Home defense ammo

Hornady Critical Defense in .357mag, 9mm and .40cal.

quote:

---

Any reviews on it, and what do you guys use if there is something better?

---

If you're shooting Critical Duty from a short barrel, you may want to reconsider changing it. But if it's from a 4.5-5" barrel that is optimal. The way hollow points work is a bit counter intuitive - the faster the bullet is flying, the less penetration you get since the bullet expands quicker. There may be some exceptions to this rule, but for the majority of rounds it's true.

Every bullet is designed to expand consistently at a certain velocity. That's why I carry Hornady Critical Defense - it's light, yes, but it delivers consistent performance from a short barrel. My carry guns (M&P9c, Kahr CM9) both have short barrels. I want the best performance out of them.

What is optimal performance? Well the FBI standard of 12-18" of penetration in bare gel is the best medium we have to test rounds. This accounts for both underpenetration and overpenetration. Optimally, I would rather my bullet stay in the intended target and not pass through, so I like it to fall in this range in tests. Does it perfectly simulate a human body? Not really, but it does give us a basis to compare rounds. I am no ballistician but I understand the basic concept.

I have 175gr Hornady Critical Duty in my M&P40 CORE 5". It is designed for longer barrels and will penetrate less than out of a shorter barrel.

The YouTube channel that really opened my eyes was ShootingTheBull410. He is the only guy I've seen that consistently tests hollow points from short barrels since that is what most of us civilians will be doing.

Anyway, rant over. Hope I at least made an ounce of sense.

quote:

---

12-18" mark instead of 10-12"? It seems like it would discharge all of its force inside the body cavity instead of having some left over to penetrate to 18"

---

Ballistics gel isn't nearly as tough as human skin so they concluded that 12-18 would be sufficient to hit the vitals including bone and dense muscle and tissue. Plus they took into account different body positions and the off chance that the attacker's arms are extended out, in which case the bullet must penetrate through the hands and arms and still hit the vitals. He also showed how much more dense skin is by poking his finger right into the block. He couldn't do that with his skin obviously.

I think 10-12 would still be sufficient. His reasoning was that to do real damage you need to reach the vitals. If your attacker is on any sort of drugs his or her reaction to pain is going to be diminished. So you have to do real damage by causing a hit to the vitals or the CNS, although a CNS hit would almost always result in a one shot stop.

I still think any bullet is better than no bullet.

I use Federal 124gr HST 9mm in my M&P and 00 buck in my 14" SBS 870. Both are within arms reach of my bed.

Run all heavy grain HST for 9mm, 40, and 45.

quote:

---

bapple, I recently picked up a box of 124 grain Monarch Ammo for my 9mm's. Mistake or okay? Go easy.

---

It's better than regular FMJ ammo but I doubt there was much research done on the bullet construction. I would suggest getting a better name brand (Remington, Winchester, Federal, Hornady, Speer, etc.) when you get the chance.

Besides just bullet construction, high quality JHP ammo also has a low-flash, high pressure propellant, sealed bullets and primers, and nickel-plated cases. That's the reason for the inflated price, not just the costs-more-to-make bullet by itself.

quote:

---

My buds at the State Police Crime Lab have a different opinion. They all carry HST (as do LSP troopers). Their testing of HST 147 grain standard pressure out of a G19 was .83" -- the .45ACP out of an HK expanded to > 1"

---

Also take into account that not everyone carries a handgun with a 4" barrel. While that is extremely impressive, you will probably get less expansion and more penetration in a short barrel.

But as far as I can remember, he saw the most consistent results from HST and Gold Dots. I'm interested in seeing these G2's you mentioned.

Did they take any pics, or was it just a test for standard issue ammo? What all did they test? I wonder why they had such big expansion differences than the other tests I've seen. Different gel?

I finished off the box of Critical Duty today, so I'd be willing to switch if there are good reasons to. I'm aware that bullets are bullets, but if I'm buying expensive ones, why not get the best?

IIRC, it was the last one he tested in the 13 minute long one


Eta: I'd also be willing to get higher quality bullets like Underwood, Double Tap, Buffalo Bore, etc. I just haven't seen any reviews on them

quote:

---

I'd also be willing to get higher quality bullets like Underwood, Double Tap, Buffalo Bore, etc. I just haven't seen any reviews on them

---

I wanna try out the underwood but I don't think it's necessary since the gold dots perform so nicely.