User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 12:08:15 PM EDT
[#1]
You're going to get a ton of responses on this. Personally, either one will serve you well and do what they are intended. I stick with the Hydra-Shok, just because I like Federal ammo in general.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 12:15:10 PM EDT
[#2]
Which one can you shoot most accurately and with the greatest reliability? Other concerns regarding ammo selection should be at the bottom of your list.
Go to www.firearmstactical.com and do a little reading. You'll uncover the fact that a lot of these rounds are just clones of each other wrapped beneath layers of clever marketing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 1:42:22 PM EDT
[#3]
You can't go wrong with both rounds. From the websites I've been to, the GS expansion is a tad more reliable.
I'd try them both and see which one you like better. If you still don't notice a difference after you shoot them, base it on money and avalibility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 2:49:10 PM EDT
[#4]
Thanks for the good discussion so far guys. I am kinda thinking the same thing. I normally carry Gold Dots in my 9mm's and .40's as they tend to be my overall favorites for penetration and expansion. But I just thought that with the .45 I would go with what I had plenty of already on hand. There doesn't seem to be too much difference in many of the premium loads these days.
I haven't heard much made of the Golden Saber's core/jacket seperation issue, so I take it that it really isn't that much of an issue? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 2:52:43 PM EDT
[#5]
I'm using the 200 grain Speer Gold Dot. I have read that the 230 grain Hydra-Shok doesn't expand well out of a short barrel, but that's not a consideration in your case. Either of your choices would seem to be a good one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 3:20:04 PM EDT
[#6]
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the GS's jacket seperation issue was only through glass.
I thought they had a "bonded" GS round to resolve that issue. Please someone correct me if I'm mistaken. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 3:32:02 PM EDT
[#7]
I'd like to throw into this thread: What do you guys think of the Ranger SXT's
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 3:46:22 PM EDT
[#8]
MillerSHO,
In a test from ammo lab it seems the 230 gr Golden Saber they tested had a core and jacket seperate. But the round expanded well and penetration was deep the best I remember. So I am not sure it would have made any difference as far as terminal performance. Seems the diameter of the jacket was .70" and the bullet core was .66". There is a newer bonded version of the GS, but I am not sure who sells them. This may be another LEO type load that is hard to get. Which version of the GS does the FBI use? I imagine it's the newer bonded version but that's only speculation. Capitalist, The Rangers I saw (the actual Ranger Talon, not the SXT) also seems to show good expansion and penetration. Seems the Ammo Lab test had them going about 14" in gel with .68 expansion or something like that. I would like to have Ranger in every caliber I own as it's fine ammo. But because I can never find it around here I just use other stuff, that way I won't have as much trouble when I need to restock. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 3:48:29 PM EDT
[#9]
SXT's must have gold cores, judging from what they want for them around here...after Black Talon went through the roof, this stuff followed!
Charging_Handle--I'd use 185 grain Gold Dots and big jolts of AA#5. Heavy slugs are okay too, but the fatties usually are better out of a Compact, short-barreled pistol. This is due to the fact that the big slugs get up to speed in a smaller space (using Bullseye, say) whereas the benefits from a lighter slug revolve around the higher speeds attainable with slower powders...and, as you know, that takes barrel length. Otherwise, from a compact, you get a light, slow slug and a whoppin' fireball...only fun on the range at dusk. NOT so good in a dark parking lot with multiple threats. FWIW, I shoot 450 SMC/45 Super loads with 185 or 200 grainers from my G21, and fire 230 grain standard loads from G30/36. This after a friend's chronograph showed that those hotties didn't move even 100 fps faster in the mini-guns...just a much bigger boom for no gain. And powder isn't cheap, so I try not to waste it! Regards, FastVFR800 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 4:48:59 PM EDT
[#10]
Golden Sabres do expand pretty regularly, but I have had enough core seperations during range testing to switch to Gold Dots.
The drawback with Gold Dots is that due to the shape of the bullet you really need to test fire them in the gun you want them to work in. A lot. Like one or two hundred rounds with no failures. That ain't cheap. But, then, you should do that with any ammo you want to depend on. Put the other ammo in your "After I Run Out Of SHTF Ammo" stash. If the world comes to an end and you run out of good ammo, the other stuff will be welcome. If you die before TSHTF, your wife will sell them for a buck a box at her annual garage sale. But you won't care.[:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 5:12:30 PM EDT
[#11]
Any ammunition by CCI, Black Hills, or Georgia Arms loaded with the 230Gn Gold Dot hollowpoint.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 8:16:25 PM EDT
[#12]
When I can find it, I use the Winchester white-box 230 grn. JHP. [url]www.ammolab.com[/url] tested the equivalent 9mm load, and it held it's own with the rest of the pack. It's $15 per box of 50, so it doesn't rape your pocketbook to practice with. It also has a nice round profile that feeds without a hiccup in my unmodified Series '70 (original, not new).
