ignore the keltec remark, he was bustin onions. a 40's recoil feels faster and snappier to me and generaly a normal sized 45 is more comfortable for me to shoot. the 9mm is cheaper,holds 1 extra round, is a nato round so surplus ammo and availability is better and the 9 will generally be a bit slimmer. the 40 is 10mm diameter but a heavier bullet and would say better stopping power, BUT with good quality self defense ammo like black hills,corbon,speer lawman, rem golden sabers etc and s.d. ranges of 0-20' I doubt it would make much diff.
Is there any place better than others to buy ammo in bulk. .45 in particular?
If you are going to shoot a lot then get the 9mm as it's a lot more economical than 40S&W or 45ACP.
I know most people think that revolvers are mechnically more reliable but my experience indicates that is not the case. I've taken several shooting classes where we shoot 600-1800 rounds in 2-3 days. In almost all these classes everybody is using pistols and most will go through the course without any problem. Even if there is a problem with a pistol it's usually a simple fix... replace extractor, replace spring, etc. I've taken 2 revolver classes where we shot about 1,300 rounds in 3 days and I think about 20% of revolvers have some issues during those 3 days and about 10% will have major issues where it can not be repaired in the field. These are not your lower level revolvers like Rossi or Ruby but top level revolvers from Colt, S&W, etc. When I take a pistol to a shooting class I usually just take one spare where as when I go revolver class I take two spares. Rarely shot revolvers remain reliable for long time but when you start to shoot them a lot they start having problems. Most military organizations switch over from revolvers to pistols about 100 years ago due to durability and not for more firepower.
I'd say as usual the $$ bottom line had a lot to do with the decision to switch as revolvers cost more and take longer to make. waiting time to recieve a gov't sized order of a few hundred thousand guns is a big issue also. the fact that semi ammo is lighter and a soldier can carry more of it per lb, parts can be interchanged and swapped out quickly if broken, they are easier to carry and care for with a higher capacity didn't hurt. back before 1935 or so and the 357 didn't exist, the 45 acp was a no brainer and is still a favorite of many today, AS A PRIMARY. but as a deep conceal and/or bug the 38 snubbie is still used, a lot, by pro's and people in the know. and I wouldn't expect a snubbie or sub compact semi to be put thru a torture test. not that good ones of either type couldn't pass. for a combat or tactical gun a full size,hi-cap semi is the way to go. for in between, I like a single stack semi, but for deep conceal/bug a snubbie. that's my prefference anyway. for pleasure shooting at the range it's revolvers all the way and not having to search and stoop to pick up brass for re-loading.
I found this old thread on another forum. This was advice given from an old experienced LEO guy to a young guy making his first purchase.
I think it aptly fits this thread and I couldn't say it any better.
You are living in the 1930s. Maybe even way before that. Well, okay, the 1970s then.
I say those things because you are totally in the wrong about the semiautomatic pistol and it's "jam"ming.
First off, there are more parts to a revolver than your modern semiauto. The standard revolver has in some cases 72 parts to it. The modern semi auto 32 in some cases. The moving parts to a revolver? Eight in most cases, some more, depending on the design of the action. The semiauto; six, including the slide and barrel. If you take those out, four. Trigger, transfer bar, striker, striker block. The revolver is FAR more complicated than a pistol in so many ways; not just moving parts but exposed chambers and action to dirt and dust, and let's face it; a revolver truly poops where it eats. Because of the exposed chambers, the fouling from its own ammo can cause failures and slow reloads. I know this, I have taken two day classes with revolvers and spent time swabbing out my cylinder between courses of fire to keep it going. Revolvers are good for about three hundred rounds before things go wrong. I know you say "I'll only need six." But this is a prep site; what if you do need more? Or don't have the means to keep the thing cleaned out?
Much of the vaunted reliability of the revolver is a farce, based on the unreliable ammunition of the semiautos of yore. Not even the pistol themselves, but the ammunition that was used. Ammo design has come a very, very, long way since the FBI shootout in Miami (one of the instances that forced law enforcement and ammo manufacturers through pressure by the FBI to look at the way things were being done) and the improvements to ammo have made the semiauto probably a far more reliable piece of machinery than the revolver, also more effective. These days the revolver improvements in ammo have come because of the semiauto, not the other way around. It used to be that semiauto ammo was simply versions of the revolver ammo; until SuperVel came along in the 70s, no one really designed specifically for the semiauto. Then Winchester started developing the Silver Tip line for better accuracy and reliability (the round used by the FBI at the Miami shooting in their SW 669s) and all of a sudden Federal came out with the HydraShok, and the world changed for the semiauto. Super exciting times for defensive shooters in the 80s believe it or not.
I am trying to understand what the reference to the FBI has to do with ammo. I was there at the scene, heard it come down on the radio, responded there, saw all the pics at the crime lab afterwards, and the ammo really had nothing to do with it. A lot or should I say most was the fault of the "FEEBS", FBI. Hell, they did not know where they were!!! Tragedy yes, but ammo fault, I don't see it. :dtect
