[Pancho]

the targets were water filled milk jugs. The results proved to me that for home defense #4 shot will be more than adequate. 3/0 will always get the job done and that a deerslug is not needed.
This report is not ment to be scientific just practical. Even #6 shot held a tight pattern at 20yards and was devastating on water filled milk jugs.
The result is The Judge is my new home defense fire arm

[REAPER4206969]

Thank you! I will put this information into good use while preparing to defend myself from water filled milk jugs.

[kd7nqb]

How tight were your groups? Specifically how tight did the number 6 hold?

[rbernie]

the targets were water filled milk jugs. The results proved to me that for home defense #4 shot will be more than adequate. Excellent! If you're ever attacked by water filled milk jugs - you'll be ready!

[ArmedBear]

Or, if your home is ever invaded by a violent gang of pheasants.

[Sam Cade]

I wonder what the penetration of #4s would be. MAYBE 3-4 inches?

[ArmedBear]

I wonder what the penetration of #4s would be. MAYBE 3-4 inches?

Probably not. Our hunting loads leave the muzzle about 500 fps faster than the Judge develops from a shotshell. The .410 shotshells used in it are designed for 26-28" barrels...

http://www.minnesotasportsmanmag.com/hunting/pheasants-hunting/MN_1106_02A.jpg

[Gryffydd]

the targets were water filled milk jugs. The results proved to me that for home defense #4 shot will be more than adequate.
So the #4 shot penetrated through at least 3 of the jugs when stood in a row?

[Pyzon]

Thanks ArmedBear and Reaper, your insightful comments and helpful attitudes added so much to the thread and I'm so glad I took the time to read them.

This forum has ocaisionally begun to acquire some of the not so fine qualities that moved me away from others, where it seemed only your post count determined the worthiness of your opinion.

Pancho-

I hope you don't let other more enlightened members make you wish you had kept your opinions of something you found interesting to yourself. I have also shot The Magnum Judge and found it to be more than enjoyable and totally up to the task that Taurus had in mind.

Put 90 or so #4 lead shot into a 12" circle, similar to the human head maybe, and I doubt that substandard penetration is going to really matter a lot due to a lack of muzzle velocity from a 3" barrel. When you upgrade to 5-.36" (or 9.14mm) lead balls with 800 ft. lbs of total energy, I don't care how much you have not shot The Judge, performance for the intended purpose is not lacking.

Then again, maybe you guys have also never shot something in .45 Colt that you could tell us all about....... ?

[Gryffydd]

Put 90 or so #4 lead shot into a 12" circle, similar to the human head maybe, and I doubt that substandard penetration is going to really matter due to lack of muzzle velocity from a 3" barrel.
Hey, if you want to rely on pain to stop an attack, go right ahead. Just hope you don't run into anybody hopped up on drugs, or adrenaline for that matter. Penetration always matters when you want to actually STOP someone.

[ArmedBear]

The Judge has nothing to do with it.

I wouldn't use birdshot from a 28" 870 for home defense.

Birdshot certainly does not become more powerful when shot from the Judge.

This forum has ocaisionally begun to acquire some of the not so fine qualities that moved me away from others, where it seemed your post count determined the worthiness of your opinion.


Your opinion isn't wrong because you have 15 posts. It's wrong because it's wrong.

Do you know anyone shot at point blank range with birdshot?

I do.

[kanook]

you would do better if you soaked a couple of phone books and then shot at those for penetration. I must agree that the judge is low on the list for PD or HD for me. :D

[jad0110]

Put 90 or so #4 lead shot into a 12" circle, similar to the human head maybe, and I doubt that substandard penetration is going to really matter due to lack of muzzle velocity from a 3" barrel.

It may work. So will the mere sight of a gun, most of the time. As AB stated, if you find yourself up against a drugged up wacko who enjoys feeling pain, you could be in real trouble. And all it takes is the assailant shielding his face with his hand or arm, or turning his face away ... a small, fast moving, difficult to hit target in and of itself.

Something to consider.

I wonder what the penetration of #4s would be. MAYBE 3-4 inches?

I think that is what .410 buckshot penetrates to. Birdshot is even less, like 2" or so IIRC.

[BCRider]

Since THR is supposed to enjoy a reputation for being above the abuse found in other forums I think the issue here isn't about how he tested his Judge or how he interprets the results. Instead it's the flippant replies from some of you. By all means point out the error of his ways but the idea is to do so in a respectful manner. Or at least put a smiley face on the funny parts and then move on to show or explain your own view in a respectful manner.

[rbernie]

Lighten up, Francis. Nobody called anybody names, and frankly the point was made far more delicately than it might have otherwise been stated.

I saw no disrepect to any poster.

[Seven For Sure]

The judge always gets people worked up for some reason, don't take it personally. I've got a 2.5" chambered, 3" barrel myself and I find it's best for knocking cans around and close range tree rats.

[John Wayne]

There really isn't any point shooting slugs when you can shoot the .45 LC.

I think there are some new loads made specifically for .410 pistols that use a different wad and maybe faster burning powders...though given that .410 loads are primarily suited for shooting snakes and such, I don't know how much of an advantage they are. Might pattern better though.

[Gryffydd]

I don't think it's the Judge that gets everyone worked up. It's the idea (perpetuated by Taurus' marketing) that bird shot (from a .410 pistol no less) is an effective defense load. I wouldn't mind one loaded with shot for snakes or the occaisional starling that flies too close to me, but for genuine defense the best load for the Judge is in .45 Colt. And there are better choices for that cartridge. 00 or 000 buck is better than bird, but this "adds up to 800 lb ft theory just doesn't add up when it comes to real penetration. It's more like getting shot 5 times by a .32 than once by a .44 Mag. That may not be such a bad thing, and may even increase your chance of hitting something vital in your first shot. Or it may just underpenetrate--who knows?

[-v-]

When loading shot shells in the Judge, it is best to remember that you have a 2.5" or 3" barrel, and are loading shells designed for at the very minimum an 18" barrel. Velocity will be, naturally, lacking. Federal has rolled out some loads designed specifically for the Judge, last I recall it was a 4-pellet 000 load with pistol-type powders to get it up to ~1200 fps (I think) at the muzzle. That will make a plenty-effective short range hand-cannon for most situations.

Also, a .410 slug is 110gr ball, a .45LC is a 230-255gr lead bullet or S/J/HP bullet at 900-1000fps. Between those two, a .45LC bullet is much preferable to the .410 slug for obvious reasons.

That said, and I will reiterate, birdshot is not a very effective HD loading choice. There are plenty of instances where repeated near-point blank hits of birdshot were unable to stop an assailant.

While it may look impressive on a few milk jugs, the low mass, low momentum, the fluid-like nature of the shot column, and the questionable velocity from a 3" barrel ensure that birdshot is a marginal choice for defense from anything above 25lbs in weight.

The Judge is quite a neat firearm. It is (in my view) an excellent woods gun choice as with .45LC it generates close to .44mag energies to deal with large critters, and with shot loadings is plenty for any small venomous critters.

The judge is a good choice as far as a gun goes, but it does require some thought as far as what you stick in the chamber.

[inheritor]

what is the best caliber wepon for home defense,the one you happen to be holding.if i broke in and someone shot me with that providing i could get back up again i would run my F%@#*^G A** off to get out of there as fast as possible:what:

[rbernie]

I don't think it's the Judge that gets everyone worked up. It's the idea (perpetuated by Taurus' marketing) that bird shot (from a .410 pistol no less) is an effective defense load.Yes - that's the point. If you're being attacked by something worth shooting with birdshot - then shoot it with birdshot. But if you're being attacked by something more substantive, then birdshot is not likely a good choice.

There are also a number of tests that show that the shot pattern from the Judge barrel is very poor; the rifling causes a doughnut-shaped pattern that is very unpredictable.


The Judge is quite a neat firearm. It is (in my view) an excellent woods gun choice as with .45LC it generates close to .44mag energies to deal with large critters, and with shot loadings is plenty for any small venomous critters.
Exactly so.

