High-powered handgun loads for self defense

[StrawHat]

(duplicate)

Kevin

 

[StrawHat]

Has anyone said "overpenetration in a crowded environment" yet? If you shoot a person with a full power large bore magnum, that bullet probably won't stop in the target. Is ten year old Milissa behind it, cowering in a corner with her terrified mom?

Overpenetration is a concern only if every one of the cartridges you shoot hit's it's intended target. The missing of the target presents a very real danger to innocents. Of course we all can hit our targets every time.

Kevin

 

[herkyguy]

For what it's worth, I just worked through a box of Guard Dog 165 grain .45ACP bullets last week. They chrono'd at 1060 fps from my Sig Commander 1911. Against a pile of pallets, the bullets literally disintegrated. I found fragements in the dirt and chunks of the blue rubber goo that goes inside the FMJ rounds. There seem to be mixed reviews of Guard Dog's claim to prevent overpenetration, but I was happy with them - they cycled reliably, were accurate, and plenty quick.

I'd compare that to the Hornady 185 grain XTPs that I was shooting at around 850 fps that tended to stay in 1 piece - albeit with relatively good expansion.

 

[Dr.Rob]

I carry a .44 magnum as my 'woods' gun, and my sidearm while hunting big game.

There was a short time that it was the only handgun I had access to.

Rather than stoke it with 300gr jsp's (my hunting/woods load 300gr at 1279fps) I downloaded it with cowboy loads of soft lead for 'nightstand duty'. It made my 44 mag into a 45 acp in power, (240gr lead flat point bullet at 750fps) still not too shabby.

I wouldn't recommend the loads I use for hunting and woods carry as a good load in a defensive handgun role.

But you can as I did, tailor your load to your needs. Just because it's a 44 doesn't mean it has to breathe fire and slay dragons. You can load it light just like Dirty Harry.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Moving this to handguns: general.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Now that said, we generally look at very high-powered handguns (e.g. 44 magnum, etc) is being over-powered for self-defense purposes.

These two arguments seems to contradict one another. So in your opinion, what gives?

I've not read through all the other postings as yet, so forgive me if someone else has already covered this.

There's "over-powered" with respect to being able to handle the handgun firing the high powered round and then there's "over-powered" with respect to penetration.

There's a world of difference in the handling of a .44 Magnum handgun and a .44 Magnum rifle, for example.

And penetration is much more of a concern in urban locations than rural, field hunting, or the battlefield. So location may also be an important part of what constitutes "over-powered".


That said, in general what one typically should have for most self-defense uses should be the largest caliber in which one can effectively carry AND use. And the dynamics of both these characteristics varies from person to person and situation to situation.

 

[Drail]

Where you hit them is far more important than what you hit them with. If you need to worry about something - worry about accuracy, not caliber or power level of your loads.

 

[Sam1911]

If one were to be forced to knowingly go into harm's way, he would want to carry a long gun because rifles and carbines have much greater power and they literally do drop people in their tracks.

That is one reason, but maybe not quite the reason it's made out to be. Rifles and carbines are much easier to hit with at distance, and they tend to be thought of as easier for less trained people to hit with quickly even at shorter ranges. They also carry more ammunition, generally, between reloads. Some of those things might be important for peacetime defensive purposes, but most really aren't.

As far as dropping people in their tracks...maybe. Maybe not. Just like with handguns, shot placement and the vagaries of physiology have huge effects. We have enough returning vets who've been shot with rifles and who've shot motivated bad guys that the the myth of knock down power should largely have died by now.

Now that said, we generally look at very high-powered handguns (e.g. 44 magnum, etc) is being over-powered for self-defense purposes.

Sure. Several reasons for that.

These two arguments seems to contradict one another. So in your opinion, what gives?

The quest for MAXXX POWR!!! is always tempting, especially to less experienced shooters. Very much in the same line as all the folks who buy endless strings of the latest and greatest new gun gear. It's an indicator of less developed understanding of the practice and the issues involved. Trying to buy proficiency through "stuff" or "firepower."

Handguns work as effective defensive tools when a) they are present when needed (thus small enough to carry conveniently, b) the user has good skills and maintains them (much practice, and as much training as time and finances allow), and c) they are employed quickly and repeatedly as needed (fast repeated shots until the threat is down).

