Hornady Critical Defense

[ptmccain]

In a recent poll on which SD ammo do you prefer I was the only one to mention using Hornady Critical Defense, which got me to thinking....

Is there something wrong with it? Some reason why 1911 users in the poll did not mention using it?

Thanks guys.

[wahoo95]

I read where Hornady says the CD line of ammo is designed for shallow penetration. I've yet to see any real life shoot data, so all I can really see is a bunch of money Hornady spent on marketing. It holds no real advantages over the current proven favorites such as Ranger, Golt Dot, or HST so I see no reason to recommend it at this time. Just my opinion....

[ghettomedic]

Loaded light for caliber and promises "consistent expansion" at the expense of penetration? I'll pass. It seems as though the firearms magazine/advertising booklets have skewed perception of penetration vs. expansion as if it is a zero sum game. With today's materials, manufacturing and ballistics science there is no reason why you should have to choose one vs. the other.

If you have not done so, please reference DocGKR's ammo recommendations here (https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19887), paying particular attention to the last four lines:

"The keys are:

-- Cultivate a warrior mindset
-- Invest in competent, thorough initial training and then maintain skills with regular ongoing practice
-- Acquire a reliable and durable weapon system
-- Purchase a consistent, robust performing duty/self-defense load in sufficient quantities (at least 1000 rounds) then STOP worrying about the nuances of handgun ammunition terminal performance."

[C4IGrant]

I don't know of any large PD, SO or Agency to run it. Which means that it has not met LE reqs/standards.

So for me, I tend to choose ammo that is approved by LE (and tested extensively).

No ammo manufacturer QC's their ammo more than ATK (Federal/Speer). Couple that with the fact that they make some of the best (if not the best) defensive ammo around and it is easy to just stick with them.


C4

[Guns-up.50]

Im quite happy with my 230gr GD. They feed good in my colts and they have been around for a long time. No need to switch to something that i dont know about. If you like the round then stick with it. Once i found a round that worked good for my gun and had good blastic reviews i went with it. I dont get soaked up in the media hype of the shooting world. He who spends the most on advertisement doesnt always have the best product.

[C4IGrant]

Im quite happy with my 230gr GD. They feed good in my colts and they have been around for a long time. No need to switch to something that i dont know about. If you like the round then stick with it. Once i found a round that worked good for my gun and had good blastic reviews i went with it. I dont get soaked up in the media hype of the shooting world. He who spends the most on advertisement doesnt always have the best product.

You are right. No one should believe advertising.

What people SHOULD pay attention to is what DocGKR does reviews on and what large PD's/SO's use (as they tend to do a lot of testing).

While it is great that Hornady ammo "feeds" in your gun, this is really just a small aspect of the entire picture.


C4

[operator81]

Speer Gold Dot, Winchester Ranger T/Ranger Bonded or Federal HST/Tactical Bonded. Those are the ammunition makers and product lines I will consider for personal defense use. Hornady does make a good product, but there is no hard data on their CD line for me to consider using it above Speer, Federal or Winchester.

[ptmccain]

Just bought some Ranger Talon for my 1911 and my 9mm Glocks
:happy: