Lehigh has changed my idea of a field pistol

[Clusterfrack]

I'm done with 10mm Lehigh XP 140gr load development and have settled on 10.5gr 800X at 1.260" COL. I get 1420fps from my G4 Glock 20 with a 24# Glockmeister recoil assembly.

So far, I've not had any malfunctions. I will do more testing SHO and WHO and report back. So far so good!

[Bigghoss]

I'm kinda tempted to get a .40 for a woods gun now. Mainly because I'm trying to justify to myself buying a cheap trade-in G22 gen 4 or M&P40. I've finally settled on just buying $300 worth of gear and parts for guns I already have and focusing on my M&P45 for that role for the time being. Still, I can't help myself from browsing armslist and lowballing anything of interest on gunbroker.

[5pins]

I Just picked up a Colt Delta Elite 10mm slide to play with. Right now it's on my .45 frame but seems to work most of the time. Right now I just want to try out some different loads, maybe later I will pick up a deadcated lower for it.

[sharps54]

Here's a question. Assuming a competent shooter (removing the administrative handling advantage a revolver has with less dedicated shooters) do revolvers still have a place as field pistols in the lower 48 or better yet in non-grizzly country? We know there are a ton of things the bottom feeder does better, the only things I can think a revolver offers are less rounds needed to verify reliability and (possibly) better functioning with a bad grip from wounds or position due to a clinch with a bear.

I'm not trying to make a case for the wheel gun, I'm trying to make sure I stay objective. I have a S&W 25-5 I had bought as a field sidearm but honestly I'm not seeing a functional reason to use it in that capacity opposed to my carry gun (G19 or even G26) with Lehigh penetrators...

[Clusterfrack]

Here's why I carry a Glock loaded with 147 HST everywhere except grizzly country. I don't have any experience fighting grizzlies, but from what I've seen/read they terrify me. If I could legally carry a M203 in grizzly country, I would. I have tangled with a few aggressive black bears. I have not shot a black bear, but have turned them with rocks and warning shots. I had an informative discussion with Tim Sundles of Buffalo Bore about black bear and cougar defense. Tim told me that black bears and cougars typically run if shot with any caliber. So, my thinking is that the same gun and ammo that I carry for defense against human attackers will work against black bears and cougars.

If anyone with more experience can evaluate this, I'd certainly appreciate it.

[SamAdams]

Here's a question. Assuming a competent shooter (removing the administrative handling advantage a revolver has with less dedicated shooters) do revolvers still have a place as field pistols in the lower 48 or better yet in non-grizzly country? We know there are a ton of things the bottom feeder does better, the only things I can think a revolver offers are less rounds needed to verify reliability and (possibly) better functioning with a bad grip from wounds or position due to a clinch with a bear.

I'm not trying to make a case for the wheel gun, I'm trying to make sure I stay objective. I have a S&W 25-5 I had bought as a field sidearm but honestly I'm not seeing a functional reason to use it in that capacity opposed to my carry gun (G19 or even G26) with Lehigh penetrators...

IMO, in country without grizzlies or particularly large black bears, a big bore revolver does have a potential role. As someone who has experienced a bit of high frequency hearing loss & wants to preserve what hearing he has, I like the lessened muzzle blast of lower pressure rounds like 44 Special and 45 Colt. (There's less advantage in this regard for 45acp). If you need to use your sidearm for an emergency Right Now, you may not be able to put on hearing protection beforehand. A big lead slug moving at modest velocities can be quite effective.

My ear doc told me people vary in their vulnerability to the effects of muzzle blast. But, once hearing ability is lost, the damage is permanent.

BTW - gun writer Brian Pearce has mentioned this advantage. He's worked on cattle ranches and in the outdoors all his life.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Jaywalker]

IMO, in country without grizzlies or particularly large black bears, a big bore revolver does have a potential role. As someone who has experienced a bit of high frequency hearing loss & wants to preserve what hearing he has, I like the lessened muzzle blast of lower pressure rounds like 44 Special and 45 Colt. (There's less advantage in this regard for 45acp). If you need to use your sidearm for an emergency Right Now, you may not be able to put on hearing protection beforehand. A big lead slug moving at modest velocities can be quite effective.

My ear doc told me people vary in their vulnerability to the effects of muzzle blast. But, once hearing ability is lost, the damage is permanent.

BTW - gun writer Brian Pearce has mentioned this advantage. He's worked on cattle ranches and in the outdoors all his life.

Interesting. As a guy who wears Vet Admin hearing aids I also look for ways to minimize further damage.

I'm a little dubious, however, about the low-pressure vs high-pressure loading differences, especially when the low pressure has twice the powder as a charge.

When hunting in the past I wore an earplug in one ear and a Walker Game Ear in the other. The Game Ear was a hearing amplifier that ran through a tube in an ear plug; the game ear would automatically shut off sound in case of a muzzle blast. I plan to start wearing it again in bear and cougar country.

[SamAdams]

SAAMI spec max pressure for 45 Colt is 14,000 psi. 44 Special is 15,500 psi. 9mm Luger (standard) is 35,000 psi and 38,500 psi for +P. 40 S&W is 35,000 psi. 357 Magnum is 35,000 psi.

In general, higher pressure means greater muzzle blast & potential for hearing damage. Of course there are factors such as barrel length, barrel-cylinder gap, etc, etc that come into play too. But a 357 Mag going off makes you cringe, if you don't put on the hearing protection, for a reason.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Robinson]

A note from personal experience related to the above posts: I'm not going to argue whether low-pressure rounds are more or less likely to cause hearing damage because I'm not an expert. However, the incident that caused most of my hearing loss and tinnitus involved a few rounds of .44 Special fired outdoors at a range when I was not wearing hearing protection. It could be that since the gun was a revolver fired off to my left side, the blast coming from the gap between the cylinder and forcing cone hit me directly -- it's hard to say. What I do know is that the dynamics of acoustic trauma are complex and some people are more susceptible to hearing damage than others.

One more thing -- I always double up on earpro when I shoot indoors. But even doubled up I've noticed that shooting .45ACP, usually considered a low pressure round, bothers my ears a lot more than shooting 9mm.

[sharps54]

Interesting discussion. I have a hard time thinking a 4” 45 revolver shooting a 255 gr bullet at 900 fps would be any more hearing safe than a semi auto considering the cylinder gap but have no hard facts to back that up. I don’t want to risk my hearing but I’m willing to risk it in the remote case of bear defense. There is probably a greater chance of defending myself against other humans and no one is advocating ear pro while walking around town. I do use electronic protection in the stand.

In the places I hunt (NC & VA) it sounds like I should just stick with the 9mm tupperware for carrying in the woods.