What is the Single stack caliber?

[mike542]

Hi.

I've been shooting single stack with my .45 colt and pretty soon I need to buy a new gun, because of normal wear. My question is should I get a .40 cal single stack? Or just stay with a .45?

Lets pretend money is not in the equation. I know it is but lets say ammo cost is not a factor.

What do the top single stack people use? And what caliber is better?

Thanks

[JerZSquid]

May be relevant, may not be but

Do you reload? Or will you be buying factory ammo?

[Jammer1911]

Money really ins't that big an option. 40 cal 180 bullets on par with 200 gr 45 cal bullets, primers identical, powder charge comparable also. brass availability more of an issue. 40 easier to aquire than 45 acp. total cost difference maybe 2-3 pennies per round. (I know, I know 2-3 pennies over thousands of rounds blah blah blah)

Real difference seems to come down to what your already loading and have components for, recoil impulse and availability. Pick one shoot shoot shoot. JMHO

[mike542]

Yes I reload and I am trying to figure out what is better for competition. .45 or 40

Any opinion on that?

[Joe4d]

A forty is more versatile and allows you to play more games. Personally Id look at the "normal" wear, something doesnt jive. Normal is not needing to replace a 1911 any time soon.
But there is no difference, most people shoot a 40 or 45 for reasons other than one being better . Usually it is a cost or convenience thing. A SS/ESP/ Limited shooter will like 40 for common ammo, someone that only shoots USPSA SS and IDPA CDP obviously will go 45.

[Strick]

If I was shooting SSTK I would most likely shoot minor at most USPSA matches. At area, sectional, or other majors the extra rounds are most always an advantage over scoring major.

If you were set on shooting major I would get a .40 if you don't mind loading for an additional caliber. With 8 rounds in a 9 round mag it reloads easier, I have seen lots of people fumble a reload with a .45 by not seating the mag properly.

[Thomas H]

If I was shooting SSTK I would most likely shoot minor at most USPSA matches. At area, sectional, or other majors the extra rounds are most always an advantage over scoring major.

Wait, what?

I'm thinking that if that were actually true, then a LOT more people would be shooting SS Minor---and hardly anyone is.

Taking a look (because I've got these results handy) at the last two years of A3, A5, and DoubleTap, the only time anyone placed in the top ten in SS shooting minor was Mike Carmoney (twice) and he wasn't the top in his class either time. No one else came close.

At the 2012 SingleStack Nats, only about 30 people (out of 301) shot minor---and the best someone did with it was 37th. Only 9 people got above 50% shooting minor---so over 2/3 of the people shooting minor shot under 50% of the winner. The best out of everyone shooting minor only shot 75% of the winner.

So...are you sure that "at area, sectional, or other majors the extra rounds are most always an advantage over scoring major"? If that were even slightly true, wouldn't many more people shoot minor?

Back to the OP's original question: I think that finding a gun that runs reliably will end up being far more important to you than any perceived differences due to caliber.

(I also am curious as to how "normal wear" means you need a new gun. How many rounds have you put through it? So many that the frame itself is falling apart somehow?)

[yoshidaex]

Dependent on what equipment you have (dies, conversion kits, mags, etc, etc).

If you have equipment for both 40 and 45, I would pick 40 since its easier to aqcuire 40 brass versus 45 brass.

40 components are cheaper too though you did say cost is not a deciding factor.

Edited May 11, 2013 by yoshidaex

[Strick]

If I was shooting SSTK I would most likely shoot minor at most USPSA matches. At area, sectional, or other majors the extra rounds are most always an advantage over scoring major.

Wait, what?

I'm thinking that if that were actually true, then a LOT more people would be shooting SS Minor---and hardly anyone is.

Taking a look (because I've got these results handy) at the last two years of A3, A5, and DoubleTap, the only time anyone placed in the top ten in SS shooting minor was Mike Carmoney (twice) and he wasn't the top in his class either time. No one else came close.

At the 2012 SingleStack Nats, only about 30 people (out of 301) shot minor---and the best someone did with it was 37th. Only 9 people got above 50% shooting minor---so over 2/3 of the people shooting minor shot under 50% of the winner. The best out of everyone shooting minor only shot 75% of the winner.

So...are you sure that "at area, sectional, or other majors the extra rounds are most always an advantage over scoring major"? If that were even slightly true, wouldn't many more people shoot minor?

So you are basing it on 1 shooter against the entire field and also basing in the SSTK Nationals (that I specifically didn't mention) to say I may be wrong?

Run the number using the SSTK against Production at some of those matches, think that is a fair representation. I have did a a handful of matches a year or so ago.

