Does a short barrel .45 make sense

[BBMW]

I did a quick search for a similar thread, but didn't find one. If i just missed it please link. That being said...

Let's look at a line of guns, the Smith Shields. They can be had in 9mm, .40, .45ACP.

There's something to like about the .45, it's chunky little can of whoop ass. A little short of mag capacity, but big on caliber. But...

.45 ACP was built around 5" barreled guns. The .45 Shield has a 3.3" barrel. And there are a whole slew of 3" 1911 platform guns out there also. If fairly consistently heard that .45 ACP doesn't do well out of shorter barrels. Some testing seems to back it up. It seems to be the same issue similar that .380 has. If you have a hollowpoint that opens up adequately the round underpenetrates. If the round has adequate penetration, there'll be little to no expansion.

Is this true, and if so, for short barrel guns is it better to go with natively higher velocity rounds like 9mm or .40 who's ammo is designed around shorter barrels (4") to begin with?

[RevolverRob]

The short answer is no, the .45 doesn't make sense in a sub-compact gun.

The long answer is...it's complicated.

Ammo selection can make a sub-4" .45 a capable gun. That ammo begins and ends, in my opinion, with the 185-grain Barnes bullet in +P loadings. Because the Barnes bullet is designed to have a wide velocity envelope over which it works, it's a bullet that can be run in a shorter barrel with minimal negative effects. However, to achieve adequate velocity from a short barrel .45, it's still going to need to be loaded fairly hot, usually pushing over into +P pressure ranges.

Add to the fact that micro 1911s in particular, have to be sprung like hell adding a +P loading to them exacerbates a lot of reliability issues inherent in that design (which are unlikely shared with the Shield or XD-S, but I don't have much experience with those platforms). Ultimately, you end up with a gun that has more recoil, lower capacity, and higher rate of wear - to have a sub-compact .45.

Given that a 9mm gun has more capacity, less recoil, and better reliability out of the sub-compact platforms out there, there is no compelling reason to choose a sub-compact .45ACP handgun for any reason, at all. Which brings us back to the short answer above -

No, it doesn't make any sense.

[OlongJohnson]

HK45c or USP45c are generally considered GTG. I wouldn't see the point of anything smaller than that.

[RevolverRob]

HK45c or USP45c are generally considered GTG. I wouldn't see the point of anything smaller than that.

Me neither. The HK45/USP45C are size wise a bit smaller than a Commander-sized 1911 and a bit larger than an Officer's-sized 1911. Making them about the best size for carry out there, anyways. Add in they are generally very reliable and are cheaper than a compact-1911...

[Half Moon]

I'm going with the consensus of: no. I have a Colt 1917 Fitz clone. I can't say what speed the bullets are hitting but, out of a 2" barrel, 1 to 2 rounds a cylinder will keyhole. To me that says the velocity is getting down to the lower limit of stabilizing the round. Fun range toy and that big bore muzzle looks intimidating as all get out. Realistically though I'm reaching for something else for self defense.

[the Schwartz]

I did a quick search for a similar thread, but didn't find one. If i just missed it please link. That being said...

Let's look at a line of guns, the Smith Shields. They can be had in 9mm, .40, .45ACP.

There's something to like about the .45, it's chunky little can of whoop ass. A little short of mag capacity, but big on caliber. But...

.45 ACP was built around 5" barreled guns. The .45 Shield has a 3.3" barrel. And there are a whole slew of 3" 1911 platform guns out there also. If fairly consistently heard that .45 ACP doesn't do well out of shorter barrels. Some testing seems to back it up. It seems to be the same issue similar that .380 has. If you have a hollowpoint that opens up adequately the round underpenetrates. If the round has adequate penetration, there'll be little to no expansion.

Is this true, and if so, for short barrel guns is it better to go with natively higher velocity rounds like 9mm or .40 who's ammo is designed around shorter barrels (4") to begin with?


I suspect that you've answered your own question with this observation; ''It seems to be the same issue similar that .380 has. If you have a hollowpoint that opens up adequately the round underpenetrates. If the round has adequate penetration, there'll be little to no expansion.''

When you ''shorten the runway'' reducing velocity enough to preclude reliable expansion of a JHP in any caliber, all you have left is a really expensive FMJ. At that point, due to the very narrow permanent wound channels produced by an FMJ, there is little real difference between the calibers. At velocities that can be expected from a 3''-inch barrel, a .380 95 gr. FMJ @ 875 fps produces about 18.5 inches of penetration, a 9mm 124 gr. FMJ @ 1,050 fps produces 27 inches of penetration, and a .45ACP 230-gr. FMJ @ 750 fps is good for about 23.5 inches of terminal penetration.

The only question remaining (as Rob touches upon) is, Are the penalties (the need for +P and +P+ loads to ensure JHP expansion, commensurate increase in recoil, wear, and somewhat larger profile and weight of the pistol) that come with carrying a 3''-barreled .45ACP sub-compact worth it?

I''ll leave it to you make that judgment for yourself.

[SAWBONES]

My own experience with smaller .45 Auto pistols includes two early H&K USP Compacts and two Glock 30s (early Gen 3) as well as a Colt CCO. (I don't and won't own a 1911-pattern pistol with a barrel shorter than 4.25" or a caliber other than .45 Auto.)

All the above have run without any problems, as used in training courses and for range practice, and years ago for CCW too.

Interestingly, the "softest" shooting of all, per my perception, are the G30s, seemingly having even less felt recoil than the G21. I know that doesn't make sense.

(OTOH, I had two early G 36s, neither of which would EVER run reliably.
Never got through more than 50 consecutive rounds without a failure to feed, fire or extract.
I'm told the current examples run fine, though.)

[RevolverRob]

I'm going with the consensus of: no. I have a Colt 1917 Fitz clone. I can't say what speed the bullets are hitting but, out of a 2" barrel, 1 to 2 rounds a cylinder will keyhole. To me that says the velocity is getting down to the lower limit of stabilizing the round. Fun range toy and that big bore muzzle looks intimidating as all get out. Realistically though I'm reaching for something else for self defense.

200-grain flying ashtrays may fair better than 230-grain ball (I'm ASSuming that is what you're shooting out of it).



Interestingly, the "softest" shooting of all, per my perception, are the G30s, seemingly having even less felt recoil than the G21. I know that doesn't make sense.

Doesn't surprise me. But that's because the G21 is HUGE. I suspect the way the grip fits in many folks hands causes it to have some weird in-hand shooting dynamics that make it less pleasant to shoot. The G30 is smaller enough that it negates those issues. I know from personal experience the G21 is the only gun I've ever picked up that is unpleasant to hold in my hand and downright painful to shoot, for the way it stretches my hand in order to grip it. I'd rather fire full-bore magnums through a 2.5" 629 than shoot 100 rounds through a G21.

[farscott]

After too many attempts (Colt Defender, Colt Officer's ACP, Glock 30, and Glock 36), the answer, for me, is "No." The shorter barreled .45 is harder for me to shoot due to the spring rate needed for the lighter slide, less reliable due to the need for frequent spring changes, and the shorter slide offers no benefit for my preferred IWB carry method. Then there are the ammo issues with penetration and expansion outlined above.

[Tom Duffy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lV8wwCzsso

Older test of the Speer 230 grain short barrel round from 2013 by tnoutdoors9 with 3.3 inch barrel. Seems like a serviceable round but just barely. I like this round out of my HK45C with a 3.9 inch barrel but I wouldn't use a 45 with a 3 inch barrel. For that there is 9mm. As Rob points out, the 185 grain Barnes all copper round is the one to beat.

[Half Moon]

200-grain flying ashtrays may fair better than 230-grain ball (I'm ASSuming that is what you're shooting out of it).

Good assumption though! Pretty much 230 grain ball or 230 grain Hydroshok or HST. My .45 ACP revolvers with fixed sights are all roughly POA = POI with 230's so I haven't branched out the way I have with other calibers. I probably should see what 200 grains do though as an experiment.

[jd950]

They make little sense. But they are fun and I guess that is all the sense something needs, sometimes.

I think a barrel of about 4" is okay if one chooses ammo carefully, and I have a couple of .45 pistols with barrels as short as 3.75". There are a few short barrel .45 guns that I just like, and whether they make sense is immaterial. If I was going to actually arm myself with one, I agree with what was said above, I would go with a Barnes all copper 185, but then, really, one would normally be better off with a 9 or 40.

Just my thoughts on the subject as I try to find things to do other than what I am actually supposed to be doing right now.

[Pacioli]

I'll jump on the NO bandwagon, but not because of ballistics. I owned a 3" barreled .45, not a 1911 pattern. It was a well made gun, never gave me trouble. The problem was it was painful to shoot. This particular gun had aggressive checkering on the front and back straps. Combine that with pretty vicious recoil and range sessions became painful quickly. So I didn't really train with it.

One day I had the "aha moment" that I was carrying, and trusting my life to, a gun I didn't train on. I moved on.

[Wondering Beard]

Doesn't surprise me. But that's because the G21 is HUGE. I suspect the way the grip fits in many folks hands causes it to have some weird in-hand shooting dynamics that make it less pleasant to shoot. The G30 is smaller enough that it negates those issues. I know from personal experience the G21 is the only gun I've ever picked up that is unpleasant to hold in my hand and downright painful to shoot, for the way it stretches my hand in order to grip it. I'd rather fire full-bore magnums through a 2.5" 629 than shoot 100 rounds through a G21.

That's where the fit of the hand to the grip really matters.

I'm sure you've read Bill Jordan's "No Second Place Winner", and one part that I found really interesting was the one about grips. He wrote that they have to be wide enough at the web of the hand to spread the recoil forces over a wider area there but, as you seem to experience with the G21, if they are too wide they can easily become as painful as if they were too narrow and focused the recoil on a small area. The way I remember you describing your hands, the G21 probably recoils straight onto the bones at the base of your thumb and twists in your hand, making it exceedingly unpleasant to shoot. The G30, being as fat as the G21 (at least the Gen 3 version) would likely be near as unpleasant to you.

