Would having to use non-expanding ammo change what handguns you prefer?
- Thread starter Nightcrawler
- Start date
- Status
Preacherman
Member
It would certainly affect my choices to some extent... I sometimes carry .357 Magnum revolvers (just 'cause I like them!). In solid ammo., they would be a LOT less effective as stoppers, so they would be relegated to backup duty and/or training guns. Similarly, my 9mm. handguns (mostly used for training, and carried occasionally) would now become exclusively training guns.
My usual semi-auto carry is .40 S&W. No change here - I'd switch to a solid, and go on using it. It's so close to .45 hardball that the difference is probably statistically insignificant. I'd also carry .45's more than I do at present.
My usual semi-auto carry is .40 S&W. No change here - I'd switch to a solid, and go on using it. It's so close to .45 hardball that the difference is probably statistically insignificant. I'd also carry .45's more than I do at present.
Dorrin79
Member
I currently like 9mm.
If I had to use non-JHP I'd probably get a .45ACP of some sort.
tangent - would this theoretical state of affairs preclude carrying, say, EFMJ? If not, I'd stick with what I have, since EFMJ is my round of choice anyway.
If I had to use non-JHP I'd probably get a .45ACP of some sort.
tangent - would this theoretical state of affairs preclude carrying, say, EFMJ? If not, I'd stick with what I have, since EFMJ is my round of choice anyway.
Missouri Mule
Member
Not really!
My 1911's perform most excellently with .45 hardball.
Not only that my Makarovs were made to handle fmj's flawlessly.
I do strongly prefer HP's for defensive purposes but fmj's will do the job too!
My 1911's perform most excellently with .45 hardball.
Not only that my Makarovs were made to handle fmj's flawlessly.
I do strongly prefer HP's for defensive purposes but fmj's will do the job too!
surfinUSA
Member
40 S&W
45 ACP
357 JSP
45 ACP
357 JSP
blades67
Member
Nope.
Lets see....
In .357 a 158gr swc would be fine.
In .45 230fmj ball has worked for years.
I'm not sure I would carry my 9mm unless I could get +p rated fmj.
In .357 a 158gr swc would be fine.
In .45 230fmj ball has worked for years.
I'm not sure I would carry my 9mm unless I could get +p rated fmj.
Hmmmm
No hollow-point ammo, or reversed hollow-bade wadcutters, etc...
Would stick to the 1911-A1 in .45ACP hardball, or maybe switch to a 45 Colt revo with a lead 250-260 Gr semi-wadcutter as fast as I could get it moving. Maybe even a jacketed soft-point in the 45 Colt loadings
No hollow-point ammo, or reversed hollow-bade wadcutters, etc...
Would stick to the 1911-A1 in .45ACP hardball, or maybe switch to a 45 Colt revo with a lead 250-260 Gr semi-wadcutter as fast as I could get it moving. Maybe even a jacketed soft-point in the 45 Colt loadings
Prodigalshooter
Member
I'd have to opt for the .45ACP ball ammo.
22luvr
Member
same gun for me......
I'd probably stay with my J-frame and shoot 158 gr LRN's (lead round nose) out of it. A pretty heavy round that usually deforms or flattens out somewhat on contact. Historically, a fairly effective stopper.
I'd probably stay with my J-frame and shoot 158 gr LRN's (lead round nose) out of it. A pretty heavy round that usually deforms or flattens out somewhat on contact. Historically, a fairly effective stopper.
cratz2
Member
Nope... I currently carry a Kahr 9mm on the belt and a P32 in the pocket and until recently carried either a 45ACP 5" 1911 or a 38 Super 4.25" 1911. I think FMJs in any of them would be adequate for serious shooting.
22luvr
Member
Hey Cratz2:
What model is your 9mm Kahr? K9? MK9? Also, what sort of belt holster do you carry it in?
I'm still mulling over the possibility of getting an MK9 and carrying it on a belt holster with untucked shirts during the summer months. I keep coming back to the MK9, which fits my hand like it was custom-made and I like the strength, durability, and reliability of the all-steel construction.
