The "Old-School/New School" Debate of Bullet Performance. - Page 3

The "Old-School/New School" Debate of Bullet Performance.

This is a discussion on The "Old-School/New School" Debate of Bullet Performance. within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by RKM Forgive me if I missed the answer to my question... since it's likely a wadcutter would not function in a semi-auto, ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 50
Like Tree37Likes

Thread: The "Old-School/New School" Debate of Bullet Performance.

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,505
    Quote Originally Posted by RKM View Post
    Forgive me if I missed the answer to my question... since it's likely a wadcutter would not function in a semi-auto, what do you carry in semi-autos?
    I'm sorry about that. When I carry an auto loader, I choose the heaviest bullet I can find in that caliber.
    Tayopo likes this.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.


  2. #32
    VIP Member Array Bad Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Where the deer and the antelope roam
    Posts
    3,661
    Yes I prefer a lswc, and I dont care if its a hp or not. Why? Because I am not depending on its ability to strike tissue, and under perfect, unobstruced conditions to bloom like a pretty little flower, magically stopping the threat and destroying tissue by virtue of its massive razor sharp talons, stretched out like sharp Katana blades.
    bmcgilvray likes this.

  3. #33
    Member Array TinkMan308's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Minot AFB, ND
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by RKM View Post
    Forgive me if I missed the answer to my question... since it's likely a wadcutter would not function in a semi-auto, what do you carry in semi-autos?
    Wide Flat Nose would be my suggestion.

  4. #34
    Member Array TinkMan308's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Minot AFB, ND
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by 10thmtn View Post
    Question - what do we think of the flat-point FMJ for use in semi autos? Any better than RN FMJ?
    I like the WFN. Someone at one time posted a link demonstrating the differences in wound profiles for the different types of bullets. The WFN performed significantly better than the RN.

  5. #35
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,503
    The round nose lead bullet is roundly condemned in print and on forums but it isn't so bad for lots of shooting purposes. I handloaded and shot a large pile of them in years gone by, for .38 Special, .44 Special, and .45 ACP. It's been a long time now but the round nose lead bullet effectively thumped small game or varmints. The .38 Special has been most used and this despite a caution against using the .38 Special round nose bullet for cottontails that I read in an early 1980s Guns & Ammo magazine article. They must have had tougher rabbits in the author's region than we have here. No rabbits crawled into their holes after being hit with .38 Special round nose ammunition.

    A few feral dogs have been dropped with round nose bullets in the .38 Special but it's been so long ago that details are hazy. They seemed to go down for the count with good hits, just as any other bullet performs.

    Lest some folks find shooting feral dogs abhorant, a life in a rural setting with livestock and poultry to protect will open ones eyes to the irresponsibility of people and their pets, whether they want the pets or not. Neighborhhood dogs pack up and wreak havoc. Unwanted dogs are dumped. It's not the dogs' fault but rather the irresponsible and selfish owners' fault. It's also not the fault of the landowner who has to deal with the misery of uncontrolled or unwanted dogs.

    Having mentioned the above, there is a better way and it is the semi-wadcutter or solid base wadcutter bullet.

    The FMJ round nose .45 ACP bullet seems to be in a class of its own regarding effectiveness. It works.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society "Get heeled! No really"

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  6. #36
    Member Array Fisher10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Western WA/Rexburg, ID
    Posts
    314
    I just don't think it's fair to say that a hollow point designed to retain it's weight is magically thrown off course (whatever that means inside of a human body) or breaks apart when it hits bone while a LSWC will not. Unless you're carrying hard cast, I think a jacketed bullet is as tough or tougher than a plain LSWC.

    100% weight retention is 100% weight retention. Unless you're shooting at someone who has a bear's head, I don't think there's any bone in the human body that is going to deflect any kind of bullet (mouse calibers excluded) that holds it's weight.

    I understand you want a clean hole, through and through like a laser beam but I don't see that as responsible. For self defense against people, I want a round that is going to do most of it's penetration/energy expenditure inside of my target. During a self defense situation we probably will not be able to know what lies behind our target when we fire. An expanded hollow point bullet is safer for anyone behind your target.

    As tempting as it is sometimes, I don't believe in ft-lbs of energy equating to a good load. Like you, I favor heavy for caliber bullets. I believe in putting a large, jagged hole in an assailant that is 11"-14" in length. CNS disruption is the quickest way to stop someone and as long as a bullet can reach the CNS, it will work if you have good shot placement. This is probably why you love LSWC bullets. Bleeding out is another way a threat is stopped. A twisting, expanded and sharp bullet is more likely to cause rapid incapacitation than a bullet penciling through someone after missing the CNS.

    Glockman, maybe you should look at a Cor-bon DPX load. Deep penetration, extremely tough copper bullet, extremely reliable expansion even through bone (I admit, even more reliable than Gold Dots or HSTs), and 100% weight retention. Cost is one the the few reasons I don't carry it right now. I expect cost would be one of the reasons you would reject it. Nothing is going to be as cheap as a LSWC...

  7. #37
    Member Array TinkMan308's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Minot AFB, ND
    Posts
    26
    1. I like the warrior mindset but believing you can shoot the perfect CNS shot is different than actually doing it.
    2. You can only have it one way. Bullets that don't deform/expand are hard, bulllets that do are soft. I did read about this one bullet that knew the difference between hard targets and soft targets, don't know what happen to that one...
    3. The bone may not deflect the bullet as much as the change in bullet shape through hydro dynamics?

    I did find the website that I pondered earllier. Another interesting point of view: Terminal Ballistics

  8. #38
    VIP Member Array dawei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    3,285
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    I really can't make much of an intelligent argument against the 357 magnum. This is an example of an extreme on the other side that is devastating. Especially with the old semi jacketed 125 weight HP's with exposed lead tips at an honest 1450 fps from a 4 inch barrel. I'd take it anyday of the week and feel extremely well armed.
    I concur. A 7 shot 357 Mag snubby is my EDCG.
    David
    Only two defining forces have ever died for you.....
    1. Jesus Christ.
    2. The American Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Marine, and Coast Guardsman.
    One died for your soul, the other for your freedom!

    1Cross+3Nails=4Given

  9. #39
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    A hard cast LSWC with adequate penetration is more efficient than a soft RNL with adequate penetration as it destroys more tissue, even is only marginally so.

    A .44/45 caliber hard cast LSWC with adequate penetration is more efficient than a .38/357 hard cast LSWC with adequate penetration because it destroys more tissue, even if only marginally so.

    A 9mm JHP that gives adequate penetration and reliably expands to .60 caliber is more efficient at destroying tissue than a .44/.45 hard cast LSWC with adequate penetration, even if marginally so.

    A .44/45 JHP that expands to .90 caliber without adequate penetration is less efficient than a .32 caliber RNL with adequate penetration because even though it efficiently destroys more tissue it doesn't reach the vital tissues necessary to effect an aggressor to stop.

    Conclusion - larger calibers and expansion resulting in greater frontal diameter are more efficient at destroying tissue all of which is INEFFECTIVE without adequate penetration.

    And derogatory references to those of us who give weight to the FBI ballistic Gelatin testing to predict ammunition performance as "Jello Junkies" is not in the spirit of the OP's thread.
    Fisher10 likes this.
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  10. #40
    VIP Member Array Bad Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Where the deer and the antelope roam
    Posts
    3,661
    Quote Originally Posted by sgb View Post
    A hard cast LSWC with adequate penetration is more efficient than a soft RNL with adequate penetration as it destroys more tissue, even is only marginally so.

    A .44/45 caliber hard cast LSWC with adequate penetration is more efficient than a .38/357 hard cast LSWC with adequate penetration because it destroys more tissue, even if only marginally so.

    A 9mm JHP that gives adequate penetration and reliably expands to .60 caliber is more efficient at destroying tissue than a .44/.45 hard cast LSWC with adequate penetration, even if marginally so.

    A .44/45 JHP that expands to .90 caliber without adequate penetration is less efficient than a .32 caliber RNL with adequate penetration because even though it efficiently destroys more tissue it doesn't reach the vital tissues necessary to effect an aggressor to stop.

    Conclusion - larger calibers and expansion resulting in greater frontal diameter are more efficient at destroying tissue all of which is INEFFECTIVE without adequate penetration.
    I agree with you assessment, all other things being equal, the bigger hole wins.

  11. #41
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,505
    Fisher10, I understand your point, but I cannot and will not depend on an HP as well as a LSWC. And, " hardcast" has become such a generic term that most people don't understand the real difference in why they are used.
    A " hardcast" bullet is only desired for pushing to magnum velocities without leading the bore. Using it below 1000 fps can actually cause more leading; but that's another topic.

    As far as the use of the DPX round; why? Sure, for people that can't or don't reload, and desire penetration, this may be the best option.

    But I can cast 1000 lswc bullets and assemble that many rounds for $60. That's a lot of practice, and, practice shooting my exact carry load. How much practice can you do with $60 using the DPX load?

    It has always been strange to me, that Hickock killed many men with a 36 caliber black powder Navy Colt, using little light 36 caliber lead balls traveling about the ballistic equivalent of a 380, but people today think they have to pay big money for a few bullets to feel they have adequate protection.

    And, the issue with the HP bullets glancing off bone isn't the jacket, it's the round profile. It skims off instead of " biting " in.

    I am not telling anyone what they should carry, but if asked, I'll give my opinion. I have made it a life's effort to shoot medium game with commonly bullet types commonly carried for SD and examine the results internally, and I base my opinions on that.

    It's each individuals choice to choose their own, but I have never been one to believe or swallow everything I read.

    There are alot of good designs out there. I am just thankful I am not limited in my choice.

    I shot a feral dog once with a highly touted 9mm HP, I see talked about here often as the latest greatest. It ran off, but I found it some time later. The shot placement was good, but the performance was terrible. The bullet entered, went thru one lung, and was found against the other lung in picture perfect flowery " bloom".
    I shot the rest of the box up at water filled soda bottles, and have never purchased a box of anything factory since. I roll my own, test them, and carry them with confidence.

    What I have found works great is the Golden Saber, and XTP.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  12. #42
    VIP Member Array Smitty901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,501
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    I really can't make much of an intelligent argument against the 357 magnum. This is an example of an extreme on the other side that is devastating. Especially with the old semi jacketed 125 weight HP's with exposed lead tips at an honest 1450 fps from a 4 inch barrel. I'd take it anyday of the week and feel extremely well armed.
    Some years ago I remember reading a paper on the argument of fist round kills with a hand gun. The one round that they rate top was the 357 125gr. While no round had a real hi rate at that time they quoted about 60% first round kill. In the real world that is not bad when you consider a big part of any rounds ability to 1 round kill is shot placement.
    Reliability of today weapons and rounds have made a couple of things clear to me.
    1. No madder the weapon I take from the 25 auto to the .45 I got to hit the target
    2. No madder what round or brand I feed it , the first shot needs to be followed by a second evaluate the threat and follow with two more it needed. Of course if any doubt the second two are sent .
    3. If I train more or less I must be able to hit center mass on what ever part of the target I can see at about 20 feet first shot and every shot, with out taking a lot of time acquiring the target. If I can not see the target I need to be leaving.
    These are the simple things I keep in mind when I start wandering in to the confusing and changing world of caliber and weapons. Long as I keep this clear in my head I can play games with theory on rounds and delivery weapons all day long with out losing a minute sleep over what I currently have loaded up.
    LouisianaMan likes this.

  13. #43
    Member Array Fisher10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Western WA/Rexburg, ID
    Posts
    314
    Glockman, I am also a reloader, but I don't carry what I load. It isn't the "potential legal problems" that keep me from carrying what I load. I am just too lazy to work up a nice load with expensive (compared to what I usually load) bullets in nickle plated cases and my favorite bullet is not offered as a component. I trust my life to a premium load, designed for the law enforcement market. I better understand your reason for carrying what you do as it is nice to have the same load universally and at a cheap cost, though it seems strange to have an inexpensive target round be what you trust your life to, not that your rounds are less reliable or of lower quality. I am a fan of XTPs, but not so much Golden Sabers. Practice IS important. While I do think it is important to ensure your carry round is reliable in your weapon, whatever that means to you. I don't think you have to shoot a lot of them just to know how they feel (it isn't like you're going to notice ANY recoil in a real SD situation). Sometimes i load a warm 147gr FMJ load in 9mm which is pretty close to the velocity and recoil of my carry round. Otherwise, it's 124gr FMJ for practice. The difference between all of the loads is negligible.

    My understanding of a hardcast is a bullet cast with an alloy that has a higher percentage of antimony or other hard metals than a traditional lead bullet would have. The harder bullet resists deformation for better penetration than an FMJ with a soft lead core would have. I would like to learn to cast bullets some day.

    The Hickock comment is true. BUT how many of us carry .36" BP revolvers? I am pretty sure most of the people shot died of infection several days later instead of being immediately incapacitated and stopping the threat. Firearms technology has advanced by leaps since then and ballistic technology has also. Now imagine how many men Hickock could have killed with a nice Glock 19 and a good load?

  14. #44
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,503
    I will say that I don't want hard cast lead bullets for use in non-magnum revolver applications. A soft lead semi-wadcutter will be fine.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society "Get heeled! No really"

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  15. #45
    Senior Member Array IAm_Not_Lost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northern AZ
    Posts
    1,016
    SO....I just read the entirety of this thread - long winded explanations included - and now I have a headache. All kidding aside, it really seems that every one of these threads involving bullet weight, HP v LSWC, modern v old, exc exc all end the same way, i.e. just go with what you can always count on; Big. Heavy. Bullets.

    I need a beer.
    "Brilliant. So now we got a huge guy theory, and a serial crusher theory. Top notch. What's your name?" - Paul Smecker

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

.38 keith bullets for defense

,
.44 special gelatin test
,
.45 acp solid copper round nose
,
357 magnum 44 comparison
,
38 special p 158 gr lscw hp
,
44 cal full wadcutter for ccw
,

full wadcutters for self defense

,

ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast

,
keith bullet for 45 acp
,

keith bullet for self defense

,
keith bullet wound channel
,
silver tip 357 vs buffalo bore
Click on a term to search for related topics.