[Dimis]

wow how original yet another judge bashing thread

you guys really got to get it through your heads that this isnt always a bash topic we dont need to hear about how much you hate 410 just like hearing about the S&W locks a few months back
also NOT EVERY ATTACKER IS RUNNING ON PCP
unless they are coked up or on PCP they are not going to be superhuman shoot a pothead there gonna feel it shoot a crack head theyre gonna feel it they may shrug it off initialy but they will feel it and it WILL slow them down cocain and PCP are the only drugs id worry about because those are the superman drugs that not only make you feel nothing they supply the body with endorphins and adrenalin that make muscles work more efficiantly

anyway point being the average robber or attacker is not usualy pumped up on something like PCP or Cocain believe me if they were youd probably know it and try your darnedest to get away from them before it escalated to violence

and anyone that feels that 410 isnt good for defense shoot whatever target you feel will react like a human body at 7 feet where MOST gunfights occur believe me youll be impressed even with bird loads

[Gryffydd]

i would run my F%@#*^G A** off to get out of there as fast as possible
It's good to know what you would do. However, counting on someone doing that when your life is on the line is risky.

wow how original yet another judge bashing thread
No one is bashing the Judge. I think pretty much everyone has said it's a very interesting and versatile handgun.
NOT EVERY ATTACKER IS RUNNING ON PCP
No, but at least where I live, fueling a meth habit is one of the number one reasons people turn to theft/assault. And that leaves out the unpredictable reactions of individuals even without drugs in their system. There was a story posted several times here of a man shot over 20 times in the torso by a .40 S&W and he kept fighting for several minutes. No drugs or alcohol were found in his system. That may not be a typical scenario, but counting on an assailant folding from mere pain is not smart planning. The only way to truly, reliably STOP someone is to destroy something they can't live long without.
and anyone that feels that 410 isnt good for defense shoot whatever target you feel will react like a human body at 7 feet where MOST gunfights occur believe me youll be impressed even with bird loads
I have. If I was underwhelmed by the penetration of bird shot from a 12 gauge with an 18" barrel, why would I be impressed bird shot from a 3" .410?

[REAPER4206969]

Do you think we are just pulling these numbers out of our asses to bust the balls of judge owners? The .410 loads will not reliably come any where close to penetrating the minimum 12” of calibrated ballistics gel, no less clothed gel or any barriers.

The reason we get so worked up over the judge is because of Taurus’s immoral marketing department that is advertising to new or ignorant shooters that the judge is the ultimate self/home/car defense weapon. That misleading advertising is going to get good people killed.

[Action_Can_Do]

I disagree reaper. I think the judge wouldn't be looked down upon nearly so much if it were a S&W. I've never seen any ad calling the judge the ultimate self-defense gun. Simply that it can be used as such. IMO the judge makes a far superior self-defense gun than any 380acp so long as the right loads are used. Of coarse, 380acp users don't take nearly so much heat as judge owners.

[REAPER4206969]

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
What a name! It's based on the fact that many judges are now carrying it into the courtroom with them-and for good reason. We know of no better self-defense firearm. Whether loading all 45s-all .410s or alternating them in the cylinder, the Judge is the ultimate shotgun/revolver duo. New for 2008, we're giving you the Judge in Ultra-Lite forged alloy. You'll be amazed how light this gun is and how easy it is to tote around. Also new is the Judge 3" Magnum. Larger and more powerful, this Judge gives you the extra firepower you need when you have to lay down the law.
http://www.taurususa.com/products/product-details.cfm?id=638&category=Revolver

[xstuntman]

Did you have problems with the shells sticking on ejection? I've heard this was a problem with the 2.5" models.
I think they're pretty good for home defense using #4, especially if you live in an apartment. X

[REAPER4206969]

I think they're pretty good for home defense using #4, especially if you live in an apartment.
What is your reasoning? Are you suggesting it is because of lack of interior wall penetration? If a projectile is incapable of penetrating a few layers of sheetrock it will not reliably penetrate to the vitals of an attacker.

[browningguy]

My original post was deleted as I should apparantly not take issue with some peoples comments.

In spite of all the several snide remarks from some of our fellow high roaders thanks to the original poster for posting their information. I don't own a judge, and use BHP's in .40 for my carry guns, and have several .223's, carbines in .45 and 9mm, and a Mossy 500 for HD. But I would think a load or two of #6 shot to the face might well stop an attack. No, it won't penetrate a skull, but would ost likely penetrate eyelids and could well blind them. A load or two to the groin might well work as a less lethal load, similar to what many police departments and military units now try first. I'd certainly want to have a couple of .45 LC loads to back those up for the worst case event though.

[REAPER4206969]

So you acknowledge that it is ineffective, yet you defend it?
Shoot them in the eyelids? Why not just carry mace?

[REAPER4206969]

Also, if you are shooting someone it already is the “worst case event.” Why half-ass it?

[John Wayne]

True, for woods use it is a very good, and versatile, self-defense firearm.

The ads that show cardboard silhouette targets with the heads half blown off and exploded watermelons are intentionally misleading, though. They know they will sell a lot more guns this way than if they marketed it as something to pop snakes and rats with.

[REAPER4206969]

Since you like shooting water jugs.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot41.htm

[Action_Can_Do]

Reaper
When you posted the Taurus ad copy, I almost fell out of my chair laughing. I guess you showed me! I will admit I don't think the Judge is the best self-defense handgun. I also don't think it's useless in that capacity. If the OP is happy with it, why should anyone criticize? It's plenty better than a 22 or 25 and lots of people use those (and kill with those ) in self-defense situations.

[REAPER4206969]

No one on this forum is criticizing anyone. We all come here to learn and we are trying to inform him and others about the dangers of relying on the judge for defense.

The reason people use .22 and .25s for defense is because that is all they can get or afford. That is not the case with the judge as it is currently hard to find and god-awful expensive for a Taurus. It is a firearm with no redeeming qualities; it is big, heavy, low capacity, awkward, ugly, ineffective, inaccurate, unreliable, of relatively poor quality and expensive. The only reason people purchase it is because of their misconstrued understanding of its external and terminal ballistics.

[xstuntman]

Hey, if he runs aways leaking important bodily fluids you still win. Who isn't going to leave at all possible speed to avoid soaking up more #4? Who are you guys planning on shooting, the Terminator? You're gonna shoot .357 and .40 in an apartment complex? You do know your responsible both civil and crimminal for where that bullet goes after it leaves the barrel? Lord Help ya, your gonna need it.

Its starting to sound like the Gunbroker forums in here lately. :scrutiny: X

[Gryffydd]

Who isn't going to leave at all possible speed to avoid soaking up more #4?
Maybe the same people who shrug off tasers and pepper spray? Sure, this is a possible outcome...but it's far from a sure one.
Who are you guys planning on shooting, the Terminator?
I think you've seen too many movies. In real life people don't always just fall over and die or run when you shoot them with a pistol...even a .45 for that matter.

[Dimis]

ok im glad you guys informed me of how useless 410 is for defence from now on im just gonna use .50BMG and 10 gauge 000 buck shot....

oh wait people have also survived being shot with those as well

i guess untill someone figures out a way to pocket carry a howitzer were all doomed

[Gryffydd]

ok im glad you guys informed me of how useless 410 is for defence from now on im just gonna use .50BMG and 10 gauge 000 buck shot....

I don't think that there's anybody in this thread who would disagree that a decent .38 Special loading would be inadequate for defense...but go ahead and jump to the 50BMG. It would be boring to have a reasonable conversation anyway.
oh wait people have also survived being shot with those as well
It's not about what people have or have not survived being shot with. It's about what can be expected to perform at a level at which it can be expected to have the capability of stopping a threat by destroying vitals. Bird shot does not exhibit the ability to reliably penetrate well enough. From any platform.

[ArmedBear]

ok im glad you guys informed me of how useless 410 is for defence from now on im just gonna use .50BMG and 10 gauge 000 buck shot....

.410 has nothing to do with it.

Shot size does.

People don't "get" shotguns. They shoot a bunch of projectiles.

Small projectiles don't work well for self-defense.

The same people wouldn't consider using .22 Short, but then they think that shooting a shotshell loaded with a bunch of pellets that are far weaker will be effective, because the shotshell is bigger.

The only issue with the Judge, specifically, is that you ALSO don't get good velocity from a shotshell. Shotshells are made for shotguns with longer barrels. So not only do you get something smaller and lighter than a .22 Short, you get something going SLOWER, too.

[Pyzon]

The reason we get so worked up over the judge is because of Taurus’s immoral marketing department that is advertising to new or ignorant shooters that the judge is the ultimate self/home/car defense weapon. That misleading advertising is going to get good people killed.

Well, imagine that, a marketing department that has no control over how their product is put to use.....

Does your workup also apply to the marketers of all .22, .25acp, .32,.380 9mm and on and on and on, whose owners in the ultimate pinch fight back with the best they have ? Talk about getting good people killed, the bad news is they are already getting killed daily, and they are on the side of the good guys.

Of course lead bird shot is far from the best choice. 000 buck is far better, .45 Colt getting closer......The point is, you dance with the one who brung you....good, bad or someplace in between.

And I also wonder how many justified shootings that result in a fatality are caused annually by rounds that would fail the 3 milk jug/12" gelatin test but the shooter was doing the best they could with the tools available ? Of better yet, how many successful acts of criminal violence might have been prevented
if the victim would have at least possessed, or shown, or maybe fired a firearm with such an unacceptable performance ? Is the potential wounding of a criminal worse than being a victim ? Beats the heck out of pointing your finger and yelling "BANG".

[Gryffydd]

Well, imagine that, a marketing department that has no control over how their product is put to use.....
That might mean something if their marketing department didn't actively suggest using birdshot for defense.

whose owners in the ultimate pinch fight back with the best they have ?
Nobody's saying you shouldn't use the best you have. Nobody is arguing that a .22 in the hand isn't better than the .45 at home.

