Does anyone carry ball ammo in their .45?

[cmort666]

No chance the HP can pass through & hit some bystander like the ball ammo? If so a law should be enacted to mandate HP's.

No chance? No.

A lot less chance? Absolutely.

And if it does come out the other side, it's going to be going a lot slower and and have less chance of penetrating to a lethal depth.

 

[Twogunnes]

I use only ball ammo.

Never felt the need for more.

Have shot three whitetail with ball ammo, 45acp. One round did make full penetration. The three bullets I recovered looked as if they had been squeezed in a vice approximately to 3/4 inch. Jacket fractured.

Pros and cons for whatever you shoot

A prosecuting attorney screaming hollow point!

Ball is more than adequate.

 

[LT4]

I have and still carry both ball and hp.My little lcp usually has ball for penetration and I have had a few hp rounds be slow to chamber or hang up and I have to push the slide forward.
I do not daily carry my 1911 in .45 so I can't comment on that.Some of the short barreled 9mm and .380 pistols I conceal are loaded with ball right now.A larger frame or bigger caliber semi auto/revolver I would more than likely use a hollow point.

 

[vipermd]

No chance the HP can pass through & hit some bystander like the ball ammo? If so a law should be enacted to mandate HP's.

As Cmort666: less velocity, less energy, less likely to penetrate.
Of 3 people shot with a 380 ball, 2 were in chest and exited the back, the third was stopped by the spine.
I do not believe we should have any laws governing our carry ammo, I believe that NJ prohibits hollow points for self defense outside of the home for civilian and active LEO, though I did not check that fact today.
regalsc: Back to the original question- why would you want greater penetration? I mean no disrespect with question, you may have other/new information that could benefit my self or others. Be Safe,

 

[Springfeildkid585]

The military still must carry ball in war and it gets the job done but the general consensus of combat veterans is they would much rather have hollow points. I always thought it ironic that military law enforcement could shoot hollow points at Americans but had to swap their ammo out to ball ammo for shooting at the enemy when they entered a war zone.

Three reasons; ball ammo is cheaper, feeds more reliably, and has better penetration. The advantage of hollowpoints is bigger holes and less penetration(overpenetration being a bigger concern on the civilian side) .

Ball ammo is fine in a .45, it's what I carried until I found Critical Defense and Critical Duty from Hornady because regular hollowpoints don't feed reliably into my 1911. Way I see it, .45 ball always funtioned similar to a hollowpoint in a smaller caliber; it's slow, fat, and makes a big hole.

 

[shawn mccarver]

Ball is not too bad, but even Jeff Cooper, who lived mostly in an era when hollow points did not reliably expand at pistol velocities, preferred something other than ball for the .45 ACP. He used plenty of ball ammo, of course, but he preferred the "JTC" or Jacketed Truncated Cone.

If FMJ or ball is all that works in your auto, then I suggest using a different auto for defense, as the premium loads are now better at expanding, which reduces the chance of ricochet and over penetration, both of which can be dangerous to bystanders.

In the photo, the bullet types are Semi-wadcutter, jacketed truncated cone, jacketed hollow point and full metal jacket.

 

[shouldazagged]

That's not funny. At all.

 

[Doug M.]

.380 was not the subject of discussion here, but the reason for carrying ball in that caliber is that generally, HPs will not have adequate penetration to pass the modern objective testing protocols. From the front, on a person of reasonable weight, yeah, but from the side, or on the typical overweight American? A lot less likely.

Older 1911 format pistols were made to only function with ball, and many would not work reliably (a minimum of 500 consecutive rounds, preferably more, without a malfunction, without cleaning) with duty ammo (ammo that passes the testing mentioned above). Ball is better than a pencil and harsh language, but does not pass the objective testing. The military's restrictions based on treaties etc, and it's terrible paranoia about firearms are only relevant to those stuck with complying with them.

The 1911 is a great pistol and I spent a lot of time and money to be able to carry one as a duty pistol for several years. However, a duty worthy 1911 will cost several times what a typical M&P or Glock 21 will. Expect to put down at least $2K, and likely closer to $3K for a hard use, duty worthy 1911. For that amount, you can get 2 M&Ps or Glocks, a couple cases of ammo, and a lot of good training.

For those of you who think my standards are unrealistic, they are based on the knowledge of people who forgot more in the time that I took to type this than I will ever know, like Hilton Yam and Gary Roberts. Yam is a full time cop, SWAT trainer, firearms instructor, and gunsmith, and even when he was using, teaching, and working on 1911s, he did not advocate them for many people. He sees a ton of rounds downrange and he has a darned good idea of what does and does not work. Gary is among other things a dental surgeon/professor, a cop and firearms instructor, and the leading ballistics expert after Dr. Fackler (and his successor).

 

[hoc9sw]

1911 carry? Golden Sabre 230gr HP
9mm carry? Federal HS 124gr HP

I am not interested in hitting anyone other than the bad guy, and have seen pass-thru rounds cause severe legal issues for otherwise valid shooters.

Stopping the immediate threat doesn't need to cause a lifetime of litigation.

 

[Watchdog]

Good morning all, I am wondering who out there carry standard ball ammo in their .45 1911...

I do. All the time. Matter of fact, there's a full magazine of the stuff in the pistol right now.

 

[andyo5]

As I understand it, ball ammo has enough energy to go through the first victim and enter a second one behind him. This is so because unless it hits major bones, it deforms little and exits the body with energy to spare. This is risky for personal or urban use, since you have a greater chance of harming unintended targets standing behind the target. Also, ball is less likely to kill than hollow point. So it leaves moaning wounded solders on the battlefield, tempting new potential targets who wish to rescue them. This is desirable from a tactical military point of view.

 

[mrrick]

Ball only.

Most important attributes in self defense:
1. reliability.
2. shot placement.
3. Head shots are always reliable man stoppers, and no worries about body armor.

 

[Watchdog]

Older 1911 format pistols were made to only function with ball, and many would not work reliably (a minimum of 500 consecutive rounds, preferably more, without a malfunction, without cleaning) with duty ammo (ammo that passes the testing mentioned above).

I'm curious. How many is "many"? And do you have statistics and test results to back up that statement? If so, I'd love to see them.

The 1911 is a great pistol... However, a duty worthy 1911 will cost several times what a typical M&P or Glock 21 will.

Don't know about "several times more", but yeah, a full size .45 will cost more than a Glock. I don't know about M&P stuff, because I have no experience with them, nor have I priced them. But they're more expensive because a typical full size .45 semi-auto pistol, a Colt, for instance, is made of steel and wood, not plastic or some polymer material. Glocks are a dime a dozen around here, and LGSs have had to cut prices on them so much, they're practically giving the things away.

I'd also be interested in hearing your definition of "duty worthy".

Expect to put down at least $2K, and likely closer to $3K for a hard use, duty worthy 1911.

No, I don't think so. And again we see this term "duty worthy". I paid $1K for my full size Colt Series 70 Mark IV in stainless steel. I have put it through my own rigorous tests, and I have fired over 500 rounds of 230 grain FMJ through it without cleaning or oiling just to see it it would handle it. It handled it just fine, no jams, no malfunctions whatsoever.

But sure, you can spend $2K-$4K or more on a fancy-dancy .45 like a Nighthawk or something, but who needs all those doo-dads on a pistol? We're talking about duty guns, not match pistols. If I can put 9 rounds into a 5.5-inch circle at 25 yards with simple military style sights, what else do I need? Maybe some tritium dots, but that's about as far as I'll go with that.

For those of you who think my standards are unrealistic, they are based on the knowledge of people who forgot more in the time that I took to type this than I will ever know, like Hilton Yam and Gary Roberts.

It isn't that your standards are unrealistic (well, maybe just a little), but you seem to be basing them on the thoughts and writings of just two people.

Regarding Hilton Yam and Gary Roberts...I'm not familiar with Roberts, but I believe Yam has been discussed on this forum before. He may be all you say, but he's also entirely too dogmatic in his thinking on the 1911. It's either his way or no way at all. I think you have to have some leeway in your thinking, some ability to accept others' ideas, and Hilton Yam doesn't possess that quality...which is why I discount 95% of he says about the 1911. But I will admit that he does know how to disassemble one and put it back together.

 

[BgDnTx]

Massad Ayoob Blog

For a very comprehensive discussion on Ball vs HP check out Massad's Blog here:
Massad Ayoob » Ammunition

For me, it's a Speer GDHP 200g +P in my .45

 

[all5x]

In San Francisco no hollow point ammunition is allowed. Not being a citizen of the city and I have a CCW that is suppose to be good state wide I figured it did not apply to me but was advised not to carry HP ammo in the city. So FMJ's are the only option. And having served in Federal Law Enforcement in San Francisco for 20+ years I know pretty well how the city works.

 

[hoc9sw]

Yes, I am over 55, and my new-out-of-the-box CCW .45 would not handle JHP correctly. Three trips back to the homeland, and it now works like a champ. And it stills gets along well with ball.

I started with ball, trained with it, and carried it for years. But the CCW environment is different. There isn't a state or federal agency covering my back.

So I consider myself one who will use HP, and demand that any .45 I have manage it, for use in a daily self defense environment.

If things were to go badly, and we had complete social breakdown, with people coming over the fence in masses, the ball goes back in the mag. Why not get three for the price of one? But that day would be the last for a lot of sane decisions.

 

[cmort666]

Yes, I am over 55, and my new-out-of-the-box CCW .45 would not handle JHP correctly.

My first handgun was a Series 70 Colt I bought in 1978.

It initially wouldn't feed ball, but would feed 200gr. Hornady "flying ashtrays" all day long. It eventually broke in to the point where it would feed ball.

The Norinco M1911 that I bought used from a friend fed anything I put in it from the day I got it. 230gr. ball, 200gr. Hornady TAP, 117gr. Aguila IQ, 200gr. LSWC handloads. It didn't care.

After the hammer and trigger parts in that Norinco were replaced, I had total confidence in it. $3,000 for an M1911? I guess, if you have the money. $300 (plus about $75 in small parts and grips) for the Norinco gave me something I could trust my life to.

 

[Fastbolt]

I remember the days when a box-stock Colt worked better with ball than some of the early hollowpoints. The magazine lip designs had something to do with that, too.

Nowadays, with better magazines and ammunition being available, I only use ball loads for some occasional training/practice.

I don't carry .45 ball in my .45 pistols for the same reason I don't carry LRN or ball in my .38's. There are much better options available.

I can understand the nostalgic allure of some shooters wanting to remain with .45 ball, but that doesn't mean it might turn out to be a good decision at some point down the road, if they really have to use it as a defensive weapon.

My dad (Korean War generation) used to keep his Gov Mdl loaded with the old Rem MC SWC target load, as that gun had been tuned to feed it by a Border Patrol gunsmith. He liked the wider flat point compared to ball. He also liked 200gr LSWC loads. Ball was his last choice. I still have a couple rounds he gave me of an old Norma .45 ACP load which used what appeared to be a revolver JHP, with lots of exposed lead around the nose cavity.

Perforations (also called "over-penetrations") of an intended threat target can happen, even with JHP's (and especially if hits occur in peripheral, shallow areas of the anatomy), and misses with any bullet design are still ... misses.

Training & practice ... training & practice ... training & practice ... and the use of the best of the modern hollowpoint ammo someone can afford may still be helpful and a "better choice" than ball ammo (presuming it's lawful in the user's area).

Then again, some folks might still get their gun advice from Mike Hammer novels. (Hey, I liked those books growing up, myself. )

 

[JayFramer]

The .45 ACP is one of the most devastating manstoppers ever devised. .45 ball put more men in the grave than anything else in WW2 methinks.

Carry with confidence.

 

[mrrick]

Of the dozen or so 1911s I had/have, the Norinco was the ONLY one that would consistently and reliably feed anything and everything. The next reliable ones are a pair of Systema 1927 Colts manufactured in Argentina on Colt machinery and Colt gunsmiths. The least reliable are my Colt series 70 Commander and Gov't 1911s, (2 0f them).

If I'm carrying the Norinco, I'll have an HP in the chamber, followed by ball.
If I need more rounds of RELIABLE firepower, I carry my Springfield Armory X-D 45, with a XDs backup.

And yes, I'm over 55.