|
April 6th, 2013 | #121 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 349
|
Roy, I see your point, but I would like to mention that there IS an auto-pistol that shoots wadcutters.
I once owned a Smith & Wesson Model 52 -a very unique target pistol, that was designed to shoot ONLY .38 Special wadcutters, and it did so reliably, feeding the rounds from a magazine. I still regret trading that pistol. It was highly accurate and designed for bullseye target-shooting competition, and a joy to shoot. |
April 6th, 2013 | #122 |
professional critter
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: under your bed
Posts: 1,618
|
I'm aware of those custom match pistols from yesteryear; in fact I was remembering the 52 while posting.
They were irrelevant then, and they're irrelevant now.
__________________
"Don't underestimate the power of 'evil.' ... The fact is, 'evil' makes women horny and men curious. Use those to further the cause." |
June 25th, 2013 | #123 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,093
|
Quote:
If you want to risk buying some no-name .38 snub from a pawn shop for $200 that will probably blow up in your face, then go for it. Pawn shops are a shady business, and one of the last places I'd buy a gun from. A lot of them are ran by Jews. |
|
June 27th, 2013 | #124 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,093
|
Quote:
Glock 27, $525 new: http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/p...ducts_id/73394 Which means you could get them for $400-$425 used. |
|
June 27th, 2013 | #125 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 349
|
I like revolvers AND semi-autos. Both categories have their good points. I prefer 1920's through mid-1980's manufacture. By the late 80's/early 90's many manufacturers were adding un-needed "safety" features, in response to lawsuit/liabilty fears. This trend generally added more moving parts, complicated the internal workings of the gun, and often resulted in heavier, less-crisp trigger pulls.
|
June 29th, 2013 | #126 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,093
|
|
June 30th, 2013 | #127 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,093
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Crowe; June 30th, 2013 at 12:14 AM. |
||||
June 30th, 2013 | #128 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,093
|
Quote:
And I'd take a semi-auto 9mm over a .38 special any day of the week. I'll take the 9mm JHP +P rounds over your .38 special wadcutters. Quote:
Quote:
.357 magnum is a much more powerful round than .38 special. If someone is going to get a snub, you may as well get a .357 magnum. Or if you got the money go all out with a .500 magnum snub. I rented one a few months ago at the range, and the recoil wasn't as bad as I expected. |
|||
June 30th, 2013 | #129 |
Celebrating My Diversity
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
|
Great self defense caliber and piece--against crippled grizzly bears charging in open terrain.
Good luck with that. |
June 30th, 2013 | #130 | |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,481
|
I'm confused about something. Are you saying that a .45 dia JHP that doesn't expand will leave a smaller permanent wound channel than a .355 dia wadcutter or haven't I had enough coffee yet this morning? Honest question.
As far as clothing, material, barrier penetration, bone, etc effecting expansion of JHP..... Those have all been serious problems with the reliability of using a HP style bullet head in a cartridge. It is undeniable that barrier penetration (a thick jacket, denim, coat of fur, etc) is a major concern because the material can clog the open face of a HP round and cause it to not expand fully (if at all). That is one of the reasons the FBI has 4 layers of denim as their base standard barrier for ballistic gel penetration tests, and include testing through sheet metal, glass, and dry wall. This issue has been addressed by bullet manufacturers in the latest generation of defensive and hunting rounds. New gen bullet construction are utilizing a tapered jacket design where the copper jacket wall is much thinner towards the nose of the bullet, allowing for faster and more reliable expansion. Couple this with a polymer plug that fills the opening of the hollow point that does two things: 1) it is designed to prevent the opening from being clogged by an unknown material, thus ensuring the round will expand inside a wound channel. 2) the material and shape of the plug is designed to assist with expansion of the bullet itself in conjunction with the tapered jacket design (magical - because I don't understand how it works in self defense rounds, but do understand how it works in a ballistic tipped hunting round because of the shape). I do agree that a body is much different than a ballistic gel block, as there are many more variables involved. And that is the reason that I included hunting rounds in my post. Hunting rounds are now utilizing the same technology as self defense rounds, and they are field tested every day. The results are verifiable, quantifiable, and undeniable. These designs work, they work incredibly well, and they work every time. It doesn't matter if you are talking about using a high powered rifle caliber, or a pistol caliber that can be used for hunting/self defense. Even with next gen bullet design, the time old adages of dia/weight still are applicable. The bigger the diameter, the bigger the hole (wound channel); the heavier the bullet, greater penetration (velocities being the same between bullet weights). The .38 special, 9mm Luger, and .357 Magnum all use the same diameter bullet - .355" diameter. So I really don't understand the arguments about which one is "better". Unexpanded at similar velocities, they will all have the same penetration, and create the same permanent wound channel, as they are all the same freaking bullet. The only difference between these "calibers" are the weight ranges of the bullet, and the velocities in which they are traveling. Even though a 9mm casing is much smaller than the .38 special or .357 Magnum, if using a +P powder load (a compressed powder load as opposed to a 50% fill you typically see in a .357 Magnum), you can get near the same velocity as the .357 Magnum. How is this possible? Some call it magic, but it has to do with internal case pressure and volume fill of the powder load. The greater volume a powder load has inside the casing, more pressure is created upon powder ignition, resulting in a much more efficient powder burn and a higher velocity. In the end, the argument comes down to "range of options". The .357 has a range of bullet heads that are heavier than the 9mm or the .38 special even though they are all the exact same diameter. Can I load .38 special and 9mm Luger rounds in the +P (higher pressure) range that will give the exact same terminal ballistic performance as a standard .357 Magnum round? The answer is YES. So much of the .355" diameter caliber arguments are based on 100 year old bullet and firearm frame design that isn't really applicable in the modern firearm market. Quote:
Last edited by Mr A.Anderson; June 30th, 2013 at 09:42 AM. |
|
June 30th, 2013 | #131 | |
Switching to glide
|
Quote:
The recoil looks a bit....much.
__________________
"When US gets nuked and NEMO is uninhabitable, I will make my way on foot to the gulf and live off red snapper and grapefruit"- Alex Linder |
|
June 30th, 2013 | #132 | |||
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,481
|
Quote:
Also, the exact manufacture of hp bullet will have a different sized "nose" to the bullet itself, which (whether it expands or not) will have the same flat facial area that a wadcutter's flat face has to destroy tissue the entire path through a wound channel. Bigger diameter = bigger hole. Quote:
Add to that barrier penetration testing requirements, and these bullet designs are a proven commodity. Quote:
When it comes to bullet design, I trust designs made specifically for hunting purposes - because these bullets are designed to kill (a specific size range of animal based on caliber) every single time, without fail. A poor hunting bullet design will be exposed as such immediately because of daily field testing by the average person. A poor self defense round designed by the proclaimed experts (see Federal Hydro-Shock) will continue selling for years and is easily hyped as the average person doesn't go around testing it by shooting and killing people on a daily basis. Last edited by Mr A.Anderson; June 30th, 2013 at 10:37 AM. |
|||
June 30th, 2013 | #133 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,481
|
|
June 30th, 2013 | #134 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,481
|
Me? No I'm not. I'm saying the real educated men are the designers that work for companies such as Nosler, Hornady, Winchester, Remington, Barnes, etc, who design bullets that work well for killing with decades of proof their designs work as advertised. Whiz kids are the result of being the lowest bidder.
What exactly was it you would like to see proved? Not saying that I can provide the data, but am curious. |
June 30th, 2013 | #135 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2013
Location: a LAND that never been occupied
Posts: 1,933
|
Just received 2 of this at the gunshop, I am partners in. After using them for a week, for self defense especially for people who can not handle recoil, are a shit load of rapid gun fire if they can hit their target and overcome the muzzle flash. And if you know what you do then can modify in an emergency situation your pistol into this. Not the same gun but can be if you make it to be. |
June 30th, 2013 | #136 | |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,481
|
Quote:
The points that I was making are: That new generation bullet designs have been thoroughly tested and proven to work. That these new bullet designs relegate standard arguments based upon a ballistics table (velocity, kinetic energy) an outdated and irrelevant notion. That common firearm feeding designs (tilting barrel) have greatly reduced the feeding issues that once commonly plagued semi-auto pistols. That the belief a semi-auto has more moving parts than a revolver, thus making it less reliable, is false. Reading back through this thread in it's entirety, several people have given good advice, and several have given terrible advice. Personally, I believe the best CCW weapon is on that a person is extremely comfortable and proficient with, first and foremost. As far as caliber for a CCW, with proper ammunition and maintenance, a .38 Special, 9mm, .357 Magnum, .40 S&W, .44 Magnum, and .45 ACP will all get the job done. I do hesitate with the .380 auto and smaller because of terminal ballistic results are borderline. With the emergence and proliferation of the Sub-Compact pistol frame since this thread started back in 2006, a person can get an easily concealable (pocket gun) semi-auto pistol in a .45 ACP if they so choose. If you ask me, one is not "better" than the other. It all comes down to which a person is most comfortable and proficient with. I personally carry a Springfield XD-9 Subcompact 9mm, loaded with either 135 gr Hornady Critical Duty or 124 gr Speer GoldDot. Both cartridges meet and exceed all FBI testing standards for barrier penetration, expansion, body penetration, and weight retention. Being a medium grain, they work well for hot or cold weather penetration. Last edited by Mr A.Anderson; June 30th, 2013 at 12:24 PM. |
|
June 30th, 2013 | #137 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,093
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
There are situations where a high velocity bullet can penetrate without transferring most of its energy to the target, in which case a lower velocity bullet designed to transfer more energy to the target would win. But .357 wadcutter vs .38 wadcutter, the .357 is going to deliver more damage to the target by default. Higher velocity would also penetrate better vs someone wearing heavy clothing. What if the guy is wearing a coat + 2 shirts under that? Would you take the .357 in that situation or the .38? People aren't just running around naked out there. Quote:
Last edited by Crowe; June 30th, 2013 at 05:26 PM. |
|||||
June 30th, 2013 | #138 | |||||
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,481
|
Quote:
The amount of 'shock' energy a bullet has slamming into a target is the amount of raw recoil (kick) a person feels when firing (a manually operated) firearm (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction). Most people that have been shot say it feels like getting hit by a 90 mph fast ball. I personally can't attest to that as I've only been hit with birdshot and rock salt. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And remember, I chose the 9mm to carry for several reasons beyond terminal ballistics, which is to say again, anything chambered in the .38 special, 9mm and above will certainly get the job done. Maybe this will help people understand about Terminal Ballistics, and how it isn't as simple as weight and velocity. Quote:
Last edited by Mr A.Anderson; June 30th, 2013 at 06:20 PM. |
|||||
July 1st, 2013 | #139 | |||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,093
|
Quote:
I've personally seen this first hand on animals I've shot. I had a deer suddenly turn around on me at the moment I fired, and I was sure the shot was off, but it died on the spot. I actually hit the deer on the outside of its ribs, the shot missed its heart entirely, but bone fractured and went into its heart. I'll admit It was a lucky shot. I was using .300 win mag ballistic tip. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
.38 special is more expensive than semi-auto ammunition. Maybe not if you load your own, but box for box they're more expensive because of the larger casing. Which is a huge advantage semi-autos have over a .38 special. And if you load your own, how is .357 magnum that much more expensive than .38 special, assuming you reuse the casings? Powder is cheap. Quote:
.38 special is one of the most overestimated rounds out there by gun noobs. Its frequently mistaken for being more powerful than semi-auto ammunition just because its got a larger *derp* casing. Quote:
Last edited by Crowe; July 1st, 2013 at 06:46 PM. |
|||||||
July 1st, 2013 | #140 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,216
|
When I took a round in the forearm from a .357 magnum there was no pain involved. There was just a slight sensation of heat in that immediate area. If not for that I would not have known anything had happened aside from the chaos. No doubt the fire rated door of the apartment slowed down the round, maybe even broke it apart, maybe even redirected from its intended course which was my head from a mere 18 inches away. Or maybe the nigger just couldn't shoot. What I will add to this conversation is echoed in many of my other posts, and that is you do not get to decide the situation, the situation chooses you. When that time comes it gets much more complicated than gel targets. And still yet, how often does someone take down a deer by shooting through a door. There are no end to the variables, chance, and shear luck. What I have concluded is what these conversations always seem to wind down to in conclusion to anyway, and that is go as big as you can effectively deliver a defense. Gun control means what you can shoot affectively with one hand. A two handed grip is a good sign that things are going in your favor.
|
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|