Factory Vs. Reloads for Personal Defense
- Thread starter Violator22
- Start date
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Hmmm. Silence.
gushulak
CGN frequent flyer
Suputin said:
I'm sure Suputin he knows what he's talking about, but comments like this and then claiming that the internet is full of people that don't know what they are talking about leads no credibility to his case. (Even though I agree with the claim about the internet). With all the factory testing he has done, is he really supporting that handloads over factory is the way to go when all the leading authorities on the subject claim otherwise? I am sure he knows better. I'm also sure he's very aware of what factory ammo's terminal effects are, they are repeatable and consistant, shot after shot. Reliable and loaded to better specs than any handloads can ever be as far as defensive ammo goes.
Show me where all the experts are recommending handloads? I haven't seen or heard this anywhere....except this site.
As far as testing of rounds goes, its a great way to see what works and what doesn't. I've personally tested 16, 9mm JHP's, 14, .40S&W and 6 .45GAP JHP's through bare wetnewprint packs, one layer denim and four layer denim, also through auto glass and wall board. Using the basic FBI tests, minus the 10% gelatin. I just don't need acceptance from the rest of the CGN's to make my decisions regarding ammo thanks.
As most post's seem to go here, the seem to get into pissing matches. There is some good info on this one and a ton of bad, lets just try to stay on point and discuss things in a civil way. I'm sorry Suputin if I ruffled your feathers with my previous post, my bad.
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
Actually, he made a good point about the exit dia. in a .45 suppressor, as compared to a 9. However, as far as terminal performance goes, I think i'd rather depend on a subsonic .45 over a sub-sonic 9mm. The 9 makes up ground when you can shove it fast and make it expand hard, and you don't do that (well) below 1000fps. Meanwhile the .45 seldom gets that fast.
I was rattling on outside of practical experiance when i commented on .45 being a good choice to suppress, that was based on the fact that all are (ok, not some +P lightweights) are subsonic, where you have to deliberatly pick subsonic in 9 and give up horsepower doing so. I don't live in a free country, can't have nice toys, so can only go on what I've read, and I've done a fair bit of that, so sort my sources by cross checking and when I can, talk to those who have been there or are in the industry, I do the best I can to learn about what I enjoy.
Still, if you want to call me an idiot (and I've been guilty of that before, I suspect most of us have) you can at least be a bit polite about it and I'll listen and maybe learn something from you, and you won't have to listen to it again
I was rattling on outside of practical experiance when i commented on .45 being a good choice to suppress, that was based on the fact that all are (ok, not some +P lightweights) are subsonic, where you have to deliberatly pick subsonic in 9 and give up horsepower doing so. I don't live in a free country, can't have nice toys, so can only go on what I've read, and I've done a fair bit of that, so sort my sources by cross checking and when I can, talk to those who have been there or are in the industry, I do the best I can to learn about what I enjoy.
Still, if you want to call me an idiot (and I've been guilty of that before, I suspect most of us have) you can at least be a bit polite about it and I'll listen and maybe learn something from you, and you won't have to listen to it again
Last edited:
- Location
- Calgary, AB
What are the rules of civility
X2; If you want to overtly call me or anyone else an idiot or especially a liar, you should be whipped with a wetknudel. There is a way to ask and a way to accuse.
Show me where all the experts are recommending handloads for pp. Good point gushalak!
X2; If you want to overtly call me or anyone else an idiot or especially a liar, you should be whipped with a wetknudel. There is a way to ask and a way to accuse.
Show me where all the experts are recommending handloads for pp. Good point gushalak!
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Just having a hard time today gathering facts before speaking. Thas OK, I'm married with children, I have a thick skin. Lets move on with the real gun stuff. I find that some people who shy away from the 45 jsut are under the myth that it is too much to handle. There are many very manageable loads and guns in 45. I like how this calibre seems to push hard but not snap liek some of the really fast 9mm. I prefer "push" over "snap".Dragoon said:
Last edited:
Ummmm... perhaps somebody can help me with this.gushulak said:
If a factory round drives a Hornady, Barnes, whatever bullet to x velocity, and a handload drives a Hornady, Barnes, whatever bullet to x velocity... just what magical terminal affects are imparted to that exact same bullet when it comes out of a factory round, as opposed to when that bullet achieved the same velocity out of a handload?
