Support Head-Fi.org by
starting all of your
Amazon.com shopping by
clicking here.
____________________________________________________________________
Today's Featured Head-Fi Blog: Jude's Blog
____________________________________________________________________
Please help
support Head-Fi by becoming a Contributing Member
CLICK
HERE -- Contributing Members, thank you
for your generous support! --
No, but it looks like a refinement of the Glaser safety load; larger lead birdshot filling a bullet jacket and held in place with a plastic plug and I have several decades of experience with those. Forensic pathologists I have known refer to the wound track left in human flesh by the Glaser "bullet" as "inoperable". BTW, Glasers were introduced to make some inadequate pistol calibers (.25ACP, .32ACP, .32H&R. etc) "seem" more effective. Mag Safe work about the same as Glasers for reducing ricochets and shoot-throughs, but should also have the same problems in terms of physics. The advertised Mag Safe bullet weights are half (or less) of an appropriate jacketed hollowpoint in each caliber. Mag Safe loads have much higher claimed velocities than conventional JHP loads in each caliber. They have much lower sectional densities. They are about ten times more expensive. So:
They will shoot to a different point of aim than conventional JHP ammunition in any given pistol (perhaps beyond sight adjustment)
Their velocities will be more affected by the available barrel length than conventional JHP ammunition in the caliber
They will recoil differently than conventional ammunition, which may affect reliable funtion in semi-automatic firearms (I've seen pistols completely refuse to load or feed Glasers)
They will lose velocity more rapidly in flight than conventional JHP of the caliber (gives them a trajectory of a lob wedge)
Their penetration against light cover or vehicles will be markedly less than conventional JHP ammunition of the caliber
They will probably have higher flash and report than conventional JHP loads in the caliber
They will be too costly for effective regular practice
I guess I would view them also as a specialty ammunition for particular narrow "up close" purposes (ie. assassination) rather than an effective general purpose self defense load.
__________________
Doing my duty . . . . the way I see it.
"The trouble with most people is not what they don't know, but what they know for certain that isn't true."
Mark Twain
I got away from the Glasers back in the early 80s; they were very expensive, had a different point of impact than my usual ammunition, were useless against vehicles or light cover, and had problematic functioning in some semi-auto pistols due to the light bullet weight. I could never afford enough of them (at least 250 rounds) to train adequately with and ascertain reliable function. You may want to re-think this.
Old Pa,
Thank you for the advice, but I think the Glasers will do just fine for it's intended purpose; close quarters, confined space, home protection. No ricochets, no strays.
Thank you for the advice, but I think the Glasers will do just fine for it's intended purpose; close quarters, confined space, home protection. No ricochets, no strays.
To each his own. I, myself, have never experienced or thought I would have quite that much control over the circumstances of a self defense situation involving lethal force. BTW, since lethal force exercises are these days most commonly accompanied by later criminal and/or civil prosecutions, even if successful in the self defense encounter, I would not like to explain to a civil jury in a wrongful death action my particular choice of fragmenting projectile ammunition before the bereaved widow(s), kiddies, and other surviving relations. But what do I know?
__________________
Doing my duty . . . . the way I see it.
"The trouble with most people is not what they don't know, but what they know for certain that isn't true."
Mark Twain
Going back to the range tomorrow. Going to try out a glock .40 and 9mm. Revolvers last time, pistols this time. I really enjoyed watching myself get even incrementally better while practicing. This may well turn into a hobby.
