OT- Munk's defensive ammo

Spectre

Spectre

Joined
Nov 3, 1998
Messages
4,331
The problem with using really powerful (comparatively) handgun ammo vs. human opponents, is that most really powerful stuff- like 240-grain .44 Magnum JSP/JHP- is made to shoot larger game. It is therefore not nearly as useful for SD, because (besides the hellacious recoil), these rounds will tend to zip through a human, wasting most of that energy.

If one were going to use a magnum round for SD, a lighter bullet at high speed will usually be more likely to rapidly mushroom and/or fragment, actually using that extra energy it has when compared to typical duty rounds (9mm, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, etc).

Anyway, this came to mind when I saw this on the Midway site.

John
 
IMI makes good ammo for sure. My question is how much recoil is there that would make follow up shots slower. Bad guys often travel in twos and threes so I want to be able to deal with them quickly. Good ammo loaded in my Colt 1911 does that for me. A good 357 with proper ammo does the same thing.

Ice
 
Price, for one thing. Some ammo may work a little better than others, but one needs to shoot enough to get good with whatever, just in case the magic bullet ain't.

Also, exotics (frangibles included) often shoot to a different point of aim than typical ammo.

GI, I do agree that recoil is an issue- one of the several reasons I recently disagreed with friend munk about revos vs. autos. If one is shooting a portable cannon, it does take time to get back on target, and even large, powerful rounds sometimes don't work instantaneously.

My point, though, was that if one believed more power in a handgun was better for self-defense, a relatively lightweight, high velocity round should be the way to go...otherwise, all that extra power goes to waste as it blasts through and keeps going (in which case you could have just shot him twice with a .45 ACP with more effect).

John
 
First, a 240 gr 44 is light for calibre. That's OK with me, but it is hardly a round intended solely for hunting. Second, the old 'zips right through and wastes the energy' argument is exactly that; an argument.

Most my defensive ammo is probably what classic use has gravitated towards for over a 100 years- modest velocities, fairly heavy for calibre projectiles, and as large diameter projectiles as possible. I don't favor 180 gr 44's or 170 gr 41s-I don't like the 125 357 or the 185 gr 45. I'll go with weight every time. The reason is large bone and dense tissue destruction. The only for sure one shot stops are when the CNS is knocked out. Splashing your opponent with a grievious wound is not neccessarily stopping him. Further, when you are using a semi auto round power is to be spent frugally- you don't have a lot to go around. Not so for the civilian's magnum rounds.

I strongly suggest a modern controlled expansion round in a revolver calibre will do both energy dump and permanent wound channel more effectively than almost all semi auto round with the possible exception of the 10mm. And the Ten is an orphan the semi auto boys have let die!

The experts I agree with state permanent wound channel is the way to go. Big fat slugs create larger permanent wound channels everything being equal.

I once shot a deer with a 41 210gr Hornady at around 1400 fps. It destroyed a lung, several organs, took out the spine, broke ribs and 'zipped right through." The deer was 'stopped'.

LE cannot afford 'zipping right through' in today's litigious society. I live in the country and can.

This is a very old argument. Fortunately, stopping a human is not as hard as stopping a deer. You can kill a deer with a explosive lung shot- but things have to be just right. How much better to have a round capable of the deepest pentration from all angles? You think bad guys offer broadside shots for explosive ammo?

Besides, I want to be able to go through a wall and get the bad guy. I want to be able to shoot through a car- or have the option.

The truth is todays cartridges and bullets have never been better. Even the anemic Nine mill is formidable- nothing I'd choose to get shot by.

Too much is made of all this. A willingness to use your head, avoid conflict unless absolutely neccesary, and be willing to stand if push comes to shove is far more important than calbre or ammo selection.

Let me ask this- for all of you who are concerned with 'zipping right through': Which would you rather be hit by, a 223 soft point or 308 soft point? A 40 SW or a 41 mag?

Uh huh.

munk
 
You also might want to consider where your round might end up if it is powerful enough to pass through an intended target :eek:
 
SW makes a N framed 10. Or did, it may be custom shop only now. Used for a pin gun, I think. Seems like they put out a hunting rig several years ago Metcalf reviewed too.





munk
 
Bamboo said:
Has anyone ever put out a revolver in 10mm?
Click to expand...

Yep, and Munk has one. It's called the 41 mag. :D

As for the Mag Safe argument, I ain't even going there...!

Bottom line, in my Nine, which IS at the bottom range of the defensive range, I carry mag-safes or Glasers. In my .45, I have Georgia Arms 185 gr. +P JHP ammo. Recoil is stout, but not at all unmanageable. I have no idea what it does to people, but on gallon jugs filled with water the results are spectacular!

Norm
 
There is a great similarity between 10 loads and the old 41 police load, but suggestions the two cartridges are the ballistic equal of one another are someone's pipe dream.

I think the Smith 10 N frame is called the 610, but Spectre will know for sure. Rusty used to know all the model designations too, darn him.


munk
 
munk said:
I think the Smith 10 N frame is called the 610, but Spectre will know for sure. Rusty used to know all the model designations too, darn him.

munk
Click to expand...

I speak S&W.

The original 10mm revolver is the M610, offered in 4, 5, and 6" tubes. There were a few engineering changes, involving whether the cylinder was fluted or unfluted, etc. and also the cast-in cylinder stop, and whatnot.

The M610 also fires the 40 S&W, since both cartridges are clipped into moon clips.

I second the motion about too much velocity and not enough expansion wastes energy, and that the new controlled-peeling JHPs and JHCs are much more effective at expanding and energy transfer as well as generally improved slicing and dicing.

