sd ammo change/big deal?


PDA






thefamcnaj
May 14, 2012, 09:03 PM
I have specific SD ammo for each gun that serves a purpose in the home or outside. G30 Hornady tap, g27 golden saber, kahr cm9 pdx1. I've shot lots of boxes of SD/hd ammo to ensure each gun functions on my chosen ammo.
I've put 7 boxes of pdx1 through my kahr, and its functioned flawless. Well today I hit the lgs to buy some more and there out, and so are the big box stores around me. I picked up a box ac federal hydro shocks because I've read good things about it. I carry my kahr daily and had to have something to put in it. I've never ran any of these, so I'm hesitant to carry them.
Am I to concerned? Should I shoot Atleast box to make sure it functions? Or if a gun proves it will shoot hollow points of one brand, it will run any hollow point?

If you enjoyed reading about "sd ammo change/big deal?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Telekinesis
May 14, 2012, 09:16 PM
It really depends. Some guns are picky and will run fine with one brand of HP and choke every other round with another brand of HP, and some will run fine no matter what you put through them. I would do a full test with the new ammo before trusting it for SD, but its up to you. You might also want to rethink the Hydra shok, but that's another thread (actually, I think there's one of those active right now).

In the future, you may want to make sure you have replacement SD ammo BEFORE shooting your current loadings at the range. Keeps you from running to the store and realizing that everyone is out of your favorite HP, and it also lets you have some defensive ammo for the trip home.

blarby
May 14, 2012, 09:23 PM
Before some buts in and ribs you for it, its HYDRAshok, not HYDROshok. :)


There are known failure to feed issues with these HP's in many types of handguns...even yes/no within some models- just made on a different day it seems. Magazines make a huge difference in HP feedability.

If you can fire 50-100 of them without any issues, I would say you are in the clear.

Some will say you need far more than that, some far less. Its a mechanical reliability issue whose determination is really only reasoned away by you.

As with any good SD ammo...once you've established a brand(s) that work for you, plunk test all of them before carry. A pair of calipers might do you some justice here too...if carry for you is a life or death situation, making sure all the rounds are up to snuff never hurts. I'd never rely on any factory ammo simply because of a name or brand. Trust, but verify.


If you really need them :

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=winchester+pdx1+9mm+for+sale&hl=en&safe=off&prmd=imvns&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&biw=1360&bih=679&ion=1&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=13734508790921087530&sa=X&ei=p7CxT6KrKuvRiAK824j1Aw&ved=0CGIQ8wIwAA

Loosedhorse
May 14, 2012, 09:30 PM
I think a box (50 rounds) is probably too few--for me--to be sure about ammo function. I begin to feel better at 100 rnds, and much better at 200.

One could argue that if you have a standard size pistol that's famous for digesting all ammo (say, Glock 17), maybe fewer rounds. But small pistols I consider tempermental, so I'd like to really know it functions.

I see no problem with Hydra-Shok, though I've only carried it in .45.

Shawn Dodson
May 15, 2012, 07:10 PM
Ammunition that does not function reliably in your pistol will be readily apparent - you will experience consistent failures of the same type.

Fire three full magazines of your defense ammo through your pistol. If you experience no failures then you're good to go.

If you experience a failure then immediately stop and try another three full magazines. If the failure doesn't recur then you're good to go. If you experience a second failure of the same type then either: 1) the ammo isn't compatible with your pistol, 2) you're limp wristing, or 3) there's a problem with the gun.

coalman
May 16, 2012, 01:06 PM
IMO people overthink the minutiae of things. IMO select a reputable common brand that runs in your gun and stick with it. For me the cost to (function test with a) switch is not worth it.

Telekinesis
May 16, 2012, 02:52 PM
IMO select a reputable common brand that runs in your gun and stick with it. For me the cost to (function test with a) switch is not worth it.

Those two sentences seem contradictory. If you don't function test your new ammo, how do you know it will run in your gun?

Jeff F
May 16, 2012, 03:37 PM
I carry a revolver so I just run one cylinder full to see where the POI is and call it good.

Warp
May 16, 2012, 05:36 PM
I recommend against carrying any round that you have not run through that specific gun. Preferably that specific magazine, too.

