I have always been intrigued with "short-barreled hand cannons" for concealable self-defense. In my early years as a retail pharmacist, I carried snub-nosed magnums and eventually progressed to auto-pistols.
I lusted for a Semmerling LM-4 ("for those who truly believe their lives are in danger") but life had other priorities for me.
Now with a reasonable amount of income for 'luxuries', I am seriously looking at the S&W Shield in .45acp, but am still plagued by the controversies of 'effective' defensive ammunition for short-barreled weapons (SBW).
I have read numerous articles praising ammunition specifically-designed for SBW, but critical analysis of the ballistics are showing inconsistences in stopping power as a consequence of the reduced velocities out of 3 - 3.5" barreled pistols.
I did see an interesting article out of the Cheaper than Dirt's blog, "The Shooter's Log" by Bob Campbell.
He summarized his findings by saying, "The bottom line is to choose a load that is reliable and burns clean. If recoil is excessive and muzzle signature is anything more than a modest orange glow, consider another choice. Marksmanship is the most important single element of wound ballistics and prior training the single most important factor in surviving a critical incident."
That having been said, I'm wondering if I am 'chasing windmills' and should just load my new Shield .45 with 230gr ball ammo and practice, practice, practice. I,m shying away from +P ammo as the Shield isn't really built for a steady diet of this type of round and not convinced it is the best choice.
Anyone have any opposing comments to this, I'd be curious to read your comments, but please back up your comments with article citings and not just 'something you heard happen from a 3-rd party source."
Thanks, and 'keep yer powder dry',
Echo47