Question on my friends thinking?

[Warp]

Every now and then somebody brings up this topic on a gun forum.

It is, to put it mildly...silly.

It is of course his choice, I'm in no position to tell him not to...but I would happily ask him WHY and tell him that I still have yet to hear an actual reason for doing so.

But what if it expands and doesn't have the penetration to finish the job?

Ammo selection is important. Shot placement is king, penetration is queen, everything else is just gravy.

Not all JHPs have the same penetration. In a borderline defensive round like .380, careful attention must be paid to penetration when selecting ammo.

 

[Kosh75287]

Never saw the movie or the TV series. I found the ravages of the Carter administration (when the TV show aired) quite enough departure from reality without having to see more "unreality" on TV.

 

[Kosh75287]

Each round is an independent sample. Assuming each are of equivalent quality and reliability, then they all have equivalent chances of firing. And if you know ahead of time that one is less likely to fire, then it shouldn't be in the gun.

1.) If each hollow point is of different manufacture/design/whatever, how can we make the assumption that they all have equivalent chances of expanding (I don't think worry was expressed over all of them FIRING)? Remember, not all hollow-points are created equal.

2.) Each different round is an independent EVENT. A magazine-full of rounds, if all are of the same manufacture/design/whatever might constitute a SAMPLE, albeit a probably unrepresentative one.

3.) If I substitute the word "expanding" for "firing" in your post, as I hope you meant to, how am I to know ahead of time if one is more or less likely to expand than another? If I shoot a box-full of each type into the same ballistic medium, I MIGHT ascertain which of them is most prone to expand in that medium. Will the results generalize to a clothed human torso, shot at any angle other than 90 degrees? I wouldn't bet on it. At least I wouldn't willingly bet my LIFE on it.

 

[Warp]

1.) If each hollow point is of different manufacture/design/whatever, how can we make the assumption that they all have equivalent chances of expanding (I don't think worry was expressed over all of them FIRING)? Remember, not all hollow-points are created equal.

2.) Each different round is an independent EVENT. A magazine-full of rounds, if all are of the same manufacture/design/whatever might constitute a SAMPLE, albeit a probably unrepresentative one.

3.) If I substitute the word "expanding" for "firing" in your post, as I hope you meant to, how am I to know ahead of time if one is more or less likely to expand than another? If I shoot a box-full of each type into the same ballistic medium, I MIGHT ascertain which of them is most prone to expand in that medium. Will the results generalize to a clothed human torso, shot at any angle other than 90 degrees? I wouldn't bet on it. At least I wouldn't willingly bet my LIFE on it.

Better to pick the one you think is best and go with it

 

[Kosh75287]

Better to pick the one you think is best and go with it.

Yes, PROBABLY. And the whole THING'S a matter of PROBABILITY. Perhaps his best bet is to practice shooting the Mozambique stroke until it's instinctive to him, and pray for fewer aggressors.

Or carry something more powerful.

Okay, I'm done.

 

[RustyShackelford]

I'm waiting for the post that says.....

I'm waiting for the forum post that says; My friend bought a gun & when he pulled the trigger, a loud noise & blast came out! .

Really, Id advise your pal to try a few well made factory .380acp rounds that feed & cycle in the Glock 42 then train with it.

There are a few decent .380acp loads out there. Even the much railed against G2 RIP is now in .380acp. Yes!

For a Glock 42, Id buy the Corbon PowRball, Glaser Silver Safety Slug, Winchester Silvertip 85gr HP or the Buffalo Bore .380acp HP load.
To carry a spare mag or 2 with factory FMJ .380acp would be smart too.
Do not mix carry loads. Or medications.

 

[USAF_Vet]

I'm not 100 percent on his reasoning behind it but when asked he claimed that if one brand failed the next would work. Oneounceload how will that look in court is a concern of mine just looking at all the details is all.

If his Glock fails, does he also carry a Springfield, a Taurus, a Smith & Wesson, a Ruger and a Walther just in case?

His reasoning is, as been stated, silly. If his shoot is determined as lawful, his choice of ammo stacked in the mag isn't going to be a factor. If his shoot isn't lawful, the ammo stacked in his mags probably won't be much of a factor then, either.