Of course lead bird shot is far from the best choice. 000 buck is far better, .45 Colt getting closer......The point is, you dance with the one who brung you....good, bad or someplace in between.
And if you've bought a Judge you're just as capable of using effective defense rounds instead of ineffective ones. Why not just load something that works?
And I also wonder how many justified shootings that result in a fatality are caused annually by rounds that would fail the 3 milk jug/12" gelatin test
How many times must this be said? .22s kill people all the time. The fact that they CAN work is a long way away from making them the best choice. We're not standing on a street corner with a zombie hoard shuffling towards us while we look over the weapons we have on us. We're sitting on a forum, discussing ahead of time what will be best. If you're out shooting squirrels with birdshot in your Judge and somebody jumps out of the bushes waving a knife, by all means, shoot them with the birdshot. Just don't plan on it being your primary defense round ahead of time.

[mgkdrgn]

But I would think a load or two of #6 shot to the face might well stop an attack. No, it won't penetrate a skull, but would ost likely penetrate eyelids and could well blind them.

A load of #6 or larger shot in the face out of a Judge at SD distances (ie, 10' or less) would be an attack stopper. My 2.5" chamber Judge will put #6 shot fully through a 1" pine board at that distance. #4 would be even better.

Will it penetrate your skull and kill you instantly? No.

Will it blind you? More than likely.

Will it knock off a good chunk of your nose and a large quantity of skin from your face. Yup.

Can a BG continue the attack blind, with no nose, and his face hanging in tatters? Maybe, but he isn't going to be very effective. All I have to do is step to one side ... I've got 4 more in 000 buckshot ready to finish the job if necessary.

[mgkdrgn]

Do you know anyone shot at point blank range with birdshot?

I do.

Do you visit their grave often?

Anyone that took a full load of anything "point blank" out of a shotgun would be just flat out dead (assuming we are not talking about some grazing hit)

For the first several feet, the shot carries as a single mass until freed from the wad cup. A solid hit is going to leave big holes, produce massive internal injuries and/or sever limbs.

[Pyzon]

And that is the point that a lot of Judge haters seem to not understand, it's the combination of choices you have with the Judge that makes it fun and then some.

Let me also mention I have experimented with hand-loading 3" shells with lead BB and also #2 shot and the penetration factor is greatly improved, considering a count of 32 or so pellets of BB (.18"/4.57mm) or 62 or so #2 shot ((.148"/3.76mm) again at a realistic SD range or 5 yards or so with a 9-12" pattern, that seems in the case of my 3" Judge to be pretty well distributed.

[ArmedBear]

Do you visit their grave often?

I wouldn't if the guy was dead. He's an ***hole.

But, since he was shot with birdshot instead of something more effective, he's not a dead ***hole -- which is what someone who defends himself with birdshot sometimes becomes.

Don't be a dead ***hole. That's the meaning of life, right there, pretty much.

The point is, you dance with the one who brung you....good, bad or someplace in between.

Yeah, but unless your Mommy bought you the Judge and the birdshot in it, you dance with the one YOU BRUNG. YOU make the choice.

Make a good one.

Or, just whine about the people here who don't want you to die at the hands of a violent attacker because you overestimated the efficacy of birdshot for self-defense. THAT will surely save you.:rolleyes:

[Gryffydd]

load of #6 or larger shot in the face out of a Judge at SD distances
What happens if you can't get them in the face? What happens if they put their arm up at the last moment and take most of the shot there? A .45 Colt slug would blow through their arm and into their head. Birdshot won't. Counting on a clear shot to a small, quick moving, instinctively protected area in a firefight is not the way to go. The spread of shot at SD distances isn't large enough to make it any easier to hit the head than it is with a slug.

And that is the point that a lot of Judge haters seem to not understand, it's the combination of choices you have with the Judge that makes it fun and then some.
I think every "Judge Hater" in this thread has acknowledged that it's a versatile gun. The only thing we've spoken against is the choice of one type of round for one particular use.


Will it blind you? More than likely.

Will it knock off a good chunk of your nose and a large quantity of skin from your face. Yup.

Will the person whose face you just maimed and blinded try to sue your pants off in court, showing off his mangled face the whole time while talking about how he's disabled for the rest of his life? Yup. Will he win? Hopefully not. But he sure has a better chance than if you'd just dropped him where he stood. And just by trying he might cost you a lot in lawyer fees and time. This is always a risk(unless state law protects you), but maiming and blinding people definitely doesn't help.

[ArmedBear]

Will the person whose face you just maimed and blinded try to sue your pants off in court, showing off his mangled face the whole time while talking about how he's disabled for the rest of his life? Yup. Will he win? Hopefully not.

And when you "win" the case, will you lose your house paying for your attorney?

Of course, when the case goes to court, he was just some drunk guy asking for directions. You were the bloodthirsty bastard who blinded him and disfigured him for life.

What, you don't think a criminal and his attorney might actually LIE?

[REAPER4206969]

Another Taurus advertisement.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl-ZIo-Wztc

[REAPER4206969]

For the first several feet, the shot carries as a single mass until freed from the wad cup. A solid hit is going to leave big holes, produce massive internal injuries and/or sever limbs.
That is not how a shotgun works. Each individual pellet is independent of each other. All you are going to get is a tight shallow wound.

[jad0110]

Do you know anyone shot at point blank range with birdshot?

I do.

I don't know of anyone personally, but this guy survived a partial blast of 12 gauge #6 birdshot from a distance of about 2 meters, fired from a Winchester 1897 pump shotgun:

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=315025&highlight=birdshot

To summarize: Birdshot is for birds, though I'm not saying I'd like to take a blast of it :p .

I don't have much against The Judge myself. If I had a lot more $$$ and a much bigger safe, I might consider one "for the heck of it".

Although another THR member pointed out a potential problem area. The S&W N Frame revolvers chambered for 38 Special (ie 38/44 HD) and 357 Magnum (ie M27) have massive, heavy cylinders. If fired too rapidly too often, the guns have a tendency to batter their lockwork overcoming all the rotational inertia of the beefy N Frame cylinder. Methinks The Judge may well suffer from the same problem with it's gigantic cylinder, so I'd avoid frequent rapid fire until confirmed otherwise.

[-v-]

Look, other than 1 poster, no one here has been bashing The Judge as a firearm. What we have been bashing is the notion that birdshot is an effective choice as an HD round.

Yes, birdshot has stopped/killed people. But, just about everything out there has stopped/killed people in some way, including a wiffle ball bat and blanks.

The question is, what is the likelihood that said choice of weapon will stop someone. Just because it has in a 1 in a 1 million chance stopped someone, does not make it a good choice. I'm sure people have died of being hit with wiffle ball bats, but I doubt you'd say "forget this nice flanged steel mace, I'll take this wiffle ball bat instead!" when using one to defend yourself. Equally, I doubt you would pick wax .38spl loadings as your primary HD loading for a revolver either.

There is certainly an element of use what you got. If you're out on the trail, and have the judge loaded up with #8 shot for snake control, and a crazed pot grower charges us, by all means, shoot him with bird-shot.

BUT! If you are planning ahead of time your defensive loadings for a firearm, its best to load them with stuff that is designed for the 160lb average weight animal, like deer or human.

Point being, birdshot, but its nature is designed for...BIRDS! It is not a reliable "man-stopping" round. Yes it has stopped people now and then, but something like 00 buck, .45 JHPs and the like have stopped people too in many many more instances then birdshot.

On loading shotgun loadings in the Judge as a HD choice, so far this is the only one I'd feel comfortable with: Federal .410 pistol #4 buck (http://www.federalpremium.com/products/details/shotshell.aspx?id=847) or Federal 4 pellet 000 buck (http://www.federalpremium.com/products/details/buckshot.aspx?id=848)as I know it WILL generate the necessary velocities to do damage from a short barrel.

[REAPER4206969]

Will those loads meet the F.B.I. 12” minimum standard for penetration in calibrated ballistics gelatin?

[Ed Ames]

The only reason people purchase it is because of their misconstrued understanding of its external and terminal ballistics.

What a silly and unsupportable thing to say.

Let's consider the Judge rationally for a moment. Imagine you are an authority figure working in an environment where:
A) Weapons are uncommon. Metal detectors are used to screen most weapons.
B) You routinely make yourself the target of angry people with a propensity to physical violence...some of those people with very little to lose or even in a suicidal state.
C) There is usually an audience facing you, and an attacker will come from in front of you, so if you must shoot you know you will be shooting towards a mass of people.

Do you know of any better self defense weapon for that circumstance?

Want a Glock .40? Three problems:
1) It may not work because the attacker, in pushing against it/you, pushes the slide out of battery and prevents it from firing.
2) If it does work it stands an excellent chance of killing or maiming innocent people in the crowd you KNOW will be behind the attacker.
3) If you vary the load too much you will make it unreliable.