In my hands, the G21 is just a bit larger than what I normally handle and spreads the recoil very nicely, making it the softest shooting 45 ACP I have ever shot (the G30, due to its short barrel has a bit more muzzle flip and thus only a little less pleasant). I remember shooting a 1911 with very fat (but very nice) antler stocks so that my palm was very spread out but the web spread on the normal metal part of the 1911. That very weird, to me, grip (fat at the palm and narrow at the web) made it hard to actually hold the gun properly and smacked the web very hard, thus giving me way more recoil than a regular gripped 1911 has ever done.

There is no "one size fits all" when gripping a gun.

[Whirlwind06]

Working up different .45 loads for target shooting, I've come to the conclusion that if I had to carry a compact 45. I would look for a factory 200 or 185 grain SWC target load. Similar to using 148 WC in a j-frame. Not saying it's the best solution but would be something that I could see actually practicing with.


Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Borderland]

HK45c or USP45c are generally considered GTG. I wouldn't see the point of anything smaller than that.

I'm considering buying one of those. Not because I don't like 15 rd magazines or 9mm, but because of future restrictions in my state. I see a time in the not too distant future where >10 rd mags will be banned just like CA. I've made an effort in the last few years to buy firearms as tho the restrictions are already here. I just can't fathom having a bunch of legal mags today and illegal mags tomorrow. Whats the point of having a 15 rd P226 when you can't run a 15 rd mag in it? I might as well step on up to a larger bore before I have to sell a bunch of pistols and mags. I have a 9mm carry but it has an 8 rd mag.

Some may laugh at that idea but I pay attention to the way the political wind blows here in WA and it's been a strong head wind here for about 3 years.

Or I could just riot in the streets and burn a few government buildings. Referring to the situation in MN.

[Whirlwind06]

Some may laugh at that idea but I pay attention to the way the political wind blows here in WA and it's been a strong head wind here for about 3 years.

Or I could just riot in the streets and burn a few government buildings. Referring to the situation in MN.

Looking how quickly Virginia turned I don't think it's funny at all. Most states seem to one election or mass shooting event away for things to change.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[OlongJohnson]

I'm considering buying one of those. Not because I don't like 15 rd magazines or 9mm, but because of future restrictions in my state. I see a time in the not too distant future where >10 rd mags will be banned just like CA. I've made an effort in the last few years to buy firearms as tho the restrictions are already here. I just can't fathom having a bunch of legal mags today and illegal mags tomorrow. Whats the point of having a 15 rd P226 when you can't run a 15 rd mag in it? I might as well step on up to a larger bore before I have to sell a bunch of pistols and mags. I have a 9mm carry but it has an 8 rd mag.

One point is you're getting older, and the recoil takes its toll. 9mm and its lower recoil still enables you to shoot more for le$$, get quicker hits, more accurately, with faster follow-ups. A full-size gun with the recoil of 9mm is still more shootable than the same gun with the recoil of .45. If you shoot it better, it's a better tool that improves your odds of surviving. That's been hashed over many times here. And a 10-rd P226 mag doesn't require a ridiculous elephant foot sticking out the bottom of the grip like the USPs.

Because you referenced the P226, I'd encourage you to consider the P220 if you're looking at a .45. It gets you away from the HK trigger issues. The mags are skinny like 1911 mags and hold the same number of rounds as a 1911 or the compact HKs, but I've never read any discussion at all about factory Sig P220 mags having issues. Get 8-rd standard mags mostly. If you want a 10-rd reload, they have those too.

In the HK compact family, a USPc in 9mm or .40 has 10-rd capacity without the elephant's foot, and is reliable and shootable if you figure out a trigger you like.

And yeah, I hear you about the politics. I'd likely plan on retiring an island or two north of you if not for that c.f. It's so frustrating, because a place like Skagit Arms represents so much of the population there. It used to be paradise. I miss the hippies who just wanted to smoke their weed, make their art, and be left alone.

[OlongJohnson]

That's where the fit of the hand to the grip really matters.

I'm sure you've read Bill Jordan's "No Second Place Winner", and one part that I found really interesting was the one about grips. He wrote that they have to be wide enough at the web of the hand to spread the recoil forces over a wider area there but...

As most are aware, Bill was a big man and legendary for even proportionally huge hands. I'm also tall and have fairly long fingers, including thumbs. I can't grip a J frame or even K frame exactly the way some people (like Uncle Jerry, for example) do, because I have too much thumb that I have to find a place to put. My metacarpophalangeal joint is especially prominent and right at the web of the thumb, so I often have issues with the "corner" of a grip. I've tuned up quite a few of them by removing material at that location, essentially skinnying them up, on a bunch of different guns. Slimmed up the Hogue grip on my GP at the top, removing material from both sides to get it to stop hammering that joint.

So yeah, fit is very personal.

[Bucky]

Because you referenced the P226, I'd encourage you to consider the P220 if you're looking at a .45. It gets you away from the HK trigger issues. The mags are skinny like 1911 mags and hold the same number of rounds as a 1911 or the compact HKs, but I've never read any discussion at all about factory Sig P220 mags having issues. Get 8-rd standard mags mostly. If you want a 10-rd reload, they have those too.
.

What about the P227? I like the idea, but never shot one. Are they GTG? Hard to tell with current Sigs.

[revchuck38]

Borderland - Another possibility is the M&P45. Full capacity mags are ten rounds and IME they recoil less than 1911s with the same ammo. Size-wise they seem to be more adaptable to different hands than the G21.

[deputyG23]

I borrowed a new unfired Shield .45 and a G30 from one of my deputies three years ago and went to the range.
My hands, which are small, preferred the Shield to the G30. If the Shield had another inch of barrel, I would probably bought one. .45 Lawman 230 grain ball chronographed at 698 FPS average from the Shield and my WST handload did 684 avg. My BE-86 handload did 761 fps average which is a service load equivalent handload that yields 890 FPS from my old 5" Kimber.
All that being said, the only .45 in the house that I would ever consider carrying at this time would be my newly acquired HK45 and may do so as soon as I figure out holster(s) and mag pouches.

[Borderland]

One point is you're getting older, and the recoil takes its toll. 9mm and its lower recoil still enables you to shoot more for le$$, get quicker hits, more accurately, with faster follow-ups. A full-size gun with the recoil of 9mm is still more shootable than the same gun with the recoil of .45. If you shoot it better, it's a better tool that improves your odds of surviving. That's been hashed over many times here. And a 10-rd P226 mag doesn't require a ridiculous elephant foot sticking out the bottom of the grip like the USPs.

Because you referenced the P226, I'd encourage you to consider the P220 if you're looking at a .45. It gets you away from the HK trigger issues. The mags are skinny like 1911 mags and hold the same number of rounds as a 1911 or the compact HKs, but I've never read any discussion at all about factory Sig P220 mags having issues. Get 8-rd standard mags mostly. If you want a 10-rd reload, they have those too.

In the HK compact family, a USPc in 9mm or .40 has 10-rd capacity without the elephant's foot, and is reliable and shootable if you figure out a trigger you like.

And yeah, I hear you about the politics. I'd likely plan on retiring an island or two north of you if not for that c.f. It's so frustrating, because a place like Skagit Arms represents so much of the population there. It used to be paradise. I miss the hippies who just wanted to smoke their weed, make their art, and be left alone.

I shoot a P226 very well. My neighbor has one and I've shot it several times. I really like those pistols but I'm going to pass on it because of the mag capacity. I've had two P220's and could never warm up to them. I much prefer a 5" 1911 and I have plenty of those. I've also had a Commander and sold it. Along those lines I have an HK45 which is a very soft shooter. I much prefer that to a P220.

I like your idea about a 9mm USP. I'm going to go down that rabbit hole now. :D

[Baldanders]

I have been carrying my Kahr cw45 lately.

Craptastic for the first 200 rounds, great since.

Commander-sized and feeds from (some) 1911 mags (I use an 8 round Mec-Gar). All I have done besides run ammo though it is slap on some Talon grips. I love mine.

230 grain Gold Dot expands violently in water from it. I am interested in the newer "short barrel" 230 grain Speer offers now. They had it at SGA last time I checked.

I find 185 grain Gold Dot snappier than the 230 grain, but the 230 Speer tends to run slow in chrony tests.

I find it funny that the G20/G21 is the worst frame of all for many folks, since it seems to be perfect for me.

I have shot a Glock 36, and I felt like it had more felt recoil and muzzle rise than my Kahr, and just didn't fit my paws as well.

[OlongJohnson]

What about the P227? I like the idea, but never shot one. Are they GTG? Hard to tell with current Sigs.

I'm not a fan of the E2 grip concept where it tapers in at the top of the back strap like Homer strangling Bart. Unfortunately, there are zero grip options for the P227 that don't do that. Otherwise, I'd probably have two of them.



I shoot a P226 very well. My neighbor has one and I've shot it several times. I really like those pistols but I'm going to pass on it because of the mag capacity. I've had two P220's and could never warm up to them. I much prefer a 5" 1911 and I have plenty of those. I've also had a Commander and sold it. Along those lines I have an HK45 which is a very soft shooter. I much prefer that to a P220.

I like your idea about a 9mm USP. I'm going to go down that rabbit hole now. :D

Funny about the USP 9 these days. For the full size gun, there are 10- and 15-round mags. 18 rounds if you go for the "jet funnel" add-on magwell and much more expensive mags. And I think there's like a 30-ish-round mag that's about $100 on a very good day.

For the Compact, there are 10- and 13-round mags, and baseplates for both that come with and without the pinky extension. Thanks to the ongoing support and development of the P30 and VP9, if you add an X-Grip adaptor, there are 15-, 17-, and 20-round mags for the Compact. The 17-rounders end up being pretty reasonable for carry, as the increased length is about equal to the pinky extension on the Compact mags.

[Rex G]

A standard-pressure .45 ACP cartridge, fired from a short barrel, without hearing protection, or with minimal hearing protection, in an enclosed space, seems less concussive than typical 9mm, from a somewhat longer barrel, and, notably less-concussive than .40 S&W. I am simply throwing this out there, as I am aware that this discussion is mostly about terminal effectiveness, but the concussive effect of higher-pressure rounds does seem to intimidate some shooters, firing at indoor ranges, even when they are wearing hearing protection.

The heavier bullets, launched by .45 ACP, .44 Special, and .45 Colt do result in plenty of total push-back, into the shooter’s hand, but the effect is not as intimidating, for some folks, as the sound and fury of some higher-pressure cartridges.

Let’s keep in mind that much of the USA’s population has much better access to indoor shooting ranges, than outdoor ranges.

Once upon a time, in the Eighties, I owned am S&W 25-2 snubbie, and later had a Wilson Combat Sentinel, for a while, in the late Nineties. These are my frame of reference, for short-barreled .45 ACP weapons. (I eventually realized tha N-Frames were not good for my K/L-sized hands, and, the Sentinel did not feed reliably, with its short mags, probably due to a period during which Wilson mags were equipped with defective springs, but I had parted with the Sentinel before sorting that out.)

[awp_101]

I'll jump on the "not worth the squeeze" bandwagon, especially if you have hand and/or wrist issues. I had carpal tunnel surgery about 15 years ago but it still flares if I'm not careful.

I don't remember my G30 being uncomfortable from a recoil standpoint but it just felt weird. The XD-S on the other hand was a different story. Again, it wasn't uncomfortable to shoot but for some reason just a couple mags of garden variety 230gr FMJ left my hands swollen for a couple of days. OTOH my M&P45C doesn't bother my hands and doesn't feel weird.

YMMV...

[Robinson]

A true Commander-length 1911 (4.25" barrel) is all the shorter I am willing to go with the 45 ACP, from both a velocity and reliability standpoint. Also, a Commander still rides okay in an AIWB holster but anything shorter would feel off balance to me.

I'm just now getting back into Commanders after carrying an all steel 5" gun for years, so this conversation is timely for me.

[Trooper224]

No, there's no logical reason for a short barreled. 45, when the 9mm has proven itself to be so effective and adaptable in that role. In fact, given the performance of modern ammunition, there's really no logical need for any other handgun round period in an anti-personnel role. To show it isn't always just about the science, I say this as someone who's currently carrying a .45 auto. So, if you like your big bore snubby and it works for you, then you do you bro. Just don't look for some kind of factual validation for your choice because you won't find it.

[45dotACP]

No, there's no logical reason for a short barreled. 45, when the 9mm has proven itself to be so effective and adaptable in that role. In fact, given the performance of modern ammunition, there's really no logical need for any other handgun round period in an anti-personnel role. To show it isn't always just about the science, I say this as someone who's currently carrying a .45 auto. So, if you like your big bore snubby and it works for you, then you do you bro. Just don't look for some kind of factual validation for your choice because you won't find it.<thread>

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[mmc45414]

I borrowed a new unfired Shield .45 … My hands, which are small, preferred the Shield to the G30. If the Shield had another inch of barrel, I would probably bought one.
I have the Shield 45. The primary reason I got it is because it is just a little bit BIGGER than the 9mm, and my small hand fits on the grip without the extended magazine. I have always thought a 4" Shield would be great, with the grip being molded to the length of the current extended magazines. It could be like a $300 Polymer Commander. Now they are offering a 4" version but I just can't get my brain to accept the magazine being part of the grip frame.

While I like my 45 Shield it gets almost no use. Loaded it is too heavy for elastic pants and if I am wearing a belt I am carrying a normal pistol.

[willie]

I have both calibers in the Shield. Sometimes I carry the 9. The .45 lives in a small cabinet next to my easy chair. I shoot both about the same. The 45 is accurate and reliable with factory target 185 gr jacketed swc. Having a case of this ammo, I decided to use this in the 45 Shield as I fool around and fish and play in rural areas. You will have to expend great effort to locate defense ammo that will demonstrate adequate performance in the 45 Shield.

[Baldanders]

My only real question about my short barrel .45 (CW45).

Does it give me an advantage over a 9mm (with 147 grain jhp) for a mercy shot on downed livestock with my 230 grain Gold Dot carry ammo?

Because that scenario is way more likely than self-defense in my rural milieu. And the hive says .45 ACP is better on bovine skull shots than 9mm, in general .

Other than that, I don't care at all. The only reason I have a .45 Kahr, not a 9mm, is the 9mm at my LNGS had a shit trigger, the .45 was great, so I gave it a try.

[corneileous]

Well, since the general consensus here says that short-barreled 45’s aren’t all that great- which I’m not necessarily arguing with, it makes a little bit of sense actually but since I’m already the still proud owner of my XDE Springfield 3.3, what would be a good defense ammo for this pistol if the barrel is really too short? So far I’ve just been practicing with regular ole 230gr FMJ’s and carry Federal Premium 230gr HST’s for defense.

I got no problem with 9mm, I just chose the 45 in this pistol because of the fact that since both are single stack, comparing only 9+1 rounds with the extended magazine in the 9mm to 8+1 with extended magazine in the 45, I figured more punch would be better even though it had less rounds. That, and the several ballistics videos I watched with the 230gr HST’s that was fired into ballistics gel through denim, seemed sufficient to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

Side discussions culled, let's keep it on topic.

DocGKR any input on ammo selection for short barrel .45 Auto?

[45dotACP]

If a short barreled .45 was all I had, I'd carry it with target loaded wadcutters, much in the same vein as carrying wadcutters in a snub. The recoil won't be as bad, you'll get decent accuracy and good enough penetration and the added positive of not cycling the slide as fast as a +P 230 gr. HST might make the shorter framed guns a little less likely to malfunction.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Trooper224]

In a shorter barreled gun I'd go with a lighter projectile, an 185 or 200 grain bullet.

[jd950]

I like the .45 and many of the guns made for it. It just loses too much juice in a short barrel for me to trust it for life-saving purposes. If I were going to carry a 3-3.5" .45 for defense/leo use, the only load I know of and that I would feel comfortable with is a 185 Barnes Copper hollowpoint as put out by a couple of different manufactures.

If one wants a short barrel gun and doesn't like 9mm and can't/won't shoot the exotic ammo, then a 180 grain .40 works fine assuming you can shoot it well enough.

The above are my opinions. I am not an expert. My opinions are based on what experts have said and what I have seen and read. If my opinion doesn't work anyone, please ignore it and do what makes you feel good.

[corneileous]

If a short barreled .45 was all I had, I'd carry it with target loaded wadcutters, much in the same vein as carrying wadcutters in a snub. The recoil won't be as bad, you'll get decent accuracy and good enough penetration and the added positive of not cycling the slide as fast as a +P 230 gr. HST might make the shorter framed guns a little less likely to malfunction.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

Ok so, after reading this article (https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/wadcutter-bullet/) about full wadcutters and semi-wadcutters, explain to me please on why this would make a good self defense round? Keep in mind, I know little to nothing about wadcutter ammo even after reading this article.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[corneileous]

In a shorter barreled gun I'd go with a lighter projectile, an 185 or 200 grain bullet.

How come? For recoil reduction? Does this recommendation have anything to do with a faster/lighter bullet having better chances at expansion compared to a slower/heavier bullet? What about barrier penetration through a car door with a 165, 185, 200 or 230gr 45? I ask this because since I spend the majority of my time in a semi, and with all this rioting crap going on, I would think that my chances of having to shoot through my truck door would be more common than the short time I spend outside of the truck but still, both environments still exist so I can understand finding a happy medium for both.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinedoc]

I'm going with the consensus of: no. I have a Colt 1917 Fitz clone. I can't say what speed the bullets are hitting but, out of a 2" barrel, 1 to 2 rounds a cylinder will keyhole. To me that says the velocity is getting down to the lower limit of stabilizing the round. Fun range toy and that big bore muzzle looks intimidating as all get out. Realistically though I'm reaching for something else for self defense.

Totally agree. Maybe for a different reason, but when I was a cop, got good prices on most guns. Picked up a Kimber 3" bbl in .45 acp. Simply put, I couldn't shoot it very accurately, and especially under timed restraints with multiple rounds fired. You obviously lose velocity vs longer bbl's. Wasn't any more concealable than my 4.25" .45 and certainly not any more comfortable. Quickly back to my 4" bbl guns for all EDC, whether 9mm or .45 acp. which I shoot well under all circumstances.

[corneileous]

I like the .45 and many of the guns made for it. It just loses too much juice in a short barrel for me to trust it for life-saving purposes. If I were going to carry a 3-3.5" .45 for defense/leo use, the only load I know of and that I would feel comfortable with is a 185 Barnes Copper hollowpoint as put out by a couple of different manufactures.
I can understand that, hence the reason I asked about it. But are these (https://www.luckygunner.com/45-acp-p-185-grain-schp-barnes-tac-xpd-20) what you’re talking about? But why these? Why would these, even in the lighter weight be trusted by you over the 230 gr HST’s or Speer Gold Dots?


If one wants a short barrel gun and doesn't like 9mm and can't/won't shoot the exotic ammo, then a 180 grain .40 works fine assuming you can shoot it well enough.
I’m not saying you’re assuming this but it’s not like I don’t like 9mm’s, I just figured at the time since both the 9mm and 45 XDE were relatively close in ammo capacity that the 45 would be a better stopper since the 230 gr HST’s had great ballistics penetration and expansion through four layers of denim in a 16 inch block of gel and not to mention the quarter-sized wound channel they make.


The above are my opinions. I am not an expert. My opinions are based on what experts have said and what I have seen and read. If my opinion doesn't work anyone, please ignore it and do what makes you feel good.
Anyone that has useful knowledge and experience, and does what they do, must be for a reason. All I’m asking is for is friendly advice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

Ok so, after reading this article (https://thebiggamehuntingblog.com/wadcutter-bullet/) about full wadcutters and semi-wadcutters, explain to me please on why this would make a good self defense round? Keep in mind, I know little to nothing about wadcutter ammo even after reading this article.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The general idea is if you're not going to get expansion anyway a wadcutter is preferable to a ball round. The shoulder makes it less like to skip off bone and does more damage to tissue in it's direct path.

