Using antiquated rounds for defense purposes

Status
Not open for further replies.
WestKentucky

WestKentucky

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
13,117
Location
Western Kentucky
There are lots of old guns in calibers people generally scoff at in modern times. Right off the bat I'm coming up with 22 short, 25 acp, 32 swl, 38sw, and anything with a dash in the name. I also see talk about "lawyer loads" and how nobody should rely on anything weaker than (insert caliber between 38spl and 460 rowland).

I am of the opinion that all of this talk is a bunch of hogwash. From the colt pocket guns up through today's wondrously small 32 acp guns we have a wide variety of deep concealment guns available at incredible prices just because the naysayers want a bigger bullet.

So would a person be well served by carrying one of these guns that have proven extremely reliable in feed and function or is this just a fantasy? Is 6 shots of 32 swl not as good or better than 5 shots of 38spl, or is 10 shots of 32 act not as good or better than 7 shots of .380? Is penetration more of a consideration than overpenetration? Have these rounds not served their purpose and stuck around for a reason, having proven themselves worthy? Does it take a 357 mag or 9mm to go through a t shirt, or a heavy winter coat?

So realistically, what should we look to for determining adequacy or inadequacy for carry purposes weighing the options at hand?
 
I guess it would depend on how much stopping power you want. A 40 grain 22 or a 98 grain 32 S&W Long may discourage an aggressive teenager, but what about that 250 pounder high on crack that’s coming at you. Your choice.
 
I for one don't think caliber is really THAT much of an important consideration as long as penetration is sufficient. As by in large with civillian SD shootings someone getting shot is immediately followed by disengagement.

The problem with many of the old guns you mention is more a failure of accuracy, ergonomics and safety.
 
A friend of mine in North Carolina carries an 1880s Colt single-action, spur trigger in .32 Rimfire! :what::eek:

As for me, I'll stick with my XDs in .45 ACP, thank you very much! :cool:
 
My grandfather told me that he personally shot Germans at close range cleaning out the hedgerows during winter in France with 45 acp out of a revolver that used moon clips, and that it was good for knocking them down so he could finish them with a knife. He specifically mentioned that it didn't even make it to skin.

So, for me, in winter when people are wearing lots of clothes, I want something pretty stout.

Otherwise, yeah, with light summer clothes I think the smaller stuff with lots of bullets is more likely to be able to get be job done.

I always just carry the biggest thing I can keep hidden.
 
Last edited:
When my daughter was ready for a truck gun I let her try every one I have and choose. She picked the last one that I would have thought. A 1920 colt revolver in 38 s&w. Finish pretty worn off but mechanically perfect after a recent trip to the smith. She liked the smooth double action and accuracy. And she can hit with all 6, fast!
Any gun that you are comfortable and accurate with will do. The 32 and 38 s&w were the police loads at one time.
 
In my mind, the biggest thing that has changed in defensive calibers in the last 100 years is the invention of anti-biotic drugs like penicillin.

Back in 1900, getting gut shot with a lead bullet .32 was a slow death sentence from infection, if you were not lucky enough it outright killed you DRT.

I have read that old gun fighters feared the little outside grease lubed .32's and .41 RF's getting stuck in their innerds more then a relatively 'clean' through & through shot with a more powerful gun.

True or not?
I don't know?

But I would rather bleed out on the spot from a .45 Colt, then linger in agony from blood poisoning and die two weeks later from a slow little 'dirty' bullet left inside me.

I think before modern medicine, EMP's, Life Flights, and Free Health Care for 'Everyone'?

Getting gut-shot with those Little guns would scare the crap out of me!

Might even make me decide to go somewhere else, and do something different.
That might have been a lot of common thinking 114 years ago too?

rc
 
Last edited:
I'd venture to say that 100+ years ago, humans were substantially scrawnier than these days, due to harsher living/survival conditions and totally different foods. I imagine fat, beefy people were probably the exception back then, especially bad guys.

Modern foods are so overloaded with sugars, fats, and convenient availability that there's beefier humans these days. So, smaller rounds were probably more effective back then. Plus we have more nasty drugs these days that make criminals meaner, crazier and harder to knock down.

Just my thought.....
 
RC hit a good point (of course...he is RC) but backwards from my thinking. If back then guys were more worried about a puny round than a big beefy one that overpenetrates then in today's world a guy shot with one would likely live to either stand trial and be punished or to be fixed up and sent along their way assuming an innocent bystander was struck. Sounds good to me...especially if a person hits more than misses. Hits add up and enough hits with a be gun would eventually kill a man, but that's not the goal today. The goal today is to stop the threat. Will 6 32s to the chest do that...probably so. Would a more powerful gun be necessary and would the added risk of hitting a bystander be worth the advantage of carrying a cartridge known to overpenetrates and do more damage? Seems to be one factor for PDs when choosing a caliber. What all will this go through and still hurt or kill domebody...hmmm...
 
