Talk:.45 ACP

Reorg Ammo table

The copying wholesale of copyrighted material should be removed from this page. That includes the ripping off of Marshal and Sanow data. I don't believe ANY tables on ammunition are permissible as they represent copyrighted material. But if this violation persists, I would at the very least reorganize it like this:

Full Metal Jacket - Original Factory Loads

Manufacturer	Cartridge	Bullet Weight	Muzzle Velocity	Muzzle Energy
Military	FMJ	15 g (230 gr)	261 m/s (855 ft/s)	506 J (373 ft⋅lb)
Federal	FMJ	15 g (230 gr)	260 m/s (850 ft/s)	500 J (369 ft⋅lb)
Remington	FMJ	15 g (230 gr)	255 m/s (835 ft/s)	483 J (356 ft⋅lb)

Jacketed Hollow Point

Manufacturer	Cartridge	Bullet Weight	Muzzle Velocity	Muzzle Energy
Federal	JHP	15 g (230 gr)	260 m/s (850 ft/s)	500 J (369 ft⋅lb)
Remington	JHP	15 g (230 gr)	255 m/s (835 ft/s)	483 J (356 ft⋅lb)
Winchester	JHP	15 g (230 gr)	270 m/s (880 ft/s)	537 J (396 ft⋅lb)

Plus P (not to be used in older or non Plus P certified handguns)

Manufacturer	Cartridge	Bullet Weight	Muzzle Velocity	Muzzle Energy
Atomic Ammunition Plus P	JHP	15 g (230 gr)	300 m/s (1,000 ft/s)	693 J (511 ft⋅lb)
Speer Plus P	JHP	13 g (200 gr)	330 m/s (1,080 ft/s)	702 J (518 ft⋅lb)
Hornady Plus P	JHP	15 g (230 gr)	290 m/s (960 ft/s)	625 J (461 ft⋅lb)

Lead Free .45 ACP (note all are Plus P)

Manufacturer	Cartridge	Bullet Weight	Muzzle Velocity	Muzzle Energy
Barnes Plus P	JHP	12.0 g (185 gr)	300 m/s (1,000 ft/s)	557 J (411 ft⋅lb)
Cor-Bon Plus P	JHP	12.0 g (185 gr)	328 m/s (1,075 ft/s)	644 J (475 ft⋅lb)
Buffalo Bore Plus P	JHP	12.0 g (185 gr)	350 m/s (1,150 ft/s)0	736 J (543 ft⋅lb)

This is what I'd put in the place of what is there. There are NO specific copyright names here. Digitallymade (talk) 03:06, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't see what you're objections are, nor the difference between what you've posted and what was already there. Facts are not copyrightable; only their presentation can be. So unless the tables were copied wholesale from a book or another web article, there isn't a copyright issue.

ETA: Never mind, you changed it before I looked at it. I don't see that there was anything wrong with the old table, unless, as I said, it was copied wholesale out of a book. − Bardbom (talk) 05:20, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I just wanted to note that if someone uses the specified metric values of the various cartridges, they do not add up to the listed muzzle energy. I suspect that's due to the original values being in imperial measurements and then being converted to metric with variances due to dropping decimal places. Are we happy to remain with the converted values or would there be a benefit to doing the calculations by hand and including those values? I could see it being argued either way as the variances are probably within the bounds of manufacturing tolerance in real-world situations. - MarkTBSc (talk) 13:45, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• 45acp.stl

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:06, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Two different case capacities mentioned

Sorry if I do anything wrong here, that's my first "talk". I realized that there are two different case capacities mentioned on this page:

"Case capacity 26.7 gr H2O (1.73 cm3)" in the tech specs and "The .45 ACP has 1.62 mL (25 grains H2O) cartridge case capacity." in chapter "Cartridge dimensions".

Is there a reason for that?`

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Friedrich Oesch (talk • contribs) 19:52, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks for your objection.

Case capacity is often different by the case manufacturer, depending on brass thickness used in various places of the case in question. This is true not only for .45 ACP, but nearly any other cartridge. Only outer dimensions are regulated by SAAMI and CIP.

Loaddata.com states in its article "Top 10 Reloaded Handgun Cartridges #2: .45 ACP"

"Just for reference, water capacity of the Starline brass is 26.7 grains, while Federal brass held 25.7, Remington 25.3, Winchester 25.7 and Speer 26.9 grains."

https://loaddata.com/Article/LoadDevelopment/Top-10-Reloaded-Handgun-Cartridges-2-45-ACP/710

As the (incomplete) information "The .45 ACP has 1.62 mL (25 g H2O) cartridge case capacity." pops up first when performing a Google search, this should be corrected to: "The .45ACP has a case capacity between 25,3 (1,386 ml) and 26,9 g (1,474) H2O, depending on manufacturer."