[url=http://www.winchester.com/ammunition/store/cfhlist.eye?cartlist=NDUgQXV0b21hdGlj&uselist=PP&brandlist=5&image=on&summary=on&velocity=on&energy=on&traj=on]Here's Winchester's link for it.[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 8:25:45 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: SXT's must have gold cores, judging from what they want for them around here...after Black Talon went through the roof, this stuff followed! Charging_Handle--I'd use 185 grain Gold Dots and big jolts of AA#5. Heavy slugs are okay too, but the fatties usually are better out of a Compact, short-barreled pistol. This is due to the fact that the big slugs get up to speed in a smaller space (using Bullseye, say) whereas the benefits from a lighter slug revolve around the higher speeds attainable with slower powders...and, as you know, that takes barrel length. Otherwise, from a compact, you get a light, slow slug and a whoppin' fireball...only fun on the range at dusk. NOT so good in a dark parking lot with multiple threats. FWIW, I shoot 450 SMC/45 Super loads with 185 or 200 grainers from my G21, and fire 230 grain standard loads from G30/36. This after a friend's chronograph showed that those hotties didn't move even 100 fps faster in the mini-guns...just a much bigger boom for no gain. And powder isn't cheap, so I try not to waste it! Regards, FastVFR800 I don't reload. I have a Colt CCO (4.25" bbl w/Officer's frame) that I occasionally use as a carry gun. This barrel is "medium" in length when compared to the G21 and G30/36 you mentioned. In light of this, what is an ideal bullet weight? Keep in mind that I am a believer in the violent expansion/fragmentation side of the handgun ammo ballistics debate. Of course, I am always willing to listen to evidence that backs up the contrary. I normally lean towards fast/light hollowpoints (185 +P) rather than slow/heavy (230 +P). Is this a bad idea for my 4.25" bbl? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2003 11:07:33 PM EDT
[#14]
The Federal Hydra-Shok design is about 15 years old. While it was state-of-the-art when it was first on the market, some of the more recent designs are much better. The primary problem with the Hydra-Shok (in all calibers) is that the hollow-point cavity tends to get clogged when shot through clothing (particularly heavy clothing), and with the center post holding that clothing to the front of the bullet, it prevents the bullet from expanding. When this happens, it performs more or less like a FMJ round; lots of penetration but relatively little damage.
The Golden Sabers, in both regular and bonded versions, are also prone to fail the denim testing and have greater muzzle flash than the recommended loads. The best loads currently are: - Winchester 230gr Ranger Talon (RA45T) - Winchester 230gr +P Ranger Talon (RA45TP) - Federal 230gr Tactical (LE45T1) - Speer 230gr Gold Dot (23966) Among the ligher-weight loads, the only recommended load is the Taurus/Barnes 185gr all-copper JHP. While it doesn't fully meet the penetration requirement (typically 11-12"), it performs well in a wide variety of scenarios (far superior to loads such as the Triton Quickshok, Aguila IQ, Magsafe, Glaser, etc.) and does well in barrier testing. But check your state laws; due to the all-copper bullet, this load is illegal in some states. -Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 9:04:48 AM EDT
[#15]
Just do what I do. Pick your two favorite and stagger them in the mag. I do Gold dot, Hydroshock, Gold dot. etc. Some times I even do three different ones.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 9:22:44 AM EDT
[#16]
I carry 200 gr. Gold Dot +Ps in my Glock 21. I find it to be a good compromise between bullet weight and velocity.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 9:32:07 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: The Federal Hydra-Shok design is about 15 years old. While it was state-of-the-art when it was first on the market, some of the more recent designs are much better. The primary problem with the Hydra-Shok (in all calibers) is that the hollow-point cavity tends to get clogged when shot through clothing (particularly heavy clothing), and with the center post holding that clothing to the front of the bullet, it prevents the bullet from expanding. When this happens, it performs more or less like a FMJ round; lots of penetration but relatively little damage. The Golden Sabers, in both regular and bonded versions, are also prone to fail the denim testing and have greater muzzle flash than the recommended loads. The best loads currently are: - Winchester 230gr Ranger Talon (RA45T) - Winchester 230gr +P Ranger Talon (RA45TP) - Federal 230gr Tactical (LE45T1) - Speer 230gr Gold Dot (23966) Among the ligher-weight loads, the only