Pros and Cons of .45 Vs .32 - Please help me choose

[AndyK]

Hello forum members,
I am new to this forum, and am hoping to get some valuable inputs.
My handgun license has been approved and am expecting it by this week. I am deciding between .32 and .45 for self defence. I need a compact, light weight, easy to carry and easy to conceal weapon, yet it should be effective.

I dont like used and old weapons. I only like Pistols, that too very good quality imported names preferable. My research says:
For 0.32 - Webley Fox good choice?
For .45 - looks like Kiehberg Girsan is a good choice

I am used to handling weapons in gun ranges in the USA (handled 9 mm revolvers and pistols and am aware of their high recoil)

Here are my questions:
1) I like the Girsan .45 - but will the bullet size and effect be too much for self-defence? Should I opt for 0.32 instead?
2) Will a .32 be an effective self defence weapon? (In US gun shops, they scoff at .32 and say they are useless for self-defense, and in fact don't offer gun choices at all in that bullet size caliber)
3) What other .45 guns are available in India - that are as reliable as Girsan (which seems to be of good quality given that is it imported and assembled and have good reviews abroad)
4) what .32 options are better than webley fox?
5) What disadvantages exist with .45 sub -compact pistols? (Poor accuracy? lower effective distance range?)

YOur help and valuable inpus will be much appreciated

Thanks

[timmy]

1) I like the Girsan .45 - but will the bullet size and effect be too much for self-defence?

No

Should I opt for 0.32 instead?

This is something you will need to address by assessing many factors: cost, what you are willing to carry around (weight and size), your expected situations, availability of holsters, etc.

2) Will a .32 be an effective self defence weapon? (In US gun shops, they scoff at .32 and say they are useless for self-defense, and in fact don't offer gun choices at all in that bullet size caliber)

Yes, within limits. It won't penetrate heavy cover like winter jackets. There are lots of places to find information on this, and I've posted a bunch of 32 Auto penetration information on this site. You might try your own searches for such information.

Most of those manly he-bulls at the gun shops and other Old Stove Society locations would not be anxious to stand in front of the muzzle of a 32 Auto to demonstrate its ineffectiveness! Remember that, when it comes to guns, the Hindenburg wasn't the only flammable gasbag.

3) What other .45 guns are available in India - that are as reliable as Girsan (which seems to be of good quality given that is it imported and assembled and have good reviews abroad)

There's the MHD

5) What disadvantages exist with .45 sub -compact pistols? (Poor accuracy? lower effective distance range?)

My understanding is that subcompacts in 9mm and 45 Auto can experience feeding problems. The angles inside the action are different than for longer versions of the same gun. I'm sure that this depends on the make and model of pistol, and other factors. As I don't own any compact pistols, I can't offer any personal observations, other than to note that I'm not at all interested in carrying a pistol that won't feed and operate correctly, even if it mows the lawn for me.

[AndyK]

Timmy, Thanks for your detailed replies and the humour!

Just to clarify - MHD is Malhotra defence right? IS that an imported gun also? or made in india? I hear that some made in india guns have barrel bulging and other quality issues. Is that true? Please dont mistake me for an India basher. I am not! I am a patriot. But when it comes to quality in guns, I cannot compromise, because that will compromise my personal safety.

Based on your response, I have decided to go for .45. Now I just need to choose the right brand. Leaning towards Girsan. Anyone else has any usage experience or opinion on Girsans? Please share your views. Thanks.

[eljefe]

Having run a .45 ACP GoldCup National Match trophy, i can attest to the accuracy.
Feed problems are usually , as mentioned by Timmy,due mostly to feed ramp angle and predilection for particular projectile profile.
I had the odd feed issue with Lee 230 gr cast tumble lube projectiles, but once I switched to a H&G # 65 (?) mould, it fed flawlessly and accuracy was outstanding. This was a requirement at the pistol club to ONLY use cast loads.
With factory loads, all went bang, fed and fired perfectly, except for some old PMC. But as has been discovered before, each gun has a pet load and a pet ‘hate’ load !

