.45 ACP defense loads...

[NineseveN]

Might I ask why?

I've been reloading for 20+ years and have never had a problem, where as I have have store bought rounds (Remingtons) that had primers missing, more then likely an error of quality control.

Now if you are talking about buying someone elses reloads, then I might have to agree with you, but I would have to think long and hard on that.
JMHO

I think he was more talking about legal issues that can be raised against you if you use reloads. Massad Ayoob wrote a few pieces on this as well.

[TonyF]

I posted this in the *what's the best 9mm load* thread.

This is from Dr. Gary Roberts, one of the most prominent and well respected ballisticians in the country.

Note the summation at the end (keys).


The following loads all demonstrate outstanding terminal performance and can be considered acceptable for duty/self-defense use:

9 mm:
Barnes XPB 105 & 115 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal Tactical 124 gr JHP (LE9T1)
Speer Gold Dot 124 gr +P JHP (53617)
Winchester Ranger-T 124 gr +P JHP (RA9124TP)
Winchester Partition Gold 124 gr JHP (RA91P)
Winchester Ranger-T 127 gr +P+ JHP (RA9TA)
Federal Tactical 135 gr +P JHP (LE9T5)
Federal HST 147 gr JHP (P9HST2)
Remington Golden Saber 147 gr JHP (GS9MMC)
Speer Gold Dot 147 gr JHP (53619)
Winchester Ranger-T 147 gr JHP (RA9T)

.40 S&W:
Barnes XPB 140 & 155 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Speer Gold Dot 155 gr JHP (53961)
Federal Tactical 165 gr JHP (LE40T3)
Winchester Ranger-T 165 gr JHP (RA40TA)
Winchester Partition Gold 165 gr JHP (RA401P)
Federal HST 180 gr JHP (P40HST1)
Federal Tactical 180 gr JHP (LE40T1)
Remington Golden Saber 180 gr JHP (GS40SWB)
Speer Gold Dot 180 gr JHP (53966)
Winchester Ranger-T 180 gr JHP (RA40T)

.45 ACP:
Barnes XPB 185 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal HST 230 gr +P JHP (P45HST1)
Federal Tactical 230 gr JHP (LE45T1)
Speer Gold Dot 230 gr JHP (23966)
Winchester Ranger-T 230 gr JHP (RA45T)
Winchester Ranger-T 230 gr +P JHP (RA45TP)

Notes:
-- Obviously, clone loads using the same bullet at the same velocity work equally well (ie. Black Hills ammo using Gold Dot bullets, etc…)

Keeping in mind that handguns generally offer poor incapacitation potential, bullets with effective terminal performance are available in all of the most commonly used duty pistol calibers--pick the one that you shoot most accurately, that is most reliable in the type of pistol you choose, and best suits your likely engagement scenarios. Whatever you choose, make sure you fire at least 500 and preferably 1000 failure free shots through your pistol prior to using it for duty. If your pistol cannot fire at least 1000 consecutive shots without a malfunction, something is wrong and it is not suitable for duty/self-defense use.

The keys are:

Invest in competent, thorough initial training and then maintain skills with regular ongoing practice

Acquire a reliable and durable weapon system

Purchase a consistent, robust performing duty/self-defense load in sufficient quantities (at least 1000 rounds) then STOP worrying about the nuances of handgun ammunition terminal performance.

[Holleta]

Tony,

I have read that info in your 9mm post also, thanks again for sharing. The part of Dr. Roberts recommendations that intrigue me is he seems to favor heavier bullets and ft-lbs most of the time over velocity. few 115g, 155g and 185g loads for their respective calibers while more 124/147, 180 and 230 loads.

I remember seeing/reading Towert and Fackler (spelling?) reports back when they was still free on the web and they seemed to favor the opposite, higher velocity, lower weight bullets. I think Towert did post shooting studies for Police agencies and Fackler had his way with goats and then shot them or something like that.

It's interesting how different researchers can go in complete different directions with their recommendations.

[NineseveN]

Tony,

I have read that info in your 9mm post also, thanks again for sharing. The part of Dr. Roberts recommendations that intrigue me is he seems to favor heavier bullets and ft-lbs most of the time over velocity. few 115g, 155g and 185g loads for their respective calibers while more 124/147, 180 and 230 loads.

I remember seeing/reading Towert and Fackler (spelling?) reports back when they was still free on the web and they seemed to favor the opposite, higher velocity, lower weight bullets. I think Towert did post shooting studies for Police agencies and Fackler had his way with goats and then shot them or something like that.

It's interesting how different researchers can go in complete different directions with their recommendations.

Actually, Fackler states: "Fortunately, the great majority of law enforcement groups have ignored the Marshall and Sanow "Definitive Study" and opted for the heavier, slower bullets, which have proved far more reliable than the faster, lighter bullets that they replaced." in his review or Marshall and Sanow's garbage book.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm

[Holleta]

Actually, Fackler states: "Fortunately, the great majority of law enforcement groups have ignored the Marshall and Sanow "Definitive Study" and opted for the heavier, slower bullets, which have proved far more reliable than the faster, lighter bullets that they replaced." in his review or Marshall and Sanow's garbage book.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm

So I'm taking it you are a supporter of the heavy and slow crowd?

[NineseveN]

I wasn't putting forth an opinion either way, just clarifying what I recall Fackler stating in the past.

[VeryPrivate]

Having read both Marshall & Sanow and MacPherson (Fackler), I am of the older momentum school of General Hatcher.

[TonyF]

I wasn't putting forth an opinion either way, just clarifying what I recall Fackler stating in the past.

I do believe Fackler is in the *heavy / slow* camp.

Penetration in living tissue for handgun rounds is critical. Minimum of 12 inches and as pistol rounds don't create near the damage that rifle rounds do, and as HP mushrooming cannot be relied upon 100% of the time, the larger bullets produce greater tissue damage all else being equal.

[Holleta]

I'm still quite intrigued by this discussion. Question for you fellas:

Which would you consider the superior load and why?

10mm 175g approx 1250 fps and 650 ft-lb (Old School Win load)
or
45 ACP 230g approx 850 fps and 350 ft-lb (typical 230g load)

There is no right or wrong answer (at least in my book).

This seems to be a classic fast vs slow comparison, you can even sub the 125g 357 mag load for the 10mm to widen the difference even more (approx 1400 fps and 500 ft-lbs).

Thoughts?

I do believe Fackler is in the *heavy / slow* camp.

Penetration in living tissue for handgun rounds is critical. Minimum of 12 inches and as pistol rounds don't create near the damage that rifle rounds do, and as HP mushrooming cannot be relied upon 100% of the time, the larger bullets produce greater tissue damage all else being equal.

[TonyF]

I'm still quite intrigued by this discussion. Question for you fellas:

Which would you consider the superior load and why?

10mm 175g approx 1250 fps and 650 ft-lb (Old School Win load)
or
45 ACP 230g approx 850 fps and 350 ft-lb (typical 230g load)

There is no right or wrong answer (at least in my book).

This seems to be a classic fast vs slow comparison, you can even sub the 125g 357 mag load for the 10mm to widen the difference even more (approx 1400 fps and 500 ft-lbs).

Thoughts?

My thoughts.

Forget the velocity. Forget the ft lbs of energy.

A .45 has a bit more than 12% larger diameter than the 10mm / .40 caliber (e.g. larger permanent wound channel).

That stated, I don't feel the least bit under-gunned carrying a G19 with 9mm 124 gr +P gold dots.