We see lots of opinions on it, lots of anecdotal experiences, and of course many of us who have already developed a preference for one or another cartridge are skeptical of the others.
Take a few of each shooter type:
- 'newbie'
'some experience but petite'
'some experience but strong'
'more experienced and prefers 9mm'
'more experienced and prefers 40 S&W'
'more experienced and prefers 45 ACP'
- slow-fire targets,
a single moving target, and
multiple targets requiring prioritization
So yes, if 'concealability' or light weight is a high priority on a given day, I'll opt for the 9mm (don't have a 40), but the real question is....what about the days when I am fine with a full-size CCW gun...?
I have a full-size 9mm in a Taurus PT-92, and I haven't even formally compared that to my 45 ACP 1911 in terms of the above scenarios, but if I did, it might reflect more difference between 'platforms' (love that word
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Anyway, it would be interesting. I'm betting some police departments or military units have actually done that experimenting, but of course their results might not extrapolate to civilian shooters or scenarios.
I would think that in 'combat' one could make a case for a less powerful round that penetrated well even if not causing immediate lethality, if the tradeoff were a much higher magazine capacity and/or much better controllability for multiple targets all at once. On the other hand, the average civilian shooter is (I think) more likely to face fewer bad-guys (most often just one I'm suspecting), and may therefore need the balance shifted less towards volume of fire and more towards stopping-power within their limits of accurate same-target followup shots.
If someone wants to donate three Glocks and a few hundred rounds of ammo, I'd be glad to complete the 'more experienced and prefers 45 ACP' category of testing towards this noble end...
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)