Headphones Sold: AKG k501, k340, k701 and k1000(twice), Denon D5000, Senn HD580 and HD650, Sony SA5000 and CD3000, Audio Technica W5000, Grado 325i, RS1(twice), RS2 and Allesandro MS-2i, Headphile hp3000(Grado hp1000 drivers in a Sony CD3K shell) and k3000(AKG K1000 drivers in a Sony CD3K shell)
No, but it looks like a refinement of the Glaser safety load; larger lead birdshot filling a bullet jacket and held in place with a plastic plug and I have several decades of experience with those. Forensic pathologists I have known refer to the wound track left in human flesh by the Glaser "bullet" as "inoperable". BTW, Glasers were introduced to make some inadequate pistol calibers (.25ACP, .32ACP, .32H&R. etc) "seem" more effective. Mag Safe work about the same as Glasers for reducing ricochets and shoot-throughs, but should also have the same problems in terms of physics. The advertised Mag Safe bullet weights are half (or less) of an appropriate jacketed hollowpoint in each caliber. Mag Safe loads have much higher claimed velocities than conventional JHP loads in each caliber. They have much lower sectional densities. They are about ten times more expensive. So:
They will shoot to a different point of aim than conventional JHP ammunition in any given pistol (perhaps beyond sight adjustment)
Their velocities will be more affected by the available barrel length than conventional JHP ammunition in the caliber
They will recoil differently than conventional ammunition, which may affect reliable funtion in semi-automatic firearms (I've seen pistols completely refuse to load or feed Glasers)
They will lose velocity more rapidly in flight than conventional JHP of the caliber (gives them a trajectory of a lob wedge)
Their penetration against light cover or vehicles will be markedly less than conventional JHP ammunition of the caliber
They will probably have higher flash and report than conventional JHP loads in the caliber
They will be too costly for effective regular practice
I guess I would view them also as a specialty ammunition for particular narrow "up close" purposes (ie. assassination) rather than an effective general purpose self defense load.
+1, glasers and MagSafes have been shown to be unable to achieve the depths in ballistic gelatin to pass the FBI's test. If you read Fackler, et al, the 2 ways to take someone down are:
1) Blood Loss - make the hole big but unless you hit an artery may take some time during which they can kill you.
2) CNS hit - Fastest way to bring them down and the reason for the FBI's recommendation. The FBI guidelines are based on the Miami shootout where a bad guy managed to shoot a number of agents to ribbons after a bullet didn't penetrate deeply enough to hit his heart allowing him to continue on his rampage.
__________________
Proud member of Team Stealth.
Proud member of Fuzzy Fuzz's Fuzzbox.
+1, glasers and MagSafes have been shown to be unable to achieve the depths in ballistic gelatin to pass the FBI's test. If you read Fackler, et al, the 2 ways to take someone down are:
1) Blood Loss - make the hole big but unless you hit an artery may take some time during which they can kill you.
2) CNS hit - Fastest way to bring them down and the reason for the FBI's recommendation. The FBI guidelines are based on the Miami shootout where a bad guy managed to shoot a number of agents to ribbons after a bullet didn't penetrate deeply enough to hit his heart allowing him to continue on his rampage.
Yep. Even worse, they don't even perform like you'd expect.
Compare to #4 buck and .45 ACP. Same drywall penetration as #4 buck, marginally less than .45 ACP. Both of these will do the FBI's 12" while the Glaser will not. Also see performance after going through normal drywall construction. It seems that the fragmenting jacket won't fragment upon hitting something as soft as drywall, instead it'll impact and prevent the projectile from fragmenting at all.
The only thing it really helps with is target overpenetration, but light, fast hollowpoints will do the same with lower price and better penetration.
__________________
Simplified Rig: iPod Video > Shure E500
My Feedback
Went to the desert last weekend with my kids and we had enough guns to take down a city hall (just kidding). Le me see: a Tommy gun, SKS, a bunch of shotguns, all kinds of hand guns, from a 25 Browning "purse" gun, to 22's, 38, 45's etc. and a few others. This place had all kind of junk to shoot at, from a bowling pin to an old car fuel tank. Plus we did skeet shooting. Man, we had fun!
It's been a while since I took the FNP9 to the range. I should do it, but bills have been so crushing recently I had to actually sell something audio-related to buy more audio-related things. Usually I can accumulate. =P
It's also kind of hard to take a gun to the range when you don't own a car, and you can't take weapons on public transport. I don't even have a conceal carry permit since I haven't been in OK long enough to be considered a resident.
Edit: I guess I could lock it in the soft bag and stuff it in my satchel, but even so the buses don't exactly go to the boonies where the range is...
__________________
This space intentionally left blank.
But what do I know?
I really enjoyed watching myself get even incrementally better while practicing. This may well turn into a hobby.
Linear Mode
