.38 snub
 

What do you think about 110 gr hp loaded to 1000fps+ for snub nose revolvers.
To my knowledge 125 gr has had it's supporters but most seem to still think 158 gr to be best even if it is slower.
Another question.
Many will say the .38spcl is under powered but there has been millions of small .380s sold in the last few years.
I would think the old .38 in almost any configuration would be preferable to even the new better .380 loads.

I like the little .38sp. Always have. It's a bit anemic but it gets the job done when up close and personal work is needed. My wife carries the little Lady Smith in .38sp and she is danged accurate with that little bugger. 25 feet and in (actual self defense range) there wouldn't be a live attacker with her that much I would bet on.

I worked up a load for her using 5.5gr Unique under a 110gr XTP which chrony's an average of 1005fps. Her little revolver didn't like Power Pistol at all. Your results may vary. I personally think it has more than enough power to take out a bad guy if needed. The right bullet put in the right place will equal a problem solved.

What are you wanting these loads to do for you? Are you thinking the 100-110's at 1,000fps will have an advantage in terminal performance over 125's and 158's? Or, are you simply looking for a lower recoiling load?

If you're looking to reduce recoil, then the lighter pills will work. Be sure you have realistic expectations for performance, and be sure you consider the trade off you're making.

If you're looking for enhanced performance, look heavier. The greater momentum, penetration, and expansion on the bigger pills - even running slower - is impossible to deny.

Don't be too easily dissuaded - good enough is good enough - but don't be too hurried to pick one without considering reality - better is better.

It is a trade of no matter how you slice it I guess. The 110 load is easier to shoot out of an airweight. Velocity offsets weight some I would think.
I bet the answer is in the middle.
About 135 gr at better velocity than the 158.
The 110 do make a nice tighter group and are faster fired.
I have always used heavier.Just wondering.

FOr self-defense, 110 grain bullets are a bad idea.

Go with the FBI load: 158 grain LSWCHP +P. I use this load in my .357 Mag revolver for self-defense.

They aren't a bad idea at all. A 110gr put in the right spot will equal just as dead as a 158gr. It's all about placement. Are the 158gr better? Of course in some applications but when it comes to smaller female shooters they absolutely aren't. Bullet performance also needs to be factored in. As in what type. You have bullets out there nowadays that are built to fragment and cause extreme damage. Lets face a little reality here, humans are not that hard to put down. We are one of the weakest species on the planet when it comes to getting hit by a bullet.

Hi super_hunt54,

I'll have to disagree.

Women, even petite women, can shoot large handguns.

It's all about penetration. This in one of many areas where 110 grain .38 caliber bullets would be a very poor choice.

I'll vehemently disagree about human tenacity. Human beings, absent a CNS hit, can take a whole lot of lead. My friend put 6 rounds from his duty .357 Mag revolver into the X ring of a very bad guy. A single round of 12 gauge 00 buck reduced him to property of the corner as evidence.

BTW, there is no such thing as a man stopper tactical handgun.

When in come to self-defense, bigger & heavier bullets are better.

Best of luck to you.

It's all a trade-off.
I personally don't want to know how good or bad my shot placement would be in a self-defense situation, but I'm not going to bet on the best possible accuracy.
However, I also don't have a large caliber; I shoot a 9mm. But I like two things about it that I think balance out the firepower vs. accuracy imperatives in my case.

1) Higher mag capacity---knowing that if I get in some sort of a shootout situation I won't be so likely to run out is good. If someone is drugged up and doesn't feel impacts, I have more to spare. One thing I don't like about .380s or .45s that only have 6+1 capacity is they don't offer this.
2) Less recoil---I'm pretty thin, and perhaps more importantly, for want of practice not quite experienced with containing recoil from larger cartridges in the sub-compact frame. Being able to get back on target faster at the range than I could with a .40 S&W or larger encourages me to think the same goes for a real-life situation. I won't carry a full-size for concealed carry, so whatever I can shoot in a sub-comp frame without completely losing sight picture is what I'll go with.
Perhaps for some, that means shooting a .38 Special, and a lower-grain bullet at that. More power to them; it's better than nothing.

