Ranger SXT .40 Sub-Sonic?


PDA






Killermonkey21
May 27, 2010, 04:05 AM
Hey Everyone,

I recently applied for and received my CPL in WA and was looking in a gun store for some quality .40 SW carry ammo and was dumbstruck when I saw Winchester Ranger SXT for $23 for 50! I grabbed a box and some other gun stuff and checked out...only to find it said in smallish letters "Sub-sonic"...ooooook. I don't have a suppressor...damn.

I looked around and couldn't find any stats for this ammo. How underpowered is it? It's 180 grain and I didn't get a chance to shoot it, but it makes me wonder. Out of a 4" barreled G22, what would the stats be? Thanks.

-John

If you enjoyed reading about "Ranger SXT .40 Sub-Sonic?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
HappyHunting
May 27, 2010, 04:21 AM
Sub-sonic generally means that the projectile's velocity will be under the speed of sound. I found this speed of sound out in my yard with a 1000 ft/s air rifle and a +25% velocity gold coated pellet. Basically, at about 1117 ft/s you break the sound barrier and you get a distinctive <CRACK> that would not happen if you were at 1116 ft/s. Here is an article that goes into light detail as to what that means, and the purpose of it. http://www.thegunzone.com/buzzwords.html
According to that article, a subsonic cartridge will never be an "ideal" manstopper, and would only be sought after by people with suppressors as you initially thought.
Happy Hunting

Killermonkey21
May 27, 2010, 04:29 AM
I appreciate the help, but I'm already tracking the difference between sub-sonic and super-sonic, my main curiosity is how different the kinetic energy is going to be, as in ft pounds and velocity. Thank you though.

rkammer
May 27, 2010, 09:58 AM
The ballistics for the Ranger SXT Sub Sonic = 180 grain, 1010 FPS, 408 FPE

Many consider these numbers more than sufficient for great expansion and very adequate penetration.

DasFriek
May 27, 2010, 10:57 AM
I just went threw an exact thread with the same question.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=524699

My ammo in question had an even slower speed of 950fps in a 4" barrel. I switched too 165gr since i had a 3" barrel in my weapon.
But if yours has a 4" barrel or longer its no issue, And even with a 3" id say you should be fine as Ranger is well known for great expansion.
My ammo was Hornady TAP which is more leaning towards penetration than expansion.

I think you got great ammo at a good price and id use it myself even in my 3" barreled XD.

WardenWolf
May 27, 2010, 10:59 AM
I strongly recommend against carrying SXT's. The SXT is a newer version of the Black Talon ammunition that got so much bad press that it was withdrawn from civilian sales (in fact, there's a semi-serious joke at the company that SXT stands for Same eXact Thing) and was very nearly banned. Because of the negative political climate involving that ammunition, you run the very real risk of a prosecutor claiming your use of that ammunition was malicious and showed intent to kill rather than merely stop the threat. The fact that it's officially marketed for law enforcement only also gives the prosecutor leverage to say, "It was so deadly that it was never intended for civilians, but this person went out of their way to acquire and use it." Don't laugh at that possibility. Cases have been won based on such a claim before. Carrying that ammunition is just a bad idea.

DasFriek
May 27, 2010, 11:18 AM
Does that mean people should not use PDX1 since the FBI use that round?
Then you better never carry FMJ as the Military uses that deadly round.
Same with Federal HST as many police use that round also.

Does that mean civilians shouldn't use the Beretta m9 as the Military carries that weapon.
Or god forbid the deadly Glock with no manual safety thats designed for the police.
What about a tricked out 1911 with so many mods internally it could be said to be redesigned just for killing?

This is how i see it.
If i need to protect my life ill pick up a rocket propelled grenade launcher if it was legal to own and accessible. Should a guy who has legal full auto guns at his home not protect it with a Tommy gun or Uzi?

My main point is if you have to use your weapon be darn sure you have the right and need to use it, What is inside it is no matter as long as it does the job and does it safely if there are bystanders.
The only time your ammo would come into question is if you used it at a questionable moment and may not have had the right to use deadly force.

Im no lawyer, And so poor if i did get sued in civil court they would get paid in quarters most likley.
use your own common sense and what your heart says to do as you will have to live with your actions the rest of your life wether good or bad.

WardenWolf
May 27, 2010, 11:28 AM
No. I'm just saying it's a bad idea to use a round with particularly bad press. There's plenty of police-used rounds that are more legally acceptable. There's plenty of other good ammunition that's also perfectly fine. But using Black Talons is just asking for trouble. You can argue all you want that a bullet is a bullet, and a good shoot is a good shoot, but legally you're supposed to shoot to stop. Using this ammunition lets them claim you were intending to kill, not stop, which can get you charged with first-degree murder because you had planned and selected this ammunition. Even if it was a good shoot, you can still be charged if they decide you acted maliciously or used excessive force.

