Double Tap Ammo

[ELCruisr]

I am currently using Gold Dot Short Barrel 135 +P in my BUG, a 638 S&W snub. In the never ending curiosity about ammo I have looked a time or two at Double Tap's specs for his .38 +P and they look pretty impressive. Has anyone ever tried any of this stuff? Yeah, I already agree it's still mostly about shot placement but any edge you can get with a .38 Special can't be a bad thing!

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[ccw9mm]

Awhile back, I did a comparo on two 9mm JHP rounds: DT JHP 124gr +P Gold Dots vs. Federal Hydrashok Tactical JHP 124gr +P+.

For a semi-auto pistol, reliability of cycling is paramount. Much less of an issue with a revolver. However, I found the DT's to be exceptionally smooth, reliable and consistent. Powerful, of course. Little flash or smoke. A lot more recoil to manage, which in a snubbie revolver may be an issue with you and your specific gun.

IMO, the DT's are absolutely worth trying out. I spoke with Mike McNett at DT when originally considering evaluation of the DT's. He indicated the newer equipment they use to make their ammo gives them a strong edge in reliability, consistency, given many of the larger, older makers are running on aging equipment. Whatever the reason, I've switched my carry rounds to these.

[frostyeyes]

I use them in 45acp for my full size 1911's the recoil is stout but not terrible however muzzel flash and smoke are very minimal and that makes a big diff. to me anyway and they are loaded with a very respectable bullet Speer Gold Dots

[nn]

I've heard good and bad, double TAP seemed like an expensive ball round for me.

[ccw9mm]

I've heard good and bad, double TAP seemed like an expensive ball round for me.

The .38's being discussed are Speer's Gold Dot JHP.

In 9mm flavor, 1000rds of the DT's with the Gold Dot JHP head is about 40% cheaper than Speer's Gold Dot bullets. About on-par with the Federal Hydrashok Tactical rounds. Less than the EFMJ offerings, less than the CorBon 9mm +P, less than the Pow'r Balls. Nowhere near as cheap as reloads, sure, but there are many other more-expensive rounds on the market (for factory loads).

[older gunner]

I have been using DT as my carry rounds for some time now. I have found them to be excellent. Whenever I practice, I always fire at least one full mag for each pistol of my carry rounds. They always work and they always go where they are supposed to go. I use the 200 grain .40 S&W loads. These are heavy and fast and I feel they are the best .40 self defense loads available.

[Mike from Texas]

OK, here comes the newbie to CCW in me. From what I can tell, Double Tap is basically a commercially available hand load. I've heard and read that if you were to ever have to shoot someone and go to court that handloads would be a bad thing. How much truth is there to this and could DT AMMO get me in a bad position like this?

[ccw9mm]

From what I can tell, Double Tap is basically a commercially available hand load.

Uncertain what commercially-available load would be considered other than "hand load", other than the simple use of larger, more-automated equipment.

[ELCruisr]

Well, I put in a call to DT but got the answering machine. I have a few questions for Mr. McNett but I suspect I'll be giving a box a try! If I get some to test I'll post my impressions back here.

Mike, one of the benefits of living in FL is, from what I've seen, a legal act of self defense is just that, legal. Never seen an issue of ammunition being questioned here. Can't speak for other areas!

One of the things I like is that it does use a Gold Dot bullet. Pretty well tested and proven design. The speed and muzzle energy he achieves from a 2" barrel in this particular round are pretty impressive. My concern is with an Airweight J Frame if it will be controllable for follow up shots.

[Mike from Texas]

Uncertain what commercially-available load would be considered other than "hand load", other than the simple use of larger, more-automated equipment.

What I meant by that is I have read more than one article in Combat Handguns by Masaad Ayoob that he shows case studies where a guy was using reloads and the prosecutor portrayed him as basically being a terrorist and was hand loading souped up loads specifically for the purpose of killing and that they were much more deadly than factory loaded (Winchester, Remington, etc...) ammo. In more than one case, the shooter was prosecuted even though it was a justified shooting situation; but the hand loaded ammo made the difference in the outcome of the case. He has basically outright stated that using hand loads in a CC gun is a bad idea. I'll see if I can dig up the articles and post them.

[ccw9mm]

What I meant by that is I have read more than one article in Combat Handguns by Masaad Ayoob that he shows case studies where a guy was using reloads and the prosecutor portrayed him as basically being a terrorist and was hand loading souped up loads specifically for the purpose of killing ...

I'm familiar with Ayoob's (and others') discussions on the risks of hand loads. Generally, it centers on the reliability and consistency, the ability to prove that a given load was what has been claimed. I am not questioning the argument. I'm qustioning how a recognized, commercial manufacturer of ammunition can be considered a "hand load." With respect to the argument that hand loads may increase the risk of a "***** in the armor" of a self-defense defandant, non-HL ammunition wouldn't meet the same standards of vague, unspecified, undocumented loading. The claim isn't that hotter = viciously deadly; rather, the claim is that undocumented = unknown = unjustifiable. Such claims may not be honest or truthful, yet they happen and succeed on occasion as an argument against a self-defense shooting.