Why is it that enforcement agencies do reliability testing with ammunition submitted for a bid with their issue pistols - and not all of that ammunition passes their testing if it is so reliable (at least not in their particular weapons)? How many people who are so utterly confident that factory ammunition is better than ANY handloads, no matter who assembled them, have actually done reliability testing similar to what police agencies do with their carry ammunition in their handgun?
And if I have a couple of issue police rounds with dented primers that didn't go bang, and one of those rounds doesn't even have a flash hole, while all my handloads are visually inspected as part of the case preparation process to ensure they DO have flash holes... just how is factory issue ammunition (even if taken from actual police stores) somehow more "reliable"?
I am also puzzled as to why those same factory bullets somehow or other have "better specs" when, by trying assorted powders, charges, primers, etc I can get much better groups than I can with the superior handloads? All who want to start screaming accuracy won't be a big deal anyways... go tell all the experts who are apparently the final arbitrators of this to quite discussing night sights and similar other obviously useless aiming appendages. And tell Novak and Heinie to quit swindling people out of money for their sights on defensive pistols.
I can think of at least one and possibly two real live gunfighters (which is something different than being a gunwriter) who carried handloads. But before we get into that "show me" part, you need to deal with some incomplete business of your own:
Why don't you come up with some actual examples of all these dire legal consequences that we keep hearing about, instead of just fancily tapdancing past that? I have heard mention of exactly TWO instances in the 20+ odd years that this issue has been going around in the magazines and now on the internet as well. Including from the leading proponent of this horrible possibility, who as part of making his living has to come up with something fresh to write about every month. And who also warns us, incidentally, that we better not have handguns with aggressive sounding names - any of you guys now in fear who want to get rid of your "combat magnum", "Python", or similar handgun with a scary name can send them to me and I will give them a good home. I will reluctantly assume the terrible risk of death by lawyer to save them from the scrap metal furnace.
Now you've assured us in past posts that there are "many instances" of where using handloads has landed people in legal hot water. So instead of just wandering off in another direction, why is it so hard for you (or anybody else) to come up with a fairly small set of examples like half a dozen or so? If there's "many" of them, it can't be that hard, can it?
As I said before, I don't believe for a minute that you can do it. We get the same two case examples quoted to us, again and again, that the use of handloads will result in the sky falling on you. Doesn't it ever occur to you - even for a moment - to wonder why it is always the same two example no matter how many years go by?
I see this kind of like all the Chiefs of Police and police spokesmen out there who warn people that if they carry a gun for protection, it will only be taken from them and used against them. These people, incidentally, generally are considered "experts" on the use of force and firearms as well... does anyone with a carry permit believe what they're saying because they're "experts".
The legal BS aside, there are some pretty good reasons to refrain from advising people that handloads are a good idea for self defense. The products from Federal, CorBon, Hornady, etc, have known QC/QA standards; Joe Average out there, reading your column or attending your two day course, is an unknown quantity. He might be intensively involved in reloading, well read, cautious, prudent, and have QC/QA standards that are the equal of any factory. Then again, he just might be some idiot who goes out and buys a Lee Loader, dumps in a charge of WW231, see a lot of empty space in that case, and figure it looks pretty empty in there and besides, more velocity in a defensive load has to be a good thing. He then blows himself up - or gets killed in a defensive gun battle when the first "super round" disables his firearm and the bad guy casually walks over and shoots him to bloody hamburger.
When you're an "expert", the only possible consequence of suggesting or approving of handloads when you have no control over how Buddy puts them together or how much he knows, or what stupid ideas he gets in his head about how to REALLY put together some nuclear rounds is to increase your legal liability. Not by a little bit; by a lot. And who wants to go there?
gushulak
CGN frequent flyer
If you handloaders are worried about the QC of factory rounds, thats why we practice tap, rack, bang's at the range. Any round can be a dud, training is going to trump that.
