Nonsense. The accuracy has nothing to do with the caliber, only the quality of the firearm and the ability of the shooter. While the .45 does have greater recoil, it is also more effective as a man-stopper. The comparative absolute range of any handgun is largely irrelevant, since they are almost never effective beyond 50 yards at most, and are most commonly used at less than three yards. At any rational tactical distance, both are equally "accurate."FBM wrote:Only when the round actually hits the target, tho. The 9mm is more accurate and the reduced recoil means you can put more shots on-target faster. The .45 has a much shorter effective range than the 9mm, too.Feck wrote:I thought 45's made bigger holes and imparted more energy to target ?
The low recoil of the 9mm is offset by the anemic performance of the bullet. A 115 grain 9mm round has far less lethal effect than a 250 grain .45 round. While the higher velocity of the 9mm round compensates somewhat for the lighter bullet, the heavier, though slower .45 round has better "knockdown" power, and it's less likely to overpenetrate.
I put away my 9mm in favor of a .45 long ago, in response to a photo in "Street Survival - Tactics for Armed Encounters" showing a PCP-loaded guy who was shot 29 times in the torso, arms and abdomen with 9mm rounds before becoming "incapacitated."
Recoil issues can be compensated for by training, and I can fire my H&K USP Compact .45 as quickly as anyone with a 9mm and be just as accurate at combat ranges. It just takes practice.