recommended load is the Taurus/Barnes 185gr all-copper JHP. While it doesn't fully meet the penetration requirement (typically 11-12"), it performs well in a wide variety of scenarios (far superior to loads such as the Triton Quickshok, Aguila IQ, Magsafe, Glaser, etc.) and does well in barrier testing. But check your state laws; due to the all-copper bullet, this load is illegal in some states. -Troy For a long time I've been a believer in violent expansion/fragmentation rather than controlled expansion and deep penetraion when considering anti-personnel ammo. For instance, my always-loaded house gun is an S&W 629 Mountain Gun (4" .44 Mag) loaded with Glaser rounds. I know this setup won't pass the 12" minimum penetration through ballistic gelatin test, but will it not still cause MASSIVE damage to human flesh? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 1:18:29 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: Quoted: The Federal Hydra-Shok design is about 15 years old. While it was state-of-the-art when it was first on the market, some of the more recent designs are much better. The primary problem with the Hydra-Shok (in all calibers) is that the hollow-point cavity tends to get clogged when shot through clothing (particularly heavy clothing), and with the center post holding that clothing to the front of the bullet, it prevents the bullet from expanding. When this happens, it performs more or less like a FMJ round; lots of penetration but relatively little damage. The Golden Sabers, in both regular and bonded versions, are also prone to fail the denim testing and have greater muzzle flash than the recommended loads. The best loads currently are: - Winchester 230gr Ranger Talon (RA45T) - Winchester 230gr +P Ranger Talon (RA45TP) - Federal 230gr Tactical (LE45T1) - Speer 230gr Gold Dot (23966) Among the ligher-weight loads, the only recommended load is the Taurus/Barnes 185gr all-copper JHP. While it doesn't fully meet the penetration requirement (typically 11-12"), it performs well in a wide variety of scenarios (far superior to loads such as the Triton Quickshok, Aguila IQ, Magsafe, Glaser, etc.) and does well in barrier testing. But check your state laws; due to the all-copper bullet, this load is illegal in some states. -Troy For a long time I've been a believer in violent expansion/fragmentation rather than controlled expansion and deep penetraion when considering anti-personnel ammo. For instance, my always-loaded house gun is an S&W 629 Mountain Gun (4" .44 Mag) loaded with Glaser rounds. I know this setup won't pass the 12" minimum penetration through ballistic gelatin test, but will it not still cause MASSIVE damage to human flesh? But WHICH flesh? If you can't get deep and get to vessels, even after going through an arm, then you're not doing a good job. See: [url=www.ammo-oracle.com]The Ammo FAQ[/url] and read the discussion on terminal performance and anti-personnel use. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 2:20:38 PM EDT
[#19]
One other non-wound ballistics point to consider with the various rounds. If you do a lot of administrative loading and unloading of your gun, there are some things to consider with the Gold Dots and Golden Sabers. This had been my experience with a Wilson SGP and a SIG P220: Gold Dots seem very susceptible to bullet tip damage from feed ramps; Golden Sabers only need two or three chamberings to start experiencing significant bullet set back into the case (dangerously increasing chamber pressure). In my experience, this doesnt happen as often with Hydra-Shok or SXT's. That could vary with different guns. Something worth looking testing with your gun.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 6:09:29 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Federal Hydra-Shok design is about 15 years old. While it was state-of-the-art when it was first on the market, some of the more recent designs are much better. The primary problem with the Hydra-Shok (in all calibers) is that the hollow-point cavity tends to get clogged when shot through clothing (particularly heavy clothing), and with the center post holding that clothing to the front of the bullet, it prevents the bullet from expanding. When this happens, it performs more or less like a FMJ round; lots of penetration but relatively little damage. The Golden Sabers, in both regular and bonded versions, are also prone to fail the denim testing and have greater muzzle flash than the recommended loads. The best loads currently are: - Winchester 230gr Ranger Talon (RA45T) - Winchester 230gr +P Ranger Talon (RA45TP) - Federal 230gr Tactical (LE45T1) - Speer 230gr Gold Dot (23966) Among the ligher-weight loads, the only recommended load is the Taurus/Barnes 185gr all-copper JHP. While it doesn't fully meet the