Guns & Ammo tit for tat re: handgun ammo article

[86er]

In the Oct. 2012 Guns and Ammo Patrick Sweeney wrote an article "Critical Choices". Within the article he states citizens and in particular home defense situations do not need ammo that meets the FBI protocol. He states in part and substance that they don't need to penetrate walls, sheet metal or glass (among other things). He then goes on to say that Hornady's Critical Defense will serve most people's needs and has substanially less recoil than Hornady's Critical Duty (which does pass FBI protocol). This article concerned me greatly! You can see my letter to the editor in the November issue. However, they cut and redacted a great portion of my letter. First, I address the possibility of a bullet hitting a metal coat button (denim jacket),or the actual gun or stock of the bad-guy. I'd want my ammo to penetrate enough to still incapacitate after encountering those barriers. What about a car jacking? Wouldn't you hope you could shoot through glass or metal to stop the attack? Lastly, not being able to shoot through a single sheetrock wall, etc may force you to come out from behind cover or concealment to get a shot into your adversary. Next, I pointed out that Hornady's Critical Defense ammo (9mm as referred to in the article) is a 115 gr bullet at 1140 fps. Hornady's Critical Duty ammo (same caliber) is a 135 gr @ 1010 fps. This comes out to 0.16 foot pounds of recoil energy difference - that's it! I don't know anyone who could tell the difference at the range, but in a combat survival situation is anyone going to notice and is this significant enough to make you miss?

My letter to the editor was abreviated in the publication to only include my comments on the need to shoot through barriers. Patrick Sweeney's response is poor at best. First, he assumes I am "6'4" and 200 pounds and can bench press my weight". Folks, I am 5'10" and 180. He then backpedals and says "Its not that citizens don't need barrier performance it is simply that you can't get something for nothing".

He says "You can't meet FBI criteria without paying the price in recoil". Well is 0.16 foot pounds a "price to pay"? How about the CCI Gold Dot 9mm that is 115 gr and 1150 fps and does meet the FBI Protocol? I believe there is self defense ammo and then there is range ammo. If you cannot successfully defend yourself due to narrow parameters for bullet performance, why not bridge that gap in the first place?

Lastly, he does comment "I'm glad to see we have such involved readers, please keep at it". I hope that was a round-about way of saying "your right" or "maybe you do know more than I do" or whatever kind of acknowledgment that my points are valid.

Anyway, I post this here for several reasons. One, you may see my name in G&A and realize you know me to one extent or another. I wanted you to have the whole story not the redacted version. Two, you may have read the original article and decided to switch your ammo without realizing the consequences.

I get G&A because they are usually informative and the home subscription price for outdoor businesses, LEO's, and FFL's is extremely reasonable. I don't dislike the mag and I respect them for printing my response, but I have lost some faith in the credibility and credentials of Patrick Sweeney.

BTW - there is a good article on the 405 Win in the Nov issue... but they don't know you CAN use 400 grain loads in a modern 1895 Win with a modest chamber ream.....

[crs]

Thanks for the informative post.

WRT the .405 WCF article, IMHO, it serves as further proof that many gun and hunting magazine writers and editors know much less than they could and should about the topics of their articles. Possibly they are paid by the volume of their work and not the quality thereof?

Further, my comment above will be old news to the members of this forum.

[Marlin32]

Great response Joe. I scoff, that as an ordinary citizen, I don't NEED what the FBI does.
Guess I didn't realize the "Ordinary citizen's" combat survival needs were that radically different from Law Enforcement's.

ANd one always has to remember, it is "THEIR" magazine, Their newspaper, their radio station etc, and they will edit to their advantage. Been there done that. You can concot the most brilliant piece of editorial ever composed and when they are done with it, you come out 180degrees from what you wrote!! Been there.

Secondly, who are you to rebut an expert gun writer's article?? (even one who was writing by the seat of his pants and not really thinking through his own article before sending it off to print)

Keep at them, I don't let stuff coming out of gun rags, or newspapers go either.

[WinM71]

G & A's subscription price gets really ridiculous when you become a lapsed subscriber. A few months after my last subscription ran out, I finally succumbed to their monthly entreaties and re-upped, 2 years for $15. $7.50 a year, less than 65 cents an issue, delivered. At that price, I can put up with the occasional less-than-coherent point of view.

Your observations on the author's "the ordinary guy doesn't need . . . ." position are dead on. I was surprised when I read it, knowing the difference in performance and recoil (the difference seemed to be mostly more noise & flash to me) between the two excellent Hornady loads. Just reinforces that you're far better off trying the two alternatives wherever possibe as opposed to relying on a gunwriter's opinion.

[Blaine]

I have not subscribed to any gun rags (well, I get the NRA just because) for several years mostly because I find the advice on this board to be above reproach. I would not be surprised if that particular ammo is being pushed by a paid advertiser, hence the article.

[AJMD429]

I read that a few days ago (in the issue with the strange EBP-converting thing on the cover), but I didn't know it was YOU...!!!

We'll all expect our autographed copies in the mail this week.

I don't know if the author intended to be a 'LEO-snob' with his comments or was just saying that less-experienced shooters might not feel the 'extra recoil' is worth putting up with just to get extra performance they 'may not need'. I agree with you, though - if it is "self-defense" ammo, then by definition your life is at stake (unless we're assuming good-guys just go around shooting at people for the heck of it), and if your life is at state - you don't compromise...you get the best.

[tman]

Every body has opinions. Anybody, nowadays; can write a gun article. Good job keeping em on their toes

[FWiedner]

I have not subscribed to any gun rags (well, I get the NRA just because) for several years mostly because I find the advice on this board to be above reproach. I would not be surprised if that particular ammo is being pushed by a paid advertiser, hence the article.

+1

Dang skippy.

[piller]

Joe, the .16 ft-lbs in recoil is something I would never notice in a stressful situation. At the range, I may and may not notice it. Since I do fire .22lr, .327 Federal Magnum, 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 Colt (Ruger and TC Contender loads sometimes), .44 Magnum, and .480 Ruger in handguns, I think I shoot a modest variety of calibers and bullet weights. I truly don't know if 0.16 ft-lbs would be noticeable.

As far as the .405 Winchester, I have read the posts here. Based on the data provided by the people here who shoot that caliber, and most specifically CRS, there seems to be more info on Leverguns than in the article in Guns & Ammo. I learn a lot on this forum.

[AJMD429]

I have not subscribed to any gun rags (well, I get the NRA just because) for several years mostly because I find the advice on this board to be above reproach.

Yep. Same here.

The only 'gun rags' I subscribe to are "Women & Guns" (SAF publication), and I do get all three of the NRA magazines due to lifetime membership plus paying extra. I keep at least one copy of "Women & Guns" in the waiting-room at all times.

You might consider subscribing your doctor - http://www.womenshooters.com/ - $18.00

[Walker]

Good info as always! I like options; a 45 Officer's Model (hybrid comp barrel - strictly for bad news up close), and a 9x23 lightweight commander IF penetration is required at any range.

[Streetstar]

I saw your reply in my issue Joe --- i did think Sweeney's comment "ITs good we have such involved readers" was a little patronizing myself , but its hard to tell context in print

I use Gold Dot and Ranger SXT for defensive needs -- probably won't change on the advice of PAt Sweeney, but the mags make for good outhouse reading and let me know when new stuff is coming down the pike i might be interested in

One book in particular that is thinning out is Shooting Times --- seems like it gets slightly less and less content by the month somehow -- but a lot of the writers seem to flip flop between publications so much they almost seem indistinguishable ------

[Hobie]

There are a couple of writers on this forum. They probably know better than any of us what is what in the "business" but I suspect that editing is a fearsome companion to some articles and alters much of what the author intended to say in favor of the editor. Also, I think I read that ST and G&A are owned by the same company hence the demise of one in favor of the other.

I personally use Federal HS in my Officer's Lightweight ACP.

[Griff]

I'm with Blaine, unless something in particular catches my eye, I hardly ever pick up a gun rag. (With the exception of "Old West Guns", but, even then, I need to see something that I desire to read about). Good on you Joe, someone's gotta keep 'em on their toes.

