Printable View
I might consider it if I lived in an apartment but I dont really liked my .45 rounds less than 200 grains. I prefer my 9mm rounds 115 grains or higher, these sound a little bit gimmicky to me. I would consider the EFMJ if they were a little bit heavier, I think the concept may have value.
I was watching on self defense tv where they were discussing cover vs concealment. They shot a 9mm through simulated walls, a couch, an arm chair, and even a refrigerator. All rounds easily penetrated the "concealment" and continued to the target with plenty of punch. I wouldn't want a 135gr bullet in my .40, no way, I want a big 185gr mother with a lot of umph. I'll just make sure I hit what I aim at ya know.
Just goes to shows if the marketing is slick enough there are folks that will buy it no matter how worthless the product may be.
Federal developed the EFMJ ammo years before Hornady's Critical Defense jumped on the band wagon. I've been carrying EFMJ in my .45's for over 10 years. The reason they were developed was because hollow point bullets often fail when they become clogged with clothing or other material. I have personally seen hollow point bullets, including the super-duper Law Enforcement Only stuff and HydraShok, clog and perform exactly as a FMJ bullet, with NO expansion what-so-ever. I'm one of the guys who had to recover the bullets at autopsies or emergency operating rooms.
For decades, ammo makers told us we should only use hollow-point bullets, and the bigger the HP the sexier the ammo. I've seen gun guys comparing bullets to see which one had the biggest HP cavities. Once that mind-set took hold, any other options were unthinkable. Then people like me started to point out the flaws in the HP designs and the ammo makers responded with new technology. For some reason gun owners and shooters are slow to adopt change, but cling to the old wife's tales and myths about bullet performance. I was around when the in-crowd resisted hollow point technology, clinging to the idea that soft lead bullets were superior.
Some are upset if the new bullets won't penetrate four (4) layers of wall material and then penetrate ballistic jello. Think about that. Should you really be shooting at someone two rooms away?
Time and technology marches on.
My opinion based on experience. Your mileage may vary.
Well its offered in 9mm, 40S&W, and 45ACP only; so I'm guessing that Hydra-Shok® will still be available for the 380ACP, 38 Special, 357 Magnum, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragman
I don't rly think it's a big deal. If it cycles through your firearm smoothly with no issues, it doesn't really matter what you shoot someone with. You can shoot someone with a .45 caliber pebble and it will still do the trick 9 times out of 10. Ok, I carry critical defense in .45 for CC. It's worked well for me so far and havent had any issues. If in the slim to none chance I have to shoot someone and it doesn't expand 100% exactly the way it should it's still going to do the job.
How do you know that? There is no way anyone can know ahead of time, what a bullet will do.Quote:
Originally Posted by KimberUltra
Just marketing hype...
Looks like they just changed the name from "EFMJ" to "Guard Dog". There is no mention of EFMJ on the Federal site anymore.
Bobo
I use the +P 124 gr "LEO" version of 9mm EFMJ. Unfortunately, it is backordered, and Federal won't be making more until later in the year, per an email they sent me when I inquired.
I like it because there is no hollow cavity to get plugged, wrapped by clothing fibers, or crushed by barriers. It feeds well, has low flash, and the recoil is good. If it fails to expand, it still has a blunt profile.
As far as performance goes, 15 inches out of a P11's short barrel seems pretty good to me:
GoldenLoki.com
My supply firm has plenty and I have plenty in stock at my Off Premise Storage and Reloading Depot. Bought at really good prices for the 25 round boxes vs the 20 round boxes for other brands in the last two years.
just what I was thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackeagle
I'm sure it isn't. they did a dismal job of promoting it. I think it is a great idea and one which I have wanted to try for a long time now. But i can't find any of this ammo to actually look at in my hands before buying it yet. No matter where I have looked. So if they want to rename it and actually promote it and get it out there on the market, then great. Do it already!Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhouse 15
^^^^This I like a lot.^^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Pioneer
What the heck does this mean? Are you saying you do not think the EFMJ round works? If you have some proof of this I would be interested to see it. I have read time and again how this round performs just as advertised in test after test.Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalexplr
If you don't understand or don't appreciate the relevance of the FBI test protocol, the value of an objective performance standard, its correlation to terminal effectiveness and the reason why it's stood the test of time as the standard for almost 30 years...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pioneer
Any conversation on this point would be moot.
If the ammo isn't passing what has become, for good or ill, the industry standard, I am simply not interested in it.
If the standard is insufficient or no longer applicable, then show me a convincing reason to deviate from it, and I will reconsider my point of view.
Well, I'd like to get my hands on some of both to try them and see if there is a difference; I haven't been able to find either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackeagle
FWIW,
I've heard unconfirmed reports that this is what the CIA contractor used in the shooting in Pakistan...