penetration requirement (typically 11-12"), it performs well in a wide variety of scenarios (far superior to loads such as the Triton Quickshok, Aguila IQ, Magsafe, Glaser, etc.) and does well in barrier testing. But check your state laws; due to the all-copper bullet, this load is illegal in some states. -Troy For a long time I've been a believer in violent expansion/fragmentation rather than controlled expansion and deep penetraion when considering anti-personnel ammo. For instance, my always-loaded house gun is an S&W 629 Mountain Gun (4" .44 Mag) loaded with Glaser rounds. I know this setup won't pass the 12" minimum penetration through ballistic gelatin test, but will it not still cause MASSIVE damage to human flesh? But WHICH flesh? If you can't get deep and get to vessels, even after going through an arm, then you're not doing a good job. See: [url=www.ammo-oracle.com]The Ammo FAQ[/url] and read the discussion on terminal performance and anti-personnel use. I have read the Ammo FAQ twice through in the past week or so. It is an OUTSTANDING compilation of information on the part of both Troy and yourself. Even though I've been a fairly well-read firearm enthusiast for 8 years or so, I learned much about the 5.56x45mm cartridge and found it to be fascinating reading in general. Call me a geek. Getting back to the matter at hand. I'm not a believer in the 12" min penetration rule (I know, blasphemy) because the only time you would need more than 8" or 9" is if, as you and many others have stated, you need to shoot directly through an arm. Aside from the arms and clothing, there is no barrier between the projectile and the torso. Compared to an arm, clothing is an almost negligible barrier when we're disussing frangible loads in lieu of hollowpoints. This is why I don't see the need for a full 12" of reliable penetration. Of course, I understand the desire people have to err on the side of too much rather than too little. I guess you could say I'd rather have a broader but shallower wound profile. Deep enough but PLENTY wide, ya know? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 6:45:53 PM EDT
[#21]
Cor-Bon 165 Grain +P
Very Fast, Very Hard Hitting, and will turn their innards to jelly! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 7:04:26 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: I'm not a believer in the 12" min penetration rule (I know, blasphemy) because the only time you would need more than 8" or 9" is if, as you and many others have stated, you need to shoot directly through an arm. Aside from the arms and clothing, there is no barrier between the projectile and the torso. While you are, of course, free to believe anything you like, you might reconsider your position on this issue. The "12-Inch Minimum Penetration Rule" came after extensive study of real-world shootings, both military and police. One of the important lessons learned is that, in a gunfight, a clear frontal shot to the chest is by far the exception, not the rule. In most cases, shots are made at angles, or that the entire length of an arm is blocking access to the chest (i.e., criminal holding a gun out in front of him, aiming at the officer). In these (likely) situations, adequate penetration is VITAL to quickly incapacitating the attacker. Of course, if you're an assassin who shoots unsuspecting people in the back, or you're betting that your attacker will stand facing you at attention while you fire at him, then you will probably do fine with less than 12" of penetration. Our recommendations use this standard because we believe that it is important that your load selection is able to perform well in ANY probable situation. Glaser rounds don't come close to providing enough penetration, and in many cases do much LESS overall damage to tissue. Again, something you may wish to consider. -Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 7:06:25 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Cor-Bon 165 Grain +P Very Fast, Very Hard Hitting, and will turn their innards to jelly! Interesting. I'm sure you have some terriffic peer-reviewed data to back up this assertion, right? [:)] -Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 7:08:34 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Just do what I do. Pick your two favorite and stagger them in the mag. I do Gold dot, Hydroshock, Gold dot. etc. Some times I even do three different ones. While I can't recommend this practice, if you're going to do this, make sure you practice with this combination, and that you check your groupings. Few loads shoot to the same point of aim, expecially with very different bullet designs. -Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 7:15:03 PM EDT
[#25]
People tend to forget that we live, move and shoot in three dimensions.
