Originally posted by FishHead111
9mm is better no the .45 is better no the 9mm is better no the .45 is better no the 9mm is better no the .45 is better no the 9mm is better no the .45 is better no the 9mm is better no the .45 is better no the 9mm is better no the .45 is better no the 9mm is better no the .45 is better no the 9mm is better no the .45 is better no the 9mm is better no the ...[text shortened]... no the .45 is better no the 9mm is better no the .45 is better .........to infinity and beyond.
Auto pistols are for close range work. Heavy bullets, low velocity, .45 rules.
Cooper oversimplifies, but he does make a point. More capacity doesn't help, if you can't hit your target. No1, Paraordnance makes a .45 with a 14 round double stack magazine, stead of the old 7 rounders for the traditional 1911 .45ACP. Navy Seals like the other German .45 which has a double stack magazine as well. Smaller hands may limit use of those double stack guns. I notice little difference between felt recoil of nines and a .45, and I don't care much about downrange accuracy or flatness of trajectory. Inside 30 feet I want the 230 grain .45 hitting my target, not a wimpy 125 grain nine.
Which is "better"? The one that you can hit your target with consistently, and quickly, and that is light and compact enough so that you will carry it.