|12-27-2001, 09:26 PM||#1|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Maybe Clint Smith is right about using ball.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Farley on 2001-12-27 22:28 ]</font>
|12-27-2001, 09:46 PM||#2|
Join Date: Mar 2001
I disagree. All this test proves is Fed HydraShok is a poor performer into clothed gelatin from a short barreled pistol. Try the test with a Gold Dot or W-W Talon bullet at 925 fps and the results are likely to be much different. Even at standard velocity, the Black Talons opened up in cloth covered water jugs for me(.40 S&W caliber) just the same as non-covered jugs.
|12-28-2001, 01:18 AM||#3|
My posting here is not directed to anyone specifically and please exscuse the tone but why are people forever misquoting such things?
These "sayings" are not light whimsical quotes. When we speak of wound ballistics we are in essence at the very core of the conversation speaking of serious injury at the minimum up to and including death and permanent injury. Crush cavities and temporary stretch cavities large enough to measure in tens of inches really are the resultant end of the loss of human life.
To return on course, yes of course the 230gr .45 fmj can be effective and at times in some situations more effective than some comparable jhp loadings but that does not mean that .45 fmj ammo is the optimum choice in a personal defense loading.
The Federal Hydra shock .45acp jhp loading is not a very good self defense bullet,
That does not mean that it cannot be but it is not consistent and it is easily defeated by clothing barriers in testing although in reviewing those tests 18” of gelatin penetration is very close to a realistic optimum.
One point to remember is that testing in gelatin alone does not accurately predict how a bullet will perform in tissue, it only gives an indication.
The fact that gelatin testing has become the "in fad" does not make it a perfect science, it is in several ways an improvement over shooting modeling clay and water jugs but it is not 100% or even 90% and that is something to remember.
FWIW, I know that the latest issue of "marketing and selling gun stuff" features a stellar write up with some great pics of expanded wonder bullets next to dyed and back lighted gelatin and I know that they are completely willing to misquote the same old garbage that has been printed at least 2,000 times by five different experts in which the writer "recommends" a bullet that only penetrates 6" in 10% gelatin but destroys the gelatin test block producing what is surely an 80" permanent stretch cavity, blah, blah, blah.
The fact remains that such foolishness helps to sell products in an industry in decline during an increasingly difficult economy and I really cannot fault their efforts.
But, the sad fact is that reality must fall into play somewhere along these lines.
Bullets and the things we need them to do so we can survive has not changed since Charles Minnie filed the first bullet nose to improve expansion.
Test the ammo you now carry/load in your defensive pistols/rifles/shotguns personally.
Build simulated segments of your environment, what do your bullets do against your apartment walls; find out what you need before you look at someone else’s needs.
Quite often what you need and what you believe you need from your bullet will be very different.
I would argue that the intended environment you are planning for and a matching bullet/caliber that performs properly for your specific use as tested for your environment is critical much more important than the FBI protocols or the latest gelatin bullet.
Loading a .45acp with a bullet that can penetrate 4 feet of traditional building materials is so foolishly misguided. And likewise, loading up a 127gr +P+ Ranger Talon as your primary carry gun when you work at an office building with 5/8” sheetrock on either side of our friend “Sally” and the dozens of cubicles is just as dumb.
As dumb and ill fated as loading lightweight over expanding jhp and frangible ammo in your duty gun before you pull the cruiser onto the pavement to start a 12hr shift on highway duty.
Or the Physician that carries a .22, .25, .32, and .380 loaded with untested ammo in a pistol without sights in his/her pocket while attending and making rounds in the hospital.
The hospital and especially the ER being one of the few places where only a surgically accurate shot with substantially reduced penetration has even the slightest chance of saving a life without taking another. The possibility of getting more than one well placed shot off are slim to none and quite possibly only one well placed major caliber bullet to the face, neck, or head of the perpetrator will do.
