best combat load for a 1911 fullsize

Handguns » 1911 Discussions

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - best combat load for a 1911 fullsize

Posted: 9/6/2005 7:10:08 PM EDT

well?

Posted: 9/6/2005 7:18:05 PM EDT

[#1]

I think the 230 gr SXT is a dandy choice, personally. YMMV.

Posted: 9/6/2005 7:20:13 PM EDT

[#2]

i also carry the SXTs, but i would opt for gold dots if i could find them locally.

Posted: 9/7/2005 12:04:33 AM EDT

[#3]

I have corbon 230+p in it right now

Posted: 9/7/2005 12:14:45 AM EDT

[#4]

230gr SXT OR GOLD DOT

Posted: 9/7/2005 5:07:37 AM EDT

[#5]

Winchester Ranger RA45T

Posted: 9/7/2005 9:04:51 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Winchester Ranger RA45T

I think most will agree. Either Ranger RA45Ts or Speer 230gr Gold Dots.

Posted: 9/7/2005 10:25:07 AM EDT

[#7]

I'm partial to the Speer 230gr Gold Dots...

Buy a box of every good defense load you can find, then buy more of what functions best in your weapon.

` 45

Posted: 9/7/2005 10:31:55 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
230gr SXT OR GOLD DOT

See? Thats why he's a 1911 forum mod

I still like the old tried and true 230gr Hydra-shoks simply because they have always been incredibly accurate out of my guns.

Posted: 9/7/2005 1:07:45 PM EDT

[#9]

230 gr. Hydra Shoks
1. Easy to get at Walmart
2. Have been reliable in stopping bad guys in the "tests" I have read about
3. They feed reliably in my Pro CDP, and that is the most important issue for carry ammo!

Posted: 9/7/2005 1:27:39 PM EDT

[#10]

.

Posted: 9/7/2005 1:55:45 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
There is a difference between Combat and Personal Defense.

That being said a Combat .45 round is 230 gr. Ball Ammo

Defense round is really whatever you want, shot placement is what really counts.

So self defense isn't Combat? Then what the HELL is it? And WHY would Ball ammo be a combat round and a FMJHP not?

com·bat
v. com·bat·ed, or com·bat·ted com·bat·ing, or com·bat·ting com·bats or com·bats
v. tr.

1. To oppose in battle; fight against.
2. To oppose vigorously; struggle against. See Synonyms at oppose.

v. intr.

To engage in fighting; contend or struggle.

n. (kmbt)

Fighting, especially armed battle; strife.

The only true thing you said is about shot placement and it ain't the easyest thing to do when the target is SHOOTING THE FUCK BACK!!!

Posted: 9/7/2005 2:26:43 PM EDT

[#12]

.

Posted: 9/7/2005 2:37:11 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

No, Self Defense in your home or on the street is not combat. Combat is sweating your ass off in tactical gear in the hot desert sun, dodging RPG's at night on Highway 8, taking sustained automatic small arms fire and the occasional pot shots while taking a leisurely drive in your hummer.

Oh you’ve got to be kidding me.

Posted: 9/7/2005 2:40:03 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is a difference between Combat and Personal Defense.

That being said a Combat .45 round is 230 gr. Ball Ammo

Defense round is really whatever you want, shot placement is what really counts.

So self defense isn't Combat? Then what the HELL is it? And WHY would Ball ammo be a combat round and a FMJHP not?

com·bat
v. com·bat·ed, or com·bat·ted com·bat·ing, or com·bat·ting com·bats or com·bats
v. tr.

1. To oppose in battle; fight against.
2. To oppose vigorously; struggle against. See Synonyms at oppose.

v. intr.

To engage in fighting; contend or struggle.

n. (kmbt)

Fighting, especially armed battle; strife.

The only true thing you said is about shot placement and it ain't the easyest thing to do when the target is SHOOTING THE FUCK BACK!!!

No, Self Defense in your home or on the street is not combat. Combat is sweating your ass off in tactical gear in the hot desert sun, dodging RPG's at night on Highway 8, taking sustained automatic small arms fire and the occasional pot shots while taking a leisurely drive in your hummer.