If I decide to do this, it will be my first foray into not carrying in-the-pocket.
What model is your 9mm Kahr? K9? MK9? Also, what sort of belt holster do you carry it in?
I'm still mulling over the possibility of getting an MK9 and carrying it on a belt holster with untucked shirts during the summer months. I keep coming back to the MK9, which fits my hand like it was custom-made and I like the strength, durability, and reliability of the all-steel construction.
If I decide to do this, it will be my first foray into not carrying in-the-pocket.
mrmeangenes
Member
You've just described New Jersey's gun laws to a "T" :
nothing with soft point, hollowpoint; nothing that will expand reliably. ( This INCLUDES the time-honored .22 LR ! )
Sold lead, or FMJ - take your pick...Oh, yeah : God help you if you actually defend yourself with anything that can be construed by anyone as a weapon !
Prepare for " crucifixion " if the weapon you choose is a firearm of any sort ...
nothing with soft point, hollowpoint; nothing that will expand reliably. ( This INCLUDES the time-honored .22 LR ! )
Sold lead, or FMJ - take your pick...Oh, yeah : God help you if you actually defend yourself with anything that can be construed by anyone as a weapon !
Prepare for " crucifixion " if the weapon you choose is a firearm of any sort ...
Nightcrawler
Member
I think that, for a military, full metal jacket is the best choice anyway. It penetrates; you WANT penetration in combat. Bad guys hide behind stuff, you know.
That's why the military switched from 55 grain to the 62 grain SS109 5.56mm ammo. The coveted fragmentation, that people say makes the 5.56mm round super-lethal while over-penetrating less than a pistol, is actaully a detriment in combat, as a round that fragments in a person or several layers of drywall will also likely fragment in the tree the badguy is hiding behind, or his armor, or other light cover.
But, for personal defense, a JHP might be preferable if only to reduce the chance of overpenetration. (Another solution is to use very light bullets; even if they're moving fast, a light bullet has less momenthum than a heavy one and tends to lose velocity more quickly. Just look at the typical 100 yard velocities for 9mm 115 grain and .45ACP 230 grain; 9mm loses velocity more quickly.)
That's why the military switched from 55 grain to the 62 grain SS109 5.56mm ammo. The coveted fragmentation, that people say makes the 5.56mm round super-lethal while over-penetrating less than a pistol, is actaully a detriment in combat, as a round that fragments in a person or several layers of drywall will also likely fragment in the tree the badguy is hiding behind, or his armor, or other light cover.
But, for personal defense, a JHP might be preferable if only to reduce the chance of overpenetration. (Another solution is to use very light bullets; even if they're moving fast, a light bullet has less momenthum than a heavy one and tends to lose velocity more quickly. Just look at the typical 100 yard velocities for 9mm 115 grain and .45ACP 230 grain; 9mm loses velocity more quickly.)
Sean Smith
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 4,925
I imagine that somebody woud notice if you hit them with a 200gr flat-point FMJ at 1,200 feet per second, so naah, I'd still favor 10mm. Still be hitting harder at 100 yards than most .45 ACP does at the muzzle. 
JeepDriver
Member
16 or 18 rounds(B92FS or G17) of 9mm is still gonna end any confrontation that can be ended with a hand gun
Well I have taken a strong liking to the 1911 platform of late. I would simply find a truncated cone shaped load that fed and stick with it or some 200 grain semi wadcutters. In the Glock Platform I would stick with the 21 or 22 with simular ammo. I would not use my faviorate 357 sig caliber or the 9mm.
PAT
PAT
chaim
Member
Only a few modifications.
My CZ 75B (9mm) would be removed from the HD (and possible future CCW) rotation. I have no problem w/ 9mm with good HPs but with no HPs forget it.