I just watched the company video about this pistol and no mention was made of the test ammo or accuracy.

As a subcompact, 10m should be about the edge of the envelope, its upto you to develop your skills to carry,draw and put out enough ‘protection’ AND handle the recoil. My then 16 year old daughter had a SOP of 3” at 25m with full house loads, weaver stance. And about the same with a CZ 75 in 9mm.

Obviously, two to the centre body mass should be the dictum! Forget about the bolly/tollywood movie ‘shoot at the legs’ joke.

As for the pros and cons of performance, a 80-90 gr projectile cannot stack up to a 230 or 200 gr from a .45.

I know a cop who was in the Karnatake STF anti Veerappan group for 3 years and he swore by his Webley .455 revolver. Refused to take the Browning Hi Power or Ruger/S&W he was offered.
It served him well, as per didacted pictures

Stay safe

[AndyK]

Hello eljefe,
Thank you for your time and detailed reply. I did'nt understand half the tech stuff you mentioned in your reply!! But I am assuming you are saying that "Go with .45 pistol". Am I right?
Also, are you saying that a sub compact gun can have bullet feeding issues? There are some You tube reviews of Girsan 1911 SC done by shooters from the US. They seem happy (although I dont know if they are influencers).
Can I assume that all sub-compact pistols will have bullet feeding issues?
SHould I stay away from sub compacts? Girsan only has a barrel length of 3.4". IS that a problem? If yes, what are my good light weight alternatives in India? I want to buy only imported/assembled new weapons (not used and old ones).
Please provide your valuable feedback. Thanks in advance.

[timmy]

Just a few notes:

I'm sorry, Asif, I sis not make myself clear: My 1911 has never had any feeding problems, The bulk of my shooting has been with the same Lee 230 gr mould and with varieties of ball, particularly GI-issue ball. There has also been a smattering of Hornady and Sierra hollow point bullets, but those were quite some time ago. Again, no feed problems at all with any of this. (The Lee bullet was conventionally lubricated -- at first, by the pan method in my younger days.)

Can I assume that all sub-compact pistols will have bullet feeding issues?

No.

If you think about the distance that the rear of the barrel moves downward to unlock the action, this is a fixed distance, no matter what the barrel length, although it may vary between different designs.

For instance, the toggle link of the 1911 action may move the barrel downward a different distance than the now-common Hi Power cam method, which doesn't use a link. The angles at work between these two methods are somewhat different, but at the end of the day, the barrel still has to move down in order to unlock the action.

So, in comparing the same action (either toggle link or cam), it should be clear that a long barrel will tip at a shallower angle than a short barrel. This difference may account for some feeding issues.

Secondly, there is the matter of the recoil spring. The 1911 has the long 16# spring, but a compact must fit a spring or springs into a shorter distance, but provide the same spring power. This often takes the form of an outside and an inside spring on the same axis, from what I've seen, but my idea of this would be that there's no way that the spring of a compact action will act in the same way as a longer spring in a longer barreled gun.

Another issue is the gun itself: There are all kinds of compacts, even ones that seemingly want to duplicate a Browning 25 Auto pocket pistol in 45 Auto. One place that is trimmed is the grip frame, in some, going from a 7 round magazine to a lesser number. This makes the grips shorter and, perhaps harder to hold. Of course, the shorter barreled guns will be "whippier," or "jumpier" in the hand when fired. Whether this leads to some sort fo limp wristing, I can't say, but limp wristing is certainly a cause of failure to feed.

Bullet shape can be an issue. There are all kinds of shapes available, but what is available on the shelf of an Indian gun store is another matter. This is something to think about.

As I said, I don't own a compact, and am not interested in one. My body is more than large enough to conceal carry a full sized 1911 or any of the other "duty pistol" sizes without too much difficulty, so that's an issue that each must deal with on a personal basis.