Factory vs. handloads to the same velocity? The factory generally has tighter QC standards, ballistically the results will be the same. Having attended my share of IPSC events I'd have a hard time believing most people's reloads are up to factory specs as far as reliablity is concerned. I think my reloads are pretty darn good, but when I am going to lay my life on the line, I'm going to use something with a proven track record for reliablity and performance. As far as the legality of it, its going to be just one less thing for the prosecution to hang their hat on.
Most "experts" recommend using a good factory JHP, firing a minimum of 200 rounds through your firearm to ensure function and the hit the range with a good practice load, in my case, a good handload. Then practice, practice, practice.
I guess its to each their own, if your 100% comfortable with using reloads in that situation, fine. You just don't see a lot of law enforcement, CCW trainers or firearms professionals in my opinion suggesting it. Not only for when a firearm has to be used in a self defense situation to the legal aftermath that follows. I do understand the points the handload guys are making, but to me its just not worth the risk, its as simple as that.
Factory vs. handloads to the same velocity? The factory generally has tighter QC standards, ballistically the results will be the same. Having attended my share of IPSC events I'd have a hard time believing most people's reloads are up to factory specs as far as reliablity is concerned. I think my reloads are pretty darn good, but when I am going to lay my life on the line, I'm going to use something with a proven track record for reliablity and performance. As far as the legality of it, its going to be just one less thing for the prosecution to hang their hat on.
Most "experts" recommend using a good factory JHP, firing a minimum of 200 rounds through your firearm to ensure function and the hit the range with a good practice load, in my case, a good handload. Then practice, practice, practice.
I guess its to each their own, if your 100% comfortable with using reloads in that situation, fine. You just don't see a lot of law enforcement, CCW trainers or firearms professionals in my opinion suggesting it. Not only for when a firearm has to be used in a self defense situation to the legal aftermath that follows. I do understand the points the handload guys are making, but to me its just not worth the risk, its as simple as that.
Last edited:
- Location
- Calgary, AB
Double Yep to Gushalak's comments. I have a Lee progressive reloader and I trust my hand loads, but not for PP. I am not as meticulous as Rick about my reload practices but I have only had two misfires and one squib in a couple thousand reloads. I know of no one in pro or instruction circles (civilian or LEO) who loads handloads for pp or recommends their use for that.
I would suspect you think the likelihood of a dude factory round is about the same as I think the likelihood is of handloads causing somebody to be dragged through court.gushulak said:
That said, if you think that training and "tap, rack, bang" is ALWAYS going to trump the time lost due to a misfire, you're wrong. If the guy with the shotgun ten feet in front of you is only a second behind you on the trigger, you're going to maybe get as far as "tap"... If you're doing the real cool maneouver Ayoob was demonstrating to Gresham last weekend, with your weak hand deflecting their weapon down at contact range while you draw and put one in their head, the "bang" part will be their weapon stitching you from the bottom up as they recover and you're trying to figure how to get that weak hand back up to start your "tap" drill.
Now obviously, these "what if" scenarios are not likely. But I do disagree with your contention that factory ammunition is "reliable and loaded to better specs than any handloads can ever be".
Reliable, yes. More reliable than properly handloaded ammunition assembled with great attention to detail? No.
Nobody at Federal, Hornady, etc will guarantee you that you will NEVER get a case without a flash hole, a primer without an anvil, ammunition from a lot that is later recalled for some manufacturing defect or not. But I can, because I personally inspect every case, every flash hole, every primer, every bullet, etc. Furthermore, those companies do not test and evaluate their ammunition for my personal weapon, they develop it for best function over the wide range of weapons out there. Mine is developed and tested for mine and mine alone.
I am not saying I don't trust factory ammunition; because in fact I do, and I would no more worry about the chance of a factory defect costing me my life than I would worry about ending up in court over the issue of using reloads. But I certainly do disagree with the contention that handloads cannot be of as high a quality - and higher - than factory loads when those handloads are intelligently and properly assembled.