Contrast that with the judge, which:

1) Can fire when pressed against the attacker, unlike most semi-auto pistols.
2) Is unlikely to do undue harm to someone standing beyond attack range...say 15 feet.
3) Can load anything from an excellent contact-range defensive loads (yes, birdshot... far more devistating than a blank and many people have been killed by blanks at contact range) to one of the best self defense loads ever devised.

Now... you can argue that you aren't in that situation and therefore don't personally need a Judge... but you can't argue that the Judge isn't a very workable self defense weapon.

[REAPER4206969]

You are not seriously suggesting that you buy into Taurus marketing about judges carrying the judge more than any other weapons are you? Do you really think the millions of military and civilians both police and private citizen are having problems with their adversary pushing their auto pistol out of battery?

If they were there are many of cheaper, lighter, smaller, higher quality and more effective revolvers to be had. Also, I submit that the Taurus’s extremely poor accuracy is a far bigger liability then over penetration of a good quality .40 S&W JHP.

[Ed Ames]

Doesn't matter what I buy into.

I know you don't like the Judge. I'm asking you to rationally counter the arguments for the Judge in its intended milieu. Not illogical bandwagoning, not irrelevant comments about accuracy... hard rational arguments against the Judge for its intended role.

If the Judge is really that bad it should be easy to explain its deficiencies in a rational way.

[-v-]

Will those loads meet the F.B.I. 12” minimum standard for penetration in calibrated ballistics gelatin?

Both #4 and 000 buck at 1200fps both meet or exceed the FBI minimum of 12" in gel. As long as it gets up to speed, doesn't matter if its from a 2" or 20" barrel. End result is the same either way.

That said, letting loose 4 pellets of 000 buck from a handgun is outright frightening, if you ask me. At 9.1mm diameter, a hit from a single chamber of .410 000 buck is not something most people will calmly stagger out from.

[maskedman504]

Guess what I am gonna use to defend myself?

Hint: it is not matte black

I stopped shooting .410 in my judges; unless I am after a snake, it seems gimmicky from my experiences. I now load them with some wicked pre-expanded hollow points.

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc99/maskedman504/IMG_0640.jpg

I know this argument is for shotshells, but the Judge also fires these guys. :eek:

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/hipowersandhandguns/Ammunition/Corbon45ColtDPXvsJHPexpwp1.jpg

I've been known to load two cylinders with birdshot and three with JHPs. Start with shot and work your way down.

[REAPER4206969]

Smart man. I like your 2nd sig!^

[REAPER4206969]

Both #4 and 000 buck at 1200fps both meet or exceed the FBI minimum of 12" in gel.
Those things must be loaded hotter than the hinges of hell!

[suemarkp]

On loading shotgun loadings in the Judge as a HD choice, so far this is the only one I'd feel comfortable with: Federal .410 pistol #4 buck or Federal 4 pellet 000 buckas I know it WILL generate the necessary velocities to do damage from a short barrel.

I think the #4 loads are bird shot and not buck shot. Can't be sure, as I've seen it listed both ways, but Federal says shot and not buckshot in the description.

Has anyone seen this ammo anywhere? I'd like to try it, but can't find it online and the local stores don't seem to have it.

[maskedman504]

I like the Judge. I own two. If you think the .410 shells, excluding buckshot, are sufficient for self defense you are fooling yourself! I would feel fine with a Judge and either .45 Colt JHPs or 000/00 buckshot; loading it with birdshot is only hamstringing yourself by limiting the capabilities of your weapon. Just my opinion.

[Ed Ames]

Has anyone seen this ammo anywhere?

I saw some in a store the other day. Odd part was that it was behind the counter even though the particular store had gobs of ammo (handgun, rifle, and shot shells) in the showroom.

To scale things, they are talking about roughly 218 grains at 1200fps. That's almost 700fpe at the muzzle. Think of it as the ultimate short range frangible load. The key being "short range". That's the load you use if you are anticipating an unarmed man trying to strangle you, and you defending yourself at contact distances.

Personally, I prefer a straight .45, but then again I don't anticipate a need to fire towards a crowd.

[JWF III]

I wouldn't use birdshot from a 28" 870 for home defense.


There are instructors for (very accredited) SD/HD courses saying that birdshot is the best thing to use in HD, when over penetration is a concern. Seems slugs and buckshot will hold onto the energy long eough to penetrate through several (I believe it was four in the test that I saw) interior walls.

Here's a good test for anyone that thinks it would be easy to stand up to a load of birdshot CM. Take your standard 12 ga., 3" pump shotgun. Load one shell of 3", #4 Turkey load in the chamber. Put the buttstock dead center on your chest, pull the trigger, and notice the recoil. Now remember that you have 7-8 pounds of shotgun (probably with a recoil pad) soaking up recoil, and slowing it down. Just the force behind a load of shot would be huge to deal with. And the pattern at 15' would be roughly the size of that buttpad. (15' chosen because that would probably be close to an average shot inside most normal houses.)

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating the Judge for SD/HD. I have a Judge, and I love shooting it, and trying to break skeet at an informal shoot. (If you want a real challenge, try shooting a skeet with the Judge, when the skeet is coming out of an Atlas Trap at 50+ mph.) Having one, and having pattered it, and shot it extensively; the only thing I would use it to defend against is a snake at about 10 feet of range. And I believe in letting even poisonous snakes be in the wild, if at all possible. I only shoot them if I truly have no way out, or they (poisonous snake only) are near my house or is where my family is likely to be.

Wyman

ETA-No one on this forum is criticizing anyone.

REAPER, you must've been reading a different thread than the rest of us, I saw a lot of (sarcastic) criticizing. It was even coming from moderators.

[Dreaded]

Bird shot whether #2,4,5 or 6 is just what the name implies bird shot. Ill take a 45 colt in all chambers. Hollow point please.

I couldn't imagine telling everyone that the attacker I just shot tried to attack me with i knife so I ground swatted him with a pheasant load.

[REAPER4206969]

Here's a good test for anyone that thinks it would be easy to stand up to a load of birdshot CM. Take your standard 12 ga., 3" pump shotgun. Load one shell of 3", #4 Turkey load in the chamber. Put the buttstock dead center on your chest, pull the trigger, and notice the recoil. Now remember that you have 7-8 pounds of shotgun (probably with a recoil pad) soaking up recoil, and slowing it down. Just the force behind a load of shot would be huge to deal with. And the pattern at 15' would be roughly the size of that buttpad. (15' chosen because that would probably be close to an average shot inside most normal houses.)
Seriously? First we had “shoot him in the eyelids” then we had “birdshot will act like a slug up close” and now we have “the shear AWSOME force of birdshot will stop him!” It amazes me the odd stuff the pro judge people come up with.

[REAPER4206969]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8GBl1XlRtc

[JWF III]

shear AWSOME force

Never said that. But there is a good amount of force that has to go somewhere. And I'm not talking about the pumped up PCP fiens of the 80s-90s. Hell with exception of these forums, I've heard nothing about the drug for 12+ years. Drugs are just like fashion, in the fact that most people do what is fashionable at the time. Yes there may be some out there that still do it, but they're few and far between.

We're talking about the standard home robbery here. No, chances are great that birdshot will not kill an intruder. Are you going to shoot at an intruder with buckshot, slug, pistol, or rifle, when you have your child asleep 5 feet behind them. With the child only proteceted by 1" of sheetrock. I'd take my chances with the birdshot rather than take a chance at going to my son or daughter's funeral, of which I caused. If it takes 2 shots to stop the intruder, I'll put 3 in him.

Oh, and as of right now, I have no kids. The shotgun in my corner is loaded with buckshot. Each persons situation is different, and changes through life. With the changes of situations, there also needs to be a change in tactics/equipment. But if you think you can live with killing your own child, by all means, shoot what ever you want.

Now once you step outside the front door, all bets are off on what I'll be toting. The aggressor will never know. Only the police, detectives and the coroner.

Oh and on the youboob video, I don't know what body armor has to do with any of this. I quit watching after 25 secs. I wasn't going to waste another 6 minutes of my life. Same as trying to debate someone that has no vision of other people, being in different situations, needing different tools/safety equipment for the job at hand.

Wyman

ETA- Here's a video that actually pertains to home defense...

www.downrange.tv/bestdefense/wall-penetration.htm

[KBintheSLC]

I always thought that using .410 bird shot in a Judge was for close range small game hunting. I always assumed that it would be best to use .45 LC in the 255g range for defensive use.

I don't even use bird shot for defense in my 18" 12ga long gun. Bird shot does wonders on wet stuff at the range... makes it blow apart nicely at close range. But that does not translate into real world defensive performance. If that were the case, the cops and the military would all be using bird shot... instead they use 00/000 Buck or Slugs.

