The MagSafe "discussion" posts.

Kentucky Rifle · August 8, 2001, 01:10 PM

I started thinking about it and began to wonder just how many of us use these "frangibles" in our carry weapons. (I've heard the argument that they are "too expensive" and "if MagSafe is so good, why don't police departments use it"?) I just wanted to know how many guys are convinced regarding MagSafes? I've admitted that I carry MagSafe "Defenders" in my Seecamp and my Jetfire and, a post on another board has convinced me to buy a few packs in .40 caliber for my Glock 27 at the next Louisville gun show. (You can save a few bucks on them at a gun show.)
So how about it? Just how many guys use this ammo for their daily carry pistols?

Thanks,
Kentucky Rifle

Bartholomew Roberts · August 8, 2001, 01:51 PM

My first two are Glaser Silver. I had used Glaser Blue; but decided I wanted the marginally heavier shot in the silver. Before that I used MagTech; but wasn't confident that they would feed reliably since they were considerably shorter and stubbier than normal 9mm rounds.

I figure if the problem isn't solved after the first two shots, I have a penetration issue and the rest of my mag is plain ol' JHPs.

Kentucky Rifle · August 8, 2001, 02:08 PM

Did you mean to say "MagSafe" instead of "MagTech". It's a whole different ballgame when you compare "MagSafe" to "MagTech". Just a type-o?

KR

Darkangel · August 8, 2001, 02:13 PM

For years I carried the glassers just for the fact of the term "Safety Slug" printed on the package. It seemed like a PC thing for me to do, and would be well recieved by any jury if I was, in fact, involved in a shooting. Plus the fact that they wouldn't go through a wall was appealing. Then I started to think ..........if they won't go through dry wall, will they go through a leather jacket, windshield, heavy sweater? Now I've seen a ton of gun shot wounds, so I decided I needed something big and fast............but not hardball. I try to stay away from weird stuff but occasionally fall victom. I look for a reasonable mixture of both, weight and speed. I stay super sonic with the biggest, most accurate, HP I can find, for any weapon I carry.
I also practice a lot, put the round where it will do the most good.
Sure hope I never get into a situation where I would have to use it.
good luck
DA

Bartholomew Roberts · August 8, 2001, 04:28 PM

Doh! I did mean to say MagSafe...

My limited experimentation with Glasers has shown me that they are quite capable of going through drywall and heavy clothing. I don't have any doubts about them punching through heavy leather either. We're still talking metal moving at high velocity here...

The idea behind a Glaser is not to overpenetrate a target and to reduce the potential for ricochet. They are still dangerous after penetrating your standard household wall (unless you have the poor luck to hit a stud).

As for windshields, those are pretty hard on any bullet, including JHPs. I wouldn't trust Glasers to be effective on any target that was behind glass. that's why I have JHPs behind them.

As far as I can see, the main con to using frangible ammo is that penetration is relatively shallow. The Glaser is only going to be effective with an unobstructed frontal shot. It will still do damage without that; but it will be performing worse than your standard JHP. The second con would be glass. Most bullets I've seen that went through glass are pretty badly mangled and I imagine that glass probably degrades the performance of a frangible bullet badly.

Glaser has a FAQ addressing the various myths on frangible bullets and my own experimentation tends to agree with what they say:

http://www.safetyslug.com/FAQs.htm

Kentucky Rifle · August 9, 2001, 12:17 PM

I can't be the ONLY person on the board who carries MagSafes! Please, somebody else admit it!

KR

JFrame · August 9, 2001, 01:24 PM

Kentucky:

I actually believe in the effectiveness of Magsafe ammo. The main problem I see with these and other "exotic" loads is that they're way too expensive for me to do the necessary reliability testing in semiautos...I just don't think running 2 or 3 packs through a semiauto is sufficient to provide evidence of total reliability. I'd probably feel okay after running maybe a hundred rounds--and that's a HEFTY investment in Magsafes!

