It might seem that if the whole purpose of a maximum disruption round is to expand to a larger diameter, it would make more sense to start out with the desired diameter rather than relying on the somewhat inconsistent results of expansion on impact. While there is merit to this (there is a strong following of the .45 ACP, as compared to the .40 S&W and 0.355 in diameter 9×19mm, for just this reason) there are also significant downsides. A larger diameter bullet is going to have significantly more drag than a smaller diameter bullet of the same mass, which means long range performance will be significantly degraded. A larger diameter bullet also means more space is required to store the ammunition, which means either bulkier guns or smaller magazine capacities. The common trade-off when comparing .45 ACP, .40 S&W, and 9×19mm pistols is a 7- to 14-round capacity in the .45 ACP vs. a 10- to 16-round capacity in the .40 S&W vs. a 13- to 19-round capacity in the 9×19mm. Although several .45-caliber pistols are available with high-capacity magazines (Para Ordnance being one of the first in the late 1980s) many people find the wide grip required uncomfortable and difficult to use. Especially where the military requirement of a nonexpanding round is concerned, there is fierce debate over whether it is better to have fewer, larger bullets for enhanced terminal effects, or more, smaller bullets for increased number of potential target hits.