New entry to the caliber conflict that has played out so often

[allaroundhunter]

Again, I will restate what I have said in previous posts:

Yes, the .410 can be a very good fight stopper under 7 yards. But in that scenario, I can fire 4 accurate 9mm rounds for every 2 semi-accurate .410 rounds.

In summary, this is my personal experience with the guns, and it mirrors 3 other shooters that I shot with that day.

So yes, the .410 can be a good defensive handgun for the "average" self defense encounter distance, but unless you personally are able to test it, you cannot say whether it is better or not.

As far as putting it up against the .45 ACP, .40 S&W, and 9mm, it won't ever stack up as competition for a defensive handgun. It's capacity is less than a 1911, its range is lacking, and it is not nearly as accurate.

By accurate, I don't mean having 3 out of 5 projectiles hit my target. I want to know that if I do my part, the bullet will hit its mark. If I am in duress will I be able to make every shot hit? Probably not, but that is all the more reason to not be sending extra projectiles out of the barrel. I am responsible for everything that leaves the barrel of my gun, as are each of us.

 

[Pfletch83]

@allaroundhunter

So you are saying that since a K/J-frame .38 holds less ammo than a 1911 then it is not a good option for a self defense gun?

I know several folks on this board that would disagree with you on that one.

 

[Skribs]

As far as putting it up against the .45 ACP, .40 S&W, and 9mm, it won't ever stack up as competition for a defensive handgun. It's capacity is less than a 1911, its range is lacking, and it is not nearly as accurate.

It's accurate enough at short range, its capacity is better than most stock shotguns, and...okay yes, it doesn't have range, you're right there.

By accurate, I don't mean having 3 out of 5 projectiles hit my target. I want to know that if I do my part, the bullet will hit its mark. If I am in duress will I be able to make every shot hit? Probably not, but that is all the more reason to not be sending extra projectiles out of the barrel. I am responsible for everything that leaves the barrel of my gun, as are each of us.

I think its safe to say that if you carry a .410 and the target is more than X feet away, your best bet is to reload .45s into it (people claim the .45 ACP in the governor is actually fairly accurate) or call it quits.

So yes, the .410 can be a good defensive handgun for the "average" self defense encounter distance, but unless you personally are able to test it, you cannot say whether it is better or not.

Unless you've tested both in actually stopping an attack, I'm going to say that at "normal" SD distances, they both will put shots on target and penetrate to vitals. Whether one shot of 0.6-0.8" diameter that impacts directly where you aim (which means if you're not pointing at the heart, you're not hitting it; but similarly you are if you are), or 3-5 shots of 0.36" diameter that impact around where you aim is best isn't something you're going to figure out until you're in the middle of it.

I will agree with you that you can get faster shots with a 9 than a .410, it's part of why I wanted to go 9 instead of .40 or .45; lighter recoil (the others being capacity, which you mentioned, and price, which you didn't mention, but also goes to a cartridge over a .410 shell). I just think it's the old argument "rifle or shotgun for HD?" ported into a smaller package.

ETA:

So you are saying that since a K/J-frame .38 holds less ammo than a 1911 then it is not a good option for a self defense gun?

Not relevant to this thread, per se, but I do believe that revolvers don't offer any real advantage over semi-autos (I've seen both fail, and both failures required factory work), but they come with reduced capacity and slower reloads. Overall, I see the auto as the better choice.

That doesn't mean revolvers won't work for most situations, I just don't see a reason for your average citizen to carry a revolver over an auto.

 

[Pfletch83]

@Skribs

And historically speaking from the 19th century on through to world war 1 and beyond which has done better in hits when the range is close on a moving target....a rifle or a shotgun?

 

[hatt]

Example #7

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz4tOc1GLgo

I think this shooter is a member of a gun forum. Bunch of good stuff. The dude that didn't get shot was popping off on facebook and stuff.

 

[Kiln]

Impressed by lots of holes in paper? Gotcha.

Impressed by the 4" of penetration behind those holes in a real life bad guy? Not so much. 24 non-lethal wounds in a 300lb methhead coming for ya... aint going to cut it.

I want to know where in the hell all of you guys keep seeing these mythical 300lb meth heads?

I think that some people may be out of touch with the fact that regular meth/crack abusers are unlikely to weigh in over or even at 200lbs.

 

[481]

I want to know where in the hell all of you guys keep seeing these mythical 300lb meth heads?

I think that some people may be out of touch with the fact that regular meth/crack abusers are unlikely to weigh in over or even at 200lbs.

Perhaps the assumption is that they are a "noob" meth-head.

 

[silicosys4]

Wow. This round is so conflicted...does it work? 4"? 12"? Box o truth says one thing, brass fetcher says something completely the opposite. Brass Fetcher can't even keep all 5 pellets on target at 10' for the gel test. Thats not a good thing to me....in fact, thats a very bad thing to me. It all depends which link you click to on this thread. Bottom line, it seems: no real data, but I can tell you for sure; It does NOTHING better than another platform, and it does many things much worse. In the absence of data, I'll stick to the tried and true.