My specific goals for ammunition selection are these: Increased reliability; increased safety; sufficient performance given likely clothing profiles of attackers:

• Absolute, utter reliable operation in my specific guns.
• Sufficient performance in terms of both penetration and expansion to stop a violent attacker. Based on the numerous documented instances of 9mm rounds failing to stop violent, often jacked-up attackers even when struck by multiple bullets, I believe that performance on the order of a strong .45cal is a reasonable standard for sufficient effectiveness.
• Not such great penetration that the next twelve bystanders are at immediate risk of death via a missed round. I am acutely aware of the risks of off-target rounds putting others at risk; as such, I train diligently to keep my accuracy honed to the degree that I think could be justified as every reasonable and achievable step that could be performed to guard against and mitigate collateral damage. The fact is, anyone within 100yds is at severe risk of injury or death by any bullet, "hotly" loaded or not.
• I live in an area where people are frequently bundled up with multiple layers of clothing 8mos out of the year. I don't believe it reasonable to expect that a 9mm bullet with moderate .38spl force and velocity can reliably stop an attacker.
• Gold Dot bullet selection. All in all, the tests and reviews I've seen suggest this is one of the more effective bullets. Combined with the smoothness, reliability and consistency of the DT rounds (and a couple others), these increase safety by helping to take emergency maneuvers off the table that shouldn't otherwise be needed (ie, clearing a jam), during which time everyone nearby is at grave risk.

Everyone must come to grips with the rationale behind equipment selection. Any prosecutor worth his/her salt will attempt to take issue with everything, since his/her "bonus" and reputation is on the line via winning the case ... truth or not. The problem isn't that a claim can be made. The question is whether you can articulate the rationale behind the selection to a "reasonable man" standard such that someone else can see the reasonable nature of the choice. In Ayoob's words: CYA = Can You Articulate.

[Mike from Texas]

I'm qustioning how a recognized, commercial manufacturer of ammunition can be considered a "hand load." With respect to the argument that hand loads may increase the risk of a "***** in the armor" of a self-defense defandant, non-HL ammunition wouldn't meet the same standards of vague, unspecified, undocumented loading. The claim isn't that hotter = viciously deadly; rather, the claim is that undocumented = unknown = unjustifiable. Such claims may not be honest or truthful, yet they happen and succeed on occasion as an argument against a self-defense shooting.

Well, I guess more than anything I was asking about information on Double Tap Ammo than insinuating that they were manufacturing hand loads although on a larger scale.

Let's face it, 75% (on a really good day) of jurors that will be on a jury are gun, CHL defense, ammunition ignorant. So, it's in the prosecutors best interest to make you look like a bloodthirsty killer. "Oh, regular ammunition is not good enough for you, you have to have super duper kill 'em deader ammunition right Mr. Smith?" A jury has no clue. All they know is that you shot someone, using enhanced performance ammunition. Why did you feel the need to do that? All the prosecutor has to do is put doubt or uncertainty into the minds of those jurors.

I'm not discounting Mike's ammo, I will have some very soon. I want the ultimate performance from my ammo if I'm depending on it to potentially save my life. The numbers speak for themselves and loudly to someone who knows what they are looking at. I just want to make sure that they couldn't be used against me if I were to ever have to shoot someone. I know guns, but had never heard of DT Ammo until I got on Glock Talk and on these forums so the chances of anyone in gen pop knowing anything about them is very rare. They would tend to know names like Remington, Federal, Winchester, etc....

[ELCruisr]

Well, I'm going to know a lot more about his ammo in a week or so as I ordered a box of +P .38's and broke down and bought some .45 200 grn Gold Dot topped stuff. Seems he's been testing the load in a 3" and getting some pretty good numbers like just over 1000 ft/sec from a 3" barrel. I gotta try it in my SA Micro but this might be a new carry load if it's controllable. He says it will probably feel like a +P load, which is fine by me, but at non plus P pressures.

As for calling them handloads, I don't think it will fly. He is an established manufacturer of self defense ammo. Just like some other names. Much of this type of worry about prosecution can be very regional and it isn't an issue here.

[Flippinstk]

Yes, I've also read both good and bad about them and personally have experienced the bad. see my post http://www.combatcarry.com/vbulletin...ad.php?t=20721
I never did get any resolution. Lesson learned I guess.

[mountainhound100]

I use the 200 grain .40 S&W loads. These are heavy and fast and I feel they are the best .40 self defense loads available.

I've been debating with ordering some of these. I backpack a lot and was thinking of the hardcasts, but I was worried about the .40 being able to push such a heavy projectile. Have you had any problems?