Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.
Discussion in 'Caliber Corner' started by eamonher, Dec 29, 2009.
The PDX1 performs in a similar fashion.. I'm actually tempted to buy some PDX1's to try.
current production, they are not the same.
Winchester SXT is also being dropped from the Winchester lineup in favor of PDX1.
if i go with a new round my testing proceedure is as follows:
with my carry mags, i load 2 mags of the new JHP load.
i shoot one mag through the weapon while it is perfectly clean as i would be carrying it or keeping it around the house for SD purposes.
then i run 300-500rds of the cheapest, nastiest practice ammo i can through it to get it hot and nice and dirty.
then i shoot the second mag of JHPs through it. if it doesnt have a problem with JHPs clean and dirty than i trust it. i have also heard the "you need to run a case of your carry ammo through it to make sure it wont have a problem. forget that bull*****.
this makes sence thanks
this makes NO sence. i dont need to do it the way it been for years and years.
i got a better way.
The company policy of Winchester with Ranger-T or Federal with HST does not carry power of law. It COULD, of course, be used as an argument by either a prosecutor or a plaintiff's lawyer desperate to make a case against the user. I haven't personally seen that happen, but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen.
FWIW, at a seminar with Winchester executives a couple of years ago, I asked if this had ever come up to their knowledge, and if the company had ever been contacted by either side of a case in this regard. Their reply was that it had not.
Personally, I carry both HST and Ranger and have given Ranger-T to my significant other to CCW. Her answer and mine, if challenged on this, would be simple:
"I figured if the police thought it was the best to use to protect me and my loved ones from violent criminals, it was logically the best for ME to use to protect myself and my loved ones from violent criminals."
I do just like an earlier poster. One mag of carry ammo to include one in the chamber from a clean gun just as I would carry it. Then I fire about 200 rds of my handloads through the gun. It would be rare for me to fire less than 200 rds per range session. I finish up with the spare magazine I intend to carry with one in the chamber. That is all the testing I'm going to do with expensive self defense ammunition. I use Federal HST and Winchester RA40T. There is a lot of it available right now at about $26 to $28 a box of 50.
This is in my mind set also.
I feel the Police can afford to test or at least get their information from the FBI. I cannot afford to do my own extensive testing and I am sure the FBI is not going to call me back and freely give me the information that I am looking for so I use what they use. It makes sense to me.
Given that you have contacts inside the major ammo manufacturers, any idea why they keep their premium non-bonded ammo (HST and Ranger Tseries)as "L/E only" yet they readily make their latest bonded ammo, specifically Gold dot and PDX1 (same as Ranger Bonded), available to civilians? If bonding was such a premium feature, you'd think the opposite would be true. Any insight you can provide would be appreciated.
Frankly, DRT, I haven't heard a reason for it that makes sense to me. In the old days, companies would sell +P+ only to large institutional purchasers that would sign waivers not to sue them if high pressures blew up junk or defective guns. That's still true with some of the large manufacturers. That reasoning would not of course apply to a high-tech 9mm 147 grain or .45 ACP standard pressure 230 grain. Just one guy's opinion, of course.
There's really two different scenarios. One you've got the Ranger T ammo which Winchester decided not to sell to the public to appease the government, same as with FNH not selling certain 5.7 ammo to the public for the same reasons. It's not illegal to own it, some ammo is illegal to own, that's usually armor piercing rifle ammo, which is the opposite of a hollow point.
The main thing people run into is marketing. CCI/Speer which makes Hydrashok, HST, Gold Dot and others sell 50 round boxes to LE distributors for about the same price as they sell 20 round boxes marked personal protection to gun shops, Cabelas, etc. I've seen 50 round boxes of LE marked Gold Dots for less than 20 round boxes of personal protection and it's identical.
HST is currently LE marked only because they can't make enough to keep up with the demand. I would wager (if betting was legal) that you will see civilian HST within the next 6-20 months, and it will be in 20 round boxes and cost more than the current 50 round LE boxed HST.
My personal preference is to carry personal protection marked rounds like Gold Dots or Remington "Ultimate Home Defense" and only use LE marked stuff like HST and Rangers for HD where the castle doctrine provides a strong legal shield.
I just picked up some Ranger T's in the 9mm 124 grain +p variant yesterday at the gunshow
Use Gold Dots. They're street proven, bonded, and Speer sells them to the public and they are relatively easy to find.
these are what I use.
Also look to find the same FMJ, brand and wt of the HP.
IMO training or plinking with the same brand and wt ammo as the HP then it should not be any differnt when you do use the HPs.