How Many Carry a 1911 with FMJ Ammo?

[TexasRifleman]

Seems that having a gun, being able to trust the guns reliability, and being able to hit with the gun is 99+% of the problem.

Ammo type then is maybe 1% of the problem?

If I had a gun that I would carry, could trust to be reliable, and shoot with very well, and all this happened to be with FMJ then I don't think I'd give any more thought to it.

 

[mavracer]

Everything is a trade off. You are trading presumed improved reliability of the FMJ for presumed improved terminal effectiveness of the JHP. There is nothing wrong with that trade, so long as you are aware of the trade off.

yes but even given that the JHPs jam once ever 100 rounds and only expand 90% that's 90% more effective against a 1% chance of failure. so concidering some of my carry guns have digested 1000s of rounds of JHPs without fail I'm more than ok with any percieved tradeoff

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

My open carry is a 1911 that the MEUSOC armorer built as one of their guns and I asked him to build it for any particular JHP... when he got done laughing at me we went for FMJ/Ball. I get the JHP argument and fully support it in ALL our revolvers (where the hole isn't filled with a shot round "one in the face - change his pace!") but figure... why risk it in the 1911 given "interaction" distances.

 

[David E]

we went for FMJ/Ball. I get the JHP argument....(but) why risk it in the 1911 given "interaction" distances.

Because it's not hard, difficult or surprising to have a 1911 be 100% reliable with a JHP. (or at least be as reliable as it is with FMJ)

Maybe you need a new armorer/gunsmith....

 

[Japle]

Posted by David E:
Because it's not hard, difficult or surprising to have a 1911 be 100% reliable with a JHP. (or at least be as reliable as it is with FMJ)

^ This.

 

[USSR]

...expansion of handgun rounds is great, IF it happens at all, as long as the penetration is still adequate.

That's why I cast my HP's. I can control both expansion and penetration by varying the alloy I use. Buy store bought bullets and it's one size fits all.

Don

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

You know what I REALLY like about jacketed hollow points? In some of my guns, the premium bullets are actually more accurate than the bulk FMJ's. Now THERE is a reason for even ME to like JHP's. However, every now and then, something goes wrong with weapon function, like dirt, lint, fouling, weak springs in magazines, worn or damaged mags or internals, loose extrators, pushed in bullets, etc, and a round nose, FMJ might feed JUST a little better than a JHP. Anyone that wants to disregard all that and put all their faith in JHP's is fine by me. I can see we have two very distinct camps here on the subject. The points taken are interesting, but where we each place our trust in ammo or weapon performance is sure diverse.

 

[Deputy25]

I work in a level one trauma center, and I've seen bullets recovered from human bodies. Hollow points appear to be 50/50, maybe less. A lot of the time, they do no more than ball ammo. YMMV, use what you have confidence in. I can tell you this, most shooting victims that are hit in the head/heart/liver/major vessels don't make it to the OR, regardless of ammo caliber or type.

 

[Jim Watson]

I think JHPs are worth having but I go with ball in 1911s.

JHPs have or should have the warning "Specifications subject to change without notice."
A gunzine article of a number of years ago noted that there had by then been five different variants of .45 Hydrashok, then the latest and greatest. Three of them were identifiable by appearance, differing in nose shape and/or seating depth. Apparently the other two variants had internal differences; maybe jacket thickness, lead hardness, or powder choice.
I'd rather not have to deal with a new box of the same brand of ammo being physically different. It might be better, but it might be worse in my gun.

Non-1911s seem more tolerant of differences in ogival hollowpoints. And I don't think they have monkeyed much with 9BP, at least not where it shows.

 

[Old krow]

Anyone else less than enchanted with JHP's in the .45?

It's a big bullet regardless. I'd use either in a pinch and probably wouldn't feel defenseless in the least. I normally keep some 200 grain +P JHPs loaded. I don't know that they are any more accurate than ball ammo, less accurate than handloads, but, I like the speeds that they shoot at.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

You know what I REALLY like about jacketed hollow points? In some of my guns, the premium bullets are actually more accurate than the bulk FMJ's. Now THERE is a reason for even ME to like JHP's. However, every now and then, something goes wrong with weapon function, like dirt, lint, fouling, weak springs in magazines, worn or damaged mags or internals, loose extrators, pushed in bullets, etc, and a round nose, FMJ might feed JUST a little better than a JHP. Anyone that wants to disregard all that and put all their faith in JHP's is fine by me. I can see we have two very distinct camps here on the subject. The points taken are interesting, but where we each place our trust in ammo or weapon performance is sure diverse.

Never heard it happening once.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

"Never heard it happening once."
You just need to get out more!

 

[USSR]

...every now and then, something goes wrong with weapon function, like dirt, lint, fouling, weak springs in magazines, worn or damaged mags or internals, loose extrators, pushed in bullets, etc, and a round nose, FMJ might feed JUST a little better than a JHP

Absolutely no way of proving that one bullet "might" feed better than another bullet "might". It's just an unprovable hypothetical. The problem with some jacketed HP's is the profile. Take a look at this cast HP bullet's profile, and you will see why it feeds so well.

Don

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

I have seen some of those deficiencies listed above affect the feeding of a round into the ramp or chamber, sometimes causing the round to drop or dip during feeding, changing the angle that it feeds, and thus getting it to hang up on the lip of the HP on the bullet nose. Just enough, on just a bad feed, to hang up the round. There is just LESS to hang up on a round nose. If you don't agree, that's o.k. Maybe you've never experienced THAT type of malf.

