Walther Forums banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
I love shooting them in all 3 calibers. So accurate, and for whatever reason, I just find them fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,756 Posts
Watched it yesterday. I'd love to find a 32 PPK to go along with my pre war PP, but alas, prices have left me on the side of the road, a mere bystander. I keep looking though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Interesting. Considering how much it's mentioned on this forum that the 32 is like day and night more pleasurable to shoot than the 380, Gun Jesus didn't seem to think so. Said they weren't nearly as different as he expected. Can I feel better about my 380 now? :) Don't get me wrong, I'd love a 32 as well, but have a hard time justifying spending 4 figures on a pistol (and actually shoot it).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
I’m weird. I prefer the .380 to the .32 and I’m not fond of the .22 at all (I actually use it as a training gun for students). I do have a set of the German ppks models... but I much prefer the .380.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,417 Posts
The difference between .32 ACP and .380 ACP in the PPK is like the difference between catching a baseball with a glove versus catching it with your bare hand. I can spend my whole time at the range shooting a .32 without any discomfort or fatigue. After one or two magazines of .380 I'm done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
I think everybody should try a .32 but everybody ain’t gonna feel like its significantly less snappy than the .380... especially if the .380 wasn’t killing their hand in the first place. All of my friends who HATED shooting the .380, apparently love the .32. All of my friends who didn’t have problems shooting the .380, didn’t see a huge difference in feel between the .380 and the .32.

I can shoot both my .380 ppk and .380 ppks at the range all day long. And I’m a girl. Shooting the .32 immediately after shooting the .380 didn’t make me think ‘oh wow... this was like shooting BBs compared to shooting that .380’.

I do wish that there was a .25 though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
My .32 doesn't have the recoil of my .380, but I prefer the .380 for carry. For a couple of reasons. It's more accurate than my .32, or at least I can shoot it better. It's more powerful, if that means much, and it's SS which is easier to carry. I don't find the .380 objectionable recoil-wise, easier than a J-frame S&W, and more accurate by far, at least in my hands. I've expressed before my surprise that many on this board find the .380's recoil unpleasant.

I don't shoot multiple magazines of either on a range day because I've always been reluctant to shoot ammo for fun of it, too expensive. I shoot mine occasionally to verify I still can hit with it for 2-3 mags at self defense ranges and stick it back in my holster. For fun and practice of fundamentals, I'll shoot a .22 High Standard.

I carry a PPK because I like to carry a PPK, I've got better choices for self defense. I've carried a weapon most of my adult life and have never needed to use one for SD, so I guess I carry a PPK for a "fantasy defense" gun. (Bond...James Bond.) But mostly because I like carrying a PPK.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Guys,

New video just posted in Forgotten Weapons:

If you notice Ian (Gun Jesus) did indeed say the .380 recoiled more than the .32 acp but lets explore this further. I have noticed a tremendous amount of pain when shooting most blow back .380's (not locked breach guns) in the winter time when my hands were very cold or even moderately cold compared to my various .32 automatics. Ammo makes a very big difference as well as the really hot loads I have fired out of blow back .380's stung my hand in the winter far worse than my Model 29 .44 magnum. I am in no way being factious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
It's more powerful, if that means much, --------------quote.

That may or may not be true. The German Army adopted the .32 acp over the .380 because the .32 would penetrate a German helmet and the .380 bounced off (in 1945 the U.S. Military did the same with the 9mm v/s the .45 acp and the .45acp lost out dramatically). It has been very well known among professional market hunters since the early 1900's that bullet diameter does not make a caliber more deadly rather its bullet placement and penetration. Having said all that the .380 has a much wider choice of expanding bullets compared to the .32 acp so one might be able to find a .380 brand of bullet that might expand more reliably than the very few styles of expanding .32 caliber bullets available both in brand , design and weight rage.

The moral of the story is test what ammo you are carrying on a large hunk of meat with a couple of layers of new, not old, denim folded over the meat (an outdated ham works fine). I do not trust the results of shooting bullets into water or even ballistic gel as its not real flesh covered with the clothing that you might have to shoot through in a gun battle.