That being said--my Jetfire .25 has a Magsafe in the pipe and a magazine full of Hornady XTP's. Both of my .38 snubbies have Magsafes in the first two chambers, with 125gr JHP's filling out the cylinder. So I guess I'm in your camp where Magsafes are concerned! -- JFrame

HET · August 9, 2001, 01:31 PM

Well I don’t carry but they are in my gun for home protection. I am in the same mind frame as Bart:

“I figure if the problem isn't solved after the first two shots, I have a penetration issue and the rest of my mag is plain ol' JHPs.”

I have kids in the house and worry about over penetration.

JB in SC · August 9, 2001, 05:49 PM

KR,

I carry Magsafes in my Seecamp (but confess to carrying Gold Dots most of the time). I can hardly dismiss the "frangibles" as being ineffective, and I admit there is not a lot of data on actual shootings. However, I don't think I would want to be shot in the upper pneumo-thorax with one!

JB

bpisler · August 9, 2001, 11:32 PM

In my apt i use 357mag magsafes but for my carry gun it's golden sabres

Jeff OTMG · August 11, 2001, 12:45 PM

KR, you aren't alone. I carried Glaser starting about 20 years ago. I then started changing to MagSafe about 8 years ago. Now I find myself shifting more to RBCD since it is MUCH more affordable for reliability testing yet I don't feel like I am giving up much compared to the MagSafe. I usually carry a MagSafe in the chamber, but with the magazine full of RBCD.

user110011 · August 11, 2001, 09:31 PM

KR:

My experience is very similar to Jeff OTMG. I carried Glaser in the 80's. Want to see something cool? Shoot a thick phone book with one of the Glaser slugs you rotate out of your carry ammo. I did it with a .357 back in the 80's and it was eye opening!

I carried MagSafe, particularly in my (.38 Special) M38 or 442 ankle revolver. The new owner of MagSafe is a friend of mine, and I was impressed by the product long before he purchased the company from Mr. Zambone.

In the small calibers (.32), bullets need all the help they can get. I feel personally that RBCD, MagSafe, and Glaser can significantly help by offering more energy that conventional rounds in diminutive calibers.

We are now a RBCD distributor, and I carry it in my pocket and ankle guns. The video on this stuff is nothing short if incredible, where they compare RBCD to (typically) Gold Dot in various calibers. I carry 9mm +P+ in my primary gun at work, however.

Interesting how you other gentlemen carry a different (brand) first round in the chamber from the rounds in the magazine. I do this, but my reasoning is that after the gun gets unloaded and loaded a few times, I remove this round from use (increased chance of bullet setback, extractor scaring, deformed hollow point cavity, general uglyness), and it is easliy identified as different from the rest of the carry ammo. Right now my first round in my Glock 19 is a Triton 115 +P, followed by a magazine of Federal +P+. My P32's first round is a Cor-Bon JHP, followed by a magazine of RBCD. Definately easy to tell which is which. And which one gets shot in the range when it's been cycled a few times.

Would anyone care to share other reasons (such as desiring a different characteristic for the first - second - whatever shot) for loading differing rounds in the magazine and/or chamber in a particular order?

RikWriter · August 11, 2001, 09:45 PM

I used to carry Mag-Safe but some shooting of it convinced me that accuracy is too spotty. I would rather have a less "spectacular" load that I know will hit my target.

Kentucky Rifle · August 11, 2001, 10:30 PM

I KNEW I wasn't alone. I may switch from Cor-Bon to MagSafe when my new small size, DeSantis ankle holster gets here next week. I'm going to carry my P-32 in it. (I think.) If there is anything I'll be able to wear on my ankle without much trouble, it's got to be that light P-32. I think a heavier pistol would be hard to get used to.

Kentucky Rifle

**Mike Irwin** · August 12, 2001, 12:55 AM

User,

Unfortunatly "significantly more energy" doesn't translate into the ability to stop a fight.

With the small calibers, penetration is even MORE important (at least I believe so) because you don't have as great a margin of error to get both expansion and penetration.

If you shoot someone with the .32 and the round only penetrates 4 to 6 inches, you may not get to vital structures in the body. In essence, you've just created a nasty flesh wound.

Jeff OTMG · August 12, 2001, 06:03 AM

Rikwriter, I suggest that you try the RBCD ammo. It has addressed all the accuracy problems faced by the Glaser (not bonded core) and the MagSafe (wide velocity deviations) and is loaded to standard pressure. This was a BIG seller to me for use in the lightweight S&W 342 revolver.