A shot that might only require 6-8" pen on a frontal sillouette can requir much more if it pivots on one - let alone two axis. Turning laterally can add many inches to the need penetration before any major organs are hit. The same for any aspect changes in the angle of approach to the chest. What Troy posted on the studies of shooting are true - now if you feel that it does not apply to you that is your perogative. Corbon ammo tends to have some of the worst performance when not involved in straight on shootings as it has virtually no penetration. -Kevin |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 7:24:07 PM EDT
[#26]
Golden sabers, 185, seem to work great in mine. Blew the hell outta a racoon. I also love the "Flying Ashtrays".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 9:11:30 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Quoted: I'm not a believer in the 12" min penetration rule (I know, blasphemy) because the only time you would need more than 8" or 9" is if, as you and many others have stated, you need to shoot directly through an arm. Aside from the arms and clothing, there is no barrier between the projectile and the torso. While you are, of course, free to believe anything you like, you might reconsider your position on this issue. The "12-Inch Minimum Penetration Rule" came after extensive study of real-world shootings, both military and police. One of the important lessons learned is that, in a gunfight, a clear frontal shot to the chest is by far the exception, not the rule. In most cases, shots are made at angles, or that the entire length of an arm is blocking access to the chest (i.e., criminal holding a gun out in front of him, aiming at the officer). In these (likely) situations, adequate penetration is VITAL to quickly incapacitating the attacker. Of course, if you're an assassin who shoots unsuspecting people in the back, or you're betting that your attacker will stand facing you at attention while you fire at him, then you will probably do fine with less than 12" of penetration. Our recommendations use this standard because we believe that it is important that your load selection is able to perform well in ANY probable situation. Glaser rounds don't come close to providing enough penetration, and in many cases do much LESS overall damage to tissue. Again, something you may wish to consider. -Troy Interesting. Help me out on three things: 1) I currently have Glaser Blue loaded in my 4" 629 .44 Rem Mag house gun. This caliber normally provides entirely too much penetration for anit-personnel use. Considering the under-penetrating properties of the Glaser projectiles, what kind of penetration would this load produce in the typical 10% ballistic gelatin (covered w/ denim) test? I'm not being a smart-ass here, I really do want to know. 2) My typical carry pistol is a Colt CCO 4.25" bbl. What would be an ideal defense load in this case? I was leaning towards a Cor-Bon/Triton/Golden Saber 185 +P. 3) From the Ammo FAQ under [b]"Q. So do both M193 and M855 fragment the same? How do their wound profiles compare to the FBI requirements?"[/b], it looks like M193 will do the bulk of its damage between 5" and 9.5" (~12.5 and 25 cm) with the nose penetrating to a litle over 14" (36 cm). If the bulk of the damage is done between 5" and 9.5" with only the small nose making to 14", does this round pass the 12" min rule? Technically, pratically, or both? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/30/2003 10:21:48 PM EDT
[#28]
Chuck,
Glaser safety slugs, regaurdless of caliber, typically penetrate 4-6". If you insist on using a 44 revolver for home defense I suggest you load it with 44Special ammo. CCI even offers their excellent Gold Dot bullet in the economical Blazer line with this bullet in .44Spec For .45Acp I prefer the 230Gn Gold Dot bullet. Several manufacturers, including CCI, Black Hills, and Georgia Arms offer ammo loaded with this bullet. I'm a big believer in bonded bullets. LE officers often finds themselves shooting into and through automobiles. Safety glass and even interior plastics play hell with JHP bullets. In one local shooting a cop was abmbushed while seated in his patrol car. The suspect was standing in front of the patrol car shooting through the front windshield. The officer tried to take cover and return fire as best he could. Some of the officers bullets went through the dashboard, stripping the jacket in the process, then hitting the windshield laking the mass/momentum to even penetrate the windshield. The bullets were recovered on top of the dash board! In another local shooting a man armed with several guns drove to his girlfriends house after calling her and telling her he was comming to kill her. When he pulled up infront of her house, the police approached his truck from behind and starting giving him commands to slowly exit the vehicle. The suspect grabbed a rifle from the seat beside him and 3 officers opened fire. Two of the officers were armed with 9mm handguns and none of their bullets penetrated deep enough to get through both the rear window and headrest/seat to reach the suspect. 1 Officer with a .45 was able to shoot through the window & headrest, and still hit the suspect. The bullet was recovered from the suspects neck. The bullet shed it's jacket and much of it's mass before getting to the supect. A bonded bullet would have held up better, pentrated deeper and straighter, and the suspect would have likely died. Instead he lived and sued. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 12:17:36 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: 3) From the Ammo FAQ under [b]"Q. So do both M193 and M855 fragment the same? How do their wound profiles compare to the FBI requirements?"[/b], it looks like M193 will do the bulk of its damage between 5" and 9.5" (~12.5 and 25 cm) with the nose penetrating to a litle over 14" (36 cm). If the bulk of the damage is done between 5" and 9.5" with only the small nose making to 14", does this round pass the 12" min rule? Technically, pratically, or both? It meets the requirement and would pass the FBI test. The point of the 12" penetration rule is to provide enough penetration to pass through some extraneous material before reaching vital organs/vascular structures. If a M855 nose penetrates the heart wall, well, that's plenty of damage. Getting it there is the issue. Meanwhile, leaving a large cavity riddled with fragments behind the nose's path is opening up more bleeding and cutting a wider path, making it more likely to damage any nearby CNS structures. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 12:31:24 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Corbon ammo tends to have some of the worst performance when not involved in straight on shootings as it has virtually no penetration. -Kevin And what information do you base this statement on? The FBI information for the 9mm CorBon says that the round will penetrate about 9-10 inches. I don't have their test results for any of the .45 CorBon loads or I would post them. Now this certainly is not the 12" minumum extablished by the FBI but "virtually no penetration"? I think you need to reevaluate that statement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 12:53:53 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Quoted: Corbon ammo tends to have some of the worst performance when not involved in straight on shootings as it has virtually no penetration. -Kevin And what information do you base this statement on? The FBI information for the 9mm CorBon says that the round will penetrate about 9-10 inches. I don't have their test results for any of the .45 CorBon loads or I would post them. Now this certainly is not the 12" minumum extablished by the FBI but "virtually no penetration"? I think you need to reevaluate that statement. [url]http://www.ammolab.com/Test%20Results.htm[/url] [url]http://www.ammolab.com/corbon_prb_45.htm[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 4:57:18 AM EDT
[#32]
Colt Rifle,
The data I have from the .45 165gr +P JHP from Corbon has 7" of penetration... I noticed that Ammolab has it at 7.2" I mentioned the 9mm round in another thread The 115gr loading has 9" of pen. and the 124gr 10" Both are a little short of what I would want... Okay 9.6" by ammolab and 10.5" respectively (not where I got my data but close enough for gov't work) I don't see what I need to re-evaluate? 7" is 5" short of the FBI min recommended (which I tend to think is a good golden rule) - so I would say [b]seriously inadequate[/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 6:37:06 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: Chuck, Glaser safety slugs, regaurdless of caliber, typically penetrate 4-6". If you insist on using a 44 revolver for home defense I suggest you load it with 44Special ammo. CCI even offers their excellent Gold Dot bullet in the economical Blazer line with this bullet in .44Spec For .45Acp I prefer the 230Gn Gold Dot bullet. Several manufacturers, including CCI, Black Hills, and Georgia Arms offer ammo loaded with this bullet. I'm a big believer in bonded bullets. LE officers often finds themselves shooting into and through automobiles. Safety glass and even interior plastics play hell with JHP bullets. In one local shooting a cop was abmbushed while seated in his patrol car. The suspect was standing in front of the patrol car shooting through the front windshield. The officer tried to take cover and return fire as best he could. Some of the officers bullets went through the dashboard, stripping the jacket in the process, then hitting the windshield laking the mass/momentum to even penetrate the windshield. The bullets were recovered on top of the dash board! In another local shooting a man armed with several guns drove to his girlfriends house after calling her and telling her he was comming to kill her. When he pulled up infront of her house, the police approached his truck from behind and starting giving him commands to slowly exit the vehicle. The suspect grabbed a rifle from the seat beside him and 3 officers opened fire. Two of the officers were armed with 9mm handguns and none of their bullets penetrated deep enough to get through both the rear window and headrest/seat to reach the suspect. 1 Officer with a .45 was able to shoot through the window & headrest, and still hit the suspect. The bullet was recovered from the suspects neck. The bullet shed it's jacket and much of it's mass before getting to the supect. A bonded bullet would have held up better, pentrated deeper and straighter, and the suspect would have likely died. Instead he lived and sued. 6" ain't so great. I may have to re-think my load selection there. Would the standard pressure 230 Gold Dot acheive adequate velocity from my 4.25" bbl? I was leaning towards the lighter bullets (although NOT 165) because I want to be confidant in my hollowpoint's ability to violently expand in the target. I definitely agree with you regarding bonded bullets for LE work. I don't want to compromise the terminal ballistics of my load in order to acheive more reliable performance through laminated glass. Maybe it's wishful thinking but I want my load to be based almost purely on its capabilities against a clothed human body with no obstacle in between. I would think man-on-man is more typical of self-defense encounters than man (in car)-on-man. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 6:46:42 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: Quoted: 3) From the Ammo FAQ under [b]"Q. So do both M193 and M855 fragment the same? How do their wound profiles compare to the FBI requirements?"[/b], it looks like M193 will do the bulk of its damage between 5" and 9.5" (~12.5 and 25 cm) with the nose penetrating to a litle over 14" (36 cm). If the bulk of the damage is done between 5" and 9.5" with only the small nose making to 14", does this round pass the 12" min rule? Technically, pratically, or both? It meets the requirement and would pass the FBI test. The point of the 12" penetration rule is to provide enough penetration to pass through some extraneous material before reaching vital organs/vascular structures. If a M855 nose penetrates the heart wall, well, that's plenty of damage. Getting it there is the issue. Meanwhile, leaving a large cavity riddled with fragments behind the nose's path is opening up more bleeding and cutting a wider path, making it more likely to damage any nearby CNS structures. The "large cavity riddled with fragments" portion of this example wound is what I view to be the most important. Like you said, the larger breadth of this portion of the wound would increase the chances of destroying CNS structures while providing plenty of bleed-out opportunity. Even more bleed-out, perhaps, than the heart wall puncture made by the small bullet nose. This is why I have always leaned toward loads that offer a very wide and somewhat deep wound profile rather than somewhat wide and very deep. I guess I view the penetration depth of the bulk of the tissue damage to be more important than the actual maximum penetration of the projectile. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 8:11:15 AM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: I don't see what I need to re-evaluate? 7" is 5" short of the FBI min recommended (which I tend to think is a good golden rule) - so I would say [b]seriously inadequate[/b] LOL....Ok I'll accept that. There is a big difference between "virtually no penetration" and "seriously inadequate". Virtually no penetration implies that the round in question bounces off the surface or goes in maybe an inch or so. I have my own views on penetration but I will keep them to myself. No reason to get started on THAT topic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 9:25:32 AM EDT
[#36]
ColtRifle - I guess maybe my word choice was not the best but I was trying to make a point.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 10:52:27 AM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Would the standard pressure 230 Gold Dot acheive adequate velocity from my 4.25" bbl? Yes; most of the tests are done with 4" barrels, to reflect the popularity of todays "compact" handguns. -Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 12:09:42 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: Golden sabers, 185, seem to work great in mine. Blew the hell outta a racoon. I also love the "Flying Ashtrays". |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 12:29:32 PM EDT
[#39]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 3) From the Ammo FAQ under [b]"Q. So do both M193 and M855 fragment the same? How do their wound profiles compare to the FBI requirements?"[/b], it looks like M193 will do the bulk of its damage between 5" and 9.5" (~12.5 and 25 cm) with the nose penetrating to a litle over 14" (36 cm). If the bulk of the damage is done between 5" and 9.5" with only the small nose making to 14", does this round pass the 12" min rule? Technically, pratically, or both? It meets the requirement and would pass the FBI test. The point of the 12" penetration rule is to provide enough penetration to pass through some extraneous material before reaching vital organs/vascular structures. If a M855 nose penetrates the heart wall, well, that's plenty of damage. Getting it there is the issue. Meanwhile, leaving a large cavity riddled with fragments behind the nose's path is opening up more bleeding and cutting a wider path, making it more likely to damage any nearby CNS structures. The "large cavity riddled with fragments" portion of this example wound is what I view to be the most important. Like you said, the larger breadth of this portion of the wound would increase the chances of destroying CNS structures while providing plenty of bleed-out opportunity. Even more bleed-out, perhaps, than the heart wall puncture made by the small bullet nose. This is why I have always leaned toward loads that offer a very wide and somewhat deep wound profile rather than somewhat wide and very deep. I guess I view the penetration depth of the bulk of the tissue damage to be more important than the actual maximum penetration of the projectile. That's where we differ. If you can't GET to it, you can't make it bleed. The real sensitive stuff is deep and protected. You have to get there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 4:17:26 PM EDT
[#40]
How about the Corbon 165gr+p Pow 'R Ball. Great expansion, penetration averages between 12"-14". Wouldn't be my choice for a police load because of barrier penetration, but seems pretty good for CCW use.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 7:38:26 PM EDT
[#41]
All I shoot and carry is federal white box nato 230 ball. allways runs and i feel confident. will this round 'get there?' or is this a lesser performer than desirable in a head on conflict?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 7:45:12 PM EDT
[#42]
I'm new here, but these ammunition arguments sound like the oldest debate in the book. Basically, i think what ammo selection comes down to is "What works reliably, what is most comfortable for you to use, and which can you put the most accurate shots into an attacker with". If you can put 6 FMJ shots into an attacker reliably, but only one JHP and barely hit... then its not a matter of penetration or expansion, its about ammo usability and reliability.
What did i do? I bought my first and only pistol (Glock 23) and bought a few boxes of various ammy and shot it. I shot it at paper, at glass, old car doors, wooden doors, and even homemade geletin tests (1/2 gal milk cartons full of water). My conclusion? I prefer the 155 gr. Federal Hydra-Shok JHP. It has a reasonable recoil, good penetration, and reasonable expansion. Its a compromise. But i can also put 10 shots into 10 3x5 index cards reliably at 10m... That was my biggest reason. A pistol is a down and dirty 'necessity' weapon and will never replace the need for a good long rifle for range, and will never compare to a shotgun up close. When you have a personal 'shtf' incident, i'd prefer to have ammo i know well, trust to function, and is accurate FOR ME compared to anything any study says. Your mileage may vary |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 8:05:52 PM EDT
[#43]
guess i will go out on limb here.
My carry ammo is usually aquilla hi-q's. I have had very good results with it and the stats are impressive. I have also had good results with triton quick shocks. I have found that several pistols don't feed this well however. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/31/2003 9:10:28 PM EDT
[#44]
I did some .45ACP balistic testing with my Sig P220 the other weekend.