 

[Sol]

I bet he does it because he thinks it looks likes the bees-knees.

I know somebody who does the same with their defensive ammo using hydro-shocks and something else.

The staggered yet symetrical pattern is visually appealing, though it serves no purpose and may make things more difficult if needed to use the weapon.

 

[Field Tester]

OP,
Ask your friend if his reasoning is somewhat close to my reply (post #25).

 

[USAF_Vet]

I wonder if his reasoning is that he's worried if he has to shoot through light covering material? I.E. a windshield, car door, sheet rock, a house door, etc...

This is why I carry a full spare mag of FMJ. Staggering different JHP's to defeat cover doesn't make sense. If a 124 Hollow point Golden Sabre doesn't punch through a windshield or car door, why would I presume a 124 Hydro Shok or whatever else would?

A 124 FMJ, however, has been tested and proves itself capable of defeating light cover, although with questionable velocity and energy to deliver an incapacitating wound to any soft meat behind it.

If you've tested a JHP of a certain brand and know its capable of defeating light cover, then why even bother to load anything else?

 

[Davek1977]

I see absolutley no benefit to this, and as has been previously pointed out...if it were such a great idea, professionals in the field who actually USE their weapons would be doing it as well....andthe fact is, they do not.

 

[mnrivrat]

Why would there be any legal ramifications as he is using factory ammo

Might be easier to mount an insanity defense . Tell him he should put 4 different size wheels on his car as well to seal the concept of him being a couple cards short of a full deck.

 

[ku4hx]

He's hedging his bet by combining the preferences of several different people into one magazine. Who's to say any one of those preferences is wrong? As long as he's using ammunition with a "proven" track record, what difference does it make at self defense distances?

I feel it's best to stick with one type/brand of bullet in one magazine. But I have no real proof that the best course. It's just what I feel is the best solution. Obviously your friend feels differently. Feelings are a bit like opinions: we all have them and one person's feeling are no less valid than another person's. Unless and until real world experience proves differently.

 

[B!ngoFuelUSN]

1.) If each hollow point is of different manufacture/design/whatever, how can we make the assumption that they all have equivalent chances of expanding (I don't think worry was expressed over all of them FIRING)? Remember, not all hollow-points are created equal.

2.) Each different round is an independent EVENT. A magazine-full of rounds, if all are of the same manufacture/design/whatever might constitute a SAMPLE, albeit a probably unrepresentative one.

3.) If I substitute the word "expanding" for "firing" in your post, as I hope you meant to, how am I to know ahead of time if one is more or less likely to expand than another? If I shoot a box-full of each type into the same ballistic medium, I MIGHT ascertain which of them is most prone to expand in that medium. Will the results generalize to a clothed human torso, shot at any angle other than 90 degrees? I wouldn't bet on it. At least I wouldn't willingly bet my LIFE on it.

Not sure you're right here. Each is a sample of one. They are also one event in a sample of one. That these words, in this particular context can be interchanged points to the error of his analysis. In this context the OP's friend is not analyzing the results across all of the cartridges in the magazine. But rather the result of each cartridge.
To be clear, I meant to comment on both firing and expansion. If you look up to a few earlier entries from my original, there was speculation that the intent of the friend of the OP was to improve the chance of proper expansion by loading one round of each brand/model. Both chance of firing, and chance/degree of expansion were being discussed as potential reasons for his actions and I commented on each.
And to your last comment, if by saying you would not bet your life on it (the gel tests), is it because you would in fact ignore the results in the gel? But if you would ignore them, I assume you would not have run the experiment. People don't run flawed, faulty or bad experiments. Is that what you were saying? I'm not a firearms professional/lab procedure expert but I thought that the value of gel was not an absolute measurement, but an agreed to standard on relative performance of bullet behavior that factor in to betting ones life on the results. In fact calibrated gel is one of the few and perhaps the only (and correct me if I'm wrong here) testing environments that allows real scientific testing. That is, calibrated testing that can be performed by independent testers, at separate times and different locations while still being able to compare the results such that confirmation of initial and subsequent analysis is viable and trusted.
Finally, you didn't appear to net it out. Are you saying that placing one cartridge of each type in the mag is proven to be a better solution?
B

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

I'm not 100 percent on his reasoning behind it but when asked he claimed that if one brand failed the next would work. Oneounceload how will that look in court is a concern of mine just looking at all the details is all.