I disagree with Mike Irwin on whether or not 4"-6" is sufficient penetration for self-defense carry. Anything that I want to hit is within 4"-6" of the bullet entry point. I agree that it is not enough for uniformed LE use where more penetration is necessary.

**Mike Irwin** · August 12, 2001, 07:57 AM

Jeff,

Glad to know that ALL of your potential CCW scenarios/confrontations will occur with the attacker:

1. Sanding completely still, fully facing you, with you standing completely still.

2. Arms to his side.

3. Wearing nothing by a light T-shirt.

4. Being of light to medium build only.

Simply put, a slight variation in any of the parameters above, and your ammo may well NOT penetrate as far as you thing it's going to.

For example, my forarm at the midpoint between the wrist and the elbow is, as best as I can determine, about 4 inches thick. Add to that the fact that I'm a pretty heft guy, and guess what, you're now to the point where 4 to 6" of penetration is barely getting through the skin on my chest.

Add to that the potential for a heavy winter jacket, and guess
what? You're screwed.

To believe that 4 to 6 inches of penetration is sufficient is to set yourself up for a permanent fall followed by funeral arrangements.

lonegunman · August 12, 2001, 08:39 AM

Amen, Mike.

The only calibers I carry FMJ's are small ones like 32 ACP. People have disagreed with choice, and tell me I should carry a JHP, but I think the FMJ will penetrate better, given the overall poor performance of the 32.

**Mike Irwin** · August 12, 2001, 11:32 AM

Lone,

Bingo.

With a small-caliber gun, with iffy power, penetration is about the only thing that's going to get you there. Even penetration with FMJ bullets in these small calibers isn't a given.

**Mike Irwin** · August 12, 2001, 02:20 PM

Jeff,

I don't know why I didn't see this before...

Quote:

. I agree that it is not enough for uniformed LE use where more penetration is necessary.

HUH?

What POSSIBLE reason could there be for Joe CCW Citizen to have ammo that penetrates LESS than Les LEO?

I can't think of a single VALID reason why you would want to cut penetration to just 4 to 6 inches, so I'm asking you to share your reasons why you think this to be the case.

juliet charley · August 12, 2001, 04:48 PM

Quote:

What POSSIBLE reason could there be for Joe CCW Citizen to have ammo that penetrates LESS than Les LEO?

Actually, I believe that "pearl of wisdom" (non-LEOs needing less penetration than LEOs) was cooked-up by Ed Sanow (you know, the man who recommends 135 grain .40 S&W and carries 165 grain GS) to bolster his light/fast arguments (particularly when the LEO community as a whole did not buy it).

**Mike Irwin** · August 12, 2001, 06:01 PM

JC,

Wow.

Just unbelivable.

If true, two words to describe the reasoning. One is "insane." The other starts with an F.

Jeff OTMG · August 13, 2001, 07:33 AM

An LEO would want more penetrating ammunition because there is a potential that they could engage in a gun battle with someone behind cover, inside an automobile, or on a side facing shot where the upper arm might need to be penetrated to get into the upper torso, or even a side upper torso shot that would need to cross half of the body to get to the heart. This is the reason that the FBI recommends an ideal 12" to 14" of penetration. I am not concerned about taking shots like that because if any of them were presented I would have the opportunity to leave the area and not have to shoot. Distance is the same for me. I practice at distances less than 45 ft and concentrate of speed. Any encounter I have had have been less than 10 ft and I figure that if I am threatened at 45 ft or more I have a better chance of running away than getting involved in a shootout.

The exception for me would find me in agreement with lonegunman. When carrying a .22 lr, .25 ACP, or .32 ACP I would carry FMJ or solid lead bullets. Now that high performance ammo is available for the .25 ACP I would use that, but now that .32 ACP pistols are available with the same dimensions there is no reason to carry a .25 anymore. RBCD now makes a .32 load so I use that. I use to carry a .22 (Walther TPH) in which I would use solids, but now that the QuickShok is out I might consider it pending performance testing.