BTW, 300lb methheads do exist. I work in a small town fishing community. Trust me, there are people who are lifelong users who have found that "balance" between tweaking, eating, and working...and smoke meth like some people smoke cigarettes...then go fishing, come home, eat dinner, and go to bed.

 

[k_dawg]

Remember folks: no one has the 'need' for a 'military style' 'high capacity' 'military assault pistol'. But we'll let the folks keep a revolver.

Except now, this revolve is an 'military assault pistol' because it can fire 'shotgun shells'.

lol

 

[NG VI]

PFletch, I wasn't comparing it to other large frame revolvers, because so few people carry those these days.

If it's going for a concealed carry role, it's competing with J frames and a long list of far better performing autos.

At 8.5 inches long and 29.5 ounces unloaded, it's larger and heavier than many compact and full size service autos even.

If I was offered a 686 Plus or a Judge/Governor, I'd beg for the 686, I love those.

they are indeed niche guns,the niche being that they make for a better fight stopper than a single projectile dependant weapon.

I'm going to have to heartily disagree with you that they are a better fight stopper. They are cumbersome, the number of very low velocity, poorly shaped, low sectional density, wildly inaccurate, easily deflected projectiles does not outweigh the advantages of any well designed conventional service caliber JHP bullet.

 

[NG VI]

I would say it would be more accurate for you to say you THINK pfletch is wrong, just like I think it would be accuratte for plfetch to say he THINKs he is right. It's the same with the other contraversial calibers:

The fanbois say "OMG ITS THE GREATEST THING EVER ID GIVE UP PIZZA TO HAVE THIS!"
The haters say "9mm/.45 has worked, and the new thing is different, so it won't work."

Then you get people like me, who recognize that both the conventional and the "new" have advantages and disadvantages, and it's hard to say where one or the other is "better".

No one here is saying it's different so it won't work, we've very diligently laid out the shortcomings of the 3", rifled-bore .410 shotgun as a weapon. There are many faults, many ways in which the revolvers themselves are less than acceptable as a carry weapon compared to competing pistols and revolvers, in some ways the rifled 3" .410 is nearly an irresponsible choice for a defense weapon.

The people who have made cases against the Judge/Governor as a carry gun or home defense gun have all explained how and why they hold that position, and have explained the serious, fatal flaws inherent in the points made by Pfletch and whoever else thinks three projectiles matters more than anything else, like accuracy and wounding capacity of the projectiles in question.

And as far as the Governor being significantly more accurate than the Judge, if the Governor will place all three 00 pellets on a torso-sized target at ten yards reliably, that's what, a sixty percent improvement over the judge?

Still not enough.

And if Pfletch thinks it's absurd to even consider that just maybe your defensive encounter won't fit the vague, mythical few feet defense shooting no one ever seems to produce evidence for the existence of, that's his deal.

If he ever finds himself in a situation where some shooting at another human being is necessary, I hope he's right next to the guy, because after seven to ten yards a Judge is extremely likely to send at least one pellet flying off Lord knows where.

 

[NG VI]

So you are saying that since a K/J-frame .38 holds less ammo than a 1911 then it is not a good option for a self defense gun?

J frames are also significantly smaller than a 1911, I notice you keep ignoring the size issue with these guns, or you compare it to guns no one carries because they are far too heavy and bulky in comparison to the wide array of better carry choices.

Bottom line, it seems: no real data, but I can tell you for sure; It does NOTHING better than another platform, and it does many things much worse. In the absence of data, I'll stick to the tried and true.

Hell to the yes.

 

[Skribs]

No one here is saying it's different so it won't work, we've very diligently laid out the shortcomings of the 3", rifled-bore .410 shotgun as a weapon. There are many faults, many ways in which the revolvers themselves are less than acceptable as a carry weapon compared to competing pistols and revolvers, in some ways the rifled 3" .410 is nearly an irresponsible choice for a defense weapon.

Most of the people saying it won't work claim it will be too inaccurate at SD ranges and that it will not meet minimum penetration, and tests show that with specific loads designed for the revolvers, 000-buckshot can hit the target at SD ranges and penetrate deep enough.

 

[NG VI]

As long as those ranges happen to fit a very specific set of conditions.

To me the idea that even a competent shot couldn't count on their gun to land a shot on a human sized target at twenty yards is pretty unacceptable. Sure it's unlikely that a defensive shooting will require a shot that long, and people generally are in motion in those incidents, but the idea that it's wishful thinking to hit a man at thirty yards at all doesn't work for me.