The number of rounds it takes to trust the gun/ammo/magazine combination will vary with the gun in question as well as the ammo. If the gun has never given you any problems regardless of ammunition and has seen hundreds of rounds of JHP then running a 50 round box through seems reasonable to me. If it's a new gun and you are putting the first JHP through it I'd rather 100 or more. If it is a picky gun, say a Kimber 1911, and it likes some JHP but not others, I'd want to put a couple hundred through it (or get a different gun altogether...).

For revolvers, as mentioned above, a cylinder is plenty IMO. Just enough to verify point of impact, accuracy, recoil, etc.

coalman
May 18, 2012, 01:57 PM
IMO people overthink the minutiae of things. IMO select a reputable common brand that runs in your gun and stick with it. For me the cost to (function test with a) switch is not worth it.
Those two sentences seem contradictory. If you don't function test your new ammo, how do you know it will run in your gun?

If you have something you know runs IMO it's not worth cost of the test ammo to switch when you are comparing modern reputable brands. Dudes often seem on the lookout for the next best wonder bullet, and companies are happily boastful in their marketing, but when comparing reputable big name modern lines, they are all pretty much the same.

mljdeckard
May 18, 2012, 02:00 PM
I agree. Shoot at least a few magazines. You should shoot a lot more when you have time and money to do so, or just switch back, but it would seriously give me the willies to carry untested ammo, especially a hollow-point which may not feed well in a new gun.

9mmepiphany
May 18, 2012, 03:36 PM
There is enough difference in the slug profile between different hollowpoints that I wouldn't feel comfortable carrying a new bullet without function testing it first. This is even more important when you get into sub-compact pistols like the CM9 (short slide, polymer frame)

The very minimum I'd consider acceptable is that which Shawn Dodson has recommended. Three full magazines without a bobble

JohnBiltz
May 18, 2012, 05:20 PM
I don't get 3 magazines as a test. For a Glock 17 that would be 51 rounds, for a 1911 that would be 21 rounds and I'd want to test a 1911 more than a Glock. If its a well broken in proven reliable gun a box of 50 rounds is fine. A new gun, put 200 rounds of ball through it as a break in, if those were good put 100 rounds of the new SD ammo through it for minimum. If there were problems with the ball another 200 ball would be needed.

Warp
May 18, 2012, 05:22 PM
I agree with you, John, on the number of magazines thing seeming a little bit less useful than a particular number of rounds.

CountryUgly
May 18, 2012, 06:23 PM
Wow... I so under do it. I usually load up 2 mags worth rapid fire it reload rapid fire second mag load 2 more mags full and shoot for POI/grouping. If there are no failures and I'm happy with my groups I call it good.

If you are just using the Federal till your regular gets in I'd just burn a mag or 2 just to make sure and buy an extra box when my good stuff gets in stock. Then put the left over Hydra's up in case this happens again if they run in your gun.

mljdeckard
May 18, 2012, 07:32 PM
for me, it's testing the magazines AND the ammo. This is why you need to test BOTH.

9mmepiphany
May 18, 2012, 11:38 PM
I agree with testing how the magazines like your new loads.

The majority of feeding problems, in a normally reliable 1911, can be traced to the magazine. Just loading a couple of rounds in each magazine won't do it. You need to test at the maximum spring tension, the minimum and at some mid-point...the max and min are the most critical

thefamcnaj
May 19, 2012, 12:14 AM
@countryugly,
You hit the nail on head. I've ran 140 pdx1's and 300 fmj's in the cm9 with no failures. I'm running the Federal until the pdx1 gets back in stock. I really do need to run a a few mags of the federal, I just have to find find time to make the drive to my uncles house that's an hour away. My local range is closed for now because people have been shooting the cables and post.
The pdx1's are no where in sight for now, all lgs around me say their dealers are out. I hate to buy online because I was a victim of identity theft once. I may be making a switch to the federal if the pdx1's don't soon become available.
For now I'm carrying my g27 because I know it sure does like to eat the golden sabers that's in it :).

