Magsafe Ammo

[JimJD]

Hi there,

I was wondering if anyone has any experience or info on Magsafe ammunition?
In particular their .38 Spl and .357 Mag loadings. I'm interested in the other caliber types they make as well.
One situation is for HD, so I've been looking at their "SWAT" loads. I live with my family, So I don't want bullets going through multiple walls if I ever have to use it.
Another situation is when I have my pistol in the car. That would be their non-swat loadings.
I know there's a lot of good defensive ammo out there, just looking at these in this case.

Thanks

 

[George Hill]

I like the "Agent" loads if you can find them.

 

[Preacherman]

There have been very few, if any, verified shooting results with this ammo. The big problem with any "fancy" round is that it will probably increase one aspect of bullet performance at the expense of other aspects. IMHO, you want the best all-round bullet you can buy, because you can't predict how it will have to be used. You might have to shoot through concealment or light cover - so don't give up on penetration. You want to avoid over-penetration through an assailant - so don't give up on expansion or fragmentation. You might have to take a shot at long range - so make sure the round is accurate and carries enough energy to do the job at long range (and practice your long-range marksmanship! ). You might have to stop an attacker at arm's length - so don't choose a round that won't impart enough "shock" power to stop an attack.

The Magsafe rounds advertise great effect in flesh - well, I don't know, as I haven't seen actual shooting reports. However, I have found them very inaccurate in some guns. If your gun likes them, and you choose to go this way, that's fine. Personally, I go for the best-performing JHP in a given caliber, and live with its limitations in order to get its all-round performance.

 

[clubsoda22]

I use Aguila IQ. Frags in flesh and drywall. One shooter reported 1 entrance hole and 7 exit holes in a 1 gallon milk jug. Aguila IQ's also do this funny thing when they hit a target that is the same relative hardness or harder than their aluminum alloy composition, like a car door or bulletproof glass. they, collapse down to a point and penetrate. Tests on their sight show penetration through 3/4" bulletproof glass and 12" of gelatin but only penetrating 10 or so inches in bare or clothed gelatin. Cool stuff.

 

[longeyes]

I have some around in various calibers. I used to have two revolvers
loaded with them but never felt secure with them, especially after reading
how they were often inaccurate and lacked real penetration, etc. The point is,
we KNOW hollow-points work so why mess around when your safety's at stake? If
you ever need to shoot in self-defense you are going to want the closest to a
"sure thing" you can get. There are plenty of good hollow-point rounds to
choose from.

 

[Sleuth]

Pre-fragmented ammo has it's problems, in addition to the ones mentioned. I was told (by the police forenics expert who examined the cases) of two failures:
1. naked man shot at about 6 feet with .38, who grabbed his clothes and ran to the hospital.
2. Woman in sheer nightgown shot with .45 at less than 10 feet, ran down stairs and about a block before she tripped and was shot in the ear by her crazed lawyer husband.
In both cases, the shootees were morbidly obese.

If we could choose who we were going to fight, I choose Pee Wee Herman. My luck, I'll draw the Incredable Hulk! Choose your ammo for worst case situations.

 

[JimJD]

Wow. So far all of the replies have been great. Thanks all!
Right now, I have some .357 Mag, 125 Gr. JHP's for my pistol.
Maybe I should stick with those for now?
By the way, the pistol in question is a Ruger GP-100, 4 in. SS, fixed sights.
Just picked it up the other day. Was going to get the 3 In. ,but went for the 4 In. . Hopefully I'll be going to the range this weekend to try it out, see where where it prints with what.

 

[Preacherman]

JimJD, the optimum defensive ammo for your pistol, in historical terms, would be the Federal or Remington 125gr. JHP (not the Remington Golden Saber, which is downloaded a bit, or the Federal Hydra-Shok, but the standard, "classic" design in both). Another very effective - and very accurate - round is the Winchester Silvertip 145gr. JHP. This is my personal choice of carry load in this caliber: it penetrates a bit better than the light 125gr. loads, but not nearly so much as the traditional 158gr. loads. Its street results are also very impressive.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

I've always wanted to try out this type of ammo. Glaser safety-slugs in particular. The enormous cost is the reason I've yet to. I firmly believe in practicing with what I use as a SD load. So far, Hydra-Shoks are about as pricey as I want to go. Since it's generally considered one of the best SD loads, this is good enough for me until I win the lottery.

 

[Jeff OTMG]

I went from Glaser to MagSafe many years ago. If you were living in an apt next door to me I would love for you to have one of them as your home defense load.