One more interesting historical tidbit which is as true today as it was back then. Agnes Herbert who wrote 3 books on big game hunting in 1900 said that when she first became interested in becoming a crack shot that all the gun magazines she read were total baloney as the gun writers of the day did not know what they were talking about. She was the very first to teach people to shoot with both eyes open contrary to the moron , pompous , men, gun writers of 1900. I might add that today's gun writers differ little from their predecessors. I value little of what they pander to the public today because like Agnes I am a tester not just a reader.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
I don't put much faith in expanding bullets in .32 or .380, depending on penetration. I shoot ball ammo. I would never shoot a ham because I doubt I'd find a free ham to shoot and because I'd rather rely on published data on penetration on denim covered ballistic gel, and even then I find the possibility of being in a gunfight so slight to me while mildly interesting, is filed under information I will never practically put to use. If you watch the video in the OP, you'll see the .380 knocked off the reset target while the .32 did not. To me, that means power. Some of this is ballistics, some is simple math.

As for dangerous game, they're best hunted with big, heavy bullets from what I've read. I'm told that regulations in countries where big dangerous game is hunted, big, heavy bullets are mandated. Preferably moving as fast as can be achieved. I know that Bell guy killed a lot of elephants with a 7mm Mauser, but he was the exception. And that was a long time ago and ethics change. Poachers are killing elephants with AK 47s, but it isn't sport, it's ivory. Not a one shot thing. It's not legal and not wise, but it happens. many rounds.

And on the .44 Mag having less painful recoil than a .380, what load were you using? A .44 Special in my Redhawk is a teddy bear, but full house Magnum loads, is just tolerable with enough rubber on the grips to recap an 18 wheeler. But it's a hell of a lot more painful than a .380. With factory wood grips it's worse.' I don't hate shooting it, but neither do I find it less recoil punishing than my .380. It's the most unpleasant shooting handgun I own.

I admit I'm recoil sensitive. I don't like it. My favorite rifle is a .22 Hornet. The fact that my .380 should give me pain according to you and a lot more on this forum makes me wonder why it doesn't. It shoots sweeter than my J frame .38,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
I don't put much faith in expanding bullets in .32 or .380, depending on penetration. I shoot ball ammo. I would never shoot a ham because I doubt I'd find a free ham to shoot and because I'd rather rely on published data on penetration on denim covered ballistic gel, and even then I find the possibility of being in a gunfight so slight to me while mildly interesting, is filed under information I will never practically put to use. If you watch the video in the OP, you'll see the .380 knocked off the reset target while the .32 did not. To me, that means power. Some of this is ballistics, some is simple math.

As for dangerous game, they're best hunted with big, heavy bullets from what I've read. I'm told that regulations in countries where big dangerous game is hunted, big, heavy bullets are mandated. Preferably moving as fast as can be achieved. I know that Bell guy killed a lot of elephants with a 7mm Mauser, but he was the exception. And that was a long time ago and ethics change. Poachers are killing elephants with AK 47s, but it isn't sport, it's ivory. Not a one shot thing. It's not legal and not wise, but it happens. many rounds.

And on the .44 Mag having less painful recoil than a .380, what load were you using? A .44 Special in my Redhawk is a teddy bear, but full house Magnum loads, is just tolerable with enough rubber on the grips to recap an 18 wheeler. But it's a hell of a lot more painful than a .380. With factory wood grips it's worse.' I don't hate shooting it, but neither do I find it less recoil punishing than my .380. It's the most unpleasant shooting handgun I own.

I admit I'm recoil sensitive. I don't like it. My favorite rifle is a .22 Hornet. The fact that my .380 should give me pain according to you and a lot more on this forum makes me wonder why it doesn't. It shoots sweeter than my J frame .38,
I agree with you on the J frame .38. I don’t shoot mine much because it’s unpleasant when compared to my other guns but these .380s don’t bother me at all... so you are not alone.

I would only carry my .32 if all of my .380s were unavailable. I love the little Walthers for their size so I’m willing to go down to .32 if I can keep the same small package. I don’t use fmj for self defense in any caliber BUT if I had to, the .32 would be the one given that the round is not likely to pass through a bad guy.

As for using a ham, a rack of ribs, etc, I do see the value in that over ballistics gel and denim. Ideally I’d like to see both tests. I’ve seen highly acclaimed Hornady ammo perform perfectly in the gel then fail miserably after hitting a shard of rib bone. I’m a believer and I’ve changed my carry ammo based on those ‘closer to reality’ experiments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
Lucky Gunner does tests in gel and denim on both rounds (and others,) Very informative. Basic is expansion limits penetration, which is why I carry FMJ. Plus the pistols were made to shoot them decades before hollow points were made. I've not seen these rounds shot into hams or ribs but feel a FMJ would penetrate better, not that I expect to have to defend my life with one. BTW, the FBI standard is 12" of penetration and some HP rounds didn't make it in gel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
I don't put much faith in expanding bullets in .32 or .380, depending on penetration. I shoot ball ammo. I would never shoot a ham because I doubt I'd find a free ham to shoot and because I'd rather rely on published data on penetration on denim covered ballistic gel, and even then I find the possibility of being in a gunfight so slight to me while mildly interesting, is filed under information I will never practically put to use. If you watch the video in the OP, you'll see the .380 knocked off the reset target while the .32 did not. To me, that means power. Some of this is ballistics, some is simple math.

As for dangerous game, they're best hunted with big, heavy bullets from what I've read. I'm told that regulations in countries where big dangerous game is hunted, big, heavy bullets are mandated. Preferably moving as fast as can be achieved. I know that Bell guy killed a lot of elephants with a 7mm Mauser, but he was the exception. And that was a long time ago and ethics change. Poachers are killing elephants with AK 47s, but it isn't sport, it's ivory. Not a one shot thing. It's not legal and not wise, but it happens. many rounds.

And on the .44 Mag having less painful recoil than a .380, what load were you using? A .44 Special in my Redhawk is a teddy bear, but full house Magnum loads, is just tolerable with enough rubber on the grips to recap an 18 wheeler. But it's a hell of a lot more painful than a .380. With factory wood grips it's worse.' I don't hate shooting it, but neither do I find it less recoil punishing than my .380. It's the most unpleasant shooting handgun I own.

I admit I'm recoil sensitive. I don't like it. My favorite rifle is a .22 Hornet. The fact that my .380 should give me pain according to you and a lot more on this forum makes me wonder why it doesn't. It shoots sweeter than my J frame .38,T
quote---------------------------If you watch the video in the OP, you'll see the .380 knocked off the reset target while the .32 did not. To me, that means power. Some of this is ballistics, some is simple math.--------------quote

I believe that I too saw the video you mentioned on You tube. It did not impress me one bit and as to proving the .380 had more power. Here is why:

If you watch the video of the President Reagan Assassination attempt you will see the Assassin mow down not one but 3 large men with a pistol shooting a .22 rimfire round. All 3 men were knocked off their feet. The security guard shot in the shoulder was the most thought provoking.

Although it was understandable that Jim Bradey would have been knocked down because he was hit in the head but the Security guard was only hit in the shoulder yet it spun him around and knocked him down. All this proves that all the ballistic mumbo jumbo you are given in the gun rags often relates little to actual shootings incidents and the standard gun writer story that if you shoot someone with the lowly .22 rim fire you will only make him mad certainly was dis-proven as just gun writer baloney. I think this can be compared to the debate over the .32 v/s the .380 as well.

I might mention Jack O'Connor as well because he proved that W.D.M. Bell was correct about small calibers being so deadly on the biggest of dangerous game. O'Connor found out that the .270 did not bounce off of big game as the bull crapping Elmer Keith claimed and that small rifle calibers like the .270 could and did even mow down moose and grizzly bear just as Bell's 6.5mm mowed down over 1,000 elephants and Bill Judd's 577 Nitro Express got him killed after he blasted an elephant 6 times with one and it failed to stop the elephant because of insufficient penetration. Again it was not caliber that killed it was bullet penetration and placement that did and still does. I have shot deer with both the 9mm and .45 acp and the 9mm was the better killer especially when the ranges were increased. Like Bell and O'Connor my own experience seem to mirror theirs i.e. it is bullet penetration and placement not caliber that kills or incapacitates.

I might also mention the infamous Col. Thompson Chicago Stockyard tests of 1900 that proved the opposite of what Col. Thompson said and that was that his own testing on 1,200 lb steers proved that the .30 Luger and 9mm Luger killed the steers every bit as well as the .44 and .45 cal. revolvers he used during those tests even when Thompson in a blind panic the ran out and bought expanding bullets for the revolvers yet they failed to be superior once again. Thompson then lied between his teeth when he recommended to the U.S. Ordinance Board that larger caliber pistols were more deadly and the U.S. should adopt a modern semi-auto pistol in .45 caliber. See the Gun Digest article "Shooting Holes in the Stopping power theory" emphasis of course on the word "theory". The unfortunate result of Col. Thompson's lying was that the U.S. got stuck with the .45 acp which had inferior penetration, also had increased recoil which resulted in less accuracy for the recruits over the 9mm and lower magazine capacity and a less flat trajectory making it the inferior combat cartridge compared to the 9mm of that era. That is why the Europeans roundly rejected the .45 acp in favor of the 9mm and the Russians adopted the .30 Tokarev which is another interesting story for another day.

The moral of the story is that the .32 acp is not the anemic caliber mouthed by the gun writers nor is the .380 so superior either to it. In fact with the extra penetration of the .32 acp it may when using fmj bullets be superior to the .380 when using fmj bullets in that caliber. Whether the .380 using expanding bullets is superior to the .32 acp is still rather nebulous because of a variety of variables. Again another long story.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
It is physically impossible for a .22 to knock someone off his feet. They fell as a reaction to getting shot, not because of the massive firepower. It is also impossible for ANY handgun to knock someone off his feet without it knocking the shooter off HIS feet. (action/equal reaction) There is a video of a Michigan deputy shooting a guy who attacked her. She had a 9mm pistol and shot the guy like 9 times and he continued to attack her and only fell when his central nervous system shut down.

I like a .32 and feel it's adequate. The .380 is also adequate, but not demonstrably more adequate than a .32. It delivers more mass at more fps, so there is that. I haven't seen penetration results on a FMJ .380 but I have on a .32, which penetrated deeper than SOME .380 expanding bullets.

I wouldn't put all my eggs in the baskets of trials conducted 50-100 years ago. I don't hunt anything, but if I was put in a self defense situation with dangerous game, I wouldn't rely on a 7x57 (my favorite round, btw) to deliver the goods. Bell proved it was possible, but "possible" for one man doesn't mean it's a great idea for the rest of humanity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Lucky Gunner does tests in gel and denim on both rounds (and others,) Very informative. Basic is expansion limits penetration, which is why I carry FMJ. Plus the pistols were made to shoot them decades before hollow points were made. I've not seen these rounds shot into hams or ribs but feel a FMJ would penetrate better, not that I expect to have to defend my life with one. BTW, the FBI standard is 12" of penetration and some HP rounds didn't make it in gel.
The FBI also has a maximum penetration limit so everything has to be taken into account... also I find that it’s best when comparing ammo to compare the same kinds: fmj to fmj and hp to hp. Lots of folks also only carry .380 fmj, just like in .32. Generally both HPs will underpenetrate, however, there are several brands that consistently meet FBI standards and those are the ones that I carry in my Walthers.

Lucky Gunner recently re-reviewed the .32 debate; they recommended several .32 hp rounds which feed awesomely in my PP guns with penetration beyond 12 inches and less than 18 inches as well as expansion. There are also several videos on the results of shooting .32 fmj through car doors...

If I didn’t expect to have to defend my life with a gun then I wouldn’t bother carrying a gun. It’s too much of a hassle to do just for shyts and giggles. If I’m going to carry, I’m going to carry something that will do what I need it to do with a minimal amount of consequences. Even Uncle Scar told the hyenas to be prepared.

Everybody is going to carry what they want to carry. There’s no wrong answer. As long as whatever it is feeds reliably in your gun. Part of my issue with fmj is the way it’s looked at in self defense situations... if one passes through the bad guy (unlikely in .32), it’s viewed as if the shooter was recklessly shooting reloads or something. That’s what happened in a case my cousin was involved in. I prefer not to have to deal with any of that nonsense so, in the summer-time, my Walthers will stay loaded with factory HPs.

I forgot to include this video (very informative and does touch briefly on types of ammo):

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
It is physically impossible for a .22 to knock someone off his feet. They fell as a reaction to getting shot, not because of the massive firepower. It is also impossible for ANY handgun to knock someone off his feet without it knocking the shooter off HIS feet. (action/equal reaction) There is a video of a Michigan deputy shooting a guy who attacked her. She had a 9mm pistol and shot the guy like 9 times and he continued to attack her and only fell when his central nervous system shut down.

I like a .32 and feel it's adequate. The .380 is also adequate, but not demonstrably more adequate than a .32. It delivers more mass at more fps, so there is that. I haven't seen penetration results on a FMJ .380 but I have on a .32, which penetrated deeper than SOME .380 expanding bullets.

I wouldn't put all my eggs in the baskets of trials conducted 50-100 years ago. I don't hunt anything, but if I was put in a self defense situation with dangerous game, I wouldn't rely on a 7x57 (my favorite round, btw) to deliver the goods. Bell proved it was possible, but "possible" for one man doesn't mean it's a great idea for the rest of humanity.
I agree with you that physically the .22 did not knock the man off his feet because of the bullets momentum nor would a .577 Nitro Express done so either. The point you failed to comprehend is that the man was incapacitated and did hit the ground dramatically. The point I made was that the diameter of the projectile of any round whether it be a large diameter or a small diameter has little if any influence on lethality. Its simply the old argument of the boys beating on the big bore drums without acknowledging the actual history of firearms used in hunting and in warfare. Because shooting of animals or humans are often unique to every incident with many variables to each incident the controversy rages on.

I should have mentioned the Mexican Barn Yard Pig shootings by Pistolero Magazine in the 1980's which once again proved that caliber in the pistols used was mostly irrelevant. They found no practical difference in shooting pigs that have about the same anatomical make up of humans except they are often better behaved. Calibers tested were the 9mm, .357 mag , 38 special and the .45 acp. No difference was detected in the point blank shootings once again refuting the caliber myth.

I might also add the Moro Myth was also just that a myth. Jan Libourel former gun writer now retired actually researched government records during the conquering of the Philippe Islands by the U.S. and found not one written report that claimed the .45 acp or the 45 Long Colt was superior to the 38 Colt cartridge that was used in the conflict. Troops even complained about the lethality of the 30/40 Krag.. The only thing they did praise was the short barreled shotgun. Once again more historical proof caliber is irrelevant.

I might add that one of the reasons the M1 Carbine was adopted was because U.S. Military studies showed the poor record of the .45 acp in causing casualties when used against enemy troops. Of course the M1 carbine proved not much better when substituted for the 45 acp except of course that it had way more firepower and because it was a rifle resulted in more hits on the enemy. Of course I would be less than honest if I did not call into question the professionalism of the study by the Military when they conducted the .45 acp study. It was never made clear to me at least if the failure of the .45 acp was due to the cartridge, the inaccuracy of the shoddily made WWII 1911 guns or the inability of the soldiers to handle the hard recoiling gun and shoot straight and hit a man in the vital organs. Again as you can see may variable come into play.

I can only say in my own experience of shooting deer the .45 acp that it is not the 8th wonder of the world and in no way ever outperformed the 9mm when I shot deer with it. Again my experience mirrored Pistolero's 1980's barn yard pig tests. In my own experience the .45 acp was inferior to the 9mm especially at longer ranges. If your bullet penetrates to the vitals caliber is irrelevant, at least that has been my experience.

I might also add I had a friend years ago that shot deer at a measured distance of 225 yards out his kitchen window with fjm bullets in the .223 caliber. The deer seldom ran more than 25 yards before dropping dead and many times dropped dead on the spot and did not even run at all. Once again it was bullet placement and penetration not caliber that killed. I might add some of these deer had a live weight of 180 to 190 lbs.

I also forgot to add that Agnes Herbert who hunted big game on 3 continents (with generous bag limits much of the time in those days) in, Alaska, Africa and the Caucasus's started out with a .45 caliber elephant rifle but soon switched to the 6.5 Mannlicher caliber and she too said she saw no practical difference between the big bore blaster and her little 6.5mm Mannlicher rifle.

Stewart Edward White when hunting in Africa in the early 1900's was aghast when he met a Boer Woman who shot lions with the 8mm Mauser that were raiding her cattle. He tried to admonish her for being so foolish but she told him "The Lions fall down dead if you hit them right". He could not argue that point because she was living proof of this.

As you can begin to see I base my claims on my own actual shooting of live game and historical live tests and the hunting of live game by professional old time hunters who shot hundreds of live game. Conclusion: Caliber is irrelevant but bullet placement and penetration are.

I could even give you many actual shooting incidents with the .25 acp, the most maligned of all pistol calibers as being totally worthless. Wrong. A lady cab driver saved her own life by blasting a rapist killer with one and killed him and in my neck of the woods a man coming out of a bar one night gunned down 3 large men with one shot apiece with a .25 acp when they tried to rob him. Try telling these people the .25 acp is worthless.