Warp
May 19, 2012, 12:18 AM
@thefamcnaj: Did you shoot the very last of your PDX1 before acquiring more or testing it's replacement? If so...learn from this mistake. Gotta plan ahead. ;)

thefamcnaj
May 19, 2012, 02:16 AM
@warp
Yes sir I did:banghead: I just took for granite that atleast one of my lgs's or box store would have it. Lesson learned.

Warp
May 19, 2012, 02:41 AM
You know what? The PDX1 is the same round as the Winchester Ranger Bonded. (provided all other variables are matched, such as caliber and bullet weight)

The Winchester Ranger Bonded is available here. http://www.mahsupplies.net/

And the Ranger is virtually always priced better than the PDX1 because it comes int he 50 round boxes.

thefamcnaj
May 19, 2012, 07:17 AM
Thanks for the link I didn't know that. Why do people(like myself) who like the pdx1 pay the extra money over the Ranger if its the same round? Come to think of it I've never even seen the ranger. For the price ill have to pick some up. 31 dollars for a box of 50 is cheap compared to the 24 bux for 20 pdx1's.

larryh1108
May 19, 2012, 09:14 AM
I'd be comfortable after a full box (total) with all magazines you carry with it. The cost of 1 box is worth the peace of mind.

jeepnik
May 19, 2012, 10:44 AM
For years I've told folks that it ain't what you are shooting, it's where you are hitting that counts.

Along that lines, if you use factory ammo, I tell people, find a JHP from any of the major makers, that functions in "your" firearm and forget the rest of the BS. It's mostly just advertising hype anyway.

Now as to "testing" to find that ammo, you should be practicing anyway, so once you find something that "works", from time to time, pick up another brand and "test" them. That way if what you're using isn't available, you have a backup.

There's a fellow,that's oft quoted (with whom I disagree on some stuff) that says "Two is one, and one is none" or words to that effect. He didn't invent the saying, but it's one of the things he's gotten right.

Water-Man
May 19, 2012, 11:35 AM
MAH says Law Enforcement Sales Only for the Winchester Ranger ammo.

Shawn Dodson
May 19, 2012, 01:07 PM
In the three full magazine test it doesn't matter the number of cartridges fired. Yes, it will require more ammo to test a Glock than a 1911 - but the end result is the same - three full magazines of ammo were fired without a failure. At this point the ammo isn't suddenly going to start failing to feed and function. Ammo that doesn't reliably feed and function in the pistol will not pass the test.

9mmepiphany hit the nail on the head - it's the absolute minimum level of testing.

SabbathWolf
May 19, 2012, 01:25 PM
MAH says Law Enforcement Sales Only for the Winchester Ranger ammo.

I'm not LEO and have over a 1k of both 9mm and 45acp Ranger right in front of me....lol
Bought it on line with no problems at all.
What or who is MAH?

SabbathWolf
May 19, 2012, 01:33 PM
If you have something you know runs IMO it's not worth cost of the test ammo to switch when you are comparing modern reputable brands. Dudes often seem on the lookout for the next best wonder bullet, and companies are happily boastful in their marketing, but when comparing reputable big name modern lines, they are all pretty much the same.

No offense, but that's just silly in my opinion.

It may well be true that most modern "bullets" will perform just fine for self-defense depending on shot placement....
But, that in no way means all modern "cartridges" as a whole will function flawlessly in the same gun.
That's 2 VERY different things.

If I find some ammo in which the "bullet" is relatively the same thing and just as good as another...but it costs less as an example....
I'll still test that ammo for proper "function" in my gun before I just go arbitrarily trusting my very life to it.
:eek:

Warp
May 19, 2012, 02:00 PM
MAH says Law Enforcement Sales Only for the Winchester Ranger ammo.

That is Winchester's policy...


In the three full magazine test it doesn't matter the number of cartridges fired. Yes, it will require more ammo to test a Glock than a 1911 - but the end result is the same - three full magazines of ammo were fired without a failure. At this point the ammo isn't suddenly going to start failing to feed and function. Ammo that doesn't reliably feed and function in the pistol will not pass the test.

Is 24 rounds enough, in your opinion?

I'm not LEO and have over a 1k of both 9mm and 45acp Ranger right in front of me....lol
Bought it on line with no problems at all.
What or who is MAH?