If you don't believe me, ask Dick Cheney. The guy he shot with bird loads took 3 days to die... and he was 78 years old !!!

[ArmedBear]

Birdshot doesn't "act like a slug" if you put the muzzle to your torso and pull the trigger.

Like I said, I know someone who did.

WRT using it for HD if overpenetration is a concern, that may have some validity. So does pepper spray and a Taser.

We're talking about the standard home robbery here. No, chances are great that birdshot will not kill an intruder. Are you going to shoot at an intruder with buckshot, slug, pistol, or rifle, when you have your child asleep 5 feet behind them. With the child only proteceted by 1" of sheetrock. I'd take my chances with the birdshot rather than take a chance at going to my son or daughter's funeral, of which I caused. If it takes 2 shots to stop the intruder, I'll put 3 in him.

If those are your concerns, don't use a gun as your first line of defense. Get pepper spray, a Taser, etc.

If it doesn't penetrate drywall, it doesn't penetrate a jacket, either.

What doesn't make sense to me is this line of thinking:

A firearm is not a good choice for a first line of self-defense in my situation and environment. Therefore, I'll load my firearm, on purpose, with ineffective ammunition that still causes serious injury and can kill a child.

Sounds like the worst of both worlds, doesn't it?

[Ed Ames]

Weapon choices always come down to context.

A military weapon is (shopuld be) chosen for use in a specific type of theater, against a particular type of foe. As the foe changes (including adapting to the abilities of your weapons) your weapon choices should change too. It's a continuous process.

The mistake a lot of people here are making is to compare unlike kinds... the fractured logic being A is not suitable for B, therefore it is not suitable for C. A 10mm wrench is not suitable for turning a phillips screw, therefore a 10mm wrench is not suitable for turning a 10mm bolt. Bad logic, bad results.

Testing a 410 birdshot shell at 15 feet is like testing a car across the english channel. That's not what it was designed to do and that's obvious.

I'm not saying the use is common or that they are a good choice for most people...I don't have one myself...but there is a big difference between "not optimized for me" and "useless."

[ArmedBear]

Testing a 410 birdshot shell at 15 feet is like testing a car across the english channel. That's not what it was designed to do and that's obvious.


Right.

A .410 birdshot shell is designed to be fired from a 20-30" barrel, and to kill birds and other small game at 10-30 yards without much meat damage.

That's what it's designed to do.

Suggesting that it's a good self-defense load in an effective 6" barrel, against humans, is like suggesting that one might drive a car across the English Channel, too.

[Ed Ames]

Again, context is required.

Let's try this: one very effective self defense round is made up of a 30-30 cartridge case with a .38 special case in its mouth. When the primer on the .38 special is struck it fires the 30-30 cartridge, along with a bunch of still-burning gunpowder, into the target. Deadly in its context. Harmless across a room.

Same deal with the 410 judge. It is designed as a short range weapon. It will do that job exceptionally well. It will also work as a medium range weapon with .45c ammo loaded. It will get the job done if that's the job you are doing.

Unlike the car, which will not get across the channel without help.

[ArmedBear]

Same deal with the 410 judge. It is designed as a short range weapon. It will do that job exceptionally well.

Not with birdshot.

Shotshells are described by what they are loaded with. Their outside diameter is only somewhat meaningful.

[Ed Ames]

Again, 218 grain projectile delivering nearly 700fpe and fragmenting perfectly into a bunch of neat 3.3mm fragments... sounds like you are dreaming.

[ArmedBear]

Again, 218 grain projectile delivering nearly 700fpe and fragmenting perfectly into a bunch of neat 3.3mm fragments... sounds like you are dreaming.


No, I just know a few things about birdshot.

That's NOT how it works. If it did, we'd all be singing its praises.

Go ahead and believe it. People do.

Doesn't make it true.

[Ed Ames]

I'm not into belief. I'm into the provable...physics, science, math.

The physics says that delivering 700fpe into a body and following it up with a 12000psi puff of hot air will do a lot of damage.

You say it won't because birdshot has some magical ability to avoid physics. I think you are wrong.

[Gryffydd]

Again, 218 grain projectile delivering nearly 700fpe and fragmenting perfectly into a bunch of neat 3.3mm fragments... sounds like you are dreaming.
At no point is a 218gr projectile involved. It is always and only a collection of individual pellets each carrying only about 9fpe of energy (for #4, about 4fpe for #6).
You say it won't because birdshot has some magical ability to avoid physics.
You're the one inventing special physics if you expect a 4gr projectile carrying 9fpe to penetrate sufficiently for a human sized target.

[Ed Ames]

Sorry, a mass of shot behaves differently than a bunch of individual pellets. It is three dimensional with many pellets following the path broken by the first pellets in. While it isn't 100% equivalent to a single 218gr projectile it is far closer to that than the individual pellets.

There is a reason I compared it to a frangible load...the behavior is similar.

[Gryffydd]

It is three dimensional with many pellets following the path broken by the first pellets in.
And then they smack into the lead of the pellets in front of them rather than bare flesh. It's not like the first pellets evaporate once they're done penetrating. The pellets behind hit the pellets in front and are deflected in other directions. yes, a solid mass of pellets will penetrate slightly better than if they're spread out. The difference between that and a frangible load is that a frangible load is solid until impact. Birdshot is never solid.
Once I see some covered gelatin tests where birdshot from any range reaches 12" of penetration with the majority of pellets I'll agree with you.

[Ed Ames]

And by smacking, they push those pellets along. That's why a mass of pellets doesn't behave like a single pellet times N.

As for testing with ballistic gel, I don't know many who would willingly do that test. It would take a vice and trigger actuator to make me comfortable doing it...and actually owning a 410 revolver.

I don't think 12" of penetration would be so important as total damage done.

Oh, and re: people surviving point blank 410, people have also survived being shot through the head with rifles. The plural of anecdote is not data.

[Gryffydd]

I don't think 12" of penetration would be so important as total damage done.
Yes, but what is being damaged? You have to have penetration in order to damage something vital. Otherwise tis' but a flesh wound.

As for testing with ballistic gel, I don't know many who would willingly do that test. It would take a vice and trigger actuator to make me comfortable doing it
Huh? I don't get it. What do you think is going to happen? You might get jello on you?
Oh, and re: people surviving point blank 410, people have also survived being shot through the head with rifles.
But when a load consistently fails to reach satisfactory penetration in a standardized testing medium, that is data, but it seems you're not interested in that.
And by smacking, they push those pellets along. That's why a mass of pellets doesn't behave like a single pellet times N.
And yet, even with this supposed effect, birdshot struggles to beat 5" penetration in bare gelatin from 10 feet--from a 12 gauge with at least an 18" barrel. How do you think a .410 with 3" of barrel is going to compare to that? If you need to be closer than that to get this phenomenon which I have yet to witness in my own testing, it's too close for comfort.

[Ed Ames]

We are talking about a weapon that was clearly designed for contact ranges and to be ineffective by 30 feet. Your desire to test at ten feet would be like insisting on testing a .357 starting at 100 yards. Yeah, it'll still do damage at that distance but nothing like what it'll do when used as designed.

As for my concern in doing gel tests... I'm uncomfortable pressing the muzzle of any gun against anything and pulling the trigger. I would do it in a fight. I wouldn't do it to satisfy curiosity without extra protection.

[rbernie]

As for my concern in doing gel tests... I'm uncomfortable pressing the muzzle of any gun against anything and pulling the trigger. I would do it in a fight. I wouldn't do it to satisfy curiosity without extra protection.So your entire argument boils down to a singular belief that you are also unwilling to test?

Do you believe that, at 5', the mass of pellets is still viable as a singular entity or is that beyond the wounding range you desire?

[Ed Ames]

C'mon, that wasn't even close to what I said. :rolleyes:

I'm unable to test it (I don't have a judge) ... if I did it would be with the precautions I listed.

But, since you are the one saying a 410 used as a contact weapon is harmless in the face of physics and reason, YOU should be proving your point.

At 5'... don't know but I'd use .45c.

[rbernie]

The results proved to me that for home defense #4 shot will be more than adequate.Here's a fairly good discussion of birdshot-for-SD use, complete with a ballistic gel test of 12ga #4 shot.

http://www.shadonet.com/2008/01/choosing-between-birdshot-buckshot-or-slugs-for-shotgun-home-defense/

Hint - #4 birdshot, even in the 'mass o' lead' of a 12ga shot wad, penetrated less than 7" from five feet away.

C'mon, that wasn't even close to what I said.C'mon, it is. You're advocating a theory that you cannot prove and that you cannot test.

