.45 cal Accuracy in general?

[psriley]

I've been shooting my XD 9mm for a few months now, and loving it. Lately, I've also been test-driving some .45s...several Kimber 1911s, an SA GI-spec, and an XD45 Service. I'm still a newbie, and I expected not to be able to hit the broad side of a barn with the 45s, being used to the 9mm, but I was pleasantly surprised to find them extremely accurate in general, with the recoil totally manageable. My worst groups with any of the 45s were right up there with my best groups with the XD9. My best groups with the better pistols (Kimber TLE and XD45) were ragged holes out to 15 yds. In fact, today, I had the unique experience of firing a second shot at a clean target at 10 yds that "disappeared". I thought had missed entirely, but on closer inspection the first shot was now slightly ovular.

Additionally, I found rapid fire much easier and more accurate than I expected it to be.

I'm not trying to be self-congratulatory here, just seeking insights on whether others have found .45 to inherently more accurate than 9mm (or other calibers I haven't tried yet) on similar platforms. I realize there are a ton of variables, but in general, is this what everyone else has found?

BTW, my purchasing short list is the TLE or XD45 Tactical. Leaning just slightly towards the TLE at the moment, but since I intend this to be a competition pistol, I'm going to go to a couple IDPA matches and check out what those folks shoot.

psr

[Captain Jack]

That's the myth of the .45; that they are unwieldly and super-recoil laden monsters. Not so.

I had a strange experience when I went shooting for the first time. My friend brought his 9mm HK USP, .40S&W Beretta and Sig, and a .45 1911 Colt. I HATED the USP. That thing was so snappy and just too light for me. I hit nothing. Nada. I didn't like the feel of the Beretta, but loved the .40S&W Sig P226. But the Colt, was a sweeeeeeeeeeet shooter. I was really happy shooting the 1911, followed closely by the Sig.

Well, some time later, I bought me a Ruger P345, and it is harder to handle than the 1911 was, at least for me. Then I got a FNP in 9mm, and that gun is just fantastic. Funny how different brands and/or models can behave so differently. I'm just a novice shooter though. But I do know that the .45 is actually a really controllable round, and rather fun to take to the range. Less snap, more "push".

[ichy_trigger]

The dont bullseye shoot with a .45 for nothing. Its a bit like the .308, its an inherently accurate round.

[Trent]

I'm in almost exactly the same boat as you. I do have an XD45 Service, Beretta, S&W40, and Sig 22 trailside. I miss not having an 1911 and think I'll be getting another one very soon.

I think everyone has their own take. I know that my 22 is silly accurate even at 50 yards. I think my best 25yd shooter is actually my Beretta but I've had that gun a very long time with minor mods and it can easily shoot better than me on most days. I will say my XD45 is much more accurate than I thought and am considering adding the ported barrel and the X2L light/laser to it. If only the aftermarket would pick up on the XD more I'd stick with it.

The 1911's that are at the top of my list to consider along with the thoughts behind them...

Kimber - Great out of the box and you get what you pay for normally. Accurate, reliable, brand you can trust for the most part.

SA - The stainless version just above the GI is only $600 new in most shops and is a nice one to get and mod. SA as well makes quality products. The range has one of these as a range gun and I take it out and while the groups are decent they are nowhere near match, but a little modding and this would be a nice weapon.

Taurus - For some reason feelings on this are very polar to a lot of people. Out of the box these have a very large amounts of mods (or things you would do anyway) standard. They shoot exceptionally well imo and are one of the cheapest at a hair over 500. If they churn this out in stainless it will likely be my pick.

Rock Island 45 - I get odd looks most times I mention this... This is a very good solid gun that is at a fraction of the others at just over $300. My friend has one that is still nearly factory and that thing shoots 2"@25yrds from a bench rest. This would be my pick if I am planing on modding a 1911, at that point 50+% of the gun will be replaced anyway. It is a rough gun though and needs polishing but is very very solid.

Also considering just getting the frame and building it up from there so I get proven parts in the right areas. With handloads and a comp this would turn into one of the very accurate choices.

Most likely I'll end up with the SA or a entry level Kimber just because I can't seem to get past the names on the other two even if they are somewhat comparable.

[Brickboy240]

I have found both the 9mm and the 45ACP to be very accurate...depending on the pistol.

I have owned a few 9mms that were not all that accurate. The Smith 3906, Ruger P89 and Taurus PT92 came to mind. They were so-so in the accuracy area, but nothing to write home about.

However, I have found my Swiss Sig P225 and Belgian Hi-Power to be two of the most accurate 9mms I have ever shot. My Hi-Power is probably one of the most accurate pistols I have ever owned, period. Most of that is due to its build quality, ergonomics and crisp trigger.

Same for the 45ACP. I have owned a few rough 1911s that were so-so in the accuracy dept, but my Series 70 Commander and Springer GI are surprisingly accurate. Ditto for my W. German Sig P220. I did not find the Glock 21 and HK USP 45s to be as accurate - aprtly because the grip does not fit my hand and the triggers were not as crisp as the 1911 or 220 Sig.

Recoil? Out of a 5" steel 1911, I have never found the 45ACP to be punishing in the least. Its recoil is more of a gentile push and not as snappy as the 9mm or 40SW. I have actually found more compact 9mms and 40s to be TONS less pleasant to shoot than any 5" 45/1911.

