Why is factory ammunition so weak

Status
Not open for further replies.
Saami

SAAMI specs can get goofy too. 9 mm Luger SAAMI max pressure is 32,000 while for the 30 Luger the max is 28,000 The thicker barrel walls make the 30 caliber barrel weaker? (It should be noted that the original DWM factory load for the 30 caliber Luger carbine ran 40,000, so it's not a weak action.)
 
Is it just me, or is it the lawyers who have achieved this "failsafe" ammo situation?

Well I can remember at least two recent threads I've read where someone asked the question "Can I bore out my .38 Special to take .357 Magnum?"

I think that pretty much answered the question.
 
Posted by RyanM:
The more I mess with my Glock, the more I become positive that the legendary ".40 kaboom" is because the 9mms and .40s use the same spring weight. I'm going to take some fired primer photos and post them in a few minutes....Actually, when you take all the market factors into account, steadily weakening ammo and recoil springs makes sense.

Just about all Glock kaBOOMS occur with significantly overpressure rounds, almost always homemade handloads/reloads and commercially remanufactured ammo. Glocks rarely kaBOOM when using factory ammo.

"4. Why do kB!s occur in these Glock models?

Reports compiled by Speir from various independent laboratories are inconclusive as to one single cause for the catastrophic failures.

There do, however, appear to be several contributing factors which collectively may induce catastrophic case failures:

* Firing out of battery. Most Glocks will do this to some degree, especially those improperly maintained.

* Significantly overpressure rounds. These occur mostly in homemade reloads or in commercially remanufactured ammunition, but have occurred in factory ammunition as well.

Unsupported chamber

* Lack of full case support in the critical area over the feed ramp of all large caliber (.40 S&W, 10mm, .45 ACP) Glock pistols."


http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb-faq.html
 
It's only weak when you are BEHIND the muzzle...
Phil DeGraves has a point. Today's weak ammo is killing people and stopping situations every day:)
 
S&B

S&B has always tested slow for me, althought it's been a while.
Nice ammo though.
 
Talking about 9x19mm ammo, the Fiocchi, Geco and Dynamit have been weak for my CZ75B - they doesn't seem to slam the slide to the back, thus the slide won't return to battery, so I have to push the last 2 mm-s with thumb. It doesn't happen with every round, but several times per 50 rnd box.

When using S&B FMJ this issue has never come up, maybe it has something to to with the fact that both the weapon and ammo is Czech?.

Anyway, other ammo I use is Swedish M/39B (6.75 g bullet, thrown out of the barrel at max 420 m/s).

It has a extra ordinary thick jacket that prevents it from deforming easily, and that makes it better in penetrating hard targets. Some examples: It goes through 50 layers of kevlar or 20 cm of wood or 7 cm of brick. The jacket of the projectile also leads to a higher tear and wear on the weapon. Some figures point at up to 25% higher wear on the barrel when using m/39B ammunition compared against normal 9x19 ammunition e.g. m/39
Tests have shown up to 65 layers of kevlar (so it's supposed to punch through most pistol vests), I've personally shot this round through 5 mm thick steel wall of a train cabin, so no worries for this round being too weak. But I should keep a small supply of CZ spares in the drawer.
 
Run some Winchester 9x23 over the sky screens. Rumor has it that handloads with say 88/90 grain bullets will blast the throat of a 9x23 much as the .357 Maximum did for revolvers so balance is an important element in a load.

Rumor also has it the CorBon/Barnes bullet 9x23 is deliberately loaded to a lower velocity - matches the .38 Auto +P - because the performance on gelatine is the standard and more penetration would hurt agency acceptance.

Just possibly better balanced ammunition is the result of bullets that expand reliably at lower speeds.

Then too simple changes in ammunition have unexpected consequences. Paul Weston wrote up a personal Python used as a range gun for public safety training with a very high round count and negligible wear - but it wasn't with the 125 grain loads that led to the L frame.
 
Imagine, if you will the days of .38-44 rounds. Horrors! A hot-loaded cartridge the exact same size and shape as the .38 Special! Nothing between your standard Mk 1 Mod 0 idiot and a potentially blown up gun except for a different headstamp and a little grey matter between the ears.

I will say that not all rounds have gotten weaker. I'm shooting 9mm +P+ rounds at velocities that would have been unheard of 30 years ago, except for Super Vel loadings. The lowly .38 Special, on the other hand, has done nothing but get lowlier and lowlier. It seems like every few years, the pressure ceiling for .38 loads drops another 500-1000 CUP.
 
What is interesting to me is that a 158 grn 38/44 round Chrono-ed by Phillip Sharpe in 1937 did 1130 with 6.6 grns of Unique, presumably out of a 6.5 Outdoorsman.

That is pretty close to or exceeds what some factory "357 magnum" rounds do out of my 6" python in 2008.


Now how did the 357 Magnum get "neutered" over those 71 years??? I think the correct answer has been stated several times above.
 
I notice you're discussing handgun loads. If you look at reloading manuals you will see that most rifle loads are about the same as they were thirty years ago.

As far as handgun loads, I doubt it's lawyers. It's engineers. They have come up with better ways to measure pressure and they made some scary discoveries, especially in calibers such as .44 special.
 
Maybe bullets have gotten so much better that they don't require as much energy? Couple that with the popularity of lightweight guns with aluminum frames, and perhaps there's less market for zombie-stomper factory ammo. (there are boutique ammo makers that still provide it if you're willing to cough up the $$)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top