The Guns and Ammo Thread

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by Kalessin, May 4, 2006.

  1. 10mmCurator

    10mmCurator Mildly Dipped

    528
    Jan 23, 2007
    Mmmmm finally had a chance to check out my new Glock. It shoots sweet and I can fire rather quickly without spreading too much. The main problem I have with 9mm is that they don't do enough damage. One of my Girlfriend's cousin who was a cop was killed by a 365lb asshole. The asshole was hit more than 10 times but was still able to beat my GF's cousin to death with his bare hands. Backup arrived before the asshole could get away they had to shotgun him twice to finally bring him down. Turns out the 9mm slugs hit only fat. The asshole was like 5'5" and 365 lbs so he was very well protected by his own fat.
     
  2. SuAside

    SuAside Testament to the ghoul lifespan
    Admin

    May 27, 2004
    euhm, that's a little hard to believe. 9mm are heavy penetrators 10mmCurator. the wound canal might not be as broad as the .45 but they go deeper.

    by your own explanation, he'd still have been fucked if the cop had had a .45, it would also only have penetrated fat.

    i cant really believe that's what happened. not unless the cop was using special low penetration home defense rounds.

    PS: nearly 80% of all european cops use 9mm as standard sidearm and all NATO militaries use it as a default as well.
     
  3. 10mmCurator

    10mmCurator Mildly Dipped

    528
    Jan 23, 2007
    Well the perp was hopped up on PCP also most of the rounds hit him from 15 ft away.

    EDIT: just talked to my GF's cousin's former partner... He told me that the rounds they were using were indeed low penatrator dum-dum rounds... local PD had a policy to bring in suspects alive at almost all costs. But after losing eight cops in one year they changed that policy and now use better rounds.
     
  4. DammitBoy

    DammitBoy Carbon Dated and Proud

    Feb 23, 2006
    There is sooooo much lying and bullshit going on in this thread.

    Let me get my hipwaders out... :roll:
     
  5. Dauthi

    Dauthi First time out of the vault

    16
    Mar 13, 2007
    Hey guys I have been browsing this thread for awhile and have finally decided to buy a handgun. I have done some research and I am planning on getting a rimfire .22 Ruger pistol. I am buying the gun to just go plinking with etc. My question is,being a complete handgun novice...should I make the jump and maybe buy a 9mm or something first or should I stick with the plan to start at the .22 and then eventually get more guns from there?!? Cares, comments,concerns all appreciated thanks!
     
  6. Ah-Teen

    Ah-Teen Vault Senior Citizen
    Orderite

    Jun 21, 2007
    my suggestion, don't buy a ruger. But thats just my biased opinion based on a 22 revolver I shot and a 45 auto that I curse to this day. Both rugers. I suggest you buy what you are comfortable shooting. Probably a good idea to start with a 22 first if you haven't shot alot of handguns before.
     
  7. SuAside

    SuAside Testament to the ghoul lifespan
    Admin

    May 27, 2004
    .22 is advised to learn to shoot, as the low recoil allows you to spot errors in your handling much easier than with lets say a 9mm.

    but before you make the jump, go to a gunclub, talk to people, try out a few guns.

    as for 9mm or not... well, 9mm is plentifull, but personally .45 has much more enjoyable recoil. 9mm has a certain 'sharpness' to it. it's more than managable of course, but you'll likely get a better sensation out of a .45

    also, when people buy their first guns, a lot decide to get a normal pistol (9mm, .45, whatever) and a .22 convertion kit for it. i dont quite like that (although, i once was of the same mindset). the pro is being able to train in .22 with the exact same ergonomics and safeties etc. the negative would be that more often than not, for the price of the conversion kit you can get a whole new slightly used mint condition second hand .22

    imo you're better off with seperate guns. if there is a problem with one and it needs to be repaired, at least then you wont be without your pistol(s) for a month...
     
  8. Seeks

    Seeks First time out of the vault

    38
    Jul 28, 2007
    Quite a lot of misinformation floating around here. You can thank hollywood and a press that answers to nobody for that, I guess.

    On topic, though... my main guns:

    Glock 30 - Small 10-shot .45, goes with me everywhere. I love it... also takes the G21's 13-shot mags or the 25-round (I think, give or a take a few) extended capacity mag. Gotta love Glocks and their magazine compatibility.

    Glock 20 - Full-sized 10mm. Most would agree that it's the best 10mm pistol ever made, probably the only one outside of a Witness that isn't known for having problems. And you don't need new springs for the "real" loads, either.