As far as shot placement when someone is shooting back, thats called training for combat. Train as you fight, and fight as you train, Better to bleed in training than in combat and all that other jazz.

Geneva convention also states what type of round can be used in combat, something about undue suffering.

img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/FROST18E/Iraqifreedom286.jpg
img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/FROST18E/Iraqifreedom044.jpg

I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree. You don't have to be in a battle, war, or conflict to eperience combat. I'd consider exchanging fire on US streets combat. The definition of the word supports this. It's just my opinion. I'd say what you decribed is warfare but I'm no soldier. I don't think being one would really make ones definition more valid however, especially if the accepted definition doesn't support it.

Thanks for your service not that it means anything coming from me. I don't think there's anything more honorable.

Posted: 9/7/2005 2:46:28 PM EDT

[#15]

No, Self Defense in your home or on the street is not combat. Combat is sweating your ass off in tactical gear in the hot desert sun, dodging RPG's at night on Highway 8, taking sustained automatic small arms fire and the occasional pot shots while taking a leisurely drive in your hummer.
As far as shot placement when someone is shooting back, thats called training for combat. Train as you fight, and fight as you train, Better to bleed in training than in combat and all that other jazz.

Geneva convention also states what type of round can be used in combat, something about undue suffering.

With all due respect I think you are confusing WAR as Combat. While WAR necessitates Combat, Combat does not necessitate WAR.

Combat is the life and death struggle between antagonists, be it in your Home in Anywhere USA against a crackhead or in Iraque against Abdull camelwhacker. You loose in either and you are DEAD.
It is not solely the realm of the Soldier to engauge in Combat.

I will agree with you that you will fight the way you train. But as the Geneva convention (which doesn't have anything to do with Military ammuntion restrictions) nor the Haag Accord (which does) has any affect on me as a Civilian I'll continue to advocate modern FMJHP designs as the best Combat load to the general public as it IS most likely to give them the best service.

"Semper Fi"

Posted: 9/7/2005 4:15:29 PM EDT

[#16]

I can make the distinction simple: Self-defense RARELY if ever involves incoming projectiles addressed To Whom It May Concern.

Posted: 9/7/2005 4:57:49 PM EDT

[#17]

Do you often hear non-mil folks refer to a shootout between Joe Homeowner and Thug-Of-The Day as combat?

No?

Why is that?

A shoot out may be a fight to the death, or it may just be the short (comparatively speaking) exchange of rounds between two sides. When Joe Homeowner starts shooting, the attacker(s) may peel, deciding the TV ain’t worth a potential dirt nap. Or they may continue until death. But eventually, and in the not too distant future, one side or the other will get eliminated. Game over.

Now combat on the other hand, provides the participant numerous, unrelenting opportunities to die by the protracted aggressive actions of a foe. That foe will not stop until he gains what you have. You kill him, and another will take his place. Death awaits at every corner, for day after day, month after month.

Guess you could say I believe combat is an overly aggressive shootout on meth.

That’s about the best I can do, and I can see this debate lasting a while.

Regardless, two-way ranges can be equally hazardous to your health.

So...YMMV.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For combat, there ain’t nothing better than 230gr FMJ.

For shootouts in my current local, I use Hydr Shoks, or your expansion bullet of choice. The ONLY reason I carry HPs is to reduce the liability of a through and through.

I’m gonna have a t-shirt printed that says, “If I’m not shooting at you, please move from the immediate vicinity behind the person I am shooting at.”

And in the 15 mins or so it took me to type this, no one else responded...??

EDIT: punctuation

Posted: 9/7/2005 5:13:33 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
... For combat, there ain’t nothing better than 230gr FMJ.

For shootouts in my current local, I use Hydr Shoks, or your expansion bullet of choice...

Even if “combat” that involves small arms and a “shoot out” were two different things the objective would still be exactly the same... to stop ones opponent. So wouldn’t it be logical to use the best equipment no matter what it is?

Posted: 9/7/2005 5:14:24 PM EDT

[#19]

Oops... double tap...

Posted: 9/7/2005 5:40:06 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
... For combat, there ain’t nothing better than 230gr FMJ.

For shootouts in my current local, I use Hydr Shoks, or your expansion bullet of choice...