"Generally" is not the same as claiming always, which was your contention originally. I can accept "generally". And you're correct, when the bullet is moving at a given velocity, it does not have some extra magical powers if it came out of a factory load instead of a reload.
Once again, instead of continuing these dire warnings about the prosecution stringing you up for using handloads, how about some examples beyond the same two that are always cited in magazine articles, decade after decade? A little factual support beyond warnings and two well-worn incidents would be nice.
Are we going to deal in "any possible problems"? If so, Ayoob recommends against owning - much less carrying - any handguns with "provocative names". Are you also going to recommend that "as far as the legality of it goes", that nobody who may use a firearm in self defense should ever own a handgun with a name like "combat magnum", Python, "Wilson Close Quarters Combat"? For he states that too has been made an issue of in court (although, like handloads, he never states what the incidence is of it becoming an issue). If you don't see a problem as well with owning a handgun with a "provocative name" when he advises against it, I'm a little puzzled why you would be so concerned with handloads.
Police forces are usually over the 1000 round mark in their functionality testing - you figure maybe they're overdoing it and just wasting taxpayer's money, or maybe the "experts" are a bit lax in their recommendations?
In any case, how many people do you know that feel handloads are too risky, but have also purchased and run a thousand or so CorBon rounds through their handgun to ensure there's no reliability risk there? At around a dollar a round? Would be kind of crazy to be concerned about the legal risk of handloads, yet not be concerned about the lethal risk of malfunctions, don't you think?
It is to each their own - in everything from whether or not to carry a firearm at all, onwards. I just take exception about Chicken Little warnings about how the sky will fall if you use handloads, when there is absolutely nothing beyond a few repeatedly mentioned instances to back up that fear.
When they have no knowledge of whether you are a competent handloader or an idiot who shouldn't have access to anything resembling reloading equipment, why would they? They aren't really worried about YOUR liability - they're worried about THEIR liability if you do something stupid and then say "Well, Fred said...".
BTW, here's three lawmen/gunfighters who eventually became gun writers after surviving their enforcement careers who wrote of carrying handloads in their handguns and at times suggested self defense handloads to their readers: Bill Jordan, Skeeter Skelton, and Charles Askins.
All were in law enforcement, all became trainers of other law enforcement at various times in their careers, all at one time or another made their living as firearms professionals, two at least were National Pistol Champions. Name me one of the CCW trainers and "firearms professionals" that you have in mind of that was in anywhere near the number of actual gunfights any one of those three was in.
There's gunwriters... and there's gunfighters. The first writes to survive, the second survives to write.
Once again, point us at the "many" instances where handguns have become a factor in the "legal aftermath". You keep saying this, but you also keep going to extraordinary lengths to avoid having to provide examples of this from the "many" instances where you claim this has happened. Why not just list a bunch of them to prove your point and establish your allegation once and for all?
My contention is that you are at a far greater risk of being disarmed and having your handgun used against you - small though that risk may be. But that, I suspect, doesn't cause you to decide CCW isn't for you. And you're also, apparently, at legal risk if you own a firearm with a provocative name - but I'll also bet that doesn't cause you to ensure you own nothing but firearms with names like "Ladysmith"...
That's fine. The fact that the "greater risk" you keep alluding to (but still can't provide examples of) is in fact statistically non-existant really doesn't matter. What's important is you feel secure in your choice.
I will pay more attention to this "legal risk" crap - whether the fear is of handloads or owning firearms with "provocative sounding" names - when somebody can do better than dredge up only one or two examples over the last 20 - 30 years. That kind of warning is a Wendy Cukier type argument: dire warnings, no evidence.
And I'll also bet most if not all of those running around warning about the legal dangers of using handloads are for some reason or other not issueing equal warnings about the name of the handguns you own, attending nasty sounding schools like "Lethal Force Institute", etc. Only some legal risks, apparently, need mention or worry about!
gushulak
CGN frequent flyer
Rick,
I'm getting the point that anything I say your going to pick apart. I agree with your your points about carefully assembled handloads, the gunwriters you have mentioned (however ancient they too may be) and many of your other points.