Dispensing advice with regard to self-protection strategies, tacticxs, and gear should be treated with a little more rigor than that. :rolleyes:

[Gryffydd]

Your desire to test at ten feet would be like insisting on testing a .357 starting at 100 yards.
Wait, so you are talking about a gun that can't be expected to work across the width of a very small room? Why even bother with a gun? Just get a knife! If it literally has to be less than 1 foot away from the target there is NO point in it even being a firearm! The whole point of a firearm is to be a ranged weapon. Not force you to wait till somebody is in choking distance before you can use it. 100 yards is beyond typical self defense range, and beyond typical pistol range. 10 feet is squarely within what you'd expect to need to use a gun to defend yourself.
At 5'... don't know but I'd use .45c.
:banghead: So you agree that birdshot is worthless beyond arms reach? And you've been arguing that it's an effective load all this time? :what:
But, since you are the one saying a 410 used as a contact weapon is harmless in the face of physics and reason
We didn't say that at all, because we didn't realize anyone was discussing a firearm as a contact weapon of all things!
Yeah, it'll still do damage at that distance but nothing like what it'll do when used as designed.

Guns are not designed to be contact weapons!

[Ed Ames]

Rbernie, That quote wasn't anything I said. Read the thread...I have consistently described the judge as a contact weapon intended for very short ranges in environments with known risk of serious consequences to overpenetration. It is.

That's not what you need? Don't buy one. It isn't what I need so I haven't. It is foolish and potentially very harmful to falsely say that the weapon is useless simply because you have no use for it. You made a comment about rigor that is exactly apt...you need to remember that your circumstances are not the only circumstances before you dismiss a specialized tool.

Gryffydd, Guns are designed for many roles including as contact weapons. Expand your horizons.

[rbernie]

It is foolish and potentially very harmful to falsely say that the weapon is useless simply because you have no use for it.I didn't say that. I said that using #4 birdshot for self defense was foolish. You have yet to prove that statement false, despite having posted many times in favor of #4 birdshot.

I have shown empirical data (ballistic gel tests) with regard to the poor efficiency of #4 birdshot for self-defense use. Where is your data that supports it effective use?

[Ed Ames]

Sorry, I'm on a smartphone here so maybe I've missed your relevant data. Where is the contact range gel testing of 410?

Anyway, my defense wasn't of 410 or #4 shot. It was of contact distance weapons. That's why I mentioned the 30-30/30sp load.

Google "powerhead" or "bangstick" for the closest direct equivalent I can think of.

[Gryffydd]

I have consistently described the judge as a contact weapon intended for very short ranges in environments with known risk of serious consequences to overpenetration.
10 feet is a "very short range." And yet at half that you back track and say you'd go with the .45 Colt.
Guns are designed for many roles including as contact weapons.
But they're not designed to be effective only when used as contact weapons. A load/gun combination that's useless at anything over 5' is a ridiculous idea. You'd be better served by a knife at that point. In fact you even go so far as to imply it wouldn't be effective at even 6"
Anyway, my defense wasn't of 410 or #4 shot.
It wasn't? Because that's what we've been discussing. Seems to me this thread is about birdshot, from a Judge as a defense round. And suddenly your argument was for something completely off topic? Since you keep redefining what it is we're discussing I'm out of this one.

[mgkdrgn]

Will the person whose face you just maimed and blinded try to sue your pants off in court, showing off his mangled face the whole time while talking about how he's disabled for the rest of his life? Yup. Will he win? Hopefully not. But he sure has a better chance than if you'd just dropped him where he stood. And just by trying he might cost you a lot in lawyer fees and time. This is always a risk(unless state law protects you), but maiming and blinding people definitely doesn't help.

IF I'm going to get sued if hes blinded/maimed, I'm also going to get sued (by somebody) if hes dead. If I can -avoid- taking a life, I will ... but I won't trade mine, or someone in my families life for that of an BG. He only gets ONE round of #4 to abandon the attack ... the rest will be 000 buck or 45 Colt.

And yes, state law here in SC does protect me from a civil suit in a self defense shooting.

[earlthegoat2]

Go ahead and believe it. People do.
Doesn't make it true.

This is the greatest challenge of the gunshop employee.

[Ed Ames]

10 feet may or may not be short range. Depends on what the weapon was designed for. For the judge it is long range.

Go back a few dozen posts and reread the Judge use case I posted. I think it was my first in this thread. From their marketing material and the weapon's design I think that is pretty much what it is for... defense against an unarmed attacker who is trying to throttle you, in a room full of innocents, with your attacker between you and the innocents. I haven't changed my opinion.

It is foolish, again, to think that everyone or anyone could use a knife more effectively than the Judge. This isn't a game. Again I'm going to point you to Rbernie's comment about rigor. People's lives could be on the line and you are giving them a knife when a gun exists. What if we are talking about a 70 year old victim? Still think they should use a knife?


Re: only contact weapon...IIRC the judge has five chambers. That means you can load for a variety of situations...but if you know what sort of attack you are most vulnerable to there is no harm in optimizing for that.


This argument started because someone dismissed the judge altogether, claiming it had no use at all. It clearly does, including the use for which it is marketed...including effectively using birdshot for self defense. No, birdshot isn't universally appropriate. Nothing is.

[Gryffydd]

Ed's other favorite weapon:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/img-1751.jpg
At least this one can reach vitals at contact distance.

[Ed Ames]

I can tell Gryffydd was on the debate club at his highschool. :rolleyes:

I like the CZ75. Again, I don't own one, but I like it. I suspect a lot of people around here like them.

So let's look at this gun....

Notice that they have a guard up in front of the slide so that this can be used as a stabbing weapon without disabling the firearm? Without that this thing would be useless...but it adds weight a revolver doesn't need. Score one for the Judge. Also, stabbing with a pistol grip knife is probably quite hard on the wrist, not something everyone can take. Third, it adds considerably to the length, which makes it harder to bring to bear. Fourth problem is that the bullet is likely to pass through with sufficient velocity to kill or maim a bystander when used in the scenario a Judge is marketed for. As such, this would be a seriously inferior choice to a Judge for the Judge's intended purpose.

[Gryffydd]

you are giving them a knife when a gun exists.
And you are giving them a gun that won't do its job, while a knife can easily reach vitals.
As such, this would be a seriously inferior choice to a Judge for the Judge's intended purpose.
What is the Judge's intended purpose again? Please don't say Judges, my stomach muscles are sore and I don't want to start laughing again. I'm pretty sure I've never seen anything in any marketing for the Judge that discussed shoving the muzzle against the target and pulling the trigger.
defense against an unarmed attacker who is trying to throttle you, in a room full of innocents, with your attacker between you and the innocents. I haven't changed my opinion.
I'm sure I could come up with a defense against attackers wearing pink shirts, mickey mouse ears, in oval shaped rooms during a full moon, but I'm not sure why it would be worth discussing here.

[REAPER4206969]

Say what you want about Taurus firearms, but they have the best marketing team.
:what:

[Ed Ames]

LOL... no, they'd have the best marketing team if I actually owned one.

Gryffydd is seriously misled if he thinks that a knife is automatically more likely to be lethal than 1/4th ounce of lead fired at 1200fps followed up by a 12000PSI puff of burning gasses.

You are seriously mislead if you think that there are no cases where that's a useful weapon.

I have no problem with the idea that you personally have no use for it. I don't either. But the fact that I have no use for something doesn't blind me to the use others could have, or the effectiveness the weapon could have when used correctly.

That is your argument. You wouldn't use it correctly therefore it's no good. That argument isn't strong...it's an admission of your own failure to recognize and properly apply a tool. If it's an admission you are proud to make...good for you.

[stonecoldy]

Popped a large feral feline (I would guess close to 20 lbs. live weight) once upon a time with a 20 gauge, 3" load of 1 and 1/4 oz shot, full choke, while squirrel hunting. It was facing me, crouched on the ground. Square in the chest, right under the chin. About 15 feet away.
Cat ran about 40 feet before expiring.
I have shot enough small game to know you match your pellet size for penetration in the size of game you hunt. No. 4 shot, when I use it, is for big squirrels, late season cottontails and pheasant.
Why would you hamstring yourself with a lesser load when you can use the .45 Colt loads?
I could find plenty of fun popping house sparrows and starlings with the shotshell loads in the Judge buzzing past with #8 shot, though.

[Ed Ames]

Only reason I can see for using shot shells (of any sort including buckshot) in a Judge for SD is the one I've been yammering about... contact distance use in a situation that includes very high risk of collateral damage using conventional projectiles.

Re: cat running 40 feet... ever hear about chickens running around with their heads cut off? Some things don't know when they are dead.

[Gryffydd]

But the fact that I have no use for something doesn't blind me to the use others could have, or the effectiveness the weapon could have when used correctly.
Like I just said, you can imagine a scenario where just about anything is a good idea. That doesn't make it worth discussing here. The discussion was about birdshot from the Judge for self defense. Period. For 99.99% of the population that means it needs to work out to at LEAST 20 feet. Maybe your point blank thing will work, as I said before. But how about you TEST it before you yammer on about it?
or the effectiveness the weapon could have when used correctly.
Oh, you mean like when you put buckshot or .45 colt rounds in it? :neener:
followed up by a 12000PSI puff of burning gasses.
12,000 PSI is chamber pressure. It won't be anything remotely approaching 12,000 by the time it's exiting the barrel. A given powder charge in a .45 Colt produces roughly 30% less pressure than it does in a .44 Mag case. Think about how much it will have dissipated by the time it leaves the barrel. No doubt it'll be enough to cause a burn though...

