Best Defence Cartidge?
- Thread starter BruderShweigen
- Start date
Once again, a million different opinions...
I would first of all, do what LE and Mil use. They use it for a reason. You can use it for the same reason, to stop someone....
The next point is more important that the first....Shot placement is equally if not more important than the cal./weight/type of round. One well placed .22 can stop an aggressive attacker just as easy as a heavy .45. You have to be able to hit what you are shooting at and hit it well and consistantly, for that you need to practice.
Once again, this is just my opinion, and it is shared by many....
I would first of all, do what LE and Mil use. They use it for a reason. You can use it for the same reason, to stop someone....
The next point is more important that the first....Shot placement is equally if not more important than the cal./weight/type of round. One well placed .22 can stop an aggressive attacker just as easy as a heavy .45. You have to be able to hit what you are shooting at and hit it well and consistantly, for that you need to practice.
Once again, this is just my opinion, and it is shared by many....
"I would first of all, do what LE and Mil use. They use it for a reason. You can use it for the same reason, to stop someone"
Well these would be the last reasons I would chose a handgun for self defense. First the military use Inglis HI-Powers porimarily because we made a ton of them at wars end and because the military has so little use for handguns in the games they play they still have a ton of them left over chambered in 9MM.
Our LEO's use them because a) Glocks are dirt cheap b) the RCMP got a sweetheart deal from S&W, the latter wanting to have the RCMP using their guns.
That said some mil units are getting Sigs as are some units of RCMP.
As a one on one cartridge the .45acp is one heck of a cartridge and some units of the USMC are getting the pistols back in inventory. The biggest problem with the 1911 is the cost of manufacturing the guns. For the most part we don't have to be politically correct, or go with the crowd. Buy what you can shoot well for the use you are going to put the gun to. For most of us that is shooting paper BG's and any of the popular rounds will do that. For other uses I like my .45apc. or handloaded .45Colt.
Stay safe
Well these would be the last reasons I would chose a handgun for self defense. First the military use Inglis HI-Powers porimarily because we made a ton of them at wars end and because the military has so little use for handguns in the games they play they still have a ton of them left over chambered in 9MM.
Our LEO's use them because a) Glocks are dirt cheap b) the RCMP got a sweetheart deal from S&W, the latter wanting to have the RCMP using their guns.
That said some mil units are getting Sigs as are some units of RCMP.
As a one on one cartridge the .45acp is one heck of a cartridge and some units of the USMC are getting the pistols back in inventory. The biggest problem with the 1911 is the cost of manufacturing the guns. For the most part we don't have to be politically correct, or go with the crowd. Buy what you can shoot well for the use you are going to put the gun to. For most of us that is shooting paper BG's and any of the popular rounds will do that. For other uses I like my .45apc. or handloaded .45Colt.
Stay safe
This is a BAD way to choose both guns and ammo as both are subject to political considerations. Canuck44 pretty much covered the issues related to guns.
However with ammo, the military uses what they are allowed to use by the Geneva Convention and that would be non-expanding ammo. We as civilians can do better ... a LOT better.
I think the whole 45 is better than 9mm thing came from experiences with Mil ball, where of course a 45 will make a bigger hole. However, as real experimentation will quickly show, modern 9mm JHP ammo is very capable stuff.
Let me start by saying that the number one way to avoid a lethal force encounter is to avoid it in the first place.
Then, consider that it is always far better to talk your way out of a situation than to fight your way out. Less consequences.
From a strictly theoretical standpoint (because using fire arms for self defense is illegal in Canada), the militiary doesn't necessarily pick the best defensive round. Don't forget that they are using pretty much stricly "bal" ammunition. I don't think they are allowed to use bullets that expand on impact.
Suputin
Nice photos and could not agree more. A miss with a cannon is just another miss. In self defense situations bullet placement is almost everything. Handguns are not dath rays and not come close to the effects of a shotgun slug or modern rifle ammo. In fact in relative terms handguns are rather puny, effective but puny never the less.
I think is was the Haige (sp) Convention that governs the use of bullets for which nobody real pays much attention to in practical terms with FMJ rounds designed to tumble in flight or when they strike flesh and with the use of shotguns etc. The fact the US has never signed on even makes the treaty of less concequence but like it was posted we civies can shoot what we want to.
For playing the games and unexpected house guests I prefer the .45acp but would carry my CZ 85/Hi_power for serious anti-humoid encounters of the worst kind but then I live in Liberal Canada where carrying is a luxury of criminals, cuzz that is the law of the land.
Therein ends the sermon.
Stay Safe
Nice photos and could not agree more. A miss with a cannon is just another miss. In self defense situations bullet placement is almost everything. Handguns are not dath rays and not come close to the effects of a shotgun slug or modern rifle ammo. In fact in relative terms handguns are rather puny, effective but puny never the less.
I think is was the Haige (sp) Convention that governs the use of bullets for which nobody real pays much attention to in practical terms with FMJ rounds designed to tumble in flight or when they strike flesh and with the use of shotguns etc. The fact the US has never signed on even makes the treaty of less concequence but like it was posted we civies can shoot what we want to.
For playing the games and unexpected house guests I prefer the .45acp but would carry my CZ 85/Hi_power for serious anti-humoid encounters of the worst kind but then I live in Liberal Canada where carrying is a luxury of criminals, cuzz that is the law of the land.
Therein ends the sermon.