I've got news for your friend...of one brand "failed" in the pistol, then he's going to have to clear the round regardless. Given that quality ammunition of any particular brand tested in the pistol is likely to be just as reliable as any other quality brand that's been tested, this makes such an assertion silly.

And if your friend means that one particular bullet "fails" with respect to terminal ballistics, I've got further news for him: So long as the ammunition he uses has sufficient penetration ability, then shot placement is far more paramount than any chance of 'failure'.

It sounds like your friend has some misguided notion that it will be a particular one-shot success that will save the day. Not true. Handguns are, by inherent design limitations, rather limited on their abilities to present effective deadly force when compared to other more powerful projectile weapons, such as a rifle. It's simply an inherent limitation of a smaller firearm.

Expecting any single round to "save the day" because of some magic properties is a very false expectation. What is required is a reliable round (functions reliably in the gun) that provided sufficient reliable penetration to reach vital organs in the body. All other ammunition characteristics are secondary, and icing on the cake, to that.


That said, the answer to any particular round which does not stop an attacker is "more rounds into the attacker", not "a different brand of round into the attacker".

But practically speaking, as long as the different varieties of ammunition he's packing into his gun reliably function with the gun AND provide adequate penetration, then more power to him. It's just a false notion he's basing his beliefs on.

 

[Ryanxia]

I make the first round in the mag a squib load, that way when the rest of the bullets come out they come out EXTRA powerful!

 

[g.willikers]

It's just about guaranteed that anyone who thinks it's all about the equipment, is not someone you would want to share your foxhole.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

If the ccw weapon for your pal serves no practical use as a firearm but is instead some sort of emotional talisman or protective juju object, I don't see an issue if he is otherwise handling his piece in a safe manner. Otherwise the many issues already raised should give one pause to reconsider the practice.

In my experience it is best to stick with a type/brand of ammo that actually functions reliably in a particular weapon. For a carry weapon this really should be consideration number one and all other factors follow after--penetration and expansion numbers mean little if the weapon fails to fire.

There is a very limited practical/tactical purpose to having different types of special purpose ammo loaded in a single magazine (or revolver) but at most this might be two types of ammo. But really, this isn't what is being done at all. Then again, your friend will have to figure out what work for him as we all do.

 

[ku4hx]

If the ccw weapon for your pal serves no practical use as a firearm but is instead some sort of emotional talisman or protective juju object, I don't see an issue if he is otherwise handling his piece in a safe manner. Otherwise the many issues already raised should give one pause to reconsider the practice.

In my experience it is best to stick with a type/brand of ammo that actually functions reliably in a particular weapon. For a carry weapon this really should be consideration number one and all other factors follow after--penetration and expansion numbers mean little if the weapon fails to fire.

There is a very limited practical/tactical purpose to having different types of special purpose ammo loaded in a single magazine (or revolver) but at most this might be two types of ammo. But really, this isn't what is being done at all. Then again, your friend will have to figure out what work for him as we all do.

My most favored 9mm ammunition is Speer Gold Dot 124 grain, Remington Golden Saber 124 grain and Federal HST 124 grain. All of my 9mm guns function with them reliably and have done so without issue for several years.

Knowing all function well in my Glock 19, how it is not a reasonable, safe and effective thing to do to have all three in a single magazine? I, in fact, have done that at least twice with five year old ammunition I was replacing. I replace factory ammunition every five years and in fact have done the same with 10mm, 40S&W and 45ACP.

If all the different maker's rounds in a given magazine are effective as defined by current testing methodology, and functioning of mixed ammunition has been the same as all cartridges from the same maker... what practical difference does it make?

 

[Greg528iT]

Not one comment about different bullets, different powder loads, different point of aim. Granted probably not as severe as when I switch from 200 gr plinking loads to 275 gr HOT loads in my .45 Colt Ruger Vaquero BUT I'd imagine you would want to shoot one SD load enough to prove reliability of that brand and that particular point of aim. ..

