testtest

Ayoob: Is the .45 Obsolete?

Blacjac said:
.45 acp is the BEST DEFENSE ROUND FOR CLOSE ATTACKS
, if u miss it won’t travel for a mile and go through two houses like a 357 mag
With a a good hollow point round , guaranteed to take the fight out of ant intruder
Click to expand...
.357 mag won’t travel for a mile, either, assuming a level shot; it’ll hit the ground about 350-400 yards downrange, not a lot farther than the .45 will carry.
 
iklwa said:
I grew up in Houston, Texas.
Those boys, and I do mean "men", had 357s and 1911s.
The Harris County Sherriff's Department (Houston is in Harris County) had the same with a high proportion of 1911s.
The Texas Rangers and the Department of Public Safety (good name, huh?) did the same.
Those guys had 357 Smiths, mainly.

It was only when lawyers got into the "sue the police because the weapons have no safety" game and the bookkeepers began pushing for cheaper ammo that the change started (read "Glock").
Not coinkydentally, the HPD began recruiting more and more women and they complained the standard "issue" firearms were to hard to shoot.
It was not until the adoption of "issue weapons" that this really all began.
Most LEO of the time where I grew up purchased and qualified with their own firearms.
I believe the DPS were required to use the S&W 357 but they were still responsible for the purchase and maintenance of their handgun...like all motorcycle police had to do.

The majority of 38s came in the form of Detective's Specials and snubby Smiths.
Click to expand...
Texas isn’t the entire US; and that’s a ridiculously small sampling of Texas LE, to boot.

In the golden age of the revolver in law enforcement—that is, up until the early-mid 1980’s, the .38 Special cartridge was the predominantly issued round, used in the most shootings, and anchored the most bad guys.

Again, the issue is not caliber, it’s training.
 
HansGruber said:
.357 mag won’t travel for a mile, either, assuming a level shot; it’ll hit the ground about 350-400 yards downrange, not a lot farther than the .45 will carry.
Click to expand...
6FBB2A08-6CE2-4525-AFF0-007A2354741B.png
Last time I checked a mile was 5280 feet
 
Blacjac said:
View attachment 17431Last time I checked a mile was 5280 feet
Click to expand...
Again—fired at the level is kinda a key phrase in my reply.

Put it in a ballistic arc—45°—and it goes considerably further, yes...but I really don’t think you’re going to be doing that in a gunfight—unless your opponent is 12 feet tall.

Let’s do the math:

At 32.17 feet per second acceleration due to gravity, it will take just over .58 seconds for a bullet to drop 66” (the distance measured from the muzzle to the ground when I went into a defensive shooting stance).

A Remington Golden Saber 125gr JHP moves at 1250ft/sec; in .58 seconds it travels....725 feet, or 241.3 yards...and then it hits the ground. Seems I overestimated the distance originally...

A .45, at 950 ft/sec, would travel 551 feet, or 183.6 yards...pretty close to the 50 yards less I referenced.
 
Last edited:
bigx5murf said:
What unit of measure is acceleration measured in? In physics, it's usually m/s^2, or meters per second SQUARED
Click to expand...
Granted. But the equation F=ma is a Newton equation. Period. It’s a fundamental law of physics. The equation is showing how force is determined. When a car crashes into something, the force is mass times acceleration, and that acceleration is a function of the earth’s gravity. The equation stands.
 
EconMaestro said:
Granted. But the equation F=ma is a Newton equation. Period. It’s a fundamental law of physics. The equation is showing how force is determined. When a car crashes into something, the force is mass times acceleration, and that acceleration is a function of the earth’s gravity. The equation stands.
Click to expand...

Acceleration due to gravity is a function of gravity, a bullet does not accelerate due to gravity, well a warning shot fired upwards eventually does. But not one fired from a firearm.

My point was the relationship of mass and acceleration is not perfectly linear as you're implying, it's a logarithmic relationship. If you chart the two, you won't get a straight line, you'll get a curve.

accelVSfmass.jpg
 
bigx5murf said:
Acceleration due to gravity is a function of gravity, a bullet does not accelerate due to gravity, well a warning shot fired upwards eventually does. But not one fired from a firearm.

My point was the relationship of mass and acceleration is not perfectly linear as you're implying, it's a logarithmic relationship. If you chart the two, you won't get a straight line, you'll get a curve.

accelVSfmass.jpg
Click to expand...
Look, this is my last post about this silly pissing match. Your equation that F=ma^2 is just wrong. Simple as that. The correct equation is F=ma. I’ve studied plenty of physics and hold a masters in ME. NO WHERE EVER HAS YOUR INCORRECT EQUATION BEEN USED. End of the saga. You are wrong and you need to admit when you are wrong. Continue to argue about a set equation since calculus was discovered—not invented—but discovered, makes you look foolish.
 
I read somewhere online that a question was thrown out for thought referring to the difference between the 9mm and 45ACP. It went something like this "Would you rather be hit with a golf ball or a brick?"

I would've replied neither, both are going to hurt. Believe me, I've been hit by a golf ball and it wasn't funny.
 
EconMaestro said:
Look, this is my last post about this silly pissing match. Your equation that F=ma^2 is just wrong. Simple as that. The correct equation is F=ma. I’ve studied plenty of physics and hold a masters in ME. NO WHERE EVER HAS YOUR INCORRECT EQUATION BEEN USED. End of the saga. You are wrong and you need to admit when you are wrong. Continue to argue about a set equation since calculus was discovered—not invented—but discovered, makes you look foolish.
Click to expand...
I think what's being confused is that kinetic energy is calculated by velocity squared (K.E. = 1/2 m v2)
 
10mm is the new .45acp it has a much higher velocity with similar recoil to .45acp, more capacity, and bullets weights comparable to .45acp.

Technology evolves though stubborn men are slower to admit it.....😜

.45acp is not obsolete neither is most center-fire cartridges if there's a use or demand for them.
 
Last edited:
Old school, old time, dye hard 1911 in .45.

And to answer (perhaps the only stupid question) is of course the .45 will always be relevant.

And yet my EDC is now 9mm in 1911. And the 9mm is superior to the .45.

Why?

Because times (and physical capability, and practicality, and comfort, or not, and other considerations) change.
And so the 9mm that I have with me is superior to the .45 I left at the house!!!
 
I think that C. Sumpin hits at the central issue here. People have to decide which pistol and which round suits their needs. I carry my revolver loaded with .38 +P when I walk my dog at night; however, I'll carry the Glock 20 when I feel the need to be loaded for bear even if I'm going to the city. Having only 1 gun, regardless of caliber, if that's all you can afford and you feel confident that it will do the job, is better than no gun at all should a situation arise. But having the right gun, caliber, and number of rounds for any given situation is a toss of the dice. There are lots of factors to consider that's probably the reason that a golfer carries more than one type of club in his bag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top