The problem with .45acp ball ammo... - Arms Locker
Arms Locker Gun Forum
Go Back   Arms Locker > Gun Forums > Handguns


Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Terry G
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-28-2016, 10:26 AM   #1
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
From: Central Arkansas

Posts: 3,959
The problem with .45acp ball ammo...

Clearly, ball ammo in a 45 auto is worthless, and is so weak that it's totally ignored when something is shot with it.

Cases in point:
Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
mak load wont reliably stop a chuck or a coon, just like .45 ball wont...
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikto View Post
...Cooper, Tappan and Elmer were fos about .45 swc's (much less ball ammo)
Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
...hit the english setter above the hip, and it exited his chest, the 750 fps 230 gr swc had no effect at ALL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
you dont know much about .45 lrn at 750 fps, obviously. it aint worth a hoot and neither is .45 ball.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
...I put a 200 gr lrn .45 thru his chest (note - a woodchuck's chest - john in ar), from 'the side, 4.5 grs of Bullseye, 750 fps. The chuck rolled over, got up again, I shot him again, same effect...
The .45 just aint much, with standard, non expanding bullets.
'Tis a sad thing indeed...




But WAIT!!!

We now finally know WHY these 45-caliber bullets are so ineffective. We've been putting gunpowder in the cases, and the bullet isn't made of soap.:
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikto View Post
I"ve taken 2 rabbits with primer only .45's
one with a wax bullet and one with soap..

With additional research and some go-fund-me campaigns, perhaps we can raise the 45's performance to that of a galosh:
Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
...Killed one chuck with my overshoes.
Imagine... A 45 auto that would be as capable as a rubber overshoe. One can only hope that these advances can be accomplished in our lifetimes.
 
Remove Ads
Old 10-28-2016, 10:50 AM   #2
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2016
From: USA

Posts: 1,430
facts are facts. .22's have stopped quite a few people, too, but that dont mean that they are an effective load, just like .45 ball aint. half of those who have to be shot stop pretty easily, but why lug around a .45 when it does no better than a watch pocket .32 keltec?
 
Old 10-28-2016, 10:53 AM   #3
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2016
From: USA

Posts: 1,430
you can hold the .32 ready in your hand, arms folded, which is a helluva advantage. 200 ft lbs and real expansion of the silvertip, loaded to 1200 fps in the locked breech keltec, is just as "effective" as .45 ball. In the same 1.5 second terry would need (on a good day) to draw a .45 and get a hit at 10 ft, I can start arms folded and get 7 hits with the .32
 
 
Old 10-28-2016, 11:24 AM   #4
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2016
From: USA

Posts: 1,430
if you're going to bother to lug around a .45, and give up that much of a time frame to the enemy, why not have a load in it that's 6-7x as likely to succeed? That is, a 95% stopper, instead of 65-70% probability of a stop. Cause you CAN get that with a .45, if you load it right, as in 70 gr split nose at 2200 fps.
 
Old 10-28-2016, 12:41 PM   #5
Registered User
 Terry G's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2004

Posts: 4,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
you can hold the .32 ready in your hand, arms folded, which is a helluva advantage. 200 ft lbs and real expansion of the silvertip, loaded to 1200 fps in the locked breech keltec, is just as "effective" as .45 ball. In the same 1.5 second terry would need (on a good day) to draw a .45 and get a hit at 10 ft, I can start arms folded and get 7 hits with the .32
You better quit following me around and timing my draw. I won't shoot you with my .45 since it's so ineffective, but I will hit you with my galoshes.
Garand likes this.
 
Old 10-28-2016, 03:30 PM   #6
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
From: Central Arkansas

Posts: 3,959
Point of the story, you non-shooting airbag, is that you completely seriously simultaneously claim that with primer-only loads, you've killed multiple animals, but say that full through-and-through’s with actual bullets using actual gunpowder have no effect.

