Has anybody tried Mag Safe Ammo?

[JFootin]

I have been looking at the Mag Safe Ammo (http://www.magsafeonline.com/) and am impressed by the claims of their 380 ammo putting test animals down faster than any other self defense ammo in the test, including 9mm, 40s&w, 45scp and 357 magnum hollow point rounds. It also won't ricochet, or go through walls and kill neighbors, and it has the lowest recoil by far. (Details here (http://magsafeonline.com/magnum_performance.html). Look at the dispersal patterns in the picture at the top of the page.)

I know, it is very expensive. But once I shot enough of them at the range to ensure reliability, the expense would cease.

So, who has experience with these rounds? Especially with the PM9/ CM9 pistols? Will they load and cycle OK? (They say they will. And they have a 9mm round called the "Baby Glock" that is especially for short barreled semi-autos.)

http://i1230.photobucket.com/albums/ee486/John_England/Miscellanious%20Guns%20and%20Holsters/MagsafeAmmo-1.jpg

http://i1230.photobucket.com/albums/ee486/John_England/Miscellanious%20Guns%20and%20Holsters/MagsafeBullets.jpg

Any sage and experienced advice will be greatly appreciated. :)

[jocko]

a way way over rated very very expoensi8ve round that I never read of ANYONE bragging about the round. If u notice theys eemtooperate on the principal of a very very light weight bullet to achieve some of their add hype.

I don';t see the gun rags promoting it, and any of the so called good gun testers out there either.

[Barth]

Frangible bullets have been around for a long time now.
Seems like when everything goes perfect they can have impressive performance.
But everything isn't always perfect.
Also I've heard the accuracy of the super light rounds can be poor.
Best to take law enforcement's lead when choosing self defense ammo.
(I think even Air Marshals use P229/357 125 grain HPs)

[JFootin]

Jocko, it doesn't seem like you have actually tried them. I know there is not a lot of talk about them, mostly because they are so expensive, and also because they are so different that hardly anyone has tried them.

Barth, these are not like the little shot filled rounds. The pieces are locked together in epoxy resin and the hollow point is jacketed so it gets good penetration. If you look at the gel tubes in that photo, the penetration is over 12" on all but one of them, and the damage is dramatic.

Again, I want to hear from people who have some EXPERIENCE with the ammo.

[Vanzpp]

Over the years I've fired nearly 100 rounds (Defender and Mini-Glock loads) through my CW9 and about 50-60 through my SW 642. I've never had a problem with it. I say over the years because the stuff is too expensive to shell out $250 to test 100 rounds all at one trip to the range.

I carry Magsafe in the summer months. I think there is something to be said for neural shock and light/fast frangible ammo. However, you're going to get a LOT of different opinions on this issue!!

[Suthrncop66]

I have been wondering the same thing too, I havent been able to find anyone with first hand experience either...

[JFootin]

Thanks Vanzpp. That's the actual experience I was looking for. So, let me pick your brain some more:


How much less recoil is there? Compared to the typical high power or +p HP rounds favored by so many?
Any perceived differences or preferences in the rounds?

Thanks for the valuable info!

Anyone else with actual experience using the ammo?

[Vanzpp]

Thanks Vanzpp. That's the actual experience I was looking for. So, let me pick your brain some more:


How much less recoil is there? Compared to the typical high power or +p HP rounds favored by so many?
Any perceived differences or preferences in the rounds?
Thanks for the valuable info!

Anyone else with actual experience using the ammo?

You're welcome.

Like I said, I've never had any problems with Magsafe in my CW9 except for the last batch I tried (FTF). However, that wasn't the ammo's fault. It was the gun's, and I had to send the gun back to its home planet of Worcester to have it fixed.

For me, recoil is slightly less with Magsafe than with traditional HP designs, but that's largely a matter of personal perception. Personally I like the Defender load, because it gives +P performance from a standard pressure round. The Mini-Glock load shoots fine too, but I'm suspicious of that round because I think it's a tad too light--only 50 grains. That's just my opinion, though.

I've only fired 8 rounds of the +P Stealth load through my CW9. They shoot fine, but I don't want a polymer handgun to take a prolonged beating with that stuff. As I'm sure you saw from the website, they're loaded pretty hot.

Hope that helps. For what it's worth, I carry Magsafe regularly during the summer months when people tend to wear light clothing.

[JFootin]

Thanks a lot!

[Vanzpp]

I have been wondering the same thing too, I havent been able to find anyone with first hand experience either...

Marshall and Sanow speak highly of Magsafe's effectiveness in their books "Street Stoppers" and "Handgun Stopping Power". Ayoob speaks highly of Glaser Safety Slugs (different round, same basic concept) in "The Ayoob Files." Jim Cirillo was an advocate of RBCD ammo, a light, fast frangible-type round.

All the above writers are/were cops with actual street experience. Most people who trash Magsafes are the many online keyboard warriors on the net who have never heard a shot fired in anger in their lives. (Except for Martin Fackler, who hates frangibles based on his experience as a combat doc in Vietnam).

I'm going to trust the guys with the street experience.

[JFootin]

Thanks a lot, Vanzpp. Now, this thread is becoming an important addition to the knowledge base available in the Ammunition section!

I had seen this ammo carried by leading online ammo sellers, so I figured it must have some legitimacy. Then, I went to their website and read what they say about the ammo, and it made sense to my engineer's mind. As I get my CM9 broken in, I am going to try some of this ammo: see how it functions in the gun, and how accurate it is compared to conventional rounds. I have an idea that, within the 7 yard defensive range, it will be effective.

[frank_drebin]

a way way over rated very very expoensi8ve round that I never read of ANYONE bragging about the round. If u notice theys eemtooperate on the principal of a very very light weight bullet to achieve some of their add hype.

I don';t see the gun rags promoting it, and any of the so called good gun testers out there either.

I got caught eemtooperateing once. Very embarrassing for both of us. :blushing:

[JFootin]

I went back and read the Performance Info page again, and decided to just copy it here:

http://i1230.photobucket.com/albums/ee486/John_England/Miscellanious%20Guns%20and%20Holsters/MagsafeGelTubes.jpg

MAGNUM PERFORMANCE WITH SAFETY...
That's the concept which led to MagSafe Ammo, the world's most effective handgun ammo. There isn't another bullet anywhere with the take-charge performance offered by MagSafe Ammo.

DESIGNED FOR PERFECT PENETRATION DEPTH
MagSafe's revolutionary design uses large lead shotgun pellets rather than solid lead for a bullet's core. The earliest versions (1986-1987) used small pellets, like the #6 shot a competitor uses for their "Silver" line of frangible ammo.

Early in the design process, hundreds of videotaped test shots were made into ordnance gelatin. Then, viewed in slow motion, you could see how a core's pellet size and pattern created the greatest wound damage for any given caliber.

It was quickly learned that using much larger #2 or #3 shot gave perfect penetration depth in gelatin or flesh-form 10 to 13 inches (two to three times as much penetration as our competitors). A large man's chest is only 12 inches thick from front to back, and any more penetration than that was wasted energy which would endanger innocent people.

That was the first goal reached - ammunition which won't overpenetrate a torso and hurt or kill innocent bystanders.

REDUCED RICOCHET HAZARD
One side benefit of using huge shot pellets is the reduction of ricochets, because larger objects are affected more by rotational forces. Tests showed that MagSafe Ammo won't even glance off slimy, wet boards at the most shallow of angles. They also don't ricochet off windshields, car doors or interior house walls. And, most importantly, they won't glance off bone.

ANOTHER GOAL WAS REACHED. "CONTROLLED-CORE TECHNOLOGY"
For almost a year, experimentation with shot placement within the bullet's jacket continued, looking for a fan-shaped pellet wound channel. It was felt that the wider the pattern the better the chance of hitting vital organs, even with a poolry-placed shot.

By arranging pellets in specific patterns, literally stacking them in place one at a time, by hand, bullets could be designed to work nearly any way wanted - maybe deeper penetration, or wider wound channel, some even to break apart in sheetrock walls.

To stabilize the pellet patterns until the instant of impact, dozens of types of epoxy resins were tested. A custom blend with perfect properties was found - it is easily broken apart at impact, yet tough enough to launch at twice the velocity of normal bullets.

No other ammo uses high-tech resins or pellets put onto specific patterns by hand.

WORLD'S FASTEST AMMO - YET LOWEST RECOIL!
The final goal - to have the world's fastest ammo, yet with much less recoil than standard (slower) ammunition - was really tough.

However, hot loads are now offered like the .45 ACP SUPER SWAT load, which clocks 2,160 + feet per second (fps) in a five-inch auto - yet has about one-third the recoil.

The 9mm Mini-Glock Load cruises along at about 2,000 fps from Glock's teensy Model 26, yet has far more stopping ability than the nastiest .357 magnum or 10mm hollowpoint in the world. Yet the recoil is about like shooting low-powered target loads!

LOTS OF FOLKS SAID "IT WON'T WORK"
For example, half a dozen gun "experts" stated a 66-grain bullet would not function a .45 ACP weapon. So, MagSafe was tested in full-auto Tommy Guns, which don't function very well at all with light ammo. It was also tried in a 645 Smith with 28-lb. recoil springs - just to make sure.

Then the folks at Magnum Research said a slug as light as 250 grains would not function their massive Desert Eagle in .50 Action Express Caliber. MagSafe's 180-grainer functioned perfectly under all conditions.

MAGSAFE SWEPT THE STRASBOURG TESTS
The now -famous Strasbourg Tests put MagSafe on the map. To Summarize what nearly everyone already knows, over 600 live French Alpine goats (their bodies are very much like humans) were shot under controlled conditions: no anesthetic, same shot placement form animal to animal, and with blood pressure and heart rate monitors to determine the Incapacitation Time (measure of how long it took a goat to cease functioning after the single shot was delivered).

MagSafe Ammo worked - better than anything else. Tests were done without MagSafe's knowledge, so some versions tested were the lowest powered. For example, two types of .380 ACP are offered; the .380 Defender, a 60-grainer at 1,360 fps in a Colt Mustang; and the .380 MAX (designed for a big city's undercover drug agents) with a 52-grain slug sizzling along at 1,620 fps in the Mustang.

The Defender has 247 ft-lbs of energy, while the MAX load has 303 ft-lbs. The Defender's lower velocity hampered stopping power, resulting in a Average Incapacitation Time (AIT) of 7.12 seconds. That's the average time for five different goats, each shot once with the MagSafe 60-grain Defender.

However - and this is where things get interesting - there wasn't a jacketed hollowpoint bullet in ANY caliber which dropped the goats faster than MagSafe's weakest .380 load!

MagSafe's .380 beat every .45 ACP slug, every 10mm, every 9mm (including police-only ammo), every .40 caliber - no matter who made it - Cor-Bon, Remington, Glaser and HydraShok.

In fact, MagSafe's lowest-powered .380 ACP load had an AIT faster than the best manstopper of all time - Remington's .357 Magnum 125-grain JHP!

Average Incapacitation Times for all other MagSafe's calibers were in the 4-second range, and MagSafe topped the tests in every caliber but .357 Magnum (a prototype Quik-Shot beat by a fraction of a second), and .38 Special, where Glaser won by .04 seconds. Had the .38 Special tests been done in a 2-inch barrel, MagSafe would have topped that test, too.

THE BOTTOM LINE
MagSafe Ammo is faster, recoils less, and stops attackers faster than any other ammunition in the world. Elite forces are outfitted with MagSafe, from Navy SEALS to the Royal Hong Kong Police anti-gang units, from big-city undercover narcs to guards at some of America's meanest prisons.

The reason is simple. MagSafe works. It's expensive, but it works. You really can turn your .380 into .45 auto, but you have to pay for this kind of hand-crafted performance.

The question is this: Just how much is your life worth?

Here are the stats for 9mm Luger:

Name......................... Wt... Speed/Hitting Power... Description............................
#95 + P Max Load...... 64... 1,950fps/540 ft-lbs.... Best all-around 9mm load
#9MG Mini-Glock Load 50... 2,000fps/444 ft-lbs.... Best for short-barrelled autos
#9D Defender............. 60... 1,800fps/431 ft-lbs.... Lowest recoil of any 9mm

[garyb]

I don't know what kind of animals they are using a 380 on, nor how effective this ammo is. For what it is worth, we are using Hornady's Critical Defense 90gr FTX in our 380 for carry. You may wish to look into this Hornady ammo. However, there's lots of good carry ammo out there, so I am not entering any debate. Do your homework. It is what you feel confident using. Hopefully you never need to use it and if you do, it does the job for you. The new 380 ammo has come a long way and the FTX is an excellent choice among many other good ones and not so good ones.

[Vanzpp]

I am going to try some of this ammo: see how it functions in the gun, and how accurate it is compared to conventional rounds. I have an idea that, within the 7 yard defensive range, it will be effective.

Let us know how your test goes! I'm always interested in input from others on this round.

[Vanzpp]

However, there's lots of good carry ammo out there, so I am not entering any debate. Do your homework. It is what you feel confident using.

I agree. Nothing wrong with Hornady or any of the other established HP loads.

[JFootin]

I agree, too. Just doing some homework on these rounds. They piqued the interest of my engineer's mind. :popcorn:

[Vanzpp]

I agree, too. Just doing some homework on these rounds. They piqued the interest of my engineer's mind. :popcorn:

:confused:

Well, any news on your Magsafe test?

[Vanzpp]

I should also add that I called Magsafe about using the +P+ Max .38 special load in alloy framed guns like my SW 642.

I was told that as long as the gun is +P rated, there is no problem.

[Mr. S]

I went back and read the Performance Info page again, and decided to just copy it here:

http://i1230.photobucket.com/albums/ee486/John_England/Miscellanious%20Guns%20and%20Holsters/MagsafeGelTubes.jpg

MAGNUM PERFORMANCE WITH SAFETY...
That's the concept which led to MagSafe Ammo, the world's most effective handgun ammo. There isn't another bullet anywhere with the take-charge performance offered by MagSafe Ammo.

DESIGNED FOR PERFECT PENETRATION DEPTH
MagSafe's revolutionary design uses large lead shotgun pellets rather than solid lead for a bullet's core. The earliest versions (1986-1987) used small pellets, like the #6 shot a competitor uses for their "Silver" line of frangible ammo.

Early in the design process, hundreds of videotaped test shots were made into ordnance gelatin. Then, viewed in slow motion, you could see how a core's pellet size and pattern created the greatest wound damage for any given caliber.

It was quickly learned that using much larger #2 or #3 shot gave perfect penetration depth in gelatin or flesh-form 10 to 13 inches (two to three times as much penetration as our competitors). A large man's chest is only 12 inches thick from front to back, and any more penetration than that was wasted energy which would endanger innocent people.

That was the first goal reached - ammunition which won't overpenetrate a torso and hurt or kill innocent bystanders.

REDUCED RICOCHET HAZARD
One side benefit of using huge shot pellets is the reduction of ricochets, because larger objects are affected more by rotational forces. Tests showed that MagSafe Ammo won't even glance off slimy, wet boards at the most shallow of angles. They also don't ricochet off windshields, car doors or interior house walls. And, most importantly, they won't glance off bone.

ANOTHER GOAL WAS REACHED. "CONTROLLED-CORE TECHNOLOGY"
For almost a year, experimentation with shot placement within the bullet's jacket continued, looking for a fan-shaped pellet wound channel. It was felt that the wider the pattern the better the chance of hitting vital organs, even with a poolry-placed shot.

By arranging pellets in specific patterns, literally stacking them in place one at a time, by hand, bullets could be designed to work nearly any way wanted - maybe deeper penetration, or wider wound channel, some even to break apart in sheetrock walls.

To stabilize the pellet patterns until the instant of impact, dozens of types of epoxy resins were tested. A custom blend with perfect properties was found - it is easily broken apart at impact, yet tough enough to launch at twice the velocity of normal bullets.

No other ammo uses high-tech resins or pellets put onto specific patterns by hand.

WORLD'S FASTEST AMMO - YET LOWEST RECOIL!
The final goal - to have the world's fastest ammo, yet with much less recoil than standard (slower) ammunition - was really tough.

However, hot loads are now offered like the .45 ACP SUPER SWAT load, which clocks 2,160 + feet per second (fps) in a five-inch auto - yet has about one-third the recoil.

The 9mm Mini-Glock Load cruises along at about 2,000 fps from Glock's teensy Model 26, yet has far more stopping ability than the nastiest .357 magnum or 10mm hollowpoint in the world. Yet the recoil is about like shooting low-powered target loads!

LOTS OF FOLKS SAID "IT WON'T WORK"
For example, half a dozen gun "experts" stated a 66-grain bullet would not function a .45 ACP weapon. So, MagSafe was tested in full-auto Tommy Guns, which don't function very well at all with light ammo. It was also tried in a 645 Smith with 28-lb. recoil springs - just to make sure.

Then the folks at Magnum Research said a slug as light as 250 grains would not function their massive Desert Eagle in .50 Action Express Caliber. MagSafe's 180-grainer functioned perfectly under all conditions.

MAGSAFE SWEPT THE STRASBOURG TESTS
The now -famous Strasbourg Tests put MagSafe on the map. To Summarize what nearly everyone already knows, over 600 live French Alpine goats (their bodies are very much like humans) were shot under controlled conditions: no anesthetic, same shot placement form animal to animal, and with blood pressure and heart rate monitors to determine the Incapacitation Time (measure of how long it took a goat to cease functioning after the single shot was delivered).

MagSafe Ammo worked - better than anything else. Tests were done without MagSafe's knowledge, so some versions tested were the lowest powered. For example, two types of .380 ACP are offered; the .380 Defender, a 60-grainer at 1,360 fps in a Colt Mustang; and the .380 MAX (designed for a big city's undercover drug agents) with a 52-grain slug sizzling along at 1,620 fps in the Mustang.

The Defender has 247 ft-lbs of energy, while the MAX load has 303 ft-lbs. The Defender's lower velocity hampered stopping power, resulting in a Average Incapacitation Time (AIT) of 7.12 seconds. That's the average time for five different goats, each shot once with the MagSafe 60-grain Defender.

However - and this is where things get interesting - there wasn't a jacketed hollowpoint bullet in ANY caliber which dropped the goats faster than MagSafe's weakest .380 load!

MagSafe's .380 beat every .45 ACP slug, every 10mm, every 9mm (including police-only ammo), every .40 caliber - no matter who made it - Cor-Bon, Remington, Glaser and HydraShok.

In fact, MagSafe's lowest-powered .380 ACP load had an AIT faster than the best manstopper of all time - Remington's .357 Magnum 125-grain JHP!

Average Incapacitation Times for all other MagSafe's calibers were in the 4-second range, and MagSafe topped the tests in every caliber but .357 Magnum (a prototype Quik-Shot beat by a fraction of a second), and .38 Special, where Glaser won by .04 seconds. Had the .38 Special tests been done in a 2-inch barrel, MagSafe would have topped that test, too.

THE BOTTOM LINE
MagSafe Ammo is faster, recoils less, and stops attackers faster than any other ammunition in the world. Elite forces are outfitted with MagSafe, from Navy SEALS to the Royal Hong Kong Police anti-gang units, from big-city undercover narcs to guards at some of America's meanest prisons.

The reason is simple. MagSafe works. It's expensive, but it works. You really can turn your .380 into .45 auto, but you have to pay for this kind of hand-crafted performance.

The question is this: Just how much is your life worth?