Even if “combat” that involves small arms and a “shoot out” were two different things the objective would still be exactly the same... to kill ones opponent. So how is it that you would choose one type of bullet for one event and a different type for another? Wouldn’t it be more logical to utilize the best projectile no matter which it is?

I understand your question - I'll try to explain better.

Yes, it would be logical to use the best ammo. And some do think HPs are the best. I don't. They're damn good; just not the best IMO. Backstop = waiting for the empirical shit storm of evidence to the contrary.

In combat, I wouldn't be worried about a through and through. Might even prove advantageous - I'm a firm believer that if one hole is good, two is better (refering to an entrance and an exit wound).

FMJs have a better propensity for mainting their original weight and form when going through covers which some perceive to be adequate. In combat, if I need to shoot through a door, a FMJ is the best choice.

In a shootout in my local, I give up the best ammo due to liability concerns.

Posted: 9/7/2005 5:50:35 PM EDT

[#21]

I try several and use what shoots the best.
185gr Winchester silver tips. Not sure if they are the "best" choice, but I can group them tighter, quicker, than any other load I've tested in my particular 1911.

Posted: 9/7/2005 6:24:01 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
... In a shootout in my local, I give up the best ammo due to liability concerns.

So what you are saying is that, on the “street” in a fight for your life, you knowing use what you believe to be an inferior round. That sounds logical...

I think my earlier point may have been lost in transmission. I think this notion that somehow a civilian based gunfight doesn’t qualify under the definition of combat is hogwash. It’s naive to think that, on an individual level, the objectives of a “civilian gun fight” and “military combat” are different. They are not and won’t be unless somehow we go and rewrite all the dictionaries and confuse the general populous into believing that the definition of combat can’t apply to individual conflict of all types.

Combat is combat. It may take place on varying levels, with varying numbers of opponents, in various terrains and locals but for individual participants the objectives are the same... stopping ones opponent. As such, logic would dictate one use whatever bullet one believes to be the best for the task of stopping ones opponent

Posted: 9/7/2005 7:58:46 PM EDT

[#23]

.

Posted: 9/7/2005 8:16:15 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Inspector1 I'm sorry your thread got hi-jacked and off course.

AJohnston, Have you been in Combat? (in an actual war and not on your homestreet)

If you haven't thats cool, doesn't make you less of a man. It does quantify your ability to know what it actually is though.

My last post on this topic.

So those that have been in a war/battle get to decide what is and isn't combat?

Go pick up a dictionary. The definition is relatively straightforward as posted above. Soldiers see alot more combat than us civies because that is the nature of warfare. The meaning has no implication of the settings in which there is true "combat". That's why you hear phrases like "hand to hand combat". It is a part of warfare but the very definition extends beyond warfare IMHO.

Posted: 9/7/2005 9:02:46 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

In a shootout in my local, I give up the best ammo due to liability concerns.

This is screwy on so many levels I don't know where to start.

Posted: 9/7/2005 9:23:29 PM EDT

[#26]

.

Posted: 9/7/2005 10:08:38 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Inspector1 I'm sorry your thread got hi-jacked and off course.

AJohnston, Have you been in Combat? (in an actual war and not on your homestreet)

If you haven't thats cool, doesn't make you less of a man. It does quantify your ability to know what it actually is though.

My last post on this topic.

So those that have been in a war/battle get to decide what is and isn't combat?

Go pick up a dictionary. The definition is relatively straightforward as posted above. Soldiers see alot more combat than us civies because that is the nature of warfare. The meaning has no implication of the settings in which there is true "combat". That's why you hear phrases like "hand to hand combat". It is a part of warfare but the very definition extends beyond warfare IMHO.

okay I lied this is my last post on the topic.....

Why is it that people who have not been to actual combat, get all butt sore about it. Yes, in answer to your question only those that have, can decide. For crying out loud I'm a cop, now that I've gotten out of the army, and if I got into a police shooting IT IS NOT COMBAT!

if some piece of shit pulls a gun on you and demands your wallet, and then you pull your piece and start shooting at each other you just got into a GUNFIGHT.

If it makes you feel better or more manly, yes its combat. Congradulations you all get a CIB.