In conclusion I leave you with the old axiom "Beware of the man who only owns one gun because he knows how to hit with it" and that includes women too, ask the lady cab driver.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
I agree with you that physically the .22 did not knock the man off his feet because of the bullets momentum nor would a .577 Nitro Express done so either. The point you failed to comprehend is that the man was incapacitated and did hit the ground dramatically. The point I made was that the diameter of the projectile of any round whether it be a large diameter or a small diameter has little if any influence on lethality. Its simply the old argument of the boys beating on the big bore drums without acknowledging the actual history of firearms used in hunting and in warfare. Because shooting of animals or humans are often unique to every incident with many variables to each incident the controversy rages on.

I should have mentioned the Mexican Barn Yard Pig shootings by Pistolero Magazine in the 1980's which once again proved that caliber in the pistols used was mostly irrelevant. They found no practical difference in shooting pigs that have about the same anatomical make up of humans except they are often better behaved. Calibers tested were the 9mm, .357 mag , 38 special and the .45 acp. No difference was detected in the point blank shootings once again refuting the caliber myth.

I might also add the Moro Myth was also just that a myth. Jan Libourel former gun writer now retired actually researched government records during the conquering of the Philippe Islands by the U.S. and found not one written report that claimed the .45 acp or the 45 Long Colt was superior to the 38 Colt cartridge that was used in the conflict. Troops even complained about the lethality of the 30/40 Krag.. The only thing they did praise was the short barreled shotgun. Once again more historical proof caliber is irrelevant.

I might add that one of the reasons the M1 Carbine was adopted was because U.S. Military studies showed the poor record of the .45 acp in causing casualties when used against enemy troops. Of course the M1 carbine proved not much better when substituted for the 45 acp except of course that it had way more firepower and because it was a rifle resulted in more hits on the enemy. Of course I would be less than honest if I did not call into question the professionalism of the study by the Military when they conducted the .45 acp study. It was never made clear to me at least if the failure of the .45 acp was due to the cartridge, the inaccuracy of the shoddily made WWII 1911 guns or the inability of the soldiers to handle the hard recoiling gun and shoot straight and hit a man in the vital organs. Again as you can see may variable come into play.

I can only say in my own experience of shooting deer the .45 acp that it is not the 8th wonder of the world and in no way ever outperformed the 9mm when I shot deer with it. Again my experience mirrored Pistolero's 1980's barn yard pig tests. In my own experience the .45 acp was inferior to the 9mm especially at longer ranges. If your bullet penetrates to the vitals caliber is irrelevant, at least that has been my experience.

I might also add I had a friend years ago that shot deer at a measured distance of 225 yards out his kitchen window with fjm bullets in the .223 caliber. The deer seldom ran more than 25 yards before dropping dead and many times dropped dead on the spot and did not even run at all. Once again it was bullet placement and penetration not caliber that killed. I might add some of these deer had a live weight of 180 to 190 lbs.

I also forgot to add that Agnes Herbert who hunted big game on 3 continents (with generous bag limits much of the time in those days) in, Alaska, Africa and the Caucasus's started out with a .45 caliber elephant rifle but soon switched to the 6.5 Mannlicher caliber and she too said she saw no practical difference between the big bore blaster and her little 6.5mm Mannlicher rifle.

Stewart Edward White when hunting in Africa in the early 1900's was aghast when he met a Boer Woman who shot lions with the 8mm Mauser that were raiding her cattle. He tried to admonish her for being so foolish but she told him "The Lions fall down dead if you hit them right". He could not argue that point because she was living proof of this.

As you can begin to see I base my claims on my own actual shooting of live game and historical live tests and the hunting of live game by professional old time hunters who shot hundreds of live game. Conclusion: Caliber is irrelevant but bullet placement and penetration are.

I could even give you many actual shooting incidents with the .25 acp, the most maligned of all pistol calibers as being totally worthless. Wrong. A lady cab driver saved her own life by blasting a rapist killer with one and killed him and in my neck of the woods a man coming out of a bar one night gunned down 3 large men with one shot apiece with a .25 acp when they tried to rob him. Try telling these people the .25 acp is worthless.

In conclusion I leave you with the old axiom "Beware of the man who only owns one gun because he knows how to hit with it" and that includes women too, ask the lady cab driver.
But ....

Are there really people who own only one gun?
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top