G&R Tactical
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 44 of 44

Thread: 77gr OTM or 62gr Bonded

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    6,657
    Feedback Score
    82 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by scooter22 View Post
    I guess thatís all fine and dandy when the target isnít moving, and all rounds are touching where they impact the barrier...
    This argument comes up a lot but I think itís overrated. Sure, if youíre fighting across city blocks or in a ****ing hemp field, but inside of most houses Iíve been in, thereís not a whole lot of moving to do. Furniture is typically against the wall and what isnít, is more concealment than cover. Best case for the bad guy, he catches a round coming around the corner and ducks back before catching a second. Changing directions like that takes a second though, and at 5-10 meters, most people can probably send a whole bunch more rounds at him before he shields himself. And even at that, itís probably drywall sooo...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Sic semper tyrannis.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    3,149
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Wake27 View Post
    This argument comes up a lot but I think it’s overrated.
    I disagree. If I was going to bank on best case then I'd go all the way and run 55gr varmint bullets. They usually cause impressive damage on unobstructed shots. The thing is barrier blind is more consistent, both without and especially with a barrier.

    It is the need for OTM accuracy that I question the most in a self defense load.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    586
    Feedback Score
    0
    I suppose Iím late to this thread. But, Iíve noticed weíve come full circle. I remember being disparaged years ago for recommending bonded-core hunting rounds for defensive carbines and being told I was an idiot and that MK 262 was the secret sauce. I was told to ďkeep that Fudd shit in the woodsĒ and other bullshit.

    Iíve seen my fair share of gunshot wounds, and Iíve killed my fair share of game, varmints, and predators. As said above, a V-Max would be the preferred round *if* you could guarantee perfect open-air targets and perfect angles. Honestly, with a shot that misses the desired spots, the V-Max offers lots of damage to soft tissue, more likely to cause arterial damage leading to hemorrhage vs a bonded or solid. Itís also less likely to over-penetrate. We cannot, however, rely on something unreliable. We need consistency. We can roll the dice. Thatís why I use Gold Dots or TSXs.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    64
    Feedback Score
    0
    As someone here already said, at short distances, choosing one round over the other is splitting hairs. One round may have slightly better terminal ballistics over the other and another round will have slightly better barrier penetration over the other but at the end of the day, it’s a rifle wound. Either round will penetrate a couch or a chair.

    These rounds may shine one over the other at distances. For example, at X yards with Y long of a barrel, the expanding bullet may be a better choice due to the velocity not causing the fragmenting one to fragment. Or at X yards with Y long of a barrel the longer and heavier bullet may be a little more accurate and maintain it’s speed a little better. At 10 ft or 10 yards, the differences are negligible. Plain old 55 gr would suffice. If you had the newest 77gr +P Ultra Tap Match Grade Fragmenting Hollow Point with the Lime Green Tip and your opponent had plain old 55 gr, whoever got hit first in a vital area would probably lose.

    These headbreaker ammo choices are first world problems.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •