I know I’m not the first person to write about selecting duty or carry ammunition. In all honesty, this probably isn’t the first article this week on the topic. However, when I wrote about filing my front sight a couple of weeks ago, I mentioned that this was an important step. Before I get too far down the road from that article, I want to address my criteria for choosing defensive carry ammunition, and how I settled on the .357 Short Barrel Gold Dot.
Internal & External Ballistic Factors
There are important factors around how the ammunition interacts with the gun. Some of these factors are extremely important while others are less so.
Ignition reliability: The top three factors for ammunition selection are: reliability, reliability, and reliability! Knowing that your rounds are all going to fire is of paramount importance. I’ve shot some “tuned” revolvers that have difficulty with certain ammunition. My 640 Pro with Apex spring kit has had a light strike with Winchester PDX1, a cartridge I’d otherwise be perfectly satisfied to carry. Unreliability is a deal-breaker, though.
I don’t mean to imply that unreliable ignition is a common problem. The vast majority of ammunition will function perfectly well in the vast majority of guns. But, as you are shooting the ammo to assess the other factors listed here, ignition reliability should be in your awareness.
Recoil and control: I believe this is the second most important factor. You must be able to shoot the gun accurately and quickly. Excessive recoil slows recoil recovery, which slows successive shots. Each of us has to find that intersection of power and control. I wrote about this at some length a few weeks ago.
Accuracy: This seems to be overlooked occasionally with handguns. Regardless, the accuracy of a given load should be a factor when choosing defensive carry ammunition. If your handgun’s sights are non-adjustable (as is the case with most handguns) you should select a load that shoots as close as possible to point-of-aim. You should also favor loads that group consistently well in your gun.
Case Extraction: This is important if you have to reload, and a problem that is somewhat specific to revolvers. Some rounds operate at pressures that cause the cases to expand. This can lead to sticky extraction which is a more pronounced problem in guns lacking full-length ejector rods. I want those cases to come out when I work the ejector. Note that this is a secondary factor to reliability, accuracy, and the ability control recoil. The rounds in the cylinder are much more important than the ones in your speedloader.
Cleanliness: Ammunition designed for longer barrels can leave a lot of residue and unburned powder behind when fired in guns with shorter barrels. Now, I’m not the guy that carries a squeaky clean revolver, but – unburned powder and find its way under the extractor star. This can prevent the cylinder from closing and bind up the gun. Of course all ammo will be a little dirty, but if it is extremely dirty you might consider moving on for the sake of reliability.
Muzzle flash: This is a very minor factor, but perhaps deserves some consideration. Most modern defensive ammunition utilizes “flash suppressed” powders. If you have the opportunity to safely fire a couple of rounds of your top candidates in darkness, it’s probably not a bad idea. Unless it is absolutely blinding, I wouldn’t rule out an otherwise suitable candidate because of muzzle flash.
Terminal Ballistic Factors
I’m not going to beat up on this category. Plenty of others have written about bullet performance, and have given a better account of the situation that I could begin to. I will summarize the key points, however. It is difficult and expensive to perform these tests on your own. In selecting my own defensive carry ammunition I am generally relying on the results of the Lucky Gunner .38/.357 tests.
Penetration: In the absence of another meaningful standard, I default to the FBI standard for penetration. The Standard (big “T”, big “S”) dictates penetration between 12 and 18 inches. The infamous 1986 Miami Shootout was the provenance of this dictate. I am happy with anything that consistently penetrates to these prescribed depths, though I wouldn’t automatically rule out anything that is slightly (let’s say an inch or two) under or over.
Expansion: With modern bullet technology there is little reason to select a bullet that doesn’t expand at all. The prevailing wisdom these days seems to be that a bullet should expand to about 150% of its original diameter (for a .38/.357 this would be an expanded diameter of .535 or greater). I consider this a rule of thumb. I will accept a little less expansion in exchange for reliable, consistent, predictable expansion at the velocities generated in my gun. It is important to note that expansion should occur after interaction with layers of heavy clothing, and test results should reflect this.
An important note in regards to expansion: barrel length influences velocity, and velocity influences expansion. Too little velocity and the bullet doesn’t expand (and very likely way over-penetrates). Too much velocity and the bullet can (potentially) over-expand or fragment. You should look for gel tests that have occurred with a barrel length similar to your gun’s. The Lucky Gunner test was pretty unique in that it included tests for both 2″ and 4″ guns. As LG also demonstrated, velocities between two- and four-inch barrels can be significantly different.
Weight Retention: One other factor to consider here, and one that is far less prevalent today than in yesteryear, is weight retention. It is undesirable for the bullet to fragment as this is not conducive to effective penetration. I am looking for something in the neighborhood of 99 to 100% weight retention.
Mechanical Factors
There are couple of mechanical concerns, the first two of which deal more with reloading the revolver than anything else. I’ve mentioned them before but they are worth hauling out again here.
Bullet Shape: Bullet shape becomes a big factor when we talk about reloading the revolver from a speedloader. Some shapes are much harder to get into the chambers than others. For example, I’d hate to have to put the new Federal .38 HSTs in a speedloader. Loading them would require a near perfect alignment with the charge holes. Some bullets might seem like a great shape but turn out not to be in practice. For example I recently tried out the Hornady Critical Duty loads. They are very pointy, but the rubber plug on the tip of the round is very grippy. I found that unless I nail the reload and hit all six cylinders perfectly this slowed my reloads down a lot.
Case Construction: I’ve mentioned this before but I greatly prefer cases that are nickel-plated over plain brass. These tend to avoid corrosion and remain nice and slick, allowing them to slip into chambers more easily. Nickel-plating also aids in case extraction.
Waterproofing: If you stamp the word “waterproof” on anything, it will catch the eye of this old jarhead. Unfortunately, I’ve yet to see that word appear on a box of ammo. Instead I look for primer sealant on the case. This is usually pretty easy to see if it’s present. Speer, for instance, uses a blue primer sealant. It’s harder to tell if a case-mouth sealant is used. In reality this is a tertiary concern for me, but it might be a bigger concern for you if you live in hot, humid environments, work outdoors, or spend a great deal of time in and around water. If this is a huge concern for you, you may have to devise your own test for ascertaining whether or not your cartridges are waterproof.
Practical (read: Boring) Factors
So, all of that was the sexy, fun stuff. But there are a few prosaic considerations to think about here. I don’t see these written about very often, but they are definitely worth some thought.
Cost: How expensive is the ammunition? I know, I know – how much is your life worth? If one box of ammunition is all you needed this might be a fair statement. But I contend you probably need a little bit more than a box or two. You need to verify reliability. You need to test accuracy. You need a few “extra” rounds. You need to rotate those rounds out occasionally. I don’t think you need to shoot 200 rounds before you deem your ammo “good to go” but you should have more than a 20-round box.
There is decent expanding ammunition that doesn’t cost a fortune. A good example is the .357 Remington Golden Saber. At around $300/case of 500 this is less than half of what you would spend on a similar quantity of super high-end, premium ammo, and it performs well.
Availability: Finding a certain brand, caliber, and bullet weight in the premium defensive ammunition lines can be notoriously difficult. Some gun shops carry certain things, and others don’t. The internet has alleviated this somewhat, but certain rounds can still be hard to find. This is one of those practical things that may drive your decision somewhat.
Long-term Availability: Though I tend to stock up on ammunition, I like to have a reasonable degree of certainty that my preferred load will be around for a while. For this reason I strongly favor ammunition from established manufacturers. There’s nothing wrong with upstart and boutique companies – even upstart ammo companies. I like to support them when I can, but I’m not going to adopt a carry load from them. When choosing my defensive carry ammunition I’ll go with a company that has been around a long time, and has a well respected product line that has seen decent adoption by law enforcement.
Contraindications
There are some factors that should give you pause when choosing defensive carry ammunition. The firearms and ammunition industries are not immune to gimmick products. There are some contraindications that will make me second guess a particular load or brand. The questions I’m going ask are:
Is this a new round that is making all sorts of fantastic claims about “extreme” this or that, or some newly discovered bullet technology? I’m content to leave “multiple wound channels” and “extreme penetration” to shotguns and rifles, respectively. Do the cartridges come in blister packs? That’s a bad sign. Are the cartridges designed to either, a. not expand and provide penetration that can be measured in feet instead of inches, b. provide radical expansion at the expense of penetration, or c. fragment and not retain weight? If the answers to any of the above are “yes”, I’ll pass. Is the ammunition way more expensive than premium ammunition from more established manufacturers? That’s a practical factor I can’t ignore regardless of how “great” this new bullet is.
Choosing Defensive Carry Ammunition: Putting It Together
So these are all a bunch or seemingly disconnected factors, but putting this together isn’t all that hard. I’m going to start with some bullet performance data from trusted sources since this is the stuff I am not going to try to do myself. There are tons of online resources out there that document bullet performance. I am a fan of the Lucky Gunner’s test. I was also fortunate enough to help out with that test, firing a few of those shots and digging a lot of those bullets out of the blocks, so I tend to lean that way. If my bias puts you off, a little poking around on Google and YouTube will yield plenty of other results.
After I’ve narrowed down the candidates based on what I believe to be adequate penetration, expansion, and weight retention, I’m going to see what I can find. Online shopping makes it easier to find what you’re looking for, but certain rounds (the Winchester Ranger line comes to mind) can still be hard to find. Once I’ve found what I’m looking for, I’ll assess its availability, both in the short and long terms. If it looks like something I’ll be able to lay in a decent supply of, and still be able to buy a couple years from now, I’ll buy a couple boxes and move on to the next step.
The next step involves shooting some of the ammo. There are a couple of sub-phases to this. The first portion will be spent running the gun pretty hard and checking a few things. Can I control the recoil over multiple shots? Are the cartridges hard to get into the cylinders during reloads? During each reload I’m also going to be cognizant of extraction – do the cartridges all come out fairly easily?
The next portion is some slow-fire and possibly even rested fire. This is to determine the accuracy in my gun, – i.e. does it shoot point-of-aim (or close to it) and does it hold an acceptable group? Throughout both of these phases I’m aware of the other factors. Is it reliable? A single light-strike is enough to turn me off to an entire line of ammunition – in THAT gun. Is it overly dirty? If I have the opportunity, I’ll fire a cylinder or two in low light to assess the muzzle flash, but as previously stated this is a tertiary consideration for me at most.
The Bottom Line
Do you have to be this anal about choosing defensive ammo? Honestly, probably not. In fact, you’ll probably be just fine with any premium jacketed hollowpoint, provided you can hit with it and control it. But I’m a detail guy. So there’s the details as I see them – use them as you see fit.
Liked it? Support RevolverGuy on Patreon!
Justin,
I enjoy your articles. It’s nice to know others are hooked on revolvers and your information is interesting and useful.
Thanks for creating this blog!
Jim
Jim,
Many thanks – I’m really glad you’re enjoying it!
Happy Memorial Day!
Justin
I really like that you included the contraindications section. A lot of articles mention to stay away from gimmick ammo, but the fact that such ammos keep being produced (and sold) implies that some folks need more info on what is a gimmick. I think you did a good job of addressing a pretty diverse category.
Thank you! Really that was how this whole thing started – with me watching too many YouTube videos about the G2 R.I.P…
Hey Justin, good read my friend.
First off let me respond to the “light hit” thing. I have seen this enough times to cause me to do some research. Some time back I took one of my J Frames and installed an extended length firing pin (Brownells part # 206-000-010WB ). I tried it out and thought i noticed some extra recoil that was not there previously. I am qualified to state such since I probably have 35K + rounds through this gun. I set up the chrony only to find my suspicions verified. Increased velocity was a by-product of a more intense primer strike, thus throwing a greater spark, changing the burn rate of the powder in that hand load. A tangential point of interest,,, I believe it is Powers Custom that I bought extended “nose cones” (AKA firing pin) for older revolvers where the firing pin was attached directly to the hammer by means of a rivet.
At this point in time ALL of my Js have extended firing pins and I have had NO issues. FYI the extended length firing pin increase penetration into the typical primer by .015″.
In my opinion,,, one lowly light hit isn’t a trend. Could have been dirt holding that cartridge rearward just enough to allow it to “slide forward” upon firing pin impact. I don’t know,,, I wasn’t there,,, and Internet gun-smithing is NOT one of my specialties.
Next,,, ammo choice. Man a guy can get totally wrapped around the axle on this one. That bullet does this and this bullet does that. What does it all translate into? Not much from where I sit.
Ballistic data means this bullet did such & such fired from this gun, on this day, into X test media. Unfortunately that test media has no mindset,,, no human emotions and really can’t develop super human strength due to narcotics. The zeal of a typical jihadist may be enough to keep him on his feet and comin at ya like a freight train. YMMV.
I tend to place my emphasis upon shot placement. Those of us who carry short barrel snubbies will typically not gain enough velocity to encourage a hollow point to open anyways due to such short “dwell time” we experience an incomplete powder burn.
The first 5 rounds in my snub are hand-loaded by me and consist of a true HARD-CAST DEWC bullet. I am looking for penetration. The next rounds in my speed loader will be a SWAGED (AKA pure lead, meaning SOFT) 158 grain LSWCHP that I again, hand-load. I do this because trying to rapidly load a DEWC from a speed loader into a cylinder is TOUGH.
My ending thoughts on ammo selection. Marketing slickery will continue to release “new & improved” better stuff we simply have to have if we are to survive. KYBOSH!!! I’ll stick with shot placement.
We tend to have more faith in tangibles,,, something we can touch & hold. I’ll put my faith in skills. Shot placement.
Be well my friend, and enjoy this Memorial Day weekend.
I’ll check out the longer firing pins. That’s very interesting.
Happy Memorial Day, to you, too!
Excellent article! As one who continues to carry a S&W Model 66 with a 2.5″ bbl for protection despite the overwhelming popularity of the semi-auto (and yes, i own a 9mm pistol), the information you provide is not only extremely welcome but also very useful, practical, and timely. Thank you for providing good, solid information about wheelguns and wheelgun ammo that many of us still use to keep us safe. Keep up the great work!
T.L., we’re glad to have you here, Sir! That Model 66 is a wonderful choice. Don’t leave it laying around unattended, or Justin might find a way to sneak it home in his range bag! Thanks for writing and stay tuned for more good stuff here on RevolverGuy.
I carry a small Ruger 357 pocket revolver but my favorite Hornady 125 gr. cartridge feels a little hot for me. Is there a round besides the older 110 gr. Winchester hollow point that reduces recoil without suffering loss of stopping power in the Ruger pocket gun? I generally tolerate recoil in heavy caliber handguns but the new pocket Ruger seems to need the grip improved to reduce felt recoil. I put good rubber grips on my SP-101 3 inch barrel gun because the sharp edges at the back of the trigger housing were a problem but now there is no problem and the revolver is comfortable to shoot with any 357 load, even Bear Loads. I am still a great shooter at the age of 81, 82 soon.
Hello Sir! Thanks for writing in! It’s not clear to me if you’re experiencing problems with .357 Magnum loads in those bullet weights, or if you’re discussing .38 Special, but I think you’re talking about the Magnums. The obvious solution (if it’s .357 Magnum) would be to switch to .38 Special +P loads. I know that the power loss might concern you, but I think it would be far better to carry ammunition that allows you to control the recoil effectively and reduce the recovery time in between shots fired. If that means selecting a less powerful cartridge, then I think that’s a good trade off, and I wouldn’t fret about it. The most important thing is to put rounds on target in critical areas as quickly as possible, and the .38 +P can do this for you.
If you’re adamant about staying with the .357 Magnum, you might look at the Remington Golden Saber 125 grain. This is a medium-velocity load that might be more tolerable than the Hornady load, but I suspect the difference won’t be significant enough to solve your problem. Same for the Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel 135 grain load that Justin favors.
Some excellent .38 +P loads to consider would be the Speer Gold Dot 135 grain, Winchester PDX1 (or Ranger SXT) 130 grain, or the new Federal HST 130 grain. These loads seem to perform well in testing, while staying closer to point of aim than many of the 110 grain loads.
Once again, thanks for writing in!
A lot of ink (electrons in today’s digital world ?) has flowed concerning the topic of ammunition choices.
There’s a lot of good information and common sense in the above article. I’m going to attempt to add a little more.
The practical aspects of ammunition selection should play a large role in the selection process and serve as a counter to some of the marketing hype.
The criteria for ammunition selection should be biased toward the basics first: Is it reliable? Is it available and affordable? Is it accurate in my application?
After the basics are covered, we need to make decisions about terminal performance and this is where we need to be careful to sidestep all of the marketing hype. Pictures of beautifully mushroomed slugs, glowing ballistic gelatin tests, fancy packaging and clever sounding labels need to be put into perspective. Ammunition manufactures have learned that pictures of perfectly mushroomed bullets sell cartridges. There’s nothing inherently wrong with those beautifully mushroomed slugs recovered from a block of gelatin but we need some perspective. If someone is trying to kill me, I don’t care what the bullet looks like when the fight is over. I just want that attacker to stop before he/she does harm to me. When that in mind, the evaluation of the cartridge’s performance should be based on actual results and not predicted results. The only way to gain that data is by looking at actual uses in the real world. In a nutshell – we should look at track records not predicted results.
I like cartridges that are proven over a lot of actual shootings, over a lot of years.
I like long track records.
Marketing is a powerful tool, maybe too powerful sometimes.
I don’t disagree, but don’t think anything I’ve ever recommended here that lacks a substantial track record. Also, even though I opened this article with a photo of a beautifully expanded bullet, I don’t believe I over-hyped anything.
I’m not saying your recommendations lacked a track record or that you over-hyped anything.
Just pointing out that marketing is a strong force and one that needs to be taken into consideration when making decisions.
The 135 grain Gold Dot does fine in Magnum, but it doesn’t fare well in LuckyGunner’s tests in 38+p. It was what I carried until I saw that data. I have since switched to the Federal 130 grain HSTs. Not only do they outperform every 38+p on gel from a snub, they are exactly poi/poa aligned with my sights on my 442 and my wife’s 638. They are amazingly accurate, nickel plated, sealed on both ends, and best of all use the sensitive and consistent Federal primer (I have an Apex kit, too). The only bugaboo is the speedloader. It isn’t that bad once you practice with it. I can get just under a 5 second reload with a Comp1 with the Feds or the Dots. But I bungle it about 1/10 with the Feds where I only do that 1/50 with the Dots. Then I roll crimped the very end of the Feds. And that made a significant difference. I called Federal and they said this shouldn’t affect the bullet by may affect pressure, which I sincerely doubt. Anyway, it’s something to consider. The Feds are three quarters each on Sportsman’s guide now. Another idea is to carry the cylinder full of Feds and have the Dots in the loader.
Anthony, I’m concerned for your safety if you’re roll crimping the .38 Special HSTs as described. This can cause dangerous and unpredictable pressure spikes which can lead to damage or injury, and we do NOT advocate the practice here at RevolverGuy. Industry testing of some pistol cartridges indicates that even a minor amount of bullet setback can dramatically increase the internal pressures in the case, so crimping the end of the case would be equally dangerous.
It’s a much better solution is to carry a different type of cartridge, with a more favorable profile, in your loaders, as you suggested.
Regarding ammo choice, I’d caution that the LuckyGunner tests are interesting, but not definitive. They represent but a single data point for consideration, and it’s unclear how much influence the differences they noted actually make in the real world. Is a bullet that penetrates an inch deeper, or expands a hundredth of an inch, really that much better than another? Would it make a practical difference? How do you know?
Many people don’t understand that the material used to test the bullets in the LG experiment is a different material than what the FBI specifies, and performs differently than 10% calibrated gelatin. Bullets shot into the synthetic gel tend to underexpand and overpenetrate compared to calibrated gelatin, so using an FBI yardstick—designed to measure results in calibrated gelatin—to measure performance in an entirely different test medium is problematic. Proceed with caution.
In the end, even calibrated gelatin can only tell you so much. It’s designed to simulate tissue, but cannot simulate skin or bone, both of which are much tougher on bullets than tissue. As Evan Marshall says, “Gel isn’t people,” and is actually a poor measure of how bullets really work in bad guys. Bullets from autopsy rarely look like the bullets recovered from gel.
So, gel testing is useful, but not definitive, and I’d caution RevolverGuys not to put too much emphasis on it. It should be part of your calculation, but should not drive your decision by itself.
Large police departments—like the NYPD—have been using .38 Gold Dot for decades now, and have accumulated some credible data about how the ammunition works in the real world, not the lab. The NYPD has been very pleased with the performance of this round in actual shootings, and I think that’s an important data point to consider. I give this kind of information more weight in my calculus than something like the LuckyGunner data.
Your decision making may follow a different path, and that’s OK. As Jim Higginbotham is fond of saying, “We all have to find our own salvation.” I’d simply caution that when we’re talking about terminal ballistics, there’s a lot more gray than black and white. Pretty charts and neat rows of data are seductive, but don’t tell the whole story.
As a result of information sources like LUCKY GUNNER and others, I have stopped using snub nose revolvers except for pocket or other deep concealment carries. I have adopted the FEDERAL HST load for my .38 Specials, 9m.m. and .40 S&W pistols. My agency also issues the HST load.
In my revolvers, I load the HST load, but my speedloaders carry REMINGTON 125 grain +P sjhp ammo. I use the REMINGTON because it makes a fast reload and the ammo is so cheap in the 100 round boxes, I can use it for practice ammo.
In my S&W model 12, COLT Viper and other standard pressure guns, which I occasionally wear when going for a long walk, I stick with HORNADY 110 grain FTX ammo if the gun will not work 100 percent with the WINCHESTER Defend 130 grain jhp.
I have had problems with WINCHESTER ammo in many of my revolvers and pistols, so while I like the performance of the Defend ammo in .38 Special (it is a standard pressure load), I have to be very picky about which gun I will use it in.
I have also had problems with the 110 grain .357 magnum load and only use it for practice as it is so cheap.
In my GLOCK model 42, the .380ACP Defend round works fine and it is my carry ammo.
Also, my choices in defense guns for home or carry are frequently selected by a combination of size, power and recoil.
I like the standard pressure 9m.m. HST load in my BERETTA, GLOCK, SPRINGFIELD ARMORY and SIG as the recoil is fully controlable in these guns and the performance equals the old +P loads.
Same for my mid size revolvers. I like the 110 grain .357 magnum ammo in my RUGER Security Six revolvers. Recoil is controllable in a 4 inch revolver that is just right for carry based on size, weight and grip size, I use either HOGUE or PACKMAYR Gripper grips and consider these revolvers to be an excellent compromise.
I also have a GP+100 and a pair of L-frames and while they are better shooters due to the reduced recoil, they are heavier to the point of not being comfortable for all day carry.
I used to carry one of these on duty, a S&W 681, that had an action slick and was MAGNA PORTED with a pair of HOGUE grips. It is a great shooter, but the few extra ounces make it less desirable to carry. I eventually went back to my issue gun, a S&W model 13, a great carry gun, but harder to shoot.
My agency also had at least one forcing cone cracking incident with the model 13 when we were issued some of the 125 grain ammo instead of the usually issued 110 grain .357 magnum.
Just my experiences,
Jim