same question, different question
I currently carry a usp compact 40 loaded with low recoil hydra shoks or a smith 66 4" barrel also with low recoil hydra shoks. In a previous (not mine) post beantown pointed out the velocities were similar to a +p 9. Which caused me to reconsider my load choices. To paraphrase, if I am going to get nine energy might as well carry a nine. I know all of the personal decision etc about selecting ammo what I would like from you guys and gals is your favorite. I am on limited budget so I will only get to try a few different types for function and point of aim etc. So I don't necessarily need to know what is best but what you folks like. Thanks in advance.
P.S. Sorry about being long winded, it really did start out as a short simple question and just kept going.
P.S. Sorry about being long winded, it really did start out as a short simple question and just kept going.
0
-
quote:Originally posted by Gashauler
I currently carry a usp compact 40 loaded with low recoil hydra shoks or a smith 66 4" barrel also with low recoil hydra shoks. In a previous (not mine) post beantown pointed out the velocities were similar to a +p 9. Which caused me to reconsider my load choices. To paraphrase, if I am going to get nine energy might as well carry a nine. I know all of the personal decision etc about selecting ammo what I would like from you guys and gals is your favorite. I am on limited budget so I will only get to try a few different types for function and point of aim etc. So I don't necessarily need to know what is best but what you folks like. Thanks in advance.
P.S. Sorry about being long winded, it really did start out as a short simple question and just kept going.
Nothing wrong with hydrashocks, or the weapons you carry. If it's not broken, don't fix it.0 -
Well, to be clear, in that last thread I said the low recoil loads in the .40SW yielded ballistics similar to a hot 9mm with the same weight bullets (if I remember right this was a 135 grain bullet).
My advice to you is that if you like that particular load and gun, keep it. 9mm loads are nothing to sneeze at, particularly with good bullets, and your .40 is going to punch a bigger hole from the larger caliber (eg 10mm) bullet.
Being able to control your gun well, and having confidence in it is worth a LOT more than a few more foot pounds of energy, in my opinion. If you like your particular set up, KEEP IT.
If you want my personal favorite loads, in .357 and 9mm, I'll be happy to share.
For .357 magnum, I'll take *ANY* hollowpoint round, in either 125 or 158 grains. I've carried Federal hydrashoks in 125 grain, I've carried the cheap aluminum cased CCI 158 grain bullets. I'll take Winchester Silvertips, I'll take WHATEVER, so long as its from a known manufacturer.
My feeling is that *ANY* full power .357 load is going to be pretty good, and any differences in terminal ballistics between the various manufacturer's loads aren't likely to make a significant real world difference.
Its like the difference between getting it by a 4.5 lb sledgehammer or a 4.8 lb sledgehammer. On paper, there might be a difference. . .I doubt if you were on the receiving end you'd notice it. Put differently, even the crappiest full power .357 load is still probably better than most of the auto loads, and should be good enough.
On 9mm luger, same idea. I like the Corbon 115 grain +P loads since those are super fast (I think they yield 1350fps). But I'm not picky. I'll take 124 grain loads in +P; I've also carried the Federal 147 grain Hydroshok (mainly since I've managed to snag a box pretty cheap). I've carried Winchester, and there are other brands I'd be happy to carry as well. In general I try to stick to +P rounds from the "big" manufacturers in either 124 or 115 grains.
Again, my feeling is that all these different rounds are probably more similar than different, and FAR more important is shot placement. Further, with a 9mm, if one hit doesn't do the job, I've probably got another 14-15 rounds in there to keep going with.
So in short, I really don't spend a lot of time worrying about which ammo type. As far as I am concerned, any "personal defense" type ammo from a major manufacturer is good enough.
And that said, I've also carried plain "weak" ball ammo in 9mm luger, and target loads in 38 special. Definitely NOT my first choice, but if that's all I have, that's what I'd carry, and I'll still do that on occasion.
Maybe these are weak, but believe me, you do NOT want to get hit with just an "ordinary" ball 9mm luger round, let alone 10 of them.0 -
See this is my problem. I don't think and when I do I overthink. I think I may have thought myself into as you have both pointed out trying to fix something that ain't broke. Think I'll go have a beer and try to stop thinking as all it does is cost me money. Thanks for the advice. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Gashauler
See this is my problem. I don't think and when I do I overthink. I think I may have thought myself into as you have both pointed out trying to fix something that ain't broke. Think I'll go have a beer and try to stop thinking as all it does is cost me money. Thanks for the advice.
Well, there is literally a whole industry revolving around trying to sell you super-expensive premium ammunition, with everyone having some story about how their ammo is magical and better than everyone elses.