[Trooper224]

How come? For recoil reduction? Does this recommendation have anything to do with a faster/lighter bullet having better chances at expansion compared to a slower/heavier bullet? What about barrier penetration through a car door with a 165, 185, 200 or 230gr 45? I ask this because since I spend the majority of my time in a semi, and with all this rioting crap going on, I would think that my chances of having to shoot through my truck door would be more common than the short time I spend outside of the truck but still, both environments still exist so I can understand finding a happy medium for both.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You answered your own question. :)

As for shooting into, or in your case out of, vehicles: any time I was involved in those activities with a .45 it was with a 230 grain projectile, because that's what my agency issued. So, I really can't speak to the comparative capability of the lighter rounds.

I will say that my experience indicates that 9mm penetrates the cab of a John Deere combine better than .45acp. :)

[corneileous]

The general idea is if you're not going to get expansion anyway a wadcutter is preferable to a ball round. The shoulder makes it less like to skip off bone and does more damage to tissue in it's direct path.

Why wouldn’t I have penetration?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

Why wouldn’t I have penetration?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What?

[corneileous]

You answered your own question. :)

As for shooting into, or in your case out of, vehicles: any time I was involved in those activities with a .45 it was with a 230 grain projectile, because that's what my agency issued. So, I really can't speak to the comparative capability of the lighter rounds.

I will say that my experience indicates that 9mm penetrates the cab of a John Deere combine better than .45acp. :)

The recoil reduction I could see beneficial but I just wonder if there’d really be any felt difference between 230gr and 185gr. Guess I’d just have to try a box or two and see.

But as far as the lighter/faster bullet being better, I wasn’t saying that based on being fact at least from me because I just simply don’t know. All i know is there’s a ton of people on both sides of the fence where one group says lighter/faster is better and the other group says heavier is better for maximum impact energy. I don’t even know where I stand on that. Lol.

But depending on the situation, wouldn’t point blank firing through a door be a little different from firing through a door from afar? I don’t know about firing a round through the door of my pickup but firing a round through the door of this Pete would seem like a much easier feat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[corneileous]

What?

You said if I’m not going to have penetration anyway that a wadcutter would be better than just FMJ’s and I was asking why I wouldn’t have penetration from a tried and true hollow point......


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Half Moon]

corneileous

There's a couple questions here;

Wadcutters: generally get good penetration even at low velocities and the flat profile and sharp shoulder give a better permanent wound cavity in the absence of expansion. At short barrel velocities, in .38 Special anyways and I'm betting also .45 ACP, with hollow points you are likely to get either expansion with poor penetration or penetration with poor expansion. Penetration is preferable to ensure you can reach vital organs. Ball ammo will also get you penetration but is more likely to deflect off bone, etc.

Shooting from in a vehicle: .38 Super was created for the 1911 platform in the 1920's due to .45 ACP having poor penetration of car bodies. I don't think the ballistics have changed that much though I could be wrong.

On lighter bullets I believe DocGKR has stated none of the 200 grain or less .45 ACP's have displayed adequate performance in a short barrel (I think BehindBlueI's actually asked that but throwing it in).

[corneileous]

corneileous

There's a couple questions here;

Wadcutters: generally get good penetration even at low velocities and the flat profile and sharp shoulder give a better permanent wound cavity in the absence of expansion. At short barrel velocities, in .38 Special anyways and I'm betting also .45 ACP, with hollow points you are likely to get either expansion with poor penetration or penetration with poor expansion. Penetration is preferable to ensure you can reach vital organs. Ball ammo will also get you penetration but is more likely to deflect off bone, etc.

Shooting from in a vehicle: .38 Super was created for the 1911 platform in the 1920's due to .45 ACP having poor penetration of car bodies. I don't think the ballistics have changed that much though I could be wrong.

On lighter bullets I believe DocGKR has stated none of the 200 grain or less .45 ACP's have displayed adequate performance in a short barrel (I think BehindBlueI's actually asked that but throwing it in).

I get what you’re saying... short barreled 45 pistol might get good penetration/poor expansion or vice versa, bad penetration/good expansion but how do you or anybody else feel about the short-barreled 230gr HP’s from
Speer and I think Remington makes some as well?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Trooper224]

The recoil reduction I could see beneficial but I just wonder if there’d really be any felt difference between 230gr and 185gr. Guess I’d just have to try a box or two and see.

Yes, there is a difference in felt recoil. I shot bullseye for years using 230, 200 and 185 grain bullets. There is a difference. How much difference it makes to you is for you to decide.


But as far as the lighter/faster bullet being better, I wasn’t saying that based on being fact at least from me because I just simply don’t know. All i know is there’s a ton of people on both sides of the fence where one group says lighter/faster is better and the other group says heavier is better for maximum impact energy. I don’t even know where I stand on that. Lol.

It's about optimizing the projectiles performance with the length of barrel, not about which one's definitively better.


But depending on the situation, wouldn’t point blank firing through a door be a little different from firing through a door from afar? I don’t know about firing a round through the door of my pickup but firing a round through the door of this Pete would seem like a much easier feat.

If a closed and, I presume locked, semi door is between you and a threat, I don't know how much of a threat you'll be able to articulate later if you take a shot. I'll leave that issue to our resident legal minds.

[BehindBlueI's]

You said if I’m not going to have penetration anyway that a wadcutter would be better than just FMJ’s and I was asking why I wouldn’t have penetration from a tried and true hollow point......


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I said expansion.

[Caballoflaco]

If a closed and, I presume locked, semi door is between you and a threat, I don't know how much of a threat you'll be able to articulate later if you take a shot. I'll leave that issue to our resident legal minds.

Guns were reportedly flashed in one of the recent attempted hijackings. I could also see being threatened or attacked with incendiary devices as a a non-zero probability event in the current situation.

[corneileous]

I said expansion.

I don’t know why I said penetration... meant to say expansion. I meant to ask why I wouldn’t have any expansion..... from a hollow point bullet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Navin Johnson]

With out too much effort one could read previous postings about short 4/5ths.

If it were really a concern I would contact the manufacture and get info on velocity windows for a round you may be interested in. Then get a sky screen and see if you have adequate vel. for upset.

One could also carry ball as most 4/5ths JHP's are likely not going to upset in a sub 4 inch gun. But there could be new stuff on the market that does?

For me the ACP is just for fun do to SHO/WHO. (vs. a 9)

[BehindBlueI's]

I don’t know why I said penetration... meant to say expansion. I meant to ask why I wouldn’t have any expansion..... from a hollow point bullet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Insufficient velocity.

[corneileous]

Insufficient velocity.

Sooo, none of my ammo is going to expand? It did here....

https://youtu.be/Q28V7xQoZjc

What do you guys have to say about these Inceptor rounds? (https://www.inceptorammo.com/inceptor-product/preferred-defense/) Another gimmic-round?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[corneileous]

Yes, there is a difference in felt recoil. I shot bullseye for years using 230, 200 and 185 grain bullets. There is a difference. How much difference it makes to you is for you to decide.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there was. That’s quite a jump going from 230 down to 185.




It’s about optimizing the projectiles performance with the length of barrel, not about which one's definitively better.
Gotcha. So pretty much in other words, a longer barrel 45 wouldn’t necessarily matter if it was 230 grain, 200 grain or 185 grain as far as enough barrel length for proper velocity? Just pretty much recoil reduction at that point really is all we’re talking?




If a closed and, I presume locked, semi door is between you and a threat, I don’t know how much of a threat you'll be able to articulate later if you take a shot. I'll leave that issue to our resident legal minds.

Guess I don’t get what you’re saying here…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[corneileous]

Guns were reportedly flashed in one of the recent attempted hijackings. I could also see being threatened or attacked with incendiary devices as a a non-zero probability event in the current situation.

Supposedly there was a gun seen in the crowd that prompted the FedEx driver to hit the gas, and the one that drag the person in front of the tires then eventually died from that... or is that totally off base of what you’re talking about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Caballoflaco]

Supposedly there was a gun seen in the crowd that prompted the FedEx driver to hit the gas, and the one that drag the person in front of the tires then eventually died from that... or is that totally off base of what you’re talking about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s the one

[BehindBlueI's]

Sooo, none of my ammo is going to expand? It did here....

https://youtu.be/Q28V7xQoZjc



You asked "why this would make a good self defense round", I replied "in general..." as to why they are recommended.

Short barrels often have difficulty getting a bullet fast enough to do both expand and penetrate to recommended levels, especially if the cartridge isn't designed for the barrel length. Hence the recommendation for wadcutters/semi-wadcutters in those circumstances. If you've got a cartridge that both penetrates sufficiently and expands (and has tolerable recoil and shoots point of aim) then that's the better option. Wadcutters are for when that's not true.

[corneileous]

That’s the one

Well, I’ll be. lol. I wasn’t sure what you were taking about as that response was purely a shot in the dark.

But since we’re on the same page now, I couldn’t see the driver side of that truck but I did see the passenger side where there was a couple people that jumped up on the side so I would imagine whatever the laws are of the state you’re in would dictate how you responded to that if you were in that driver‘s shoes but I guarantee you if the window would’ve been broken, and if whether or not you respected FedEx’s policy against guns in their trucks, that definitely would’ve been all the excuse I would’ve needed to start shooting straight out the passenger window.

But on a sidenote, I don’t think I would call that particular case right there an “attempted” hijacking because in the video I saw, they were actually pulling packages out of the first trailer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe in PNG]

From my reading here (and the experts might correct me on this), the things you want in a defensive load are 1) reliability 2) accuracy 3) penetration 4) expansion.
1 & 2 are easy enough.

3 & 4 tend to be a bit tricky.
Older JHP designs tend to expand or break apart at the expense of penetration. You may get a kewl looking yootoob vid or gel pic, but it doesn't get where it needs to go.
But, classic ball ammo profiles like FMJ or LRN can deflect off bones or not do a lot of damage as they pass through tissue.