It's all completely semantic. No one is trying to argue what combat is.

Combat is a broad term, gunfighting isn't. Combat can happen when you're sitting in the mess tent and a rocket comes in and wipes out a bunch of guys in the middle of their mashed potatoes - yet it has zero to do with gunplay.

What we're all saying here is that shooting a man with a handgun is the same in terms of bullet choice whether you're on the streets of Bagdad or in Philadelpia. A good man stopper is a good man stopper, and a poor one is a poor one.

As an aside, I'm frankly stunned that anyone believes a full-metal-jacket is preferable to a good JHP to stop a man. If there's a terminal ballistics expert that thinks otherwise, I've never seen it in print or heard about it.

Posted: 9/7/2005 10:10:36 PM EDT

[#28]

It's not about feeling manly. You can't change a definition because you've been a soldier. It's not up to soldiers to make the definition. That's not the way words work unless you are talking about slang. There isn't a single american/english dictionary that will support your claim, and I think that a dictionary has the authority over any soldier in this argument over the true meaning of the word "combat". If it is the english language that this argument pertains to that is.

Posted: 9/8/2005 2:09:49 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:

In a shootout in my local, I give up the best ammo due to liability concerns.

This is screwy on so many levels I don't know where to start.

If you don't know where to start, maybe your stance is incorrect.

Maybe you missed the part where I said "HPs are damn good."

Probably 1.5 years ago, we had a similar thread.

I was chastised, mostly in IMs, due to the liability issues surrounding the possibility of FMJ going through and through, and my lack of responsibility in carrying FMJs.

Matter of fact, I though folks went off the deep end - seems like I hit a nerve when I said I carried FMJs and had no plans of changing.

Well, I did the research, and found that although their methods of convincing me were skewed, folks had their facts correct. And in reality, I probably knew the truth, but just didn’t want to change.

You’ll never be able to convince me that HPs are better than FMJs - I’ve seen the damage.

But I am able to read, asses the facts, make a decision, and modify my behavior based on my needs and local.

As far as I'm concerned, a 60 and claymores would make the best weapons for home defense.

But I don't use those based on liability issues.

Guess that's also screwey to you.

Posted: 9/8/2005 2:23:32 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
It's not about feeling manly. You can't change a definition because you've been a soldier. It's not up to soldiers to make the definition. That's not the way words work unless you are talking about slang. There isn't a single american/english dictionary that will support your claim, and I think that a dictionary has the authority over any soldier in this argument over the true meaning of the word "combat". If it is the english language that this argument pertains to that is.

Then I guess they could rename the CIB to Gunfight Infantry Badge, by your thoughts.

If someone would be so kind and locate the word ‘gunfight’ or shootout in here:
www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil/badges/combat%20infantryman%20badges.htm

I. DESCRIPTION: A silver and enamel badge 1 inch in height and 3 inches in width, consisting of an infantry musket on a light blue bar with a silver border, on and over an elliptical oak wreath. Stars are added at the top of the wreath to indicate subsequent awards; one star for the second award, two stars for the third award and three stars for the fourth award.

II. SYMBOLISM: The bar is blue, the color associated with the Infantry branch. The musket is adapted from the Infantry insignia of branch and represents the first official U.S. shoulder arm, the 1795 model Springfield Arsenal musket. It was adopted as the official Infantry branch insignia in 1924. The oak symbolizes steadfastness, strength and loyalty.

III. AWARD ELIGIBILITY: There are basically three requirements for award of the CIB. The soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, must be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and must actively participate in such ground combat.

(1) A soldier must be an Army infantry or special forces officer (SSI 11 or 18) in the grade of Colonel or below, or an Army enlisted soldier or warrant officer with an infantry or special forces MOS, who subsequent to 6 December 1941 has satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry, ranger or special forces unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat. Eligibility for Special Forces personnel (less Special Forces medical sergeant) accrues from 20 December 1989. Retroactive awards for Special Forces personnel are not authorized.

(2) A recipient must be personally present and under hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry or Special Forces primary duty, in a unit actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy. The unit in question can be of any size smaller than brigade.

