.50 GI: The Gentle Giant (That Can Kill You) [Multi-post review]

[cstarr3]

I'm not aware of any .50 GI load that even approaches the sonic barrier. I'm also very skeptical of the terminal performance of any load which uses light-for-caliber bullets to achieve unusually high velocities. So far, every such creature exhibits poor penetration, often accompanied by bullet fragmentation.

The fastest production stuff that GI makes is the 185 CHP. I'm not sure I would personally want that much speed, but if I did, I could also get it from a 10mm conversion on the same Glock platform.

So, for your viewing pleasure, Brass Fetcher's YouTube channel has a 230 gr. copper hollow point ballistics gel video (same as the one posted by killoften).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO6GSRB-nQI

According to the video, the velocity was 1040 fps. Though it is certainly not the 1220 advertised for 124 gr. Gold Dot 9mm +P, or even the 1150 fps that Gold Dot 9mm is advertised to run, it is still pretty quick. In fact, Brass Fetcher's .45 ACP 230 gr. Gold Dot test put the velocity at 780 fps, and didn't quite make it out the other side of the gel block, but the .50 cal projectile didn't seem to have any trouble punching straight through. And for fifty caliber, 230 gr. would still be pretty light for caliber.

Another thing to keep in mind is that real-world wounds created by common service cartridges tend to be indistinguishable from one caliber to the next. A 9mm wound looks like a .40 S&W wound, which looks like a .45 ACP wound. It's not until you step it up into the full house .357 and 10mm range, where relatively heavy bullets can be driven very deeply when fully expanded, that things start to change (still nothing like rifle wounds, though). And the .043" difference between .357" bullets and 10mm bullets makes not a lick of difference, just as the .049 between .451 and .500 doesn't.

There are plenty of legitimate arguments to be made against the .50 GI, the most damning one is that most people don't really have much use for it. Like I said, it is too much like other popular rounds (9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP); adequate in every respect, stellar in none. Every popular cartridge has some version of it that does things better: the .357 Sig is a barrel change away from a .40, and it is much faster than a 9mm; the .356 TSW could do anything a 9mm could do, and some of the things a .357 Sig could do, withought changing the 9mm's overall size; the 10mm is a far more bad-ass .40 S&W, and the .40 Super is practically magnum performance out of a standard frame gun; the .460 Rowland is to the .45 ACP what the .356 was to the 9mm. In any case, there is nothing spectacular about any of the highly popular defensive rounds. The same can be said about the .50 GI. Yes, the .50 could be faster, longer, meaner, etc. But that can be said about all cartridges. I still stand by my words that what makes the .50 so ripe for a place alongside the common semi-rounds is the very thing that will keep it from ever getting there; it is a very tame, sane sort of round.

All this, and then there's the issue of .50 GI reducing magazine capacity, on top of being (much) more expensive to shoot, and very difficult to find ammunition for other than online.

I understand the cost argument. I never hold that against a caliber. A knife costs significantly less to buy and practice with than a gun, but I'll stick with *pew-pew* over *stabby-stabby*. Maybe if the .50 GI came around in 1904, instead of 2004, we might all be using that... and if the .45 ACP was introduced in 2004, instead of 1904, we might all be wondering why some little company was trying to make a semi-automatic .45 caliber round that is only a little better than the old .45 Colt, but not as good as the .454 Casull.

But first comers do not always have staying power. The .41 AE comes to mind, as does its necked down variant, the 9mm AE. Most people have never heard of these, though they may own or shoot a .40 S&W or a .357 Sig. Now that we are 10 years in, this particular cartridge is obviously a niche cartridge. If it had had the backing of Smith and Wesson, Heckler & Koch, or Beretta or something, with Remington or Winchester making some affordable UMC/White Box versions, this round might have been okay. Even though it is not likely to gain popularity, there is always the possibility that a major manufacturer will come out with something like it that will be hailed as a game-changer, or even simply be tacitly accepted.

In any case, if any of you get the chance to shoot a .50 GI, it is plenty of fun.

 

[killoften]

MachIVshooter I waited excited all weekend to come back this morning and read the reply from you I was sure would be there and all you had to say was to correct me on the fact Desert Eagle isn't a company, IWI is.
Well, thanks. At least you're not a grammar Nazi.

You still brought price into this, even though we are CLEARLY talking about performance & ballistics, and I made it clear that I shoot .45 out of the very same gun for training and the recoil is indistinguishable. How do you know I don't roll my own anyway and cast lead? (I do already own a .50 lead cast mold for whenever I get around to doing it)

are disingenuous at best

To people's argument about capacity? Really?
That debate is long from settled, use the search bar.
At least I can carry in NY still

As well, if you're giving up capacity, you'd better be gaining something on the performance end. Where .50 GI is concerned, not only does it reduce capacity by 25% vs. 10mm, but also does not perform as well. Who in their right mind would want to carry something that uses less powerful ammunition with double or more the PPR, AND which offers only 11 rounds vs. 15 in the same package?

It seems you're a huge fan of the 10mm. I certainly wouldn't want one headed in my direction, but where, just were do you get off saying it does not perform as well? I'm waiting to hear that. You also have ignored my numerous comments about the downside to high pressure rounds. (I guess those details aren't important since they go against your argument?)

I'm not at all taking this personal, it's just that I know you're an experienced shooter and I expected more. Not all of us subscribe to the light & fast genre of bullets. The 10mm isn't anything other than a hyper fast 9mm +1mm of girth. How come you're not advocating the 5.7×28mm? Then your capacity argument really would have a leg to stand on. Again, bullets are bullets, none of which is my mortal body able to withstand, I just prefer a different approach to things. Judging off the popularity of good old 45ACP I don't think I'm alone in that.

Speaking of, here is an interesting angle...

Taylor Knockout Factor = caliber x weight x velocity : 7000 =

Caliber F/S Taylor Rating
9mm 125 JHP 1175 7.47
40 S&W 180 JHP 1050 10.07
357 Mag 158 JHP 1250 10.80
45 ACP 230 JHP 875 12.98
44 Mag 240 JHP 1250 18.41
50 GI * 300 FP 720 15.45 – 41 Mag Level
50 GI * 275 JHP 890 17.51 – 41 Mag Level
50 GI 300 JHP 860 18.43 – 44 Mag Level

*Factory Load

If anybody doesn't know, Taylor was a guy who earned his cred and became famous by killing a bunch of elephants in Africa and publishing detailed writings on it. Pretty interesting knowledge to be gained for anybody interested in it, even if it's not the end all, be all to the argument with 2 legged critters. In a nut shell, "Caliber" has merit. Weight and Velocity are obviously in the equation and nobody refutes that but do not pretend width of bullet is somehow just thrown out or not relevant. That's my whole point from the beginning! The widest bullet we're allowed to own, is .50 and all others on the market are magnums and produce far too much recoil for accurate, controlled follow up shots. That's the niche that 50GI filled.

If you don't like the 50GI, because there are other rounds already available that can stop the threat, or that it's too pricey for your taste. Fine. Just don't say that it doesn't have a legitimate place at the table.

cstarr3... I thoroughly enjoyed your write up and I felt you made some really valid points.

Every popular cartridge has some version of it that does things better

I still stand by my words that what makes the .50 so ripe for a place alongside the common semi-rounds is the very thing that will keep it from ever getting there; it is a very tame, sane sort of round.

I'll stick with *pew-pew* over *stabby-stabby*

If the .45 ACP was introduced in 2004, instead of 1904, we might all be wondering why some little company was trying to make a semi-automatic .45 caliber round that is only a little better than the old .45 Colt, but not as good as the .454 Casull

In any case, if any of you get the chance to shoot a .50 GI, it is plenty of fun.

 

[Monac]

I think I read once that the Taylor Knock-Out Value on a well-thrown billiard ball is enormous. I have not paid much attention to it since.

 

[Hookeye]

If I wanted more horsepower in a 1911 Id get an LAR Grizzly in .44 magnum.
Ammo is easy to find.

Not a fan of large diameter bullets of short axis. They don't penetrate as well and even if they do go deep enough, they often veer off line.

IMHO the 50 GI is a novelty.

Am quite content to just shoot +P .45 acp in my 1911's.
If I want more oomph I just switch over to a .44 mag revolver.

Buddy has a few 10mm. A long slide 1911 loaded hot might be a fun rig, if we ever get that wild pig invasion that was so hyped on Discovery/Animal Planet.

Even so, I'd probably just get a DE Mk7.

 

[barnbwt]

"I think I read once that the Taylor Knock-Out Value on a well-thrown billiard ball is enormous. I have not paid much attention to it since."
I rather expect a well-thrown billiard ball would be quite effective for knocking people out . The problem with all these formulas is extrapolation. Already we're getting people claiming the alternative to the 50GI is the 5.7x28 . We all know darn well that a pocket pistol is not a service gun is not a magnum revolver is not a carbine is not a battle rifle is not an anti-materiel-elephant-gun. And yet we insist on trying to numerically compare them, despite the mechanics of their ballistic effect being drastically different. It doesn't matter that the 50GI is ridiculously heavy for caliber, because anything 9mm and above will typically through-and-through the type of target for which it is intended. Likewise, there is no point playing with a neatly-expanding round when starting from a paltry .22" diameter 40 grain bullet, when fragmentation results in a far more drastic effect.