Here are the stats for 9mm Luger:

Name......................... Wt... Speed/Hitting Power... Description............................
#95 + P Max Load...... 64... 1,950fps/540 ft-lbs.... Best all-around 9mm load
#9MG Mini-Glock Load 50... 2,000fps/444 ft-lbs.... Best for short-barrelled autos
#9D Defender............. 60... 1,800fps/431 ft-lbs.... Lowest recoil of any 9mm

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=57072

Save your money.

[JFootin]

:confused:

Well, any news on your Magsafe test?

Well, ole uncle Joe, he's a moving kind a slow at the junction! :80:

It took every last penny I had to buy the gun. Then, with enough to cover most of my bills, I remained broke for weeks. Since I got another check, I have been buying a couple of spare mags, some ammo, a Universal LULA mag loader, some earmuffs to protect my ears, a cleaning kit, a Qwik-Grip to aid in gripping the gun, and I have been looking at a holster or two. I have to try and negotiate with my niece and her husband who have several acres and a house out in the country, to see if I can shoot my gun out there. I have to approach her just right, because I am told she doesn't like guns. Otherwise, I will have to go to the expense of a 70 mile round trip and expenses at an indoor range. So, as of yet, I haven't been able to shoot my gun. :( It will be some time from now, after the break in period, before I experiment with Mag-Safe ammo. But I will be scheduling my first range session soon. :53:

[TheTman]

I have no experience with this ammo. So skip this if you want, it's just opinion.
Living in an apartment, I might be tempted to use something like that, to prevent penetration into neighbor's rooms. I notice they don't say anything about accuracy.
I'd want to know some test group sizes and how close to the target the group was before I spent the money they ask for that ammo. Of course at indoor distances most rounds are going to be within a couple inches of the aim point. Other than being concerned about penetration into other rooms or apartments, I wouldn't really carry it. Particularly out in public where all kinds of things may happen. Perhaps you need to shoot thru a car door or something, these are not going to accomplish that.
I look at it as an ammo that I'd only use in guns that never left the house. It may be the perfect ammo for indoor shooting, but outside of my home in the real world, I want something more conventional.

[JFootin]

....
I'd want to know some test group sizes and how close to the target the group was before I spent the money they ask for that ammo....

That is why I started this thread. I wanted to find out all I could before shelling out the money they want for these rounds.

Thanks for your thoughts.

[JFootin]

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=57072

Save your money.

This article is talking about frangible rounds that turn into powder when they hit. This Mag-Safe ammo is not like that. Did you look at those gelatin tubes in the picture? No dust. Shot pellets and angular pieces of metal penetrating 12" and making hamburger meat out of an area several inches wide! Is there less of a tendency for these bullets to ricochet or to kill neighbors in the next apartment? Yes. But these are clearly not designed as safe practice rounds, nor are they marketed specifically for use on ships or airplanes. They are marketed as self defense rounds.

You obviously haven't seriously studied the information I shared about these bullets, and just gave an uninformed opinion without having any actual experience with the rounds.

Again, I don't want off the cuff opinions. I want information and evaluations from people who have actually USED THE AMMO! Please!

[Mr. S]

This article is talking about frangible rounds that turn into powder when they hit. This Mag-Safe ammo is not like that. Did you look at those gelatin tubes in the picture? No dust. Shot pellets and angular pieces of metal penetrating 12" and making hamburger meat out of an area several inches wide! Is there less of a tendency for these bullets to ricochet or to kill neighbors in the next apartment? Yes. But these are clearly not designed as safe practice rounds, nor are they marketed specifically for use on ships or airplanes. They are marketed as self defense rounds.

You obviously haven't seriously studied the information I shared about these bullets, and just gave an uninformed opinion without having any actual experience with the rounds.

Again, I don't want off the cuff opinions. I want information and evaluations from people who have actually USED THE AMMO! Please!




Are you kidding?
Did I "seriously study"the link from the manufacturer that you pasted?
No what is there to study?
Looking at the tubes they show what percentage of the pellets actually penetrated 12" ?
Doesnt look like any in the second tube made it 12"...
But wait they say that anything more than 12" is not needed.That sure is convenient since it looks like most of the pellets won't make it that far.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/volume4/number3/article432.htm


While I'm posting links why don't you read this one.

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm

Good advice and theory from people who don't make ammo and want you to buy it.

[jocko]

sure lots of good reading there, that is for sure.

[JFootin]

Are you kidding?
Did I "seriously study"the link from the manufacturer that you pasted?
No what is there to study?
Looking at the tubes they show what percentage of the pellets actually penetrated 12" ?
Doesnt look like any in the second tube made it 12"...
But wait they say that anything more than 12" is not needed.That sure is convenient since it looks like most of the pellets won't make it that far.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/volume4/number3/article432.htm


While I'm posting links why don't you read this one.

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm

Good advice and theory from people who don't make ammo and want you to buy it.


sure lots of good reading there, that is for sure.

You're right. This is relevant material. The first article makes a convincing case about forearms getting in the way and stuff. I'll have to take some time to investigate the material at the second site. Thanks for the info. :o

I think I'll stick to Gold Dots or something comparable.

[jocko]

same for me GD are a good safe round that one can depend on to go bang and also to work perfect in most all guns and proven to be effective. Why muddy up the waters with scenarios that 99.995% will never encounter. Again though nothing wrong with reading good material, one just has to sift the gold from the sand..

[Vanzpp]

Are you kidding?
Did I "seriously study"the link from the manufacturer that you pasted?
No what is there to study?
Looking at the tubes they show what percentage of the pellets actually penetrated 12" ?
Doesnt look like any in the second tube made it 12"...
But wait they say that anything more than 12" is not needed.That sure is convenient since it looks like most of the pellets won't make it that far.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/volume4/number3/article432.htm




I don't know if I buy the premise of this article. Even if you assume that the Federal Hydrashok penetrated an additional four inches past the ribcage after hitting an arm, that is not enough penetration to hit the vital organs mentioned in the article (i.e. spine, aorta or vena cava.) There might be enough penetration for the heart, but a shot to the heart will not immediately stop an attack by someone--esp. if they are hopped up on drugs and/or adrenaline.

The only way to stop an attack IMMEDIATELY is to take out the CNS with a hit to the brain or spine. With this in mind, I don't think either the Hydroshoks or Magsafe succeed, especially if it's a hit from the front or side. (It had better be from the front if you're going to argue self-defense in court!) With a handgun, the #1 factor involved in stopping an attack is the psychological factor. ("OH MY GOD, I'VE BEEN SHOT!!") This being the case, I suspect either traditional HP or Magsafes will do the job--assuming the attacker is "feeling pain", so to speak. If the attacker is feeling no pain, you'd better use the handgun to buy time to work your way to the 12 ga.

Also, cops with street experience speak favorably of frangible ammo. Ayoob writes about the effectiveness of Glaser Safety Slugs in his book "The Ayoob Files" and attests to their effectiveness. Marshall and Sanow speak highly of Magsafe ammo in "Street Stoppers". And Jim Cirillo was an advocate of RBCD ammo, another light, frangible design.

Yes, I know Fackler was a surgeon in Vietnam. However, it seems to me that battlefield scenarios and civilian self-defense scenarios are different animals. Heavier bullets make sense when you're trying to shoot someone with a rifle from 100+ yards away and overpenetration isn't really an issue. From a civilian self-defense perspective, you're dealing with bad-breath distances and risks of overpenetration in populated areas. Frangibles seem to make sense.

[Mr. S]

I don't know if I buy the premise of this article. Even if you assume that the Federal Hydrashok penetrated an additional four inches past the ribcage after hitting an arm, that is not enough penetration to hit the vital organs mentioned in the article (i.e. spine, aorta or vena cava.) There might be enough penetration for the heart, but a shot to the heart will not immediately stop an attack by someone--esp. if they are hopped up on drugs and/or adrenaline.

The only way to stop an attack IMMEDIATELY is to take out the CNS with a hit to the brain or spine. With this in mind, I don't think either the Hydroshoks or Magsafe succeed, especially if it's a hit from the front or side. (It had better be from the front if you're going to argue self-defense in court!) With a handgun, the #1 factor involved in stopping an attack is the psychological factor. ("OH MY GOD, I'VE BEEN SHOT!!") This being the case, I suspect either traditional HP or Magsafes will do the job--assuming the attacker is "feeling pain", so to speak. If the attacker is feeling no pain, you'd better use the handgun to buy time to work your way to the 12 ga.

Also, cops with street experience speak favorably of frangible ammo. Ayoob writes about the effectiveness of Glaser Safety Slugs in his book "The Ayoob Files" and attests to their effectiveness. Marshall and Sanow speak highly of Magsafe ammo in "Street Stoppers". And Jim Cirillo was an advocate of RBCD ammo, another light, frangible design.

Yes, I know Fackler was a surgeon in Vietnam. However, it seems to me that battlefield scenarios and civilian self-defense scenarios are different animals. Heavier bullets make sense when you're trying to shoot someone with a rifle from 100+ yards away and overpenetration isn't really an issue. From a civilian self-defense perspective, you're dealing with bad-breath distances and risks of overpenetration in populated areas. Frangibles seem to make sense.

The first paragraph I will mostly agree with.The Hydrashock is an old school hollowpoint with a good street record and the Magsafe couldn't compete with it.I would expect better performance from todays improved hollowpoint designs.

While cops with street experience may have spoken favorably of it(in the past) I doubt they use it for personal self defense use or for duty use.

I am more worried about underpenetration than overpenetration because todays hollowpoint designs work very well(as opposed to many years ago where most of your favorable comments about magsafe etc...came from).

[Vanzpp]

The first paragraph I will mostly agree with.The Hydrashock is an old school hollowpoint with a good street record and the Magsafe couldn't compete with it.I would expect better performance from todays improved hollowpoint designs.

While cops with street experience may have spoken favorably of it(in the past) I doubt they use it for personal self defense use or for duty use.

