Case in point, 600 lbs. or so bike and rider at 120+ mph near my house. The car driver IIRC walked away. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1429586897.jpg

i believe they are making the mustang once again..we have two new ones at the shop.

Interesting the bike is not folded up like an accordion.

Couched in this is the best advice for Mrs. Z - do what the FBI just did. Most of the reasons they have made this (seemingly regressive) change are no doubt valid for Mrs. Z as well.

She will shoot it better than a larger caliber, and it is "adequate" as far as penetration. Please note, however, its "adequacy" is entirely dependent upon the correct ammunition - heavy for caliber, non-expanding bullets. Flat nosed "truncated cone" bullets pretty nearly mimic the classic semi-wadcutter used in the revolver.

Not that that is the ammunition the FBI chose. Unfortunately, politics seem to trump ballistics in these choices. I'll bet the male agents are not happy with this decision, seeing it as being made more to accomodate female agents that have trouble qualifying with larger calibers. That, and the deadly Miami shootout that cost several agents their lives, even though it's now over 20 years ago, will never fade from their memories. That shootout still stands as the abject lesson in bullet and caliber failure.

Bigger calibers are always better, but there is a limit to what any one individual is comfortable shooting. In that regard, female FBI agents win, and will be more effective should worse come to worse. Maybe they would be better off qualifying two calibers, letting the agents (and their qualifying scores) determine which one they carry.

Ironically, at the same time the FBI gave up on the .40 S&W and went back to the 9mm, our Marines have given up on the 9mm Baretta and have gone back to the 1911 in .45 ACP. They got tired of bad guys shrugging off solid hits from the 9mm. They shoot a lot more people, under far tougher circumstances than does the FBI. And they have never been afraid to buck politics. And they have no women in combat roles...

Aren't the FBI allowed to choose and carry their own weapons? The cops and other LEO that I know are typically issued a sidearm, but many choose to carry their own for various reasons.

The combat application failure for 9mm isn't that it's inadequate.....it's those stupid rules by which we play while the other side makes them up as they go. Ball 9mm is small, semi-pointy and fast. It also doesn't tend to tumble. It makes clean wounds and usually exits cleanly as well. When you throw a well-designed, heavy, JHP into the caliber, it's more than adequate.

As for no women in combat roles: The Corps beat the Army to the punch, both enlisted and officer Infantry courses have been open to females for quite some time. None have graduated the officer course yet. In fact, only 3 have made it past the first 5 days. However, there are more than a few Female, enlisted, Infantry Marines in the fleet now.

So, just to get relevant to wheelguns - how do we think about the .38 SPL +P and the .357 Mag, compared to these autoloader calibers?

My thoughts are .38 Spl +p is a bit less than a 9mm (9x19) and a .357 is a whole lot more.

I thought of the 9mm as a comparission was good as they are much the same diameter.

I'll defer to you and your knowledge of the Marine Corps. I have no direct knowledge or experience. That said, however, I've had interesting conversations with my boss, a retired Marine Corps Infantry Officer. He's very much the personification of "once a Marine, always a Marine", and remains very close to a few guys still serving.

He is quite proud of being an Infantry Officer, and deservedly so. I admire and respect the man a great deal, not just for his service, but for his leadership in an often difficult civilian job role. Anyway, 'nuff of who he is - he is adamant that there are no women in infantry combat roles. Myself, not understanding the finer distinctions between "combat" and "infantry combat", it looks like I thoroughly botched my statement about women in "combat". What I meant was actively shooting, the very "tip of the spear" so to speak. I guess there are plenty in "combat" roles, in supporting positions, just not out there kicking in doors, clearing rooms, getting into firefights, and all of that.