Modern ammo is usually able to do both successfully- penetrate the minimum FBI recommended depth, expand, and stay together. But, some of the older loadings are kind of marginal at pushing a bullet fast enough to do what it's supposed to do, especially in short barrels. .45acp, .38 Special are two that are famous for this. They're older designs that are kind of slow already. Shooting them out of a shorter barrel can mean that it's not going fast enough to expand when it hits a target.

So, the classic solution is the wadcutter. It has sharp shoulders, so it will 'bite' when it hits bone instead of deflecting. It will also do more damage to tissue than a round profile.

[corneileous]

You asked "why this would make a good self defense round", I replied "in general..." as to why they are recommended.

Short barrels often have difficulty getting a bullet fast enough to do both expand and penetrate to recommended levels, especially if the cartridge isn't designed for the barrel length. Hence the recommendation for wadcutters/semi-wadcutters in those circumstances. If you've got a cartridge that both penetrates sufficiently and expands (and has tolerable recoil and shoots point of aim) then that's the better option. Wadcutters are for when that's not true.

So then would you agree that a lighter weight bullet from a 230 grain in a short barrel 45, or a specially made short barrel defend round would probably be the wiser choice? Sure, there’s really good expansion and penetration taking place in that video I posted but realistically, how close in comparison it is four pieces of denim in front of ballistics gel compared to the human body?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BehindBlueI's]

So then would you agree that a lighter weight bullet from a 230 grain in a short barrel 45, or a specially made short barrel defend round would probably be the wiser choice?

I can't really agree or disagree as I don't think I know enough to make a blanket statement like that. My *guess* is one of the lighter all-copper loads might be a good choice if it hits POA, but that's a guess. I was hoping DocGKR could weigh in. If I remember I'll try and text him later today.

[jd950]

I can understand that, hence the reason I asked about it. But are these (https://www.luckygunner.com/45-acp-p-185-grain-schp-barnes-tac-xpd-20) what you’re talking about? But why these? Why would these, even in the lighter weight be trusted by you over the 230 gr HST’s or Speer Gold Dots?

In a commander length or longer barrel, I would choose 230 grain hst or gold dots, maybe +p, maybe not. In the short barrel, yes, those are one of the ones I was referring to. Why? I know the track record of HST and Gold Dot, and probably Winchester Rangers, too, in 230 grain and in 4-5" barrels. The Barnes in short barrels because I have read the comments and seen the test results from people I trust on this topic, including the moderator of this forum, and because the technology makes sense to me and my own informal testing fits with what I have read and heard. They will, generally, penetrate sufficiently and also expand/become jagged while doing so. That round also seems to have a lighter recoil, and that is a good thing. Typical .45 ammo either expands but fails to penetrate enough or penetrates ok but fails to expand. Generally I have not been impressed with he 185-200 gr ammo anyway. And, despite the folklore and almost religious fervor for the idea, I simply do not subscribe to the belief that .45 ball ammo is worth carrying, unless one is restricted to ball ammo for some reason.

I am convinced the .45 in a short barrel is a less reliable defensive option than a good 9mm round, and I have the ability to choose, so I choose what I think is best. If all I had was a 3" .45 I would carry that with whatever ammo worked well in the gun and that I could shoot well and I would probably not lose any sleep over it.

Everything is a compromise and to me, the compromises are just a bit too much with a 3" .45. That does not mean it is useless or cannot do the job, it just means I think there are better choices with a greater likelihood of performing as one would hope for. There is also the benefit of lower recoil greater capacity in 9mm, and that also matters to me.

In tiny guns I use 9mm for any serious role. But if I was going to carry a 3" .45 acp, I would put the Barnes stuff in it, unless and until I find something I think is better or as good and less expensive. I hope this response was useful to you.

[corneileous]

In a commander length or longer barrel, I would choose 230 grain hst or gold dots, maybe +p, maybe not. In the short barrel, yes, those are one of the ones I was referring to. Why? I know the track record of HST and Gold Dot, and probably Winchester Rangers, too, in 230 grain and in 4-5" barrels. The Barnes in short barrels because I have read the comments and seen the test results from people I trust on this topic, including the moderator of this forum, and because the technology makes sense to me and my own informal testing fits with what I have read and heard. They will, generally, penetrate sufficiently and also expand/become jagged while doing so. That round also seems to have a lighter recoil, and that is a good thing. Typical .45 ammo either expands but fails to penetrate enough or penetrates ok but fails to expand. Generally I have not been impressed with he 185-200 gr ammo anyway. And, despite the folklore and almost religious fervor for the idea, I simply do not subscribe to the belief that .45 ball ammo is worth carrying, unless one is restricted to ball ammo for some reason.

I am convinced the .45 in a short barrel is a less reliable defensive option than a good 9mm round, and I have the ability to choose, so I choose what I think is best. If all I had was a 3" .45 I would carry that with whatever ammo worked well in the gun and that I could shoot well and I would probably not lose any sleep over it.

Everything is a compromise and to me, the compromises are just a bit too much with a 3" .45. That does not mean it is useless or cannot do the job, it just means I think there are better choices with a greater likelihood of performing as one would hope for. There is also the benefit of lower recoil greater capacity in 9mm, and that also matters to me.

In tiny guns I use 9mm for any serious role. But if I was going to carry a 3" .45 acp, I would put the Barnes stuff in it, unless and until I find something I think is better or as good and less expensive. I hope this response was useful to you.

So what are some of the other brands of this ammunition that you’re recommending?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

In .45 Auto barrels under 4" or so, I'd also likely choose a Barnes all copper 185 gr +P loading.

Barrels 4" and longer, I'll stick with a good 230 gr loading.

Synthetic gel YouTube videos are NOT valid terminal performance tests....

[willie]

When I had a ND inside my truck with factory 230 grain hardball, the bullet imbedded in the plastic part of the door and did not penetrate farther. Barrel length was 5 inches. When I would shoot into a plowed field with any 45 Auto, I could rake through the dirt and find the bullets. Firing grease guns and Thompsons into dirt banks at 50 and 75 yard distances showed similar lack of penetration.

Doc's findings are gospel. Study them. Perhaps more bullshit has been written about bullet this and that than any other subject. I am an expert on bullshit because I have been reading it for over 5 decades, and I still do dumb things. I may have more Doc type ammo than any other person here but sometimes carry a 9 loaded with the old Federal 115 +p+ jhp.

[jd950]

So what are some of the other brands of this ammunition that you’re recommending? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Doing a quick search I found loaded ammo with this bullet from Buffalo Bore, Black Hills and Barnes. I think they would all be considered reliable brands. I would suggest getting a box of each and checking for function, "accuracy", flash, recoil, etc., in your gun(s) and in your hands and then get some more of whatever seems best and confirm it works for you and your gun. Others may have more knowledge of these particular options.

This stuff isn't cheap, unfortunately, but you need to be confident it works reliably in your gun, in my opinion. I would be interested to hear how the experiment works out for you and what you choose.

[corneileous]

In .45 Auto barrels under 4" or so, I'd also likely choose a Barnes all copper 185 gr +P loading.
So for practicing and range shooting, just the regular ole 230 grain Winchester white box is OK for that?



Synthetic gel YouTube videos are NOT valid terminal performance tests....
I’m glad you pointed that out as that’s always been kind of a wonder to me but if ballistics gel is not a good way to test then without getting somebody to volunteer and let you shoot them a couple times, what’s the best way to find out which defense ammo will work and what won’t?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Trooper224]

So for practicing and range shooting, just the regular ole 230 grain Winchester white box is OK for that?

I’m glad you pointed that out as that’s always been kind of a wonder to me but if ballistics gel is not a good way to test then without getting somebody to volunteer and let you shoot them a couple times, what’s the best way to find out which defense ammo will work and what won’t?

Doc has posted up a list of acceptable ammunition choices on this and other forums. Do a search, find the list and pick something on it. It's really no more complicated than that. He's given you a recommendation on ammo for your shortie .45, if I were you I'd take that as gospel.

Doc's done more legitimate ballistics study than anyone else you're likely to meet.

[Joe in PNG]

Doc has posted up a list of acceptable ammunition choices on this and other forums. Do a search, find the list and pick something on it. It's really no more complicated than that. He's given you a recommendation on ammo for your shortie .45, if I were you I'd take that as gospel.

Doc's done more legitimate ballistics study than anyone else you're likely to meet.

If he's really interested, he need to go and read the stickies in the ammo section. A lot of research and a lot of money has been spent on this.
One thing you see a lot is that the stuff that does well in a proper 4ld ballistics gel test has usually done well in real shootings.

[corneileous]

Doc has posted up a list of acceptable ammunition choices on this and other forums. Do a search, find the list and pick something on it. It's really no more complicated than that. He's given you a recommendation on ammo for your shortie .45, if I were you I'd take that as gospel.

Doc's done more legitimate ballistics study than anyone else you're likely to meet.

Well I guess I’ll have to wait until this COVID and rioting craps over because I can’t find any online store that sells any of that. I did find those Buffalo Bore Barnes rounds but over 40 bucks a box and 30 bucks to ship two boxes- I think I’ll pass for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[45dotACP]

I think the most important thing in Doc's sticky is that it's much more beneficial to seek qualified training, practice with your carry gun and cultivate a warrior mindset.

It's fine to get into the weeds on a technical issue, just try not to miss the forest for the trees.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Caballoflaco]

I’m glad you pointed that out as that’s always been kind of a wonder to me but if ballistics gel is not a good way to test then without getting somebody to volunteer and let you shoot them a couple times, what’s the best way to find out which defense ammo will work and what won’t?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are different types of ballistics gel. What doc is referring to are the synthetic clear ballistics gelatin products.

Proper ballistics gel is 10% ordnance gelatin that is made from the skin bones and connective tissue of animals. It is then prepared and stored in a controlled and prescribed manner. When testing it has to be within a specified temperature range and the density is calculated by measuring the penetration of a bb fired into the block. As noted above when the proper protocols are followed bullets that perform well in specific gelatin tests also perform well in real world shootings.

All Clear or synthetic ballistics gel is garbage for actual testing because it does not react to gullet strikes in the same way that the organic properly prepared gelatin does.

Pretty much all gel tests on YouTube are garbage no matter what type of gelatin they’re using becasue we don’t know what protocols they are using, as far as temperature, calibration etc.

