Contacting a company, will they really care?

[Pyro]

I've got about 15 bullets of .32 acp Winchester Silvertips (the new design) that failed to expand through wetpack and water jugs out of my NAA Guardian. Brassfetcher tested the same bullet out of the popular Kel-Tec P-32 and got no expansion either.
The ones that did expand partially (3) really made me wish they worked reliably out of the short barrel of a CCW .32 gun (which this ammo is marketed for), because once the jacket opened up the bullets expanded incredibly well. This tells me the expansion issue lies within the initial expansion of the jacket since I've got amazing expansion on some and absolutely no expansion on most others, once the jacket 'pops' open it all goes uphill from there.

I've been thinking of either contacting Winchester about it.
Obviously they need more velocity being loaded quite anemically compared to other brands, when I called their ammo plant I was told the bullets use case brass as a jacket (harder metal than the previous aluminum alloy of the older design), and adding a few jacket serrations between the 'talons' would help the jacket open easier at lower velocities.

But will Winchester actually take my words into consideration or will they just ignore it and go on with producing a bullet that doesn't work to generate sales? Everyone and their mother told me that the .32 Silvertip (old style) was famous in this caliber, so of course I wanted them..only to find they changed the design to something albeit to ball ammo.

Please don't derail this thread to the JHP vs Ball argument. I want to know if anybody has any experience with Winchester customer service.

 

[oneounceload]

Were they designed and loaded to perform that way from your small Guardian? I used to have a Walther PP in 32 and those Silvertips worked fine, but the barrel was twice as long or longer

 

[JTQ]

Winchester Silvertips are old technology bullets. They've been around since the '80's (probably earlier). Their historical reputation is that of a light for caliber, rapidly expanding bullet, with shallow penetration.

Since lightweight for caliber, rapidly expanding, shallow penetrating bullets have fallen out of favor over the last 20 years or so, I suspect Winchester has taken input from users over the years and modified the bullet to open more slowly which is what you probably have now with your .32 ACP.

I'm sure they will take your input, but no doubt they are using a different media for penetration/expansion tests than you. They are looking for particular performance in that media and how it stacks up in relation to other bullets they and others make.

 

[Pyro]

Winchester Silvertips are old technology bullets. They've been around since the '80's (probably earlier). Their historical reputation is that of a light for caliber, rapidly expanding bullet, with shallow penetration.

Winchester no longer uses the old technology, modern Silvertip is based somewhat off SXT.

Since lightweight for caliber, rapidly expanding, shallow penetrating bullets have fallen out of favor over the last 20 years or so, I suspect Winchester has taken input from users over the years and modified the bullet to open more slowly which is what you probably have now with your .32 ACP.

I see, thanks for the input.

I'm sure they will take your input, but no doubt they are using a different media for penetration/expansion tests than you. They are looking for particular performance in that media and how it stacks up in relation to other bullets they and others make.

That's why I included Brassfetcher who uses calibrates ballistics gel.

Were they designed and loaded to perform that way from your small Guardian? I used to have a Walther PP in 32 and those Silvertips worked fine, but the barrel was twice as long or longer

I'm not sure, would love to see a bullet design for short-barrel since I hardly see many people carrying old Colt or Walther .32's with a longer barrel.
Guess it's back to the .32 Prvi Partizan for me heh.

 

[JTQ]

would love to see a bullet design for short-barrel

I don't know who else does, but I know Speer has an entire line-up of ammo for short barrel guns.

http://www.speer-ammo.com/products/short_brl.aspx

 

[Pyro]

I don't know who else does, but I know Speer has an entire line-up of ammo for short barrel guns.

http://www.speer-ammo.com/products/short_brl.aspx

Yup they do, none for mouse guns though.

 

[jimk0512]

I have read that Corbon 60 grain JHP will expand when shot through a Kel-Tec P-32. Here are two links: .32 acp Gelatin Tests and A Look at the .32 ACP and .32 NAA

 

[Rail Driver]

It's always been my opinion that when a person chooses a "mouse gun" for self defense, they're trading off all the things we look for in a defensive pistol - for concealment.

Unless you load your own, you're probably not going to find much in a hollow point bullet that will perform adequately in a tiny little mouse gun, and even loading your own is going to result in spotty performance.

I've heard it told, and known several experienced people that carry FMJ if they use short barreled pocket guns in anything less than 9mm.

While it's a step up from any rimfire, .32ACP is still quite a weak round comparatively. With a short (almost nonexistent) barrel, you're not going to get the velocity needed to open up a modern hollow point bullet reliably.

 

[Pyro]

Rail Driver:

Please don't derail this thread to the JHP vs Ball argument. I want to know if anybody has any experience with Winchester customer service.

 

[Rail Driver]

Rail Driver:

I saw it (nice job on the fine print btw).

Winchester (or any company short of a mom and pop outfit) is probably not going to change an entire product line due to your contact with them. The ammo they offer sells to people that think a hollow point will achieve proper expansion in a tiny, anemic little pocket gun - And let's be fair here, your NAA Guardian has a 2" barrel. The "short barrel" offerings from other companies are designed for 3-4" barrels and simply lose too much velocity in anything shorter to be reliable - the ammo simply wasn't designed for your gun, and your gun wasn't designed for much past a VERY short range or contact shot anyway (read up on derringers and their origins - your gun is little more than a semi-auto derringer - this is not meant to deride your gun or your choice of gun - it's simple fact).

If you reload you MIGHT be able to come up with a load that causes the bullet to reliably expand, but I'd bet you would be approaching or going beyond max loads and pressures which is more dangerous to you than a hollow point bullet that fails to expand.

The long and short of it though, is that unless you know several hundred people that are willing to call or write to Winchester on a regular basis or are a very high profile professional shooter, you have little chance of getting Winchester to change a product line to work better with your firearm. A better option would be to simply try different brands until you find something that works - your best option would be to load your own and hope you can find a load to give reliable expansion that way.

 

[Old Fuff]

The .32 ACP cartridge was designed to be used in straight-blowback pistols that do not have a locked breech. Thus acceptable pressure levels are sharply limited. Combine this with very short barrels where the powder charge likely isn't completely burned, and it's difficult to get a bullet to go fast enough for reliable expansion under all circumstances.

As requested I won't go into the ball vs. hollow point argument, but I will point out that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

 

[481]

I've got about 15 bullets of .32 acp Winchester Silvertips (the new design) that failed to expand through wetpack and water jugs out of my NAA Guardian. Brassfetcher tested the same bullet out of the popular Kel-Tec P-32 and got no expansion either.
The ones that did expand partially (3) really made me wish they worked reliably out of the short barrel of a CCW .32 gun (which this ammo is marketed for), because once the jacket opened up the bullets expanded incredibly well. This tells me the expansion issue lies within the initial expansion of the jacket since I've got amazing expansion on some and absolutely no expansion on most others, once the jacket 'pops' open it all goes uphill from there.

I've been thinking of either contacting Winchester about it.
Obviously they need more velocity being loaded quite anemically compared to other brands, when I called their ammo plant I was told the bullets use case brass as a jacket (harder metal than the previous aluminum alloy of the older design), and adding a few jacket serrations between the 'talons' would help the jacket open easier at lower velocities.

But will Winchester actually take my words into consideration or will they just ignore it and go on with producing a bullet that doesn't work to generate sales? Everyone and their mother told me that the .32 Silvertip (old style) was famous in this caliber, so of course I wanted them..only to find they changed the design to something albeit to ball ammo.

Please don't derail this thread to the JHP vs Ball argument. I want to know if anybody has any experience with Winchester customer service.

If you'd tested the rounds in an industry-accepted tissue simulant (calibrated 10 percent ordnance gelatin) under laboratory-controlled conditions, you might have something that'd interest them. However, I doubt that Winchester designs any portion of their ammunition line with its performance in "wet-pack" specifically in mind.