[PT1911]

so I find it to be amazing that in the case of the judge it is all about penetration but if you talk about say FMJ 9mm, 40 cal, .45 or many other rounds it is all about limiting the penetration for fear of a through and through shot... well... seems somewhat conflicting to me... you want this gun to fire rounds that penetrate 12 inches (farther than most people are thick in the chest) and this gun to stop fire rounds that stop much earlier? hmmmmmmmmm... sound like someone fishing for some bashing... I want the damn gun to go bang and the round to go down range accurately and dependably... beyond that, I think the rest is my job.

[Brian Williams]

Taurus made a huge mistake dropping the Tracker in 45 ACP and 45 Colt and bringing out the Judge which is basically the same frame just lengthened.
I would prefer to load all of the charge holes of a revolver with the same loads so I know what is going to come out of the barrel for each and every trigger pull, the notion of two 410 shells followed by three 45colts is IMHO ridiculous.
combine that with the length of the 410 shells it must be a bear to reload.

[REAPER4206969]

... you want this gun to fire rounds that penetrate 12 inches (farther than most people are thick in the chest) and this gun to stop fire rounds that stop much earlier?
The F.B.I. 12” minimum is required because you do not always get a straight front or back shot. Many times you are only presented with a profile shot threw the upper arm, which is approximately 12” to vital organs. You must also consider obese people as well as heavy clothing and other barriers.

[Ed Ames]

The discussion was about birdshot from the Judge for self defense. Period.

Sorry charlie... you may think that but "REAPER" never went along with you. His words, "It is a firearm with no redeeming qualities; it is big, heavy, low capacity, awkward, ugly, ineffective, inaccurate, unreliable, of relatively poor quality and expensive. The only reason people purchase it is because of their misconstrued understanding of its external and terminal ballistics."

I think he's wrong, and was responding to that comment, and now I think you are wrong for going along with him. Both of you made the rather baffling mistake of assuming that, just because it doesn't fit in your box of "how a firearm is supposed to be used", it is ill conceived and unusable. That's your limit, your failure to grasp how a tool is to be used, not a fault of the tool or concept.

I have no horse in this race... I tend towards .45ACP for SD and .223 for HD. But I can see how a tool is useful even if I have no use for it. The Judge is a useful tool.

Had you said "that application is unusual and most people have no use for what the Judge is best at" I would've gone along with you 100%. That has been available to you all along. Instead you've been arguing silliness. Play-pretending that a knife is more dangerous. That's a joke and you know it. Or should.

The Taurus Judge has a very specific design envelope, it is well adapted to that envelope, it is marketed referencing that envelope... nobody is lying about its abilities... but that envelope is outside of yours. It isn't something you need. Does your need define all possible need?

Oh, you mean like when you put buckshot or .45 colt rounds in it?

Yes actually. For some applications it is far more effective when loaded with .45c. For those uses, "correctly" means .45 colt. Not for all uses though.

12,000 PSI is chamber pressure. It won't be anything remotely approaching 12,000 by the time it's exiting the barrel.

Considering that we're only talking about 5-6" and it's common for combustion to continue through the entire acceleration of the projectile, 12K PSI muzzle pressure is not out of line at all. Arguably it could be higher. Since it's pressed against an attacker's body I don't really consider the pressure going down after it leaves the muzzle...that pressure drop is caused by expanding tissue which means wounding.

[Gryffydd]

Had you said "that application is unusual and most people have no use for what the Judge is best at"
So let me get this straight...you're saying that the one thing the Judge is best at is being used as a contact weapon?
Considering that we're only talking about 5-6"
Think about that for just half a second. Think about the size difference between .44mag and .45 colt. Think how small that size difference is compared to the volume inide a 5-6" barrel. Think about how that tiny size difference amounts to roughly 30% less pressure.

I think he's wrong, and was responding to that comment, and now I think you are wrong for going along with him.
I never went along with him. I mentioned quite clearly that the Judge has some interesting uses...as a short range shotgun for bird/squirrel sized animals using birdshot, and a defense gun using buckshot or .45c slugs. But somehow all that is me not saying the Judge is a useful tool? I think he's wrong too, but he's right in enough of his points that I probably will never buy one. Not when I can load my own shotshells for my .45 Colt. which work just as well for snakes and whatnot.

The discussion was about birdshot from the Judge for self defense. Period.
That's what it was about until you came along with your goofy ideas.
The Taurus Judge has a very specific design envelope, it is well adapted to that envelope, it is marketed referencing that envelope... nobody is lying about its abilities... but that envelope is outside of yours. It isn't something you need. Does your need define all possible need?
And none of how it is marketed or designed has anything to do with being used specifically as a contact weapon.

[REAPER4206969]

but he's right in enough of his points that I probably will never buy one. Not when I can load my own shotshells for my .45 Colt. which work just as well for snakes and whatnot.

I stand by my statements about the judge. If you want a .45Colt revolver Smith & Wesson, Ruger, Colt, Freedom Arms, Uberti and even Taurus all offer .45Colt revolvers that are smaller, lighter, higher capacity, more reliable and FAR more accurate. If you need snake defense use the CCI/Speer shot loads.

[Gryffydd]

Really, the only place I disagree with you is:
The only reason people purchase it is because of their misconstrued understanding of its external and terminal ballistics."
There are a few people out there who buy it for either the novelty/fun factor or for dedicated use as a short range pest eliminator. Unfortunately, a huge number of people buy it because they buy into Taurus' marketing.

Then there's that one guy that thinks it's one of these:
http://www.ideagrove.com/blog/uploaded_images/bardem-720795.jpg

[REAPER4206969]

How many people are on waiting lists and spending $600+ just for a pest gun of dubious utility when there are so many better, more inexpensive options to be had? Also, anyone buying one for a novelty is saying to themselves “This is such an intimidating hand cannon! You can knock a man clean out of his boots with this thing!” You know they are.

[Ed Ames]

you're saying that the one thing the Judge is best at is being used as a contact weapon?

Sigh... do you recognize the ambiguity of your statement? I wish I could know for certain.

The Judge is the best commercially available handgun for use as a contact weapon with minimal (not zero, but far lower than a 38sp) lethality at 30-50 feet.

The Judge is more effective at distance as a .45c revolver, but it is far from the best .45c revolver available.

Think about the size difference between .44mag and .45 colt. Think how small that size difference is compared to the volume inide a 5-6" barrel. Think about how that tiny size difference amounts to roughly 30% less pressure

:eek: You do realize that the pressure difference between a .44mag and .45colt has nothing to do with the case volume difference, right? You can load a .45colt case to well above SAAMI .44mag pressure. Heck, you can load .460S&W (much higher case volume than anything else in this discussion) to 60,000lbs. The pressure limit is dictated by the case construction and firearm strength.

The presence of that oversized (compared to a brass case) shot shell makes determining the volume of the chamber/barrel difficult to calculate. However, you can bet that the pressures (and energy) are high enough to do damage to a living animal.

And none of how it is marketed or designed has anything to do with being used specifically as a contact weapon.

I haven't looked at much of their marketing material, but what I have read seems to push the idea that it is used by judges, prosecutors, etc. due to a fear of overpenetration. Let's look at that... those people have no special risk of overpenetration compared to anyone else in their day to day lives, certainly no more than a LEO, so what are they talking about?

The only scenario that works, the one they are clearly referencing, is that of an enraged defendant, upon being convicted, charging the bench or prosecutor. That means dealing with an unarmed, contact range, violent, probably more youthful opponent between you and a large number of bystanders.

A common case? No. But it seems consistent with Taurus's marketing, the design of the Judge, and everything we know about the effectiveness of shotshell loads from a handgun.

Why would you disregard all the facts and attack a weapon for something it clearly wasn't designed to do? Why not attack the maker's of .22LR ammo for selling something clearly useless against elephants? It would be just as reasonable.