How about the images we have all seen of the bar tender/restaurant worker with the bead unsighted or bead sighted shotgun loaded with 00 “buck” under the counter, the same bar/restaurant where dozens of innocent people will be seated less than a few feet from each other and during busy times will be packed shoulder to shoulder
The mall security guard armed with a 4” revolver in .357 Magnum loaded with 125gr jhp ammo as it is the “top stopper”. He will reconsider when the round misses and travels a half mile away after passing through Mrs. Johnson’s suburban parked at the entrance as she picks up her teenage daughter.
Yet when given the choice the same security guard will not instead load the .357 with full power 180gr soft point ammo when on armored car duty and he has one shot, one chance to hit the bad guy now aiming a 15 shot 5” Beretta 9mm loaded with 124gr fmj NATO spec surplus ball ammo that is going to punch right through the guards second hand level 2a vest purchased by his wife for him with her Christmas money as he spent the “extra” $800 he had to buy a good vest on a new wonder pistol he had to have.
The BG has of course purchased a quality level 2 concealed vest and is safely and comfortably armored and protected from the guard’s 125gr jhp rounds.
The BG does not care and will continue to shoot until the guard goes down and that includes anyone that happens to be on the receiving end of a stray 9mm round.
Think about each environment that you live and work in and plan for each need and please test your equipment personally.
|12-28-2001, 01:54 AM||#4|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
All I can say is that is a privelage to be able to come here and read David's words of experience and wisdom.
A side note. I am still gathering newspaper (I dont take a daily myself), in order to start my 9mm testing. Test gun will be a H&K USP9-C and the ammo is going to be:
Remington Golden Saber 115gr +P
Federal Personal Defense 135gr jhp HS.
Winchester white box 115gr jhp.
And a few more brands...
|12-28-2001, 06:46 AM||#5|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Excellent response David. My purpose for posting this was to generate response's like yours and get people to think instead of buying in to the junk science of the day.
|12-28-2001, 06:21 PM||#6|
Join Date: Apr 2001
I don't see how any of these environments are all that different. The doctor, the armored car guard, office worker, and the mall security guard are all in places that may call for long shots, and shots that may require shooting around crowds of people.
For instance the office worker may have to face a gunmen toting an AK-47 at the other end of a hallway. Or the threat may no be what we expect. An armored car guard in Indianapolis recently was shot to death at a grocery store with a .25 acp.
The environments we may be required to shoot in change radically throughout the day. One minute we may have to defend ourselves at contact distance, the next we may face a 25 yard shot in a department store at an enemy behind cover.
I think the best any of us can do is to watch our backstops, make the most accurate shots we can, and not skimp on the penetration ability of our ammo. I plan for the worst case shot at a bad guy at distance and behind cover. I also train for shooting with innocents close around. This is can be complicated business.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JM on 2001-12-28 19:30 ]</font>
|12-30-2001, 01:15 PM||#7|
Opinions vary one mans survival is another mans death.
The things that work for me may not work for you or they may work for others.
You are free to use or not use the information how you see fit.
|12-31-2001, 04:07 PM||#8|
Join Date: Apr 2001
We may disagree. Nevertheless, it is a very thought provoking discussion. Thank you Mr. DiFabio for sharing your thoughts on the subject. Best of luck for the New Year.
|Search tags for this page|
ammunition for glock 30,
glock 30 ammo test,
glock 30 ammunition test,
glock 30 bullet expansion tests,
is standard ball ammo effective from a glock30
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Speer Gold Dot .38 Spl+P Ammo Test||one eye joe||Ammunition||5||07-30-2011 01:58 PM|
|Informal .45 Auto ammo test||Tom Givens||Ammunition||1||01-02-2005 06:25 PM|
|Magtech First Defense SCHP Ammo Test||MichaelOrick||Ammunition||2||11-30-2004 02:16 PM|
|PM9 147 Grain Std Pressure Ammo Test||dmobrien2001||Kahr Pistols||6||07-16-2004 05:09 AM|
|9mm Makarov Ammo Test Results||Stephen A. Camp||Ammunition||0||01-16-2004 05:25 AM|