smoothshooter
Member
I think you might be " impressed " if you were ever shot with one.
Remington FBI Load .38 Spl+p LHP real world Performance in Snub
- Thread starter Doug.38PR
- Start date
I think you might be " impressed " if you were ever shot with one.
The only problem with the micro 9's is reliability, which the revolver owns.
smoothshooter
Member
People shouldn't get hung up on the " one-shot stops " statistics too much.
Even those statistics can be misleading, because many times the person being shot is hit more than once. The more hits there are, the less the caliber and load matters.
Some say that anyone worth shooting once is worth shooting twice, at least ( if possible ). While that could potentially be problematic later in court in a few instances, overall I can't fault that logic.
The important thing is, pick a good, reliable gun and load that is fun, or at least not too unpleasant to practice with, that is not too big or heavy to carry, do QUALITY practice as often as you can, get a good non-nylon holster or two, and go on about your business.
Don't discount the effectiveness of .38 hollow-based full wadcutters, or even the little .22 LR either.
ANY GUN IS BETTER THAN NO GUN. We all know of people who were raped, assaulted, and murdered because they did not have a gun.
Pretty rare to hear about someone who was assaulted and killed because the gun or caliber they used to defend themselves was too small.
Even those statistics can be misleading, because many times the person being shot is hit more than once. The more hits there are, the less the caliber and load matters.
Some say that anyone worth shooting once is worth shooting twice, at least ( if possible ). While that could potentially be problematic later in court in a few instances, overall I can't fault that logic.
The important thing is, pick a good, reliable gun and load that is fun, or at least not too unpleasant to practice with, that is not too big or heavy to carry, do QUALITY practice as often as you can, get a good non-nylon holster or two, and go on about your business.
Don't discount the effectiveness of .38 hollow-based full wadcutters, or even the little .22 LR either.
ANY GUN IS BETTER THAN NO GUN. We all know of people who were raped, assaulted, and murdered because they did not have a gun.
Pretty rare to hear about someone who was assaulted and killed because the gun or caliber they used to defend themselves was too small.
Last edited:
Let's stop this train before it derails any further. There is a distinct difference between a compact 9mm and micro 9mm.
The Micro 9 and Sig 938 are just that - micro 9mm pistols. I do not like the micro 9mms because even if they run properly, (and some do just fine with some loads) they are hard to shoot well and the recoil is objectionable enough that no one shoots them enough to get good enough with them to be any mire effective than a J-frame.
The Micro 9 is just a wee bit longer than the Kimber Micro in .380 and below you can see the difference between a Kimber Micro and a "compact" 9mm- a CY 2075 RAMI, a double stack, 10+1 round 9mm Para pistol:
The "compact" sized CZ 2075 is as small as I go with a 9mm pistol, as it is readily concealable but still large enough and heavy enough to be comfortable to shoot, shoot accurately and shoot at speed with a self defense load.
one eye joe
US Veteran
GREAT ADVICE FROM A GUY THAT'S BEEN THERE ! ! !
THANKS FOR YOUR YEARS OF SERVICE, ON THE THIN BLUE LINE, Old cop.....
Yeh didnt say anything about Micro,, I said 9's about the same size and weight of the typical J frame,, Guns like Glock 26, Ruger LCpS Pro,, all have about a 3.5 barrel, and a grip large enough to get your hole hand on.
I mean Snubby has some advantages, simplicity and ability to cycle in a jacket pocket,,, which could be a good thing.
But "fire power" any way u measure it isnt one of them.
Higher recoil, less energy, less rounds.
I see these snubby ammo debates, like debating whats the best turbo for a yugo,,, umm While u can debate whats adequate, all you want I think most would agree, if X size weight can do Y,,, heavier weight or faster velocity, or both can do Y better.
I really think a 357 starts to shine at 3".
Speaking of that and the one shot stop data.
Cause and effect. Just because B follows A, doesnt mean A caused B.
Just look at these threads. Probably 90% on here buy 357,,, maybe put a round or two down range then carry or shoot 38.
I highly suspect the 357 125 grs have a high success rate at least partially from the type of people most likely to carry such ammo.
They probably are just more consistent more proficient shooters.
For me No 38 snub nose ammo meets my minimum needs.
I am a big strong guy. I dont go to bars or bad neighborhoods or malls at night. I maintain situational awareness, I carry pepper spray. The likely hood of anyone unarmed tangling with me are probably slime to none. The likely hood of me using deadly force against anyone unarmed is even less than slim to none..
Sorry but the balistics of a 1,87 38 just aint gonna cut it for me,, Especially when I can carry the same size platform and be firing 147's at 1000 fps and thats just when i am buy my self and only feel the need to pocket carry. Otherwise I move up to a LWT Cdr 45 or 3" 357.
Now for a woman, or other less physical person or less into guns I think a small 38 is awsome.
They are more likely to be attacked by someone unarmed, the simplicity is great.. Face it alot of folks are intimidated by autos. Nothing wrong with that. And As I said before. Best thing IMO about a 38 is you can put your hand on the gun in your pocket and no one the wiser. If the case may be.
I mean Snubby has some advantages, simplicity and ability to cycle in a jacket pocket,,, which could be a good thing.
But "fire power" any way u measure it isnt one of them.
Higher recoil, less energy, less rounds.
I see these snubby ammo debates, like debating whats the best turbo for a yugo,,, umm While u can debate whats adequate, all you want I think most would agree, if X size weight can do Y,,, heavier weight or faster velocity, or both can do Y better.
I really think a 357 starts to shine at 3".
Speaking of that and the one shot stop data.
Cause and effect. Just because B follows A, doesnt mean A caused B.
Just look at these threads. Probably 90% on here buy 357,,, maybe put a round or two down range then carry or shoot 38.
I highly suspect the 357 125 grs have a high success rate at least partially from the type of people most likely to carry such ammo.
They probably are just more consistent more proficient shooters.
For me No 38 snub nose ammo meets my minimum needs.
I am a big strong guy. I dont go to bars or bad neighborhoods or malls at night. I maintain situational awareness, I carry pepper spray. The likely hood of anyone unarmed tangling with me are probably slime to none. The likely hood of me using deadly force against anyone unarmed is even less than slim to none..
Sorry but the balistics of a 1,87 38 just aint gonna cut it for me,, Especially when I can carry the same size platform and be firing 147's at 1000 fps and thats just when i am buy my self and only feel the need to pocket carry. Otherwise I move up to a LWT Cdr 45 or 3" 357.
Now for a woman, or other less physical person or less into guns I think a small 38 is awsome.
They are more likely to be attacked by someone unarmed, the simplicity is great.. Face it alot of folks are intimidated by autos. Nothing wrong with that. And As I said before. Best thing IMO about a 38 is you can put your hand on the gun in your pocket and no one the wiser. If the case may be.
I agree. I don't know how they can be taken seriously when there are so many variables involved. Those statistics are far from scientific.
As to women being intimidated by auto loaders I gave both of our grown daughters a .22 revolver. One got a Model 317 snub she keeps in her hairstyling shop. Our other girl got a Ruger .22 all steel snub b/c she's more recoil sensitive, even with a twenty-two.
This debate...
...will still be going strong generations in the future, or at least until a Death Ray is widely used. Unfortunately, I have a genetic condition that makes me extremely sensitive to loud noises. That's a terrible affliction for one who loves guns and shooting like I do.
NOW, for the Double Whammy!
I am also extremely sensitive to recoil. I can flinch, even when shooting my .22 Rifle, which I know, after years and thousands of rounds, doesn't kick!
I could be the poster boy for "We shoot best what kicks us least!"
Given to day's legal mind-set, and the demonization of people who like and use guns, a shooter is starting from a poor position, even if he/she shoots in clear self-defense, no matter if they are of small stature and/or a senior whose physical capabilities may be less than desired. A non-lethal response and removing oneself from the vicinity immediately may answer.
But, given no other option, a reliable (From a major manufacturer) standard, Full Wadcutter, or+P load In either a steel snubby or a full-size gun may be a good option, given enough trips to the range for familiarization and accuracy. Leave the blue whistlers to those who like them, and can handle them with acceptable accuracy.
...will still be going strong generations in the future, or at least until a Death Ray is widely used. Unfortunately, I have a genetic condition that makes me extremely sensitive to loud noises. That's a terrible affliction for one who loves guns and shooting like I do.
NOW, for the Double Whammy!
I am also extremely sensitive to recoil. I can flinch, even when shooting my .22 Rifle, which I know, after years and thousands of rounds, doesn't kick!
I could be the poster boy for "We shoot best what kicks us least!"
Given to day's legal mind-set, and the demonization of people who like and use guns, a shooter is starting from a poor position, even if he/she shoots in clear self-defense, no matter if they are of small stature and/or a senior whose physical capabilities may be less than desired. A non-lethal response and removing oneself from the vicinity immediately may answer.
But, given no other option, a reliable (From a major manufacturer) standard, Full Wadcutter, or+P load In either a steel snubby or a full-size gun may be a good option, given enough trips to the range for familiarization and accuracy. Leave the blue whistlers to those who like them, and can handle them with acceptable accuracy.
Last edited:
max503
Member
My Dillon is set up to load full wadcutter 38's with X.X grains of Unique. This is a powerful, accurate load. I could see it being effective. I've though of using it in my snubbie for CC.
one eye joe
US Veteran
I AGREE THAT .40 IS NOTHING TO BRAG ABOUT, BUT THE QUESTION IS "BETTER AT WHAT" THE .357 MAG, HAS AN ENVIABLE RECORD OF "ONE SHOT STOPS" AGAINST HUMAN TARGETS, ESP WITH THE 125GR, SJHP, BULLET. THE .45ACP, WITH THE ISSUE RNFMJ BULLET--NOTHING FANCY, HAS PUT AWAY MILLIONS, IN BATTLE, SINCE 1911. IT DID THE TRICK IN VIETNAM....
I WOULD MUCH RATHER FACE A LARGE, ANGRY, 4 LEGGED CARNIVORE, WITH A HEAVY, HARD CAST, SOLID BULLET, OUT OF A .45 COLT, OR A .44 MAGNUM, THAN THE .357 MAGNUM ROUND......
I DELIVERED 4 SOLID HITS, ON A CHARGING 300+LB, BOAR, WITH .357 MAG, 158GR, SJHP, OUT OF AN 8" PYTHON, BEFORE I KILLED IT. GRANTED, THAT WAS NOT THE PROPER AMMO, FOR SUCH A HUNT. IT WAS THE ONLY AMMO, THAT WAS AVAILABLE, ON THE SHELVES, THAT I VISITED. I'M PRETTY SURE THAT THE HEAVY, HARD CAST, .45 COLT, OR .44 MAG BULLETS, WOULD HAVE PLOWED RIGHT THROUGH THE THICK LAYER OF TOUGH GRISTLE, IN THE CHEST OF THE BOAR, THAT PROTECTS ITS VITALS......
SORRY, THAT I DON'T HAVE A PIC OF THE BOAR HANDY. IT STRETCHED ACROSS THE BACK OF A LARGE, 4 WHEEL HONDA, TRAIL MACHINE---AND HUNG OFF, BOTH SIDES......
Attachments
Last edited:
I wouldn't want to be shot by any round from a .3 or .4
That being said, I think any modern ammo that shoots POA and you can handle and shoot accurately one/two handed stationary and one/two handed on the move is MORE than adequate for self defense.
That being said, I think any modern ammo that shoots POA and you can handle and shoot accurately one/two handed stationary and one/two handed on the move is MORE than adequate for self defense.
one eye joe
US Veteran
I AGREE, GaryS. THE LOWLY .22LR, KILLS MORE PEOPLE, EVERY YEAR, THAN ANY OTHER CALIBER.......
I DON'T EVEN WANT TO BE SHOT BY A BB GUN.......
I put down a menacing pit bull several years a go with a 2" mod 36 and two shots of the FBI load, one of which hit the upper foreleg at the shoulder and traversed the chest exiting just under the fur at the opposite side of the upper abdomen. The other one went through the mid neck and traversed the mid chest and was found just beneath the fur at the level of the lower chest. Range about six to eight feet.
Last edited:
All the Marshall Sanow one-shot stop numbers was proved to be nonsense almost 20 years ago.
The methodology is flawed. It's right in their books. In computing on-shot stop statistics they only count situations where one round was fired and the attacker stopped--but they DON'T count any situations where one shot was fired and the person was not stopped and additional rounds had to be fired.
What they did is creat a formula that claims to calculate one-shot stops but is grossly flawed because it deliberately excludes the most common one-shot failures--all situtations where one shot is fired and it fails to stop someone so additional shots need to be fired.
Their one shot stop numbers are meaningless because they do not factor situations when one shot was not enough to stop someone and more shots had to be fired.
Successes are meaningless unless you factor in failures. And Marshall & Sanow's numbers do not factor in a major number of failures, therefore they have no meaning.
There is also serious questions about the validity of any of their data or accounts of shootings as to whether they even took place.
Many agencies who Marshall and Sanow claim to have gotten their shootings from have come forward and said that not only did they not provide any information to Marshall & Sanow, but that the shootings that Marshall and Sanow have attributed to them do not match any of the shootings that they have on record. Credibility of data is key in any study, and Marshall and Sanow have shown that they have none.
The July 1992 Law and Order Magazine has several letters to the editor, as well as a statement by the magazines' editor, further illustrating the lack of truth and serious errors in the Marshall and Sanow "data". Several papers have been published in the peer reviewed IWBA "Wound Ballistics Review" which have discussed the lack of credibility of Marshall and Sanow. It was clear in our review and in from the investigations by others that Marshall & Sanow had lied, fabricated data, and did not follow scientific protocols. Their information is fraudulent and meaningless. Please do not stake your life on this garbage."
In response to Sanow's criticism of the 9mm WW 147 grain JHP bullet, SGT Mike Dunlap, Rangemaster at Amarillo, TX, PD contacted every department for which Sanow claimed poor results with this bullet in his "anti-subsonic" articles. Mike submitted his results to Law and Order: they showed that Sanow had misrepresented what these departments found.
In the November 1992 issue, Law and Order published three letters contradicting Sanow's "data" (p. 90). SGT William Porter, head of the Michigan State Police Marksmanship Unit wrote, "I hope that those who read this article will not be influenced by what Sanow wrote about what happened in the Michigan State Police shooting, because it didn't happen that way." In a note introducing these letters, Bruce Cameron, Editorial Director of Law and Order wrote, concerning Sanow's article, "...we do apologize for printing information that has proven to be in error."
one eye joe
US Veteran
WELCOME TO THE FORUM, eel. THANKS FOR SHARING THIS INFO.....