Like Younggun, I believe in getting back on target as quickly as possible. Now for me, standing 6'5" and weighing in at between 240 and 260 (summer and winter weights) with gorilla hands and arms, shooting and recovering sight picture for me with just about any handgun made is pretty easy. Since I own a couple .500 S&W I can attest to that statement. But with the wife barely breaking 5'3" and MAYBE 130 after x-mas turkey it's a whole other ball game. She can shoot any handgun I own. And deadly accurate with dang near all of them. But target recovery is another story entirely. More rounds ACCURATELY on target at a quicker pace is what she likes and what makes her feel the most comfortable. You put 3 110gr XTP's through the chest of ANY man walking this Earth and he is a dead man. Plain and simple. As I said earlier,, Are the 158's better? Of course. BUT are they better for HER? Absolutely not. Whichever you are the most accurate with is what you shoot. Under a stressed situation, if you don't have confidence in your ability you are thoroughly and completely screwed.

younggun308,

It might be a wise idea to avoid any trade off in gunfighting.

There are but two rules that apply to gunfighting:

1. The only known way of surviving a gunfight is to not get in one

2. If Rule 1 is unavoidable, don't get shot

Only a fool would trade his life for a bad guy's life.

Your accuracy is nowhere as important as a bad guy's accuracy. If you take time to aim at close distance, you body would likely end up as evidence of murder.

Hi super_hunt54,

I'm good.

You might want to rethink 110 grain penetration. If your wife were to have to shoot through a barrier, she'll assuredly wish she had the FBI load.

In a gunfight, your wife would be lucky to hit a bad guy, let alone a 10 ring shot. Were a bad guy to put rounds on a good guy, Rule 2 is controlling. If your wife takes time to precisely aim her handgun, her body might end up as evidence.

If you're looking for enhanced performance, look heavier. The greater momentum, penetration, and expansion on the bigger pills - even running slower - is impossible to deny.

Look at the old flying ash trays!!!! 230grn ball rounds in the 45ACP doing 950fps. They called them the one shot stoppers for a reason!!!! Not fast, just hit like a truck when they got there!!!!

I'll venture to guess neither of us is an experienced gunfighter.

One thing that does, however, stand out from writings by gunfighters in the Old West is that 1) encounters tended to be at close range) and 2) people's first reaction was to shoot as quickly as possible, firing off as many rounds as possible, and they consequently were not as effective as the people who weren't actually the fastest.

Of course one doesn't take the time aiming a pistol like they do aiming a rifle from a deer stand, nor do they aim as precisely...but if the military trains people to focus on what's behind the front sight before pulling the trigger, they're probably onto something.

We are all legally liable for every single bullet that exits the barrel. A shot that goes into the roof or 2.2 feet to the left of the target doesn't help save your life---if anything, it forces you to spend more time getting on target (because you weren't in the first place), giving the "bad guy" more time to shoot you than if you just took an extra .25 seconds to actually make your shot count. Then, if you're lucky enough to be dealing with someone who didn't capitalize on your poor aim, you might have killed an innocent bystander.

Unlike cartridge choice, tactics aren't a trade-off. There's no downside to having control over your bullet placement, even when you're shooting without hesitation at a target. If the dreaded moment arises, all I'm worried about is getting on target and THEN pulling the trigger quick (rinse repeat).

Well I HAVE been on the receiving as well as delivery end of a few. And I can tell you with absolute certainty that accuracy matters! And if the situation demands the use of force, good training takes over. Your average bad guy 99.9% of the time is untrained and is capitalizing on fear factor from most encounters. When faced by well trained people, bad guy's 99.9% of the time lose. I have no doubt in my mind that if the situation called for force, my little wife would fall back on her training as instinct. She can pull all 5 rounds from her little lady smith in under 6 seconds with all 5 in the kill zone. She's not a police officer and would, 99.9% of the time, NOT have to worry about cover penetration. Civilian encounters are usually blitz attacks and rarely, if ever, are fired from cover. I put her through her paces when training her. Shooting with heart rate accelerated, shooting after running for a distance, shooting after pushups (that was fun to watch her get madder every one), shooting after grappling with my oldest daughter. I have to admit, my little woman is probably one of the better trained civilians out there. Confidence in her equipment is key for her. As I said, if she doesn't have 100% confidence she can hit her mark with EVERY shot, then she will break down in a tight situation. Heavier bullets don't mean a damn thing if they don't find their mark!