 

[Certaindeaf]

"Meets the 12" minimum"? golly.. Uh, ok.. a .32acp will go 30"+ so the FBI has found a new super round! lolz

 

[SEE IT LIKE A NATIVE]

I cant help but wonder if the shot pattern would improve any if you could lead the barrel up shooting soft lead 45 then leave it that way ! If i was going to use it for self defense i would be shooting 45 colt out of it anyway ! They are too bulky for me , I would rather carry my glock 30 sf and if snakes are a problem load the first round with snake shot ! Kevin

 

[allaroundhunter]

@allaroundhunter

So you are saying that since a K/J-frame .38 holds less ammo than a 1911 then it is not a good option for a self defense gun?

I know several folks on this board that would disagree with you on that one.

You are putting words in my mouth. That is not at all what I said. The combination of the factors that I mentioned make it a poor defensive choice, IMO.

A 5-shot revolver in .38 spl is not a bad choice, and I would take it over the Judge any day of the week.

It is funny that you are comparing the Judge to a J-frame.....aside from capacity and both being revolvers, they are as comparable as you seem to think...


Sent from my HTC One X

 

[Skribs]

"Meets the 12" minimum"? golly.. Uh, ok.. a .32acp will go 30"+ so the FBI has found a new super round! lolz

Placement > Penetration > PWC cross-section (usually the expanded diameter). .32 ACP FMJ is a lot different than an expanded 9mm JHP or 3-5 x 0.36" 000-buck.

In the case of the judge OR the 9mm, at expected ranges:
Placement = Adequate
Penetration = Adequate
PWC = 0.3-0.51 sq in. (Judge) vs. 0.33 sq in. (9mm, assuming .65" expanded). You also got 3-5 wound tracts instead of one, so if that 9mm just hits lung, that .410 has a couple of extra chances to hit the heart and bring about a stop a lot quicker. Conversely, if the 9mm would hit the heart, the .410 would likely spread out around it. That's why I say both are "adequate" unless you can guarantee exactly COM every time in a real gunfight.

Again, I'm not arguing which is best. I'm arguing that both are viable for self defense within the expected range of the Judge, but only the standard cartridge is viable beyond that. What I'm mainly arguing against is the notion that with a Judge, you're pretty much miss the target at 10 feet with everything, and if you hit the target the pellets will practically bounce off. No, it's not a tack driver, but it's better than a lot of people give it credit for.

 

[NG VI]

.32 FMJ is actually pretty similar to 00 buck, except in this case it'll certainly penetrate better and will probably be moving faster.

No, you don't get three to five of them per shot, but you also don't have to compensate for a gun that can't be counted on to land every projectile on a human torso on the other side of a mid sized room.

 

[Pfletch83]

@NG VI

Here is the point.



































This is how far away you are from said point.


Show actual video of the many documented incidents of self defense beyond point blank range.


You know the counter point to my earlier statement of such an encounter being at the distances you think you will most often have to engage a target with your 9mm or .45 acp.

 

[Pfletch83]

@Allaroundhunter

"It's capacity is less than a 1911"

Did you or did you not type the above bit?

 

[allaroundhunter]

@Allaroundhunter

"It's capacity is less than a 1911"

Did you or did you not type the above bit?

Yes I did, but that is not the only factor that makes it a bad defensive gun. If you are only going to read one single piece of each of my statements then this discussion will never get us anywhere... Heck, that wasn't even a full sentence of my post. And I used the 1911 as a reference as another limited capacity gun that is in the same weight and size range (a commander size 1911).

But let me rephrase this into one sentence: For its size, it's capacity is too small for me to consider it a good choice as a defensive gun.*

There are other factors that go into my thoughts here, but I am just going one factor at a time.

Sent from my HTC One X

 

[tomrkba]

The whole 410/45 Colt craze has to go. My issue with 410 from a handgun is that it's barely "minute of body" at 21 feet. I patterned several shots from a Taurus Judge and it was terrible. I could NOT count on an upper torso hit unless I was shooting 45 Colt. Spread was over 24" with three non-lethal hits (the nut shot would have gotten a reaction).

As for 9x19mm versus 45 ACP--that argument comes up every other day on this forum. I'm sure you can find 100 threads that document both calibers and make the case for either cartridge.

 

[Lawdawg45]

Yes I did, but that is not the only factor that makes it a bad defensive gun. If you are only going to read one single piece of each of my statements then this discussion will never get us anywhere... Heck, that wasn't even a full sentence of my post. And I used the 1911 as a reference as another limited capacity gun that is in the same weight and size range (a commander size 1911).

But let me rephrase this into one sentence: For its size, it's capacity is too small for me to consider it a good choice as a defensive gun.*

There are other factors that go into my thoughts here, but I am just going one factor at a time.

Sent from my HTC One X

I understand your logic, my Glock 19 fully loaded (15+1) weighed less than my 1911 unloaded.

LD

 

[Skribs]

It was hardly "minute of body" when I rented one at the range a few years ago...I'm pretty sure specific loads will behave better in the short barrels than others. I'm also guessing people use a load not optimal for short barrels and blame the gun for the ballistics that are a combination of gun and ammo.