Moderators: Immortals, Supreme Beings, Old Ones
Dead Boy wrote:All hail Jefffar... King of the Mods
Killer Cyborg wrote:.357 revolver.
Revolvers are easy to clean, and they don't jam.
Alejandro wrote:Never heard the term "escolta" before. What's that?
Alejandro wrote:
So they're the armed guys in the vehicles with you while driving? Didn't know that there was a term for em'.
Alejandro wrote:
Ahhh...never went to SA while in uniform. Makes sense now though...just couldn't figure out why Marine escorts were being called escoltas.
Writers Block wrote:1911 has several companys, Para Ord included, that can do after market mods to give as much as 14 rds in the mag. They bore out the innards of the handle somewhat and this gives the extra room for larger mag. Factor in Plus 2 Mags, and one in the pipe, a 1911 can carry 17 rounds if you so desire...
svartalf wrote:Say, since so many here seem to really have a thing for the classic M1911... Does it take a lot of practice, or do you need to be particularly beefy to handle that baby and fire effectively with .45 ACP? I like big calibers, and the look of that pistol, but I was a 100 pound weakling before I became a 190lb tub o'lard on two legs, so I have serious doubts as to my ability to handle it, if I ever got to handgun practice.
Can I indulge myself, or should I really go for something lighter, like 9mm, or maybe a .32 PPK?
Alejandro wrote:I honestly could never get into Glocks, no matter how highly praised they are.
They just look and feel like toys to me...I dunno...can't get over that.
Black Cross wrote:GhostKnight wrote:Alejandro wrote:I honestly could never get into Glocks, no matter how highly praised they are.
They just look and feel like toys to me...I dunno...can't get over that.
Do you want something that feels good, or something that works?
There's a good reason that many police have gone to glocks. They don't fail.
That and the fact that Glock undercut their competition in a lot of cases price wise. The almighty dollar does rule after all. And if Glocks were so good why are they not used in certain quarters?
Lucky wrote:Lather- the slide-lock thing could be a magazine issue. try changing out different mags and see if you have a bad one.
Lucky wrote:As for glocks, I personally dont like them. I have nothing against the company, but the design of the guns just dont agree with me. For one, they make my hands sweaty. Secondly, some of them have a funny angle that just doesn't feel comfortable aiming with.
Lucky wrote:My favorite, however, would have to be the Kimber custom II .45 ACP
Mike Wong wrote:Let me quote Revolver Ocelot: "The Colt New Model Army, the greatest handgun ever created!" Or something like that.I have a weakness for the older revolvers mainly for the grip...the new ones like my Python (got rid of it) felt like wearing high-heel shoes...just not pointable. My Peacemaker copy, however, is nice. (just a .22 but that's enough for fun-shooting) In the forces we use Browning HP 35's mostly, which are ok if you can get a new one. Most we get are ancient wrecks. I fired the Glock 17 which a pleasure, and the Colt 1911 a lot which is cool once you get used to its unique feel. As for the Walther PPk, well, I have tiny hands
and it still doesn't sit right in my hand.
Dead Boy wrote:All hail Jefffar... King of the Mods
Svartalf wrote:Does it take a lot of practice, or do you need to be particularly beefy to handle that baby and fire effectively with .45 ACP? I like big calibers, and the look of that pistol, but .... Can I indulge myself, or should I really go for something lighter, like 9mm, or maybe a .32 PPK?
I prefer a .45ACP Sig P220 with Novak sights and Hogue rubber grips. I'm also partial to the P245! Writers Block wrote:On the other hand, it has a hell of a lot of moving parts compared to many other semi-autos, and that means more things to go wrong. Add to that a scenario where parts are at a premium or such (TEOTWAWKI or the like) and it becomes more of an issue. It is also quite hefty to lug around (eight hours under your arm in July is a treat...day after day; it gets even better...) and if you want to carry serious ammo for it the same goes for that as well.
Writers Block wrote:I wasn't saying it has LOTS of parts; I am aware there are plenty with more. I am just pointing out there are plenty with less...
And from a standpoint of protection, for things like backpacking and other outdoors pursuits, why not a .45 revolver? You only lose one round...
Oh, and I am so glad to see no one is singing the praises of the Desert Eagle...that thing is crap (IMHO).
Rockwolf66 wrote:Writers Block wrote:On the other hand, it has a hell of a lot of moving parts compared to many other semi-autos, and that means more things to go wrong. Add to that a scenario where parts are at a premium or such (TEOTWAWKI or the like) and it becomes more of an issue. It is also quite hefty to lug around (eight hours under your arm in July is a treat...day after day; it gets even better...) and if you want to carry serious ammo for it the same goes for that as well.
Now that's funny the M-1911 has less parts than a Ruger, S&W, SIG-Sauer, or a Glock. Heck the animation in my previous post shows every single part to an M-1911 and how they all fit together. It's such a simple design that a ten year old can figure out how to field strip the design after seeing it once. As far as daily carry with one it's not very bad with the right holster. If you backpack like myself then a loaded M-1911 is a real comfort because as a cavalry weapon the M-1911 had to be effective against a horse. While it may take all seven rounds to dispatch a rogue bear, it's rather overkill on overgrown sand colored housecats(Yeah, a mountain lion is related to your housecat. It's the largest cat that can purr if I remember correctly).
Thanks.Capt. Amundson wrote:Glock G17. Love my 9mm's.
psychophipps wrote:Capt. Amundson wrote:Glock G17. Love my 9mm's.
Have to agree here. With modern JHPs you don't see that big a difference between 9mm and the heavier calibers "stopping power" any more.
G17 was the first and is still the best one they make, IMO.
Grey Death wrote:You cant always rely on a hollow point to open, or perform well against different materials and conditions. In that case a larger bullet hits the target with more force than a smaller one. Therefore a bigger is better. A thick winter coat like a carhart can keep a bullet from mushrooming, or performing as otherwise expected.
psychophipps wrote:Grey Death wrote:You cant always rely on a hollow point to open, or perform well against different materials and conditions. In that case a larger bullet hits the target with more force than a smaller one. Therefore a bigger is better. A thick winter coat like a carhart can keep a bullet from mushrooming, or performing as otherwise expected.
This is pretty much not an issue with modern JHPs. It was a recognized issue with the older Hydra-Shok ammo but modern JHPs will mushroom pretty much 100% of the time regardless of baggy or padded clothing as has been demonstrated in countless testing examples found (with video and/or photographic examples) with a simple google search. In fact, I have yet to see an example of a modern JHP completely failing to mushroom during such testing.
Grey Death wrote:psychophipps wrote:Grey Death wrote:I'm sorry but bigger is always better. Especially when it comes to stopping power. Let give you a little example from history. In response to problems encountered by American units fighting Moro guerrillas during the Philippine-American War, the then-standard .38 Long Colt revolver was found to be unsuitable particularly in terms of stopping power, as the Moros had very high battle morale and frequently used drugs to inhibit the sensation of pain. The U.S. Army briefly reverted to using the M1873 single-action revolver "Peacemakers" in .45 Colt caliber, which had been standard during the last decades of the 19th century; the slower, heavier bullet was found to be more effective against charging tribesmen. After this and the Thompson-LaGarde pistol round effectiveness tests, it was determined to quote Colonel John T. Thompson "should not be of less than .45 caliber". Because it could not be trusted to bring down a target. Now you claim that advanced bullet design has made this a moot point. I say to you if a 9x19mm with JHP is great, than .45 ACP JHP is an unstoppable juggernaut.
Lets look and compare some ammo shall we.
9x19mm 147Gr Hornady TAP-FRD (Which is their top of the line self defense JHP)
at the muzzle 975 ft per sec and 310 ft lbs of energy
at 50 yds 935 ft per sec, and 285 ft lbs of energy
at 100 yds 899 ft per sec, and 264 ft lbs of energy
now lets compare that to
.45ACP 230Gr Hornady FMJ
at the muzzle 850 ft per sec, and 369 ft lbs of energy
at 50 yds 818 ft per sec, and 342 ft lbs of energy
at 100 yds 788 ft per sec, and 317 ft lbs of energy
So lets take a look at the stats. The big .45 does move a lot slower at all ranges. But it consistently delivers 50+ lbs more energy to the target.
Velocity is great, but it means nothing if you don't have the power with it, when it makes contact. Bigger heavier bullets regardless of bullet style will always prove to have more stopping power.
Even though I do carry a little mouse gun loaded with JHP in the summer time. (Loaded with Hornady .32 auto 60gr JHP/XTP and yes Hornady is one of my favorite ammos, if your wondering. Have had good luck reloading with their bullets, and ammunition.) Even though its loaded with these "Modern JHP". I'm not thinking that one or two rounds of these always mushrooming bullet as you say will be sufficient to stop an assailant. I train to if facing a single opponent to fire to entire 7 rounds magazine. If facing multiple opponents no target would receive less than 2 rounds. Now if in the same situation one on one with the 357. Two rounds center of mass is more than enough. If facing multiple a single round per target is acceptable. Now all my ranting here probably won't change your mind about smaller caliber JHP. Conversely I cant believe in the idea of relying on design, over sheer brute force.
Two words: "Shot" and "Placement"
Rockwolf66 wrote:Now that's funny the M-1911 has less parts than a Ruger, S&W, SIG-Sauer, or a Glock. Heck the animation in my previous post shows every single part to an M-1911 and how they all fit together. It's such a simple design that a ten year old can figure out how to field strip the design after seeing it once. As far as daily carry with one it's not very bad with the right holster. If you backpack like myself then a loaded M-1911 is a real comfort because as a cavalry weapon the M-1911 had to be effective against a horse. While it may take all seven rounds to dispatch a rogue bear, it's rather overkill on overgrown sand colored housecats(Yeah, a mountain lion is related to your housecat. It's the largest cat that can purr if I remember correctly).
psychophipps wrote:Grey Death wrote:psychophipps wrote:Grey Death wrote:I'm sorry but bigger is always better. Especially when it comes to stopping power. Let give you a little example from history. In response to problems encountered by American units fighting Moro guerrillas during the Philippine-American War, the then-standard .38 Long Colt revolver was found to be unsuitable particularly in terms of stopping power, as the Moros had very high battle morale and frequently used drugs to inhibit the sensation of pain. The U.S. Army briefly reverted to using the M1873 single-action revolver "Peacemakers" in .45 Colt caliber, which had been standard during the last decades of the 19th century; the slower, heavier bullet was found to be more effective against charging tribesmen. After this and the Thompson-LaGarde pistol round effectiveness tests, it was determined to quote Colonel John T. Thompson "should not be of less than .45 caliber". Because it could not be trusted to bring down a target. Now you claim that advanced bullet design has made this a moot point. I say to you if a 9x19mm with JHP is great, than .45 ACP JHP is an unstoppable juggernaut.
Lets look and compare some ammo shall we.
9x19mm 147Gr Hornady TAP-FRD (Which is their top of the line self defense JHP)
at the muzzle 975 ft per sec and 310 ft lbs of energy
at 50 yds 935 ft per sec, and 285 ft lbs of energy
at 100 yds 899 ft per sec, and 264 ft lbs of energy
now lets compare that to
.45ACP 230Gr Hornady FMJ
at the muzzle 850 ft per sec, and 369 ft lbs of energy
at 50 yds 818 ft per sec, and 342 ft lbs of energy
at 100 yds 788 ft per sec, and 317 ft lbs of energy
So lets take a look at the stats. The big .45 does move a lot slower at all ranges. But it consistently delivers 50+ lbs more energy to the target.
Velocity is great, but it means nothing if you don't have the power with it, when it makes contact. Bigger heavier bullets regardless of bullet style will always prove to have more stopping power.
Even though I do carry a little mouse gun loaded with JHP in the summer time. (Loaded with Hornady .32 auto 60gr JHP/XTP and yes Hornady is one of my favorite ammos, if your wondering. Have had good luck reloading with their bullets, and ammunition.) Even though its loaded with these "Modern JHP". I'm not thinking that one or two rounds of these always mushrooming bullet as you say will be sufficient to stop an assailant. I train to if facing a single opponent to fire to entire 7 rounds magazine. If facing multiple opponents no target would receive less than 2 rounds. Now if in the same situation one on one with the 357. Two rounds center of mass is more than enough. If facing multiple a single round per target is acceptable. Now all my ranting here probably won't change your mind about smaller caliber JHP. Conversely I cant believe in the idea of relying on design, over sheer brute force.
The problem with your "bigger is better" is the fact that energy delivered, at least in pistol calibers less than quite a bit over the speed of sound, has been largely shown to be a moot point. It's all about disruption of the CNS and MBBO. Any handgun round is like driving a dowel into your target the width of the bullet (this is what makes bonded JHP work the best as they don't fragment and lose mass) so if you don't hit something immediately important then the size of the bullet doesn't really matter much. Add the recent US Army and FBI research showing that in a firefight the participants strongly tend to be either up and fighting or down and out and you again get to the #1 most important aspect of firearms defensive shooting...
Two words: "Shot" and "Placement"
AS for the 230gr .45 ACP as being the bestest of the bestest, that was around 100 years ago. It's 100 years ago anymore. .357 Magnum 125gr JHP and .40 S&W 165gr JHP are the top of the charts in one-shot stops in LE and civilian shootings and have maintained their slots for a number of years now.
Grey Death wrote:Your missing the point about the 230gr FMJ. My point was a simple stupid basic heavy bullet. Delivers more energy than a smaller bullet. More energy delivered on target contributes to greater wound probability.
Shot and placement, cant argue with you there. The one thing I think we both can agree on.
.357 and .40 are both widely carried now a days. Helps contribute to increase statistics of them in one-shot stops. Just because they see more action now. Besides It also proves my point about larger bullets. Typical gr weights for 9x19mm self defense loads run 115-147 (generally), while .357 runs 125-158, .40S&&W runs 155-180. For the most part bigger, heavier bullets than 9mm.
Oh and this,
Add the recent US Army and FBI research showing that in a firefight the participants strongly tend to be either up and fighting or down and out
This is about the silliest thing I've read in a while. So in a gun fight your either shot and wounded/killed or not. No kidding? Brilliant, nice to see my tax dollars at work. Helping to validate facts like this. Come on you can do better than this.
) I do have to agree that a round from a snub, is not effective as a longer (5") barrel. (Dang it, quit making sense ) Those not willing to put up with the weight? Wussys. 
)
