Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Frangible ammo for HD or CCW

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Frangible ammo for HD or CCW

    I’ve read some about efficacy, advantages and disadvantages of Frangible ammo. I’ve used it in an indoor range and it appeared to work as advertised in that environment but I don’t know that I’m convinced it is a good option for home defense or as carry ammo. Ammo technology over the past few years has advanced a great deal and I wonder of the primary (IMHO) advantage of reduced risk of over penetration compared to HP or ball ammo is worth the reduced kinetic energy (stopping power) and reduced wound cavity once the round peels after contacting a target.
    Lots of smart folks here, I’d love to know your thoughts.
    Last edited by Huntington Guy; 01-09-2020, 10:04 PM.

    #2
    Frangible ammo in a pistol for home defense is sort of like 9 shot in an 870 for the like. Some people think it's great, others think you have to be crazy not to load that 870 with buckshot or slugs or both. Me personally, I have shot frangible ammo only at steel targets. I'd be very unlikely to consider it for defensive purposes. Of course, if you are thinking home defense and have loved ones in other rooms, well you have to go with what you think best not to put them at unnecessary risk and I don't just mean over penetration and accidentally shooting a family member with standard ammo but also maybe hitting and not bringing down the bad guy with frangible ammo and he then goes on to harm you and then them. Its a weighty decision for sure.
    Retired and loving it.

    Comment


      #3
      I could be wrong but I'd say it depends upon the situation, caliber and gun.

      For instance, an AR shooting fragmenting 45 grain .223 is a good urban home defense choice but in a .380 is probably woefully underpowered on a perp with winter clothing on.

      My .02
      "Except the Lord build they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall God governs in the affairs of men. I have lived, Sir, a long time..."
      Ben Franklin, arguably our least faith driven founding father

      Comment


        #4
        How well does that ammo do against a Carhartt or biker jacket? If it doesn’t do the job how it does with drywall is irrelevant.
        Exercise the Bill of Rights. It's good for your Constitution.

        Comment


          #5
          Frangilbe Ammo has been tossed around for a long time. The glaser “safety round”, there was some Liberty Ammo I thing 50 gr 9mm, and a bunch of others. IMO if it was that good, LE would be carrying it.
          Frangible IMO goes to one extreme, light weight, high velocity equaling high kinetic energy and no over penetration. I think the other extreme is ball Ammo FMJ. My personal opinion is you need a blend of the 2 and the latest HP Ammo is that blend of velocity for kinetic energy and expansion and a solid core for deep enough penetration to stop an attacker reliably in all conditions. I believe the average amount of shots/hits to take down an attacker is 4-5. Very few one shot stops in the real world. We have all heard real shoot scenarios where winter clothing and extremely over weight perps getting hit by 45 HP Ammo and creating a superficial non-life threatening wound.
          frangible Ammo would create a much higher then average incidence of a superficial, non-life threatening wound in a shoot situation due to the lack of mass and ability to get to the vitals. The concept is great and putting the “safety” moniker on it is fashionable but when push comes to shove in a shoot situation, damn I don’t want a winter coat or even auto glass to allow the adversary to get a leg up.

          I would stay with the tried and true Gold Dot 124 gr +P+ and the Hornady Critical Defense LE Ammo which performed very very well in the FBI tests. There are many other the hydra-shok being one I like but when the shit hits the fan penetration isn’t a bad thing

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Barnslayer View Post
            How well does that ammo do against a Carhartt or biker jacket? If it doesn’t do the job how it does with drywall is irrelevant.
            First off, frangible ammo is designed to shatter on HARD surfaces. It will go through drywall like a solid ball. It needs something significantly stronger to cause it to shatter. I don't believe that plywood is hard enough either, but steel certainly can be, and there is a decent chance that a car door will stop it. My plaster over concrete with steel lath walls might actually stop it too.

            It also has no ability to expand, so a Carhartt, puffy, or leather jacket doesn't really change its penetration profile (which is lousy overall anyway) other than slow it down.

            Frangible ammo has the primary purpose of being safe to use on steel plates for practice because it will not bounce back at you. It's also inherently low lead (it can be lead free, but isn't necessarily, as the primers and even the propellant often contain lead). I know that Air Marshalls use it, in the hopes that it is less likely to break steel hydraulic lines. But for self defense anywhere else, I wouldn't consider it at all.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Rrudo74901 View Post
              Frangilbe Ammo has been tossed around for a long time. The glaser “safety round”,...
              The Glaser Safety Slug was an interesting product. It was birdshot packed into a thin lead shell with a plastic tip (probably epoxy) that was supposed to be stopped by drywall due to the lightweight nature of the components. Wikipedia calls it a frangible bullet, but I'd say that's a bit of a stretch of the word's definition. That's like calling LEGO frangible.

              True frangible rounds are made from sintered powdered metal that disintegrates back into that state upon shock impact.

              Comment


                #8
                In other news, no home defense situation is perfect, but have a plan.

                If it's night time, chances are you and your family are all upstairs. If you only have one set of stairs in the house...get the family into one room where they can escape if they have to. Then defend the stairs and that doorway.

                If you're in a cape with bedrooms down and up...well things change. Or a single story ranch.

                Besides at least if you have a plan....you'll know how far off that plan you are when it all goes to shit.

                Vick
                High quality building supplies since 1948! Friendly FFL transfers of long guns, receivers, and ammunition. Feel free to call us at 516 741 4466

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by rlitman View Post

                  The Glaser Safety Slug was an interesting product. It was birdshot packed into a thin lead shell with a plastic tip (probably epoxy) that was supposed to be stopped by drywall due to the lightweight nature of the components. Wikipedia calls it a frangible bullet, but I'd say that's a bit of a stretch of the word's definition. That's like calling LEGO frangible.

                  True frangible rounds are made from sintered powdered metal that disintegrates back into that state upon shock impact.
                  By strict definition you are correct. Loosely they all fall into that same lightweight high velocity limited penetrator round variation. That’s why I threw that in. Either way they are designed to perform similarly. I group that G2 RIP Ammo into that category too as it’s designed to splinter off the “darts” on impact and have the very lightweight core penetrate. And boy does it look impressive on a water filled balloon or watermelon but in ballistic gel a 22 mag does better
                  However you are correct

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X