How do you want to carry the gun? What clothing will you wear and in what environment? If you are wearing a sport coat or a kamiz, the problem is easier than if you wear a tee shirt. Will you carry inside the waistband or out, use an appenedix carry or crossdraw, use a shoulder holster, or what? Compacts are lighter, but if weight is an issue, then consideration of polymer frames enters the picture. These are all things that have to be considered almost at the same time, rather than going down a check list.

For myself, as an example, I carry instde the waistband at the 4 o'clock position, and usually have a light cotton "sportsmans" or "fisherman's" vest on during the summer. as it gets cooler, I'll set the vest aside and wear a heavier cotton long tailed shirt, not tucked in, or even simply a longer waisted cool weather coat of some kind. Dressed, I wear a sport coat. I've been in many situations and sometimes as my Wife to check me out, but nobody has ever noticed, whatever I've been carrying.

But this may not apply to you.

Don't worry about barrel length or accuracy in shorter guns. A short gun may have a shorter sight radius, but it's no less inherently accurate than a longer barreled one.

Ammunition: Longer and shorter barreled guns may use different ammunition, but in 45 Auto, you are not going to loose any appreciable amount of power at the short ranges of self defense. For carry purposes in 9mm, I use the Hornady brand "Critical Duty" ammunition. This is FBI rated ammunition that is tested to perform under a number of circumstances, including through barriers. It is mainly oriented towards police with full sized duty weapons of ~4.5" or longer. Hornady also sells "Critical Defense" ammunition that is oriented toward the civilian with a concealed compact pistol. It is appropriate for short barreled guns. The key difference here is the powder used, as Critical Defense has a quick burning powder best for short barrels, where Critical Duty has a slower burning powder that can take advantage of longer barrels. The bullet of Critical Defense isn't penetration rated like Critical Duty, however.

There are all kinds of ammunition available, and although 9mm has the greatest number of choices, there is still a wide range of ammo avaiable for 45 Auto. Federal HST, Remington Golden Saber, Speer Gold Dot, and there is also a Winchester line that are all well-respected, along with the Hornady Critical Duty. Then, there are smaller companies that load for 45 Auto, as well. My suggestion to you would be to look at your possible sources for buying ammunition and see what is available, so you can make your choice. I never conducted penetration tests or anything like that, and rely on tests that are available online. Two sources I'd suggest are "Lucky Gunner" and Paul Harrell's youtube channel. This, I feel, is pretty reliable information.

[AndyK]

Thanks again so much Timmy for your detailed reply. I infer from your reply that the Kiehberg 1911 is not a bad choice for me. But I think I’m going to have a tough time, finding the right kind of ammunition in India.
Again, I don’t think polymer handle pistols are available in India yet. I intend to carry the pistol inside the waist band and have already purchased a 1791 two way leather holster.
I have an athletic body, and usually prefer tucking in my shirt or T-shirt. With IWB carry., this is going to be a problem, I know. I may have to let the T-shirt out.
Also, I hear of the dangers of carrying in the small of back, because if you fall on your back, you can badly hurt your spine. So I intend to carry the holster in the front right side above my thigh- 3 o clock? I am looking for a very lightweight pistol in the hope that it will not pull down my jeans or pants down where I clip the holster.

[Vineet]

I hear that some made in india guns have barrel bulging and other quality issues. Is that true?

The barrel bulging is caused by squib load. There is no fault of handgun in it. MSD are good pistols considering the price and lifetime guarantee. If you are going with .32, go with Taurus, its very good quality pistol.

Girsan 1911 is alloy frame plus expensive. I would go with champion which is almost half the price and all steel

[AndyK]

Thanks Vineet for your brand and model suggestions.

[timmy]

AndyK:

I have seen some of the 1791 holsters in stores, and they seem to be nicely made holsters.

About the carry location, I used Galco Royal Guard IWB holsters. Here's a picture of one with a 1911:



The two snap straps loop over the top of the trouser waistband and loop around the belt. When I was carryiing my CZ70 (very similar in profile to a Walther PP, but totally different lockwork) I carried at the 3 o'clock position. I especially liked putting one loop in front of and one behind the trouser belt loop. There was no way that the holster was going to move from that position!

When I got a 9mm pistol and a similar Galco Royal Guard for it, it was clear to me that the larger pistol was not going to be concealed at 3 o'clock. The grip/magazine stuck out to the side too much. So, I moved it back along the belt about an inch, where both snap straps are behind the 3 o'clock belt loop on trousers.

I found that the pistol now laid in a hollow over my kidney, nowhere close to my spine. It tucked in there so well that it was as concealed as well as the smaller CZ. Nor did the holtser and pistol move around. Once the trousers were up and the belt tightened, everything would stay put quite well.

Naturally, the whole business is not secure when answering a call of nature. (Of course this doesn't apply to standing duty!) In this case, special care must be taken as to how the pistol is handled. Because it is a single action striker fired pistol, the holster is what I consider a very necessary safety device. Unless I'm shooting the gun, it stays in the holster 100% of the time, and the trigger is covered.

I also like that the Galco Royal Guard's snap strap portion is replaceable, so when the straps wear out (this hasn't happened yet), there are screws under the snap heads that can be removed, and the snap strap assembly exchanged for a new one. These come in two colors, and my new one is black, so it matches the belt. This makes a little bit less to peek out if I'm in a more revealing posture, like reaching to a top shelf in a store. Also, there is a new strap assembly out that stands the gun straight up, so the holster can be used for appendix carry. I don't care for appendix carry, but I might have an application for this.

May I suggest that you consider a sturdy, wide belt? This will help keep your holster where it belongs.

Regarding aluminum alloy pistol and revolver frames: I don't have any such guns, but I do have this new composite frame pistol. Regarding the durability of an aluminum alloy frame (note that I say "aluminum alloy," because just saying "alloy" is meaningless. Steel guns are alloy, in that steel is an alloy of iron and carbon, and a few other things. Also, many cheap guns are made of zamak, which is a zinc alloy, so saying "alloy" can refer to one of these, as well. I feel that the extra precision in writing and speech of saying "aluminum alloy," rather than just "alloy," makes for a better understanding of the subject, and having to say or write "aluminum" in these cases hasn't worn me out yet.) this is a varied subject.

Snub nosed revolvers from Colt and Smith & Wesson with aluminum alloy frames have been around a long time, long enough to know that these guns won't blow up or wear out overnight. Smith & Wesson began issuing its 9mm Model 59 back in the 70s, and it proved to be a durable pistol, as well. It is clear that the little snub nose revolvers don't like a constant diet of heavy +P and +P+ loads, and wise folks shoot them with regular loads, which they digest perfectly well, and save the heavy loads for carry and maybe 6 rounds for practice, so that one knows what to expect.

The aluminum alloy frames work fine in these situations, as long as one understands the limitations and is willing to accept them to have a lighter carry gun. The durability also depends on the aluminum alloy frame being properly heat treated, and in some pistols, anodized. (If you've ever tried to file or saw a piece of anodized aluminum, you will understand how hard those surfaces really are!)

But the case you are talking about is a 45 Auto pistol, and one issue here is the slamming of the slide against the frame. Speaking of a 1911 clone, one can use a buffer, a small semi-soft plastic piece that's inserted between the frame and the slide. This takes some of the slamming blow out of the firing cycle. I use a buffer in my 1911, as well as using them in my SKS and AK rifles.

The other major wear point is along the frame rails, where the slide is in rubbing contact with the frame. Here, a little lubrication will help the wear issue.

I see two considerations here: One is the quality of the gun. If the frame is made of some cheap aluminum, it will wear out quickly, plain and simple. If the frame is a quality heat treated piece of aluminum alloy, then its performance should approach that of steel, unless you are a competition combat shooter going through 10s of thousands of rounds per year.