Stay Safe
peckerwood
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- PalePony, Yukon
Aren't they now repackaged as the Winchester SXT's?G37 said:
See the following link for a debunking of this myth. FWIW Black Talon's aren't teflon coated. The black is a lubricant (I think it is a moly compound) and it does not help the bullet penetrate kevlar
The bullets are all 147gr JHP's. From left they are:
Remington Bulk, Winchester Bulk (very very similar to silvertips), Hornady XTP, Rem Golden Sabre, Speer Gold Dot, Fed HydraShok, Win Ranger (Black Talon) also known as Win SXT now.
Guys, all this was covered several months ago in this thread.
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33607&highlight=suputin
Here is an earlier thread showing the .45 ACP terminal ballistics testing
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=39005
Last edited:
I'd be willing to believe that. The 17 is very high speed with a very small frontal area and a sharp point. I don't have a .17 so I can't try it unfortunately. I'd even think it would work out of a handgun length barrel.
Teflon is only used as a lubricant on bullets itself. It doesn't help penetrate teflon. The myth comes from the fact that many armor piercing bullets are hard metals such as brass. They are frequently teflon coated to reduce barrel wear. It's the hard bullet that penetrates armor better, though.
Retort...
Ok, maybe the analogy of Mil is not a good one, however I was making reference to the bullet type, not handgun or caliber. In other words, JHP ammunition.
We (USMC) never got rid of them, they were always in our inventory, read some of my previous posts regarding this. Also, I posted a hands on report of a Army bubba who became a security consultant in the current conflicts who opted for 9mm vs .45 and had practical experience saying the Browning HP was superior to the .45, also stating that Shot Placement is more important....
I am referring to the round type, the original post was about type of defensive round....
Since the HPs are almost always stopped by vests or heavy clothing, and Ball ammunition is not, would it not make sense to use Ball ammunition or FMJ in the odd case where an intruder may or maynot be wearing a vest? WE all see how easy it is to buy a used vest now a days...besides, whynot load 5 JHP followed by 5 FMJ?
Agreed, mostly. I think that even though mil. are not supposed to use HP or expanding ammunition, you would be a fool to think that the stuff is not in theater. We brought our own and had Hydrashoks sent to us in 1990-1991. Even though the only reason to own a hand gun in Canada is for target shooting, I would think given the situation ( that you are in harms way from a justifieable threat) that you use the tool on hand to do what you need to do to save yourself, irregardless of the tool (handgun, shottie or rifle) you will be charged initially the same by the Crown. The point is not that you used a restricted, but that you killed someone and it comes down to whether DF was justified or not. I am pretty sure that using a restricted (handgun or long gun) in a DF situation IS NOT illegal.
For an collective version of Suputin's ballistics stuff in .pdf format Click Here
From what I have gathered, unless the vest has a plate, almost any rifle round will penetrate it.
Ok, maybe the analogy of Mil is not a good one, however I was making reference to the bullet type, not handgun or caliber. In other words, JHP ammunition.
We (USMC) never got rid of them, they were always in our inventory, read some of my previous posts regarding this. Also, I posted a hands on report of a Army bubba who became a security consultant in the current conflicts who opted for 9mm vs .45 and had practical experience saying the Browning HP was superior to the .45, also stating that Shot Placement is more important....
I am referring to the round type, the original post was about type of defensive round....
Since the HPs are almost always stopped by vests or heavy clothing, and Ball ammunition is not, would it not make sense to use Ball ammunition or FMJ in the odd case where an intruder may or maynot be wearing a vest? WE all see how easy it is to buy a used vest now a days...besides, whynot load 5 JHP followed by 5 FMJ?
Agreed, mostly. I think that even though mil. are not supposed to use HP or expanding ammunition, you would be a fool to think that the stuff is not in theater. We brought our own and had Hydrashoks sent to us in 1990-1991. Even though the only reason to own a hand gun in Canada is for target shooting, I would think given the situation ( that you are in harms way from a justifieable threat) that you use the tool on hand to do what you need to do to save yourself, irregardless of the tool (handgun, shottie or rifle) you will be charged initially the same by the Crown. The point is not that you used a restricted, but that you killed someone and it comes down to whether DF was justified or not. I am pretty sure that using a restricted (handgun or long gun) in a DF situation IS NOT illegal.
For an collective version of Suputin's ballistics stuff in .pdf format Click Here
From what I have gathered, unless the vest has a plate, almost any rifle round will penetrate it.
Last edited:
I think the useage of Ball ammo..in 1911 isnt just a Hague issue but also a reliability issue..with less feed problems from ball ammo vs JHPs..
I had heard that the PTFE acted as a lubricant for the hardened metal cores? which allowed the cores to slip through the kevlar without fragmentation?
I had heard that the PTFE acted as a lubricant for the hardened metal cores? which allowed the cores to slip through the kevlar without fragmentation?
This is an endless debate. Although, I enjoyed it more when it used to come up more often.
Hey, anyone remember when this board was just a fraction of its size now, and the same handfull of people were having the same debate....every other week?
Too funny.
BTW, I vote for 45
I would take a "slightly" larger would channel over "slightly" more penetration anyday.
MAKE BIGGER HOLES!
Hey, anyone remember when this board was just a fraction of its size now, and the same handfull of people were having the same debate....every other week?
Too funny.
BTW, I vote for 45
I would take a "slightly" larger would channel over "slightly" more penetration anyday.
MAKE BIGGER HOLES!