Noah
 
I miss Rusty.

I really like a 4" Model 25 or Model 57; they're wonderfully balanced, and just feel, well, right. If lives depended on me, though, I'd rather be reaching for something like a (Glock) Model 23.

I think 10-16" is about the right penetration depth in tissue for defensive ammo. 16-20ish" penetration should be right for hunting ammo.

I used to have about 500 rounds of .40 S&W 155-grain XTPs I had Jeff Mullins load up for me. It was my "everything" load, with both expansion and reasonable penetration. Put down a nice buck with it one year. (The buck had taken a .35 Remington through the ribs, but after over half an hour, refused to die, and jumped up and ran when I walked up.) When the buck lay down again, I fired the first round facing him at about 20 yards. The XTP ran along underneath the skin for about 16", with expansion- good performance, but an almost harmless wound, except perhaps for potential infection. I took a deep breath, wondered why the deer was still looking at me, and let the breath out slowly.

When he stretched his neck upward, turned broadside to me, I slipped another round into that big groove in the neck, just underneath the jaw, and it was over. As usual, shot placement counted more than whatever I believed my ideal performance parameters to be.

Anyway, I'm a big fan of testing the bullets and loads you carry. I've often used gallon jugs of water- just be sure to remember that it takes about 10" of water to equal 4" of ballistic gelatin. For me, good performance from defensive ammo will mean stopping in the 3rd or 4th milk jug, with good expansion. Try putting some old jeans in front to see how that affects your bullet, too.

John, sorry for rambling. I had a point...at some point... :rolleyes:
 
This is very simple- all you fans of the wasted energy theory- just answer this question: Which would you rather be hit by, a 41 mag or a 40 SW?

I've said if I lived in a condo or apartment in the city my choices would be different. If my round overpenetrates here, it will hit nothing but mountain, rock, or tree.




munk
 
Which would you rather be hit by, a 41 mag or a 40 SW?
Click to expand...

Easy- neither. If I *did* happen to be hit by the .41, I'd certainly be hoping that (first) my attacker was either a very good or very bad shot, and (second) that he was packing a heavy bullet that had little or no expansion. If, on the other hand, he shot me with something like a 170-grain JHP at 1600 fps, with any decent hit, I know I'd be screwed.

Truth is, with many rounds, the practical effects of the .40 or the .41 will probably be so close on limited-depth wounds as to be indistinguishable. With some loads, at some angles, the .40 should be superior. Yup. Superior. If I had to get shot, the old .41 170 grain lead "police" load would have to be well-positioned to stop in reasonable time, while there are many effective .40 loads. Even a much stronger .41 load, with cast or heavily constructed bullets, could be most of the way through me on the typical facing the shooter profile before expansion started. OTOH, a 135-grain .40 would be almost guaranteed to give me an even worse day, from virtually any shot. No, it's no magic bullet- don't exist- but it is a fast, fragmenting/expanding load.

Anyway, my whole point of making this thread was to point out that all that extra energy from a big wheelgun is wasted for defensive usage if you don't have a bullet designed for the job. Yeah, it'll blow through the target, yeehaw- but if that's all you wanted, you coulda done that with a .45 ACP, cheaper and quicker...

John
 
Lessons learned:

1. Practice, practice, practice
2. Get the best ammo available for your chosen weapon
3. We all miss Rusty
 
While I might not have all the experience of you others. If you carry a pistol, carry a spare mag too.
 
No Spectre, a 210 hunting bullet will do just fine. IT's not either or, you know; the 170 HP or the 240 hard cast.
The 40 is not superior to any 41 load unless you've deliberately cherry picked the loads- hardly the measure of a cartridge, is it- to select the most advantagious round for the 40 while picking the worst for the 41? That fair to you? It is not reality based. The question remains- would you rather be shot by a 40 SW or a 41 mag?

You've also made the assumption that with over or nearly 1000 foot pounds of energy, the 41 bullet leaving the body is a waste. Frankly, that's an invalid assumption. There is no comparison with the destructive passage of a modern magnum round to a 'human defense round'. Both can do the job, but I asked what you'd prefer to be hit with. It is true relatively modest rounds would do better to remain in the body and dump all the energy. Not so of the super strong. They don't have to remain inside the target to be more destructive, and the odds of a devasting CNS hit are greatly enhanced.

You would not probably survive a normal 41 loading. You could easily survive a 40. You know this is true. It is quite probable even a limb hit would deactivate the attacker with a modern 45 Colt, 41 or 44 mag.

Driving light bullets fast is one way to insure a spectacular stop- but only one way, and only if everything works according to plan.

I never felt undergunned with the 45 ACP and 230 hp, or even round nose, for that matter. Nor do I feel unprotected with 210 wadcutters in the 41 at a mere 1100 fps. But if I had my choice, I would never want to be hit by any hp or controlled expansion bullet in any large bore mag when I could be shot with a 40 SW with a similar bullet (relative to case capacity and power of the cartridge)

You might as well say you'd prefer to be hit by the Browning 50

I am not against modest cartridges or even loadings, but it is beyond academic debate to seriously propose a full house 44 or 41 with a modern bullet is less devastating than a 40 SW in ANY Loading.
The reason, btw, is I never felt undergunned with my wadcutters is that even at that relatively modest velocity, it would penetrate all the way through. I don't rely upon expansion and energy dump to achieve the goal. That is more problematic than penetration.

They have these exact same debates with hunting cartridges and bullets. There is no reason the laws of physics are suspended when the target is human. A 300 win mag is more powerful than a 30/30 Loaded properly, the 300 is going to do better at 'one shot stops'.

munk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top