I don't understand the point of both of us standing perfectly still. It wouldn't matter if we were standing still or running, but I tend to shoot more accurately from a stationary position and would use movement to find cover and not fire while moving. If my opponent is moving you would probably find me moving in the opposite direction. Anytime that I have been approached by the unsavory sort they either attempted to come up from behind and when I turned we were face to face or they approach from the front to block my path.

Yes, everyones arms are at their side. Frankly I don't plan on shooting just one shot and if they happen to have their arms across their chest like a dead person I could always go for a head shot since they will be close enough. I don't think that arms blocking the shot from the front are much of a problem though we did have an Oklahoma Highway Patrol officer back around 1972 get in a shoot out with a bank robbery fugitive and the officers' shot hit the gun, disabling it and crippling the fugitives' right hand. That was shooting a .357 mag HP conventional bullet and didn't perform any better than a frangible. Any arms in front are probably going to point toward me so a shot that hits the hand or arm will travel up the arm. Frangibles are devastating in shots like that.

Actually down in Texas a t-shirt is what people wear. Penetration with MagSafe or RBCD is not an issue with a heavy coat as they require a more fluid medium to fragment. Glass is bad on a MagSafe, I do not know how it affects the RBCD. I could foresee that a problem could arise from a cookie cutter mouth hollow point though. When being fired through heavy clothing or a leather jacket, according to magazine articles, the HP can clog and give performance similar to a FMJ. The Glaser, MagSafe, and RBCD are not HP's and are not hindered in this way.

Even with someone of heavy build the heart, lungs, major arteries in the torso, jugulars and spinal column in the neck, and the brain are all within 6 inches of the surface.

I still think that the RBCD .357 SIG 25 gr at 2800 fps would be a very effective load as well as most of the others in their inventory.

**Mike Irwin** · August 13, 2001, 12:01 PM

Jeff,

Hum...

Ok, so a citizen may never face the same situation? Sorry, but that's not logical in the least.

The point of you both standing stock still, upright, means that through the breast bone is the absolute SHORTEST route to the heart.

However, if the person twists, is standing sideways to you (people CAN stand sideways and still point a gun at you very nicely), meaning that you now have an arm to penetrate as well as about 6 to 8 inches of chest, ribs, and lungs in ADDITION to the arm before you can reach the heart.

Additionally, if the person leans forward, or if you're kneeling, you've added angle distance, or more material that must be penetrated.

The point of a heavy jacket, etc., is that anything in between the target and the skin causes loss of velocity and penetration ability.

And, I hate to tell you this, but Magsafes (I don't know about the RBCD bullets) HAVE been defeated by heavy clothing, to the point where they either fragment early, or don't fragment at all. No bullet is going to perform the same way every time.

In short, and if it isn't obvious enough, I really think you're making a SERIOUS mistake by carrying disintegrating bullets in these small caliber guns.

Clayton · August 13, 2001, 12:17 PM

Mike, good post. You are dead on.

People that plan on making an "unobstructed frontal shot" in a fight are kidding themselves. Peple don't stand still and face you when you are shooting. Trust me.

The threat will probably be moving, will probably have his body bladed towards you, and may be behind cover. You may have to penetrate arms, multiple layers of cloth, window glass, etc.

12" of gelatin does not mean 12" of human. Human bodies contain bones and varying types of tissue. People don't run around naked either.

Penetration is paramount. The FBI sets a minimum of 12" of gelatin penetration. I prefer around 15"-16"

The "standard" non premium loads normally provide more penetration, and equal expansion. They perform just as well as the more expensive loads. I have fired thousands of rounds of the Winchester USA JHP loads in .40 and .45, as well as the various 9mm 147gr JHP loads available from Federal and Winchester. They all offer excellent accuracy, terminal performance, low flash, and an affordable price, which means you'll practice with it, and rotate your mags once in a while.

Test what you carry. Don't put your safety in someone else's hands when you don't have to.

More money doesn't mean more performance. Quite the opposite.