Well, it doesn't get much more "antiquated" than a .36 round ball in front of 25 grains of black powder... and that's exactly what I use for home defense:

Colt_Navy.jpg

This is a Colt 1851 Navy percusison revolver in .36 caliber and it sits on my nightstand every night, ready to go. I shoot it at the end of the week and never once has it failed me. Then I reload with the above mentioned 80 grain .36 pure lead round ball with 25 grains FFFG black powder, and I seal the caps and chamber mouths with melted beeswax.

This load hits about as hard as a .380... another "antiquated round"... but ask the hundreds/thousands were were killed with it in the Civil War and on the western frontier if it is lethal. This load is well regarded by many soldiers and gunfighters of the era, and it was used to telling effect. I have no problem using it for home defense.
 
Rondog I'm not so sure. Opium was abundant as was alcohol. They may or may not produce different effects with regards to a jacked up dude getting plugged in the chest. For size of people though I doubt that it makes a huge difference. Fat is not dense and wouldn't cause a lot of velocity reduction until muscle and bone were hit. A difference for sure but I don't think it would be much more than marginal.
 
Aren't you guys concerned that if you ever to have to use one of these guns that will police will take it and hold it in who knows what conditions for who knows how long?

There was a thread on here a while ago about a pistol that sat in evidence with blood on it for a long time and that gun was horribly messed up.

My defense firearms are new and nothing special for that exact reason.
 
I'm of the opinion that carrying the most powerful gun you can practically for self defense makes the most sense. I don't think anybody has ever wished they had a smaller gun once they needed it. PCP completely changed the playing field as to what is or is not effective for self defense IMHO. People that think they're going to get a head shot with a mouse gun against a 250 pound dude that's raging on drugs are completely unrealistic. I've seen some of these people freak out and calling them superhuman is not too far off. And of course they have no sense of reason or right/wrong. They are monsters, not unlike the made up ones on TV or in the movies.

Aren't you guys concerned that if you ever to have to use one of these guns that will police will take it and hold it in who knows what conditions for who knows how long?
Click to expand...

If I need to use a firearm in self defense I don't care if it cost $100 or $10,000 dollars. If I never get it back? Oh well, it served the ultimate purpose for which it was designed and thanks to it I lived to tell about it. :) Money means absolutely nothing to me in this case, and I am not by any means well off. It would take months for me to save up enough money to replace my carry gun. Use the best tool you have for the job, this is your LIFE you are talking about!
 
My grandfather told me that he personally shot Germans at close range cleaning out the hedgerows during winter in France with 45 acp out of a revolver that used moon clips, and that it was good for knocking them down so he could finish them with a knife. He specifically mentioned that it didn't even make it to skin.
Click to expand...
Either you aren't remembering what he said, he's not remembering what he did, or he was having fun making up stories.

1. No soldier whose strategy is to shoot enemy soldiers with a handgun (that he thinks won't even penetrate their clothing) to knock them down so he can kill them with a knife is going to live long enough to be a grandfather.

2. Handgun rounds can't actually "knock down" a person.

3. They certainly won't reliably incapacitate a fighting man to the point that you can just go kill him with a knife afterwards--especially if they don't even penetrate his clothing.

4. Soldiers come in multiples and their friends don't just stand idly by while you shoot one of their buddies with a handgun, kill him with a knife and then perform a cursory post-mortem to examine the bullet wound (or absence thereof). Even if they don't like their buddy much, they understand that if they don't do anything they are next on the list.
 
Mr.510 said:
If I need to use a firearm in self defense I don't care if it cost $100 or $10,000 dollars. If I never get it back? Oh well, it served the ultimate purpose for which it was designed and thanks to it I lived to tell about it. :) Money means absolutely nothing to me in this case, and I am not by any means well off. It would take months for me to save up enough money to replace my carry gun. Use the best tool you have for the job, this is your LIFE you are talking about!
Click to expand...

You completely missed my point. The thread is about old firearms and small calibers. Usually meaning they are hard to replace or have sentimental value.

I could go to any gun store tomorrow and replace any of my defensive firearms. Not because they are cheap, but because they are common, modern firearms.

:)
 
These are all valid points and the "old" calibers will still do their job. I used to carry a 5 shot 357 mag. snubby loaded with 38 special +P. But with a greater chance of multiple attackers or the chance of needing more hits if the assailant is hopped up, I wanted more and switched to small 9mm pistols with extended magazines. Easier to conceal, several times the fire power of the revolver and faster to reload. A lot of my shooting is old fashioned by modern standards: SA revolvers, single shot rifles, and muzzleloaders. Concealed carry is another matter.