With having worked as a LEO for over 25 yrs now, I have seen that most shooting instances happen with in 21ft. The closer you are to your assailant, the faster you have to aquier your target and make your shots count before he does his or hers.
That's why I advocate dry fire practice at home. I teach the shooting portion of CCW for people who feel they may not qualify for the test.
I tell them to practice in their home with the weapon that they are most likely to carry.
I tell them to make sure the weapon is unloaded, clear and safe. Take all the ammo into another room completely and secure it. Do it while alone so they can practice without disturbance.
I tell them to dress for that time of year and place their carry weapon on them like they plan on carrying.
Pick out a small spot on the wall or item at about 21ft if possible. Then standing comfortable with arms at their side, draw. If they are not able to draw and get at least 1 round off in 2 seconds without the sights leaving that spot, they need to look at how they are carrying and modify it. Then, they need to change/modify how they carry.

I find it interesting that some of the most famous gunfighters like Wild Bill used pistols like the .36 Navy shooting round ball.
Wyatt Earp was supposed to have said that it was the man who was cool enough to make his first shot count that was dangerous or something to that effect.
Some of the operators who are the real deal are just amazing how fast and accurate they are.
I lost a good friend years ago. He was shot at from distance with a .22 rifle. The bullet hit a piece of steel and shaved off a sliver that went between his ribs and into his heart.
When I worked with the EMS I helped pick up a young man who had been shot in the chest with a 12 gauge shotgun at a distance of less than ten feet. The shot was still in the cup when it hit him so it cut a hole about the size of a quarter. He was walking around when we got there and was not in hospital long.
I have seen several strange things. It seems to come down to whither your number is up.
So far Situational awareness and not being in places I shouldn't be has served me well.
I am going to do some penetration tests with different bullets and see what I come up with concerning faster velocity lighter bullets and slower heavies. From the multitude of testing available to look at there does not seem to be a great lot of difference in the two per some tests.
I have some old books I am going to use.I think it might be interesting but may not have much to do with real life.

Its not who is the fastest, its who's the most accurate is who will be telling the story later!!!!

Well, I'll go with many of us having different exposure to gun fighting. Cops used to be taught the Weaver stance with precise aiming. That all changed around 1987. The old training was causing a lot of cops to lose gunfights, many after taking rounds to the head because the Weaver stance placed their heads in bad guys' lines of sight. After scientific analyses of gunfights, the farthest cops were taught to shoot was 15 yards. At that distance, only the front sight is used. Closer than 15 yards it was all shoulder point except for 6 yards and less. Then hip point was indicated.

Any hit on a bad guy is a good hit. There is no such thing as a bad hit.

If you want to remain a taxpayer and cannot avoid a gunfight, you must never become an easy target for a bad guy who wants you supine on a fiberglass autopsy gurney. Taking time to aim might well cost you your life. If you want to live and you cannot avoid a gun fight, never make yourself an easy target. Run to a barrier and get behind it. Better, run and keep running until you're out of harm's way.

After you've mastered point shooting, then work on shooting while moving. If you remain stationary, you will be giving a bad guy who wants you dead a very easy target.

What gunfighters of the 19th century might have done has zero application to the 21st century. If Wyatt Earp had access to a 1911A1, do you think he'd of carried a Peacemaker?

Bad guys train. Many have military experience. Rarely will a bad guy do bad things alone. That means that good guys have to scan for bad guys' buddies.

Accuracy is nowhere as important as not getting shot. Precise accuracy is very old school. Now cops are taught to shoot and keep shooting until a bad guy is no longer a threat.