 

[Preacherman]

Magsafe ammo was tested by Firearms Tactical Institute. Their conclusion?

MagSafe Ammunition Demonstrates Inadequate Terminal Performance for General-Purpose Personal Defense Use.

The article may be found here. They also note that they tested .45 ACP Magsafe ammo, and that:

MagSafe bullets that carry less shot, or smaller size birdshot will produce less trauma than observed in this test.

That doesn't bode well for smaller calibers...

 

[JimJD]

Wow...

Preacherman, thanks a million for the link and the info therein!
Those are some very interesting tests.
I'm going to stick with the 125 Gr. JHP's I have on hand. Probably get something from Cor-Bon, or those Winchester Silvertip 145 Gr. JHP's you mentioned in the near future.
Once again, thank you.

 

[fastbolt]

I quit carrying frangible rounds ... Glaser Blue in the older "flat" nose cap configuration, and then Blue & Silver in the "round" nose versions, and any of the MagSafe loads ... many years ago. At first it was a deliberate decision on my part, and then in later years it was prohibited by agency policy.

While you DO have a very valid concern for the safety of anyone else "downrange", the use of specialty ammunition might not be the exact answer to your problem, and might very well introduce a different problem ... Your call, so to speak, and you're right to start looking for as much information as you can find so you can hopefully make an informed decison ...

I think it was sometime after a local PD experienced a "failure-to-stop" problem many years ago, while one of their officers was using a popular frangible round, that our agency stopped authorizing the use of frangible ammunition in service weapons, and nowadays they aren't even premitted in off duty weapons.

If I remember right, I think the situation involved an armed suspect who sustained a close range hit by a Glaser round, in his neck, and he wasn't exactly what you'd call "incapacitated" ...

Sure, I remember when the local gunstore/distributor of Glaser ammunition showed me "secret" X-ray photocopies he'd received, in hushed tones, showing the awesome & frightening wounding capability of the then-current Glaser rounds ...

The MagSafe rounds included some very interesting variations of frangible bullet composition, but some of the more interesting ones either weren't produced in much quantity, or else weren't commonly offered to the general public. I think I still have some .44 Magnum MagSafe loads somewhere in my ammunition cabinet. I've been tempted periodically to use them for gopher eradication out in the orchard.

If you visit Glock Talk, and send a PM to ULVER ... as I recall, he used to know Joe, the developer of MagSafe, in the early days of the product ... he might be able to offer some informed opinions and personal experiences about the use of different MagSafe loads.

In the meantime, remember to know your downrange "background", regardless of the ammunition you select ...

Sometimes circumstances exist that might make the use of a firearm inappropriate, even if the threat of immediate serious bodily injury or death might otherwise make the use of deadly force in a defensive capacity seem reasonable and justified.

Cops have to consider such things each and every time they draw and present their service weapons, and so do civilians ...

I can't offer anyone legal advice, and won't even pretend to infer that I can ... I'm not an attorney and I don't practice law. Period.

But anyone who considers it likely that they might have need to use a firearm (or any other form of deadly force, for that matter) for defensive purposes should certainly learn as much as possible about the laws governing the use of deadly force for defense of self (or any known/unknown third person), even it means spending money asking for the opinion of an attorney familiar with such areas of the law.

In many states CCW classes require the permit holder receive at least a basic awareness and knowledge of the applicable laws. This is generally the eye-opening part of theCCW classes I assist in teaching. It's the rare class where at least one of the folks attending isn't surprised by the amount of responsibility that's placed upon them, under the law, regarding the use of deadly force. The part of the classroom lecture about how bare fear, alone, is NOT sufficient to justify the use of deadly force, etc., etc., is especially a surprise to a lot of folks, for some reason.

If you know any local cops that you can ask about such things, that's fine ... just remember a couple of things, though ...

Six cops might give you a total of seven different opinions about how they MIGHT perceive and enforce different laws ... and that while cops may the first folks that respond to investigate a shooting situation, the prosecuting city attorney, district attorney, grand jury or what-have-you will often be making the decision of whether or not to prosecute ... and then there's the entire civil litigation potential, wrongful death, emotional pain & suffering of the suspect's surviving family members, etc. ... not to mention potential civil rights issues.

Even a "righteous" self defense shooting can cost thousands of dollars in legal fees, and impose horrific emotional cost on the people involved.

Owning a firearm and the "best" ammunition is easy ...

Nobody in their right mind ever desires to be involved in such a situation, however ... and I'm certainly not implying that anyone here does ... but it's always a good idea to take a moment and remember to think beyond the firearm & caliber issue, no matter how much we might enjoying friendly discussion on these forums.