Anyway, I don't want to belabor that point. Anyone who is up for that kind of service gets my fullest respect and gratitude. The salient point I was trying to make - and the one important to Mrs. Z - is that smaller folks have an easier time with smaller weapons. That's kind of a no-brainer, really. The real question is "how small is too small?" (not the person, the caliber). There is a lower limit at which effectiveness becomes too compromised. We argue about where that lies, and always will, but it's there. Our different experiences lead us to different conclusions. I offer my own experiences to illustrate where I'm coming from, and hopefully to convey I'm not just passing along what I've read somewhere. I'm the quintessential "doubting Thomas" in a lot of regards, with firearms and ballistics just happening to turn out to be one area that really caught my interest early on.

Bill is pretty much right on with his assessment of the 9mm, .38 Special +P, and the .357 mag, as far as foot pounds of energy produced. That said, with available bullet designs, I would place the .38 Special, even at standard pressures, ahead of the 9mm in real killing power. Again, it's all about the bullet. There are a wide variety of semi-wadcutter style bullets available in .357"-.359" diameter (I even shoot .360" in some guns) for the revolver. We don't see much along those lines in .355"-.356" diameter for the 9mm, although those of us who cast bullets can make them. That, and they just don't seem to feed well in typical 9mm pistols. Which is odd, because we have no trouble with 200 grain semi-wadcutters in the .45 ACP. So, on bullet selection alone, I prefer the .38 Special.

My favorite target pistol was a semi auto in .38 SPL. S&W model 52. Oh I loved that gun.

Lots of the old time pistol smiths converted 1911's to shoot .38 Special wadcutters for the old "2700" game. This traditional bullseye match calls for three guns, one in .45 ACP, one rimfire, and one centerfire. A total of 900 points are on the table for each of the three guns, for a total of 2700.

Revolvers in .38 Special and .44 Special dominated the "centerfire" portion for an awfully long time. Once they figured out how to accurize the 1911, most competitors went to that (in .38 Special) for the "centerfire" stages, so they only had to learn two guns. Further on down that road, most went to using the .45 ACP for both the ".45" stages and the "centerfire" stages. The S&W 52 was one of these early .38 Special wadcutter guns. Good ones are very much sought after today.

Speaking of .38 Special wadcutters, they have a reputation of being a pretty decent defensive round, especially in shorter barrels. They are usually loaded over light charges of fast burning powders (Bullseye, 231, etc.) so they get about all they are going to from shorter barrels. Low recoil, too.

That S&W .38 model 52 won a competition at the Olympics.


I don't know what comp' it was but a guy at the pistol club with one tells me this about once a week LOL

Bill, I need to get back to NZ.

I should try some .38 SPL wadcutter in my snubby.

Good. There are adventures to be had :)

I mentioned you to an elderly family friend and she passed on a script (I guess that's what you would call it) from the 1940s? called "Walt Disney's Bambi Reaches the Screen --- After Five Years in Production" with pictures and sheet music. She thought maybe Walt Disney Corp would like it.

Colts.............
 

Colt actually built a proprietary 1911 for the .38 wadcutter round to compete with the S&W version. But you are correct in saying that 'smiths did a lot of conversions.

Crash...........
 

Maybe the bike isn't, but how about the rider?

My new spoon question. I don't mean to hijack the thread, so please point me in the right direction if there's already a general thread, or if you'd rather I'd just start a new one for my specific question.

I've recently moved to central Texas, very remote, lots of critters. I want to get a small piece to carry on hikes around the property, something like the Taurus Personal Protector, which fires .45 ACP or 410 shells. My carry is a 1911, but I'd probably blow my toe off trying to hit a rattler with that.

Anyway I wanted to ask this group if there's something comparable to the PP that can do the same, in about the same footprint (jeans pocket)? I know there's some hate for Taurus among the shooters here, but I've held (not fired) one of these, and it seemed sturdy and well built to me.

Thanks in advance for your help
http://i.imgur.com/zZBbaYJ.jpg?1

I would just buy a compact revolver and put snake shot in it. That judge looks like fun but .410 is really not necessary for snakes and it is a poor set up to shoot 45 LC. It also is big. It's more likely you carry a small piece on a regular basis.

Load the first three rounds shot and the rest with large critter ammo.

I'm sure our archivist would love it.