[Whirlwind06]

Well I guess I’ll have to wait until this COVID and rioting craps over because I can’t find any online store that sells any of that. I did find those Buffalo Bore Barnes rounds but over 40 bucks a box and 30 bucks to ship two boxes- I think I’ll pass for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And there is the rub...

That's why most folks are carrying 9mm with known good SD ammo that's much more available and cheap enough that you can run a hundred rounds through your carry gun.



Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[corneileous]

And there is the rub...

That's why most folks are carrying 9mm with known good SD ammo that's much more available and cheap enough that you can run a hundred rounds through your carry gun.



Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

My guess was that stuff like that isn’t as well-known as what I have been using.

But well, probably if I would’ve known then what I know now, I more than likely would have gone with the 9mm XDE but I don’t think the 45 version is a total flop. I did pick me up a couple of boxes of Speer Gold Dot short-barrel 230-gr 45’s for a decent price to try out. Thanks for everybody’s advice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bucky]

So how much velocity is lost with 230 grain ammo as the barrel gets shorter? Well, let’s see....

I thought this would be an interesting project for my morning range time.

Ammo 230 grain Speer Gold Dot standard velocity.

Gun / Barrel length. Muzzle velocity. 11 Yard Velocity.

Caspian 1911 5”, 897, 886

Glock 21 4.25, 851, 840

Glock 30, 3.78, 816, 808

DW ECO 3.5, 819, 808

XDS 3”, 796, 786

Seems like a consistent and steady drop, up to 100 FPS. I thought perhaps the ECO would have gotten closer to the G21 with its, arguably, “better” barrel, but that just isn’t the case. I have seen in 9mm where a shorter barrel will outrun a longer barrel, especially in the heavier loads, but certainly not the case here.


For what it’s worth. :)

[Lester Polfus]

Well I guess I’ll have to wait until this COVID and rioting craps over because I can’t find any online store that sells any of that. I did find those Buffalo Bore Barnes rounds but over 40 bucks a box and 30 bucks to ship two boxes- I think I’ll pass for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I generate this search (https://ammoseek.com/ammo/45acp/-handgun-185grains?ikw=TAC) by inputing the following search criteria: .45 ACP, 185 grain weight, and the text string "TAC."

There may be other instances of loads with the 185 grain Barnes bullet where the seller doesn't list them with the "Tac" nomenclature, but I didn't have the time or motivation to search through pages of search results.

I would rather slam my balls in a car door than get involved in a prolonged 9mm vs .45 debate, I would offer two observations:

1) While it certainly has some merit as a "woods cartridge" for folks that want to carry a field pistol (see GJM's thread on the USP 45) I'm not sure it is the best choice for a 3" barreled urban/suburban carry pistol.

2) .45 ACP seems to sit in a sweet spot where it is widely produced, but not the first thing to go out the door during an ammo buying panic, so there's that.

[corneileous]

I would rather slam my balls in a car door than get involved in a prolonged 9mm vs .45 debate, I would offer two observations:
Guess it’s a good thing that’s not what this discussion’s about, is it?...lol. Thanks for that visual, BTW...


1) While it certainly has some merit as a "woods cartridge" for folks that want to carry a field pistol (see GJM's thread on the USP 45) I'm not sure it is the best choice for a 3" barreled urban/suburban carry pistol.
If you’re just telling the thread, that’s ok but I’ve already stated why I chose this little 3” semi-auto so I’ll just have to make the best out of it. I’m not totally sold on wadcutters as defense ammo when there are other options available so I guess I’ll just take my chances on the short-barreled 45’s from Speer. Guess I coulda tried probably the same exact thing in the Federal HST’s for shortie-barrel 45’s but I didn’t even realize Federal made a short-barreled defensive round in a 45 until after I submitted the order for the Speers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[corneileous]

I’m gonna try these as well. Thoughts?


https://www.underwoodammo.com/products/45-acp-p-185-grain-bonded-jacketed-hollow-point?variant=18786995929145


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Trooper224]

Honestly, I think you're starting to fall victim to analysis paralysis.

Over 80 posts and you're still asking essentially the same question. I think it's been pretty well established that what you have isn't ideal, but it's what you have. As the saying goes, "You don't always need a plan bro, sometimes you just need balls." The gun you have, combined with some of the ammunition you've mentioned, will be enough to discourage an attacker and that's the whole point. Maybe it isn't perfect, but it's what you've got. Take you shorty half ninety, load it with some rounds and train so you can accurately place your shots. Then, replace it with something better when you can. That's really all there is.

[corneileous]

Honestly, I think you're starting to fall victim to analysis paralysis.
You’re probably right, I do tend to get a little carried away but you seem as though you think it’s a bad thing. Most of you guys already have the necessary knowledge, a lot of us don’t. Put yourself in our shoes. There’s so much in the market these days with endless possibilities that how is someone like myself supposed to know what’s a good choice and what isn’t? That’s the purpose of these forums- isn’t it?


Over 80 posts and you're still asking essentially the same question. I think it's been pretty well established that what you have isn't ideal, but it's what you have. As the saying goes, "You don't always need a plan bro, sometimes you just need balls." The gun you have, combined with some of the ammunition you've mentioned, will be enough to discourage an attacker and that's the whole point. Maybe it isn't perfect, but it's what you've got. Take you shorty half ninety, load it with some rounds and train so you can accurately place your shots.
Hold on friend, I didn’t join the discussion till about 50 or so posts ago but I don’t think I’m essentially asking the same question over and over again. I’ve asked for thoughts and opinions and why people feel they way they do about their thoughts and opinions but that’s it.

And yes, it has been pretty well established that what I have isn’t preferred but just because that appears to be the case, is it really that bad? Considering that most handguns aren’t ideal? Is it not possible to make the best of it to not be considered a waste?

But yes, that’s the plan with the Underwoods. I’m just hoping that the +P in them doesn’t add more recoil that I’m somewhat trying to take away but going down from 230 to 185 grain but even if it does, I’ve gotten pretty proficient with just regular ole 230 grain target rounds.


Then, replace it with something better when you can. That's really all there is.
Replace what, the ammo or the gun? Kinda feelin’ like you’re referring to the gun but really- is really that bad? Again, it may not be preferred but I don’t think it’s bad enough to fully scrap and get something else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JRB]

You’re probably right, I do tend to get a little carried away but you seem as though you think it’s a bad thing. Most of you guys already have the necessary knowledge, a lot of us don’t. Put yourself in our shoes. There’s so much in the market these days with endless possibilities that how is someone like myself supposed to know what’s a good choice and what isn’t? That’s the purpose of these forums- isn’t it?


Hold on friend, I didn’t join the discussion till about 50 or so posts ago but I don’t think I’m essentially asking the same question over and over again. I’ve asked for thoughts and opinions and why people feel they way they do about their thoughts and opinions but that’s it.

And yes, it has been pretty well established that what I have isn’t preferred but just because that appears to be the case, is it really that bad? Considering that most handguns aren’t ideal? Is it not possible to make the best of it to not be considered a waste?

But yes, that’s the plan with the Underwoods. I’m just hoping that the +P in them doesn’t add more recoil that I’m somewhat trying to take away but going down from 230 to 185 grain but even if it does, I’ve gotten pretty proficient with just regular ole 230 grain target rounds.


Replace what, the ammo or the gun? Kinda feelin’ like you’re referring to the gun but really- is really that bad? Again, it may not be preferred but I don’t think it’s bad enough to fully scrap and get something else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

None of these folks mean any offense, about any of this.

Just take a deep breath and take a moment to consider the whole scope of your concerns.

Ultimately, the first and most important step is to have a good holster and safe carrying practices, along with a sharp mindset to avoid trouble at all cost - especially in stupid places at stupid times that tend to be full of stupid people.

Beyond that, you need a skillset and mindset that can identify when a fight is absolutely and truly necessary, and have the skills and willpower to finish the fight effectively on your terms. Specifically, marksmanship and good shot placement is OVERWHELMINGLY more important than ammo selection. This has been covered.

Specific selection about ammo, and even your chosen weapon system takes a distinct third place behind these two ultimately higher priorities.

If shit hits the fan, I'd rather ride next to a guy with a well-run old Gen 2 Glock 21 full of 230gr hardball that I *KNOW* can shoot when it counts and who *KNOWS* the difference between when it is and isn't necessary.
Fancy guns and fancy ammo are great when all the other skills and concerns have been addressed.

So, if it seems that we're losing patience with your analysis paralysis over ammo selection, it's ultimately because we're concerned you're worrying about ammo for no further benefit, while so many other things worth worrying about go unconsidered.
Personally, friend, I say run a few boxes of whatever you've got through your XDE and if it runs like a champ, and you can run a clean 'Bill Drill' from concealment in under 4 seconds or so, carry it with confidence.

[Keith E.]

I did a quick search for a similar thread, but didn't find one. If i just missed it please link. That being said...

Let's look at a line of guns, the Smith Shields. They can be had in 9mm, .40, .45ACP.

There's something to like about the .45, it's chunky little can of whoop ass. A little short of mag capacity, but big on caliber. But...

.45 ACP was built around 5" barreled guns. The .45 Shield has a 3.3" barrel. And there are a whole slew of 3" 1911 platform guns out there also. If fairly consistently heard that .45 ACP doesn't do well out of shorter barrels. Some testing seems to back it up. It seems to be the same issue similar that .380 has. If you have a hollowpoint that opens up adequately the round underpenetrates. If the round has adequate penetration, there'll be little to no expansion.

Is this true, and if so, for short barrel guns is it better to go with natively higher velocity rounds like 9mm or .40 who's ammo is designed around shorter barrels (4") to begin with?

