot and a pocket full of marbles, for all I care. You do you, and I'll do ME

I would go with whichever one I shoot better or more accurately and call it a day.

I’ve gone to just about exclusive 9mm for concealed carry. Mostly the Glock 48 MOS and every once in a blue moon when I really need to go minimalist the P365X that I put together with the WC frame. My .45s are now mostly safe queens and I keep them mostly because I do love to shoot the platform and nostalgia.

I want to do some more testing (shoot a pig) with my G36 and the 185gr Speer GD. That’s about the only .45 ACP I’d consider carrying these days because of its light weight and compact frame. If it doesn’t perform………

The whole "knocks stuff down" aspect has been pretty much discredited from an SD point of view. Yes, 230 grains has more momentum and will move unyielding surfaces like bowling pins and steel plates, but when it comes to reaching vital organs:

Any of the FMJ and non-expanders in any of the major calibers will give plenty of penetration. . .

The 147 grain 9mm HP's tend to penetrate better than their counterparts that start with a 4 on the basis of better sectional density. I think the .45 230 grain HP's could easily be made better by simply dialing back the expansion a little. They'd be great if they stopped around .70-.75 caliber and dug a little deeper, but .85" and up is one big parachute.

So I'm more 9mm than .45 these days. The guns are lighter, kick less, hold more, and the real world results seem to indicate it's about all the same. Giving serious thought to ditching HP's in favor of cast flat points or FPFMJ for the .45 if it returns to "frequent companion" status.

So, the .40 SW is no longer an option for anyone?

Diver43 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 1:59 am So, the .40 SW is no longer an option for anyone?

It's my EDC...

Diver43 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 1:59 am So, the .40 SW is no longer an option for anyone?

I still carry one on occasion. I actually prefer it to the 9mm AND .45 ACP, ballistically.

breamfisher wrote: ↑Sun Jul 16, 2023 6:18 pm I would go with whichever one I shoot better or more accurately and call it a day.

This would be my way to go as well. I like Kahr guns, but I bet the Springer has a better trigger

Bigslug wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 1:46 am The whole "knocks stuff down" aspect has been pretty much discredited from an SD point of view. Yes, 230 grains has more momentum and will move unyielding surfaces like bowling pins and steel plates, but when it comes to reaching vital organs:

Any of the FMJ and non-expanders in any of the major calibers will give plenty of penetration. . .

The 147 grain 9mm HP's tend to penetrate better than their counterparts that start with a 4 on the basis of better sectional density. I think the .45 230 grain HP's could easily be made better by simply dialing back the expansion a little. They'd be great if they stopped around .70-.75 caliber and dug a little deeper, but .85" and up is one big parachute.

So I'm more 9mm than .45 these days. The guns are lighter, kick less, hold more, and the real world results seem to indicate it's about all the same. Giving serious thought to ditching HP's in favor of cast flat points or FPFMJ for the .45 if it returns to "frequent companion" status.

My current load for any 9mm edc is 124 grain jhps. In my little XD-S it's 185gr JHPs, but if I were to use a 1911 compact, I would stick with a flat nose ball. There are videos after videos after videos of defensive shootings and probably 90 to 95% of them show the assailant running helter-skelter at the sight of a gun in their intended victim's hand.

My time in investigations has shown me that any 9mm or .45acp, in any of the popular bullet weights is simply going to reach the vitals of any human, regardless. The exceptions are far more rare than the rules. Shot placement will always be king!

Admin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 17, 2023 1:46 pm

breamfisher wrote: ↑Sun Jul 16, 2023 6:18 pm I would go with whichever one I shoot better or more accurately and call it a day.

This would be my way to go as well. I like Kahr guns, but I bet the Springer has a better trigger

It's odd, but I love both.
The Springer is more precise but the Kahr has a silky smooth trigger that sort of mimics a finely tuned double action revolver.
I shoot either equally well.

In my last LEOSA qualification, the instructor commented, "That Kahr really shoots!"

I'm a proponent of having as many rounds of whatever caliber as I can. I'd rather have 15+1 in my Bersa Thunder Plus than 6+1 of 45 or 9mm. That's just me though and I'm a horrible shot

[quote=DanielChamberlain post_id=2663 time=1689634603 user_id=125

My current load for any 9mm edc is 124 grain jhps. In my little XD-S it's 185gr JHPs, but if I were to use a 1911 compact, I would stick with a flat nose ball. There are videos after videos after videos of defensive shootings and probably 90 to 95% of them show the assailant running helter-skelter at the sight of a gun in their intended victim's hand.

My time in investigations has shown me that any 9mm or .45acp, in any of the popular bullet weights is simply going to reach the vitals of any human, regardless. The exceptions are far more rare than the rules. Shot placement will always be king!
[/quote]

Comes down to what gives you the warm tinglies. . .or the screaming meemies. Under-penetration is what scares me and I view exits by mostly depleted bullets as just fine. As such, I tend to avoid the light for caliber stuff. The FBI likes the idea of going 12-18" deep in gelatin after passing through whatever obstacle is placed in front of it. I'd like to see about 14-24" personally. Your hang-ups, of course, may vary.

