Back story, as briefly as possible: First exposure to .45 ACP was in ah U.S. Army, 45+ years ago. Military 1911. Hated it. Ever since then I've avoided both the caliber and 1911s.

Fast-forward to 10-12 years ago. A best friend wanted to get into shooting and SD. He liked the sound of the DAK trigger. Only rental a local range had in DAK was a P220. I was rusty because I hadn't been to the range in a while. Contrary to my expectations I shot it well and really enjoyed it.

That never left my mind. So when it came to buying a dedicated home defence handgun I ended-up with a Sig P320 in .45 ACP. Shoot it well, too. Better, perhaps, than anything other than my Ruger Mk I or Glock G34.

Finally decided, a couple months ago, I really should have a 1911. And if I was going to have a 1911, it was going to be in .45 ACP. Acquired a Rem. 1911 R1 Enhanced. I shoot that pistol better than any I own, incl. my Sig P210A Target (so far) and possibly even the G34.

That got me on a 1911 kick, so I bought a Colt Defender. It happened again. I have a Sig P239 SAS, Gen. 1 and a Walther PPS M2. I shoot that Defender better than either. Ok: The P239 SAS is a .40 S&W with a DAK trigger. But the PPS M2 is a 9mm with a decent trigger.

In a couple of these cases I suppose part of the performance gain is the triggers on these pistols. Both 1911s have great triggers. But my P320's trigger ain't bad, and the P220 was a DAK.

So: Is it the pistols, the caliber, or both? What have been your experiences? Have you found there's a caliber that suits you, almost regardless of what hardware is sending it down-range? Or a pistol design that makes caliber essentially irrelevant for you?

I went 357 sig pretty much right when the 229 357 came on market. I was just getting into it and the ballistics impressed me enough to make my 229 dual caliber running 357/40 interchangeably. That lasted almost 20 years.

Same pistols had 9mm barrel conversions (229 barsto, 239 oem) and I would routinely get 9mm +p fmj's for practice to supplement my 40 and 357. There was a big hub hub on here and many places about the Federal HST so I decided to try it in 124g +p. One mag of that, feeling and hearing the "crack" of the fps of that round....well soon after I started selling all my 357sig, which I had many thousands of rounds, as well as my 40sw stockpile. Sold my pistols and swapped to 9mm after 20 years. I was help captive by the few solid 357sig options on the market for so long. Going to 9mm opened my choices up all across the board. Went through various 9mm platforms until I settled on what I run now. Beretta PX4 storms (every size) and HK P30's in P30/P30sk varieties. I still carry the HST round in 124g +p to this day.

For me it was the caliber that suits me, specifically the jhp carry round that dictated all. I've shot 45 over almost 30 years now, but never had much interested in owning the caliber. Have respect for it but with these modern ballistics I choose the economical route. I now only stock one semi-auto caliber. I have a revolver and some 38/357 for nostalgia mostly, but the only revolver I own is for deep concealment. And oddly, I now love revolvers, their simplicity, etc, more than semi-autos even though I own only one, and carry 9mm in a semi-auto every day.

A friend in college was taking the Design Of Experiments class (Box Hunter Hunter Textbook, if you are familiar with it). He did experiments with different guns, different caliber but same platform, and different experienced shooters.

His experiments were 1911 in .45 and 9mm, and revolvers using .38 sp and full house .357 mags, and he had a 9mm revolver to tie the data together. he had different barrel lengths, and some Glocks in .45 and 9mm IIRC. We were near Target Masters in the bay area so renting what we didn't have was easy to do. I don't think he tried the .40, but this was long ago, before the .40 was popular.

He found without question that the platform made the biggest difference with some experienced shooters doing better with some over others.

In his data, the caliber didn't make much difference, at least not as much as other factors.

I've been a .45 ACP and 1911 fan for over 50 years. You ask a fair question. For me it's a combination of the two, caliber and platform just because of the amount of shooting with them that I have done. Ironically, the most accurate gun I've ever owned and shot was a Ruger Super Blackhawk in .44 magnum that I shot Silhouette with. Of course in those days I shot between 500-1,000 rounds a week of handloads in competition and practice. That's all I can add to the conversation and just based on my personnel experience.