Also in the specifications side box.

If there are no objections I will perform this change next week.

Kind regards, Pepysshack (talk) 07:28, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

To complicate things, the internal volume does not only vary between manufacturers, but also between production lots. According to my knowledge, 1 grain is about 0.6479891 gram/ml. Expressing internal case volumes of cartridge cases in more than two decimals in the metric system is nonsense.Francis Flinch (talk) 18:52, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Sure, I'll add that for good measure and will stay within 2 decimals. While this nitpicking is mostly good only for handloaders (which I hope don't get their data from Wikipedia as a small decrease in case volume can lead to dangerous overpressure), information on Wiki is widespread through the internet, so it should stay (or become) a reliable source of it.

After a more thorough research I found values from 25 g (1,62 ml) up to 27,4 g (1,78 ml) from participants in various handloading forums, so I'll take that into account, too.

A 10% deviation is quite much (about 5% is more common), I wonder if this is a result of using/measuring +P brass, which should have stronger wall thickness, therefore restricting available case volume. +P is rated 9,52 % over standard pressure, so this could make sense.

Should take a closer look at other common calibers. 9x19 Luger also states only one value ...

Many thanks and kind regards, Pepysshack (talk) 19:09, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

What you brought up is known by serious reloaders. In my jurisdiction, you have to pass an exam for a reloading permit. Access to potential dangerous components like propellants is limited to permit holders. Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuickLOAD#Cartridge_case_volume_establishment to read even small volume differences between individual cartridge cases occur.Francis Flinch (talk) 12:39, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Correction on Performance

In the second-to-last paragraph on performance in the FBI article it cites, it says that the .45ACP "was no more effective with regard to terminal ballistics than either 9 x 19mm Parabellum or .40 S&W.", this is patently false as it states in the source of the article that there is no "no discernible increase in terminal performance", when weighed against higher recoil and reduced magazine capacity. I will be changing that section to more closely mirror the FBI document. 173.59.11.121 (talk) 08:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I wonder why this misconception still persists:

"The .45 ACP is generally considered to have greater stopping power than the 9mm.[citation needed] Due to its larger size and slower velocity it creates a larger wound channel and transfers more energy to the target."

While this was obviously true in the beginning of the 20th century regarding the poor performance of the .38 long colt [125 gr (8 g) LRN 772 ft/s (235 m/s) 165 ft⋅lbf (224 J)] compared to the .45 ACP [230 gr (15 g) FMJ, Winchester 835 ft/s (255 m/s) 356 ft⋅lbf (483 J)] in the time of the Moro rebellion, it is certainly a myth nowadays.

Contemporary 9x19mm Luger ammo will perform similarly to the .45 ACP with same pressure and bullet design. You can't cheat physics, can't you?

The FBI Academy has stated many times that there is no difference in wounding potential between that two.

The first report I am aware of (September 15-17, 1987) stated:

"none of the eight experts were able to say definitively that the larger .45 automatic round caused more damage than the 9mm round; and four of the eight experts found that there was no difference in the wounding effects of either caliber given equal penetration."

The latest report (May 6, 2014) says: "That is to say an operating room surgeon or Medical Examiner cannot distinguish the difference between wounds caused by .35 to .45 caliber projectiles."

and

"While some law enforcement agencies have transitioned to larger calibers from the 9mm Luger in recent years, they do so at the expense of reduced magazine capacity, more felt recoil, and given adequate projectile selection, no discernible increase in terminal performance."

Full report here: https://soldiersystems.net/2014/09/25/fbi-9mm-justification-fbi-training-division/

If there are no further objections, I will remove these two sentences in a few weeks.

Kind regards, Pepysshack (talk) 17:00, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Correction needed on Ammo

Where it lists the energy of 230 gr (15 g) FMJ, Double Tap, I just checked Midway USA selling the ammo and the ballistics information for the ammunition on here is either out of date, or conflicting with the source. Doubletap Ammo is currently listed as having 1000 FPS and 511 ft. lbs of energy.

References

Sorry to hijack your post, but I am not able to reply to that.

MIDWAY USA also states: "** Approximate velocity. Resulting velocity may vary and will be listed on each box"

while DOUBLETAP states the ballistic data as: "Ballistics : 950fps and 511ft lbs of energy at the muzzle 5" 1911"

You may achieve greater velocity with a (much) longer barrel theoretically, but not by much. The optimal barrel length for a 230 gr projectile is about 11". Lighter projectiles (165 gr) may use up to 18" to gain speed.

950fps for the 230 gr .45 from a 5" barrel is optimistic, to say at least, if you don't want to get in the +P or +P+ pressure ranges. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepysshack (talk • contribs) 17:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)