'Sides, if you want a self-defense round, it should start with a 4, and end in a 5!

[olyinaz]

In general I like Sweeney and his writing, but I can't recall a time that a writer or editor in any gun or car magazine said, "Yeah, you're right." Ever. Also, having read Sweeny for years now it's become clear that he's not a fan of recoil and I think he feels that it scares away new shooters and makes average shooters poor ones. He wrote an article on a full sized .32 ACP a few years back (it was either a Walther or a Taurus, can't recall, but it's usually chambered in .380 I think and it's a full sized hand full of gun, not a pocket pistol) and waxed on about the nearly non-existent recoil and how it could be just the ticket for a frail person. My feeling is that the frail person would be better with the .380 (or a 9mm) and just practice with a .22 if they hate recoil that much. In a gun fight they're surely not going to notice the recoil but they WILL go back to their fundamentals learned through practice.

At any rate, I agree with you Joe and I now stoke my pocket 9 with Critical Duty instead of Critical Defense. It feeds both perfectly and it's good to know that the performance is tested and documented as very good for a 9mm.

I go through phases where I read gun rags (I'm in one now) and then I go for years without because they just start repeated and regurgitating the same old thing over and over again.

Best,
Oly

[DixieBoy]

Joe - I think you caught Mr. Sweeney talking out his backside and "took him aback" as they say. Good on ya !

I don't have an axe to grind with Sweeney, but I think he's mediocre at best. And I think you caught him putting together an article about nothing during a slow month. Must not have been a new super-duper whizz-bang new pistol to write about, so he decided to cover his writing duties with one of those "Hamburger Helper" columns.

Seeing as you crunched the numbers on recoil, and it's obviously such a small difference between 'Critical Duty" and "Critical Defense" you caught the man with his pants down around his ankles. You nailed him. And, no offense meant to you, but what did you expect him to say in reply ? "Well gee, Joe, you nailed me. I pulled that column and everything in it straight out of my butt" ?

While I would LOVE to come across that kind of honesty in a gun rag, I don't hold my breath waiting for it to happen. I mean, wouldn't it be refreshing if, just once, they reviewed a new pistol for instance, and said something like "Folks, this new pistol from zippitty-doo-da really just stinks to high heaven" ? Again, I'm not holding my breath for that to happen, even though I bet their readers would just love it ! A little breath of honesty.

You nailed Sweeney, caught him being silly, and he patted you on the head in a condescending way, saying something equivalent to "isn't that special?". Don't lose any sleep over it Joe. You at least put him on notice to watch himself and the stuff he spews out there a bit more closely. Good on you for caring enough to point out the silliness that jumped out at you. - DixieBoy

[Irelander]

What I have read and been taught previously about home defense ammo is that you don't want your rounds penetrating walls. This is because you may be shooting towards a wall that could be your loved one's room, be it your son, daughter, wife, dog... Many well known firearms instructors I have heard speak on the subject all advocate for ammo that does not penetrate walls such as ammo that uses the Glazer Safety Slug. I definitely see your point with having to take a shot at an assailant when he is behind a barrier, but what if the perp is standing in front of your daughter's bedroom wall? It's definitely something you need to consider if you have a family.

Rob Pincus did a great demo of how many interior walls different kinds of ammo will penetrate. It's pretty amazing! Lots of defensive ammo will penetrate several interior walls so you not only need to consider who might be in the room behind the wall you are shooting against, but also who might be in the next room. It gets kinda scary.

I totally agree that civilians should consider all types of defensive ammo and choose what is best for them and FBI approved ammo is not too good for the average citizen. But consider that in the stress of a critical incident you are only about half as accurate as you are when practicing at the range. So, there is a good chance that when you engage an attacker in your home, some of your rounds could miss the target. We all need to be mindful about who could be behind the different walls in the house and take into account what we are willing to loose if a shot goes astray.

This is why a good plan needs to be in place in each home in case of an emergency such as an attack in the home. That way we can have a reasonably good idea of where everyone in your home is at when it is time to shoot.

[44-40 Willy]

I quit paying attention to the gun rags years ago. They're only going to say what their paid advertisers want them to.