    Side note:

    ---------

    I must disagree with the theory that the 10mm is "too penetrative." The 165gr GoldDot expands to just over an inch in diameter after about 15.5 inches of penetration, which is optimal for humans. If it exits their body, so much the better... two holes are better than one.

    All this talk about "energy transfer" is, largely, bullshit. It's only semi-relevant with high-powered rifles, where the speed of the projectile turns the temporary crush cavity of the wound caused into a permanent wound channel. I can't recall the ballistics off the top of my head, but I think there are two "levels" or "steps" of this that are reached at certain velocities. I can't recall what they are, but they're pretty damn fast... we're talking around 3000fps (or so) and 4000fps (again, not sure on this) when the projectile hits the target.

    Anyway, none of this has anything to do with "energy transfer." Energy, measured in foot-pounds or joules, is just a handy way of gauging (sp?) the "overall effectiveness" of a round.

    An example of this is comparing the GoldDot 165gr noted above to a 70gr LeMas (not sure about the name) round.

    165gr@1325 = 643 ft-lbs
    70gr@2400 = 895 ft-lbs.

    The LeMas round is, mostly, just a "trick" round to show how fast you can get a 10mm round to go. I.e., largely worthless. Energy does not equal "killing power."

    For handguns, "energy" is completely irrelevant. The only things that matter in stopping a threat are, in this order, shot placement, penetration, and wound cavity. Obviously, there are extremes and exceptions, so let's not pull any "so why doesn't everyone use .22s" shit.

    If you can't hit the brain/CNS, you have to destroy important organs and make them bleed to death, or much more common, shoot them and hope they go into shock (this is pretty common actually, and probably the leading cause of death).

    Of course, save a CNS shot, you can't rely on them going into shock, so you have to get them to bleed out. The point of this isn't just to kill, it's to stop (for which killing is usually the best and most reliable method, and has the benefit of being permanent as well), so the faster they bleed out and don't have the oxygen available to their muscles with which to attack you, the better.

    And thus, two holes are better than one. Essentially, they "drain" quicker.

    Plus, it's important to remember that while something might penetrate "too much" as far as people are concerned, there are other things out there to worry about. Windshields, car doors, and of course, animals. 10mm, in its full-power loads, is just shy of .41 Magnum "power," and suited quite well for most game in North America, save Brown/Grizzly bears, Polar bears and maybe Moose.

    In other words, there's nothing the .357 magnum can do that the 10mm can't do better.

    Also, since I'm already rambling, I'll go ahead and add a couple other things: One, the .45ACP isn't that much better than the 9mm. Sure, it IS better, but the difference isn't what you can call staggering, especially if you take into account premium hollowpoints.

    In fact, the difference in wound cavities is pretty negligible when comparing all the common handgun rounds. Which is why shot placement and penetration are more important.

    That being said, I'm a .45/10mm fanboy myself and will take any full-sized .45 over a likewise-sized 9mm if given the choice. I just feel more comfortable with it.

    As well, the 5.56 is a perfectly acceptable round, if it's being used correctly. You can't use a M855 in a 1:10 (or is it 1:12?) barrel and expect it to perform properly. In fact, you can't use armor-piercing rounds on humans and expect it to perform like normal 5.56 ammunition, what with its wonderful fragmentation mechanism.

    ------

    End side note. Continuing:

    S&W Sigma, SW40VE - A nice gun, doesn't deserve the shitty rep it has. Mine works flawlessly, and for the money, it's a pretty good deal.

    Mossberg 590 - I saw someone else has one of these in this thread. 8 (or nine, if you put one in the chamber) shots of #000 goodness, nothing wrong with that.

    And, just recently, I acquired a Mosin Nagant M91/30. I can't shoot it for shit, but it's a nice gun.
     
  9. DammitBoy

    DammitBoy Carbon Dated and Proud

    Feb 23, 2006
    Stick with the plan and buy a Ruger. I own 6 Rugers and have owned a dozen others in the past - they are incredibly well built and shoot very nicely. They are the best guns on the market for the money invested.

    Anybody who says different is a moron who is completely full of shit and obviously lying.

    I'd start out with a used Ruger Mark II in semi-auto - you can get one with a heavy target barrel for around $250, possibly less at a gunshow....
     
  10. Dauthi

    Dauthi First time out of the vault

    16
    Mar 13, 2007
    Thanks for the fast replies everyone! For now I am gonna do a little more research but my heart is mostly set on the Ruger,unless someone can sway me to buy a .45 and get a .22 mod but like Suaside said there could be some money concerns.
     
  11. Seeks

    Seeks First time out of the vault

    38
    Jul 28, 2007
    Yeah, I wouldn't go the 1911/.22 mod route if I were you. Just too damned expensive, and the .22 mod costs, in and of itself, about the same price as a Ruger MKII.

    I've got mixed feelings on the Ruger... I owned a MKII, and honestly, it was pretty crappy. Jammed every other shot. I was in a marksmanship class which used them, and though they were remarkably more reliable, they definitely weren't error-free, either.

    Though personally, I'm pretty sure that A) I got a lemon, B) The drill instructor cleaned those guns maybe once a year (he'd tell stories of the lead "sleeves" he'd push out after soaking them in solvent), and C) .22s semi-auto pistols are never going to be as reliable as "actual" calibers, anyway. They're prone to fucking up a little, which is another reason they're a great caliber to learn on... never know when you'll need to clear a jam or whatever.

    Course, there are also less expensive .22s out there. The Walther is actually pretty cool.
     
  12. DammitBoy

    DammitBoy Carbon Dated and Proud

    Feb 23, 2006
    I've never had a jam-up with any gun I've owned - maybe it's becasue I'm a stickler for cleaning after every shooting?

    Break-free is the shit, by the way, as far as cleaners go...
     
  13. SuAside

    SuAside Testament to the ghoul lifespan
    Admin

    May 27, 2004
    be default, rimfire is less reliable than centerfire Dammitboy, i think that's what he meant.
     
  14. DammitBoy

    DammitBoy Carbon Dated and Proud

    Feb 23, 2006
    That's just silly.
     
  15. retro

    retro First time out of the vault

    37
    Jul 3, 2007
    id recommend get a ruger single six, its more fun than an auto. that was my first gun, very satisfying to plink with..
     
  16. DammitBoy

    DammitBoy Carbon Dated and Proud

    Feb 23, 2006
    I love my Ruger single-six as much as all of my Blackhawks - they are great guns, especially considering the price. They handle well, shoot like a dream, are perfectly balanced and well made.

    But, if you want to learn the basics of semi-auto shooting, the Mark II is the ticket...
     
  17. myzko

    myzko It Wandered In From the Wastes

    194
    Jul 5, 2007
    Well you see sometimes you only want to hurt them, and some rounds are made so that they stay inside the body and don't fly thru and hit some1 else :crazy:
     
  18. [PCE]el_Prez

    [PCE]el_Prez Vault Fossil

    Apr 25, 2003
    Try mace or a taser (or a fist)

    I'd say that rounds that stay inside the body are more lethal.
     
  19. Seeks

    Seeks First time out of the vault

    38
    Jul 28, 2007
    How?

    Unless the wounding mechanism is fragmentation, more bleeding is better than less bleeding. Thus, two holds = better than one.

    The only exceptions I can think of are when a bullet is a combination of too heavy and too fast to perform properly (i.e., expands), as would be the case in, say, a FMJ .44mag or 10mm. Even then, that's a maybe.

    Another sort-of exception is when fragmentation is the wounding mechanism, where flying through a target is the same as "icepicking" its way through. In other words, leaving a tiny hole with minimal upset, save for any "tumbling."


    Note on tumbling: It's only going to maybe "tumble" once, as the bullet is simply returning to its "natural" position (heaviest part of the bullet forward, usually the base) once the gyroscopic stabilization imparted by the rifling is no longer a factor... such as when it enters into denser medium (flesh, water, etc.). Bullets do not "buzz-saw" their way through flesh.


    Edit: Well, I suppose if the rounds were so inefficient that the best way to kill someone was to give them a nasty infection or cause a need for amputation... then "staying in" would be a good way to go. Surgery's a bitch.
     
  20. [PCE]el_Prez

    [PCE]el_Prez Vault Fossil

    Apr 25, 2003
    Which 'less lethal' rounds are you trying to advocate? Is there any argument for a less lethal pistol round that isn't trumped by using a less than lethal force weapon (taser, mace, bean bag round, etc.)?

    I've already said that my personal preference in pistol rounds are the .45 ACP (thats what my 1911 takes last time i checked). The have great stopping power and do not have a tendency to over penetrate.

    The blood doesn't have to hit the ground in order for you to be bleeding. If you have a pistol round lodge in your body and only one hole on the outside - trust me, your bleeding pretty badly - just internally.