Hey, I didn't mean to imply that you weren't aware of these issues. Obviously, you're asking about ammunition that minimizes the risk to your parents, after all.

It's just that we're talking about the potential use of deadly force, after all, right?

Sorry, I didn't mean to become pedantic or block the sidewalk with my soapbox, or anything. Honest. Someone might make some money offering a "fastbolt" filter around here ... Unless you have trouble falling asleep, and need something to put you under ...

Think, plan and stay safe ...

 

[Sleuth]

All good points Fastbolt! I agree.

 

[JimJD]

Thanks for the input Fastbolt.
I've had to move down to FL to help out with my Mother and Father.
Health issues and whatnot.
Add to that, My two teenage sisters live here too. So I'm taking up some of the slack where I can. Besides my Father, I'm the only one with a Driver's liscense in the household. That will change soon!
This is the first real house that I lived in. Back in NYC it was a Co-op Apartment with a lot of security. Even then, one still had to be careful.
Especially when I used to live in Chinatown, that was an "adventure"...

To shore up some of the security here in the new home, I'm thinking about getting a dog. I've worked with animals for some years(in a medical capacity) Plus, I like having them around.
I'm prepared to deal with the legal, monetary, and moral issues if I have a HD situation arise. Hopefully, that won't happen though. It's happened to my family before, thankfully we had a great lawyer and were just in our actions. Believe me, a NYC jury is tough on the senses... We did'nt have to shoot anyone thank God. The criminals did have a nice long hospital stay though. Plus, I have family who have suffered a home invasion. Horrible stuff. I want to give myself a chance if that should ever happen.
Because of that, I've been setting up various security measures around the house and property.

I'm also planning on getting a CCW permit in the near future. I have an uncle by marrage who is retired Miami-Dade Police. He's been a great source of information and guidance.
It's nice to live in a state where one can legally defend one's self. Unlike NY, where the legally armed and prepared are viewed as being just as bad as some of the criminals.

 

[fastbolt]

Unlike NY, where the legally armed and prepared are viewed as being just as bad as some of the criminals.

I always thought NY liked their crooks better???

Sorry, couldn't resist ...

It sounds like you're well ahead of the curve in both awareness and ... unfortunately ... personal experience in some of these issues, compared to most folks.

A couple of teenage youngsters in the house can be a real headache when it comes to being aware of where everyone is when something goes bump in the night.

Animals can be good companions, as well as good early warning systems ...

Think about a couple of those ultra-bright flashlights, which are unfortunately a bit expensive, but which will burn bright enough to just about peel paint off the walls. They really ruin anyone's night vision that's on the wrong end of them ... and, unfortunately, they're not all that "kind" to folks standing on the "smart" end of them, regarding what used to be YOUR night vision ... But they offer a chance to not only provide bright illumination, but perhaps a bit of momentary disorientation to otherwise unwelcome folks.

Hint: Illuminate and MOVE, and review some of the better body indexing and positioning methods for using handheld lightsources. One of my least favorite methods of using a lightsource is to have it mounted to a weapon, for general use ... unless I REALLY expect I might be illuminating and SHOOTING, in which case I'd like my hands filled only with weapon.

One thing I dislike about being limited to weapon-mounted light sources is that I've had situations occur where I didn't want my muzzle moving to cover something else I was illuminating, or, I didn't want to automatically cover something with my muzzle just in order to illuminate it. I've actually had to partially move a flashlight so that it not only allowed me to continue to cover a suspect, but also helped another cop avoid an unseen hazard while he was approaching to help me.

A couple of conveniently placed flashlights, of different sizes, strengths and types would probably complement your Ruger revolver. But you've probably already got that avenue convered, I'll bet ...

As far as the drivers license issue ... you're not going to have to pay for the girls' insurance when they get their licenses, are you? I can't help with that ...

Best of luck with things ...

 

[fastbolt]

JimJD,

Talk about a timely coincidence ...

Here's a new GT thread topic about MagSafe ammunition, posted by the fellow I mentioned previously, who uses ULVER as his forum name ...
http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=201522

 

[mec]

"Read about this, and several other interesting happenings (like a .45 not stopping the bad guy) in the CONCEALED HANDGUN MANUAL. Should be at your local Borders bookstore. Excellent reading...

Long story short: Perp attempts a car-jacking. Joe ..."

I was at a meeting where the author of that book discussed the incident. A police investigator called the shooter and told him the next time he shot an armed career criminal who was a great pain in the butt to the investigator and law officers.