Jim

for me it's 80% caliber 20% pistol. 357sig is my caliber, but in the Steyr M platform it's unbeatable.

It's the pistol. Some calibers are easier to shoot, particularly for the recoil sensitive, but, the ergonomics of the gun are a large determinate in how well a shooter will perform. Which is why new shooters are rightly encouraged to try different platforms. See what best fits their hands.

quote:

Back story, as briefly as possible: First exposure to .45 ACP was in ah U.S. Army, 45+ years ago. Military 1911. Hated it. Ever since then I've avoided both the caliber and 1911s.

The same reason I love .45 but exposed more like 53 years ago. But I have abandoned the 1911 for the "modern" Sig P220 in DA/SA

You know, we were all a bit confused during the 1970's. It was...a confusing time.

Having said that, my experience has been that it's the platform first, then the caliber. I shoot a SIG P226 and a Steyr M in 9mm better than I do their equivalents in .40S&W, but I shoot a Steyr M in .40 better than I do Berettas or CZs in 9mm.

I'm with Jimbo as a long time 1911 45ACP fan.

I prefer the 45 overall but confess pistol ergonomics rule my choices as I have a "stunted" strong hand trigger finger, so many that I would otherwise like just don't work unless the grip is canted in my hand because of the trigger finger "reach."

quote:

Originally posted by Udo:

quote:

Back story, as briefly as possible: First exposure to .45 ACP was in ah U.S. Army, 45+ years ago. Military 1911. Hated it. Ever since then I've avoided both the caliber and 1911s.

The same reason I love .45 but exposed more like 53 years ago. But I have abandoned the 1911 for the "modern" Sig P220 in DA/SA

You should really try the M&P 45 2.0. Just rent one. Really, it's such a different animal and it's still a .45 ACP.

For me. It's all 3. The Pistol itself, the Caliber, and the trigger. The pistol has to fit me well. Some pistols that come in 2 or more calibers, I find 1 of the calibers just shoots better for me than some of the others. And, the trigger itself. While I can shoot well with a gritty trigger or heavy or long, it takes more effort on my part.

I'm in the "Pistol" crowd.

.40S&W out of a Gen 3 Glock 22 feel like your typical snappy .40 recoil impulse.
However, shoot the same round out of a Gen4 or Gen5 Glock 22 and it feels completely different (or a 229 or M&P40 for that matter).

And as crazy as it sounds, I prefer shooting .45ACP out of a HK45C than my 1911.

I am not a "1911 guy" and I experienced the same thing. On a slow day at the range all the instructors took a bunch of the rental guns and decided to see what gun worked best for each instructor - as in accuracy with speed of presentation and fast shooting.

A stainless steel 1911 is what I was most accurate with and fastest with at varying ranges. But I don't carry one. IMHO you need to spend at least $1K to get a decent reliable example. Then it requires a bit of testing and more maintenance than my 3rd gen 45s to maintain that reliability.

And then there is the whole cocked and locked carry which I am not enthused with. I shoot my 4506-1 and 4566 almost as well and a bit faster. At this point in the game I see no reason to change. Regards 18DAI

ability beyond both of those.
if your eyes, brain and motor skills can't sync up,
neither matter

1911 guy here with at least one chambered in about any caliber you could want. I find that I shoot all fairly consistently regardless of caliber. When I change platforms I always have adjustment issues regardless of caliber or trigger. So put me solidly in the platform category.

Some people carry Cocked and Unlocked striker handguns, i.e., Walther PPQ, S&W M&P, Sig et al. The striker is in a fully cocked condition. There are many others.

To the OP, I have stuck with my first love, the 1911. 1911's and Glock .45's are my fav's.

quote:

Originally posted by 18DAI:
And then there is the whole cocked and locked carry which I am not enthused with. I shoot my 4506-1 and 4566 almost as well and a bit faster. At this point in the game I see no reason to change. Regards 18DAI

This message has been edited. Last edited by: vba,

I would’ve, initially said pistol. After carrying a Glock32 in 357 Sig for many years, transitioned over the the G19G5. Never felt under-gunned with a Mag full of 357Sig..