Other than the ammunition's failure to perform (terminally) to your liking in a medium that cannot be standardized in any scientifically acceptable way, the rounds fit into, cycled through and fired reliably in your pistol. They functioned properly.

The "failure" of any product to behave in a way or under circumstances that it was not designed for does not mean that it is defective.

Winchester has, at least in my experience, always managed to stand behind their products when a legitimate problem has occurred, but I see no reason for them to answer to this "issue".

On the other hand, shooting stuff is fun.

 

[45_auto]

But will Winchester actually take my words into consideration or will they just ignore it and go on with producing a bullet that doesn't work to generate sales?

They'll gladly take your words into "considerstion". Heck, I'm the same way, I'll take anything anybody wants to say into "consideration".

Doesn't mean anybody is going to do anything about it, though!

 

[BSA1]

I've got about 15 bullets of .32 acp Winchester Silvertips (the new design) that failed to expand through wetpack and water jugs out of my NAA Guardian. Brassfetcher tested the same bullet out of the popular Kel-Tec P-32 and got no expansion either.
The ones that did expand partially (3) really made me wish they worked reliably out of the short barrel of a CCW .32 gun (which this ammo is marketed for), because once the jacket opened up the bullets expanded incredibly well. This tells me the expansion issue lies within the initial expansion of the jacket since I've got amazing expansion on some and absolutely no expansion on most others, once the jacket 'pops' open it all goes uphill from there.

Welcome to the real world of bullet and handgun performance. This is why you should always test your ammunition in your gun and not accept someones word on it.

I've been thinking of either contacting Winchester about it.
Obviously they need more velocity being loaded quite anemically compared to other brands, when I called their ammo plant I was told the bullets use case brass as a jacket (harder metal than the previous aluminum alloy of the older design), and adding a few jacket serrations between the 'talons' would help the jacket open easier at lower velocities.

There are many more factors than velocity in bullet performance. There is a tradeoff between penetration of hollowpoints and ball bullets. Have you really thought about if mousegun hollowpoint will reach the boiler room of your target? I favor ball ammo in anything smaller than .380.

But will Winchester actually take my words into consideration or will they just ignore it and go on with producing a bullet that doesn't work to generate sales?

Is this comment is based on a few rounds in backyard experimentation or carefully controlled test media and conditions in a lab?

Everyone and their mother told me that the .32 Silvertip (old style) was famous in this caliber, so of course I wanted them..only to find they changed the design to something albeit to ball ammo.

Reality check. Are you wanting a mousefart caliber to perform like a 45? The 32 is a close range in the face defensive round. To be blunt it is most effective stuck as close as possible to the attackers face and fired multiple times.

 

[Teachu2]

...it is most effective stuck as close as possible to the attackers face and fired multiple times.

Preferrably with the muzzle inserted in the assailant's ear canal.

 

[orionengnr]

Yes, I read your "fine print".

The .32 is a sub-par cartridge. Better than a pointy stick...yes. Better than a .22LR RF...perhaps. Although some people carry a .32 as their only gun, they are betting that they will never use it.

Think about it...does anyone who carries a gun "for real" carry a .32 or .380? Every LEA carries a 9mm or larger. Most carry .40, some carry .357 Sig, some carry .45acp. Military carries 9mm, but they carry a pistol as a back-up. There are a number of reasons for that.

If you choose to carry a .32, I sincerely hope you never have to use it.

Will Winchester care about one man's opinion?

Why should they?

 

[Jim K]

I think anyone who expects super expansion from a .32 ACP is ISO the tooth fairy. It is a low power round, and any expansion will not be significant enough to matter. IMHO, loading "expanding" bullets in calibers like .25 ACP, .32 ACP and .380 ACP is more hype than anything else. The performance will be no better than straight FMJ, and the penetration will be less.

Jim

 

[PabloJ]

I would call them and ask why Winchester 'Silvertip' 7,65mm handgun ammo is so expensive.