My little Taurus 85 being a 2" snub isn't likely to open a HP anyway so my plan when I get to a CCW state is to use LSWC-HPs so making it plain LSWCs isn't much of a change. Most likely, out of a 2" barrel a .38spl or .38+P HP isn't going to open anyway and the sharp corners of the SWC insures ugly wounds while the tapered point leads to decent penatration (esp. w/ 158gr)..
My .357s and .38s would use LSWCs instead of good JHPs and I would possibly move to replace them (for HD at least) w/ .44spls or .45LCs, though due to size, when I get to a CCW state I'd probably still use them for carry. Well, "replace them" is the wrong phrase (no way I'd sell them), I'd simply add to the "collection".
Due to the advantage of having the same platform for cheap practice (cheap 9mm FMJs) and defense, I'd probably pick up a CZ 75B in .40S&W. I would load it with FP rounds (my 40B that I sold never choked on even the flattest point bullets I tried).
Until I added the CZ 75B in .40 and some big bore revolvers, my Charles Daly 1911 would probably become my primary HD gun (instead of my .38spl and .357 revolvers). The revolvers would occasionally come out, but without the use of HPs I'd want to use a big bore as much as possible. In fact, it would be highly likely that I'd add more 1911s and maybe a Ruger P90 and CZ 97 faster than I otherwise would have (hey, if big bores are going to be my primary defensive guns, I may as well have a few to choose from to satisfy different moods). Again, FP bullets though, no ball- ball, even in .45 is notoriously inept.
My CZ 75B (9mm) would be removed from the HD (and possible future CCW) rotation. I have no problem w/ 9mm with good HPs but with no HPs forget it.
My little Taurus 85 being a 2" snub isn't likely to open a HP anyway so my plan when I get to a CCW state is to use LSWC-HPs so making it plain LSWCs isn't much of a change. Most likely, out of a 2" barrel a .38spl or .38+P HP isn't going to open anyway and the sharp corners of the SWC insures ugly wounds while the tapered point leads to decent penatration (esp. w/ 158gr)..
My .357s and .38s would use LSWCs instead of good JHPs and I would possibly move to replace them (for HD at least) w/ .44spls or .45LCs, though due to size, when I get to a CCW state I'd probably still use them for carry. Well, "replace them" is the wrong phrase (no way I'd sell them), I'd simply add to the "collection".
Due to the advantage of having the same platform for cheap practice (cheap 9mm FMJs) and defense, I'd probably pick up a CZ 75B in .40S&W. I would load it with FP rounds (my 40B that I sold never choked on even the flattest point bullets I tried).
Until I added the CZ 75B in .40 and some big bore revolvers, my Charles Daly 1911 would probably become my primary HD gun (instead of my .38spl and .357 revolvers). The revolvers would occasionally come out, but without the use of HPs I'd want to use a big bore as much as possible. In fact, it would be highly likely that I'd add more 1911s and maybe a Ruger P90 and CZ 97 faster than I otherwise would have (hey, if big bores are going to be my primary defensive guns, I may as well have a few to choose from to satisfy different moods). Again, FP bullets though, no ball- ball, even in .45 is notoriously inept.
Nightcrawler
Member
Very interesting that without JHP ammo, everyone would seem to want more velocity and heavier bullets, whereas WITH JHP ammo, many are content to stick with regular velocity light-loads.
In the revolvers, I would start using WFN bullets for carry; I use them anyway for hunting. I may experiment with heavier bullets in the .38 snub if penetration wasn't adequate in the 158 grain bullets.
My main "go-to" guns are pretty much 1911s unless I am lazy and drop the Model 60/pocket holster into my pocket. The 1911 sitting next to me is loaded with hardball anyway, so that wouldn't be much of an issue.
My main "go-to" guns are pretty much 1911s unless I am lazy and drop the Model 60/pocket holster into my pocket. The 1911 sitting next to me is loaded with hardball anyway, so that wouldn't be much of an issue.
10-Ring
Member
Shot placement, Shot placement, Shot placement, oh & Shot placement. That said, I'd be very content w/ my USP 45 and FMJ's
SnWnMe
Member
My 625 wouldn't care.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