I am more worried about underpenetration than overpenetration because todays hollowpoint designs work very well(as opposed to many years ago where most of your favorable comments about magsafe etc...came from).

Believe me, I'm not trash talking hollow points. They can be very effective. The one thing that frangible ammo does NOT do better than hollow points is penetrate intermediate barriers like auto glass, car doors, etc. I have yet to see a manufacturer like Magsafe or any other frangible load claim that their rounds are equally effective against intermediate barriers as more traditional HPs. Any such claim would be pretty hard to back up.

The reason I carry Magsafes in the summer months (and the old Federal LE +P+ load in the winter) is because I'm convinced that fragmentation has to count for something re:stopping power. The Federal load is a light, fast 115 grain round that sheds its jacket into little bits of shrapnel upon hitting its target and penetrates an average of about 10 inches in gel. However, if I remember correctly from the Marshall and Sanow studies, it has about a 90% one shot stop ranking. That's far better than the heavier 147 grain 9mm loads that have deeper penetration.

I think the case was made for me when M&S spoke of the old .38 special LRN that was the standard police revolver load in the 60s and 70s. That load became known as the "widow maker" because the cop would empty the entire cylinder into the bad guy with no immediate effect. As a result, the cop was killed. However, the .38 LRN could typically get 20+ inches in gel. But it was a lousy stopper. Lighter, faster HP loads are much more effective even though they penetrate much less.

Bottom line: I believe in the effectiveness of light, frangible loads that might not penetrate as much as HPs but fragment and create a large stretch cavity. However, I'm not trying to convert anybody. Modern HPs have also been proven to be very effective.

[JFootin]

Good points, Vanzpp. The Strasbourg Tests that they cite, using live French Alpine goats (don't they have PETA over there?), showed that MagSafe's weakest .380 load incapacitated goats better than any other load, including 9mm, 10mm, .45acp and .40s&w in every brand, and even the best man stopper of all time - Remington's .357 Magnum 125 grain JHP! Now, that's amazing!

Remember the video story about the police officer who was shot many times at close range with .45acp ammo and survived? So higher bullet weight and diameter aren't universally more effective (I wonder if those were FMJ rounds, though?). The recently quoted survey of shootings proves this out, too.

But MrS and his referenced articles do bring up some good points about forearms getting in the way and taking all of the damage from the Magsafe round, while conventional bullets can be powerful enough to go through a forearm and still render a fatal blow to the torso. But then, one is going to keep firing, right? And the first one of the Magsafe rounds (even in .380 caliber) to the COM is proven by the tests to stop the bad guy quicker.

We all understand that they won't penetrate car doors or windows too well. But how many 9mm rounds can do that reliably, anyway? Don't you need a bigger caliber for that? But doesn't that kind of penetration expose us to unintended consequences and liabilities? We CCW people are not police officers. We are not going to aggressively go after bad guys, but just seek to defend ourselves from immediate harm.

He makes another comment about accuracy, but with no report or evidence showing that the rounds are not accurate. He points out that MagSafe don't say anything about accuracy, but then I don't remember much talk about accuracy from other manufacturers, either. They talk about penetration, expansion, speed and impact force - and so do MagSafe. I don't see why they would be less accurate because of the frangibility because that doesn't happen in flight. The bullets are much lighter in weight, but move much faster (up to 2000 fps in 9mm). I think the .22 long rifle round proves the accuracy of that combination.

He discounts the endorsements from respected experts, saying they are a few years old, but wouldn't those experts have spoken out if their opinion had changed since then? So, I don't think it is valid to dismiss all of the experts simply because you don't agree with them.

There are pros and cons. Other pros are no ricochets, no overpenetration, lower recoil. And the fact that one is using safety ammo in an incident could help to avoid legal complications. A big con is the price.

Interesting discussion.

[Vanzpp]

But doesn't that kind of penetration expose us to unintended consequences and liabilities? We CCW people are not police officers. We are not going to aggressively go after bad guys, but just seek to defend ourselves from immediate harm.

BINGO!

I suspect that's why most LEO's (to my knowledge) don't carry frangible ammo for duty use. The ability to penetrate barriers might be necessary for a cop. For a civilian who is supposed to AVOID trouble at all reasonable costs, however, barrier penetration can be a liability.

[Vanzpp]

Hey, Jfootin..Check this ammo out.http://rbcd.net/


This is light and fast on steroids. But hiow they're able to do it with standard pressures is beyond me...

[JFootin]

Wow! These are some specs!

Caliber Weight Speed / Impact Power
9mm 60 gr. 2010 fps / 539 flbs

Caliber Cavity Diameter Penetration
9mm 7" 9"

There are no prices or availability on the website. I think I'd stick with the Mag Safe, which is well known and carried by many large ammo dealers.

[TucsonMTB]

There are no prices or availability on the website. I think I'd stick with the Mag Safe, which is well known and carried by many large ammo dealers.
Good call, Mr. JFootin!

Not only is this ammunition not commercially available, but testing indicates that the performance "data" provided by the distributor is probably false.

The second link below includes some pictures of the projectiles cut in half to expose their construction. The cross section cuts were performed by a group asked to evaluate the ammunition. They also describe their disappointing experience with the supplier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RBCD_Performance_Plus,_Inc.#cite_note-Roberts-2

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19888
(http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19888)

[JFootin]

Sounds like they're a bunch of crooks!

[Vanzpp]

Good call, Mr. JFootin!

Not only is this ammunition not commercially available, but testing indicates that the performance "data" provided by the distributor is probably false.

The second link below includes some pictures of the projectiles cut in half to expose their construction. The cross section cuts were performed by a group asked to evaluate the ammunition. They also describe their disappointing experience with the supplier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RBCD_Performance_Plus,_Inc.#cite_note-Roberts-2

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19888
(http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19888)

Great info. Thanks!

It's impossible to get those specs with "standard" pressures. I find that claim to be very dubious!

I'll stick to the Magsafes.

[Vanzpp]

There are no prices or availability on the website. I think I'd stick with the Mag Safe, which is well known and carried by many large ammo dealers.

That's what I like about Magsafe. They list the exact gun with barrel lengths when they list the specs.

I get suspicious when the barrel lengths aren't listed. The only way to get the specs listed on the RBCD site is to use overpressured rounds or really long test barrels!

[Vanzpp]

Here's another

http://www.glockpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1873

[ltxi]

mag-safe/frangibles work well at close quarters with no subject clothing issues and inside pressurized aircraft. Otherwise not.

[JFootin]

mag-safe/frangibles work well at close quarters with no subject clothing issues and inside pressurized aircraft. Otherwise not.

What basis do you have for this statement? Have you read an article that says this specifically about MagSafe ammo, or is it just your opinion about frangible ammo in general?

MagSafe does not market their bullets for use on aircraft, and even thick clothing will not stop them.

Here are some quotes from their website:


Elite forces are outfitted with MagSafe, from Navy SEALS to the Royal Hong Kong Police anti-gang units, from big-city undercover narcs to guards at some of America's meanest prisons.

No, heavy clothing will Not defeat MagSafe Ammo. We test MagSafe by shooting through intermediate barriers: up to 12 layers of Levi material; many layers of T-shirt material; through leather cowboy boots, clipboards, cigarette packs, wallets, credit cards, tennis shoes and anything else an attacker might be wearing. You can't wear enough clothing to stop a MagSafe round.

No, MagSafe won't hit a wall and go "splat" and drop to the floor. To be very lethal, ammo needs some penetration.

[Vanzpp]

Here's Robert Boatman on frangible ammo. Interesting...

http://www.youtube.com/user/azmorgan#p/a/u/1/eAjh59bPs_o

He doesn't mention Magsafe by name, but the computer animation included in the video is obviously a Magsafe round.

[JFootin]

Looks pretty effective to me! He says that accuracy is not as good, but he was hitting those watermelons at SD distance with no problem. He made a good point about having another mag full of normal rounds if a situation warrants it. That's probably a good idea anyway; because, if the situation isn't handled with the first 7 rounds, time to pull out the Gold Bond +p.

[Mr. S]

Good points, Vanzpp. The Strasbourg Tests that they cite, using live French Alpine goats (don't they have PETA over there?), showed that MagSafe's weakest .380 load incapacitated goats better than any other load, including 9mm, 10mm, .45acp and .40s&w in every brand, and even the best man stopper of all time - Remington's .357 Magnum 125 grain JHP! Now, that's amazing!

Remember the video story about the police officer who was shot many times at close range with .45acp ammo and survived? So higher bullet weight and diameter aren't universally more effective (I wonder if those were FMJ rounds, though?). The recently quoted survey of shootings proves this out, too.

But MrS and his referenced articles do bring up some good points about forearms getting in the way and taking all of the damage from the Magsafe round, while conventional bullets can be powerful enough to go through a forearm and still render a fatal blow to the torso. But then, one is going to keep firing, right? And the first one of the Magsafe rounds (even in .380 caliber) to the COM is proven by the tests to stop the bad guy quicker.

We all understand that they won't penetrate car doors or windows too well. But how many 9mm rounds can do that reliably, anyway? Don't you need a bigger caliber for that? But doesn't that kind of penetration expose us to unintended consequences and liabilities? We CCW people are not police officers. We are not going to aggressively go after bad guys, but just seek to defend ourselves from immediate harm.

He makes another comment about accuracy, but with no report or evidence showing that the rounds are not accurate. He points out that MagSafe don't say anything about accuracy, but then I don't remember much talk about accuracy from other manufacturers, either. They talk about penetration, expansion, speed and impact force - and so do MagSafe. I don't see why they would be less accurate because of the frangibility because that doesn't happen in flight. The bullets are much lighter in weight, but move much faster (up to 2000 fps in 9mm). I think the .22 long rifle round proves the accuracy of that combination.

He discounts the endorsements from respected experts, saying they are a few years old, but wouldn't those experts have spoken out if their opinion had changed since then? So, I don't think it is valid to dismiss all of the experts simply because you don't agree with them.

There are pros and cons. Other pros are no ricochets, no overpenetration, lower recoil. And the fact that one is using safety ammo in an incident could help to avoid legal complications. A big con is the price.

Interesting discussion.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/undeniable-evidence.htm

http://www.firearmstactical.com/sanow-strikes-out.htm

http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2008/04/29/one-shot-stop-handgun-statistics-and-why-theyre-a-load-of-crap/

http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-discrepancies.htm

Read these thoroughly.
Then talk to me about Marshall and Sanow.

[Mr. S]

Looks pretty effective to me! He made a good point about having another mag full of normal rounds if a situation warrants it. That's probably a good idea anyway; because, if the situation isn't handled with the first 7 rounds, time to pull out the Gold Bond +p.

Why would you need to do that?
The magsafe outperformed all the hollowpoints in the Strasbourg tests.
And they are much better for one shot stops as well...

[Mr. S]

BINGO!

I suspect that's why most LEO's (to my knowledge) don't carry frangible ammo for duty use. The ability to penetrate barriers might be necessary for a cop. For a civilian who is supposed to AVOID trouble at all reasonable costs, however, barrier penetration can be a liability.

But I thought Navy Seals use magsafe..it says so in their add?

[JFootin]

MrS,

MagSafe is well known ammo that is sold by most large ammo dealers. We know you don't like it. Fine. You are entitled to your opinion. It looks like you just want to argue, and that is not what I want to do with this thread. I want to hear from people who have ACTUALLY TRIED this ammo. You haven't done so. I don't want to hear all this from someone who has no actual experience with the ammo. And I don't want to get into an argument. Peace to you, but move on. Please!

[Vanzpp]

Fackler's attacks on M&S are dubious at best, ad hominem at worst.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0701/0701268.pdf

I just got back from the range this evening to test my CW9 with its new slide and barrel. Sent another 8 round pack of the Magsafe Mini-glock load downrange without a hitch.

[Vanzpp]

MrS,

MagSafe is well known ammo that is sold by most large ammo dealers. We know you don't like it. Fine. You are entitled to your opinion. It looks like you just want to argue, and that is not what I want to do with this thread. I want to hear from people who have ACTUALLY TRIED this ammo. You haven't done so. I don't want to hear all this from someone who has no actual experience with the ammo. And I don't want to get into an argument. Peace to you, but move on. Please!

Some people, for whatever reason, have huge egos--even online.

Don't like Magsafe? Then don't carry it. No one here is saying "Get rid of those Gold Dots and carry Magsafe ammo only!!"

To each his own.

[bamaman]

I've never tried them myself, but I have seen an XRay of a dude shot from the side through his upper arm with a magsafe 380 load. It was devastating. Pellets all in the lungs, and heart. Yes it killed him.

[crazymailman]

I've not tried the Magsafe, but have tried the Glaser. They really impressed me in the whallop they pack. I know that some people are all about penetration, but something has to be said for the transfer of energy. Think of the damage a 55gr HP .223 traveling 3000fps does.

[Vanzpp]

i've never tried them myself, but i have seen an xray of a dude shot from the side through his upper arm with a magsafe 380 load. It was devastating. Pellets all in the lungs, and heart. Yes it killed him.

yeah, baby!!!!!!!:86:

[Mr. S]

MrS,

MagSafe is well known ammo that is sold by most large ammo dealers. We know you don't like it. Fine. You are entitled to your opinion. It looks like you just want to argue, and that is not what I want to do with this thread. I want to hear from people who have ACTUALLY TRIED this ammo. You haven't done so. I don't want to hear all this from someone who has no actual experience with the ammo. And I don't want to get into an argument. Peace to you, but move on. Please!

What makes you think I haven't tried it?
Go ahead and waste your money I personally don't care.
I just dont want other people to believe the hype of these overpriced rounds.

[JFootin]

What makes you think I haven't tried it?
Go ahead and waste your money I personally don't care.
I just dont want other people to believe the hype of these overpriced rounds.

Oh. You tried them. What was your experience with them? You have expressed a lot of dislike for them and quoted a lot of articles. But what I wanted to hear was people's actual experience with them. So, what gives? Did they miss the target by 3 feet? Hit the target and explode without penetrating? Not cycle properly through your gun? What round(s) and gun(s) did you test them with?

[Vanzpp]

I just bought another pack of the 9mm +P Stealth load yesterday...

[Mr. S]

Oh. You tried them. What was your experience with them? You have expressed a lot of dislike for them and quoted a lot of articles. But what I wanted to hear was people's actual experience with them. So, what gives? Did they miss the target by 3 feet? Hit the target and explode without penetrating? Not cycle properly through your gun? What round(s) and gun(s) did you test them with?

It was probably 5 years ago.My friend and I were at a range renting some glocks and they had magsafe,glaser and cci shotshells in 9mm so we bought some of each and shot them.I think the load I used was called defender or something like that.The main thing I remember about the performance was they seemed loud compared to standard 9mm range ammo.They seemed accurate enough but my only complaint (at the time) was the price at almost $20 for 8 rounds I said it would cost $100 to fill the mags in a Glock 21.

[JFootin]

It was probably 5 years ago.My friend and I were at a range renting some glocks and they had magsafe,glaser and cci shotshells in 9mm so we bought some of each and shot them.I think the load I used was called defender or something like that.The main thing I remember about the performance was they seemed loud compared to standard 9mm range ammo.They seemed accurate enough but my only complaint (at the time) was the price at almost $20 for 8 rounds I said it would cost $100 to fill the mags in a Glock 21.

Yeah. The price is a big turnoff. Definitely not range ammo! :wof: But I have a CM9, so one 8-pack would load it with one bullet left over. I have seen them for less than $15, almost $2 a bullet. You either have to be so rich it doesn't matter, or be very convinced that these bullets offer a unique advantage for self defense situations. Hmm.....

Thanks for your input, Mr. S! :)

[Bill K]

For years I've understood that Kel-Tec tells you not to use them in their P3ATs. I've seen for sure one documented KB with MagSafe and a P3AT. If I remember I'll check my owners manual for my P3AT to see what the manual has to say about ammo.

[JFootin]

For years I've understood that Kel-Tec tells you not to use them in their P3ATs. I've seen for sure one documented KB with MagSafe and a P3AT. If I remember I'll check my owners manual for my P3AT to see what the manual has to say about ammo.

Well, they have a 380 round called the MAX that is +p+. Kel-Tec doesn't approve the use of +p+ ammo in their guns. I think Kahr doesn't either. They have another round called the Defender that is standard pressure.

[Vanzpp]

You either have to be so rich it doesn't matter, or be very convinced that these bullets offer a unique advantage for self

Or take two years to SLOWLY test 100 of 'em, like I did.

[JFootin]

LOL! Yeah. Cudos to you, Vanzpp! :D

[Vanzpp]

LOL! Yeah. Cudos to you, Vanzpp! :D

Make that 108.

I went to the range last night for the first time since getting my gun back from Worcester. I put 50 rounds of Remington FMJ, 15 rounds of Fiocchi MonoBlock and another 8 round pack of the Magsafe +P Stealth load. All functioned 100%, no problems.

[Vanzpp]

I bought more!!! The +P Stealth load!! :hurt::hurt:

I'm addicted to Magsafe. I guess there are worse things to be addicted to...

[Michael W.]

I really don't have a dog in this fight but I'd just like to point out something
painfully obvious that I have NOT seen mentioned (yet) in this thread.

*IF* we agree to the basic thesis "Shot placement trumps bullet technology"
(and I am assuming everyone invested in this thread does....)

And *IF* we agree to the subsequent thesis that the antecedant thesis
can only be accomplished by regular practice with as close to your intended
carry round as you can get.

How will you accomplish this with any of the exotic frangible rounds in this
discussion? A bad-ass looking wound channel won't mean squat if you miss
right?

For the record, I have spent time in both camps of the Facklerites and the
Marshall-ites. I think that there's sufficient dogma and ego in both camps
to make a definitive conclusion virtually impossible (in this lifetime).

(Although this doesn't stop me from being fascinated by the latest
greatest ammo design or watching Jello shoots on Youtube:)

But I have developed my own criteria for carry loads.

I go with the "coolest and baddest" looking hollowpoint.
If it's nasty looking it MUST be effective......!!









Ok, I was just kidding:) I tend to split the difference between the goat
shooters and the jello shooters and generally choose the middleweight of
any given caliber. Except when it come to Federal HST.....those rounds
are just so ****** that one shot will stop them DEAD if the bullet even
misses by 12 inches! For real dooood!:)

Just to drive the point home that there ARE NO MAGIC BULLETS.
Take a look at this video of a spectacular failure of one of the MOST
REVERED 9mm carry loads to date. In fact it is MY carry load in my
G19.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSY018CXRi8&feature=feedu

(Incidentally, it will still be my G19 carry load tomorrow)

M-

[Vanzpp]

I really don't have a dog in this fight but I'd just like to point out something
painfully obvious that I have NOT seen mentioned (yet) in this thread.

*IF* we agree to the basic thesis "Shot placement trumps bullet technology"
(and I am assuming everyone invested in this thread does....)

And *IF* we agree to the subsequent thesis that the antecedant thesis
can only be accomplished by regular practice with as close to your intended
carry round as you can get.

How will you accomplish this with any of the exotic frangible rounds in this
discussion? A bad-ass looking wound channel won't mean squat if you miss
right?

For the record, I have spent time in both camps of the Facklerites and the
Marshall-ites. I think that there's sufficient dogma and ego in both camps
to make a definitive conclusion virtually impossible (in this lifetime).

(Although this doesn't stop me from being fascinated by the latest
greatest ammo design or watching Jello shoots on Youtube:)

But I have developed my own criteria for carry loads.

I go with the "coolest and baddest" looking hollowpoint.
If it's nasty looking it MUST be effective......!!









Ok, I was just kidding:) I tend to split the difference between the goat
shooters and the jello shooters and generally choose the middleweight of
any given caliber. Except when it come to Federal HST.....those rounds
are just so ****** that one shot will stop them DEAD if the bullet even
misses by 12 inches! For real dooood!:)

Just to drive the point home that there ARE NO MAGIC BULLETS.
Take a look at this video of a spectacular failure of one of the MOST
REVERED 9mm carry loads to date. In fact it is MY carry load in my
G19.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSY018CXRi8&feature=feedu

(Incidentally, it will still be my G19 carry load tomorrow)

M-

MagSafe is expensive, so it MUST be good, right?? :59:

Seriously...I agree with everything you say above. My reasons for carrying MagSafe are twofold...

Handguns make lousy people stoppers. Why? Because the most common carry calibers (i.e. 9mm, .38 special, .40, .45acp) do not have enough power to do what's necessary to stop an attack INSTANTLY--a hit to the CNS, meaning the spine or the medulla oblongata. So, those aside, what's left?

The psychological factor is the number one stopping power factor for handguns. ("OMG, I'VE BEEN SHOT!!!!") The best way to stop someone this way is to cause as much pain as possible. Most pain receptors in the human body are peripheral located on or near the skin. A fast, high energy projectile causes a huge stretch cavity that stimulates more of these pain receptors. Thus, being hit with one hurts a lot more.

In theory. :rolleyes:

I know that something like this poses a problem for someone who is so high on coke and adrenaline that he is feeling no pain. That being the case, a traditional HP design won't stop the attack immediately either. Not even a direct hit to the heart can stop someone immediately under such conditions, because it can take anywhere from 30 seconds to a minute for the blood pressure to drop to a point where the person passes out. That's an eternity if your life is in danger. So, the old saying applies. Use the handgun to fight your way to the 12 ga.

[Vanzpp]

I should also add that, for me, less perceived recoil is an added bonus because it allows for faster follow-up shots.

The only thing that frangibles like MagSafe do NOT do better than more traditional HP designs is penetrate intermediate barriers like auto glass, car doors, walls, etc...However, that's the whole point. Cops sometimes need the ability to penetrate barriers with the ammo they carry. For civilians, it seems that this can be a potential liability.

[Lobo_79]

...So, who has experience with these rounds? Especially with the PM9/ CM9 pistols? Will they load and cycle OK? (They say they will. And they have a 9mm round called the "Baby Glock" that is especially for short barreled semi-autos.)

Any sage and experienced advice will be greatly appreciated. :)

FWIW: I've test fired about 20 rounds in my PM9. It was funny watching it cycle the action; it was almost like it was in slow motion. The rounds did cycle ok but I could watch the process taking place. That's probably because I use extra power recoil and magazine springs.

I'm not sure I buy into all the marketing hype about this ammo so I pretty much stick with good old fashioned JHP PD ammo. But to your question about it cycling a PM9 I can say that it does...sort of.

[JFootin]

I should also add that, for me, less perceived recoil is an added bonus because it allows for faster follow-up shots.

The only thing that frangibles like MagSafe do NOT do better than more traditional HP designs is penetrate intermediate barriers like auto glass, car doors, walls, etc...However, that's the whole point. Cops sometimes need the ability to penetrate barriers with the ammo they carry. For civilians, it seems that this can be a potential liability.

My point exactly. Lower recoil and less penetration are pluses in my book, reducing the chance that someone might sue you for unintended consequences from using bullets designed to enable LEOs to penetrate barriers. And the much higher velocity and nasty bullet disintegration that produces more pain and more instant shock was proven in the test to incapacitate the sheep quicker than traditional HP rounds, even in larger calibers.

You know, I am seriously thinking about the CC insurance, though, because there are so many in positions of authority and sitting on judges' benches that are anti-gun. Where I live, I see no need to carry my gun at present. But when I do, I think I want the insurance. For now, I will just use it for home protection. But I will have and maintain my carry permit. I live in an apartment in a small complex for elderly and disabled people, and I think the chance of a home invasion of my 625 sq. ft. apartment to be extremely unlikely. At present.

For most of my adult life, I have concluded that there is a very thin veneer of civility over our society. But let something bad enough happen, grocery stores shelves becoming bare, gas and other resources interrupted, and even people whom you have attended church with will come to take what they can from you. And any breakdown in civil order will make it very dangerous to be out and about because of thugs seeking to mug you. Of course, a likely action of Big Brother in such a situation might be to seize all firearms, declare martial law, curfews and travel restrictions. But while I can, I will exercise my right to keep and bear arms and defend myself.

Thanks for sharing your experience with your PM9, Lobo_79. The perceived slowness of the action is surprising. I wonder if your stiff recoil spring contributes to that? Vanzpp, have you perceived any slowness like this?

Lobo_79, my thought is to carry a backup mag or 2 loaded with traditional HP defensive ammo. My thinking being that, if the situation isn't over with 7 rounds fired, we are in a major confrontation with everyone seeking cover, and the greater penetration is needed. But having the gun loaded with the Mag-Safe ammo to start with makes your first response a measured one with, as Vanzpp believes, some advantages.

[Michael W.]

I should also add that, for me, less perceived recoil is an added bonus because it allows for faster follow-up shots.

The only thing that frangibles like MagSafe do NOT do better than more traditional HP designs is penetrate intermediate barriers like auto glass, car doors, walls, etc...However, that's the whole point. Cops sometimes need the ability to penetrate barriers with the ammo they carry. For civilians, it seems that this can be a potential liability.

What I would be concerned with is not so much lack of recoil
but POA-POI. If going between a 115gr vs 147gr makes a difference
(and it does in all my 9mm's, not just the Kahrs) then going to
an "ultra-light" like a Powerball or any of the other exotics
will be even more so.

The theater that exotic rounds were originally developed for, that being
for air marshalls inside the plane cabin is still where I see the most
appropriate use. That's where overpenetration is not an issue of
litigation but very possibly suicide!

Overpenetration is most certainly a concern, hence Rule #4 of the 4 Rules
of firearm safety as codified by the late Col. Jeff Cooper. I think that all
things being equal, bullet technology just isn't as predictable as we
would like to think they are. Shooting a homogenous mass of ballistic
gelatin is far from emulating the human body in motion where about
1000 other variables come into play like movement, angle, bone, body
cavities, etc. There will probably be cases where something that's
guarunteed to expand (ie, Corbon 115gr +P or Federal 9BPLE)
won't and clog and over penetrate. There will be instances where
bullets that guarantee "knock down power" and huge wound channels
(ie, 45 ACP Golden Saber or Hydra-Shok) won't stop a perp who
absorbs 6-7-or 8 rounds and keeps coming.

We're left with sifting through some relatively thin data, anecdotal street
reports, and inconclusive empirical tests to find some load that
gives us that most important edge I think, confidence.
Ultimately, for me, that's an important factor in my mind set
and may make the difference between prevailing in a battle
or not.

The ultra-light exotics just don't instill a whole lot of confidence
for me, and NOT being able to hone my skills with them just makes
it that much less credible for me. But, hey, I could be wrong too!:)

I would hope that if you DO commit to such a load that you
would consider, as JFootin suggested, either a reload with conventional
HP's or perhaps even a mixed mag with the first 3 rounds of Magsafe
backed by a few rounds of Gold Dot.

That way when you shoot a bad guy and he responds with "Ooooooo,
that tickled, what did you shoot me with? MagSafe?.."
You plug him with a few Gold Dots............:D

M-

[TucsonMTB]

I would hope that if you DO commit to such a load that you would consider, as JFootin suggested, either a reload with conventional HP's or perhaps even a mixed mag with the first 3 rounds of Magsafe backed by a few rounds of Gold Dot.

That way when you shoot a bad guy and he responds with "Ooooooo, that tickled, what did you shoot me with? MagSafe?.."
You plug him with a few Gold Dots............:D

M-
Now that's just too funny! Only on KahrTalk can I find a civilized, thoughtful discussion of competing ammunition technology with no name calling or ruffled feathers . . . amazing! :D

[Vanzpp]

Vanzpp, have you perceived any slowness like this?



No, but I don't use heavier recoil springs whenever I shoot MagSafes, just factory standard springs. In fact, I have one pack of the 10mm 46 grain "Swat" load and it clearly states NOT to use heavy springs or ported barrels for it. The same warnings are not given on any of the regular Defender or +P loads I've seen.

[Vanzpp]

I would hope that if you DO commit to such a load that you
would consider, as JFootin suggested, either a reload with conventional
HP's or perhaps even a mixed mag with the first 3 rounds of Magsafe
backed by a few rounds of Gold Dot.


M-

I actually have done that in the past. Might be a good idea to go back to that practice for a "best of both worlds" kind of thing...:cool:

[Vanzpp]

Now that's just too funny! Only on KahrTalk can I find a civilized, thoughtful discussion of competing ammunition technology with no name calling or ruffled feathers . . . amazing! :D

Yeah! It's like actual adults talking!

On some of those "other" gun forums, someone will make a comment about carrying MagSafes or some other frangible design and, inevitably, someone else will post something along the lines of: "You dumb *******, why are you carrying that ****, you moron??"

It all goes downhill from there.

The bottom line is that there's no reason to get worked up. Don't like MagSafes, Gold Dots, 147 grain loads, etc etc? Then don't carry them. Make your own decisions on what's right for you.

Freedom of choice is what this country is about, isn't it?

[Bawanna]

How did I miss all this?

[Lobo_79]

...Lobo_79, my thought is to carry a backup mag or 2 loaded with traditional HP defensive ammo. My thinking being that, if the situation isn't over with 7 rounds fired, we are in a major confrontation with everyone seeking cover, and the greater penetration is needed. But having the gun loaded with the Mag-Safe ammo to start with makes your first response a measured one with, as Vanzpp believes, some advantages.

JFootin: I don't disagree with your assessment but I would certainly consider developing some training scenarios so that when the "pucker factor" is off scale high you have your process burned into muscle memory. Further, I would test mixing different types of ammo in the same magazine to make sure they feed okay but you've probably already tried that. I have a CZ75B in .40 S&W that is a little stubborn at times if I get too clever mixing ammo types.

My experience with MagSafe ammo was simply to satisfy my curiosity and to verify that in a pinch my PM9 would handle it without modifying my current spring configuration. Not very scientific; it was more of a science project. I used a similar ammo type in my Ruger Security Six (with a 2.75" barrel) for this experiment and the first round appeared to key hole the target. Subsequent rounds worked okay.

The friendly debate can rage on about the value added of this type of ammo. It would certain be nice if we could get access to actual real world results experienced by credible public safety organizations.

I originally considered MagSafe because in my home I had a typically occupied guest bedroom in the line of fire from where I would most likely be standing should a home invasion occur. When my guest moved out I switched back to conventional PD ammo because I want to have the option of being able to shoot through my front door if necessary (and justifiable). I've tested .357 Mag from a 6" barrel and 9mm in a 4.9" barrel against a sample of the door material and I know this will work...in spades actually.

[JFootin]

Everyone, this is a great discussion! A lot of good points being made. Lobo_79, that is a great idea mixing the rounds - maybe just 3 of the Mag-Safe.

[Chuck54]

Does anybody remember the F.B.I. study that came to the conclusion that the 9mm round tested was second only to a 44mag round tested for stopping power?

I think that was a study done in the late 60's or early 70's.

[Lobo_79]

Does anybody remember the F.B.I. study that came to the conclusion that the 9mm round tested was second only to a 44mag round tested for stopping power?

I think that was a study done in the late 60's or early 70's.

That would be an interesting read since it happened before the tragedy at Ruby Ridge. They probably updated that study to reflect the new threat scenario. I think this may have been the genesis of the .40 S&W. But, I may be mistaken.

LOL...I'm hoping this doesn't erupt into a caliber war discussion. :)

[Michael W.]

There's a good read in the latest American Handgunner in the Ayoob Files
with a revisit of the infamous Miami Shootout that pretty much launched
the whole industry (and some would argue pseudo-science) of bullet
technology and performance that many shooters (present company
included) remain addicted to.

It was the Miami Shootout that led the FBI to start looking at more
powerful handgun rounds which led to the 10mm (on the S&W 1076
platform) and then to the 40 S&W (in order to duplicate the lower end of
the 10mm power scale but in a 9mm sized platform).

Digital edition available here:

http://fmgpublications.ipaperus.com/FMGPublications/AmericanHandgunner/AHND11/

M-

[JodyH]

MagSafe meets none of the established standards for handgun bullet performance.
But they have pretty advertisements.
Maybe you should look into "Extreme Shock" (http://www.extremeshockusa.com/) ammo if you are impressed with price per round and bold typeface claims.
Me, I'll stick to rounds with established, proven track records.

[Vanzpp]

MagSafe meets none of the established standards for handgun bullet performance.
But they have pretty advertisements.
Maybe you should look into "Extreme Shock" (http://www.extremeshockusa.com/) ammo if you are impressed with price per round and bold typeface claims.
Me, I'll stick to rounds with established, proven track records.

:blah: :blah::blah:

[JFootin]

Now be nice, boys. Jody, I started this thread to gain some knowledge about this ammo from people who have actually used it in their guns, not to hear put downs or insults. Have you, Jody, ever actually used the ammo?

[JodyH]

No.
Why would I?
I don't have to waste $150 on a Jimenez .25 to know they are junk either.
Do a little more research other than ad copy and you'll see that MagSafe is all junk science.

[JFootin]

No.
Why would I?
I don't have to waste $150 on a Jimenez .25 to know they are junk either.
Do a little more research other than ad copy and you'll see that MagSafe is all junk science.

So, this is what you have to contribute to the intelligent and civil discussion we have been having about this ammo? Which you have never tried. But to just call us all idiots for looking into it?

[Bawanna]

Happy thoughts everyone. Happy thoughts.

[Chuck54]

I just looked at the Magsafe web site.

The velocities WOW

I may order some of the 25 acp for my Beretta 950

If it works out I may never need to carry a larger pistol again

[Vanzpp]

This is interesting....hollow point performance through bone. Pretty dismal.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/PDF/38%20Special%20JHP%20performance%20through%20Bone% 20Simulant%20plates.pdf

Could this be used as a justification for frangibles like Magsafe?

[JFootin]

We'll never know because there wasn't any frangible ammo in the test.

Could the performance of these brands of ammo, in particular the ones favored by law enforcement, be illustrating the ability to penetrate car doors and windows—doing what they were designed to do?

How do you think the Magsafe ammo would have performed in this test?

[Vanzpp]

How do you think the Magsafe ammo would have performed in this test?

Assuming this test to be correct, I suspect the Magsafes would have penetrated the bone then fragmented as advertised. This person did not test expansion in gel. He wanted to see how much sheetrock Magsafes would penetrate to determine safety for home defense.

http://www.shootingresources.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=52&Itemid=39

"The Sheetrock test showed that this ammo traveled though 8 layers and the front portion of the round shattered into multiple pieces. An equivalent of 4 interior walls. Not to bad. I also tested this round on the steel plate rig, 3 layers of 22 gauge steel, this was very surprising, it blew a clean hole though all 3 layers."

[Vanzpp]

Also, I assume the Magsafes wouldn't plug like the HPs due to the epoxy that fills the cavity.

[JFootin]

Wow! That's the most impressive report I've seen on this ammo.

They shattered into multiple pieces, at least some of which still had energy enough to penetrate 8 layers of sheetrock. With traditional bullets, they are always talking about weight retention—staying in one piece—as being the desired result. They want to make one hole as big as possible. But the destruction caused by multiple pieces of Magsafe bullets going as fast as rifle bullets sounds more devastating to me.

[Barth]

I live in a paper thin apartment so I got some of this for my S&W 342 ti 38.
The stuff kicks like a 357 mag in my 11.6 oz gun.
I wouldn't want to be hit by it...
http://www.magsafeonline.com/img/MS_logo.gifhttp://www.ammunitiontogo.com/images_thumbs/38max65gr.jpg



Manufacturer: Magsafe 38MAX
.38 Special +P, MagSafe Max Load, 65 Grain Pre Fragmented Bullet.
Muzzle velocity: 1670 fps.
Muzzle energy: 402 ft/lbs.
Test Gun: 2" S&W 60.
Uses: Personal Protection, Law Enforcement.

[JFootin]

Thanks, Barth, for sharing your experience. :)


I live in a paper thin apartment so I got some of this for my S&W 342 ti 38.
The stuff kicks like a 357 mag in my 11.6 oz gun.
I wouldn't want to be hit by it...

That's interesting. Magsafe talks about low recoil with their rounds. Maybe that's more true in semi-autos than wheel guns. (I still haven't tried any in my CM9, yet.)



http://www.magsafeonline.com/img/MS_logo.gifhttp://www.ammunitiontogo.com/images_thumbs/38max65gr.jpg

Manufacturer: Magsafe 38MAX
.38 Special +P, MagSafe Max Load, 65 Grain Pre Fragmented Bullet.
Muzzle velocity: 1670 fps.
Muzzle energy: 402 ft/lbs.
Test Gun: 2" S&W 60.
Uses: Personal Protection, Law Enforcement.

It amazes me how some people poo-poo this ammo, call them scam artists, and anyone dumb who even considers using it. Its like they think if a bullet doesn't stay in one piece, it will be totally ineffective. But look at these stats. Mach 1.5 and over 400 ft/lbs of energy, ALL of which would be transfered to the target in a very wide wound channel with multiple pieces dispersed throughout.

It just dawned on me. This ammo acts like a regular bullet in flight and through clothing, but then explodes like a shotgun blast. Exploding bullets are illegal, but this brand of high tech frangible ammo gives you that in a legal way. Hmmm....

[Barth]

Thanks, Barth, for sharing your experience. :)



That's interesting. Magsafe talks about low recoil with their rounds. Maybe that's more true in semi-autos than wheel guns. (I still haven't tried any in my CM9, yet.)



It amazes me how some people poo-poo this ammo, call them scam artists, and anyone dumb who even considers using it. Its like they think if a bullet doesn't stay in one piece, it will be totally ineffective. But look at these stats. Mach 1.5 and over 400 ft/lbs of energy, ALL of which would be transfered to the target in a very wide wound channel with multiple pieces dispersed throughout.

It just dawned on me. This ammo acts like a regular bullet in flight and through clothing, but then explodes like a shotgun blast. Exploding bullets are illegal, but this brand of high tech frangible ammo gives you that in a legal way. Hmmm....

http://www.indyarocks.com/videos/Ammo-Test--45-ACP--68-Gr-P-Super-Swat-PreFragmente-1675521

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5pXmWrv9DE

[JFootin]

Very good reports. Did you see that pile of jagged pieces, including the jacket which had expanded to close to an inch after the water expansion test? Wow! How is someone going to live with that mess anywhere in C.O.M? Or with his head split like a watermelon? And that .45 round goes more than 2200 fps, almost Mach 2!

[Barth]

Yup, Yup.
Appearently they have been perfecting the formula - LOL!

DESIGNED FOR PERFECT PENETRATION DEPTH
MagSafe's revolutionary design uses large lead shotgun pellets rather than solid lead for a bullet's core. The earliest versions (1986-1987) used small pellets, like the #6 shot a competitor uses for their "Silver" line of frangible ammo.

Early in the design process, hundreds of videotaped test shots were made into ordnance gelatin. Then, viewed in slow motion, you could see how a core's pellet size and pattern created the greatest wound damage for any given caliber.

