Where is the chart?
found this and thought it was pretty cool.Uses data from lab and real world shootings.Just pick caliber and bullet weight and it shows top performers.
Note that you can click on any load on the chart, and get even more information.
I have to note that it is not a great idea to merely choose your ammunition from this sort of chart, and feel satisfied that you have done your part.
You still have to practice, practice, practice.
Near-misses by the most powerful cartridge in the world won't save your bacon, against a .22 rimfire in the hands of a practiced, competent shooter.
n0o,I agree with you but it should help a new shooter to pick a quality SD round or answer questions some may have.
Yeah, I know.
I don't really mean to spoil the party.
But I'm just an old fussbudget, and I tend to harp on the practice angle, because I've known all too many young shooters who thought that all they had to do was pick a powerful cartridge, and the rest would come "naturally" and "automatically."
You know how we old people are.
And did I mention that I'm old and fussy?
Oh by all means I know about the cranky old man,I is one.I am a firm believer in practice and question everything.I hate seeing younguns spend a fortune on the latest and greatest handgun then not use the same mindset when purchasing SD ammo.In ammo,the recurring theme seems to be cheap.SD ammo is the last place you should scrimp on.Heck,when I qualified the range officer made a comment about me being serious cause I was using HP.The round I practice with is pretty cheap but has the same weight and characteristics as my primary round.
I hate to see younguns buy a handgun and not do practical training and think that just owning it will be enough.We old guys know there is a whole lot more to it besides just buying one and never really are prepared for an ugly situation.
I would question any results from Marshall & Snow. There research is very questionable.
Since in today's Liberal climate, nobody would sanction tests such as those run by Thompson and LaGarde, this is the best information we have.
Please suggest a better source, and also explain why you make the recommendation.
Doesn't include any data for Hornady or Cor-Bon, both of which I prefer as my defense loads as personally tested in .380, .45 and 9mm against most on the list.
If you want "all" data just have to do a lot of research independent of manufacturers claims, then shoot, shoot, shoot to find what you (and your gun(s)) like
The reason is most new rounds werent even developed.From the reading Ive done all of the top theories are flawed especially some like the FBI methodology which factors in such as wound efficiency and wound value which are based on assumptions.At least Sanow and Marshall used real world cases.The Thompson-Lagarde was one of the worst and was considered top stuff.In 72 the NIJ funded the Relative Incapacitation Index and it was all computer generated.
And sir what test medium do you use?I carry hornady 9x18 XTP.I did gel test,wet phone book test,fired through things like plywood,plasterboard and car doors before I was satisfied.I posted that as a starting point for your own testin.This helps to weed out undesirable rounds and by no means is it meant to just take someones word.Manufacturers are the worlds worst about lying.They have been known to fudge on data provided to federal agencies for a contract.Think they wont lie to you or me?
I have been looking at a lot of different theories and all are flawed in some way-some more than others.Is the truth out there?Yes but ya gotta dig deep to find it.And if you look at all most still come with the same basic results.Is there a majic bullet?NO.The same basic principle still is fire into subjects vital area until the aggression is stopped.Whether it is 1 or 25 rounds.I see some who still daily carry a round that the FBI used in the miami-FBI shootout.Is it anemic-not at all.The problem with that scenario was poor tactics and poor marksmanship.
To VAMarine,I been thinking about what you said about thier theories and would love to hear what your opinion is.PM me or public,dont matter.
I test on wet newspaper and 5/8 plywood @ 15 yards for no other reason than that's what I started on years ago when I was too poor/cheap for anything else and into a 55 gal drum of water from 3 feet on a stepladder to make sure I'm perpendicular to the water surface.
The wet newspaper tests penetration and expansion.
The plywood (backed by wet newspaper) test is primarily for penetration of a hard surface, and the water test is to check expansion/deformation.
Since I test every round the same way, the same number of shots, and measure the same things, I'm pretty confident that I can judge what I like for the reasons I like.
It's not particularly scientific, no chronograph, no high speed camera, but I'm confident in my choices, especially since I do research what the pros are saying and am willing to use their numbers also.
I used to carry Hydra-shok changed to Black Talon, changed to Golden Saber, now carry Hornady Critical Defense in the gun with a spare mag of CorBon.
.380 Hornady 90 grain Critical Defense loaded, 80 grain CorBon DPX spare
9 mm Hornady 115 grain FTX Critical Defense loaded, CorBon +P 90 grain spare
.45 Hornady 185 grain FTX Critical Defense loaded, CorBon +P 230 grain spare
It's not a particularly good idea to mix rounds as I do (in fact I wouldn't recommend it), but I'm confident with the loads I've chosen and practice often enough to know what to expect with each of my choices.
This is what I meant the chart for.To use as a starting point.I like you firmly believe in my own results.It doesnt mean it is the final say but a start in the right direction.Have you tried the silver bear.It too is nickel plated and performs really close to the hornady critical defense and is alot cheaper.20 for 50 rounds.It feeds in my cz-82 flawlessly and is my backup and range round.
The first link in many ways reenforces what I have felt for a while. An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power
This one is very informative on terminal ballistics. If you can work your way through it, there is a lot of information. Terminal Ballistics
Now for the last one. FirearmsTactical.com - Web Site Index and Navigation Center
This is where there are a number of reviews of Marshall and Sanow along with a variety of wound information. You may or may not agree with them, but the more information and knowledge you can gain will help in deciding what will work for you.
Both of you are very welcome. Normally I do not post in discussions like this, but this one seemed to be one where everyone was respectful and looking for verifiable information. We all have our own preconceived ideas. In the past few decades, I have tried to either prove or disprove my ideas so that hopefully I can make better decisions regarding my family's safety. It has also helped actually seeing a number (lots) of gsw injuries by having worked in trauma 1 hospitals for the past 20 plus years. At my age, I find it hard to deal with self proclaimed experts and prefer to just stay out of it. If there are facts that are verifiable or able to be researched, I love those discussions and am able to make more informed decisions.
I do agree with Steve being old and fussy myself. Nothing will work better than practice, practice, practice. Power does not trump skill and the ability to put the round where it will do the most good.
I agree with Steve as well and never claimed anything different.I am a firm believer in questioning everything.I dont have 100%faith in charts or articles but some good can be learned from all.And all theories say the same basic rule of putting rounds into a vital area in quanity enough to stop aggression.LEOS have one of the worst records of missed shots.Look at the North Hollywood shootout.Hundreds of officers and no one put rounds into thier heads.They didnt even kill them.One commited suicide and the other bled to death after the SWAT officers attempted the takedown.This is unexcusable in my books.