Closing in on two weeks ago I taught a couple friends how to point shoot. One had new sights put on his new CCW handgun. I asked him why he went with new sights. He had no idea of point shooting. So we all went to a nearby indoor range. I went first with an old duty gun. Keep in mind that I haven't point shot since I've retired. My first round hit the 10 ring. The target was about 10 yards distant. Then they tried. Before we left, both had point shooting wired.

The most accurate in a gunfight does not always win, disregarding the fact that it would be extremely difficult to determine the most accurate. I can tell you that the one who doesn't get shot will win. And winning a gunfight is determined by survival. If a good guy dies, he loses. Keep in mind that a human being with his heart destroyed can live another eight seconds, more than enough time to kill a good guy.

Another spurious criterion is number of rounds fired as a metric of gun fighting. When cops fire hundreds of rounds and hit no one, it's a good shooting if cops survive. There is tactical benefit of suppressive or cover fire if it prevents bad guys from shooting at good guys. So when I hear cops fired many magazines, I determine success by their survival. Never die with rounds in your gun.

I highly recommend this book: https://play.google.com/store/books/...UFlA&gclsrc=ds I'm not sure if calibre Press will sell it to those not in law enforcement. Libraries, especially university libraries will almost assuredly have a copy of it. Were you to read it, it might change your mind about what you thought was right.

Never forget the primary rule of gunfighting: the only certain way of surviving a gunfight is to not get in one. Rule 2: if you cannot avoid, you must not get shot.

It's a wise idea to keep in mind that bad guys train. Many have military experience. Bad guys rarely do bad things alone. That puts a lone good guy at extreme peril. One good guy vs. one bad guy = bad odds for the good guy. Hence, avoid at all costs.

One final point: you have to have a survivor's mindset. You have to be prepared to accept that much of what you now believe might just be wrong...dead wrong.

When I carry a gun for self defense, it's either a .40 S&W or a .45 ACP. I carry heavy-for-caliber bullets in my guns.

A citizen does not have a union or municipality to back him. I would think the only thing worse that getting shot by a bad guy would be firing many unaimed rounds and discovering unintended causalities.
And not to argue that a single action compares to a semi auto but have you ever been to a Cowboy Action Shoot.
Perhaps more than one discipline is in order according to the circumstances at hand.
In my case I can't imagine I would ever be trading shots at distance.If I had a chance or was able to run I would have already done that. I won't know what is going to happen till it starts happening or I would be gone already.If I should have a chance to produce a weapon it will probably chance or trickery.If I should get off a shot it would most likely be close and better be good.
I am not a cop. I am not military. I will not be on the offensive.I am not the Lone Ranger and I know it.
I am a citizen responsible for every round.If I fire a shot it will cost me most of what I have. If I hit anything it will cost me everything I have.
I do not disagree with anything said in this thread. I just think a man better think about who he is and what his priorities are.
I don't think a lot of suppression fire would go over to well in a mall.

No kidding!

I'd want the situation to end as quickly as possible, because when authorities arrive, they do not know who the good guy is and who the bad guy is.
Even if it ends quickly and you are the one who makes the 911 call reporting the incident, the police might handcuff you and take you for questioning until their investigation has gotten a sense of what happened. They'll almost assuredly take your gun as evidence, temporarily, too.
But it won't even be that good if you've still got a gun in your hand and are firing it when they arrive. Better to make shots count...as has been said, don't obsess over it like you're making a 25 yard target shot, but be deliberate.

Mando, I don't know what books you have been reading or training by, but no sir bad guys are NOT generally trained and they most certainly are NOT often ex military. You think the war zone in my state, known as Chicago, is under siege by paramilitary trained individuals? Or any other cities where gang violence is prevalent? No, it's a bunch of thugs and punks with guns. Plain and simple. As was said, civilians have to think about EVERY SINGLE SHOT and WHERE IT IS GOING because they don't have unions and high priced lawyers at their backs like police do. Suppression fire is fine in a war zone, I did 12 years in the Marines so yes sir I know a weeeee little bit about rapid fire suppression of the enemy. But no you don't want the "spray and pray" method used in some dark alley. That's 100% incorrect thinking. And I'm sorry to say, but most times, the reason cops get shot in a face off is the fact that most of them can't shoot themselves out of a wet paper bag. I've just seen absolutely too many cops that just flat out can't shoot worth diddly. And the reason is lack of practice. And that's just laziness! They are PAID to carry a firearm to help protect themselves yet they don't train anywhere near as much as the average Joe Shmoe who carries concealed. They go through their academy training, and qualify once or in some states twice a year and some states even less! And that's all they shoot! I'd be willing to bet every member on this forum that carries, shoots upwards of 10 times more than your average cop! Because we absolutely KNOW what will happen if we ever have to pull our weapons. We have NO protection from authorities in most states outside of our homes.