[Thomas H]

So you are basing it on 1 shooter against the entire field and also basing in the SSTK Nationals (that I specifically didn't mention) to say I may be wrong?

Run the number using the SSTK against Production at some of those matches, think that is a fair representation. I have did a a handful of matches a year or so ago.

No.

1) USPSA is a competition, where winning is the goal. As such, people try new equipment all the time, to see if they can squeeze out an extra percent or two in their score---and if thousands of people over the past how many years have collectively NOT chosen to use minor, that should tell you something.

2) You said "area, sectional, or other majors" --- I picked two Area matches and another major match (DoubleTap) and then I pulled info from the one major match where people will always bring their best singlestack game. (And I don't think you can argue that SS Nats isn't a "major match," which is what you said.) And in those matches, A: hardly anyone chose to shoot minor, and B: those that did were not the high-performing ones, nor were they ones that even won their own class.

3) Your phrase was specifically: "...the extra rounds [from shooting minor] are most always an advantage over scoring major" for SS division. You are comparing shooting a single-action, single-stack firearm shooting major to one shooting minor. Saying that a good comparison here (that would be giving good results for your argument) is comparing SS scores to Production scores just flat-out isn't going to work---the differences in equipment (particularly in holster type and double-stack magazines) means the comparison simply won't be valid.

Again---the concept is simple: If the extra rounds more than made up for shooting minor, then the top performers would be all doing it, because they'll do any little thing they can for any advantage they can get.

What data do you have showing that SS Minor is an advantage over SS Major?

Edited May 11, 2013 by Thomas H

[NoSteel]

I would expect that you may find that.40 may be a bit more finicky to get to run than .45 all things being equal. Reliability is key, the more you chase that the less fun you'll have as your scores slip. Don't get me wrong, .40's can run but there is a lot of info on B.E. that indicates sometimes it can take some work. My Springfield in .45 would just shoot, dirty,wet, dry, hot or below 0..

[Strick]

So you are basing it on 1 shooter against the entire field and also basing in the SSTK Nationals (that I specifically didn't mention) to say I may be wrong?

Run the number using the SSTK against Production at some of those matches, think that is a fair representation. I have did a a handful of matches a year or so ago.

No.

What data do you have showing that SS Minor is an advantage over SS Major?

2nd at the 2013 SSTK nationals?

[Strick]

So you are basing it on 1 shooter against the entire field and also basing in the SSTK Nationals (that I specifically didn't mention) to say I may be wrong?

Run the number using the SSTK against Production at some of those matches, think that is a fair representation. I have did a a handful of matches a year or so ago.

No.

1) USPSA is a competition, where winning is the goal. As such, people try new equipment all the time, to see if they can squeeze out an extra percent or two in their score---and if thousands of people over the past how many years have collectively NOT chosen to use minor, that should tell you something.

2) You said "area, sectional, or other majors" --- I picked two Area matches and another major match (DoubleTap) and then I pulled info from the one major match where people will always bring their best singlestack game. (And I don't think you can argue that SS Nats isn't a "major match," which is what you said.) And in those matches, A: hardly anyone chose to shoot minor, and B: those that did were not the high-performing ones, nor were they ones that even won their own class.

3) Your phrase was specifically: "...the extra rounds [from shooting minor] are most always an advantage over scoring major" for SS division. You are comparing shooting a single-action, single-stack firearm shooting major to one shooting minor. Saying that a good comparison here (that would be giving good results for your argument) is comparing SS scores to Production scores just flat-out isn't going to work---the differences in equipment (particularly in holster type and double-stack magazines) means the comparison simply won't be valid.

Again---the concept is simple: If the extra rounds more than made up for shooting minor, then the top performers would be all doing it, because they'll do any little thing they can for any advantage they can get.

What data do you have showing that SS Minor is an advantage over SS Major?

I know this is your deal, and I don't have the desire to pick at every single data point.

Comparing a B or C class shooter to the a M or GM in SSTK is a very poor comparison. Comparing SSTK a Division that only score minor using equipment that is is no more enhanced seems pretty reasonable, considering holster and mag placement is basically the same, the only thing that really differs is a better trigger and magwell in the division you think should win.

[Thomas H]

Thanks for bringing up this year's Nats! (Which, I'll note, is after you took exception to me bringing it up earlier. Hmm.)

Actually, looking at this year's preliminary SS Nats results, we can see pretty clearly that minor hurts.

