Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/3/2003 11:38:21 AM EDT
What are some opinions regarding what the best bullet wieght is for self defence/combat in the .40S&M? I have read in some reports that the 155grain hydra shok are best, and have also read that the 180 gold dot is best. I kinda tend to think that the heavier the bullet the better specially in pistols more so than rifles. With pistols tragectory matters less than rifles so in light of that heavier is better. Also I think that the heavier projectile will penitrate deeper than the lighter one, which is benificial in colder climates where one could encounter numerous layers of heavy clothing. Does anyone know of a factory self defence/combat load that uses the Hornady XTP bullets? If so how have they been rated to perform? What are your thoughts?
Link Posted: 8/3/2003 2:30:59 PM EDT
For factory self defense ammo I'm using the 180 grain hydra shok. The point of impact is very similar to my 180 grain reloads (165 PF) that I use for IPSC/USPSA.
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 8:08:54 AM EDT
I used 155 grain Federal Hydra-Shok rounds. Potent and very effective with good one shot stop results on the street.
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 9:45:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/4/2003 9:51:38 AM EDT by AR15fan]
Hydrashok was state of the art 20 years ago. I used to carry 155Gn Hydrashoks too, when I got my ballistics info from gun rags and works of fiction like Evans Marshalls books.

Fortunately there are palces you can go for good factual information now. liike Firearms Tactical, Tactical Forums, and Ammo Lab.

The Gold Dot in both 155Gn and 180Gn has acceptable terminal performance.

64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum78/HTML/000387.html
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 12:20:01 PM EDT
Speer Gold Dot in any weight 155/165/180 (my preference is the 155gr).
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 8:03:16 PM EDT
I like the 180 grain gold dot, but the POI is 3" high at 20 yards. I know the Hydra shoks hit very similar to my range ammo I reload. Ballistics are cool and everything, but shot placement is where it's at.
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 8:26:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Yar1182:
I like the 180 grain gold dot, but the POI is 3" high at 20 yards. I know the Hydra shoks hit very similar to my range ammo I reload. Ballistics are cool and everything, but shot placement is where it's at.



Don't most people make their practice ammo match their carry ammo? Especially if they reload? Seems like you're going at it from the wrong end.
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 10:14:58 PM EDT
The "best ammo" for my purposes is the Winchester 180 gr Ranger or the Speer Gold Dot 180 gr JHP's. Time and time again these have proven to be very good performers and IMHO are hard to beat. I am not a fan of the Hydra-Shok at all.

-Charging Handle
Link Posted: 8/4/2003 10:58:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Hoplophile:

Don't most people make their practice ammo match their carry ammo? Especially if they reload? Seems like you're going at it from the wrong end.



Depends on your application. I mostly shoot pistol competition so I make the best possible load for my gun that makes the USPSA/IPSC major power factor. I shoot about 400 rounds of this stuff a week (2 matches every weekend). Out of the few brands I tried the hydra shok POI is the closest to my match ammo. Shot placement is the most critical. I'm more confident if I had time to call my shot, or do some fast indexing.
Link Posted: 8/5/2003 6:01:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Yar1182:
I mostly shoot pistol competition so I make the best possible load for my gun that makes the USPSA/IPSC major power factor.



Gotcha. Now it makes more sense.
Link Posted: 8/5/2003 10:45:25 AM EDT
Fiction?
Link Posted: 8/5/2003 8:45:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Fiction?



Yes, fiction. From www.firearmstactical.com/briefs8.htm:


A few years ago, Sanow wrote several articles wherein he criticized the performance of the 9mm 147 grain JHP, and cited several police agencies who were allegedly dissatisfied with the cartridge’s "dismal" performance after their officers had to shoot criminals with it. Several law enforcement firearms trainers were so alarmed at Sanow’s findings that they contacted these agencies to verify for themselves if what Sanow had claimed in his articles was true. What these trainers learned was that Sanow had deliberately misrepresented the circumstances and facts of these shootings to make the 147 grain JHP look bad. As a result, Sanow and his work lost whatever little remaining credibility he had with law enforcement.


