View Poll Results: .40 S&W 165gr. or .45 ACP 230gr.
Voters: 50. You may not vote on this poll
.40 S&W or the .45 ACP
#11
#14
I don't want to be on the business end of either one! I chose the .40 S&W because that is my department issue and what I carry for my backup. Either is a solid choice. I would be more concerned about finding the pistol that felt best in my hands, than whether it was chambered in 40 or 45.
#15
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Clermont Florida U.S.
Posts: 4,970
#16
Great poll. It's been back and forth many times and it's tied once again. I'm a .40 S&W fan myself and have a Ruger P91DC that I enjoy shooting. Like some have said here, you won't want to be on the receiving end of either one.
#18
Pull a gun and take a shot on a home invader and they're taking off. This isn't the movies where storm troopers in full tactical gear invade your home with automatic weapons...
And personally, based on my experience, a handgun is FAR superior to both shotguns and rifles in self-defense/home invasion situations, especially in urban environments.
#19
I voted for the .40 S&W out of logic, but I actually find myself carrying a .45acp much more often. Sometimes it's better to just go with your gut.
I have a Glock 23 .40S&W, and a Glock 32 .357Sig for that matter, that I CAN use for CC, but I find that I almost never do. My brother in law actually carries my 23, since it hadn't been out of the safe in so long. Between the .40 and the .45, my Micro-Compact 1911 gets MUCH more use than the .40 Glock.
In reality, I carry a .380 MUCH more often that I even carry the .45acp.
Logically, I prefer to have either MORE ammo, or a smaller piece, or both. I'm a bit of a minimalist when it comes to CCW, where I'd much rather have a "pocket pistol" like my Kel-Tec P-3AT .380Auto than have more firepower but in a bigger package, like the "compact" Glock 23 .40S&W.
So comparing the .40S&W with the .45acp, the .40 is a smaller package with more rounds in the mag. I don't NEED the power of a .40 to take care of 2 legged varmints, let alone the power of a .45acp. With nearly TWICE the ammo on deck, getting hit TWICE with a .40S&W does a lot more damage than getting hit ONCE with a .45acp, plus it's coming out of a more compact piece.
But like I said, I tend to carry the .45acp much more often, and prefer to do my plinking with the .45acp as well. No matter what the mind believes, sometimes the heart trumps logic.
I have a Glock 23 .40S&W, and a Glock 32 .357Sig for that matter, that I CAN use for CC, but I find that I almost never do. My brother in law actually carries my 23, since it hadn't been out of the safe in so long. Between the .40 and the .45, my Micro-Compact 1911 gets MUCH more use than the .40 Glock.
In reality, I carry a .380 MUCH more often that I even carry the .45acp.
Logically, I prefer to have either MORE ammo, or a smaller piece, or both. I'm a bit of a minimalist when it comes to CCW, where I'd much rather have a "pocket pistol" like my Kel-Tec P-3AT .380Auto than have more firepower but in a bigger package, like the "compact" Glock 23 .40S&W.
So comparing the .40S&W with the .45acp, the .40 is a smaller package with more rounds in the mag. I don't NEED the power of a .40 to take care of 2 legged varmints, let alone the power of a .45acp. With nearly TWICE the ammo on deck, getting hit TWICE with a .40S&W does a lot more damage than getting hit ONCE with a .45acp, plus it's coming out of a more compact piece.
But like I said, I tend to carry the .45acp much more often, and prefer to do my plinking with the .45acp as well. No matter what the mind believes, sometimes the heart trumps logic.
#20