Sevigny is currently in second place, shooting SS Minor, compared to Leatham's SS Major. Sevigny shot a clean match---no penalty points at all. And he also shot it in 143.63. Leatham also shot a clean match, but took 151.19 to shoot the match.

They both had 6 D-hits, and Sevigny had 12 more B/C hits than Leatham.

However, Sevigny also only achieved 87.08% of the possible points, where Leatham got 94.24%. Now, we KNOW that Leatham doesn't move like he used to, and Sevigny CAN really move, so the speed difference isn't surprising. Their accuracy difference was 12 A --> C hits, out of 243. (Sevigny had 12 more B/C hits than Leatham, a 24 point difference.)

And Leatham is ahead of Sevigny by about 3.3% overall. So---there is a time difference between them, but I'd not really bet on that being due to having extra rounds. (Leatham is normally a little slower than others.) Even if it WAS, it still wasn't enough to make up for the huge difference in points that occurred. Even if they had shot the SAME accuracy level (which they didn't--to get that extra speed, Sevigny had to push his accuracy limits more) Sevigny would only have gotten about 89% of the possible available points--which is still about 5% less than Leatham's, and Sevigny's speed still wouldn't have been enough to make up for that in terms of the match score.

After all, we would expect that if there is an advantage to be gained in time, Sevigny would be someone who could take advantage of it, yes? For this match--the advantage in time simply wasn't enough to make up for the difference in points.

Now, that's only one data point. But it does show pretty clearly the effect of shooting minor on points.

[Calmwater]

The platform was originally designed around a 45, factory ammo will function more reliably in a 45, I think 45 shoots softer at the same power factor and a bigger hole breaks more A box lines. Yeah it hits a few more no shoots too, but there is an A box on every target. Truth is its probably so close the best shooter will win with either....

[Calmwater]

And ten or eight rounds I'm reloading every time I move so the two rounds minor gives wouldn't help me as much as major scoring but that wasn't the point of this post anyway

[Strick]

Thanks for bringing up this year's Nats! (Which, I'll note, is after you took exception to me bringing it up earlier. Hmm.)

Actually, looking at this year's preliminary SS Nats results, we can see pretty clearly that minor hurts.

Sevigny is currently in second place, shooting SS Minor, compared to Leatham's SS Major. Sevigny shot a clean match---no penalty points at all. And he also shot it in 143.63. Leatham also shot a clean match, but took 151.19 to shoot the match.

They both had 6 D-hits, and Sevigny had 12 more B/C hits than Leatham.

However, Sevigny also only achieved 87.08% of the possible points, where Leatham got 94.24%. Now, we KNOW that Leatham doesn't move like he used to, and Sevigny CAN really move, so the speed difference isn't surprising. Their accuracy difference was 12 A --> C hits, out of 243. (Sevigny had 12 more B/C hits than Leatham, a 24 point difference.)

And Leatham is ahead of Sevigny by about 3.3% overall. So---there is a time difference between them, but I'd not really bet on that being due to having extra rounds. (Leatham is normally a little slower than others.) Even if it WAS, it still wasn't enough to make up for the huge difference in points that occurred. Even if they had shot the SAME accuracy level (which they didn't--to get that extra speed, Sevigny had to push his accuracy limits more) Sevigny would only have gotten about 89% of the possible available points--which is still about 5% less than Leatham's, and Sevigny's speed still wouldn't have been enough to make up for that in terms of the match score.

After all, we would expect that if there is an advantage to be gained in time, Sevigny would be someone who could take advantage of it, yes? For this match--the advantage in time simply wasn't enough to make up for the difference in points.

Now, that's only one data point. But it does show pretty clearly the effect of shooting minor on points.

Dude, that was just a joke since I just happen to be looking at the results right before I responded.

SSTK Nats is a terrible place to shoot minor, a typical Area match on the other hand is a different kind of match. Next time you walk stages, instead of breaking into 10 rounds break it into 8 and see how many extra reloads you have to add.

[The Antichrome]

Actually, looking at this year's preliminary SS Nats results, we can see pretty clearly that minor hurts.

Sevigny is currently in second place, shooting SS Minor, compared to Leatham's SS Major.

Notice though, that Dave did not shoot Minor by choice...his ammo flunked chrono.

I doubt that he is loaded up to 10+1.

[juan]

Thanks for bringing up this year's Nats! (Which, I'll note, is after you took exception to me bringing it up earlier. Hmm.)

Actually, looking at this year's preliminary SS Nats results, we can see pretty clearly that minor hurts.

Sevigny is currently in second place, shooting SS Minor, compared to Leatham's SS Major. Sevigny shot a clean match---no penalty points at all. And he also shot it in 143.63. Leatham also shot a clean match, but took 151.19 to shoot the match.