When I carried smaller, Colt Lightweight Officers Model (very short-lived) and an early G-30, .45ACP handguns, they were loaded with standard pressure Hornady 230XTP or 230 ball. I had a very brief run with the Remington 185JHP +P until firing some out of the Officers Model one day at dusk. There was way too much flash for my use. The G-30 was shot a lot with the 230XTP & ball rounds during practice and pistol matches. I knew that the ball projectile was going to stay the same unless it hit a hard surface and felt that way about the XTP as well. I also knew where they would land from contact distance out to 200yds. Before folks get too wound up on the 200yd reference, that was plinking with the G-30, at a metal silhouette with about an 80% ding rate. That was good enough for me for several years and I had no concerns with the G-30 reliability or accuracy. If required, I would not have any problems carrying that same pistol with that same ammo nowadays.

YMMV,
Keith

[corneileous]

None of these folks mean any offense, about any of this.

Just take a deep breath and take a moment to consider the whole scope of your concerns.

Ultimately, the first and most important step is to have a good holster and safe carrying practices, along with a sharp mindset to avoid trouble at all cost - especially in stupid places at stupid times that tend to be full of stupid people.

Beyond that, you need a skillset and mindset that can identify when a fight is absolutely and truly necessary, and have the skills and willpower to finish the fight effectively on your terms. Specifically, marksmanship and good shot placement is OVERWHELMINGLY more important than ammo selection. This has been covered.

Specific selection about ammo, and even your chosen weapon system takes a distinct third place behind these two ultimately higher priorities.

If shit hits the fan, I'd rather ride next to a guy with a well-run old Gen 2 Glock 21 full of 230gr hardball that I *KNOW* can shoot when it counts and who *KNOWS* the difference between when it is and isn't necessary.
Fancy guns and fancy ammo are great when all the other skills and concerns have been addressed.

So, if it seems that we're losing patience with your analysis paralysis over ammo selection, it's ultimately because we're concerned you're worrying about ammo for no further benefit, while so many other things worth worrying about go unconsidered.
Personally, friend, I say run a few boxes of whatever you've got through your XDE and if it runs like a champ, and you can run a clean 'Bill Drill' from concealment in under 4 seconds or so, carry it with confidence.

I’m sure they don’t and I never really took any for offense but it’s plain to see that not a lot of folks agree with my choice of EDC weapon and that’s ok. I’ve even admitted that my choice of a short-barrel 45 probably wasn’t the wisest of choice but it is what it is. I love this little pistol. I’ve gotten good with it and it’s here to stay.

And yes, I know good shot placement is important but we’re not talking about any other more choice pistol- we’re talking about a short-barreled 45 that doesn’t seem to be meant to be a 45 just because of the nature of a 45. As far as why some ammunition manufactures make short-barrel 9mm’s, I fully understand it in such a large, but slow caliber that’s already slow even in a long barrel. I don’t mean to over-analyze but if there’s a reason why most of you guys are so against a shorty 45, is it not normal for someone to be a little bit more concerned about what’s best for it? If I really don’t have a reason to be concerned then I kindly digress.

But I will say that even though I’ve yet to try them, I feel pretty confident in the Underwood +P 185-grain ammunition I have coming to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stephanie B]

Ballistics By the Inch has some interesting data (http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/45auto2.html).

My uneducated opinion on SD cartridges is that it can be a massive rabbit-hole, filled with anecdotal information that is more misleading than anything else.

Personally, when it comes time to buying SD ammo, I just get something from DocGKR's list and call it a day.

[sheepdog]

Does a short barreled .45 ACP make sense? In my opinion, yes, absolutely, depending on the person. In fact, they may make as much sense as a 9mm or more depending on the shooter's physiology, level of proficiency and experience.

This isn't something you can understand with a short reply, but if you're interested I think you'll see I'm right.

Heavier bullets like a .45 ACP don't rely on velocity as much as lighter bullets like 9mm to create the energy that's needed to stop an attacker, so if you shoot a short barreled .45 ACP like the immensely popular Smith & Wesson M&P45 Shield M2.0, you'll typically have more energy than a comparable 9mm (not that you don't have more than enough to get the job done with 9mm or even .380 ACP, you do).

Look at the graphs below from ballisticsbytheinch.com (http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/index.html). Each contains a limited sample of ammo, and since it was made more than ten years ago it may be a bit antiquated but it nonetheless demonstrates my point.

First notice that the barrel length vs. energy curve is arguably flatter on a 9mm. I only point this out to acknowledge that short barreled pistols can be an exception to the rule that larger bullets generally have a flatter curve (which you'd notice more comparing calibers for pistol carbines, but even then it's it depends more on the load IMHO). Either way, all calibers take a hit especially coming out of a sub 3" barrel (especially compared to .357 Magnum).

What we can say for sure is that heavier bullets don't need to rely on velocity as much as lighter bullets to produce energy. Don't get me wrong, lighter faster bullets are more efficient at creating energy (k.e. = 1/2 mass x velocity squared), but 9mm lacking mass to begin with is hurt disproportionately by shorter barrels.

A .357 Magnum which uses a much smaller bullet than a .45 is affected even moreso, and as you can see its muzzle energy rating takes a drastic hit on very short barrels. This is why snubbies in .357 Magnum are often criticized because they don't do any better a job than even 9mm out of a short barrel yet they're incredibly uncomfortable to shoot from a small/light gun (watch the Military Arms Channel ballistic test).

When comparing .45 ACP and 9mm, you can find loads powerful enough in either caliber, but more of the .45 ACP's coming from a short 3.3" Shield 45 barrel are going to be north of the 300 or 400 ft. lb. mark (depending on where you want to be) than the 3.1" barrel of a Shield chambered in 9mm.

The most important part, however, is hitting your target. Some people like what they describe as the gentle push from lobbing a .45 ACP bullets believing 9mm is too flippy (even if it is considerably less so than .40 S&W or .357 SIG) whereas other people are just the opposite preferring the flippier 9mm over the perceived recoil of a .45 ACP (especially out of such a small gun). Ultimately, however, a shooter should place a greater priority on the gun/caliber they shoot more accurately under stress as the most important thing is hitting your target, so if you shoot a 9mm more accurately, go with a 9mm. But .45 ACP tends to be more accurate in gunfights, so if Newton's Third Law doesn't bother you shooting a .45 ACP from a short barreled pistol (in other words, it won't discourage you from practicing), and it translates to increased accuracy, go with it (https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power).

On the one hand, punching paper is different than combat. You wouldn't want to keyhole an assailant even if you could because you'd greatly increase the chance of over penetration and thus wasting energy in the process. It already takes 3 rounds on average of either .45 ACP or 9mm to stop an attacker. Coupled with the fact that you're already taking an energy hit with a shorter barrel, you don't want rounds leaving the body if you can avoid it (Note: it does statistically take slightly fewer rounds of .45 ACP, but we can't shoot 2.08 bullets). So a little dispersion in the end is actually welcome.

Remember, however, 70-80% of accuracy tends to go out the window in a gunfight, so accuracy is still important even if only reasonable "combat effective" accuracy is required (and even desired) to stop an attacker. In fact, .45 ACP may even be at a ballistic advantage coming from a shorter rather than a longer barrel because—all things being equal—a heavier bullet penetrates (and thus over penetrates) more than a lighter bullet. However—and again, all things being equal—a faster bullet also penetrates (and perhaps over penetrates) more easily than a slower one, so it's always a balancing act, but since the .45 ACP is already going to be a larger bullet than a 9mm, taking the velocity edge off may actually make .45 ACP more effective than shooting it out of a longer barrel. In that study I linked earlier, 9mm fails to incapacitate 13% of the time while .45 ACP fails 14% of the time. Certainly that is within the margin of error, but to make my point, .44 Mag is statistically tied with both also coming in at 13% despite having twice the energy. How can that be? As one coroner put it, "I've never seen a .357 leave the body and I've never seen a .44 Magnum stay in one". Like .44 Mag, .45 ACP probably doesn't do any better because a heavier bullet can pass through more easily (again, all things being equally as we're always balancing, not just mass and velocity, but bullet design as well).

Getting back to accuracy, Massad Ayoob is a good example of a subcompact .45 ACP fan (or at least he used to be as I am not sure what he's doing these days). He has written extensively in the past comparing the Glock 26 and Glock 30. He notes that the G26 is superbly accurate for the type but that the G30 is even more accurate in his hands so he often preferred to compete with it back in the day (over a G26).

That said, we are also more rounds limited shooting a .45 ACP from such a small gun, so it all depends on what someone is more comfortable with considering both a gun's shootability and capacity. If the latter isn't a concern and you can handle shooting a subcompact .45 ACP and you shoot it more accurately, you'll also find its a little more powerful and that combination can be more effective (but as the study shows, that does not necessarily have to be the case depending on what happens with the bullet).

If the recoil bothers you and you find the 9mm more accurate in your hands, go with it (as most people do including me), but anyone saying .45 ACP doesn't make sense coming out of a short barrel is being short-sighted in my opinion. It really depends on the shooter and the load.

Lastly, I don't even own a .45 ACP at the moment (most of my guns are 9mm, .380 ACP, .357 SIG and .40 S&W), so I am not sticking up for .45 ACP out of any personal bias.

557885578955790

[RevolverRob]

Short barrel .45 still makes no sense. But this weekend, I am carrying one - my late father's gun. It's father's day tomorrow, the first one without my father, and I'm gonna carry his gun for that reason. It's loaded with 230-grain ball, because that's what it is reliable with. Doesn't make any sense and I don't care.

55793

[Bucky]

Short barrel .45 still makes no sense. But this weekend, I am carrying one - my late father's gun. It's father's day tomorrow, the first one without my father, and I'm gonna carry his gun for that reason. It's loaded with 230-grain ball, because that's what it is reliable with. Doesn't make any sense and I don't care.

55793

Do I tell him? I hate to ruin the sentiment.

[RevolverRob]

Do I tell him? I hate to ruin the sentiment.

Indeed, I have lost track of the dates apparently.

It's okay.

[SiriusBlunder]

<snip>

More talk about dispersion/key-holing and energy from service caliber handguns stopping attackers.

<snip>



You mentioned dispersion/key-holing in the 9mm fmj vs 45 fmj performance thread. The follies of those concepts were addressed there (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?42039-9mm-fmj-vs-45-fmj-performance&p=1037796&viewfull=1#post1037796).