He told the bullet designer about the incident and the information was not appreciated.

 

[Sleuth]

mec, could you clarify your post? It does not make sense.

 

[mec]

I'll try: The first paragraph is a quote from the link posted just above. It referes to an incident in which a concealed handgun licensee was in his van when he saw a guy sneaking up on his passenger side door. The guy was crouched down and visible in the wide angle rear view mirror.
The licensee had a 38 loaded with the magsafe rounds and was ready when the guy stood up and pointed a gun at him.

He then shot the guy through the glass and got out of his car. Both individuals were moving toward the back of the car where they encountered each other and exchanged more shots. The licensee wasn't hit at all but he hit the perpetrator with every shot. in his revolver and then got away. The police came and spent some time looking over the scene at first believing that no one had been hit. Finally they found the perpetrator wounded and took him to the hospital.

Later that evening, the shooter received a call from the ER doctor curious about the ammo used- and needing the information for medical intervention. The perpetrator recovered from superficial wounds and it turned out that the first round had come completely apart on the car glass.

Later on, a police detective told the licensee that the perpetrator was a career criminal with multiple police contacts. The detective expressed disappointment that the ammunition had not been more effective.

The author of the book in the above link told this story at a meeting of the Texas concealed handgun instructors association. The licensee himself was schedueled to speak but didn't make it. According to the speaker, the licensee had told the manufacturer of this ammunition - which is reported to be Magsafe, about the incident and was advised that the company would take him to court if he went around saying that the ammunition did not work.

 

[Sleuth]

Thanks.
In one sense, the ammo worked (it went bang).
In a greater sense, it did not work - it did not stop the BG.

I will not risk my life on "trick" ammo.

How could the maker take the shooter to court? As long as he tells the truth, there is no cause for action. Yeah, they could sue, but not win.

BTW, to my knowledge there is no police agency issuing pre-fragmented rounds. If they were so great, how come no agency carries it????

Your choices may vary. Just remember, all you are betting is your life!

 

[mec]

"How could the maker take the shooter to court? As long as he tells the truth...."
-Probably very true. Equally true that a lot of ammunition gurus produce more bullcrap than the bull, himself. Many of them are noted for poor manners.

I like to shoot various round into thick stacks of beef brisket-sometimes with ribs in front and, more often than not, fronted by some sort of clothing material. A good many of the standard and magnum jhps expand very well and it makes me happy to think that they would do the same in real life. I've shot enough deer and small varmints to know that the current crop of high velocity hollow points do quite a bit of damage.

Still, unless I shot a very large sample of humanity under various conditions I would not pretend to know how effective any load might be in that usage. The morgue monsters and jello junkies have been yelling "liar,liar" so long that I wouldn't know whether to believe any of them either.

 

[Jeff OTMG]

Sleuth, the ammo did more than went bang. It fragmented on impact with a non-water based object. That is why it is called MagSAFE. Also see the name Glaser SAFEty Slug. It performed exactly as it was designed to do. This also answers your question why no LE agencies issue MagSafe ammo.

 

[BluesBear]

It would appear, from mec's post, that the first round disintregated on the glass, just as it is designed to do, and that the rest of the GG's shots MISSED. IF he had indeed hit the BG with "every shot" there would have been more bullet holes in the clothing and many many mamy more "superficial" fragments in the BG.

I'll bet a dollar to a doughnut that if the truth be known only the fragments from that first shot hit the BG.

Remember you can't miss fast enough to win a gunfight.


The only time misses count is when you are looking for a prom date.

 

[Kentucky Rifle]

This thread makes me glad that I switched to RBCD Ammunition...

I realize that a lot of you aren't believers. (yet ).
I did my own RBCD test last summer. I stole an uncooked corned beef brisket form my wife. Still in the package, I used duct tape to fasten the brisket to a gallon milk jug that was full of water. Cap on. I wanted to do a fair test so I picked a medium caliber. .380ACP from my Colt Mustang Pocketlite. I stepped back 10 paces, turned, took aim, and fired. I don't remember what I was expecting--but it wasn't this. The .380 RBCD blew a hole in the corned beef brisket that I easily could put my fist through. And the milk jug plumb blew UP!
Pieces of plastic were everywhere. I put the safety to the ON position and just looked at that hole for a while. I couldn't find anything of the projectile.
Jeff OTMG has posted some pictures of a beef roast which he shot with a larger caliber. His pictures are shocking. They look like the roast is turning "inside-out". So far, I've seen nothing to change my opinion of RBCD.

KR