What grain of ammo for self defense?

[Guest clutepc]

Admins if this has already been discussed let me know.

I'm curious about the good and bad points on different grains of ammo for self defense.

I've run across a few things online but I know there are always different views on it.

An example of what I'm seeing is I currently carry 165gr hollow points in my M&P, I saw the same ammo for sale this weekend at 135gr labeled as "Low Recoil". I've also seen the same ammo in 180gr. I'm sure bullet penetration is one major part of it but I know there are other variables that matter as well, recoil, velocity, etc...

This is a subject I really don't know anything about so any information would be helpful.

What do LEO's carry or is that something that also varies by the officer?

I just want to get where I don't have to go off of whatever the guy behind the counter wants to sell me.

[musicman]

This here is a biggie, and in the end it's all going to come down to personal preference, what you are most accurate with, and how you feel about it all.

Generally, lighter weight bullets will have greater velocity and lower recoil than heavier bullets of a given caliber. Heavier bullets are generally regarded as better penetrators. Those that pitch their tents in the "light and fast" bullet camp believe that the shock of impact a bullet has is more important than penetration. They think that a "shock wound cavity" of some sort will mash organs to bits and cause instant incapacitation. Others sleep soundly relying on a slower and heavier bullet to dig its way through clothes, skin, and possibly bone to cause damage to vital organs like the heart and central nervous system.

Now of course, look at total energy numbers when picking ammo. Just because a bullets is heavier doesn't mean it has more power. There are all kinds of loads. Also, I think lighter bullets tend to sometimes get up to a higher total kinetic energy due to kinetic energy squaring (i think) as speed doubles. In summer when the cothing of a possible assailant is lighter, I think it's OK to go with lighter bullets as there is generally less of a barrier. In winter, I always go for the heavier loads.

In your case, I think 135gr is REALLY light for .40. I usually carried 180gr Rangers in mine when I had a Sigma, but I'm a big fan of heavy bullets.

[musicman]

OK Glen, if you are really bored and want to do some reading, start at page 94 here: http://books.google.com/books?id=wiiUeexIMLIC&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=marshall+v+fackler+debate&source=web&ots=rvsc8pQ6gl&sig=HlyV9yw8sQ6ptwkK1M_TNN0iIYM&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=8&ct=result#PPA95,M1

it's a WHOLE LOTTA info, but good. Hope that helps!

[Guest Mugster]

From the weights, I guess you have a .40. This might not help much, but its a confusing subject.

Modern wisdom says anything with 12+" of penetration in basically a gello block with as much expansion as possible. IE, I guess they don't want 20"...they want expansion to slow the slug down some. This is some FBI standard from an MD who wrote a couple papers on killing.

This guy here does some testing, sorta based on that standard:

http://www.brassfetcher.com/

or the old site here has more info:

http://www.brassfetcher.com/oldindex.html

Historic wisdom says big as you can get with a flat point. IE, Cooper and Keith would load a 250gr wadcutter/swc up in a .44/.45. It'll punch right through heavy jackets and bone. HP's do tend to deflect and sometimes give erratic performance by shedding their jackets and fragmenting.

Modern Handgun hunters tend to use exposed lead (non hp) rounds, sometimes called a spitzer in a rifle bullet. Some do use hp's. The XTP is popular and seems to work well. So is the Gold Dot.

You should probably pick a middle of the road weight (a premium hp) in .40 and use that, its what all the cool kids do. At the point where you start looking at shot game and handloading your own rounds and doing a little testing of your own, you might choose something else based on experience.

Edited October 21, 2008 by Mugster

[molonlabetn]

Generally, the heaviest projectiles of a proven design which will expand/deform are the better choice. Lighter bullets tend to underpenetrate unless they fail to expand.

[Magiccarpetrides]

I have some 135gr HP Federal Tactical(i think) .40 and they are super accurate with very light recoil. I find I am more accurate with these then the standard FMJ 180gr rounds.

[Guest 2HOW]

Bigger is better, 180 gold dots , cant go wrong, or the new Federal EFMJ . Either is good.

[Guest Ghostrider]

I use 185 grain Remington Golden Sabers = JHP + 45 + mucho deformation - too much cost.

At least, that's my thoughts.

[Guest clutepc]

Thanks for all the responses, that helped simplify something I was probably over thinking.

I think I'll stay with the 165gr to 180gr ammo.

Here is something else I found about some various 9mm ammo.

http://frag.110mb.com/

[Im Neero]

There was a study released recently that said a 164.52 grain .3776 caliber bullet traveling at 1096 fps will consistently penetrate deep enough to reach vital organs of any attacker wearing any clothes without any chance of over-penetration through any material, including drywall, brick, and aluminum foil. The tests indicated that 1-shot stops were achieved 100% of the time when this round was used in a self-defense shooting.

Not really. It's all a trade off. I prefer the 230 grain .45acp.

[CatsEye]

I like how the 165s shoot in my XD. Good bullet weight, good velocity and manageable recoil.

[dunndw]

I like 230 grain in .45ACP, 147 grain in 9mm