(3) Personnel with other than an infantry or special forces MOS are not eligible, regardless of the circumstances. The infantry or special forces SSI or MOS does not necessarily have to be the soldier’s primary specialty, as long as the soldier has been properly trained in infantry or special forces tactics, possesses the appropriate skill code, and is serving in that specialty when engaged in active ground combat as described above. Commanders are not authorized to make any exceptions to this policy.

(4) On or after 18 September 2001:

a. A soldier must be an Army infantry or special forces officer (SSI 11 or 18) in the grade of colonel or below, or an Army enlisted soldier or warrant officer with an infantry or special forces MOS, who has satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry, ranger or special forces unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat, to close with and destroy the enemy with direct fires.

b. A soldier must be personally present and under fire while serving in an assigned infantry or Special Forces primary duty, in a unit engaged in active ground combat to close with and destroy the enemy with direct fires.

c. Soldiers possessing MOS of 18D (Special Forces Medical Sergeant) who satisfactorily perform special forces duties while assigned or attached to a special forces unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit is engaged in active ground combat may be awarded the CIB. These soldiers must have been personally present and engaged in active ground combat, to close with and destroy the enemy with direct fires. Retroactive awards under these criteria are not authorized for service prior to 18 September 2001.

d. Those soldiers possessing MOS of 18D who qualify for award of the CMB from 18 September 2001 to the 3 June 2005, will remain qualified for the badge. Upon request any such soldier may be awarded the CIB instead of the CMB. In such instances, the soldier must submit a request through the chain of command to the CG, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, ATTN: AHRC-PDO-PA, 200 Stovall Street, Alexandria, VA 22332-0471 for conversion of the CMB to the CIB.

e. Service members from the other U.S. Armed Forces and foreign military (infantry and Special Forces equivalents) assigned or attached as a member of a U.S. Army infantry or Special Forces unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size may be considered for award of the CIB. All basic requirements as listed above must be met. Retroactive awards under these criteria are not authorized for service prior to 18 September 2001.

(5) Awards will not be made to General Officers nor to members of headquarters companies of units larger in size than brigade.

(6) Special eligibility requirements by geographic area are listed in Army Regulation 600-8-22.

IV. DATE APPROVED: The Combat Infantryman Badge was approved by the Secretary of War on 7 October 1943 and announced in War Department Circular 269 dated 27 October 1943. On 8 February 1952, the Chief of Staff, Army, approved a proposal to add stars to the Combat Infantryman Badge to indicate award of the badge in separate wars. Under this change in policy, the badge was no longer limited to a one-time award, but could now be awarded to eligible individuals for each war in which they participated. The policy was expanded to permit award to Command Sergeants Major of infantry battalions or brigades, effective 1 December 1967. On 11 February 2005, the Chief of Staff, Army, approved changes to the CIB policy.

V. SUBDUED BADGES: Subdued badges are authorized in metal and cloth. The metal badge has a black finish. The cloth badge has olive green base cloth with the rifle, wreath, stars and border of the bar embroidered in black.

VI. MINIATURE BADGES: A dress miniature badge, 1 1/4 inches in length is authorized for wear on the mess uniforms. A miniature badge, 1 3/4 inches is also authorized in lieu of the regular size badge.

Everybody’s an expert. Yeah, I’m also finished here.

Posted: 9/8/2005 2:31:19 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
It's not about feeling manly. You can't change a definition because you've been a soldier. It's not up to soldiers to make the definition. That's not the way words work unless you are talking about slang. There isn't a single american/english dictionary that will support your claim, and I think that a dictionary has the authority over any soldier in this argument over the true meaning of the word "combat". If it is the english language that this argument pertains to that is.

As a veteran I would have a different perspective on what combat is also. I'm sure most vets and civilians would agree that there is a big difference between combat in a warzone and a shootout in your hallway no matter how webster defines it. The difference probably isn't worth arguing about on the internet. Still a person can see how a vet would take issue with somebody saying a shootout with a BG is combat. Besides fuck Webster, he didn't write the definition of combat sitting in a foxhole.

Posted: 9/8/2005 2:52:23 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

In a shootout in my local, I give up the best ammo due to liability concerns.

This is screwy on so many levels I don't know where to start.

If you don't know where to start, maybe your stance is incorrect.

Maybe you missed the part where I said "HPs are damn good."

Probably 1.5 years ago, we had a similar thread.

I was chastised, mostly in IMs, due to the liability issues surrounding the possibility of FMJ going through and through, and my lack of responsibility in carrying FMJs.

Matter of fact, I though folks went off the deep end - seems like I hit a nerve when I said I carried FMJs and had no plans of changing.

Well, I did the research, and found that although their methods of convincing me were skewed, folks had their facts correct. And in reality, I probably knew the truth, but just didn’t want to change.

You’ll never be able to convince me that HPs are better than FMJs - I’ve seen the damage.

But I am able to read, asses the facts, make a decision, and modify my behavior based on my needs and local.

As far as I'm concerned, a 60 and claymores would make the best weapons for home defense.

But I don't use those based on liability issues.

Guess that's also screwey to you.

Whatever. Have a nice day.

Posted: 9/8/2005 5:09:27 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Oops... double tap...

[FOFL2] Aren't you SUPPOSED to double tap?

Posted: 9/8/2005 5:14:19 AM EDT

[#34]

Posted: 9/8/2005 6:06:50 AM EDT

[#35]

So what was the answer to the original question?

Posted: 9/8/2005 6:12:07 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Quoted:
It's not about feeling manly. You can't change a definition because you've been a soldier. It's not up to soldiers to make the definition. That's not the way words work unless you are talking about slang. There isn't a single american/english dictionary that will support your claim, and I think that a dictionary has the authority over any soldier in this argument over the true meaning of the word "combat". If it is the english language that this argument pertains to that is.

As a veteran I would have a different perspective on what combat is also. I'm sure most vets and civilians would agree that there is a big difference between combat in a warzone and a shootout in your hallway no matter how webster defines it. The difference probably isn't worth arguing about on the internet. Still a person can see how a vet would take issue with somebody saying a shootout with a BG is combat. Besides fuck Webster, he didn't write the definition of combat sitting in a foxhole.

What you are describing is combat in war. I just see combat as having a broad definition. I can combat a cold. It can be used as a verb, descriptor, etc. I am not trying to make a comparison of a street shootout with someone in a foxhole combatting the enemy. I just think there are different forms I guess. I'm done now. I'll just stick to the meaning I like and I'm sure everyone else will stick to what they like.

BTW I like Winchester Ranger SXT's for self defense. I think that's what the stuff I use is called but I can't remember.

Posted: 9/8/2005 10:20:21 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's not about feeling manly. You can't change a definition because you've been a soldier. It's not up to soldiers to make the definition. That's not the way words work unless you are talking about slang. There isn't a single american/english dictionary that will support your claim, and I think that a dictionary has the authority over any soldier in this argument over the true meaning of the word "combat". If it is the english language that this argument pertains to that is.

As a veteran I would have a different perspective on what combat is also. I'm sure most vets and civilians would agree that there is a big difference between combat in a warzone and a shootout in your hallway no matter how webster defines it. The difference probably isn't worth arguing about on the internet. Still a person can see how a vet would take issue with somebody saying a shootout with a BG is combat. Besides fuck Webster, he didn't write the definition of combat sitting in a foxhole.

What you are describing is combat in war. I just see combat as having a broad definition. I can combat a cold. It can be used as a verb, descriptor, etc. I am not trying to make a comparison of a street shootout with someone in a foxhole combatting the enemy. I just think there are different forms I guess. I'm done now. I'll just stick to the meaning I like and I'm sure everyone else will stick to what they like.

BTW I like Winchester Ranger SXT's for self defense. I think that's what the stuff I use is called but I can't remember.

I will second the SXT's.

Posted: 9/8/2005 10:27:08 AM EDT

[#38]

230gr Speer Gold Dot

Posted: 9/8/2005 10:41:29 AM EDT

[#39]

This thread turned to shit fast.

xm1911.

Posted: 9/8/2005 10:54:03 AM EDT

[#40]

I use both Speer Gold Dot and Win SXT in 230 gr.

I've been curious, there are also loads in 200 and 185 gr. I'd think the bullet would move faster, possibly less felt recoil. Has anyone tried these? Does anyone have an opinion?

Tnx

Posted: 9/8/2005 5:03:27 PM EDT

[#41]

I run 230 hydrashocks, I also have a few boxes of Cor-Bon.

Posted: 9/9/2005 5:17:18 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
Quoted:
There is a difference between Combat and Personal Defense.

That being said a Combat .45 round is 230 gr. Ball Ammo

Defense round is really whatever you want, shot placement is what really counts.

So self defense isn't Combat? Then what the HELL is it? And WHY would Ball ammo be a combat round and a FMJHP not?

com·bat
v. com·bat·ed, or com·bat·ted com·bat·ing, or com·bat·ting com·bats or com·bats
v. tr.

1. To oppose in battle; fight against.
2. To oppose vigorously; struggle against. See Synonyms at oppose.

v. intr.

To engage in fighting; contend or struggle.

n. (kmbt)

Fighting, especially armed battle; strife.

The only true thing you said is about shot placement and it ain't the easyest thing to do when the target is SHOOTING THE FUCK BACK!!!

*grins* he means the difference between war, where soldiers are stuck with shit ammo, and defense, where you can use whatever ammo you bring to the fight. I'd agree with the above posts that suggest getting samples of all the good defensive loads and shooting what works best in your weapon.

Posted: 9/9/2005 5:17:54 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
Quoted:

In a shootout in my local, I give up the best ammo due to liability concerns.

This is screwy on so many levels I don't know where to start.

Sounds like he lives in New Jersey

Posted: 9/9/2005 7:40:08 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Quoted:

In a shootout in my local, I give up the best ammo due to liability concerns.

This is screwy on so many levels I don't know where to start.

I'm amazed this was the best argument mustered.

Posted: 9/9/2005 10:51:25 PM EDT

[#45]

Quite honestly i dont have a sugestion for ammo and i'm sure as hell not getting into the argument about Combat..

this is my take on ammo for home defense or otherwise.. we live in urbin enviroments... there are people EVERYWHERE around you.. am i going to use a AR15 inside my home... FUCK NO. 1 i live in a apartment and if i hit the guy the round is going to go through him.. through the wall the person standing behind that wall.. and probably 4 more walls before it comes to a stop..

Overpenatration is a big concern of mine.. i dont want ot hurt anyone else besides the person i'm shooting at.. what loads do i use in my shotgun? game loads why? becuse it will knock a BG on his ass just fine.. will it go through the wall behind him? no probably not and even if it does it will be going so slow by the time it exits that its only going to leave a bruse on someone..

i dont know it seems like some people that have posted would love to go out with AP rounds to take out a guy.. i dont know about you but i dont want the death of a innocent on my heart..

thats my take..
Jess

Posted: 9/10/2005 9:25:42 AM EDT

[#46]

Were I a soldier (I'm not, never was and never will be), I would prefer to get the best ammo available and not what I am limited to under the Hauge Convention. I would want the same Hydra-Shock 230 ammo I use in my home. I wouldn't feel bad if forced to use Winchester STX or Gold Dots either. My preference as a soldier would be irrelevant though as those loads are forbidden in a combat zone. Just because they are forbidden doesn't mean they are not the best though.

Posted: 9/10/2005 9:29:38 AM EDT

[#47]

We tested various loads at a defensive handgun course i took in March and Gold Dots outperformed ball, SXT, and hydro shoks. YMMV

Bomber

Posted: 9/10/2005 1:39:04 PM EDT

[#48]

Now that this thread has returned to ammo instead of "what is combat" . . .

I had been using Hydra shocks, but I've been getting large groups at 25 yards. I've also used the Winchester silvertip hollow points, but they have FTF if the pistol is not complete spotless.

Last week I picked up a box of Hornady TAP 200 gr. JHP and Black Hills blue box 185 gr. JHP. They were both excellent. No FTF or any other issues. At 7 yards I was putting rounds through the same hole. At 25 yards I was getting 2" to 2.5" groups (from a rest). The TAP was $12/ 20 rounds and black hills was $20/ 50 rounds.

R.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - best combat load for a 1911 fullsize

Handguns » 1911 Discussions

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us