Carry ammunition.....45ACP....

[Mike D]

PMC Starfire 230 HP always feed well for me. Bought a bulk load of it several years ago, so until it goes, that's what I carry. On the subject of 230/ball, no one likes it for carry, but it worked pretty darn good back when uncle Sam way buying. Just saying, in a pinch, I'd still use it.

 

[fatbaldguy]

On the subject of 230/ball, no one likes it for carry, but it worked pretty darn good back when uncle Sam way buying. Just saying, in a pinch, I'd still use it.

When/if SHTF it'd work just fine.

 

[Michael Miedzianowski]

I think all of the new ammunition has come a long way and it is really hard to pin down just one .

 

[awmp]

Federal HST 230gr but I'm trying Remington Black Belt 185grn +P (showing promise)

 

[Bender]

........On the subject of 230/ball, no one likes it for carry, but it worked pretty darn good back when uncle Sam way buying. Just saying, in a pinch, I'd still use it.

Not many folks were shooting the enemy with a 1911. Ball ammo was used due to the Geneva Convention agreements. It wasn't used because it was a better ammunition.

It would be foolish to not use an ammunition that is a proven man stopper. There have been many reports of shootings with ball ammunition simply not stopping the perpetrator. Then there is the potential liability of pass throughs and the innocent bystanders.

 

[Michael Miedzianowski]

ALL ammunition will kill it isn't so much the bullet as much as the placement of that shot .

 

[Bender]

ALL ammunition will kill it isn't so much the bullet as much as the placement of that shot .

Well this is a true statement, there's ammunition available that makes a larger would channel than FMJ. Why limit yourself? Seems foolish to not use the best ammunition available.

 

[Bender]

Gen Julian Hatcher died in the early sixties, his last contribution to small arms was in the early fifties. Bullet development has come a long way since then. Using this analogy is like comparing the performance of a '49 Ford to an '18 GT350.

Use what you care to, but your thought process is flawed

 

[1911U004]

In addition firearms over .50 cal are considered destructive devices (with the exception of shotguns and black powder) and subject to regulation

 

[Bender]

Mike,

The information you have provided us flawed. Flawed both in history and modern firearms. I've owned a shiOt load of 1911s. I've never had a hollow point jam in a pistol I carried.

My point is, you keep shoveling this failure to feed line. It's old news, nearly every quality pistol will reliably feed at least one of the dozens of hollow point ammunition available.

Passing of the idea that FMJ is the best ammo to use is simply foolish. It's proven to not expand as a JHP will, it's proven to, quite often, pass through the body not expanding at all.

Back in the General's day, the 1899 Hague Declaration disallowed the use of expanding ammunition. The Hague Declaration specifically prohibited the use of the British dumdum bullet, the earliest design of what we know now as a hollow point bullet. THAT is the reason the military used ball ammunition. The 230gr, 45 ACP was adopted by the Army as a more effective cartridge than the 38 Long Colt.

 

[Bender]

With that,......I'm done with the debate

 

[SLAM37]

One thing not mentioned enough in this thread is the idea of overpenetration with any ball ammunition, especially 230gr ball. Lot's of literature out there about 230gr ball over-penetrating humans in real life -- sometimes hitting innocents. From a liability and ethical perspective, this should be a consideration for its use in defensive purposes as well.

IMO, if your pistol won't feed hollowpoints reliably, you should get it worked on, or carry a different pistol -- 1911 or otherwise.

Here is an example of one such article from a reputable source:
https://gundigest.com/gear-ammo/reloading/massad-ayoob-the-dangers-of-over-penetrating-bullets

I also recommend this forum for folks interested in "stopping power", such as it is for a pistol: http://www.stoppingpower.net/forum/
I was reading articles from Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow before the internet existed ... things have changed and Mr. Marshall keeps the forum full of state of the art information.

 

[Monadh]

Did I miss a good argument?

That's OK, I don't worry about 185 gr this or 230 gr that. I carry this in the 12,250 gr size...

It's not much on range, but it hits like a brick. A very sharp brick.

 

[Bender]

Nice,......love a good camp axe

 

[Monadh]

Actually, I throw that in competition. It is a serious good time.

 

[Bender]

Mad,....not even close to mad Mike.

My points were made, they are rather clear. They are backed by many studies and shooting evaluations over the last two or three decades.

I guess we need to agree to disagree.

 

[Bender]

You win, I quit.

 

[Bender]

Who said game.......I was thinking debate/argument.

Either way.......it's pointless.

You win.

 

[Monadh]

 

[Bender]

meh.......