I rarely ask "why" when it comes to firearms, but the 50GI is an exception. I even less frequently ask "what does it do better than X common option?" because it's usually a disingenuous rhetorical question, but in this case it's legitimate. The GI seems to make no claims about being anything other than a fat 45acp, which is already quite under-bore for a pistol round (meaning its powder volume to displacement volume is low due to the squat case and fat tube) and therefore inefficient, spatially. If anything, the argument for the GI seems to be that it is a 45acp with an emphasis on the drawbacks, but the title of a "fifty." Now, if the round was a sabot'ed load, it could potentially be drastically penetrative, expansionary, or fragmentary, while remaining underbore enough to keep flash and concussion down (relative to a necked cartridge firing the same load). While very inefficient in space, an underbore design is highly efficient thermally; extracting every bit of juice from the powder and finally uncorking at a far lower pressure than something like a 5.7x28.

Why not just refer to your 45acp as a fifty acp and be done with it? That's metrologically closer to caliber than some ammunition names

TCB

 

[Nom de Forum]

"I think I read once that the Taylor Knock-Out Value on a well-thrown billiard ball is enormous. I have not paid much attention to it since.".........
.........Why not just refer to your 45acp as a fifty acp and be done with it? That's metrologically closer to caliber than some ammunition names

TCB

Yep, you loss all credibility when you resort to Taylor for calculating terminal ballistic performance of a pistol bullet!

Why not indeed just call the 45acp a fifty acp, it is after all in between the system's 50 and 51 bore/gauge.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Yep, you loss all credibility when you resort to Taylor for calculating terminal ballistic performance of a pistol bullet!

+1.

I'll waste not another minute arguing with this new member who seems to have come here not to dialogue, share knowledge and learn, but simply as a .50 GI fanboy who wishes to stir the pot.

 

[killoften]

I'll waste not another minute arguing with this new member who seems to have come here not to dialogue, share knowledge and learn, but simply as a .50 GI fanboy who wishes to stir the pot.

With 12,000+ posts you'd think you knew the forum rules a little better.
Sorry I'm a "new" member but your reply was nothing but personal and outright false to claim I didn't come here for dialogue, share knowledge and learn. You couldn't refute my points and so you simply dismiss me. That's fine. I straight up slammed you in my last post so... enjoy them apples bro

And for all of you who hang your arguments on the TKO factor as IF that was my defining point. Re-read.

 

[Nom de Forum]

And for all of you who hang your arguments on the TKO factor as IF that was my defining point. Re-read.

Nobody is doing that. It has been well stated by several posters that there are many reasons to dismiss the .50 GI as more novelty item than serious self-defense cartridge. Jeez, when you have barnbwt weighing in on bore efficiency that should be enough of a clue.:banghead:

 

[Ed Ames]

It may be more fun to contemplate what circumstances would benefit from moving in the .50gi direction.

What change in anatomy, metal prices, law, etc would favor the larger but still low pressure round?

E.g. if you wanted to run flechettes in a sabot. If you were using gold (sg of 19.3) instead of lead (sg of 11.4). Whatever.

I don't know the answers, but knowing where it would excel might help lead to understanding of why it is counter optimal in the world as we know it.

Personally I find the .50gi marginally more interesting than double barreled 1911s. As far as I can tell it exists because as soon as a legal limit is imposed, some people want to touch it. But for all I know it would be ideal if you were to adopt a one-piece formed aluminum cartridge where the bullet is part of the case and breaks free under pressure. Or something.

 

[Rodentman]

But wait a minute...

If you have a 50GI you *probably* reload for it. I haven't found any decent ammo boxes for that round, so having a GI gives you the inestimable opportunity to order a custom ammo box:





Don't mean to be flippant; I don't know all the ballistic details, but it IS fun and I do like novelty firearms. Admittedly sometimes a case of more money than brains, but I've worked hard .....

 

[cstarr3]

Why the .50 GI?

As to the "Why the .50 GI?" question: I don't really think there is a reason to abandon the old calibers and get a .50 GI. I also realize that people have to spend their money on such mundane things as mortgage, family, and sustenance. I don't think these things should be put on hold to buy and feed a .50 GI, either. But, if you are looking at a new gun, why a .50 GI? Anything that can be said both for and against the .50 GI can be said about pretty much any rare or expensive caliber. Why a .500 S&W magnum? It is overly large, very expensive, etc., etc. etc.... Why a .30 Luger? It doesn't stand out in any way, and the ammo is hard to find and expensive, etc., etc. etc....

Most poeple point out that it is a novelty. I will not argue that point. But I will point out that novelty depends more on how many people use it than how effective a round it is. I am willing to bet that a .50 GI is more effective at making a bad guy take a sudden nap than a .32 ACP. But nobody considers the .32 ACP a novelty. A more apples-to-apples comparison would be the .32 ACP to the .32 NAA or the .25 NAA. The latter two are both decent performers when compared to the former, but they are both a little bit of novelties. The .45 Colt doesn't perform quite as well as most .45 semi-auto rounds (.460 Rowland, .45 Super, .45 ACP), and yet it is not a novelty. Is .50 GI a novelty? That is a resounding "yes." Most people will never hear of .50 GI. Most who hear of it will never shoot one. Many of those who shoot one will never own one. But that is not reflective of the caliber in terms of "performance." As I pointed out, the .41 AE is a now-defunct round, even though it came along before and had almost identical ballistics to the .40 S&W. Nobody calls the .40 S&W a novelty (excepting the hardcore 10mm guys ), but owning a .41 AE would definitely place you in the gun novelty crowd.

Here are some "normal" calibers people may want: .25 ACP, .32 ACP, .380 ACP, 9mm Luger, .357 Sig, .38 Super, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, .357 Mag/.38 Special, .44 Mag/.44 Special, .45 Long Colt. Outside of these, most everything is a bit of a "novelty."

It may be more fun to contemplate what circumstances would benefit from moving in the .50gi direction.

The same could be said about moving towards the .40 S&W from the 9mm. And the move is approximately the same: Larger diameter in the same size frame. As I contend, none of the most common defense rounds are anything special. The .50 GI is the same in its relatively mild manners. It is not particularly amazing in any respect. Its recoil is not particularly harsh, and it fits into platforms that are tried and true. Its performance in terms of velocity and penetration is well within the realm of established defense caliber norms. I doubt that we will see a slow and gradual gravitation towards the .50 GI. But that has nothing to do with a lack of anything; speed, weight, penetration, whatever, in this caliber. I don't think it lacks anything that isn't lacked by any other defense round. It is simply that the .50 GI only does AS WELL as any other cartridge. If you want significantly better, it is going to come at the cost of a new platform, heavier recoil, and the same high ammo cost.

Let us do a thought experiment... You are a non-gun owning citizen, but have no problem with gun ownership. You are willed a .50 GI and 10,000 rounds of ammo from your gun-nut uncle. Would there be any reason to trade that in for a .45 ACP? No. Not because the .45 is in any way inferior. It will do pretty much most things a .50 GI will do. But why make the move if the move will both cost a lot of money but give not very much in return. This is why most people will never use, own, or shoot the .50 GI. It is too similar to everything else that is accepted as legitimate defense caliber. That similarity is what I mean when the .50 GI would do very well among the ranks of defense calibers. It is also what I am talking about when I say nobody is likely to pick it up... because it is too much like what people already have.

So, let me summarize.

Benefits of the .50 GI:
- Decent size and weight
- Decent velocity
- Decent penetration
- Fits into a couple of very popular platforms.

Detriments of the .50 GI:
- Doesn't do much that isn't done by other defense rounds
- More expensive than other rounds
- Less available than other rounds

Sound like any other calibers that you've heard of? (*cough-GAP-cough*). The .50 GI isn't bad. It is good. Just as good as the rest. But "just as good" will take it nowhere.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

The .50 GI isn't bad. It is good. Just as good as the rest. But "just as good" will take it nowhere.

.... as history has clearly demonstrated.

This would have been a good starting point for the thread.

 

[Monac]

Jeebus. Look, some people like 50 GI and are all excited about it. Most people are not. Can it kill people dead real well? You betcha. Is it a whole lot better than 45 ACP? Not hardly.

And that's the whole problem. It has something to offer, sure, just like pretty much every round cstarr3 names. But does it have enough to offer to make it worth its cost? Not that most people can see, and that's the real issue here, I think.


(History footnote: It seems to me that 50 GI is a novelty cartridge in almost exactly the same way Herter's 401 Powermag was, about 50 years ago. Remember that? Herter's had guns and ammunition made for it, and it was the only modern, high powered 40-to-41 caliber pistol cartridge around...until 41 Magnum came along and blew it into the ditch.

How did 41 Magnum do that? It had support from major manufacturers, and some support from law enforcement...both of which 50 GI lacks, BTW.

How many people remember 401 Powermag today? Darn few. Heck, even 41 Magnum is kind of a niche cartridge now.)

PS - I see that Kodiak460 has made the same point I have, only using about 1/10 as many words. I ought to delete this, but I enjoyed writing it too much.

 

[9mmepiphany]

And with that we have found, after an extended period, the natural 3 page limit for the usefulness of most discussion threads.

I think we can put this one to sleep