Posted: 2/12/2007 6:12:01 PM EDT
| I was looking at buying this ammo for self defense. I was curious about overpenatration with this ammo. 45 ACP+P 230 GR TAP - FPD Its the Hornady TAP ammo. Also what does the FPD stand for on the end? I'm new to all this. |
|
mrBull, The Hornady TAP/FPD in its various loadings uses the XTP (Xtreme Terminal Performance) bullet that is designed for more controlled expansion and somewhat deeper penetration than some of the other commonly available self-defense rounds that are available like Gold Dots, SXT's, HST's etc, etc. It was developed to meet the penetration requirements set forth by the F.B.I. after April, 1986 for their issue ammunition which was required to penetrate to a specified depth (at least 12 inches) in calibrated ballistic gelatin. Over-penetration is a very subjective issue at best. Depending on what you are looking for in terms of penetration from your carry ammunition what you ultimately decide on may be too shallow for some people and too deep for others. Typically, most people are looking for penetration somewhere between 8 and 16 inches. Some people favor heavier bullets moving at slower velocities and others favor lighter bullets at higher velocities and then there are those that favor heavy bullets at higher velocities. Some people just gotta have it all.he More to your question, I like the Hornady XTP/TAP-FPD ammunition because it is designed for deeper penetration and because it tends to be very accurate in all the guns that I have fired it in (YMMV). It appears to be high quality stuff and if I were required to use it in my carry (SIG P226) or off-duty (Glock 17) sidearm I would have no worries doing so. If I had to carry a .45 Auto with the load you are considering, I would be fine with that also. My recommendation to you is to do some research on the internet and look up the names Evan Marshall (Retired Detroit P.D. Sergeant who collected shooting data), Dr. Martin Fackler, M.D. (An Army trauma surgeon who produced empirical data using calibrated ballistic gelatin) and Duncan MacPherson (an M.I.T. researcher who completed research on the mechanics of bullet deformation and performance in several different test media). Please understand that no research method is perfect and that all have flaws of some sort, nothing is perfect. Please keep this mind when you digest the volumes of information that you will encounter and keep an open mind when doing so. Hope this answers more questions than it creates, |
|
I would pass everyday of the week onany Hornady XTP round. It isnt that its poor quality or anything, its because the bullet isnt good at expansion after encountering barriers, and even when barriers arent encountered. There is better ammo available. BTW, I would also not reccomend Hydrashoks, Hishoks, Silvertips, etc for personprotection or defense for the same reasons mentioned above. Evan Marshall really isnt the source you should be looking to for your information, but thats another thread. |
There is strong reason to believe that Evan Marshall did not so much "collect" shooting data as "make it up." http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm Excerpt from the article by Wolberg and Roberts: On page 121, Marshall and Sanow state: "The following five Glaser shootings come from Gene Wolberg, Senior Criminologist, San Diego Police Crime Lab." Mr. Wolberg, an author of this review, testified that only the third and fifth incidents described are fully documented and verifiable cases. Mr. Wolberg states he is only casually aware of the fourth incident and emphasizes that his second-hand information is undocumented. Mr. Wolberg denies all knowledge of the first two shooting reports Marshall and Sanow attribute to him. On pages 43 and 44, Marshall and Sanow discuss their data collection methodology: "4. In order to be included in this study, I insisted on either having or at least being able to review some of the following: police reports, evidence technician reports, statements by the victim (if he survived), homicide reports, autopsy results, and photos. Whenever possible, I also talked to the emergency room doctors and attending physicians. 5. Recovered bullets were either personally examined or photographed by me, or I was provided with photographs of the bullets." Mr. Wolberg never provided Marshall or Sanow any of the reports, test results, photos or evidence which they insist the inspect prior to including a shooting in their data base. As a result, the veracity of their entire data base is questionable. |
|
FAIL-SAFE and Milquetoast, Sorry that you both misunderstood my post. I never recommended one particular brand or type of ammunition over another, nor did I ever recommend a particular researcher and his results over another as being more valid than another. In fact, all I did was provide him with some brandnames, names commonly associated with the topic and information to get him started on his search for information, the very same information that the both of you obviously found on the internet, and that the original poster will likely find also. I left him free to draw his own conclusions and certainly did not push Marshall's research over that of MacPherson's or Fackler's. It is my hope that re-reading my post in a more thorough manner will clear up your confusion as to its intent and content and I wish you both the best of luck in this endeavor. TK |
I understand. I just don't think Marshall's name should be at the top of the recommended list for somebody who walked in in the middle of the movie. Somebody who didn't know better could interpret it as an endorsement. It's like saying, "To learn about the perfect golf swing, study Milquetoast, Nicklaus and Woods." (You could learn a lot about what NOT to do from looking at my golf swing, but your time would be better spent watching Nicklaus and Woods.)  I know you know that Marshall's "research" is bogus; I was just trying to keep from leading poor mrBull astray.