August 8, 2001, 01:10 PM	#1
Kentucky Rifle Senior Member Join Date: July 5, 1999 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 2,687	The MagSafe "discussion" posts. I started thinking about it and began to wonder just how many of us use these "frangibles" in our carry weapons. (I've heard the argument that they are "too expensive" and "if MagSafe is so good, why don't police departments use it"?) I just wanted to know how many guys are convinced regarding MagSafes? I've admitted that I carry MagSafe "Defenders" in my Seecamp and my Jetfire and, a post on another board has convinced me to buy a few packs in .40 caliber for my Glock 27 at the next Louisville gun show. (You can save a few bucks on them at a gun show.) So how about it? Just how many guys use this ammo for their daily carry pistols? Thanks, Kentucky Rifle __________________ "I am hurt but I am not slain, I will lie me down and bleed awhile-Then I'll rise and fight again!" (From the ballad of Sir Andrew Barton.)

August 8, 2001, 02:08 PM	#3
Kentucky Rifle Senior Member Join Date: July 5, 1999 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 2,687	Bart... Did you mean to say "MagSafe" instead of "MagTech". It's a whole different ballgame when you compare "MagSafe" to "MagTech". Just a type-o? KR

August 8, 2001, 02:13 PM	#4
Darkangel Senior Member Join Date: July 17, 2001 Location: Oregon Posts: 313	CCW For years I carried the glassers just for the fact of the term "Safety Slug" printed on the package. It seemed like a PC thing for me to do, and would be well recieved by any jury if I was, in fact, involved in a shooting. Plus the fact that they wouldn't go through a wall was appealing. Then I started to think ..........if they won't go through dry wall, will they go through a leather jacket, windshield, heavy sweater? Now I've seen a ton of gun shot wounds, so I decided I needed something big and fast............but not hardball. I try to stay away from weird stuff but occasionally fall victom. I look for a reasonable mixture of both, weight and speed. I stay super sonic with the biggest, most accurate, HP I can find, for any weapon I carry. I also practice a lot, put the round where it will do the most good. Sure hope I never get into a situation where I would have to use it. good luck DA

August 9, 2001, 12:17 PM	#6
Kentucky Rifle Senior Member Join Date: July 5, 1999 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 2,687	Guy's...COME on! I can't be the ONLY person on the board who carries MagSafes! Please, somebody else admit it! KR __________________ "I am hurt but I am not slain, I will lie me down and bleed awhile-Then I'll rise and fight again!" (From the ballad of Sir Andrew Barton.)

August 9, 2001, 01:31 PM	#8
HET Registration in progress Join Date: March 2, 2001 Location: CA :( Posts: 77	Well I don’t carry but they are in my gun for home protection. I am in the same mind frame as Bart: “I figure if the problem isn't solved after the first two shots, I have a penetration issue and the rest of my mag is plain ol' JHPs.” I have kids in the house and worry about over penetration. __________________ Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton

August 8, 2001, 01:51 PM	#2
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	My first two are Glaser Silver. I had used Glaser Blue; but decided I wanted the marginally heavier shot in the silver. Before that I used MagTech; but wasn't confident that they would feed reliably since they were considerably shorter and stubbier than normal 9mm rounds. I figure if the problem isn't solved after the first two shots, I have a penetration issue and the rest of my mag is plain ol' JHPs.

August 8, 2001, 04:28 PM	#5
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Doh! I did mean to say MagSafe... My limited experimentation with Glasers has shown me that they are quite capable of going through drywall and heavy clothing. I don't have any doubts about them punching through heavy leather either. We're still talking metal moving at high velocity here... The idea behind a Glaser is not to overpenetrate a target and to reduce the potential for ricochet. They are still dangerous after penetrating your standard household wall (unless you have the poor luck to hit a stud). As for windshields, those are pretty hard on any bullet, including JHPs. I wouldn't trust Glasers to be effective on any target that was behind glass. that's why I have JHPs behind them. As far as I can see, the main con to using frangible ammo is that penetration is relatively shallow. The Glaser is only going to be effective with an unobstructed frontal shot. It will still do damage without that; but it will be performing worse than your standard JHP. The second con would be glass. Most bullets I've seen that went through glass are pretty badly mangled and I imagine that glass probably degrades the performance of a frangible bullet badly. Glaser has a FAQ addressing the various myths on frangible bullets and my own experimentation tends to agree with what they say: http://www.safetyslug.com/FAQs.htm

August 9, 2001, 01:24 PM	#7
JFrame Member Join Date: February 23, 2001 Location: The Old Dominion Posts: 52	Kentucky: I actually believe in the effectiveness of Magsafe ammo. The main problem I see with these and other "exotic" loads is that they're way too expensive for me to do the necessary reliability testing in semiautos...I just don't think running 2 or 3 packs through a semiauto is sufficient to provide evidence of total reliability. I'd probably feel okay after running maybe a hundred rounds--and that's a HEFTY investment in Magsafes! That being said--my Jetfire .25 has a Magsafe in the pipe and a magazine full of Hornady XTP's. Both of my .38 snubbies have Magsafes in the first two chambers, with 125gr JHP's filling out the cylinder. So I guess I'm in your camp where Magsafes are concerned! -- JFrame

August 9, 2001, 05:49 PM	#9
JB in SC Senior Member Join Date: December 14, 2000 Location: Upstate Posts: 375	KR, I carry Magsafes in my Seecamp (but confess to carrying Gold Dots most of the time). I can hardly dismiss the "frangibles" as being ineffective, and I admit there is not a lot of data on actual shootings. However, I don't think I would want to be shot in the upper pneumo-thorax with one! JB __________________ "We have seen the enemy and he is us", Pogo

August 9, 2001, 11:32 PM	#10
bpisler Senior Member Join Date: June 18, 2001 Location: phoenix az Posts: 375	In my apt i use 357mag magsafes but for my carry gun it's golden sabres __________________ 'Fear the goverment that fears your guns'

August 11, 2001, 12:45 PM	#11
Jeff OTMG Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 1998 Location: OKC, OK & Austin, Tx Posts: 3,707	KR, you aren't alone. I carried Glaser starting about 20 years ago. I then started changing to MagSafe about 8 years ago. Now I find myself shifting more to RBCD since it is MUCH more affordable for reliability testing yet I don't feel like I am giving up much compared to the MagSafe. I usually carry a MagSafe in the chamber, but with the magazine full of RBCD.

August 11, 2001, 09:31 PM	#12
user110011 Member Join Date: April 20, 2001 Location: Florida Posts: 73	KR: My experience is very similar to Jeff OTMG. I carried Glaser in the 80's. Want to see something cool? Shoot a thick phone book with one of the Glaser slugs you rotate out of your carry ammo. I did it with a .357 back in the 80's and it was eye opening! I carried MagSafe, particularly in my (.38 Special) M38 or 442 ankle revolver. The new owner of MagSafe is a friend of mine, and I was impressed by the product long before he purchased the company from Mr. Zambone. In the small calibers (.32), bullets need all the help they can get. I feel personally that RBCD, MagSafe, and Glaser can significantly help by offering more energy that conventional rounds in diminutive calibers. We are now a RBCD distributor, and I carry it in my pocket and ankle guns. The video on this stuff is nothing short if incredible, where they compare RBCD to (typically) Gold Dot in various calibers. I carry 9mm +P+ in my primary gun at work, however. Interesting how you other gentlemen carry a different (brand) first round in the chamber from the rounds in the magazine. I do this, but my reasoning is that after the gun gets unloaded and loaded a few times, I remove this round from use (increased chance of bullet setback, extractor scaring, deformed hollow point cavity, general uglyness), and it is easliy identified as different from the rest of the carry ammo. Right now my first round in my Glock 19 is a Triton 115 +P, followed by a magazine of Federal +P+. My P32's first round is a Cor-Bon JHP, followed by a magazine of RBCD. Definately easy to tell which is which. And which one gets shot in the range when it's been cycled a few times. Would anyone care to share other reasons (such as desiring a different characteristic for the first - second - whatever shot) for loading differing rounds in the magazine and/or chamber in a particular order?

August 11, 2001, 09:45 PM	#13
RikWriter Senior Member Join Date: June 30, 1999 Posts: 2,104	I used to carry Mag-Safe but some shooting of it convinced me that accuracy is too spotty. I would rather have a less "spectacular" load that I know will hit my target. __________________ In three words I can sum up everything I've learned about life. It goes on.---Robert Frost

August 11, 2001, 10:30 PM	#14
Kentucky Rifle Senior Member Join Date: July 5, 1999 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 2,687	Thanks guys... I KNEW I wasn't alone. I may switch from Cor-Bon to MagSafe when my new small size, DeSantis ankle holster gets here next week. I'm going to carry my P-32 in it. (I think.) If there is anything I'll be able to wear on my ankle without much trouble, it's got to be that light P-32. I think a heavier pistol would be hard to get used to. Kentucky Rifle

August 12, 2001, 12:55 AM	#15
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	User, Unfortunatly "significantly more energy" doesn't translate into the ability to stop a fight. With the small calibers, penetration is even MORE important (at least I believe so) because you don't have as great a margin of error to get both expansion and penetration. If you shoot someone with the .32 and the round only penetrates 4 to 6 inches, you may not get to vital structures in the body. In essence, you've just created a nasty flesh wound. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

August 12, 2001, 06:03 AM	#16
Jeff OTMG Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 1998 Location: OKC, OK & Austin, Tx Posts: 3,707	Rikwriter, I suggest that you try the RBCD ammo. It has addressed all the accuracy problems faced by the Glaser (not bonded core) and the MagSafe (wide velocity deviations) and is loaded to standard pressure. This was a BIG seller to me for use in the lightweight S&W 342 revolver. I disagree with Mike Irwin on whether or not 4"-6" is sufficient penetration for self-defense carry. Anything that I want to hit is within 4"-6" of the bullet entry point. I agree that it is not enough for uniformed LE use where more penetration is necessary.

August 12, 2001, 07:57 AM	#17
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Jeff, Glad to know that ALL of your potential CCW scenarios/confrontations will occur with the attacker: 1. Sanding completely still, fully facing you, with you standing completely still. 2. Arms to his side. 3. Wearing nothing by a light T-shirt. 4. Being of light to medium build only. Simply put, a slight variation in any of the parameters above, and your ammo may well NOT penetrate as far as you thing it's going to. For example, my forarm at the midpoint between the wrist and the elbow is, as best as I can determine, about 4 inches thick. Add to that the fact that I'm a pretty heft guy, and guess what, you're now to the point where 4 to 6" of penetration is barely getting through the skin on my chest. Add to that the potential for a heavy winter jacket, and guess what? You're screwed. To believe that 4 to 6 inches of penetration is sufficient is to set yourself up for a permanent fall followed by funeral arrangements. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

August 12, 2001, 08:39 AM	#18
lonegunman Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2001 Location: deep in georgia Posts: 1,724	Amen, Mike. The only calibers I carry FMJ's are small ones like 32 ACP. People have disagreed with choice, and tell me I should carry a JHP, but I think the FMJ will penetrate better, given the overall poor performance of the 32.

August 12, 2001, 11:32 AM	#19
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Lone, Bingo. With a small-caliber gun, with iffy power, penetration is about the only thing that's going to get you there. Even penetration with FMJ bullets in these small calibers isn't a given. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

August 12, 2001, 06:01 PM	#22
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	JC, Wow. Just unbelivable. If true, two words to describe the reasoning. One is "insane." The other starts with an F. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

August 13, 2001, 07:33 AM	#23
Jeff OTMG Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 1998 Location: OKC, OK & Austin, Tx Posts: 3,707	An LEO would want more penetrating ammunition because there is a potential that they could engage in a gun battle with someone behind cover, inside an automobile, or on a side facing shot where the upper arm might need to be penetrated to get into the upper torso, or even a side upper torso shot that would need to cross half of the body to get to the heart. This is the reason that the FBI recommends an ideal 12" to 14" of penetration. I am not concerned about taking shots like that because if any of them were presented I would have the opportunity to leave the area and not have to shoot. Distance is the same for me. I practice at distances less than 45 ft and concentrate of speed. Any encounter I have had have been less than 10 ft and I figure that if I am threatened at 45 ft or more I have a better chance of running away than getting involved in a shootout. The exception for me would find me in agreement with lonegunman. When carrying a .22 lr, .25 ACP, or .32 ACP I would carry FMJ or solid lead bullets. Now that high performance ammo is available for the .25 ACP I would use that, but now that .32 ACP pistols are available with the same dimensions there is no reason to carry a .25 anymore. RBCD now makes a .32 load so I use that. I use to carry a .22 (Walther TPH) in which I would use solids, but now that the QuickShok is out I might consider it pending performance testing. I don't understand the point of both of us standing perfectly still. It wouldn't matter if we were standing still or running, but I tend to shoot more accurately from a stationary position and would use movement to find cover and not fire while moving. If my opponent is moving you would probably find me moving in the opposite direction. Anytime that I have been approached by the unsavory sort they either attempted to come up from behind and when I turned we were face to face or they approach from the front to block my path. Yes, everyones arms are at their side. Frankly I don't plan on shooting just one shot and if they happen to have their arms across their chest like a dead person I could always go for a head shot since they will be close enough. I don't think that arms blocking the shot from the front are much of a problem though we did have an Oklahoma Highway Patrol officer back around 1972 get in a shoot out with a bank robbery fugitive and the officers' shot hit the gun, disabling it and crippling the fugitives' right hand. That was shooting a .357 mag HP conventional bullet and didn't perform any better than a frangible. Any arms in front are probably going to point toward me so a shot that hits the hand or arm will travel up the arm. Frangibles are devastating in shots like that. Actually down in Texas a t-shirt is what people wear. Penetration with MagSafe or RBCD is not an issue with a heavy coat as they require a more fluid medium to fragment. Glass is bad on a MagSafe, I do not know how it affects the RBCD. I could foresee that a problem could arise from a cookie cutter mouth hollow point though. When being fired through heavy clothing or a leather jacket, according to magazine articles, the HP can clog and give performance similar to a FMJ. The Glaser, MagSafe, and RBCD are not HP's and are not hindered in this way. Even with someone of heavy build the heart, lungs, major arteries in the torso, jugulars and spinal column in the neck, and the brain are all within 6 inches of the surface. I still think that the RBCD .357 SIG 25 gr at 2800 fps would be a very effective load as well as most of the others in their inventory.

August 13, 2001, 12:01 PM	#24
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,390	Jeff, Hum... Ok, so a citizen may never face the same situation? Sorry, but that's not logical in the least. The point of you both standing stock still, upright, means that through the breast bone is the absolute SHORTEST route to the heart. However, if the person twists, is standing sideways to you (people CAN stand sideways and still point a gun at you very nicely), meaning that you now have an arm to penetrate as well as about 6 to 8 inches of chest, ribs, and lungs in ADDITION to the arm before you can reach the heart. Additionally, if the person leans forward, or if you're kneeling, you've added angle distance, or more material that must be penetrated. The point of a heavy jacket, etc., is that anything in between the target and the skin causes loss of velocity and penetration ability. And, I hate to tell you this, but Magsafes (I don't know about the RBCD bullets) HAVE been defeated by heavy clothing, to the point where they either fragment early, or don't fragment at all. No bullet is going to perform the same way every time. In short, and if it isn't obvious enough, I really think you're making a SERIOUS mistake by carrying disintegrating bullets in these small caliber guns. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

August 13, 2001, 12:17 PM	#25
Clayton Senior Member Join Date: July 27, 2001 Location: Bentonville, Arkansas Posts: 268	Mike, good post. You are dead on. People that plan on making an "unobstructed frontal shot" in a fight are kidding themselves. Peple don't stand still and face you when you are shooting. Trust me. The threat will probably be moving, will probably have his body bladed towards you, and may be behind cover. You may have to penetrate arms, multiple layers of cloth, window glass, etc. 12" of gelatin does not mean 12" of human. Human bodies contain bones and varying types of tissue. People don't run around naked either. Penetration is paramount. The FBI sets a minimum of 12" of gelatin penetration. I prefer around 15"-16" The "standard" non premium loads normally provide more penetration, and equal expansion. They perform just as well as the more expensive loads. I have fired thousands of rounds of the Winchester USA JHP loads in .40 and .45, as well as the various 9mm 147gr JHP loads available from Federal and Winchester. They all offer excellent accuracy, terminal performance, low flash, and an affordable price, which means you'll practice with it, and rotate your mags once in a while. Test what you carry. Don't put your safety in someone else's hands when you don't have to. More money doesn't mean more performance. Quite the opposite.