Magsafe Ammo--Opinions?

[Vanzpp]

Hi, everyone.

I just bought my first pack of Magsafe Defender rounds for my Glock 29 (10MM).
I've been meaning to try Magsafe for a while. I've heard various things about it. Some people love it (decent power, moderate recoil), others hate it (it's too light to be effective unless the person you shoot happens to be naked).

Any opinions? Thanks!

[Soybomb]

I'd say start reading here http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm and then you can make your own educated decision on it.

Something I'd like to point out though, a pack is what 10 rounds? Are you really sure you're comfortable with relying on the gun to protect your life with ammo that hasn't even been fired in it before? How do you know it will feed fine in your gun? Most people consider running a couple hundred hollow points of their chosing part of their reliability testing.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I used to carry Glasers and Magsafes myself. I ended up in a discussion on The Firing Line where I was trying to justify the decision. I decided I would dig up cases of actual Glaser shootings to back up my point; unfortunately all I found was cases of Glasers, Magsafes and similar rounds underpenetrating and underperforming.

There used to be a website - I think it belonged to Odd Job - showing xrays of various gunshots from a South African trauma room. He had a nice xray that demonstrated the problem with Glaser/Magsafe rounds perfectly. The round struck an arm from the side - all the shot dumped into the arm and a few tiny fragments stuck in the surface of the skin on the torso. The wound looked bad and nasty; but completely ineffective.

[Vanzpp]

Something I'd like to point out though, a pack is what 10 rounds? Are you really sure you're comfortable with relying on the gun to protect your life with ammo that hasn't even been fired in it before? How do you know it will feed fine in your gun? Most people consider running a couple hundred hollow points of their chosing part of their reliability testing.

Thanks for the input.

Glocks are notoriously reliable. I've fired all kinds of HP ammo through it without a hiccup. Not, Magsafes, though.

P.S. LOVE the Dawkins quote!!

[Vanzpp]

I found this article about magsafes from Handguns '98 by Chuck Karwan (start halfway down)

http://atlantisarms.com/History/MagSafe/magsafe_ammo.htm

[biggiesmalls]

i use magsafes in a .357 snub nose. they came in an 8-pack and i tried 2 out on an old tree and let's just say i felt bad for the tree...

[Vanzpp]

i use magsafes in a .357 snub nose. they came in an 8-pack and i tried 2 out on an old tree and let's just say i felt bad for the tree...

:-)

Approx. how deep was the penetration on the tree?

[Soybomb]

Glocks are notoriously reliable. I've fired all kinds of HP ammo through it without a hiccup.
So are revolvers and I still had a bad one fresh from the s&w factory.

I found this article about magsafes from Handguns '98 by Chuck Karwan (start halfway down)
*snip*
The biggest weakness of the Glaser round is that it often does not penetrate far enough to be effective.
First I'd like to point out that most of the article seems to be talking about a different type of round than what you have or can buy. Your magsafe rounds aren't going to penetrate soft armor. They've cited one of the main problems with glaser rounds, you'll need to see if its any different with the magsafe rounds. It isn't.

Here's a thread on another forum with some pretty sharp people talking about their experiences http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000021;p=1#000014
This would also be good to read http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000581

Now if you want a really good load I think you should go to http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/index.php?cPath=21_25 and check out the 165gr gold dot or even the 180gr gold dot.

[Vanzpp]

Now if you want a really good load I think you should go to http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/cat...hp?cPath=21_25 and check out the 165gr gold dot or even the 180gr gold dot.

I've got several boxes of this load. I carry DT frequently.

[mekender]

I found this article about magsafes from Handguns '98 by Chuck Karwan (start halfway down)

http://atlantisarms.com/History/MagS...gsafe_ammo.htm

i stopped reading after the guy brought up the LA bank robbery shootout and implied that the two shooters were using soft armor when infact they were wearing hardened armor with reinforcing plates... even the .223 rounds being fired by cops a the guys were bouncing off...

[351 WINCHESTER]

Don't know about the new magsafe ammo. When the founder, Joe Zamboni was running things his ammo was first rate. As for glasers, I tried some in my 4" 64 s & w and they failed badly. Actual velocity was no where near what they advertised. Check out the .38 glaser on www.brassfetcher.com.

Save your money.

[Vanzpp]

For all you ballistics officionados, here's an article panning Magsafe:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/volume4/number3/article432.htm

I don't know if I buy the premise of this article. Even if you assume that the Federal Hydrashok penetrated an additional four inches past the ribcage, that is not enough penetration to hit the vital organs mentioned in the article (i.e. spine, aorta or vena cava.) There may be enough penetration for the heart, but a shot to the heart will not immediately stop an attack by someone--esp. if they are hopped up on drugs and/or adrenaline.

The only way to stop an attack IMMEDIATELY is to take out the CNS with a hit to the brain or spine. With this in mind, I don't think either the Hydroshoks or Magsafe succeed, especially if it's a hit from the front or side. (It had better be from the front if you're going to argue self-defense in court!) With a handgun, the #1 factor involved in stopping an attack is the psychological factor. ("OH MY GOD, I'VE BEEN SHOT!!") This being the case, I suspect either traditional HP or Magsafes will do the job--assuming the attacker is "feeling pain", so to speak. If the attacker is feeling no pain, you'd better use the handgun to buy time to work your way to the 12 ga.