|
|
Two holes bleed better than one... I'd be more worried about under penetration with some ammo...  Seriously, what are the odds of something you don't want to hit being directly in the line of impact after a target has be perforated?  www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=237 |
|
There are rounds in .45 that perform better against our two legged friends. Winchester Ranger, Speer Gold Dot, and Federal HST all perform similarly when shot at the similar velocities up to normal +p muzzle velocity. Differences occur above that range (with loadings like Doubletap's) and to my knowledge the Gold Dot and HST win in that scenario. However, shooting a 230 gr bullet at 1050 fps is noticeably more unpleasant than the same bullet at 850 fps, and follow up shots may suffer in the effort to obtain what I can only think is an inconsistent gain in terminal performance. The 185 gr Barnes DPX loaded by Taurus and Corbon both offer similar performance to the rounds listed, with what feels to me a lesser recoil. However, these are a buck a shot, whereas I can buy standard or +p Ranger or Black Hills loaded Gold Dot for around 60 cents a pop and the traditional bullets do penetrate more. If there was a DPX available in 200 gr, I would be VERY interested in seeing its performance. |
That bullet would probably be too long to be useful. Remember that copper has much lower density than lead, so to make a 200gr bullet, you would have to make it a bit longer yet. I used to think CorBon overpriced the ammo until I saw what XPB's were going for at MidwayUSA. That's some expensive stuff! Either way - the 185's work very well. I have a couple of boxes from when Taurus made this ammo. CTD was selling them for $8/box of 20. |
Milquetoast, Actually, you are equally incorrect and offensive in both your assumption and statement that, "you know" that I "know that Marshall's research is bogus". Unless you can lay claim to some extraordinary capability such as clairvoyance or telepathy, you have absolutely no basis upon which to make such an unfounded claim as to what I know. Quite frankly, I find little merit in anything you have posted in this thread so far, since you lack the originality to present any information other than that which you have mindlessly regurgitated from another website and then gone on to make the vacuous claim that "you know what I know", not to mention the fact that you assume that the original poster ("poor"? mrBull) lacks the intelligence to make his own decision based upon what is easily found on the internet without you pointing out the patently obvious to him and saving him from his own ignorancce. After you clearly missed the sublte insult offered to you in the last sentence of my second post, your judgement and reading comprehension, are without question, dubious at best. Just to set the record straight, I find all of the authors that I have cited in my post above to be excellent sources of information in the aggregate and favor equally the opinions of them all regarding the issue of what type of ammunition works best on the street and why it does so. Although it bears reptition, I am certain that what I have stated above will be lost on you. Clearly, after nearly twenty years of being employed in the capacity of a sworn police officer for a large metropolitan police department and the experience afforded me by that occupation, I can reasonably draw the conclusion, based upon your contributions above, that your learning curve only reachs its peak shortly after the stream of chemical mace begins to make contact with your eyes. Perhaps you can use your self-perceived telepathic abilities to read my final thought for you before you start taking your medications again. (Hint: Two words. First word: A commonly used, guttural expletive referring to the act of copulation. Second word: A second person, singular, pronoun.) TK |
|
So you complain about his lack of originality for posting valid information on M&S fictiona data, yet you havent posted a single thing first hand either. Lets see your original data. Lets see all of your testing. 20 years of law enforcement doesnt make you an expert, so thats not going to count. You are bitching at him about something you do, reading others data, he just happened to post what he read, and what he posted went against what you believe. The fact you dont have a single thing to contradict so you go on and on about telepathy, when it wasnt mentioned by anyone but you, then you aqccuse him of being off a medication. Way to throw a childish insult, albeit a very lame one. Thats right, when you have nothing to back up your assertions, throw out the insult, that'll show 'em.  You know, I am gonna do the samething he did, whether or not it meets with your approval.
|
Hmm, I thought I remembered the DPX being noticeably shorter than my usual Ranger loads. Maybe I was shooting the 165 gr. Or maybe I was smoking rocks. Perhaps a 200gr would be possible in .45 auto rim |
The odds of hitting the lotto around here are like 1 in 15,000,000 but every couple of weeks someone cashes a check. |