The use is that other consideration I speak of. How long will a 1911 last? 20,000 rounds? More, I think. Twice as much, at least, but recognizing that the barrel link might be getting a bit loose by then (which is not a frame problem). I don't ever expect to wear mine out, and probably whoever gets it after me won't wear it out, either. My Brother has my Dad's 1911 from WW2, which was made a few years after WW1, and who knows what that pistol has seen? It is in fine shape.

But how long would an aluminum alloy frame pistol be expected to last? Shooting factory loads -- the military specification loads -- I don't see 20,000 rounds to be an unreasonable number. But, let's cut that in half and say, 10,000 rounds over the pistol's life. How much is that? Well, obviously, if you shot 100 rounds a year, the pistol would last you 100 years of shooting, or only 50 years if you shoot 200 rounds a year. You would have to do your own math to meet your own expectations on this.

So, looking at this question of aluminum alloy frame durability, it has to do with the quality of materials and manufacture. This may not be easy to know for newly made guns that are just appearing on the marketplace. This leaves one to wait and see how things pan out, or take the chance and begin carrying the lighter gun right away, and take what comes.

Just my 2 pais

An added comment:

I didn't get my composite 9mm to last forever and pass down to timmy XVI. I got it to do a job: to be my carry gun. It has to do that job reliably and the light weight is appreciated at the end of the day. Will it wear out on me before I've turned toes-up? Maybe. If it does, I'll buy another or carry something else that I have. For me, this gun is a tool to use for a task: everyday carry. I will practice with it a lot -- I've run about 500 rounds through it since I bought it (I've been sick some and range time lately has been curtailed) and everything works fine. I will put a few thousand more rounds through it, I think, to sharpen myself up to the point where I'm more comfortable. Then, I will need to run enough shooting to keep my edge where I want it to be, if I can.

It's not intended to be a toy, collector's item, or heirloom to pass down to 1000 generations of timmys. It's a tool to do a job.

That's how I see the carry gun issue. For me, once I stopped muddying the waters by looking at expensive toys, the whole picture became much easier to handle.

2 more pais

[winnie_the_pooh]

[timmy]

This is an interesting video, with quite a few personal observations that have a basis in the interviewee's experience.

However, I don't feel as if what he's saying here applies to my own situation. For instance:

1. He speaks from the perspective of a person who is troubled by arthritis and is challenged by recoil. Thank goodness, I don't have that issue. The most recent large handguns I've shot are the 45 Colt and the 45 Auto, and neither of these have given me any trouble from recoil. I will say that my "Tokagypt" 9mm (a "Star" pistol) is uncomfortable to shoot, but this is because of its awkward angles and sharp edges, not recoil.

2. He finds 22 Magnum and other small cartridges suitable for his Dallas, Texas urban environment. This is not at all the environment I share, which called for moving up from 32 Auto to 9mm. Also, where I live, heavier coats are standard winter dress, and in such an environment, penetration is more of an issue than Dallas, where an evening walk at 22*C will find the smell of fireplace burning in the air -- honest! It's still to hot at that temperature for me.

3. He makes it plain that he's a revolver man, and a 5 shot S&W Chief's Special man at that. I am not. I did carry a Colt Detective Special at one time (6 rounds of 38 Special) and still shoot it, and carry it hiking. Revolvers are great away from the range, where cheapskates like me aren't hving a problem recovering brass for reloading. Again, his needs don't match mine.

Again, I think it's up to each of us to identify needs and wants and go with those when selecting a handgun, or any gun. Listening to this fellow's views, opinions, and experiences is fine, but I don't find them corresponding to mine very closely. I did find his views on the 32 H&R Magnum and 327 Federal Magnum interesting, however. I think a long barreled 327 Magnum would be an interesting gun to have.

[timmy]

An additional thought:

One fault that I would find with this video is the characterization of the 32 Auto as a suitable military cartridge as used in World War 1. I feel that this is an overstatement and an overlooking of the 32 Auto performance in the trench warfare of World War 1.