 

[Neo-Luddite]

Ku4hx--it may make no practical difference whatsoever to you, in your situation, and might not ever be an issue. Your practice works for you and you are satisfied and that's all that matters. Is it a 'best practice' thing to recommend for someone else--especially to a less experienced shooter?--that was more my point.

I personally am in the habit of loading my carry pistols with a single type of ammo at a time. Full Disclosure: I also tend toward OCD and will, as an example, eat a bag of M&M's one color at a time (I even eat the colors in a specific order, but I will spare you the further details...).

But with respect to carry ammo, it is mostly a matter of limiting the subtle differences in performance between ammo types at expected combat ranges. I often carry a revolver so jamming, feeding doesn't come in to play in this situation. To my mind, I am reducing the already-small potential for differences in my shot-to-shot experience and thereby improving my performance in a tiny and subtle way. And for me, if I mixed the Winchester and Federal JhP's in my .38 I would troubled by this fact for the same reasons that the M&M's get eaten one color at a time.

For some autos (not likely with a Glock, of course) tiny differences in case dimensions and materials might give rise to feeding issues when various types are mixed together. In a similar manner, the cycling of the weapon might be altered or impaired by the shooting of 'mixmaster' ammo--especially with different weights and powder characteristics.

But yes, all of this is splitting hairs if you are using largely similar ammo.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Your friend will probably be in for some serious embarrassment if he ever mentions this practice to a group of knowledgeable shooters in a public place because they will most likely laugh at this silliness.

 

[col.lemat]

Interesting. I thought that I was the only one who carried with a shot round as the first round to be fired. I always figured that if anyone, or thing still wanted to play after that I go to the ball. Then of course I do carry a LeMat pistol

 

[Ryanxia]

Interesting. I thought that I was the only one who carried with a shot round as the first round to be fired. I always figured that if anyone, or thing still wanted to play after that I go to the ball. Then of course I do carry a LeMat pistol

A LeMat, that's awesome.

 

[Kosh75287]

Well, alright, one more time... <sigh>

And to your last comment, if by saying you would not bet your life on it (the gel tests), is it because you would in fact ignore the results in the gel?

No, not IGNORE them, just take them with a very large grain of salt, and take steps to have a response if those results do not obtain in real life.

People don't run flawed, faulty or bad experiments.

MOST people don't INTENTIONALLY do so, but DOES happen. Additionally, experimentation designed to render results supporting a priori conclusions happens more often than you might think. Peer review minimizes a lot of it, but it's still out there.

I'm not a firearms professional/lab procedure expert

I'm not sure what constitutes a firearms professional, but I spent 20+ years employed in R&D and QA/QC labs where lab procedure and statistical analysis was a way of life.

but I thought that the value of gel was not an absolute measurement, but an agreed to standard on relative performance of bullet behavior

You make my point FOR me. Ballistic gel is AN indicator, not THE indicator of projectile performance. As such, it should be regarded as A determinant, not THE determinant of what may work best in social situations. How many times a particular round effects a stop on a determined attack, versus the total times said round has been used in these situations is another, probably more valid determinant. Unfortunately, it is difficult and unethical to go out and "actively gather" such data. We must wait for such incidents to happen. THIS is the value of ballistic gel tests, but they DO have their limits.

that factor in to betting ones life on the results

.
Again, ballistic gel tests are AN indicator, not the SOLE indicator. I won't ignore them, but they won't be my only basis for picking what I carry. When I pick what I carry, I AM betting my life on my decision. I want that decision predicated on LOTS of information, including that obtained from actual shootings, despite how grizzly that may sound.

Are you saying that placing one cartridge of each type in the mag is proven to be a better solution?

Absolutely not. And "proven" is a big word. Since there haven't been a great many incidents in which a person firing for his life has emptied a magazine-full of rounds with different projectiles into his attackers, how could I say that ANYthing about such a departure is even SUGGESTED, much less proven? I don't AGREE with what OP's friend is doing. I just don't think it's quite as implausible as many on this thread seem ready to conclude that it is.

Okay, THIS TIME, for SURE, I'm done.