Magnum power really isn't a factor here. "One-shot-stops" is a largely worthless measure that does more harm than good in sorting out what to carry for defensive purposes. What matters is what gun(s) can you carry every day, shoot very accurately, very quickly, and develop the most proficiency with?

While we intuitively surmise that we are not aided much by going "too light" (.22s .25 ACP, etc. are poor choices), only with a decent amount of experience can we determine where "too heavy" is, and that's arguably even more of a problem.

The more power a gun's cartridge puts out (generally speaking, of course), the larger and heavier it has to be, the more the practice ammo costs, the harder it recoils, the harder it is to shoot well, and the harder it is to shoot accurately at great speed. Most shooters can learn to handle a .38, 9mm, .40, or .45 very quickly and accurately in at least some types of handgun. Beyond that, effectiveness starts to fall off.

Picking a common service sidearm, firing a common cartridge, is real wisdom. We know the rounds WORK for defensive purposes. There is no clear evidence that any one cartridge stands way out beyond the rest, so pick one you like and set the question aside. Then get training, train with others, and practice, practice, PRACTICE.

 

[joem1945]

I thought I read it was a .41 magnum because they didn't have a 29 for the movie.

 

[minutemen1776]

By the way, I"m sick of hearing what Elmer Keith and Jeff Cooper said.

Me too. There's a lot of developments in guns and ammo that these two never saw. For Elmer Keith, it was because he died in 1984. Though Jeff Cooper died in 2006, he could never see past the .45 ACP (excepting his foray into the Bren Ten).

 

[HankB]

1. For personal defense, the only way I'd consider a carry gun to be "overpowered" is if I couldn't control the recoil adequately to fire multiple accurate shots quickly. (I don't carry .44, .454, or .500 magnums.)

2. Size matters, and sometimes it's not practical to carry a very large handgun; the J-frame snubbie you have in your pocket when you really, really need a gun is more useful than an N-frame S&W back home.

3. ANY handgun is better than none - despite their "mousegun" labels, the difference between bare hands and a .22, .32, or .380 is bigger than the difference between a 9mmP and a .44 Magnum.

Of course, regardless of caliber, sound ammo choices are assumed . . .

 

[ku4hx]

When I feel the need to go "High Power" for a self defense load, I go with the 44 caliber 200 grain Speer Gold Dot bullet specifically designed for .44 Special velocities. I load mine to about 900fps which pretty much matches factory ballistics for this bullet.

Speer claims this bullet penetrates and expands reliably at 44 Special velocities.

That's about all I want in a "higher power" self defense round; as is the usual case ... YMMV.

 

[Ed Ames]

I have a secret to share with y'all. Some of you know this, and some may be shocked, but it sits at the heart of a huge percentage of the "X vs Y" arguments that gun people love to have.

Momentum = mass * velocity
Energy = mass * velocity^2

You can look at energy as the amount of work that can be done. In this context we mean wound channels and tissue displacement. Momentum means how resistant to stopping an object in motion is. That's about all you need to know to understand this whole topic. Well, plus one or two other points.

So using that secret knowledge, if you take a gun that fires bullets at 800fps, and raise the weight of the bullet from 115gr to 230gr, you are doubling both energy and momentum. If, on the other hand, you have another gun that can fire a 115gr bullet at 1125fps, you are also doubling the energy but only raising the momentum by 40% (ballpark numbers for casual conversation).

That's the heart of every slug vs 5.56, 9mm vs 45, 357 vs 327, 5.7 vs 40, on and on discussion.

From there you have two points to remember:
1. Velocity usually comes with noise and bother. Muzzle flash, sonic booms, shock waves off the muzzle, longer barrels, everything gets louder and less pleasant (though many would argue more fun) as the velocity goes up.

2. Penetration (which is largely a measure of momentum) needs vary from target to target. A sheet of paper is very different from a brown bear skull. Even within a single hypothetical gun fight there may be no one ideal penetration.

