It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

.45's!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2004 @ 02:44 PM
link   
who likes these handguns and why?

gallery.s2ki.com...




posted on May, 27 2004 @ 02:51 PM
link   
I think there is a problem with the link you posted



posted on May, 27 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   
First a lil note, when you start a thread, try to make at least a few lines to give your thread some value.

If everyone would start posts saying

"who likes blabla, tell me why"

This wouldn't be to great a place.

For starters, maybe post your opinion on 45 calibre handguns and what you like best about them.


Anyways, I especialy like 9mm and .45 handguns, but mainly for shooting practice. I don't want it in or around the house.

I've fired all sorts of handguns up to now and I find that the higher calibers and heavyer/larger models of guns represent much better what they are capable of. You know and feel when just looking at it, it can kill people.

My father has this miniscule 5mm that I can't even hold right because its so small and I really don' t like it at all. Mainly because its so rediculously small and totaly doesn't represent the fact that its a lethal weapon.

This almost reminds me of the movie MIB where Will Smith gets that miniscule gun (think it was called the Noisy Cricket) and this litle thing was more powerfull then the biggest they had.



posted on May, 27 2004 @ 05:26 PM
link   
I don't like the 45 because the one I have to carry is heavy! Give me a 9mm anyday.



posted on May, 28 2004 @ 12:13 AM
link   
I really like the .45. its my favorite handgun to shoot, it seems easier to aim and hold than the .40 that i have. i just like the feel, its the right weight, easy operation, good gun.



posted on May, 28 2004 @ 12:23 AM
link   
.45's by nature are good guns with great stopping power, my only gripe is the kick. The first shot is spot on and the second and third shots force you to take a little more time to aim. 9mm are good for quick multiple shots however they due lack quite a bit in stopping power. Unless you hit a fatal point on your target a 9mm has a hard time of taking them out of the fight. .45s Drop pretty much anything. Personally I have found the .38 to be a good balance of the two-less kick than a .45 and alot more stopping power than a 9mm.

[Edited on 28-5-2004 by Lythium]



posted on May, 28 2004 @ 03:56 AM
link   
I love 45's... kick doesnt bug me too much...cqb and all...but pistols like 1911's i have a gripe with...I despise the pistol grip lever that must be depressed in order to fire.



posted on May, 28 2004 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hard Red
I love 45's... kick doesnt bug me too much...cqb and all...but pistols like 1911's i have a gripe with...I despise the pistol grip lever that must be depressed in order to fire.


I know it completely ruinsthe use of an extremely well made gun. The 1911 is plagued with few problems and is very accurate however, that stupid lever makes me want to scream-that thing has no functionality what so ever. What was the point of it being there anyway? Too keep it from going off when it's dropped? If I recall the 1911 never had a previous problem with that.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 07:48 PM
link   
The .45 round was invented in the early 20th century like the 9mm Parabellum.

.45ACP : Designed to kill a man completeley.

9mm Parabellum: Designed to injure a man so the enemy would concentrate more on dragging wounded troops out the line.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 12:58 AM
link   
There is this wonderful thing called aim which compensates for the blow a pie plate size hole in your opponent thinking the .45 engenders...

personally the .45 and .357 are both insanelly kicky... and on another note my astra a-100 holds 17 rounds in a standard clip. A 1911 holds 7 standard. If you get down to nuts and bolts of total possible killing wounds deliverable, even assuming the .45 will go two to one to a nine, that leaves my astra with 3 rounds after matching the destructive potential of a .45. Plus my time between potentially lethal shots is going to be considerably less.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 01:05 AM
link   
I must admit to being guilty of the above. Sorry. Postponed getting a semi-auto for years as I was very happy with my .357 Magnum revolver. Still own both and far prefer the .45 for accuracy. The recoil has never been a problem and frankly I like it's kick better than the revolver.
Glad to see the US Military is going back to it.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 05:54 PM
link   
my entire point was the average soldier is by no means a doc holiday type pistolero... the likelihood of hitting their target on the first shot is fairly small. So when you add in the extra time it takes to bring your sights back on the target could be life and death.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 06:29 PM
link   

my entire point was the average soldier is by no means a doc holiday type pistolero...


He/she doesn't have to be, a handgun is reserved for last ditch close combat. In that kind of situation you don't have to worry about picking someone off at a distance, you only have to worry about stopping power. A 45 wins hands down over a 9mm which someone high on adrenalin or drugs wont even feel.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 01:55 AM
link   
.... oh yes the jihadis all high on heroin rumor...

There is this wonderful thing called aim... 10 years from now even the average jihad monkey will be sporting class 3a kevlar. Better to get ahead of the trend now and teach our troops to point shoot aim for the face/neck/shoulders.

I understand your reference to pistols being used primarilly at bayonet range... however in that case it's much easier to pick your shots, and further what's in the initial mag is all you're gonna get before your pistol becomes a blunt force trauma inducing instrument (aka beat someone's face in with the butt of the pistol)... So in reality thank you for proving my case.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 12:20 PM
link   
My palms are itching to get to the range and envelope my firearms.
I havent had time to go to the range in about a month. I've been to busy with projects and jobs around here. I need to get in some practice..both rifle and pistol. Lots of reloads available here ..just not much time. I hate when that happens. Sometimes it is even a great stress reliever...reloading too. I could spend hours knocking around my reloading bench with a cup of coffee and a snack.

I have been trying to learn the art of double taps..but its not as easy as it sounds. Practice practice practice. Two center mass and one in the head...not that easy to be consistant at it. Definitely need more time at the range.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Two centre mass will do the trick mate. Try not to have them hit too close together, as it widens the shock and cavitation area, resulting in more internal damage and a more effective take-down. Tight groups have no place in combat shooting. The 2 in the chest with 1 in the head technique is designed for CQB where fast target application can result in poor initial shot placement, requiring a final killing shot.

You are right though, it's a bugger to master. The low recoil of a 9mm will make it easier though



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Here's mine



God bless America.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   
That is a good point you make there. Two center mass but not grouped close together. Thanks for that tidbit of information. I will practice thusly. Thank you .

I have been trying to practice with a .357 revolver...shooting .38specials till I get accustomed to the routine. I can get them center mass alright but the head shot is a difficult one on which to constistantly follow up.

I also have a revolver in .45 ACP and it is very difficult with this one. .357s too. Most of my practice is with inexpensive .38 specials. Hope to get in some time at the range this weekend.

Thanks again Paddy,
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Heres a decent .45

www.waffen.ch...



posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Browno
The .45 round was invented in the early 20th century like the 9mm Parabellum.

.45ACP : Designed to kill a man completeley.

9mm Parabellum: Designed to injure a man so the enemy would concentrate more on dragging wounded troops out the line.


I dont know how where you have that misconception from. The 9mm Luger was invented when the MILITARY demanded a stronger round than the then-standard 7,65mm Luger round. The "wounding the enemy" theory is not feasible because using a pistol means that the enemy is in close range - close range means that there is no time to care for the wounded, either you are falling back or you charge for complete hand-to-hand fighting.

The 9mm Luger was built to these specs because it was incredibly easy to manufacture, allowed for a relatively high magazine capacity and didn´t strain the still delicate working parts of the newly-invented selfloading pistols so much (the need for a more rigid structure is one of the reasons why the M1911 is so much heavier than other contemporary pistols).

It was advertised as a large caliber cartridge for a reason - before the .45 ACP was developed the 9mm Luger was THE most powerful of the common self-loading pistol cartridges.

[edit on 25/4/2006 by Lonestar24]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join