DasFriek
May 27, 2010, 11:42 AM
No. I'm just saying it's a bad idea to use a round with particularly bad press. There's plenty of police-used rounds that are more legally acceptable. There's plenty of other good ammunition that's also perfectly fine. But using Black Talons is just asking for trouble. You can argue all you want that a bullet is a bullet, and a good shoot is a good shoot, but legally you're supposed to shoot to stop. Using this ammunition lets them claim you were intending to kill, not stop, which can get you charged with first-degree murder because you had planned and selected this ammunition. Even if it was a good shoot, you can still be charged if they decide you acted maliciously or used excessive force.

I see your point and personally don't agree, But as i said im no lawyer and i don't care about the repercussions if i carried the SXT round.

This would be a great question for Massad Ayoob who does know the ammo and the legal issues involved.
The way i see it shooting too stop includes shooting to kill, As that will definitely stop an attacker.

Let me ask this, The .357 is said to be the most effective man stopper round for a handgun thats easily concealed. For that to be true it would also mean it kills most of its intended targets also. So would a carrying a .357 mean premeditated murder?

What about people who carry a .44mag or .41mag as a ccw weapon. I know its a small number who do but there are those who carry that weapon here.
Being shot with either of those will almost guarantee death imo.

And as a parting note, There is alot of ammo out there now that imitates the SXT/Black Talon petals and expansion. Why aren't those targeted? i feel its just a carry over from the bad press the Black talon got many years back that its evolved brother gets a bad rep also when many other ammos do the same thing.

rkammer
May 27, 2010, 11:48 AM
Posted by WardenWolf:
"Because of the negative political climate involving that ammunition, you run the very real risk of a prosecutor claiming your use of that ammunition was malicious and showed intent to kill rather than merely stop the threat. The fact that it's officially marketed for law enforcement only also gives the prosecutor leverage to say, "It was so deadly that it was never intended for civilians, but this person went out of their way to acquire and use it." Don't laugh at that possibility. Cases have been won based on such a claim before. Carrying that ammunition is just a bad idea."

While there has certainly been negative press in the "not too distant" past about the "killer Black Talons", I doubt one would have to be concerned about it in a self defense shooting that was determined to be a "good shooting". In that case there would be no prosecution and no prosecutor to worry about.

Having said that, It does seem possible that the scum bag who was shot or killed might have a family who would want to cash in on the "killer bullet" thing in a civil suit for wrongful death. That has happened too.

WardenWolf
May 27, 2010, 11:52 AM
Ultimately that's what it boils down to: bad press, and the fact that your average member of a jury knows next to nothing about handguns or ammunition (the joke is sadly true: your fate is decided by 12 people who weren't even smart enough to get out of jury duty). Fact is, though, you can stop a threat just as effectively with a round that's not designed to bounce randomly around inside their torso and destroy everything inside. The SXT round doesn't stop a person any faster. It merely ensures they'll bleed out from internal injuries. That's ultimately what it boils down to. Initial shot placement is the most important aspect to stopping the threat before they can harm you. The secondary damage that this round does, though, will simply ensure they won't survive even after they've been neutralized. And that is why they can argue maliciousness: the round is specifically designed to cause inoperable wounds.

Shawn Dodson
May 27, 2010, 12:15 PM
Fact is, though, you can stop a threat just as effectively with a round that's not designed to bounce randomly around inside their torso and destroy everything inside. Are you claiming this is what Ranger SXT does - "bounce around... and destroy everything inside"? If yes, then you are misinformed. I suggest you study the FBI document Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness (http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm).

The SXT round doesn't stop a person any faster. It merely ensures they'll bleed out from internal injuries. That's ultimately what it boils down to. Initial shot placement is the most important aspect to stopping the threat before they can harm you. The secondary damage that this round does, though, will simply ensure they won't survive even after they've been neutralized. And that is why they can argue maliciousness. I performed a study with my police department and determined that the cutting mechanism of the pointed edges of an expanded SXT bullet provide a 3-5% potential increase in wounding effectiveness.

Excepting a direct hit to central nervsous system structures, rate and quantity of blood loss determines how quickly a person will be compelled to stop his/her criminal violence.

More info about Black Talon/Ranger SXT/Supreme SXT/Ranger T:
Winchester Ranger Talon (Ranger SXT/Black Talon) Wound Ballistics (http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs2.htm#Black-Talon)
Winchester Black Talon Revisited (http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs12.htm)

If you enjoyed reading about "Ranger SXT .40 Sub-Sonic?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!