I'm just providing an opinion, as are you, I don't feel I need to provide a list of references to prove my case anymore. I've listed some examples, however old they may be, some people on this thread have agreed, some have not. Your obviously comfortable with your handloads, and can back up your claims, I'm just trying to provide a counter arguement, in a constructive way.
The 200 round number I cited was for us gun guys, not LEO, their obviously held to a higher accountability. If you chose to use a round like Cor-Bon at $1 a round, you must decide yourself the economics of what makes you feel comfortable for reliability testing. There's a lot of great performing factory loads out there for a lot less (Ranger T's, Gold Dots, Fed HST's, Hydra-shoks etc). Cor-Bon is a good round but from my testing it wouldn't be my first choice. LEO's usually like to test the heck out of their loads over a variety of situations so they know exactly what their dealing with in all conditions, usually tens of thousands of rounds. Something not feasible for us with limited budgets who like to spend our $$$ on reloading supplies.
I'll stick with factory, you stick with handloads, we'll both live peacefully and hopefully never be put in a situation where we have to put any of this to use! I do agree that the anti's have made this topic much more complicated than even I have even imagined.
I'm getting the point that anything I say your going to pick apart. I agree with your your points about carefully assembled handloads, the gunwriters you have mentioned (however ancient they too may be) and many of your other points.
I'm just providing an opinion, as are you, I don't feel I need to provide a list of references to prove my case anymore. I've listed some examples, however old they may be, some people on this thread have agreed, some have not. Your obviously comfortable with your handloads, and can back up your claims, I'm just trying to provide a counter arguement, in a constructive way.
The 200 round number I cited was for us gun guys, not LEO, their obviously held to a higher accountability. If you chose to use a round like Cor-Bon at $1 a round, you must decide yourself the economics of what makes you feel comfortable for reliability testing. There's a lot of great performing factory loads out there for a lot less (Ranger T's, Gold Dots, Fed HST's, Hydra-shoks etc). Cor-Bon is a good round but from my testing it wouldn't be my first choice. LEO's usually like to test the heck out of their loads over a variety of situations so they know exactly what their dealing with in all conditions, usually tens of thousands of rounds. Something not feasible for us with limited budgets who like to spend our $$$ on reloading supplies.
I'll stick with factory, you stick with handloads, we'll both live peacefully and hopefully never be put in a situation where we have to put any of this to use! I do agree that the anti's have made this topic much more complicated than even I have even imagined.
Last edited:
Sorry it took so long to reply but I have a job and a life that don't allow me to be on the internet all day.
While I'll admit to being a bit harsh, it just drives me nuts when people insist on commenting on a subject they know nothing about. But I guess thats the internet. Everyone gets their chance to have a say.
You of course are aware that the gap between the cylinder and the barrel will pretty much render any silencer on the end of the barrel worthless for sound reduction?
Me testing a 5.56mm silencer from Finland.
.45 cal Beretta Storm with a silencer I designed and built.
Sound Testing with Al Paulson to get real sound data.
Variety of silencers waiting to be tested
As far as I am concerned you guys can believe what you want wrt silencers. I'll continue to post the correct info and we can take it from there.
If you don't believe me, go to Silencer Tests http://www.silencertests.com/ ask around and find out for yourself.
I never used the word "liar" about anyone and in fact my comment was not directed at you but at Cocked&Locked who obviously has never been within 100 miles of a real silencer but had to weigh in with a pithy comment none the less.
While I'll admit to being a bit harsh, it just drives me nuts when people insist on commenting on a subject they know nothing about. But I guess thats the internet. Everyone gets their chance to have a say.Yes, it is called a Form 1 and the tax is the same as if you bought a can.
You are going to put a silencer on a revolver? Good luck with that project.
You of course are aware that the gap between the cylinder and the barrel will pretty much render any silencer on the end of the barrel worthless for sound reduction?Uhhhh subsonic 147gr 9mm has been around for about 30 some odd years now. But if you were so knowledgible about suppressors you'd know this right?
www.canadiantactical.ca I do all the R&D as well as manufacturing and testing.
Me testing a 5.56mm silencer from Finland.
.45 cal Beretta Storm with a silencer I designed and built.
Sound Testing with Al Paulson to get real sound data.
Variety of silencers waiting to be tested
As far as I am concerned you guys can believe what you want wrt silencers. I'll continue to post the correct info and we can take it from there.
Actually I own a .45 1911 and love it but that doesn't change the fact that the smaller round suppresses way better.
If you don't believe me, go to Silencer Tests http://www.silencertests.com/ ask around and find out for yourself.
Last edited:
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
USP said:
I recall reading a piece by Jeff Cooper where a citizen killed his assailant with multiple shots from a .380 auto. Good for the citizen, right? Well, when it went to court the prosecutor put forward the theory that the number of rounds fired proved the action was murder rather than self defence. Recently NYPD cops ran into similar criticism for discharging a large number of rounds at a bad guy. Hence the lesson, use enough gun, shoot well, and shoot as little as possible until the threat is subdued. In the case against the citizen, Cooper was brought in as an expert witness, and was able to convey to the jury the realities of interpersonal conflict. The trial ended in an acquittal, but if an expert witness had not been available, the citizen's position would of been quite difficult.
I am unable to understand how a DA auto with a de-cocker is safer than a SA auto with grip safety, but each to their own
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
Suputin, nice job......you lucky b@stard Actually I have been within a hundred miles of a couple of them, and am currently machining up an adaptor for a friend in the states. I have never used on in .45, but thought that, along with the fact that I've never read anything about the problems of silencing .45 that it being subsonic would make it a good canditate. Thanks for teaching me something new, but yeah, you where a little harsh eh? Still, worth it to see thoses pics....again, nice job, and feel free to correct me, thats how you learn
Actually I have been within a hundred miles of a couple of them, and am currently machining up an adaptor for a friend in the states. I have never used on in .45, but thought that, along with the fact that I've never read anything about the problems of silencing .45 that it being subsonic would make it a good canditate. Thanks for teaching me something new, but yeah, you where a little harsh eh? Still, worth it to see thoses pics....again, nice job, and feel free to correct me, thats how you learn
Last edited:
Suputin said:Sorry it took so long to reply but I have a job and a life that don't allow me to be on the internet all day.
I never used the word "liar" about anyone and in fact my comment was not directed at you but at Cocked&Locked who obviously has never been within 100 miles of a real silencer but had to weigh in with a pithy comment none the less.
Yes, it is called a Form 1 and the tax is the same as if you bought a can.
You are going to put a silencer on a revolver? Good luck with that project.
Uhhhh subsonic 147gr 9mm has been around for about 30 some odd years now. But if you were so knowledgible about suppressors you'd know this right?
www.canadiantactical.ca I do all the R&D as well as manufacturing and testing.
Me testing a 5.56mm silencer from Finland.
.45 cal Beretta Storm with a silencer I designed and built.
Sound Testing with Al Paulson to get real sound data.
Variety of silencers waiting to be tested
As far as I am concerned you guys can believe what you want wrt silencers. I'll continue to post the correct info and we can take it from there.
Actually I own a .45 1911 and love it but that doesn't change the fact that the smaller round suppresses way better.
If you don't believe me, go to Silencer Tests http://www.silencertests.com/ ask around and find out for yourself.
So can you design a silencer for my remy 870?
Not that one, it is an uber cheap european can that isn't very good.
This one, however, is quieter than the action noise which makes it almost surreal to shoot.
Cocked: Sorry you just happened to hit one of my grumpy buttons.
Ahhh smartass thinks you can't suppress a shotgun.
Well you can and there are several shotgun silencers on the market .... in other countries of course. 
FWIW I was the only CDN participant at the inaugural Silencer Tests Silencer Shoot in 2006. It was a very cool shoot with not a single unsilenced shot fired.
Subguns galore
A bevy of pistols
AR's everywhere.
A slightly overheated silencer on an M249 (Minimi) machine gun.
An awesome suppressed 510 Whisper firing subsonic armour piercing incendary bullets. The impact was louder than the muzzle blast and featured a very cool incendary flash when the bullet detonated.
Last edited:
