9mm or 45cal

[MikeKardec]

Actually what they were using was a semi wadcutter, which had a conical taper with a fairly large flat nose(meplat) and then a fairly narrow, square shoulder , the design attributed to the late Elmer Keith, and sometimes callet a Keith bullet. The flat meplat would aid in tissue damage, and the full caliber shoulder would cut a clean hole in a target, almost as good as a full wadcutter. The wadcutter was strickly a target bullet, with a full diameter meplat that was most ofter completely flat, so it would cut a clean hole in a target for scoring, and was a very short range bullet. I have shot semi wadcutters in my 1911 Colt and they function quite well. Those do have a bit more taper than those generally used in a revolver.

You are quite right but you got me doing some research because that's not quite what I meant. Here's what I found on the sort of load I was referring to -- http://www.handgunsmag.com/ammo/ammunition_hg_wickedwadcutters_200901/ There's a bunch of computer nonsense in the middle of the article so you have to read past it. If you continue to be interested go-ogle the policeman mentioned in the article, Jim Cirillo, he would have been a younger Law Enforcement officer during the time the guys I mentioned were active, in fact his NYPD stakeout squad service started right around the time I first met Jim Worrell, the FBI agent who might have made the wad cutter comment, it was nearly 50 years ago and I was a kid so my memory is foggy. Anyway, I doubt any of these guys were very secretive about what worked and what didn't, law enforcement was a small community back then.

It's probably important to recognize that these guys may have been working within departmental guidelines and with equipment that has been surpassed, and that the general state of "wisdom" has evolved since then. That said, the more I compare the level of knowledge from the 1930s to the 1960s on MANY subjects the more I'm impressed with what used to be known. Today we get wrapped up in "theory" and "potential" and what is the faddish thing to say or do or think and sometimes forget the useful things that came before. I live in LA, a city that loves it's fast cars but has absolutely terrible streets. When I talk to younger car guys and tell them that the high profile tires and long travel suspensions that used to be found on many automobiles are better for zipping around our town they are aghast at my heresy yet they all complain about the streets eating their 19" wheels. The same tire sizes and spring lengths that worked for our fathers in the 1960s in a world with dirt roads, heavy snowfall and broken pavement are actually superior in a city where the earth never stops moving ... if they were attached to modern suspension geometry all the better. The wheels and tires sold today are intended for perfectly flat racetracks; they have tremendous "potential" but between the potholes and the hot top patches you can't unlock it on Mulholland Drive. As many here have discovered a modern suit is a straight jacket but an older style with high cut armholes and action pleats can allow you to do nearly anything without taking it off. In some cases I think we are outsmarting ourselves ... we just have to figure out which ones!

On the other hand it is worth noting that I suspect these wad cutters were both hard cast and very heavy, a lot like a magnum hunting bullet. This wadcutter idea may have been superseded by hot loaded hollow points and was intended for a short bbl, low flash, low recoil, round to be used in stressful conditions. It's interesting history, not necessarily a recommendation.

 

[jkingrph]

That article reminds me of a few things I had forgotten, like the relatively sharp edges catching on a bowling pin or bone and penetrating rather than being deflected. One of the charts shows a 148 gr Remington hollow base wadcutter, which I also remember reading about being loaded hollow base forward with not too good accuracy results, but good shallow wounds at close range ( due to rapid expansion of a very soft alloy), and double ended or base wadcutters which have identical ends to make reloading easier, just grab a bullet and position it for seating in the case. Most wadcutters are seated completely in the case or maybe just a small ring of lead showing above the case mouth. Take a semi wadcutter of the same weight, I think my old Lyman mold in 38 throws a 148 gr bullet, and about 1/2 the length of the bullet is outside the case, leaving more room for powder, although with older 38 special guns that is not a problem because fast burning powders occupy only a small volume of the case capacity, as the cartridge was originally designed for black powder. which fully fills the case. As far as terminal ballistics in flesh, at close range the full wadcutters probably would expand a bit more as they are generally of a much softer alloy, semi wadcutters usually being made of an alloy that is harder, so they can be driven at higher velocities. A non expanding bullet will penetrate much more than an expanding bullet at least of the same weight, creating a deeper wound, although not as large and causing as much bleeding as an expanding type.

Personally not having actually tested all the expanding types, I would rather carry a good solid, ie semi wadcutter in colder months where I would count on it to penetrate more layers of clothing if need be, and a faster expanding type in hotter months where only a very light layer of clothing would be encountered.

If it were practical I would like to carry something throwing a big heavy bullet, but lately I have started with a little Sig 380, so small it fits my pants pocket and is not noticeable other than as a medium size wallet in my pocket. My feeling being that the gun you can have present is better than the one at home or left in the car.

 

[IXL]

^^^When I was a kid, we used to cast bullets for use in our 1911s. They were semi-wadcutters and the RCBS catalog listed them as a "Keith-type" bullet shape.

Edit: Sorry, this was in response to post #420

 

[BlueTrain]

I've loaded 158-grain semi-wadcutters for use in 9mm pistols, although I can't give any good reason for doing so. Those were swaged bullets, however, and I don't know if a cast semi-wadcutter would work. It would probably depend on the gun. For instance, one 9mm pistol, a Star BKM, would happily shoot that load (which was a light load) as well as full metal jackets but no hollow point I ever tried. On the other hand, I used to feel that a 230 grain cast semi-wadcutter was a good all-round bullet for a .45 automatic, although you'd probably need to try several load combinations. Handloads are of course not recommended for self-defense, they say.

I've also loaded those same swaged 158-grain semi-wadcutters for a .38 S&W (".38 regular") using 9mm dies but again, I can't really recommend doing that. But I never had dies for .38 S&W.

Both .38 S&W and .38 Special used to be available with a 200-grain bullet but apparently they didn't set the world on fire.

 

[jkingrph]

I would have thought a 158gr SWC in 9mm would be too long for the case, probably causing buldging, or maybe too long for a magazine, just my thoughts. As for 45 cal I am thinking the only 230 gr bullets are the standard round nose ball configuration, the only SWC I remember were in the 180-185 gr range and 200 gr, again thinking 230 gr SWC would be too long.

 

[BlueTrain]

No but it can't be loaded heavily. In both the .45 and the 9mm one obviously has to keep the overall length in mind. There are also 200 grain semi-wadcutters for the .45. I have no idea what is the most popular.

 

[newsman]

Good old Elmer. I think that man forgot more about shooting than I can remember.

He had a major role to play in the standard set that a defensive found should be at least .40 cal in size.

Here's another batch of great men.

 

[BlueTrain]

I only recognize two of the, Reed (I think) and Cooper. Is that Weaver on the right?

 

[newsman]

Ray Chapman and Elden Carl are on the left. That is Jack weaver on the right. You are correct about Reed and Col. Cooper.

 

[minkowski1552]

I would buy a high-quality nine millimeter handgun and shoot +P or +P+ in it.

 

[BlueTrain]

If I can through in another two-dollar bill, I'd say the ammunition choice makes less difference than you would like. It is easy to assume away the more difficult parts of an armed encounter. It won't be anything like going to the range and shooting at a paper target hanging very still in front of you ten yards away or even twenty-five yards. Although it is said that most shootings occur at very close range, which is a reasonable claim for anything that happens indoor, twenty-five yards outside won't seem like very far at all. There is always the question of when to shoot, too.

In the same way that the essence of hunting is not killing an animal but rather finding it in the first place, the essence of a gunfight is hitting your opponent. Remember also, you are shooting to kill. That is, unless you can shoot like Hopalong Cassidy and can shoot the gun out of the other fellow's hands. Everything from your .25 auto to a .45 auto is for killing people. You might want to think about that for a while.

You can also forget about trying to outdraw the other person. He's not going to even try. He'll have his gun out already. Still, you have to be able to get your own gun into action right away, presumably from under cover.

Anyway, I've had several guns in many different calibers. Too bad I can't have as many as I want. At the moment, though, I want (another) .38 Super, which of course would have to be a Colt. But they make the same gun in 9mm and .45 auto.

 

[Stearmen]

If I can through in another two-dollar bill, I'd say the ammunition choice makes less difference than you would like. It is easy to assume away the more difficult parts of an armed encounter. It won't be anything like going to the range and shooting at a paper target hanging very still in front of you ten yards away or even twenty-five yards. Although it is said that most shootings occur at very close range, which is a reasonable claim for anything that happens indoor, twenty-five yards outside won't seem like very far at all. There is always the question of when to shoot, too.

In the same way that the essence of hunting is not killing an animal but rather finding it in the first place, the essence of a gunfight is hitting your opponent. Remember also, you are shooting to kill. That is, unless you can shoot like Hopalong Cassidy and can shoot the gun out of the other fellow's hands. Everything from your .25 auto to a .45 auto is for killing people. You might want to think about that for a while.

You can also forget about trying to outdraw the other person. He's not going to even try. He'll have his gun out already. Still, you have to be able to get your own gun into action right away, presumably from under cover.

Anyway, I've had several guns in many different calibers. Too bad I can't have as many as I want. At the moment, though, I want (another) .38 Super, which of course would have to be a Colt. But they make the same gun in 9mm and .45 auto.

Actually, there is quite a scandal in the news right now, over a couple writing a book about hiring a high school classmate 30 years ago to kill the woman's father. His weapon, a .22 pistol. .22 pistol was also the preferred weapon of the Mussad!

 

[BlueTrain]

My father died from a .22 gunshot. And around here where I live, animal control officers use a .22 rimfire rifle to kill deer.

 

[Adrianjgeary]

I carry both. A Glock 43 with Federal HST 124gr or a Springfield loaded 1911A1 with Federal HST 230gr. I use standard pressure rounds.

 

[David57]

If I can through in another two-dollar bill, I'd say the ammunition choice makes less difference than you would like. It is easy to assume away the more difficult parts of an armed encounter. It won't be anything like going to the range and shooting at a paper target hanging very still in front of you ten yards away or even twenty-five yards. Although it is said that most shootings occur at very close range, which is a reasonable claim for anything that happens indoor, twenty-five yards outside won't seem like very far at all. There is always the
Anyway, I've had several guns in many different calibers. Too bad I can't have as many as I want. At the moment, though, I want (another) .38 Super, which of course would have to be a Colt. But they make the same gun in 9mm and .45 auto.

If I can through in another two-dollar bill, I'd say the ammunition choice makes less difference than you would like. It is easy to assume away the more difficult parts of an armed encounter. It won't be anything like going to the range and shooting at a paper target hanging very still in front of you ten yards away or even twenty-five yards. Although it is said that most shootings occur at very close range, which is a reasonable claim for anything that happens indoor, twenty-five yards outside won't seem like very far at all. There is always the question of when to shoot, too.

In the same way that the essence of hunting is not killing an animal but rather finding it in the first place, the essence of a gunfight is hitting your opponent. Remember also, you are shooting to kill. That is, unless you can shoot like Hopalong Cassidy and can shoot the gun out of the other fellow's hands. Everything from your .25 auto to a .45 auto is for killing people. You might want to think about that for a while.

You can also forget about trying to outdraw the other person. He's not going to even try. He'll have his gun out already. Still, you have to be able to get your own gun into action right away, presumably from under cover.

Anyway, I've had several guns in many different calibers. Too bad I can't have as many as I want. At the moment, though, I want (another) .38 Super, which of course would have to be a Colt. But they make the same gun in 9mm and .45 auto.

I f you can stand an EAA witness, the 38 super is excellent.

 

[BlueTrain]

Well, actually I think I want a Colt first, then the .38 Super second. Would settle for a .45 automatic if the price difference were enough. I've had Colts, Springfield Armory and even an Auto-Ordnance .45. Haven't had a Remington or Ruger. Pretty sure only a Colt will satisfy. The Colt might actually be easier to locate, too.

 

[green papaya]

Actually, there is quite a scandal in the news right now, over a couple writing a book about hiring a high school classmate 30 years ago to kill the woman's father. His weapon, a .22 pistol. .22 pistol was also the preferred weapon of the Mussad!

Ive seen farmers kill livestock with one shot from a .22 to the head on cows, pigs , a .22 can be very deadly in the right spot , plus makes less noise.

last summer I saw a guy slaughtered a full grown cow and he shot it with a .22 rifle to kill it , I think it only took one shot to the head.

 

[BlueTrain]

The only time I saw a cow, which was a bull, slaughtered, a shotgun was used. It was a literal demonstration of knock down power. Mind you, when I use the expression "knock down," that's all I mean. I don't mean knocked ten feet to the rear. Anyone who argues against the expression knock down power has either never been knocked down or seen a boxing match.

Bullfighters use a sword to kill bulls, who are not placidly standing around in the sun. Of course, the bullfighter knows what he's doing but even so, sometimes the bull is a little better at the game than his opponent.

 

[EngProf]

Well, actually I think I want a Colt first, then the .38 Super second. Would settle for a .45 automatic if the price difference were enough. I've had Colts, Springfield Armory and even an Auto-Ordnance .45. Haven't had a Remington or Ruger. Pretty sure only a Colt will satisfy. The Colt might actually be easier to locate, too.

You might want to consider a SIG P220 as a choice for a .45. I really like 1911 Colts and have several, but the P220 is the most accurate .45 of any that I have.
I shot my smallest group ever with the P220 and have the target tacked up over my desk.

 

[IXL]

................
In the same way that the essence of hunting is not killing an animal but rather finding it in the first place, the essence of a gunfight is hitting your opponent. Remember also, you are shooting to kill. That is, unless you can shoot like Hopalong Cassidy and can shoot the gun out of the other fellow's hands. Everything from your .25 auto to a .45 auto is for killing people. You might want to think about that for a while.
..............

I would suggest it unwise to form a self-protection philosophy based upon a stated intention to "shoot to kill" if one is forced to fire one's firearm. One intends to shoot until "the threat is stopped:" if the person posing the threat dies as a result of the "stopping," the law generally allows for this result as a "justifiable homicide," or from one incident I recall from a few years back, an "excusable homicide."

The difference in articulated intent, having been expressed either pre- or post-incident, might just be the difference between facing a civil lawsuit/criminal charge(s) or not.