You can buy handguns capable of shooting 400gr bullets at 900fps, or shooting 40gr bullets at 2400fps. Choose the right one for your mission. If you want moderate penetration and good energy (usually reckoned ideal for self defense handguns) a fast light bullet is a good. If you need to penetrate with thick animal skulls and the like heavier bullets can be better even at lower speeds. In any case there is no single ideal.

 

[StrawHat]

...2. Size matters, and sometimes it's not practical to carry a very large handgun; the J-frame snubbie you have in your pocket when you really, really need a gun is more useful than an N-frame S&W back home...

Lot's of folks carry a 4" "N" frame every day.

Kevin

 

[swopjan]

Overpenetration is a concern only if every one of the cartridges you shoot hit's it's intended target. The missing of the target presents a very real danger to innocents. Of course we all can hit our targets every time.

Agreed. Worrying about the ~10% of bullets that hit a target makes little sense when ~90% of the rounds fired miss. Private citizens may have a better hit/miss ratio but not enough to make overpenetration a primary concern.

And, practicing enough to be that competent with a pistol is cost-prohibitive for most shooters. Someone could become proficient with a .357 by practicing with .38 special but the .41 caliber and up revolver rounds and 10mm and up semi rounds are much more expensive without reloading.

So I guess it adds up the same either way. The rounds that would be most likely to overpenetrate are harder to be proficient with anyway for a typical shooter.

 

[Panzerschwein]

I personally think something like a S&W Model 29 or Ruger Redhawk, both with ~6" bbls and stoked with Buffalo Bore's .44 magnum "anti-personnel" load would be formidable and effective defense guns against human beings.

Those two guns mentioned are going to be heavy enough to absorb the recoil, especially with a set of nice rubber grips. The Buffalo Bore .44 special anti-personnel load is a 180 grain medium-cast lead hollow point with a huge cavity and would be moving over 1500 FPS from a ~6" bbl for a bit over 900 ft lbs muzzle energy.

It's specifically designed and marketed as a self defense load that has manageable recoil. Now of course, if you ever shot someone with a .44 magnum loaded with "anti-personnel" loads in self defense... how would you fair in court? I won't get into that, but it's an important thing to think about also when considering high powered handguns for self defense.

But for me personally, I think it would be an effective home defense or open carry choice... it would even be a good load for a Desert Eagle if you wanted to use that for home defense. Here it is from BB website:

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=243

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Here's my premise: It's been well established that handguns are under-powered as anti personnel weapons. If one were to be forced to knowingly go into harm's way, he would want to carry a long gun because rifles and carbines have much greater power and they literally do drop people in their tracks.

Now that said, we generally look at very high-powered handguns (e.g. 44 magnum, etc) is being over-powered for self-defense purposes.

These two arguments seems to contradict one another. So in your opinion, what gives?

This brings up the aspect of carry philosophy of context.

I've always heard the argument too, that a handgun is underpowered really, and you should use it to fight your way to a long gun of some kind. I think this is true in a combat or home defense situations.

The bottom line is that when you look at the debilitating effects of a rifle cartridge or a shell of some kind from a shotgun, they inflict a lot more damage than most handguns. And that's why they end fights faster.

I choose to carry in populated public areas what I feel is the least powerful cartridge I need to stop the possible threat, so as to limit my chances of over penetration. When in a populated area, I carry a 45 acp, or a 38 special. When in the woods, I carry a longer barreled 45 acp, or a 357. When in bear country, I carry a 460 magnum. Would the 460 stop a human attacker faster than my 45 acp? I should think so. Does that make it legally, or ethically a good idea? Hell no, because the chance of over penetration is far too high, and the chances of hurting or killing a bystander are too great. In the woods, I don't really care if I injure a tree to stop a human or animal trying to hurt or kill me.

The two arguments don't contradict each other at all. It's a question of context. If you are forced to go into harms way, then yeah, bring the best weapon for the job, like an AR-10 or AK, or whatever long gun will do the job you need to do. If you are a civilian, and have a choice not to go into known danger, you have a duty to avoid trouble.

What's that saying? "Never go somewhere you wouldn't go without a gun, if you have a choice."