 

[David E]

Ok, which is it?

You carry FMJ for feeding reliability or because you don't want the JHP to clog up? (in which case it'll perform like an FMJ)

 

[Venado]

I did a test recently using a hog's head. Shot it with 230grn. lrn, and with a 185 grn. xtp hollow point. I now know why I favor a light, fast hollow point over a slower, heavier bullet. First shot was with the 230 grn. lead round nose made of linotype lead. Bullet went in one eye and out the other, taking the top of the head off with it. I thought, wow, this is great. Second shot was another 230 grn. shot from front to back. Came out the back of the skull making an exit hole the size of the original bullet. I thought, ok, penetration is great. Now came the real eye-opener. Shot it with the 185 grn. xtp, and the whole head exploded with flying pig parts everywhere. It did not penetrate the whole skull, but there was no way it would not have been an instant kill. By the way, I do not believe the .45 acp needs to be a low-pressure cartridge, so these results would not be the same as a person would get with store bought ammo.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

No reference to clogging the HP on my posts. The fouled guns, damaged mag, etc, sometimes contribute to poor bullet feed, which can hang up the lip of the HP bullet MORE than a rounded FMJ bullet.

 

[David E]

fouled guns, damaged mag, etc, sometimes contribute to poor bullet feed, which can hang up the lip of the HP bullet MORE than a rounded FMJ bullet.

I suggest cleaning your gun and checking your magazines more often....

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

You just need to get out more!

Sorry but I've just never heard of a case where a FMJ would feed in something lets say a Glock 21 and it wouldn't feed a JHP. It just doesn't really make sense. If you really are worried about part failures or it getting dirty. Clean and inspect your gun every time you go shooting.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

I like my guns to work when they are dirty; just in case.................................

 

[Prosser]

SDM:

Your no dummy. Ways to a wound channel: bullet design, velocity. Why am I not on the 230 grain ball bandwagon? It was a committee trying to get something to work like the 260 grain Colt FLAT POINT, IN .45 COLT, @ 950 fps.

Remember, Browning came up with 200 grain FP's, at about 950 in the original design of the .45 ACP.

If I'm not carrying .45 ACP HP's, I'm looking at 200 grain Flat Points, at 1200 fps.
My .45 Acps are setup by Jack Huntington, and timed to shoot 45 Detonics level loads. I think Browning, later improved by Detonics, had it right.

With the added velocity of the .451 Detonics, 200 grain speer flying ashtrays @ 1200 fps, and 230 grain HPs at 1100 fps over came the problems with the .45 ACP HP's.

I'm warm and fuzzy on penetration, and, I've shot nearly 500k rounds of 200 grain speer flying ashtrays at 1200 fps. Detonics supplied evidence of their effectiveness when used by law enforcement, and, at that velocity, you get a large wound channel, even if the bullet doesn't work.

If I'm going into a really bad part of Richmond, or Oakland, where you have huge bad guys, buffalobore's 260 grain .45 ACP/ .45 Detonics/super flat points would be my friend, or, going into hog country.

I don't think much of RFN's, unless they are in a .510 Wells, and weigh 600 grains, at 2150 fps, or .458 Lott, and 500 grains at 2300 fps:


Heck, they are even flat pointed as much as they can..

On the otherhand, the above guns shoots .510" Caliber bullets. a 525 grain, RFN, at 1350 fps would probably get the attention of everything on the planet. Anyone want to test fire those rounds, with 60-82 ft-lbs of recoil?
I've got a bunch of 525's loaded at 1350 fps, that sit in a box while I shoot Linebaugh 'short' at 1100 fps...with lighter bullets, like 350 grains.

 

[pinstripe]

The colt 1911 was designed to use fmj hardball ammunition. this is for feeding reliability. Some shoot hollow points well, others don't. if you are confident in a particular round, then use that round, I go for reliability always, so I use fmj. works in mine flawlessly.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

I like my guns to work when they are dirty; just in case.................................

How dirty are you talking here? Lathered with mud, inside and out? I just took my XD-40, hand cycled a round into the chamber, riding it into battery and not a bit of hesitation with that JHP round chambering. It could go as slow as it would function dirty and still chamber. Granted it's no 1911 and I don't have one but I will test this with my brother's next time I see him, I'm assuming you carry a 1911.

The colt 1911 was designed to use fmj hardball ammunition. this is for feeding reliability. Some shoot hollow points well, others don't. if you are confident in a particular round, then use that round, I go for reliability always, so I use fmj. works in mine flawlessly.

I guess you don't realize that the design has been modified in most modern models to use JHP reliably.

ETA: Just found these two videos, 9mm FMJ and .45 ACP FMJ. If you compare the maximum expansion of the two, it actually looks like 9mm ball does more damage than .45 ACP.

9mm: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSrlItrsbvs&feature=channel_video_title
.45 ACP: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLPjTlj1pHk

I'm even suprised by this myself.

 

[Scipio Africanus]

I carry JHP's in my 1911 and my S&W 325. The 1911 feeds them as well as it does ball and the revolver doesn't care. I prefer +P ammo in both. Ball would and has worked for a very long time, but I want every advantage that I can get. I would never disparage a fellow who did carry ball ammo.
There is definitely a place for solids in self defense, just as there is in hunting, but I think HP is a better choice overall.
And, if I was going to use a solid bullet for self defense in a 1911, it would be a JTC design; in a revolver, it would be a SWC.

No matter what, marksmanship is everything.

 

[leadcounsel]

I love these arguments.