You talk about cross-chest thru-&-thru’s and full-body-length thru-&-thru’s that have no effect, since the bullet doesn’t expand. Well sorry; if you thru-&-thru a mammal lengthwise with anything — and certainly with something that’s nearly a half-inch in diameter — then yes, it’s going to have an effect. You thru-&-thru a dog with a wire coathanger, and it will have an effect; yet you claim a 45 auto doesn't, unless of course it's loaded with your non-existent wonderloads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
…why lug around a .45 when it does no better than a watch pocket .32 keltec?
True. I’d forgotten that a KelTec P32 can do everything a 1911 can do. My bad…

(That was sarcasm, by the way. Show us what your magic loads can do, airsoft boy.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
you can hold the .32 ready in your hand, arms folded, which is a helluva advantage.
Yes it would be an advantage. But it’d be a bugger to try & walk around like that all day…

For that matter, if I walked around with my arms folded in front of me all day, I could conceal a LOT more gun than a KelTec P32, dolt.

And by the way again John, unlike you I actually OWN a KelTec P32. I quit carrying it after the second time it self-destructed mid-magazine with plain-jane, NON-PLUS-P factory loads. So — unlike you again — I have first-hand experience actually carrying, shooting, and repeatedly repairing a P32. Want to know why I own an LCP? Because the P32 sucked so bad. Want to know how I know that hot-rodding a P32 is a bad idea? Because - unlike you - I've had actual first-hand experience with how pathetic they are.

Since you bring up the topic of P32 vs, 1911, it’s relevant that I also own 1911’s from 6-shot micro-size up to 18-shot full-size; so I have first-hand experience on that subject as well — and it’s from this century even. I’ve also posted results (probably a decade ago now) of making, loading, and doing hard-target penetration tests with extra-light bullets in .45 caliber, hitting more than 2,400 fps (without exceeding book pressures); including posting actual chronograph results, rather than making blind pontifications. Which of the two of us can say that…? (Hint: it isn’t you.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
…In the same 1.5 second terry would need
Godallmighty, can you stop the whole “single white female” fixating you have with Terry and Garand… They hadn’t even been a part of this thread, yet you have to drag your drooling fixations in here with you. How very Freudian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
…In the same 1.5 second terry would need (on a good day) to draw a .45 and get a hit at 10 ft, I can start arms folded and get 7 hits with the .32
So show us, even with airsoft or whatever.

From a flat-footed start, I can jump over a full-size freight car. And I’ve given every bit as much evidence to support my train-leaping claim as you have to support your gun-handling claims.

Show us or shut up.


Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
if you're going to bother to lug around a .45, and give up that much of a time frame to the enemy, why not have a load in it that's 6-7x as likely to succeed? That is, a 95% stopper, instead of 65-70% probability of a stop.
Increasing probability from 65% to 95% is very good. But it’s actually a 46% increase in the probability of a positive outcome; not a 600-700% increase.

By your logic, going from 96% to 97% is a 25% increase in the probability of a positive outcome; and that’s what’s technically known as ‘retarded’. While you were doing whatever you did with your cell mates in the early 80’s, some of us were getting college degrees that included mandatory classes in Probability & Statistics, boolean algebra, trig, etc; you know, things that you probably didn’t pick up in ‘the yard’.

Basically, it boils down to the age-old reality of “extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence”. You perennially make extraordinary claims, and for YEARS have provided zero evidence. Hence, logically speaking, by dint of years of making unbacked claims, your position has been self-nullifying.

Sorry — big words there. Short version: show us or continue to be a laughingstock, airsoft boy.
 
Old 10-28-2016, 04:06 PM   #7
Registered User
 Terry G's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2004

Posts: 4,327
You'll never get a response, at least not a sensible one. Too many big words and abstract ideas. I'm still pondering how he knows how he knows my draw speed.
 
Old 10-28-2016, 04:24 PM   #8
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
From: Central Arkansas

Posts: 3,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry G View Post
I'm still pondering how he knows how he knows my draw speed.
Seriously it really strikes me about like a "single white female" type fixation. If you've never seen that movie, it's about as disturbing as gunkid's thought patterns.
 
Old 10-28-2016, 08:51 PM   #9
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
From: Central Arkansas

Posts: 3,959
Gunchild - even though your actions are more those of Jennifer Jason Leigh than Bridget Fonda in that movie, you simply seem more of a 'Bridget' than a 'Jennifer' to me. So, 'Bridget' it is.

Still waiting for a response, Bridget...
 
Old 10-28-2016, 09:02 PM   #10
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2003
From: nashua nh

Posts: 2,559
I can hide my P64 in my hand,arms crossed. I can do it with larger guns in bad light. People have a tendency to not really focus on me.
Not knocking a flat .32 or .380-I actually like some of the old all steel guns in the caliber,if not the calibers themselves.
For their intended roles,you could do worse. I just don't get how larger calibers that are close to them in age are somehow " ineffective". I just figure that whatever you can bring to the engagement FIRST will give you a better chance.
If I carry it,I shoot it regularly. And I won't carry what I can't hit with,or has reliability issues.
I DO like that .32 NAA,but preferred it in the Makarov with the conversion barrel. THOSE ballistics were impressive,considering the small parent case,and what it accomplished in an extra 2 inches of barrel length.
 
Old 10-31-2016, 08:20 PM   #11
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2016
From: USA

Posts: 1,430
the load's age or commonality or reliablity of function are not the issue. It's the lack of effect of common loads in nearly all handgun calibers that is the issue. This fact is widely known by many people. you dont care about it, cause you've gotten lucky a few times (or so you claim). Nobody who knows jack shyte claims that a .38 lrn is the same as a 357 jhp in effect. Well, .45 ball, and 230 gr jhp's don't expand, and they're not worth a hoot. There ARE loads that correct that problem. if you're ok with having wussy loads, no skin of my neck. But dont try to claim that they are any more effective than a .22lr rifle, cause they aint.

Last edited by justme; 10-31-2016 at 09:01 PM.
 
Old 10-31-2016, 08:55 PM   #12
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
From: Central Arkansas

Posts: 3,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
the load's age or commonality or reliablity of function are not the issue. It's the lack of effect of common loads in nearly all calibers.
That's the core of my opening post - the silliness of the contention that "common loads in nearly all calibers" lack any effect. I've not shot as many people's pets as you claim to have done, but growing up on a rural farm in the 60's and 70's, and living in Arkansas for over 23 years now (since early 1993), I've shot a whole bunch of critters just in normal, day to day rural life. The only truly, surprisingly, disappointing performance I've had by a bullet was a slow, heavy 147 grain 9mm (old federal hi-shok) on a feral dog probably 10-11 years ago. One shot in its breadbasket still stopped it, but it was just weird - the dog sat down, looked at me for 10-15 seconds (which is a long time in those situations), and then finally laid down and expired.

No, I don't shot dogs just to test bullets as you've said you used to do. This dog had killed two of our cats, and our cats are what keep the snakes, moles, scorpions and other things at bay; so he had to be put down. Just a sad reality when you live in the country.

Short version; other than that one incident, "normal" bullets have done just fine over decades of use. If you put a decently-placed bullet with even a moderate level of power thru a mammal's vitals, they tend to notice. That's my entire contention here.

Last edited by John in AR; 10-31-2016 at 09:01 PM.
 
Old 10-31-2016, 09:46 PM   #13
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
From: Central Arkansas

Posts: 3,959
So rather than reply to my post, you edit yours. How cowardly of you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by justme View Post
... Nobody who knows jack shyte claims that a .38 lrn is the same as a 357 jhp in effect.
This wasn't part of your original post, and is nothing but attempted deflection from your earlier, blanket claim that "common loads lack effect". No, a .38 round-nose isn't the same as a magnum hollow point; just as a 32acp is not the same as a 1911 45acp. It's very telling though, hat the load you choose to make your point (.357 jhp) frankly makes MY point. It's one of the most "common loads" to be encountered on store shelves; you know, one of those "common loads" that you earlier claimed have no effect.

So, do you still maintain that "common loads lack effect"; yes or no..?
 
Reply

  Arms Locker > Gun Forums > Handguns


Thread Tools
Display Modes






Powered by vBulletin 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 2003 - 2011 Arms Locker. All rights reserved.