I think I already posted a picture of some of my ammo. Note the Ranger. I am not LEO either. And I like MAH. (www.mahsupplies.net, referenced earlier in this thread)

Edit: Guess that was a different thread. Well, here is my shelf of semi auto JHP, note the Ranger. And I like MAH...

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g105/austin3161324/1bbd9dc6.jpg

SabbathWolf
May 19, 2012, 02:19 PM
That is Winchester's policy...




Is 24 rounds enough, in your opinion?



I think I already posted a picture of some of my ammo. Note the Ranger. I am not LEO either. And I like MAH. (www.mahsupplies.net, referenced earlier in this thread)

Edit: Guess that was a different thread. Well, here is my shelf of semi auto JHP, note the Ranger. And I like MAH...

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g105/austin3161324/1bbd9dc6.jpg



Now that's funny....lol
You have the exact same ammo I do.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/Swampdragon/15acd3f1.jpg

Warp
May 19, 2012, 02:21 PM
I do. My local PD uses the 147gr T-series, has for years...good results. Some of the boxes you can't read are 127 +P+ as well as 147gr bonded.

SabbathWolf
May 19, 2012, 02:27 PM
I do. My local PD uses the 147gr T-series, has for years...good results. Some of the boxes you can't read are 127 +P+ as well as 147gr bonded.

I use the 147gr in my 9mm carbine. Shoots great!

coalman
May 20, 2012, 12:38 AM
If you have something you know runs IMO it's not worth cost of the test ammo to switch when you are comparing modern reputable brands. Dudes often seem on the lookout for the next best wonder bullet, and companies are happily boastful in their marketing, but when comparing reputable big name modern lines, they are all pretty much the same.
No offense, but that's just silly in my opinion. It may well be true that most modern "bullets" will perform just fine for self-defense depending on shot placement.... But, that in no way means all modern "cartridges" as a whole will function flawlessly in the same gun. That's 2 VERY different things. If I find some ammo in which the "bullet" is relatively the same thing and just as good as another...but it costs less as an example....
I'll still test that ammo for proper "function" in my gun before I just go arbitrarily trusting my very life to it.

Hmm. Man, we are way miscommunicating somehow. How about this saying it this way: If you have a reputable, big name modern defensive carry load that you've tested and know runs 100% in your gun(s) it's not worth the money to waste on testing a different reputable, big name modern defensive load to replace it just because you, or company marketing, think it will be more effective. There, we clear now?

SabbathWolf
May 20, 2012, 12:53 AM
Hmm. Man, we are way miscommunicating somehow. How about this saying it this way: If you have a reputable, big name modern defensive carry load that you've tested and know runs 100% in your gun(s) it's not worth the money to waste on testing a different reputable, big name modern defensive load to replace it just because you, or company marketing, think it will be more effective. There, we clear now?

Ah!
Now I see what you mean.
Sure. I agree with that.
Changing ammo just to change ammo because of some pipe dream promise of a supernatural magical new bullet in magazine ads that is supossed to be 1200000000 times better than anything else on the market is most likely just another scam.

In that case, then sure, just stick with what you already know works.
Agreed.

Warp
May 20, 2012, 12:54 AM
inb4 extreme shock

http://www.extremeshockusa.com/gfx_splash/top_2.jpg

Water-Man
May 20, 2012, 10:08 AM
SabbathWolf,

It doesn't matter how much Winchester Ranger ammo you have. You're not buying it at MAH. :rolleyes:

I didn't say you couldn't buy it anywhere else.

W-M

Warp
May 20, 2012, 02:10 PM
It doesn't matter how much Winchester Ranger ammo you have. You're not buying it at MAH.

I am. And I'm not in LE and I have no special connections. I'm sure others are as well.

You were supposed to read between the lines.

Edit: And please don't quote this message. I will delete it later...

SabbathWolf
May 20, 2012, 10:03 PM
SabbathWolf,

It doesn't matter how much Winchester Ranger ammo you have. You're not buying it at MAH. :rolleyes:

I didn't say you couldn't buy it anywhere else.

W-M


Lol.....see post #37
:D

If you enjoyed reading about "sd ammo change/big deal?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!