1. How many rounds of the defensive load do you recommend running through the gun before feeling confident in it for carry?
The common recommendation is 200 rounds, but if you plan to train on a fairly regular basis and already have confidence in the gun, then perhaps a box or two will suffice--if there are any issues with a particular load on an otherwise reliable gun, then they'll usually show up quickly enough.
I was able to pick up 300 rounds of Federal Classic JHP 230 grain ammo for a reasonable price. I'm hoping that if it functions well, this can be my everyday carry ammo...Is this ammo OK? What am I giving up by not going with the stuff that costs significantly more i.e. hydrashock and other equivalents etc.
It should work fine, but in my opinion you would get more consistent performance from premium defensive ammo such as Federal HST, for example. In tests, budget JHPs (usually just older designs) tend to fail to expand more frequently than premium JHPs when passing through clothing, and some tend to fragment when passing through barriers or even just in the body sometimes. Some are better than others, and the current Federal Classic is actually pretty decent in the informal tests I've seen, although it is slightly but definitely outperformed by more modern (and expensive) JHPs, at least in tests.
Some people would ask you whether you think your life is worth a few extra bucks, while others will say that the premium rounds offer nothing for their additional cost, but I think the truth is somewhere in between the two extremes. If you really don't think that you can afford something that is a little better, then the Federal Classic JHP should get the job done well enough. Oh, and personally I prefer that the primers and bullets are sealed to the case to help avoid contamination (especially when carried), so you might want to look into that regarding this load, but it's not strictly necessarily (just makes me feel better).
My only input is that I once shot a deer with a .45acp, 165 grain hydra-shok at 70 or 75 yards. It went down right there - just dropped straight down, kicked once and then was dead. The lungs were soup, the bullet stopped under the skin on the far side and was perfectly mushroomed and .8" inches in diameter.
One shot is hardly a scientific sample, but it convinced me. I think 165 grain loads make a lot of sense. They have higher velocity and less recoil, so follow up shots are just that much quicker (not that I needed one in that case). To my way of thinking, the lighter rounds in .45 are like having the higher velocity of rounds like the .40, but with the added advantage of making bigger holes. I can't imagine any other round performing as perfectly as that hydra-shok did.
.45 ACP and .40 S&W do tend to have similar velocities with similar bullet weights. Given that, obviously the .40 will penetrate more while the .45 will make larger holes. If the .45 gives you all the penetration that you need for game of a certain size, then it's ideal for that case, but it should be said that some hunters prefer complete penetration in order to get a clear blood trail (from the typically nasty exit wound) in case the deer does not drop immediately, and that in the general case some prefer to have a greater margin in case more bone and tough tissue must be penetrated (one shot indeed proves little), which 230 grain bullets should offer.
As for the expense - hydra-shoks were designed to feed like ball ammo. I'd still function test them, but after that just practice with the Federal 165 grain ball ammo which is loaded to the same specs as the Hydra-shoks.
It's too bad that .45 ACP FMJ bullets tend to be round-nosed as opposed to flat-nosed or truncated-cone like .40 S&W FMJ bullets, which more or less mimic JHPs.
Again, one shot is hardly definitive, but 165 grains is plenty of weight for any penetration you'd want, and higher velocity is always a good thing unless the recoil becomes prohibitive. In .45, the recoil drops with the lighter loads, so... what's the downside?
Some would say that the recoil of slower, heavier rounds is lower--it's all about individual perception. And choosing between different loads and calibers is all about what margins you're willing to accept. Even a .22 LR handgun can get the job done, no question about it, but larger, more powerful calibers give one a greater margin for success. Personally, I'd hate to find out that one of the bullets I fired during a shootout stopped just short of a bad guy's vital tissues just because it was too light and happened to pass through an arm or leg or beer belly first (some people are a lot bigger than a garden-variety deer). Within reason, I prefer my bullets to be able to punch all the way through at practically every conceivable angle, and then a little extra on top of that. Others disagree, sometimes vehemently, for their own reasons.
Back when it was readily available, I always bought the Winchester white box JHP ammo at Wal-mart for my defense handguns in 9mm and .45ACP. I bought it because it was reasonably priced which allowed me to practice with it as well. Even if there is a "better-performing" JHP cartridge than that, I'm not interested - since I won't be able to consistently practice with it. I shoot a lot - so, this way I am confident that I can shoot what I carry -and that my guns can feed what I buy.
That's not a bad idea, training with exactly the same load you use for defense.
On the other hand, since I don't perceive that much difference between different loads in the same caliber with the same bullet weight, I choose to practice with even cheaper FMJ ammo and very little with my somewhat costly defensive ammo. Like I always say, we should do whatever we're most comfortable with as individuals, because at the end of the day, most of the things we enjoy discussing here really don't make that big of a difference in the grand scheme of things.