The whole story:

The French were using the Model 1892 Revolver at the beginning of the war. This was a well-made revolver chambered for a very weak cartridge. This revolver had roots going back to the Belgian designs of Charles-François Galand, who was one significant branch of double action revolver development in the second half of the 19th Century.

Building on Galand's designs, which were popular in France, the French developed the Model 1873 Chamelot-Delvigne revolver. Due to France's shortage of handguns, which proved vital in trench warfare, some Chamelot-Delvigne revolvers were issued for World War 1 used on the Western Front.

Colonel Rudolph Schmidt of Switzerland then took the Galand/ Chamelot-Delvigne design and, adding his own refinements, developed the M1882 revolver for Swiss forces. The M1882 is beautifully finished, literally made like a "Swiss watch," and used a 7.5mm cartridge, going along with the trend of smaller diameter cartridges and smaller service revolvers. (Yes, I would very much like to have one, but a nice one goes for money nowadays!)

The French, in the M1892 revolver, repaid the Swiss compliment and built upon Colonel Schmidt's design in their new service revolver, which also reduced the Chamelot-Delvigne's 11mm cartridge to the new 8mm Ordinance round. This made the new M1892 much smaller than the Chamelot=Delvigne.

Sidearms were looked upon as the officer's weapon, but in the trench warfare of World War 1, handguns became a vital part of that kind of vicious, hand to hand combat. The French were caught short in this category of weapons, and contracted with a number of companies, such as the famous "Ruby," in the Basque country of Northern Spain for more handguns, which were chambered in 32 Auto, the same as the older pistol designs from FN in Belgium.

The use of 32 Auto in the trenches was one of those situations where it was better than no gun at all, and the simple blowback designs were well suited to the muddy environment, compared to other guns. The Luger pistols were more powerful, but their complex design required a lot of intricate machining, making them much more expensive than the simple blowback designs.

The 1911 pistol brought by the Yanks was ideal for this sort of warfare: its design was closed to most dirt and mud, it was a much more straightforward design than the Luger, and its smokeless 45 Auto was much more powerful than even the older British and French large diameter revolver rounds. Even in full metal jacket designs, the 45 Auto bullet was most effective at penitrating through heavy field jackets, uniforms, belts and straps, and the other parts of kit worn by the Western Front soldier.

The 32 Auto was at the bottom end of this power and penetration comparison, and its performance was notably lacking, but it was all France could supply to its troops in the extremities of war. I would be happy to get a Ruby as a French poilu, if the alterenative was nothing at all.

So, I feel that the video claiming that the 32 Auto was a military round in World War 1, though true, only tells half of the truth in service of someone's opinion. The fact is, it was lacking in this service.

As the interviewee cites World War 1 use of the 32 Auto as one of his data points, i suggest that when considering the 32 Auto, one should examine the whole truth, not just what is convenient to someone's argument.

Please note that I offer this as one who carried 32 Auto regularly until this year. There IS a place for the 32 Auto today in many circumstances. It is up to each one of us to figure out whether this applies to our situation or not.

(Note: The USA also had a severe shortage of 1911 pistols, as the US Army was still little more than a constabulary force used for dealing with Native American tribes and border skirmishes, such as the Spanish American War. It had not grown into the service of a world power, such as the other combatants of World War 1 fielded, and had to learn "on the fly." The Large frame Colt and Smith & Wesson revolvers were pressed into service chambered in 45 Auto in numbers that exceeded the 1911 in World War 1.)

[Rameshwar Dayal]

If you're comfortable with 9mm, a .45 can work for self-defense, but the recoil might be tough and it's bulkier for daily carry. A .32 is easier to handle and conceal but lacks stopping power. For reliable .45s in India, check out Colt or Springfield.

[Saksham]

i have purchased the Girsan 0.45 SC 1911 and can confirm the trigger is butter smooth and recoil is truly manageable. The best part of the pistol is the size and weight ratio for EDC. No issues carrying it regardless of what I am wearing.