They both had 6 D-hits, and Sevigny had 12 more B/C hits than Leatham.

However, Sevigny also only achieved 87.08% of the possible points, where Leatham got 94.24%. Now, we KNOW that Leatham doesn't move like he used to, and Sevigny CAN really move, so the speed difference isn't surprising. Their accuracy difference was 12 A --> C hits, out of 243. (Sevigny had 12 more B/C hits than Leatham, a 24 point difference.)

And Leatham is ahead of Sevigny by about 3.3% overall. So---there is a time difference between them, but I'd not really bet on that being due to having extra rounds. (Leatham is normally a little slower than others.) Even if it WAS, it still wasn't enough to make up for the huge difference in points that occurred. Even if they had shot the SAME accuracy level (which they didn't--to get that extra speed, Sevigny had to push his accuracy limits more) Sevigny would only have gotten about 89% of the possible available points--which is still about 5% less than Leatham's, and Sevigny's speed still wouldn't have been enough to make up for that in terms of the match score.

After all, we would expect that if there is an advantage to be gained in time, Sevigny would be someone who could take advantage of it, yes? For this match--the advantage in time simply wasn't enough to make up for the difference in points.

Now, that's only one data point. But it does show pretty clearly the effect of shooting minor on points.

Dude, that was just a joke since I just happen to be looking at the results right before I responded.

SSTK Nats is a terrible place to shoot minor, a typical Area match on the other hand is a different kind of match. Next time you walk stages, instead of breaking into 10 rounds break it into 8 and see how many extra reloads you have to add.

other than the extra shots available, the reloads will be the same, except in very few situations,

.

[Thomas H]

Notice though, that Dave did not shoot Minor by choice...his ammo flunked chrono.

I doubt that he is loaded up to 10+1.

Ouch! (I noticed quite a few people bumped to Open, too.)

I must admit, I was wondering if Dave was shooting some new FN singlestack in 9mm...

[Thomas H]

SSTK Nats is a terrible place to shoot minor, a typical Area match on the other hand is a different kind of match. Next time you walk stages, instead of breaking into 10 rounds break it into 8 and see how many extra reloads you have to add.

How is the nationals match devoted to that division a terrible place for what you say is the best way to shoot that division?

[ktm300]

Your question seems to beg not talking about easy to get brass, less money for bullets etc.

Depending on your level, 9mm, .40, or .45 might be the best choice. I think most B/C shooters would benefit from 9mm as the stage planning is simpler and the "oops" factor for making up a shot or missing a steel is way lower. The 2 extra rounds let you recover. With 8 most of the time you just have to shoot more conservative so you don't have to do a lot of extra reloads. With 9mm you have to shoot for points so that is about a wash. B/C shooters don't control recoil as well so again the 9mm may be a good choice.

.40 to .45 To me the recoil impulse on the .45 is too slow, to others it is a perfect push with little snap. There are some advantages to mags made to hold 9 only reloading to 8 and you do a lot of reloads in SS. They both run if the gun, mags, and ammo are all doing their part. Look at the big dogs, most all run .40 there is probably a reason. Will the reason help you? You have to answer that.

[sperman]

SSTK Nats is a terrible place to shoot minor, a typical Area match on the other hand is a different kind of match. Next time you walk stages, instead of breaking into 10 rounds break it into 8 and see how many extra reloads you have to add.

How is the nationals match devoted to that division a terrible place for what you say is the best way to shoot that division?

Because the stages for that match are designed around 8 shots between reloads. It is very rare where you run into a stage where having 10 shots is an advantage. That isn't true at most other matches.

[ktm300]

Because the stages for that match are designed around 8 shots between reloads. It is very rare where you run into a stage where having 10 shots is an advantage. That isn't true at most other matches.

I just finised watching a lot of the SS Nats thanks to liveshots and for sure it was 8 round friendly. A 10 shot 9mm would not have helped. Now SC State last week or A6 a few weeks ago it would have helped a lot in several stages. Enough to make up for the points? I think it would have been close for an accurate B/C shooter

Most matches are set up by the Limited and Production shooters just because there are a lot more of them that anything else. Production shooters tend to set up things in 10's. Limited shooters don't care.

[dogtired]

I chose a 40 for SS as I was loading and shooting the 40 in limited. I use the same load with either gun. The 40 pistol cost more out the door but when weighing the need for brass, dies and bullets, it all came out even on day one. Other than trying cheap mags at first, it runs like a top with Wilsons.