You again state "a .45 ACP don't rely on velocity as much as lighter bullets like 9mm to create the energy that's needed to stop an attacker".

Service caliber handguns do not have enough kinetic energy to create a temporary cavity large enough to contribute to wounding/incapacitation.

As suggested in that thread, we have learned a lot since 1986 (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?42039-9mm-fmj-vs-45-fmj-performance&p=1037942&viewfull=1#post1037942).

You could learn a lot by reading the stickies at the top of this forum, the 1989 paper "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness" (http://gundata.org/images/fbi-handgun-ballistics.pdf) by Urey Patrick of the FBI FTU, and all the IWBA Journals that are now online.

To quote from "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness":


Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable and "knock down" power is a myth. The critical element is penetration.

[DocGKR]

What importance is ft/lbs "energy" to terminal performance and incapacitation potential???


You wouldn't want to keyhole an assailant even if you could because you'd greatly increase the chance of over penetration and thus wasting energy in the process.

Actually an upset round that hits sideways (ie. keyhole] is tyically LESS likely to penetrate as deeply as a result of increased drag and loss of stability.


In fact, .45 ACP may even be at a ballistic advantage coming from a shorter rather than a longer barrel because—all things being equal—a heavier bullet penetrates (and thus over penetrates) more than a lighter bullet.

Not with expanding projectiles fired in the appropriate velocity range.


"I've never seen a .357 leave the body and I've never seen a .44 Magnum stay in one"

Uh.... no. All depends on the specific projectile and tissue traversed.

[corneileous]

Well I went to the range Saturday and the new rounds shot really well. I don’t think I had anymore muzzle rise than with the regular pressure 230 grainers but the 185 +P Underwoods gave more of a rearward push than the others so I’m assuming these are just as good as any other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[5pins]

I just finished testing some WWB 230gr JHP in Vyse gel. Four rounds in a full size 1911, two through heavy clothing and two in bare gel. I also shot two rounds with a 3-inch Defender in bare gel. While two rounds in bare gel isn't a large sample size it performed better then I thought it would from a 3-inch barrel.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/06/23/winchester-45acp-230gr-jhp-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/

I also did the same test with some Underwood 200gr +P bonded JHP (Gold Dot). In both Vyse organic gel as well as Clear gel.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/05/11/underwood-45-acp-200gr-p-bonded-jhp-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/

The extra velocity and recoil and the +P didn't seem to help at all and limited penetration.

[corneileous]

I just finished testing some WWB 230gr JHP in Vyse gel. Four rounds in a full size 1911, two through heavy clothing and two in bare gel. I also shot two rounds with a 3-inch Defender in bare gel. While two rounds in bare gel isn't a large sample size it performed better then I thought it would from a 3-inch barrel.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/06/23/winchester-45acp-230gr-jhp-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/

I also did the same test with some Underwood 200gr +P bonded JHP (Gold Dot). In both Vyse organic gel as well as Clear gel.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/05/11/underwood-45-acp-200gr-p-bonded-jhp-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/

The extra velocity and recoil and the +P didn't seem to help at all and limited penetration.

Thank you for that. Really helpful information but in other words to what you’re saying, is that at least in this case having a lighter bullet that was even a plus P with more velocity from more powder, didn’t penetrate as well as even the standard pressure 230 grain bullets, correct? Makes sense to me. I know that the debate has been talked about a lot over some people saying that the heavier, slower round is better than the faster, lighter round and I know that it’s all about trying to find that happy medium there but for the case of the short barrel 45, that’s pretty interesting that your test results showed that the lighter-to-begin with and had more pressure pushing it, didn’t even penetrate like the plain old 230 grain bullet did.

I’m assuming I’m probably answering my own question but I guess it’s safe to say that my 185 grain plus P underwoods is virtually the same as the 200 grain plus P Underwood‘s that you tried?

Whether it was a good idea or not, I went ahead and recently loaded those 185 grain Underwood’s that I have into my full-size Beretta PX4 45 and loaded those 230 grain Speer Gold Dots I had also bought that are made specifically for short-barreled 45’s into my XDE. I figured since Speer and Federal are pretty well-known trusted brands that maybe they are onto something with their defense ammunition that they make for short-barrel 45’s.

Again, thanks for posting those results. Really helpful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[5pins]

Thank you for that. Really helpful information but in other words to what you’re saying, is that at least in this case having a lighter bullet that was even a plus P with more velocity from more powder, didn’t penetrate as well as even the standard pressure 230 grain bullets, correct? Makes sense to me. I know that the debate has been talked about a lot over some people saying that the heavier, slower round is better than the faster, lighter round and I know that it’s all about trying to find that happy medium there but for the case of the short barrel 45, that’s pretty interesting that your test results showed that the lighter-to-begin with and had more pressure pushing it, didn’t even penetrate like the plain old 230 grain bullet did.

I’m assuming I’m probably answering my own question but I guess it’s safe to say that my 185 grain plus P underwoods is virtually the same as the 200 grain plus P Underwood‘s that you tried?

Whether it was a good idea or not, I went ahead and recently loaded those 185 grain Underwood’s that I have into my full-size Beretta PX4 45 and loaded those 230 grain Speer Gold Dots I had also bought that are made specifically for short-barreled 45’s into my XDE. I figured since Speer and Federal are pretty well-known trusted brands that maybe they are onto something with their defense ammunition that they make for short-barrel 45’s.

Again, thanks for posting those results. Really helpful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sometimes more velocity isn’t always an improvement. Underwood also pushes their +P on the hot side more so then the major manufactures. With the Underwood I got more recoil (the 185gr was very uncomfortable in the Defender) and less reliability but gained nothing in performance. The extra energy gave the bullet more expansion but sacrificed penetration.

[corneileous]

Sometimes more velocity isn’t always an improvement. Underwood also pushes their +P on the hot side more so then the major manufactures. With the Underwood I got more recoil (the 185gr was very uncomfortable in the Defender) and less reliability but gained nothing in performance. The extra energy gave the bullet more expansion but sacrificed penetration.

Yeah, makes sense. Just because it’s going faster isn’t going to mean that it’s gonna have a lot more kinetic energy transferred to whatever it hits. I would imagine a dump truck going 40 miles an hour will probably hit twice as hard as a Prius going 80… LOL.

I had no idea that underwood went kind of above and beyond with their plus p ammo. That was the first time I’ve ever bought plus P anything. But yeah, even probably achieved out of a 4 to 5 inch barrel, I did kinda think that close to 1200 ft./s out of a 185 grain 45 ACP was a little bit fast.

Are they the same way on their standard pressure ammunition? I don’t know, I guess it’s normal for an un-watered down 220 grain 10mm hard cast (https://www.underwoodammo.com/products/10mm-auto-220-grain-hard-cast-flat-nose?variant=18785725055033) to be whizzing by at 1200 ft./s, or a 140 grain Lehigh Defense Xtreme Penetrator (https://www.underwoodammo.com/collections/handgun-ammo/products/10mm-auto-140-grain-xtreme-penetrator?variant=18785707950137) to be hittin’ 1500 feet per second.

But not to change the subject too much but when it comes to those two 10mm rounds for protection against four-legged predators, would the heavier, slower bullet be better or would the faster, lighter one be better for maximum penetration when expansion is out of the equation?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[5pins]

Yeah, makes sense. Just because it’s going faster isn’t going to mean that it’s gonna have a lot more kinetic energy transferred to whatever it hits. I would imagine a dump truck going 40 miles an hour will probably hit twice as hard as a Prius going 80… LOL.

I had no idea that underwood went kind of above and beyond with their plus p ammo. That was the first time I’ve ever bought plus P anything. But yeah, even probably achieved out of a 4 to 5 inch barrel, I did kinda think that close to 1200 ft./s out of a 185 grain 45 ACP was a little bit fast.

Are they the same way on their standard pressure ammunition? I don’t know, I guess it’s normal for an un-watered down 220 grain 10mm hard cast (https://www.underwoodammo.com/products/10mm-auto-220-grain-hard-cast-flat-nose?variant=18785725055033) to be whizzing by at 1200 ft./s, or a 140 grain Lehigh Defense Xtreme Penetrator (https://www.underwoodammo.com/collections/handgun-ammo/products/10mm-auto-140-grain-xtreme-penetrator?variant=18785707950137) to be hittin’ 1500 feet per second.

But not to change the subject too much but when it comes to those two 10mm rounds for protection against four-legged predators, would the heavier, slower bullet be better or would the faster, lighter one be better for maximum penetration when expansion is out of the equation?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I did a bunch of testing of 10mm, .45, .40, and 9mm for penetration in my Filed Load section. The 220gr will far out penetrate the Xtreme Penetrators. In fact the Xtreme Penetrators were the worst penetrating of all the loads tested.

https://general-cartridge.com/category/field-loads/

[RevolverRob]

I just finished testing some WWB 230gr JHP in Vyse gel. Four rounds in a full size 1911, two through heavy clothing and two in bare gel. I also shot two rounds with a 3-inch Defender in bare gel. While two rounds in bare gel isn't a large sample size it performed better then I thought it would from a 3-inch barrel.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/06/23/winchester-45acp-230gr-jhp-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/

I also did the same test with some Underwood 200gr +P bonded JHP (Gold Dot). In both Vyse organic gel as well as Clear gel.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/05/11/underwood-45-acp-200gr-p-bonded-jhp-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/

The extra velocity and recoil and the +P didn't seem to help at all and limited penetration.

The WWB JHPs performed pretty well there from either gun.

When I was a poor boy (and nobody loved me), WWB JHPs in .45 were what I carried when I couldn’t find Gold Dots.

It’s not the bullet I’d pick over an HST/GD/Crit. D/Barnes but it would do in a pinch.

[corneileous]

I did a bunch of testing of 10mm, .45, .40, and 9mm for penetration in my Filed Load section. The 220gr will far out penetrate the Xtreme Penetrators. In fact the Xtreme Penetrators were the worst penetrating of all the loads tested.

https://general-cartridge.com/category/field-loads/

I’ll be darned. Well, I guess I know what to load my Sig up with the next time I go out in the woods...lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk