Need hard evidence
I need hard evidence at to which is a better defense round, if either? The Remington Golden Saber or the Speer Gold Dot...both in 125 gr +P. I think it is a toss up...my friend says the Gold Dot is much better.
0
-
type in ammo test on www.youtube.com plenty of evidence there
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ammo+test&aq=f0 -
quote:Originally posted by 5mmgunguy
I need hard evidence at to which is a better defense round, if either? The Remington Golden Saber or the Speer Gold Dot...both in 125 gr +P. I think it is a toss up...my friend says the Gold Dot is much better.
"Hard evidence"?
If you want that, you're going to have to shoot 1000 adults with each round blinded under different conditions (eg winter clothes, etc) and compare the results.
Short of that impossible-to-conduct study, I don't know how you're going to be able to draw any scientifically definitive conclusion about which is better.
Let say one of the two goes an inch further in ballistic gelatin. . .(which I actually doubt is true). . .so what? That doesn't prove its a "better" round against people.
Lets step aside, and try to use our brains on this. Presumably you're talking about .38+p rounds here, yes? Per the manufacturers:
Rem Golden Saber claims 975 fps.
Speer Gold dot claims 945 fps.
Taken the manufacturers at their word, the two cartridges launch identical caliber specialty jacketed projectiles of identical weight at functionally identical velocities. I submit to you, then, that their terminal ballistic performance will be functionally identical too.
If someone is claiming that one of the two works a lot better then the other, I'd say that the burden of proof rests squarely on them to show how one of these two rounds with identical external ballistics "magically" demonstrates vastly superior terminal ballistics.
Without good evidence to the contrary, the only fair assumption to make is that there is no difference.
In other words, I don't have to prove that there is no such thing as a Loch Ness Monster. . .YOU have to prove that it DOES exist.
I will concede that its its *possible* that one of the two actually does use a better bullet that demonstrates better wounding potential. But I strongly doubt that either one is "much" better, and I also think that even if this were true, it would be next to impossible to prove conclusively.
Ultimately, you're still dealing with a .38+P, which is a fairly low-power round. Even the best .38+P rounds are going to fall short of 9mm luger rounds, and THOSE rounds are sometimes derided as inadequate. If you want the best performing .38 round, then step up to a .357 magnum, because even the worst of the premium .357 rounds is going to outperform EVERY .38+P.0 -
5mm,
We really need to know which round you are talking about. But as far as I know, the 357 Magnum, 125 grain JHP load still ranks tops, closely followed by the 45 ACP. It is hard to beat either.
Best0 -
As the folks have said- about even up. However, if you would just like to confuse the heck out of your friend for even bringing this up- tell your friend that the Gold Dot is a much better round when fired from a S&W- but that since the rifling on a Colt spins the OTHER way, the Golden Saber does in those- has to do with the way the "petals" are folded around the bullet.
Absolute hogwash, of course- but deliver it with a straight face- and wait and see how long before you hear someone else repeating it as gospel. [:p]0 -
I think the better round is the one your gun likes and the one you can afford to practice with enough to get the job done. A clean miss is not effective. Energy on paper is one thing, but I like Elmer Kieth thought "the only reliable killer is a big heavy bullet". 0 -
quote:Originally posted by 11b6r
As the folks have said- about even up. However, if you would just like to confuse the heck out of your friend for even bringing this up- tell your friend that the Gold Dot is a much better round when fired from a S&W- but that since the rifling on a Colt spins the OTHER way, the Golden Saber does in those- has to do with the way the "petals" are folded around the bullet.
Absolute hogwash, of course- but deliver it with a straight face- and wait and see how long before you hear someone else repeating it as gospel. [:p]
+1 LMAO Good one [}:)][:D]0 -
No arguement with any of the above, all makes sense to me.
However I practice with "plinker" and then only familiarize myself with my carry or self-defense rounds.
Acceptign everything that I read and hear about the specific bullets and loads ... I alternate loading them in my magazine. I take all of the best ... and put them all in my carry piece.
I'm not looking for target shooting at umpteen yards, but characteristics and capabilities that will stop what I want to stop. I don't argue these points, I just accept it all and load all the best. (JMHLAO) [:)] [;)] [^]0 -
quote:Originally posted by charliemeyer007
I think the better round is the one your gun likes and the one you can afford to practice with enough to get the job done. A clean miss is not effective. Energy on paper is one thing, but I like Elmer Kieth [sic] thought "the only reliable killer is a big heavy bullet".
That brings up a pretty good point.
I think the real question isn't whether this 125 grain +P round works better than that one (particularly when the two of them have identical external ballistics). Again, to the extent that there is ANY difference, its probably not a big one (let alone a quantifiable one), and its going to come down to which load uses the better BULLET.
The BETTER question is, which should you be using: a 125 grain +P load, or a 158 grain +P load (eg a modern rendition of the old "FBI load").
My feeling (and I do NOT have evidence to back this up) is that Keith was probably onto something here. Given the relatively slow velocity of these .38 bullets, all else being equal, I think you'll get better penetration with the heavier bullets and those are probably a better choice.
On bullet choice in general, frankly, I really don't think it makes all that much of a difference anyway. All of the big makers are putting out good ammo now. As long as you pick an ammo DESIGNED for defense (not some target or practice load), you should have something reasonably effective.
Personally, I'll carry any "personal defense" .38+P ammo in my gun I get my hands on (Federal, Winchester, Speer,
CorBon, whatever. . .) and I really don't waste a lot of time worrying about which one. I know ultimately that WHERE I put the bullet is going to be a LOT more important than who made it. My bottom line on this is that if I put the bullets in the right place, any of them can work, and if I don't, none of them will.
Now all that said, I think you still do have to be comfortable with your equipment. Even if "Brand X" really isn't any better than anything else, if you're comfortable with it, that's a good reason to use it. Put differently, doubt is expensive!
The most important things are to practice with your gun until you're proficient with it, and also to be "calibrated" so you know what kind of shots you can actually make with it. You have to have realistic expectations about what you can actually do with your gun.
Again, fundamentally, ALL handguns are limited power weapons, and NONE of them (not .38+P, 9mm, 45acp, 357, etc) are guaranteed to stop someone with one, or even multiple hits.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
8 comments