I prefer shot placement with penetration too. But, welcome to 2023. We can have both and add expansion as well……..with speed.

Imaging that. Modern technology.
You’re welcome.

I don’t train for the ones that run away.

Zee wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 3:43 am I prefer shot placement with penetration too. But, welcome to 2023. We can have both and add expansion as well……..with speed.

Imaging that. Modern technology.
You’re welcome.

Shallow cavity hollow point pins in your molds is modern?

Agreed that my perceived need would be easily attained with a little more jacket tweaking. There's plenty of penetration with the stuff that doesn't expand, so it's really just a question of determining how big the diameter of the open parachute needs to be, and base weight and speed on how far it needs to "fall". SAAMI pressure specs limit speed somewhat, so weight and final diameter are practically what we have to work with.

The Barnes copper rifle bullets are pretty clever in that their open petals are trying to be blades that cut more than a mushroom that crushes, so they're increasing diameter without adding so much resistance to penetration. Playing with an SXT or Golden Saber so it only has 4 petals instead of six, or reducing the width of those petals to just the SXT's forward facing "fangs" might be another possibility. These options would allow us to gain depth while running with light weight and speed.

I guess my practical game animal question for Zee is this: The FBI's notion is that hydrostatic displacement damage isn't seen until we get to an impact speed of 2000 fps or greater. I'm mostly on board with that, but not 100% comfy. Have you seen anything in your large sampling of field dressings to cast any doubt on it? Where do we go from poking a hole in a pig's heart to radially extending damage beyond bullet diameter, and can we practically get there with pistols? We gain 100 to 250 fps by dropping from the heavy for caliber bullets to the light ones in the various duty rounds. Assuming penetration is about the same, what's that doing for us?

Seems like if we wanted to get sciency on that, lighter Hornady XTP's in the .38/.357 Magnum would be an easily controlled platform, since they hold together well, and the round can be loaded anywhere from gutless to gawdawful.

(Yes. . .I know. I'd trap my own damn pigs if I could. I can only try to plant the Seeds of Enablement. )

Pistols can’t compare to rifle velocity. But, the internal damage I’ve seen in regards to bruising of the lungs and shredding of the heart and liver………as compared to non-expanding and expanding bullets is definitively noticeable. Granted speed present. Sub 9mm and sub .357 Mag (aka .38Spl) need not apply.
I still need a .45 ACP kill at sun 7yrds. But, at 35yrds…….it sucked balls.
I’m all for penetration. But, I don’t want excessive. Meaning, I don’t particularly want it popping out the back side with a defensive round. That opens up a world of liability when you hit grandma or junior.
Current select rounds are capable of giving the penetration and expansion needed without jeopardizing the masses. Adding expansion capability lowers the known exit of cast and solids.

Anyway, yes…….I’ve seen internal differences to soft tissue between solid (non-expanding) bullets and those that at least open up a little.

There is no manic bullet. But, common ground can be found.

Barriers and clothing can limit expansion. But, when you start with non as an option……..

Zee wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:03 pm I’m all for penetration. But, I don’t want excessive. Meaning, I don’t particularly want it popping out the back side with a defensive round. That opens up a world of liability when you hit grandma or junior.
Current select rounds are capable of giving the penetration and expansion needed without jeopardizing the masses. Adding expansion capability lowers the known exit of cast and solids.

Yup. That's the happy medium we seek. I'm not advocating 300 grain .375 H&H solids for PD - I guess the way I should put it is that where one camp wants the bullet to stop in the skin or clothing on the far side of a frontal shot on a 95-pound weakling, I'm in the camp that wants it to stop on the skin, clothing, or chest wall on the far side of a 9:00-3:00 lateral shot on a 275-pound gym rat after punching through his meaty upper arm and long bone on the entry side. At the point where there's ZERO risk of a pass through, we've created something that's going to fail to reach the goodies at certain times. The question then becomes one of analyzing the remaining capabilities of my preferred bullet after it exhausts much of it's energy passing through the 95-pound weakling.

I've often looked at that in terms of the generally lousy hit percentages in shootings - there's the dangers of a pass-through on the 25% that hit the intended target, but what about the performance of the 75% that don't? (red dots seem to be happily reversing that ratio, but that may be a topic for elsewhere) Optimizing to stop the threat with fewer bullets launched has therefore seemed to me to be the better way to address the issue.

Shooter just need to suck less.

Zee wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2023 4:43 pm Shooter just need to suck less.

That’s the kind of common sense logic that seems to elude a lot of people…

115 + 115 = 230

Seriously, with modern ammo it's six in one, half a dozen the other