I still use DA revolvers in the night stand and around the house for HD. If I'm coming out of a sleep, I just want to be able to point the thing and pull the trigger not fiddle with slides, etc.

Jeff
 
Bigger/more is always better, isn't it? Handguns are notoriously underpowered compared to shotguns or a rifle so there is some credibility to the desire to get "more" out of a handgun hence the never ending "Caliber Wars" and the mindset that anything less than the very biggest and most powerful is less than desirable and leaves the shooter/defender vulnerable.

That said I'm comfortable with a .32 acp, a .25 acp or even a .22 if that's what I must use. I studied long and hard at the knee of a combat nurse turned surgeon and ER doctor (who is an avid shooter) and a few sessions with him and several of his friends (who individually and combined have seen a lot of combat bullet wounds!) has given me a perspective I can't/won't share. There are folks with just as much credibility and experience that truly believe that bigger is better and no amount of discussion, facts, etc. I have seen ever dissuades them. I have been arguing this "Caliber Wars" thing for many years and have never changed anyone's mind and no one has changed mine. Long since time to stop arguing about it.

I worked as a professional musician for many years and played R&R in some of the meanest and dirtiest bars and clubs in Detroit, Miami, Chicago, and every other place across America and not schwanky environments. Many of the musicians and associates carried weapons of all kinds most of the time.....we normally got paid cash back "in the day" very early on Sunday morning when the bar closed. There were people who knew that some member of the band was getting paid for the week (several thousand dollars at times) in cash while the band was tearing down and getting ready to head off to the next town. Truthfully *everybody* in the bar knew the band got paid...I have been robbed by employees of the very establishments I played!

Long story short, many of these fine folks had no problem at all in robbing the band in the parking lot at 3:30 in the morning. The only shooting I ever witnessed first hand was from about 10 feet away and involved a .25 caliber auto. I was 10 feet away - the shooting was at arms length and involved our drummer and a good friend as the defender. Bad breath distance. The would be robber's lights went *right* out as I'm certain the first round hit something under his sternum that was instantly fatal....as much respect as I have for Col. Jeff Cooper and his theories he was wrong about the .25. I still have that vision in my head and it will never leave me. But I digress...

The key to defending yourself with a firearm is placement and penetration. Even the FBI came to this conclusion. Per my teachers, if you punch "That Button" (a vital spot) with a bullet the individual whose button is punched is done. It does not matter that you punch the button with a .22 or a .45. If you miss the button, and they are small buttons, he may not even know he has been shot and will persist...doesn't matter if you miss with a .22 or a .45. My mindset for SD is find a bullet with 12" - 15" of penetration thru clothes and sternum and to punch that button. And that can better be done by me with a more limited amount of recoil. If you can accurately place multiple rounds in about 1 second with a .44 mag or a .45 auto then you would want to use that. I feel more confident with a 9mm, .380, .38 Special, or a .32 acp. I can accurately place 4 hot .32 acp in a < 4" circle (about the size of the palm of the hand) in about 1 second...I get 15" + of penetration out of my .32's. It'll do the trick if needed. No one else needs confidence in that, only myself.

If others feel the best they can do is with a .22 or a .25? I have seen it done. Bigger is always better until it becomes too much. I don't think any caliber is outdated only maybe sub optimal. I don't see any caliber as "The Bomb" except maybe .50 BMG fired from behind serious cover.

VooDoo
 
I would go with .44-40. I would think in good ole' pre antibiotic days that one put more in grave than any other. Incidentally S&W made few N-frames in that chambering.
 
You all have valid points and I think a person should carry what he or she is confident with and can hit consistently with that being said today we have thugs wearing armor in cold weather they wear heavy coats a small cal is at a disadvantage shot placement is critical head or groin under stress that can de difficult tyre a 45 may not penetrate armor or even a heavy coat but it will hit harder and that will have an affect maybe give you time for a head shot
 
I doubt the 44-40 put more down than the small bores which were more plentiful and we're carried more commonly by bartenders, callgirls, and even many lawmen. 44 and 45 cal. Was too heavy for those purposes and as such would have been used more. I may be wrong though. 44-40 was and is a very good round though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
  • Locked
Why no small viable DA revolver?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
143
Views
10K
Anmut
A
B
  • Locked
The Most Potent Self Defense Rounds
2 3
Replies
61
Views
12K
Trumpetman
T
SharpDog
  • Locked
A Reasonable Discussion of Stopping Power
2 3 4 5
Replies
108
Views
8K
stillquietvoice
stillquietvoice
U
  • Locked
Home Defense Pistol.. and concealed carry, in one?
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
kevin387
K
whatnickname
How effective is the 45 ACP Ball round for self-defense?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
131
Views
5K
W.E.G.
W.E.G.
Back
Top