If it cost the same per round…

A lot of guys have been arguing more and more passionately that 9mm is plenty good enough.  They say that 9mm is tested out to be just fine… just as good… smaller and more rounds in the mag is better.  I’m not going to argue that more rounds can be better than less rounds, but I’d argue that bigger rounds are better than smaller rounds.  I wonder if the cost of each main stream auto handguns rounds were all the same low price… all the same as 9mm… if people wouldn’t be looking at the more potent rounds instead of the cheaper 9.  I understand the economy sucks and money is tight everywhere.  So a lot of guys are telling themselves Nine is Fine.  Really?  Is it?

9mm, .40, .45, .357SIG, 10mm… if they were all 12.99 a box of 5o for FMJ’s and 18.99 for 25 rounds of JHP’s.  I think 9mm would fall out of favor pretty quick.

The Trials of 1905 found that they didn’t like the small caliber, so they went with .45.  Recently the Army put out the Request for Proposal for a new gun that was basically “Not a Beretta in 9mm.”  That request was later withdrawn, but the fact remains that the US Army isn’t all that tickled anymore with the smaller caliber.

Given my experiences with the 10mm cartridge, I could happily run 10 exclusively.  I know MHI is all about the .45, but the MCB guys are happy with their 10’s.   If the cost was indeed all the same, what would you run?  Would you opt for 9?