[Gryffydd]

You do realize that the pressure difference between a .44mag and .45colt has nothing to do with the case volume difference, right?....The pressure limit is dictated by the case construction and firearm strength.
:banghead: I didn't say anything about pressure limits. Go back and read it again. I said if you put the same powder under the same bullet weight in both .44 Magnum and .45 Colt, you get 30% less pressure in the .45 Colt. The only difference between those two cartridges is the internal volume of the case/chamber.
Why would you disregard all the facts and attack a weapon for something it clearly wasn't designed to do?
I didn't attack a weapon, I attacked the use of underperforming ammo. If it's designed to be a defense gun then it is designed to work at least over 25 feet. Anything less is irresponsible.
I haven't looked at much of their marketing material, but what I have read seems to push the idea that it is used by judges, prosecutors, etc. due to a fear of overpenetration.
You clearly haven't looked at much. 99% of their marketing promotes it as an anti carjacking/all around self defense gun, always demonstrating it on those Shoot'N See targets, almost always with birdshot. And it's NEVER at contact range. The only thing that relates to Judges is the name, which they changed to years after they started making the gun when they found out a few Judges in miami were carrying the thing. That's it. It was originally marketed as "a sporting revolver and "snake defense" gun."
The Judge is the best commercially available handgun for use as a contact weapon with minimal (not zero, but far lower than a 38sp) lethality at 30-50 feet.
That may be so, but it has minimal lethality at contact distance too. I'll believe different just as soon as somebody comes out with the first ever penetration test that shows birdshot can penetrate 12" in covered gelatin. Maybe you should get on that.
The only scenario that works, the one they are clearly referencing, is that of an enraged defendant, upon being convicted, charging the bench or prosecutor.
That certainly happens often enough to design a gun around :rolleyes: But let's talk about this scenario. Let's say this guy charges you... Under your idea of the Judge as a contact weapon, you have to draw the thing, and wait for him to get in arms reach, then you have to press the muzzle against his body and pull the trigger, and hope he lets you do this?
The only scenario that works, the one they are clearly referencing, is that of an enraged defendant, upon being convicted, charging the bench or prosecutor.
Right... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrSGiJG25E4

[Ed Ames]

Sorry, you didn't say same powder and weight bullet in different cases. Even if you had, you would be wrong. The difference in piston area, not case volume, has a greater impact on peak pressure in that scenario. You say the only difference is case volume. I'd say the 20% greater piston area would be more relevant. However, I'd also say your premise is flawed...people don't load the same charge of the same powder. The .45c is loaded as it is in deference to BP guns.


As for the scenario... you are attacked, then you respond. There are plenty of studies showing that an attacker within 21 feet can reach you before you react, and your most likely attackers are often well within 21 feet. That's the nature of the problem you face and cannot be changed. You cannot shoot would-be attackers at 25' because at that distance they would be intermingled with the innocents and unable to do you harm (disarmed as they are).

When attacked you draw the weapon, place it against the attacker' back, torso, head, or anything else, and fire. Because of the controlled penetration you can choose a broader range of applications including some that could be suicidal with a conventional bullet.

Your opinion of what is irresponsible is clearly flawed.

[Gryffydd]

The difference in piston area, not case volume, has a greater impact on peak pressure in that scenario.
You mention something very interesting. Peak pressure. So you do know there's this thing called a pressure curve then. I didn't think you would, based on your previous comments. 12,000psi is peak pressure for a .410. And yet somehow you expect the gasses as they leave the barrel to still be at 12,000 psi :scrutiny:
I don't care whether you think it's piston area or case volume. Either way, the difference in peak pressure between identical loadings in a .45 Colt and a .44 Mag with their tiny difference of either case volume OR piston area should make you think about whether a .410 could somehow still be generating peak pressure as the gases exit the barrel.
Sorry, you didn't say same powder and weight bullet in different cases.
I said the same powder charge in either. I guess I figured you'd understand that the bullet weights would need to be the same.
The .45c is loaded as it is in deference to BP guns.

It is? :rolleyes: Have you seen the commercial rounds from Buffalo Bore, Corbon, Grizzly, and a host of others? Have you seen what handloaders do with the .45 Colt?
However, I'd also say your premise is flawed...people don't load the same charge of the same powder.
Yes, yes they do. In fact, the .45 Colt can often take MORE of the same powder for the same bullet weight than the .44 Mag can. Do you want me to copy and past from the load manuals, or do you want to take 5 minutes and go look yourself?

[hankdatank1362]

Then there's that one guy that thinks it's one of these:

Hahahahahaaha!

[Gryffydd]

I was hoping somebody would get that :D

[Ed Ames]

LOL.

Yes, pressure curve. Now tell me... what happens to pressure if you stop the bullet while the powder is still burning? Or obstruct the bore? Or even use too heavy a bullet for the speed of powder? You should know this.

You seem to think the pressure will go down. You are wrong. The powder burns with one curve, the volume behind the projectile increases with another, and if you stop that volume increase before the powder combustion stops you will get peak pressures that can far exceed typical chamber pressures.

The reason rbernie couldn't find any relevant data about #4 shot is that standard shotgun barrels tend to burst if used the way A judge would be used. Why do you think those barrels burst?

And yes, 12KPSI SAAMI loads are in deference to black powder guns. Do some research. I have done mine, and I've loaded a lot of .45c, a reasonable amount of .44mag. I've fired hot .45c, .454, and even a few rounds of .460S&W.

And since when is MORE equal to SAME? :rolleyes:

Now, just something to consider: you have consistently tried to mock me, you have attributed positions to me that simply aren't mine, have attempted to be condescending, and in general have done a very poor job of addressing the issues under discussion. If your position was strong you wouldn't have any reason to do those things. If you are going to continue, why don't you try discussing the issue instead of tossing out a constant stream of logical fallacies?

[KBintheSLC]

Amazing thread... I didn't know we had so many physicists here.

Anyway, if you bird shot lovers want to keep using it for home defense, more power to you. If you get invaded by an 18 oz pigeon, the 6" of penetration ought to do just fine. As for me, I'll keep using a loading that is designed for animals my own size.

[Gryffydd]

And since when is MORE equal to SAME?
It's not. I was making two separate unrelated statements. One was about pressure differences with the same load, the other was in your response that .45 Colt is loaded to 12kpsi. Follow along buddy.
And yes, 12KPSI SAAMI loads are in deference to black powder guns.
Yes, they are. But that's not what we were talking about. We were comparing identical loads for both calibers. Blackpowder psi levels are irrelevant. Would you care to elaborate on how people don't load the same amount of powder in a .45 Colt as they do in .44 Mag? I'd be very interested to see you explain that.
The reason rbernie couldn't find any relevant data about #4 shot is that standard shotgun barrels tend to burst if used the way A judge would be used.
You mean the way you imagine it might possibly one day maybe be used.

[Ed Ames]

No, I mean the way anyone who has thought about the strengths and weaknesses of that weapon system and chooses to carry it loaded with #4 shot should use it.

Re: powder and charges between .44mag and .45colt, the only reason you would is laziness. Or maybe a few 10ths don't matter to you?

[Gryffydd]

Still waiting for an explanation on how people don't load .45 colt and .44 mag with the same powder charges....
I'm also still waiting for an explanation on why you support an action in a case of self-defense that you've never tested and have stated that you wouldn't feel comfortable testing without a remote firing system...

[Ed Ames]

I'm not here to support anything. I pointed out how a weapon/ammo combo should be used. You are the one trying to argue that a contact-fired 410ga is harmless or less effective than a knife. I'm not sure why you think that's a strong position but maybe if you post more funny pictures nobody will notice.

How I would be comfortable testing something is irrelevant. I'm not a tester or user of this firearm. If you would care to chip in a bit I'll buy one and give it a full test.

If I did buy one of these I would give it exactly the test I've described and wouldn't use it until it passed that test to my satisfaction.

[Gryffydd]

I pointed out how a weapon/ammo combo should be used.
I'm not here to support anything.
:scrutiny:

[Ed Ames]

Yup. I mean, maybe if anyone posted a credible refutation of my premise I'd have to support it. So far people have settled for mocking me instead.

Do you: A) honestly believe that a judged, used as I described, would be harmless when applied? B) honestly believe that #4 shot in a judge would be effective in any other way than what I described?

Assuming you have a reasonable grip on reality you answered no, no. Doesn't take much support.

Re: pm's ... my cell phone doesn't handle the pop-ups and pms all that well... -l'll look at it when I get to a computer.

[Gryffydd]

A: Harmless? No. I never said harmless. Effective in damaging vitals? Maybe, maybe not. There's no evidence it would be. Put it up to somebody's neck and I'm sure it'd do the job. But that's not something you can count on pulling off.
B: Yes. Shooting birds, squirrels, snakes, and all the other things birdshot was designed for.

[Ed Ames]

I shouldn't have to remind you but we are discussing self defense. Unless you've got supersquirrels that can bite your head clean off?

[Gryffydd]

Other uses are relevant when you insist the gun must have been designed as a contact weapon because there's no other use for #4 birdshot, when there clearly are.

[rbernie]

We are clearly arguing past each other.

The OP stated that he was satisfied that his Judge, loaded with #4 birdshot, was 'tested' by him to be satisfactory for HD use. A number of us disagreed, using prior test data of #4 birdshot in ballistic gel and knowledge of living birdshot victims as proof positive that birdshot was an inadequate load for common self defense.

Some folks maintain that birdshot from a Taurus Judge is viable for HD, within some small spectum of utility.

Since nobody is adding new data to that debate and it's devolved to a 'who gets the last word' thread - I'm shutting this one down.