I can't seem to find a consistent theme while going through the 4 pages of this thread topic.
Hornady has come out with a couple of new handgun bullet designs. One has "defense" in its name, and the other has "duty" in its name.
Okay, sometimes words mean things.
Maybe looking at their website's explanation of the difference might help?
http://www.hornady.com/support/critical-duty-and-critical-defense
If they're going to be getting a lot of LE/Gov contracts for their new loads, they're going to have to be meeting contract specifications, which includes QC issues.
One of the other instructors with whom I work recently picked up some of the 380 AUTO 90 gr. FTX™ CRITICAL DEFENSE® to try in his new .380 pistol, because he said it was recently accepted for back-up/off-duty use in approved .380's for a major PD.
Okay, that makes sense, considering they don't offer a .380 load in their Critical Duty line at this time.
BTW, how did rifle loads get going in this thread, anyway?
I won't be running out and buying cases of this ammo any time soon myself, for reason of both cost and availability. I'll continue to use whatever is available in inventory (because I'm budget-minded, living on a fixed retirement income
).
If the Critical Duty service pistol loads ever appear on a contract order, then I'll try some and see what the fuss is all about.
Ditto if the 38 SPECIAL+P 110 gr. FTX™ CRITICAL DEFENSE® ever appears in the ammo inventory. In the meantime, there's enough Speer 135gr +P and Win RA38B 130gr +P (PDX1) to satisfy my need for training/practice and carry loads in .38 Spl.
If some 380 AUTO 90 gr. FTX™ ever appears as a shipment for use as qual ammo for our folks using .380's, I'll watch and see how it does in their guns (as well as keep an ear out for however it may start to do in actual shootings at any agencies who issue it, or authorize its use, for secondary & off-duty weapons).
What's to argue about?
It's just another bullet design development & option in an increasingly plentiful field of such things ...