Browse around that site a while and you'll find both more about Marshall et. al. as well as some real info about 'stopping power'
Link Posted: 8/5/2003 11:31:08 PM EDT
For anyone who believes in the Marshall and Sanow information, you need to read these:

www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm


www.firearmstactical.com/sanow-strikes-out.htm

www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-discrepancies.htm


www.firearmstactical.com/undeniable-evidence.htm

www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm

I don't know about you folks, but after reading that, it doesn't make me feel very cozy about taking ammo advice from Marshall and Sanow. All of the touting of the Hydra-Shok in gun rags over the years can be traced back to that source. Why? Because those writers are either too dumb or lazy to look at real data. The one shot stop percentage is easy to look at. It requires no real work. That's why those books sell in the first place. But I assure you, nothing in the real comes that easy. So when you get ammo advice, be sure of the source. I would not rely on any ammunition that those two guys recommend because of all the stuff mentioned in the above links. They seem to be the only people in ballistics research that are fond of the Hydra-Shok. None of the credible ammo experts recommend it.

-Charging Handle

Link Posted: 8/6/2003 3:52:50 AM EDT
Whatever decent hollowpoint brand functions in your gun and shoots acceptably accurately. Don't get too worried about it unless you have the time to look at all the opinions and formulate your own. There are lots of opinions out there. NO ONE has all the answers.

I personally carry the Federal 155 grain JHP HiShok in my duty weapon. I've done a lot of research from every side of the terminal ballistics argument and I am confident in the capabilities of the round. I don't have a choice in choosing my carry load and there may be a statistically better round out there but I don't lose any sleep over it.
Link Posted: 8/6/2003 5:02:54 AM EDT
While nobody has all the answers there are some people who have a lot more answers than others and they state that the HydraShok design was good when it came out but there are some much more effective designs out there.

Having said all that, my Kimber is loaded with 230gr HydraShoks. They function reliably, are very accurate in my pistol and I can get more of them just about anywhere in the US. One of those who know more of the answers than the majority of people is Dr. Gary Roberts. He has often said the following or something very similar:


Remember adequate and repetitive training, proper mind-set, and a reliable weapon system are far more important than what ammunition is used. The person who expends 10,000 rounds of cheap ball ammo getting adequate training is far ahead of the individual who buys 100 rounds of "state-of the-art" ammo, but never gains proficiency with his firearm.
Link Posted: 8/7/2003 9:03:57 AM EDT
Im not balistics expert, but I was told/read somewhere that the lower grain 155/165 were better for combat/SD rounds than 180. Anyone know why?
Link Posted: 8/7/2003 4:27:53 PM EDT
You'll get as many opinions about the right bullet weight to carry as there are bullets. Everyone has their own ideas. Put reliability and then accuracy first over the most "effective" load. I would feel fine with any weight such as the 155-165-180 grain loads. I lean toward the lighter loads for several reasons but I'm not going to argue over it because there are no winners in the endless terminal ballistics debate. There are inconsistencies on every side. The questions that I would ask myself are "Does this load work well in my weapon? and Am I confident that it will work if I have to use it?" Training and confidence are far more important than the actual load.
Link Posted: 8/7/2003 5:28:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2003 5:31:30 PM EDT by tberg]
What are you shooting it out of?
Coltrifle says bullets that reliably fire when you pull the trigger are best. I concur.
Edited to add: I just re-read the original post, I have no idea what is best for .40 S&M. Maybe HP's 230 grainers ...
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 11:09:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2003 11:11:42 AM EDT by ColtRifle]
I would advise you to choose a load from the major bullet manufacturers that is their current top of the line as far as current technology goes. There are many manufacturers out there. If you choose a load from Federal, Remington, Speer, Corbon, or Winchester you will be happy. Check them out and try different loads. There are very few poor loads in the .40 S&W because it was designed to be a police/defensive load for handguns from the beginning.

My personal opinion on the Hornady XTP is to avoid it. It tends to penetrate too deeply and expansion is often minimal. It might be a good hunting bullet for certain applications but I'd avoid it for personal defense against humans.
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 5:11:53 PM EDT
I read on a website called Calibers that the 165 grain is the most accurate for most pistols. I forget why but that's what I used. Pesonally, I think they're all just as good but every little bit of reassurance in your particular round makes you feel soft and squishy inside.
I carried 165 grain Pro Loads with the Gold Dot bullet.
Link Posted: 8/8/2003 5:14:18 PM EDT
I found there address.

http://www.greent.com
Top Top