Liberty AmmunitionóCivil Defense Line Review .380 and .45acp

Liberty AmmunitionóCivil Defense Line Review .380 and .45acp

This is a discussion on Liberty AmmunitionóCivil Defense Line Review .380 and .45acp within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Great review with a 15 minute in-depth video. 380 ACP 50 Grain Fragmenting Hollow Point Lead-Free 45 ACP +P 78 Grain Fragmenting Hollow Point Lead-Free ...

Results 1 to 7 of 7
Like Tree3Likes
  • 2 Post By finst3r
  • 1 Post By Nmuskier

Thread: Liberty AmmunitionóCivil Defense Line Review .380 and .45acp

  1. #1
    Member
    Array finst3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Sarasota FL
    Posts
    400

    Liberty AmmunitionóCivil Defense Line Review .380 and .45acp

    Great review with a 15 minute in-depth video.

    380 ACP 50 Grain Fragmenting Hollow Point Lead-Free
    45 ACP +P 78 Grain Fragmenting Hollow Point Lead-Free


    Thank you Bruce for the heads-up on this article.

    Video and full review can be seen here
    Don't call 911, call 1911...

    I suffer from chronic & incurable "Condition One"
    But I've learned to live with it.


  2. #2
    Distinguished Member Array Nmuskier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Upper Michigan
    Posts
    1,735
    78gr. .45ACP is not what you want to reliably penetrate in a defensive situation.

    The article is very good. There is lots of empirical data to sort through. But you have to read a little into their clear gel and "calibrated" gel, and test temperature. Basically, the 10" of penetration could possibly be double what standard density and temperature gel would produce.

    The biggest issue though, is not gel tests, but real results where more mass yields more reliable penetration. Finally, more lead aids in more expansion (bigger bullets=bigger holes). Shallow fragmentation is not usually desirable. YMMV.
    gatorbait51 likes this.

  3. #3
    Member Array Ljutic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    321
    Quote Originally Posted by Nmuskier View Post
    The article is very good. There is lots of empirical data to sort through. But you have to read a little into their clear gel and "calibrated" gel, and test temperature. Basically, the 10" of penetration could possibly be double what standard density and temperature gel would produce.
    If that was the case, wouldn't the BB calibration be way off? "Step 4) Run a 600 fps calibration test bb shot into the Clear Ballistics gel block and record penetration depth. 380 Auto test block 597 fps 3.486” penetration. 45 Auto test block 603 fps 3.48” penetration." Seems to be right in the Ordnance Gel density calibration range.

    Appreciate the comment on the article. Glad you enjoyed the facts, figures, and data.
    Author of the Pocket Guns and Gear blog. Stop by for a peek at http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com

  4. #4
    Senior Member Array NickBurkhardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,029
    Poor 380 just can't catch a brake.

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array NONAME762's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    About 235M out of The Palouse WA
    Posts
    8,660
    The same thing has been said of the 22LR Nick Burkhardt.

    As long as they're going to call it Civil Defense ammo they could show a 60s era Civil Defense Shelter sign on the box.

    Not once anywhere in the article did it list does the ammo come 20 or 25 rounds per box?
    I'm just a spoke in the wheel but not a big deal.
    America...a Constitutional Republic. NOT a democracy as the liberals would have us believe.
    Give me Liberty or give me BACON!!!
    You know that look women give you when they want some sugar? Me neither

  6. #6
    Member Array Ljutic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    321
    Quote Originally Posted by NONAME762 View Post
    Not once anywhere in the article did it list does the ammo come 20 or 25 rounds per box?[/B]
    20 rounds per box and also no mention of price because it's been falling like a rock. Liberty must have reached production levels that allowed them to reduce their costs or maybe they are trying to under cut the competition in the fragmenting bullet market.
    Author of the Pocket Guns and Gear blog. Stop by for a peek at http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com

  7. #7
    Member Array ShootingTheBull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Nmuskier View Post
    But you have to read a little into their clear gel and "calibrated" gel, and test temperature. Basically, the 10" of penetration could possibly be double what standard density and temperature gel would produce.
    In general, the ClearBallistics gel parallels reasonably well against 10% calibrated ordnance gelatin when testing handgun bullets. There are cases where it isn't quite accurate, but in aggregate I found it to be about 95% comparable in penetration, and about 95% comparable in bullet size (meaning, in general, bullets expand about 5% less and penetrate about 5% further in the ClearBallistics gel than they do in the organic gel.)

    The clear stuff is okay for evaluating handgun rounds, in general. It is not suitable for accurately evaluating rifle rounds, as it doesn't represent the temporary stretch cavity damage accurately at all. But it's a great budget alternative for not having to deal with the expense and hassle of the genuine organic stuff. As for temperature, that's one of the major benefits of the ClearBallistics stuff, it's largely immune to variations in temperature. Organic gel is highly dependent on temperature, and 10% gel needs to be shot at 4 to 5 degrees Celsius. But the clear stuff doesn't care, I've calibrated it at 40 degrees and at nearly 90 degrees, and it still calibrates within acceptable ranges.

    The biggest issue though, is not gel tests, but real results where more mass yields more reliable penetration. Finally, more lead aids in more expansion (bigger bullets=bigger holes). Shallow fragmentation is not usually desirable. YMMV.
    I would agree with all of this. In my own tests of Liberty (not published yet, still working on 'em) I find that it delivers a significant slap, but very little deep penetration. It makes a big superficial splash, sending a lot of fragments very shallow, but doesn't penetrate deeply with anything other than a thin little sliver of a disc of the bullet base.

    Bruce's tests with .380 Liberty just about parallel my tests with DRT. In my test of DRT .380, I got low velocity, little fragmentation, and little chunks penetrating deeper, just like Bruce got with the Liberty .380.

    Just about all the fragmenting/frangible bullets in larger calibers perform very much like Bruce's test of .45 ACP Liberty -- a shallow fragmentation "starburst", and a little itty bitty bullet that penetrates deeper. Whether it's Liberty, G2 R.I.P., Extreme Shock, DRT, they all create permanent cavities that look very similar (and that represent pretty much the opposite of what you'd want, as defined by the FBI and IWBA testing). Liberty and G2 R.I.P. use solid fragments, whereas DRT and Extreme Shock use compressed powder, but the end results look extremely similar.

    Whether these rounds would be effective in incapacitating an attacker is debatable; some people think the quick expansion would "transfer energy" quickly, but the fragments themselves are so small with so little mass that I doubt they would make it past any bones such as the ribcage, where many of the vital organs are. The established science from the Wound Ballistics Conferences of 1987 and 1993 is that penetration to reach the vital organs is what makes a handgun bullet capable of incapacitating someone, and in that context, a bigger hole in the vital organs is better. As such, making a big splash at a superficial level (the first four or five inches of gel) is kind of irrelevant in terms of incapacitating someone, and using up all that mass and energy early on could be viewed as a waste, when you could have retained that mass and momentum to create a bigger, deeper-penetrating bullet.

    ANY bullet could potentially disable or kill, and a Liberty to the throat would probably be instantly fatal, so I'm not saying these types of bullets would never work. But I believe that the scenarios under which they would work, are fewer than the scenarios where a conventional bullet would likely work. For example, where these rounds become seriously questionable is when you may encounter having to shoot through someone's upraised arm; in a case like that, the bullet would fragment and disintegrate in the arm, leaving little to nothing able to carry on to penetrate the chest and reach the vitals. A conventional bullet that meets the FBI minimum of 12" of penetration, should have enough power to blast through that raised forearm and continue on to deliver an incapacitating wound.

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

.45 acp ammo review
,

civil defense 380 auto review

,
civil defense ammo
,
liberty .380 ammo reviews
,

liberty 380 ammo review

,
liberty 380 ammunition review
,

liberty ammunition civil defense

,
liberty ammunition civil defense 380
,
liberty civil defense .380 review
,

liberty civil defense 380

,

liberty civil defense 380 ammo review

,

liberty civil defense ammunition review

Click on a term to search for related topics.