Of the three 9mm, 40SW and 45ACP, I actually find the 40SW is less pleasant to shoot. It has a snappy nature in smaller, lighter guns. I shot a Sig P229 and Glock 23 and found both too snappy for long range sessions. My XD-40 Service is tolerable, but my Beretta 96F really handles the snappy nature of the 40SW very well. So does the HK USP fullsize, but it was alot more pricey, so I went with the 96F Beretta (which is a great shooter, BTW). My guess is that the XD-40 Tactical is probably a better shooter and not as snappy as the 4" Service, but I have never shot a 40 Tactical.

Actually, now that the XD is avaialble in 45ACP, I am considering trading off my XD-40 Serivce and going to the XD45ACP. I hate to say it, but in my range sessions, I really like the Beretta 96F over the XD-40 and will most likely keep it as my 40SW choice.

Yes, the 45ACP looks huge and imposing, but its a pussycat and surprisingly accurate out of a fullsize 1911 or Sig P220. I don't care for the muzzle-flippy nature of the 45ACP out of the smaller 1911s, but in a steel framed Commender or bigger - its shooting nirvana!

I don't know if its more accurate than the 9mm...I have found them to be very similar. Alot depends on the gun...not the caliber. However, I do believe the 9mm and 45ACP are a bit more accurate than the 40SW, but I have no scientific basis for this.

- Brickboy240

[AR-Doctor]

I own the Springfield, TRP Operator (old style rail). Yes, it's a little heavier than most. But I have found that has helped in the accuracy And what a smooth weapon. I also shot my 22 conversion kit on this pistol, And thats a lot of cheap fun.

Nothing against the Kimbers, I would have bought one if i had not found my TRP. The "Desert Warrior" Is the weapon I would go with if i had to look for a 2nd.

And lets not forget the new Taurus PT-1911. There's another good weapon for the money.

[Miguel]

I tried several calibers, and several guns before concluding I liked 45ACP and I liked XD. Since non sush existed at the time I gave up on getting one, until a friend sent me a link to the XD45 site, when they first put it up. I bought it sight unseen not knowing if the combination om my prefered ammo, and prefered pistol would work for me. It did, I love my pistol.

The 45 myth got blown away for me when the Feds forced my Guard unit's women to qualify with M1911A1s after years of being allowed to qualify with .22 Rugers. They all did qualify with the M1911A1s w/out issue, meaning the years of using the little rugers was just Officers giving into to the googly eyes of attractive enlisted gals.

[Miguel]

Originally Posted by Brickboy240

I have found both the 9mm and the 45ACP to be very accurate...depending on the pistol.

I have owned a few 9mms that were not all that accurate. The Smith 3906, Ruger P89 and Taurus PT92 came to mind. They were so-so in the accuracy area, but nothing to write home about.

However, I have found my Swiss Sig P225 and Belgian Hi-Power to be two of the most accurate 9mms I have ever shot. My Hi-Power is probably one of the most accurate pistols I have ever owned, period. Most of that is due to its build quality, ergonomics and crisp trigger.

Same for the 45ACP. I have owned a few rough 1911s that were so-so in the accuracy dept, but my Series 70 Commander and Springer GI are surprisingly accurate. Ditto for my W. German Sig P220. I did not find the Glock 21 and HK USP 45s to be as accurate - aprtly because the grip does not fit my hand and the triggers were not as crisp as the 1911 or 220 Sig.

Recoil? Out of a 5" steel 1911, I have never found the 45ACP to be punishing in the least. Its recoil is more of a gentile push and not as snappy as the 9mm or 40SW. I have actually found more compact 9mms and 40s to be TONS less pleasant to shoot than any 5" 45/1911.

Of the three 9mm, 40SW and 45ACP, I actually find the 40SW is less pleasant to shoot. It has a snappy nature in smaller, lighter guns. I shot a Sig P229 and Glock 23 and found both too snappy for long range sessions. My XD-40 Service is tolerable, but my Beretta 96F really handles the snappy nature of the 40SW very well. So does the HK USP fullsize, but it was alot more pricey, so I went with the 96F Beretta (which is a great shooter, BTW). My guess is that the XD-40 Tactical is probably a better shooter and not as snappy as the 4" Service, but I have never shot a 40 Tactical.

Actually, now that the XD is avaialble in 45ACP, I am considering trading off my XD-40 Serivce and going to the XD45ACP. I hate to say it, but in my range sessions, I really like the Beretta 96F over the XD-40 and will most likely keep it as my 40SW choice.

Yes, the 45ACP looks huge and imposing, but its a pussycat and surprisingly accurate out of a fullsize 1911 or Sig P220. I don't care for the muzzle-flippy nature of the 45ACP out of the smaller 1911s, but in a steel framed Commender or bigger - its shooting nirvana!

I don't know if its more accurate than the 9mm...I have found them to be very similar. Alot depends on the gun...not the caliber. However, I do believe the 9mm and 45ACP are a bit more accurate than the 40SW, but I have no scientific basis for this.

- Brickboy240

Have you tried the XD45? No its not a fancy 1911, but it is pretty good in its own XD sort of way.

[Trent]

Originally Posted by Miguel

googly eyes of attractive enlisted gals.

Pictures or it didn't happen.

*** Sorry for the thread hijack there ***

[Brickboy240]

No, I have not tried the XD45, but I have lots of triggertime on the XD-40 and have shot an XD-9 Tactical and liked it too. I have held a few XD45s and seeing that I like the caliber and platform, I am pretty sure I would like the XD45.

I will probably buy the XD45 Tactical for the longer sight radius and the 45ACP just works better out of a 5" tube in my experiences.

- Brickboy240