If you are just living your life and carrying as part of that life, you have to choose an appropriate gun and cartridge to keep yourself safe, but to at least attempt to limit the possibility of someone else getting hurt. What that gun and cartridge are depend on your proficiency, and the setting you are carrying it in.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Keep in mind that with the right bullet, like the Buffalo Bore medium cast 180 grain lead hollow point anti-personnel .44 magnum, overpenetration will be no more of a concern that any common service pistol cartridge shooting JHPs.

Just because it's a .44 magnum, doesn't necessarily mean it's got to overpenetrate.

 

[BobWright]

Dr_2_B said:

Here's my premise: It's been well established that handguns are under-powered as anti personnel weapons. If one were to be forced to knowingly go into harm's way, he would want to carry a long gun because rifles and carbines have much greater power and they literally do drop people in their tracks.

It's been well established that handguns are under-powered as anti personnel weapons

Well established by whom? Seems folks have had a way of getting killed by them for over a hundred years or so.

.......because rifles and carbines have much greater power and they literally do drop people in their tracks.

No, shoulder arms provide greater range than handguns, due to their more powerful cartridges and the ability to hold them steadier.



The .45 Colt cartridge has been sufficient as a man killer for many, many years. The purpose of a magnum handgun cartridge is to provide the same power as the .45 Colt at close-up distance but at greater range.

Why don't we arm our Army with handguns? It takes much longer to train a soldier to be proficient with the handgun that with the rifle. And with the rifle, an Infantry soldier can reach out to hit a man sized target in excess of 500 yards. At least so I was trained.

Bob Wright

 

[481]

Keep in mind that with the right bullet, like the Buffalo Bore medium cast 180 grain lead hollow point anti-personnel .44 magnum, overpenetration will be no more of a concern that any common service pistol cartridge shooting JHPs.

Just because it's a .44 magnum, doesn't necessarily mean it's got to overpenetrate.

I think that it was on an episode of 'Outrageous Acts of Science' or a similar type of show that they shot a .44Magnum 240 gr. JHP through a row of 12 or 14 water-filled balloons suspended from a frame. Despite predictions (made by a few folks chosen to observe the test) that it'd pass through all of the balloons, the JHP stopped very short (3 or 4 balloons...can't remember exactly). What the bullet does in the target is what matters and that is dictated largely by its construction.

 

[tipoc]

It was Nat Geo that did the experiment regarding water balloons and the 44 Magnum.

http://www.wideopenspaces.com/many-water-balloons-will-44-mag-shoot-video/

Quite an interesting experiment. It tells us and shows us some things worthy of it's own thread. But not so much for this discussion.

Overpenetration is not a key concern, nor should it be, in carrying a handgun for self defense. Overpenetration is rare. Missing is common. That is a concern. The shooter is responsible for identifying their target and knowing what is behind it.

The key factor in selection of the round you want to carry or use for self defense is that it is the most powerful round that you can shoot it accurately at speed. This is why the 357 magnum, in it's various loads, Is much more widely used for self defense than the 44 Magnum. Most folks cannot shoot the 44 Magnum well at speed (unless it is loaded down to 44 Spl. velocity and power). Neither can they shoot more powerful cartridges well at self defense speeds.

Kodiak's opinions above are useful to read.

 

[TimSr]

"Overpenetration" is more about going through walls and other cover that may separate your intended target from innocent people as opposed to passing through a persons body. Chances are most of your shots will miss, so the bad guys body cannot counted on as a backstop. Many innocent people have taken bullets through the wall of their livingrom from shots outside. That is the "overpenetration" concern.

 

[high speed operator]

Jeff Cooper was right in everything he said - end of story

It still rings true today.

The bs about "new bullet technology" is just that -BS same old same old copper jacketed hollow points Speer did it first back in the day

 

[45_auto]

I have a secret to share with y'all. Some of you know this, and some may be shocked, but it sits at the heart of a huge percentage of the "X vs Y" arguments that gun people love to have.

Momentum = mass * velocity
Energy = mass * velocity^2

And I have a secret to share with you.

Your kinetic energy equation is wrong.

We'll leave it as a exercise for the student for you to figure out what's wrong with it.

 

[Ed Ames]

Oops yeah 1/2m ... Fingers too fast fer me brain sometimes ... Still explains the whole thing.