[ExSoldier]

Okay, I'm new here but I'll weigh in with an important caveat: When I ccw here in MIAMI, Florida, I always load my primary with magsafe or glaser silver and there may be times when I might load up with RBCD. The reason I specify my location is that due to the regular heat and humidity I am unlikely to be facing heavy jackets and multiple layers. I like the prefrangible aspect of these types of loads: If I were to get into a situation requiring a deadly force presentation and actually have to fire it's likely that I'll fire more than once. I like the idea of no richochets or even the remote possibility of a thru-n-thru (TNT) gunshot wound to a bystander. In addition because the rounds are lighter (albeit with more "mass") they won't travel as far and if they do miss, the first solid object they strike will force them to simply "powder."

If I ever move to a colder climate, I'll switch in my 9mm to Winchester 124gr +P+ for my Sig and probably Speer Gold Dot 185 gr for my 45s. OR whatever the LEOs use.

The last round, RBCD is an obscure little firm out of San Antonio but most of my friends in SpecOps love 'em to pieces and I understand that Blackwater orders by the pallet load. There is a story out of Iraq of an insurgent being shot in the butt with an RBCD 5.56mm and dying instantly, his intestines splattered over the street. Now I do hear that RBCD uses a "special" load for the military and military contractors.

I always shoot enough rounds thru any gun to be sure of cycling and proper operations. But not 200! It's less of an issue with the Glaser since the ogive they present is that of standard hardball. Same for RBCD. Even the MagSafe presents a "filled in" tip so it's unlikely to hang up on a modern feed ramp. The old speer 200gr FLYING ASHTRAY was responsible for many claims of FTF's in early 1911s. I carry H&K or Sig. It's really a nonissue for me.

[Vanzpp]

Thanks, EX. Good info.

Magsafe likes to say in their ads that they are used by elite units like SEALS and Hong Kong cops. Do you know if this is true, or is it a bunch of hooey?

[RyanM]

I don't know if I buy the premise of this article. Even if you assume that the Federal Hydrashok penetrated an additional four inches past the ribcage, that is not enough penetration to hit the vital organs mentioned in the article (i.e. spine, aorta or vena cava.) There may be enough penetration for the heart, but a shot to the heart will not immediately stop an attack by someone--esp. if they are hopped up on drugs and/or adrenaline.

The only way to stop an attack IMMEDIATELY is to take out the CNS with a hit to the brain or spine. With this in mind, I don't think either the Hydroshoks or Magsafe succeed, especially if it's a hit from the front or side. (It had better be from the front if you're going to argue self-defense in court!) With a handgun, the #1 factor involved in stopping an attack is the psychological factor. ("OH MY GOD, I'VE BEEN SHOT!!") This being the case, I suspect either traditional HP or Magsafes will do the job--assuming the attacker is "feeling pain", so to speak. If the attacker is feeling no pain, you'd better use the handgun to buy time to work your way to the 12 ga.

That's pretty much exactly right. I'm fairly sure they only used the Hydra-Shok as an example of a fairly typical JHP, or maybe that's all they had on hand. And it definitely underperformed, badly. I've been running numbers through my terminal ballistics calculation program, and I'm pretty sure that the FBI's 12" minimum penetration is indeed a minimum. 15" to 16" in bare gel is about optimal, if you're worried about having to shoot through an arm.

Other than that, personally, I'd say that frangible ammo only makes sense in a .25 or .32 mousegun, if the gun is reliable with it, and if you train yourself for certain shot placement with it. A very small caliber isn't going to be incredibly effective, on a chest shot, and your chances of hitting an artery with such a small bullet are rather low. Whether you use FMJ, JHP, or frangible, you'd really have to count on luck with one of those tiny calibers.

Head shot, won't matter a whole lot what you use. If you hit the skull itself, that should end the fight. If you hit the facial bones instead, neither FMJ nor frangible is likely to reach the brain, so it'd be ineffective no matter what ammo you have. But a shot to the throat, I'd say a Glaser Silver would probably do much better than an FMJ. The throat is really about the only part of the body where frangibles have any advantage over a JHP, and that advantage is only significant in .25 and .32 ACP, if you ask me.

So in that case only, a sub-.380 mousegun that's reliable with frangibles, and if you train for shooting at the head and neck exclusively, I'd say frangible ammo may be a valid choice.

[Yo Mama]

More proven loads out there. In a ten mm, I'd not want to go with such a light bullet.

They are for mall ninjas.

[moooose102]

well, my only experience with it is out of my 380's. i know your 10mm is in a league of its own, and at the exact opposite of my little 380. i water jug test my s.d. ammo. it did not open up at all in my tests. so it is just a high priced fmj with a hole in it. i also have a 45. but i will just stick with hornady xtp's. they work.

[mljdeckard]

Replacing 10mm with frangible ammo is like buying a corvette, and taking it back to the dealer and telling him, "You know, I think this car has a little too much power. Can you turn half the cylinders off?"

I would never trust my life to frangible ammo. As a sub-issue, I would never buy 200 of them to test in my carry gun to see whether or not they will cycle reliably.

If you are going to STAGGER a load in an auto, you are basically trying to trick it, see if it will mess up. You better be DOUBLY sure you have a gun that will actually handle it.

[mljdeckard]

Did it ever occur to you that the guys who were hit with 10mm jhp didnt MAKE IT to the OR?