I was explaining my reasoning for my personal choice. I don't believe that everyone who chooses not to make 9mm their carry that they are making a mistake. Todays modern ammo choices are mostly pretty good. Bellow I explain why I might differ from your choices. I am not trying to continue the silly caliber wars just trying to explain my reasoning for me.Liberty wrote:I am a 9mm guy because.
1: 9mm ammo is cheap, I don't buy the cheapest range ammo available compared to the larger alternatives it's cheaper. Cheaper means I shoot more. I shoot more so my 9mm is more accurate.
2: I found that I can shoot the larger caliber just as accurately, but when I attempt to string together shots, the follow up shots are slower and less accurate.
3: Gell test have shown over and over again that good modern defensive ammo makes holes pretty simular to .40 and ,45 Cal.
4: More ammo. 7 or 8 rounds just doesn't seem to be enough.
5: Unsupported chambers is this a real danger? I don't know, but I believe a gun should be more dangerous to the front than it is the rear.
6: 9mm guns are just more reliable by design. Never needed to polish a ramp, Heck my Beretta doesn't even have a ramp.
7: 9mm is easier on the gun than .40. I believe most 9mm handguns will have a longer service life than a .40 cal.
8: There are some very kewl small 9mm handguns.
9: I only stock one caliber, some people like to shoot a variety of things. I'm just a simple man with a simple budget.
10: I just enjoy shooting a 9mm more than I have other calibers.
You are right about modern defensive loads. I use range ammo for almost all my shooting. There is a larger price differential when it comes to range ammo. I believe that most agencies require that their officers qualify with the same ammo that they carry. If folks do most of the shooting using premium rounds the price differential is not as much.parabelum wrote: 1. The argument that 9mm is so much cheaper is not true anymore. As an example, I can get Speer gold dots in 357 Sig for $22.97 per box of 50, or $17.97 for 357 Sig lawman fmj box of 50 (ammunition depot).
Shot to shot recovery will be faster for most people on a 9mm. That being said, a lot of variables will be with the shooter and particular guns.parabelum wrote: 2. That's a personal preference argument. Some people, myself included, are actually better shots with larger calibers.
parabelum wrote: 3. Similar or not, 9mm when all things pressure wise are equal (no +p or +p+) will not have the power factor of 40, 45, 357 Sig etc. Just can't cheat physics.
No arguement about the pwer factor being larger on bigger guns.
No argument about power factor being greater on a larger caliber., But just how important is power factor? When it comes down to Channel wound the differences can be marginal, although the larger caliber will normally be slightly larger.
I was speaking in generalities, but generally speaking these guns have large grips which are can be difficult for those with smaller hands. some of the 9mm have huge capacities, but they are unwieldy and impractcal for EDC.parabelum wrote:
4. Not necessarily true in all cases. There are small powerhouses that move a more potent projectiles then 9mm, with plenty rounds. G33,G32, P229...
parabelum wrote: 5. Agree.
True, from what I have gathered the .40 is pretty reliable also. The gun model will have alot to do with this. But speaking in generalities I think that people tend to have fewer problems with 9mm. I never have had to fluff and buff any 9mm.parabelum wrote: 6. That only holds true for certain gun models and can swing both ways. Some can say 357 Sig is actually more reliable due to its bottleneck design. Some might be right, maybe. It all depends on the gun model.
Perhaps, but it stands to reason the softer recoil andlower pressure might be easier on a gun.parabelum wrote: 7. I've heard that argument for years, without ever actually seeing any reputable tests to confirm this. All it is is forum driven hypothetical discussion based on the pressure tolerances from 40 vs 9. I have put thousands of rounds through various 40 caliber guns, Sig, Glock, H&K, Kahr... I have never been able to break one. Even with extensive shooting using Buffalo Bore 155gr 40+p (the only properly loaded .40 IMHO) round.
Yup, but the 9mm are typically smaller and more ammo. Nothing in .45 like the LC9. I don't own anything like that but they seem pretty kewl to me.parabelum wrote:
8. Agree. But, same is true for 45's etc.
parabelum wrote: 9. Valid point.
I don't think any of the discussed choices are bad. As someone mentioned earlier, my subcompact 9mm wouldn't be my weapon of choice in bear country. There is nothing wrong with folks packing their full sized 1911 either. It's just not my choice.parabelum wrote: 10. Same as #2 from above.