here it comes... the new caliber debate.

All of the above.

Like em all and own them all. I carry a 357 sig. Love the velocity and energy. It is great for puncturing car doors, etc. As for which frame... I like all three. I only own the 31 and 33 right now but plan to fix that soon. I am dying to buy the 32.

I am not a caliber snob. I truly like all the calibers you named.

 

This is my personal belief from what I've been told. Any of those calibers will get the job done. The expectation of having a one-shot stopper in handgun calibers is for the most part mythical (except fro .454 Casull or .500 S&W). 9mm, smaller diameter but faster traveling bullet. That could possible cause over penetration problems with some of the heavier loads, but not likely. .40 is a compromise in between 9mm and .45 ACP. Larger diameter than a 9mm, but smaller than .45 ACP. Not as much ammo capacity as 9mm, but more than .45. .357 sig attempted to recreate the venerable .357 mag in an auto pistol, and according to ballistics, it has done so quite well. Plus, it and the .40 have pretty good records with their ability at stopping fights. .45 is the classic, and it will surely get the job done. It is a large diameter bullet that fires a little slower than other bullets, but it is just so darn big. 10mm, if you have a full-power load would definitely do the job of taking out the bad guy, but it is very likely that it may take out granny behind him as well.

I chose .40 personally because the recoil was not ridiculous, it has a proven track record, and I just didn't want a 9mm. I've heard horror stories of LEOs dumping and entire mag from a G17 into a bad guy and the fight still carried on. This could be chalked up to poor shot placement or the fact that the guy was on drugs. But in my opinion, it didn't punch a large enough hole in the guy and cause enough blood to drain out (because that's what the cause of a fight stopping witha a handgun is most of the time). The .45 ACP was too expensive to practice with for me, plus I liked the extra round capacity of the .40. I also chose it because I can interchange the barrel with the .357 sig glocks and have a new gun. The 10mm is overkill to me for self-defense applications especially in public. If I was in my brick house and not an apartment, the 10mm would be an awesome handgun for that application.

 

Forgot to add, if I were to go with the .45 ACP it would definitely be a 1911. .357 magnum, a Taurus, .357 sig definitely a Sig, and a 9mm or .40 a Glock all the way. Oh yeah, 10mm S&W or Glock.

 

I do not know if this guy's pasted figures are accurate, but they are easier to read than the 1980s FBI stopping power reports you can easily find on Google.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/11...g_Powerandamp_quot__statistics_revealed_.html

FBI thing from online:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

 

For me, I prefer the .40 with a gold load with proven expansion and appropriate amount of penetration (like the Gold Dot HP). We all know that "stopping power" is pretty much a myth for any handgun. Again, for me, I can control the recoil of a Glock 23 well enough to recover quickly for rapid fire of multiple shots with pretty decent shot placement. Even when using the point and shoot method. My other preferred sidearm? My trusty S&W Model 28 with .357 HP's. My first firearm ever owned from back in the late 70's. Just can't part with it.

 

Jimmyalbrecht, you posted yours as I was typing mine. Looking at the two posts, it's like we were reading each others minds. LOL. Good to know I'm on the same page with at least ONE other person

 

Lol, I understand that there is no handgun that is just going to way outperform others as far as caliber goes. I just love my .40 for the interchangeability. I can have a 9mm, .40 and .357 sig all in one gun with a barrel change (and a mag for the 9mm).

 

Question with 10mm. Isn't the ammo more expensive and harder to find then the rest of the calibers he is asking about?

 

Isn't the .40 loaded high enough that its the worst penetrator of all, or am I mistaken?

 

Gotcha. I need a good guide or website that goes over all the major calibers and lists good uses and penetration values or something.

 

wikipedia actually has a lot of info on calibers.

 

I carry a long standing bias against 9mm. I won't carry it. I think there are a number of other options that provide more than adequate ammo capacity in a big, better performing caliber. It's something that was instilled in me in the late 80's/early 90's and after all this time, it's not likely to change.

I've carried .40s, almost exclusively, since the late 90s. It's what I was "raised" on.

In recent years, I added the 10mm and carried it for a while. I love the round, I think it's a great caliber for all purposes, but I don't need to tell you anything about 10mm.

I like .357 Sig. It's a lot of fun to shoot and it sends that bullet screaming out of the barrel. I don't know that I'd use it as my primary caliber, but I do own one gun in the caliber and I have another on the way.

.45ACP has more than proven its capabilities over the years. I don't like it in a Glock, because the grip is too big for me, even in a SF model or a Gen4. I don't understand why other manufacturers can put the ACP in a smaller grip, but Glock can't.

.45GAP has become a new favorite. I had to give up my 29SF because the 10mm was too much for my early arthritic hands to handle in that small of a gun. I replaced it with a G39. .45GAP allows me to have a Glock in .45 with a reasonably sized grip.

Aside from Glock, I have two Walther P99s and a Taurus 740 in .40 that I'll happily carry. I have a Sig 229 on the way with a .40 & a .357Sig barrel. Once I get comfortable with it, I'm sure I'll be willing to carry it as well.

I have two 10mms, but neither is a carry gun. I will not carry any gun that, such as a 1911, that I have to carry "cocked & locked". If a gun has a thumb safety, like my 740, I carry the gun with the thumb safety off. It still has the same safeties as a Glock active; the thumb safety is an "extra", like the ones on some M&Ps.

I have two .45GAPs, the 37 & 39, that I'll carry. Right now, no one else is making a .45GAP, though there are plenty of XDs out there that I could have and carry if I wanted to.

I have two .45ACPs, both Taurus, one that I will carry and one that I won't.

If I were going to carry a revolver as my primary, I would want at least a .357, but would probably opt for either a .44 Special or the new S&W Governor, which can run .410, .45LC and .45 ACP via moon clips. It's on my list...I will own one eventually. That and the Chiappa Rhino .357.

 

Going back to the question I do want a .357 sig and I'd get a 32 for that. I also want a .40 but I kinda want a Sig Scorpian for that. I want a Sig and an HK for sure but not sure if I want to duplicate guns I have already. My HK is going to be a full size .45 since my Glock is the 30.

 

Glock does make a smaller grip .45. The 36.

http://www.glock.com/english/glock36_tech.htm

 

At a greatly reduced ammo capacity.

 

I like the GAP technology on paper, but aren't they fairly low capacity too?
37 - 10 rds, 38 - 8 rds, or 39 - 6 rds.

http://www.glock.com/english/index_pistols.htm

 

Yep, there will always be trade-offs. It's a capacity vs. size vs. what you can handle issue. If you can't handle the recoil of a 10mm, you shouldn't carry it. I know people who can unload an entire mag from a G19 into a 6 inch circle in a matter of seconds. 6 .45 ACP and 15 9mm bullets, I'm pretty sure if you add up total diameter of all the hits, the 9mm will win out on that one. So it's really not going to hurt you to carry any caliber 9mm and up in my personal opinion.

And I think the big draw to the GAP is that the frame is the same size as the 9mm and .40.