Telling people on a forum that civilians should use "spray and pray" methods is pretty dang careless in my lowly opinion. Have you ever truly been under fire Mando? I am guessing no because everything you have stated is pretty much copy from books and doesn't seem to be based on actual experience. I've been under fire MANY times in war and more than a couple times in civilian situations. What you are proposing would be looked at by a lawyer with utter glee in his eyes as well as dollar signs.

Derailed...
 

Letting a thread devolve into a debate of gunfight philosophy doesn't change the fact a 140 or 158 moving slower will hit harder than a 110.

However, while the distinction between their stopping power is real, the difference might be less so. After almost 20yrs instructing handgunners, and more years hunting with handguns, I can say these things with certainty:

• Heavier pills kill faster, even with lower energy.

• If a shooter can manage 110's at full velocity in a revolver, they can handle 158's. While many will agree the heavier pills are notably less comfortable to shoot, the difference in accuracy and split times, given sufficient training/practice, will be moot. Better to stack the cards in your favor and have the extra oomph.

• Within a given cartridge, placement (and often bullet construction) makes much more difference for performance than bullet weight. The heavier bullets ARE better, but lighter pills, placed well, will kill. All bets are off in an SD situation, having cards more heavily stacked in your favor is wise, but any bullet is better than no bullet - "more enough is more good, but enough is still good."

super_hunt54,

I'm good with what you believe. After all, you have to do what's right for you.

I'd suggest that you get yourself a copy of Street Survival.

Spray and pray is a term used by amateurs and readers of gun magazines. My advice is to disabuse yourself of it and adopt terms of survivors. You'll never hear that ridiculous term used in any professional firearms course, especially from cops who've been in gunfights.

You might want to Google, "felony murder rule," rule before you attempt to give posters advice.

One of the most serious problems of gun owners is that they believe that a revolver and a subscription to Guns and Ammo makes them trained killers. Trained killers are gang bangers. They don't read. They train. I once talked to a So Cal game warden who told me where bangers were training in his huge beat. In fact, it's safe to assume that all bangers train. This might cause you a lot of pain: the average LA banger is probably better trained than you.

You and other taxpayers have spent a whole lot of your money sending me to professional firearms courses. Disregard what I write if you wish.

Do yourself a huge favor: disabuse yourself of spray and pray. It makes you appear amateurish. Learn suppressive and cover fire. You should have seen it in use during the North Hollywood bank robbery.

In closing, you do what's right for you. Some people hang on to inanity of gun magazines because they cannot bring themselves to say three tiny words, "I was wrong." The agency that employed me said it. It told us that everything it had taught us about firearms training was wrong. It completely retrained every one of us with up-to-date scientific firearms tactics. But who knows, maybe you know more that professional law enforcement trainers, or, more accurately, you think you do.

Oh yeah, unless you're a lawyer, don't give legal advice. Before you presume to assign liability, check with a real tort lawyer. He'll help you with your misconceptions.

In gunfights, even huge ones like the North Hollywood shootout, it's rare for bystanders to get shot and even more rare for an innocent person to die. This might surprise you, but people are usually pretty smart when it comes to getting out of the way of bullets. But were a bystander hurt, even by a good guy's round, the felony murder rule makes that bad guy responsible for all deaths and injuries.

Super_hunt54, I could care less how you proceed. But were I you, I'd acquire actual knowledge rather than spray and pray urban legends.

Super_hunt54, you really ought to read Street Survival.

Super_Hunt54, there is nothing wrong with saying, "I was wrong."

OK. Strict unscientific test completed and results.
Round one is the 110 JHP from a major manufacture loaded to book max for +P .38
Round two is Remington Golden Saber factory.
Fired into a 1950s edition world book from 10 feet
The hollow point on the 110 filled with paper with almost zero expansion and penetrated through the hard cover and 750 pages of print. It was totally intact and might as well have been a solid bullet.
The Golden Saber was laying on the ground at the back of the book having penetrated both front and back cover and 1007 pages of print. The jacket and core was still one piece retaining about half the original weight. he jacket opened exactly as designed into petals that measured at the widest 1.05 inches.Exit hole in the book was about 2.5 inches.
Admittedly this was a crude test but the results are plain as it gets.
Shooting through a few layers of cloth into a ham with the 110 I would expect very similar results.
The gaping hollow point of the 110 did not in any way do it's job.
In fact it collapsed shut instead of opening.
It has always been known that heavier hits harder. I was not expecting physics to have changed. I did expect the results to be closer.

RR I've known for years that hollow points do not work on a person wearing more than a cotton shirt. My cousin told me this was proven in tests by the FBI where he was trained in urban combat techniques while being employed as a police chief in a south eastern PA town bordering Allentown. He was also a NRA certified instructor for police qualification and some of the horror stories he told me about some police agency's shooting ability was almost unbelievable. He had police shooting for qualification hitting 3 feet in front of the target at 12 yards!! He told several that they shouldn't even be allowed to carry a sidearm.
I'm a firm believer in a heavy bullet with big frontal mass.

I distinctly the term "spray and pray" being used in a Defensive Pistol course at Front Sight Training Institute course in the late 1990's, as well as at a Combat Carbine course by Craft International in 2013.

In both instances, it was pejorative for bad techniques. But it WAS part of the vernacular used.

While not at the same professional level as these institutes, one of the NRA Certified instructors I used to work with often used it, and while "professional firearms instructor" rarely applies to me outside of the legal (and tax law abiding) sense, I know I've used it in my classes, many times over the last 2 decades.

Are you a lawyer or just unconcerned about what your actions can do to others? I would not preach don't worry about shooting because people are good at getting out of the way of bullets, and if you do screw up it isn't your fault. That statement is straight up bad advice. You would have to live with the grief of accidentally killing an innocent bystander for the rest of your life.

Maybe self defense to you is a small combat situation but in reality things happen quick and in your face. Debating theory and style is not going to prove much here. I have seen my share so called martial artists get the crap beat out of them in a street fight. People who train in firearms are subject to this as well. Some people got it and some get lucky and some freeze up when the adrenaline hits.

Why all the salt with Super_Hunt? He has probably experienced more than everything you read about on the internet.

I have killed at least 15 good sized whitetail deer with the .357 magnum. I got a rifle, 4 inch revolver, and a snub nosed pocket pistol. I have loaded them hot and heavy and down to .38 special power with different bullets weights. All for plinking to hunting purposes.

I can attest the heavier bullets provide better terminal ballistics. 180 grain bullets are brutal, 158's are fine, 140's are disappointing and I wouldn't consider using a 110 grain bullet on a Midwestern deer. I lend on that knowledge to my choice of bullets for CCW.

Mando, All your "training" is a bunch of hot air when it comes to real life there fella. You never answered this question, have you EVER been under fire in a combat situation? Until you have been, all your splatter is conjecture and theory bud. I've been on BOTH sides of firearms buddy. And "spray and pray" has been a vernacular used since the invention of machine guns. I've been around dang near as long! Law enforcement encounters and civilian encounters are different in the eyes of the law in most every state. Civilians are not anywhere NEAR as protected as law enforcement. You are trying to tell me and everyone here to get our head outta firearms magazines. I believe it is you Mando that needs to come up for some air bubba. My profession for over 20 years now has been protection and private security services. All this bull crap in the FBI manuals is 90% horse pucky written by nerds without a real clue about the real world and survival. See, law enforcement personnel have lawyers, insurance, and Unions aiding in their protection against accidental civilian injuries. The average civilian has NONE of that. One of our moderators here has been an LA police officer for many years now and I'd be willing to bet he would agree 100% with everything I have stated here.

OP, pardon the derailment but when someone spouts off dangerous tactics on a public forum while professing to be a professional this or that it requires immediate response from those of us with actual experience.

Well a good debate gets folks thinking. Thinking before something happens is not a bad thing. In the heat of the moment it's hard to think.
I like to look back at the old hands and what they said and did. Bill Jordan is a good source of information.
The reason I say this is because many times they were alone. No radio and no backup. Much like the ordinary citizen of today.
I am in a rural area so my situation may be quite different than someone in a large city.
The one thing that I believe to be consistent is the need for practice. I am lucky in that respect as I have a plate rack in my yard. I don't shoot a lot at one time but I shoot often.
Now I am wondering about the performance of the 158 JHP as compared to 158 SWC on a target with heavy winter clothing.

Clogging has been a known problem for years with JHP's. Lot's of new tech out there nowadays in regards to bullets. I like the XTP's for the wife but I have recently (in the last year or so) been introduced to the Lehigh Defense manufacturer. Mainly in their MLer bullets but I did get some of their Xtreme Penetrator for my .458 SOCOM for hogs. Excellent performance. Good enough that I am going to get some of their pistol bullets for one of my .45ACP's, probably the old trusty colt since she aint to picky about bullets but sassy about powders, and do some testing.

Namely these

And these

Those last ones are the same design as I got for the SOCOM just littler :D

That defense bullet is interesting. In .38 it is a 100 gr bullet but they claim 18" penetration. Their video is impressive.
Have you tried the defense bullet yet?
Do you know if anyone carries them or is it best to order from manufacture?
The video and propaganda is quite impressive but it is back to the light bullet again but a much different design.
No doubt it would perform different being solid copper if I read that right.
Could this be the faster lower recoil bullet I was looking for and this one works? Could it have penetration without over penetration thus working well as a defense round where no shoot targets are present.
Sounds like that is exactly how it was designed.
It would be good to hear some first hand experience with these bullets.

Super_Hunter54,

Lord knows, since I've gotten in to the bad guy chasing business, there have been many "perfect bullet" marketed to shooters. The ones that have stuck around are the ones with proven efficacy.

I've always have gone with the FBI load for .38 Special self-defense. I prefer the SWC design to the SWCHP design. But either will bring out the best that the .38 Special can offer. If I have a .357 Mag revolver near me and it's intended for bad guy self-defense, it's loaded with the FBI load.

If you were to read Street Survival, penetration will make complete sense to you. Superficial wounds have little benefit. Unless you hit a bad guy's CNS, he'll probably take a whole lot of lead before he stops ticking. Double that if he's under the influence of drugs including alcohol. Triple it if he's under the influence of PCP (dusted). Hence, you'll have to reduce his blood pressure to zero yesterday before he is able to kill you. That is why I like heavy for caliber bullets. If one hole is good, two have to be twice as good. And keep in mind that there's a real possibility that the bad guy will have at least one buddy lingering in the area. Therefore, the longer your attention is focused on one bad guy, the greater the danger you're in.

I'm good with guys who believe accuracy is the key to gunfights. That belief was around since the beginning of gun fighting. Some beliefs die a very slow death. The wise, the experienced, the professionals know that not getting shot is 2nd most important, superseded only by gunfight avoidance. Therefore, it's wise to keep in mind that a bad guy with is heart destroyed (assuming a good guy is so lucky) he'll still live long enough to be able to kill you. If you want to remain upright, you must never make yourself an easy target.

If you remember the two dominant rules of gun fighting, you'll live a long and happy life.

Rule 1: The only certain way of surviving a gunfight is to not get in one

Rule 2: If Rule 1 is unavoidable, don't get shot.

Cops have to engage. It's their job. Civilians do not have to engage if escape is an option. Always take the escape option if it's available.

Read Street Survival. It might help you save your life.


Stay safe, hombre

You've got it wired.

This post is nothing more than opinion and assumption, all of it wrong.

It's a lot more wise to go with facts: http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=741

I prefer 158 grain SWC bullets. But others prefer different designs.

While shooting is always good, keep in mind that target shooting is not tactical shooting. Tactical shooting is defined as shooting that's designed to keep you alive.

Some hopefully helpful advice: set up two silhouette targets. About 8 feet behind where you'll engage your targets, set up what would be a barrier. Engage both targets from about six feet using hip point while running to safety of the barrier. I'm going with some practice, you'll be able to score hits on both targets while making it to safety behind your barrier.

BTW, barrier is defined as an object that'll stop handgun rounds.

Hi super_hunt54,

I've already posted a link to the felony murder rule. Here is California Penal Code Section 197 verbatim:

Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in
any of the following cases:

1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a
felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
2. When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person,
against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or
surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends
and endeavors, in a violent, riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter
the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any
person therein; or,
3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a
wife or husband, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such
person, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to
commit a felony or to do some great bodily injury, and imminent
danger of such design being accomplished; but such person, or the
person in whose behalf the defense was made, if he was the assailant
or engaged in mutual combat, must really and in good faith have
endeavored to decline any further struggle before the homicide was
committed; or,
4. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and
means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in
lawfully suppressing any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving
the peace.

CA statutory law protects civilians equally as police officers when it comes to using deadly force.

super_hunt54, instead of using the logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem, refute facts I've posted. I'm good with Socratic debate when the objective is fleshing out knowledge.

This is the US Supreme Court controlling case defining police office use of deadly force: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed...71/1/case.html

Best of luck to you

Well the winner in my book,which only includes bullets available to me,is the Hornady xtp 158 gr HP loaded to +P.
Under the same conditions as the earlier shots this bullet opened up as designed penetrated completely and retained a little more weight that the others.
I am not able to compete any longer but I know what moving and shooting is about. In competition it is fact that you can not miss fast enough to win.That might be true in other situations.
Talking about trained operators going head to head is one thing. Talking about Street punk holding a hi point sideways is another.
A fellow can't believe everything he reads. I read that 110 gr HP was the new best load for snub nose revolvers. Not so.

As I said earlier RR, I've only tried that design out of my SOCOM. I got busted up a good while back so I didn't get to hog hunt with it but I let one of my buddies use the SOCOM with those bullets loaded up. He dropped several hogs with various points for testing. Head, neck, and shoulder shots. Head shots= obliterated head. Neck shots= 2+inches of spinal removal. Shoulder shots= lungs a gooy mess and not a lot of heart left and 2 busted shoulders. Needless to say, the design works VERY well at rifle speeds. All the testing I have seen with the .45ACP loads look to be just as devastating.

As far as the controlled fracturing bullet goes, I have been using a MLer bullet called Bloodline that is similar in action. The petals break off and go in 3 (4 with the Bloodline) directions cutting everything in their path while the body of the bullet punches through. My daughter dropped a pretty dang big bodied buck last season with a Bloodline right in it's tracks. Lungs were a gooy mess and the spine was missing about an inch and a half of column. High shoulder shots are definitely productive on a deer :D

And where in all that does it give a civilian ANY protection whatsoever against ACCIDENTAL INJURY OR DEATH of a bystander? That was what we were talking about. NOT the shooting of a perp. Run and gun, spray and pray, suppressive fire, whatever vernacular you wish to use is NOT an accepted method in public. Plain and simple. Civilians are left open to both monetary as well a criminal actions.

You are bringing a very old saying to my mind, "those who can't do or have never done, TEACH"! Mando, you keep telling me to read a copy of some book. Why would I need to? I've LIVED through more firefights than I care to even think about. And I have never in my life injured an innocent civilian in any conflicts. The method you are preaching is dangerous to ANYONE around the area. I wouldn't want some mothers death on my mind the rest of my life because I was runnin and gunnin without thought for innocent lives. Just look at the city of Chicago at all those innocent women and children that have been shot by your "trained" thugs. Guess what method they use?? Spray and pray!!! Get your head out of those books Mando because real life conflicts are VERY different when going through them!