I filled two 5 gallon water cooler jugs with water, and lightly duct taped the caps back on(I didn't want them to tip over and spill in my car on the way to the range). I was shooting Winchester 185gr. Super-X Silvertip HP and Aguila IQ 117gr. HP. The Aguila blew it's jug apart, leaving a .45" hole going in with a small dent on the opposite side. The bottom of the jug shattered off and the cap blew free. The Winchester zipped right through its jug leaving .45" holes on each side. A second shot, before too much water leaked out, with Aguila blew that one apart in the same manner as the 1st, except the cap stayed on. Shooting the empty bottles, the Winchester made the same size holes as if the bottle had water in it, about .45". The Aguila made a 1" jagged hole, both going in and going out. If you want trauma, go with the Aguila IQ. It knocked the crap out of that jug. First the jug was full of water then it was empty and the water all over the ground. I wish I had more bottles so I could see when the Winchester would have stopped. It seemed to penetrate very well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2003 12:50:15 AM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: If you want trauma, go with the Aguila IQ. It knocked the crap out of that jug. First the jug was full of water then it was empty and the water all over the ground. Note that this is not exactly a scientific test in any manner at all. Please don't make ammo choices based upon what made the nastiest hole in a covered plastic jug... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2003 8:29:31 AM EDT
[#46]
Which defensive .45 ACP load....Hydra-Shok, Golden Saber, other?
Check out the Federal EFMJ. Very impressive expansion and weight retention. Feeds as slick a snot on a doorknob. Out of my 1911A1 it shoots to the same point as 230gr HydraShok so I didn't even have to mess with the sights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2003 9:45:44 AM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: Quoted: If you want trauma, go with the Aguila IQ. It knocked the crap out of that jug. First the jug was full of water then it was empty and the water all over the ground. Note that this is not exactly a scientific test in any manner at all. Please don't make ammo choices based upon what made the nastiest hole in a covered plastic jug... Aguila IQ pretty much stinks in all it's versions. See 9mm results (yawn) below- these are all I could get photos of. Don't expect better from .45 etc. [center][img]www.schloss.li/9mm Aguilas.jpg[/img][/center] You shouldn't be particularly surprised as this is a "gimmick" bullet. I'm told "Triton Quickshok" is equally pathetic. Stick with solid, proven performers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2003 9:48:53 AM EDT
[#48]
Quoted: Which defensive .45 ACP load....Hydra-Shok, Golden Saber, other? Check out the Federal EFMJ. Very impressive expansion and weight retention. Feeds as slick a snot on a doorknob. Out of my 1911A1 it shoots to the same point as 230gr HydraShok so I didn't even have to mess with the sights. Generally has serious problems expanding when encountering clothed bad-guys. (i.e. ALL badguys). I'd avoid it. Again, a gimmick bullet. More money spent on marketing than research. Seems to be working. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2003 10:24:29 AM EDT
[#49]
Ok, lets go back into history and see how & why the FBI chose thr 230 Golden Saber as "the" round for the $4K Springfield HRT pistols. Seems that the boys in the Bureau shot everything that was available on the planet and came up with the round as the best performer that exsisted . This is out of a 45 pistol used by an operator who is trained to RESCUE folks from REAL bad people. The round was selected then the 1911 contest was on. Who could build a pistol to deliver this very accurate round the best and on price target? Well, Springfield won. Then the Bureau boys went after Remingtom to improve on the bullet because of the core seperation problem. Because Gold Dots do not have this problem, Remington went to bonding their bullets.
Bonded bullets work so well that the FBI has changed all handgun rounds to the Gold Dots from Federals EXCEPT the HRT 45's because they are built to shoot the Remington round. My source is my neighbor, Tactical Commander for the FBI SWAT Team ,Phoenix. In my Sig P-220, I have 200 gr. Gold Dots because I was given a box of them and they shoot well. I also have a spair mag loaded with Golden Sabers , non bonded because I can't find bonded ones yet. May I should ask the neighbor for some hand outs !! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2003 11:12:20 AM EDT
[#50]
Quoted: I'm using the 200 grain Speer Gold Dot. I have read that the 230 grain Hydra-Shok doesn't expand well out of a short barrel, but that's not a consideration in your case. Either of your choices would seem to be a good one. Pictured below, Gold Dot 200 grain. ~1000 fps impacts with denim covered gel and bare gel. [img]www.schloss.li/200.jpg[/img] Note the "oh-so-lovely" performance of the top row (in denim). (not) Once again, showing the folly of depending on old-wives-tales, even when told by nextdoor neighbor SWAT team gurus. Stick with 230 grain. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