So its natural to dwell on this (just like people dwell unnecessarily on caliber, in my opinion).
Simple common sense indicates that out of (say) 12 different types of ammo, SOME of them are going to perform a little better and some a little worse.
The problem is that its virtually impossible to know which ones are better or worse!
Sure, you can do extensive testing in ballistic gelatin and other sorts of modeling, but these sorts of things are mostly out of the reach of the "little guy" and are just approximations anyway. Actual empirical testing (eg shooting a thousand people from different angles using different sorts of ammunition and seeing what happens) obviously can never be done.
Again, ordinary "ball" ammo is nothing to sneeze at, and any of the "personal protection" type ammo ought to be at least as good, if not a lot better. So I say pick whichever type runs well in your gun, that you are comfortable with (in terms of both shooting AND cost), stick to it, and forget it.
If you want to worry about something, worry about learning how to actually hit something under stress with your pistol.0 -
Note that it was velocities.... you are throwing a heavier bullet at that velocity, which means more energy... 0 -
there were 110,070 union battle casulities and 94,000 confederate in the civil war and no one had a gun desiginated as a " magnum" 0 -
...or fired "plus p" ammo.
Doug0 -
To date, in actual compiled data from street shootings, the 357 Magnum with a 125 grain JHP standard loading is the worlds #1 rated, one shot man stopper...followed closely by the 45 ACP with a 230 JHP, and the 40 S&W with a 155 JHP is making a mark for itself too. You seem to have two very good firearms in outstanding calibers. If it aint broke, dont fix it!
Best0 -
I would (do) leave well enough alone.
The main consideration is reliability. You would have to spend time and money shooting The Bullet Of The Month to be sure your guns were as reliable and accurate as you know they are with Hydrashoks.
I am two generations back with plain Federal hollowpoints in my 9mm but I know they work and see no reason to change horses in midstream.0 -
Off topic we continue. . .[;)]
quote:Varian
there were 110,070 union battle casulities and 94,000 confederate in the civil war and no one had a gun desiginated as a " magnum"
This is true, but to be fair most of those casualties were due to rifles and/or artillery, not handguns.
Even black powder civil-war era rifles are still considerably more powerful than typical modern defensive handgun rounds.
Also, with modern medicine (eg antibiotics, antisepsis, better surgical techniques, etc), the casualty numbers would certainly have been substantially lower.
On the topic of civil war-era handguns, the better ones are still nothing to sneeze at ballistically. For example, the Colt model 1860 cap and ball revolver fired a 138 grain .45 caliber lead ball at 750 feet per second. That's not sizzling ballistics by today's standards, but its almost exactly equivalent ballistically to the .38+P snubnose in my pocket right now! I'd like to think it would be adequate for self-defense.
The problem then was that there was only so much you could do with low-pressure black powder and the steel of that day (ie compared to today's smokeless powders and high tensile strength steel alloys). You could build longer cylinders to try to hold more powder and add more steel, but at some point this makes the guns prohibitively heavy to fire comfortably with one hand.
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
...or fired "plus p" ammo.
Doug
See above. The term "+P" is relatively new, but the concept of trying to juice up cartridges to get more power isn't anything new.
For example, the .38 special was "special" because it was more highly powered than the .38 long that preceded it.
Everyone has heard the story of the .38 long being so anemic that it led to the development of the .45 ACP (which was supposed to replicate .45 colt revolver ballistics in an automatic pistol).
The .38/44 round was the high-pressure advance on the .38 special and the direct precursor to the .357 magnum, just before the term "magnum" was coined, etc. There were high velocity .38 special rounds that were in effect +P rounds on the market years before the term "+P" gained currency.
Same idea for the .38 super (today called ".38 super +P"), which was named that as it was more "super" than the ordinary .38 automatic.
Anyway, historical stories aside, with any handgun upping the power pretty quickly runs into issues of cost, noise, and especially recoil (not to mention increased risk to bystanders from misses).
The field is littered with cartridges developed to be the next greatest thing for police/defensive use that in practice turned out to be too powerful for general use (eg the 10mm auto cartridge, the .41 magnum, which was originally supposed to be the .41 police magnum, etc).
The point is, there are practical limits to how powerful ANY handgun can be, and once you get into the more popular modern defensive rounds (eg .45ACP, 40SW, .357, etc), you start to encounter them. . .another reason why I don't spend too much time worrying about this.
You pick the biggest thing you can comfortably carry and move on to worry about something else.0 -
Just stick with the Hydro-Shok's. It is a fine defensive round. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
11 comments