It was quickly learned that using much larger #2 or #3 shot gave perfect penetration depth in gelatin or flesh-form 10 to 13 inches (two to three times as much penetration as our competitors). A large man's chest is only 12 inches thick from front to back, and any more penetration than that was wasted energy which would endanger innocent people.


Just picked up some for the S&W 640 357 -
http://www.sportsmans-depot.com/product_images/f/213/MSA_357D-3__84729_zoom.jpg

[jocko]

I carry the boron GLASER silver tip round sin my home defense K9.

I can't say I have read alot of "good" reviews about magsafe ammo.

[Barth]

I carry the boron GLASER silver tip round sin my home defense K9.

I can't say I have read alot of "good" reviews about magsafe ammo.

Yup.
I'm a big conventional ammo guy.
But for my tiny apartment.
With folks all around me. It make sense.
Plus, I believe the Air Marshals used Glasers initially.
So for special purposes it can't be that bad.

I really don't want to find out how far a bonded, super sonic,
bullet would go through this cheap drywall.

[JFootin]

Yup.
I'm a big conventional ammo guy.
But for my tiny apartment.
With folks all around me. It make sense.
Plus, I believe the Air Marshals used Glasers initially.
So for special purposes it can't be that bad.

I really don't want to find out how far a bonded, super sonic,
bullet would go through this cheap drywall.

My sentiments exactly. I live in an apartment. That is part of my motivation for starting this thread. I saw this brand and saw that it is carried by a lot of the big ammo sellers, which verifies that it is a legitimate product. There are others that you can only buy from their website or if you see them at a gun show, and I don't want to mess with them. But, this ammo is a good choice for use in my apartment.

Most of the objections I have seen to this ammo come from ignorance, such as thinking that some heavy clothing or an arm in the way is going to nullify it, or thinking that a bullet that remains in one piece and goes through and out the other side is going to do as much damage as the mess that these rounds make as they explode inside a person, with heavier pieces penetrating almost to the other side. Others site the standard recommendations for standard ammo for police use, and think that invalidates or discredits use of this specialized ammo. And some think that the only use for such ammo is in the pressurized cabin of a commercial airplane, but are apparently unaware that this particular ammo is designed from the outset for home and self defense use.

And again, the test done by other people and without Mag-Safe's knowledge using mountain sheep, chosen because of their similar size to humans, has been dismissed by some as if it didn't happen. But the result that the Mag-Safe .380 round incapacitated sheep faster than any other SD ammo in the test, including very big and potent calibers, really tells me something about stopping a BG super fast in a life threatening situation.

Jocko is right, there hasn't been a whole lot of tests and reports done on this ammo. I think it gets overlooked a lot by closed minded people, plus it is very expensive. Most people are conformists, hence the Toyota Camry is the #1 selling car year after year, not because it is better, but it has become the no brainer choice of conformists. Most shooters conform to the idea that, if an ammo is recommended for police, then it must be the best for personal self defense. But in self defense scenarios, is penetration of auto doors and glass and other barriers desirable, as it is in consideration for police duty? I want to look deeper and decide for myself, not just conform.

[Mr. S]

Are you trying to get a job with Magsafe??
You havent even tried it yourself?
So you cant even honestly say it has less recoil like advertised?


I wouldn't use #2 or #3 buckshot (Do you know if they use buck or bird shot??) out of a 12 gauge and I surely wouldn't expect it to do much from a subcompact .380 auto.Much less incapacitate better than a 10mm.


My opinion is based on reality,yours is based on advertising hype and a very unscientific test done on goats many years ago.Got anything recent? You continue to talk about this old test and you act like you were there and witnessed it..you didn't.
Any load capable of stopping an attacker will penetrate walls so stop trying to use that bs as a reason to buy this stuff.

If something sounds to good to be true it probably is.

[JFootin]

Reading suggestion for Mr. S: How To Win Friends and Influence People.

[Bawanna]

I got my eyes on this one. Lets strive for civility and sportsman like conduct. My spidey senses tell me things could ugly here very quickly for some reason and the tanker with flame retardant spray is refilling. I can call in some fast movers quickly but it's expensive and our budgets completely shot in the backside so play nice, happy thoughts, love one another, not in any mano mano way of course.

:D:D:D

[Rainman48314]

... but I am amused by, and do enjoy, YouTubers shooting watermelons and cans of beans. The videos using homemade ballistic gel are interesting but fall short, for me, in being scientific...not that the watermellon "tests" pass that test either. My real world dilema is that attacks from watermellons or bean cans are just so rare in Michigan. Besides, it's pumpkin season now.

I've read all of this thread and most of the links. To each his own. Here's my thoughts:

I don't find the economics of frangible ammo appealing. I want to shoot my chosen ammo in quantity.

I have read good things about bonded HP ammo. I like the rep Speer Gold Dots have. Sig's inhouse 'smith uses it for testing and recommended it for my .380. Reliability in a small gun is so difficult to acheive but remains critical. I load my 1911 with it also. My intructor recommends it as one of just two or three. I personally find it reliable and have used it in a half dozen guns. I can easily find it locally or online. One does not need to be in LE (see Ranger T). I am of the opinion Speer ads will play out better in front of a jury than Super Swat of Defender ads. I also carry against possible car jacking and I DO want to be able to penetrate a door or windshield.

Other than the reasons above, I also think the name is cool. :)

[JFootin]

Some good points Rainman. I started this thread to gather information about this particular brand of ammo. I didn't start the thread as a debate about frangible ammo in general, nor to get bashed over the head and called an idiot every time I say something positive about the ammo. :mad: Just information gathering about MagSafe ammo.

My main interest is because I live in an apartment, so wall penetration and killing neighbors is a concern. They also claim low recoil, which with my partially paralyzed hands and wrists, would provide better control and quicker followup shots. I still think that one mag loaded with this ammo would work for me around the apartment.

Let me make it clear, my current ammo box contains boxes of Speer GD 124gr, Federal HST 124gr+p, and an assortment of FMJs for range work. I intend to add some other bullet weights and brands of conventional SD ammo to try at the range over time. And my carry ammo will be one of those premium SD choices.

[Rainman48314]

Some good points Rainman. I started this thread to gather information about this particular brand of ammo. I didn't start the thread as a debate about frangible ammo in general, nor to get bashed over the head and called an idiot every time I say something positive about the ammo. :mad: Just information gathering about MagSafe ammo.

My main interest is because I live in an apartment, so wall penetration and killing neighbors is a concern. They also claim low recoil, which with my partially paralyzed hands and wrists, would provide better control and quicker followup shots. I still think that one mag loaded with this ammo would work for me around the apartment.

Let me make it clear, my current ammo box contains boxes of Speer GD 124gr, Federal HST 124gr+p, and an assortment of FMJs for range work. I intend to add some other bullet weights and brands of conventional SD ammo to try at the range over time. And my carry ammo will be one of those premium SD choices.
I'm inclined to use a "pass / fail" rating for SD ammo. Not saying any of yours fails, I just have my reasons as stated.

I live in a multi-unit condo, perhaps not as paper thin as some apartments, but I suspect my use of a gun in SD will probably come away from home. At home, where I would make a stand, a BG is lined up with my washer and dryer and then my full size car. I should look up what my GMAC lease says about bullet holes in the hood.:)

Stay safe

[tv_racin_fan]

I have no issue with using birdshot in a 12 guage inside my home. In fact my 12 guage is currently loaded with birdshot.

Yeah I know tests have been done that show birdshot wont work but every test I have seen shows what happens when using birdshot or buckshot or even slugs at longer ranges than I could expect to be shooting INSIDE MY HOME. I have yet to see a test where someone tried birdshot or buckshot or even slug at point blank range which is what I would have INSIDE MY HOME.

[JFootin]

Yeah, a shotgun is a good choice for home defense, especially one of the shorter barrel varieties. I used to have an old Ithaca Model 37 Featherweight 12 ga Pump, but had to sell it. Not a short gun, but nice action. The only down side is the potentially BIG mess that 2 or 3 shotgun blasts can make in a home.

But a shotgun or long gun is impractical for me. You see, my ability to stand and balance has become so limited, with me having to use a 4 wheel walker all the time, that I wouldn't be able to free both hands to handle and shoot a shotgun without losing my balance and falling. And the recoil would knock me over, anyway. Even in a power chair (I have one. Don't want to use it anymore than I have to until I can't do anything else.), I need one hand to work the joystick to maneuver it. Also, I can't wear a shotgun on me, so that would add the time needed for me to go and retrieve it when threatened. I can't move faster than a turtle, so that would put me at a great disadvantage.

So for me, a handgun works better. I can wear it in a comfortable OWB holster. Don't have to worry about concealment, although a loose shirt keeps it out of sight, out of mind when someone comes to the door. I work the joystick with my weak hand, so my strong hand is free to handle the gun. Lot's of limitations. Can't "run and shoot" or anything like that. But a handgun on my person gives me the best advantage I can have.

This is why the subject of this thread is to gather info about a brand of ammo that seems suitable for use in my handgun in my apartment, while providing a level of safety for my neighbors.

[Mr. S]

I started this thread to gather information about this particular brand of ammo. I didn't start the thread as a debate about frangible ammo in general, nor to get bashed over the head and called an idiot every time I say something positive about the ammo. :mad: Just information gathering about MagSafe ammo.

My main interest is because I live in an apartment, so wall penetration and killing neighbors is a concern. They also claim low recoil, which with my partially paralyzed hands and wrists, would provide better control and quicker followup shots. I still think that one mag loaded with this ammo would work for me around the apartment.

Let me make it clear, my current ammo box contains boxes of Speer GD 124gr, Federal HST 124gr+p, and an assortment of FMJs for range work. I intend to add some other bullet weights and brands of conventional SD ammo to try at the range over time. And my carry ammo will be one of those premium SD choices.


IF Magsafe performs as advertised then why wouldn't you carry it all the time?
Are there times you wouldn't worry about overpenetration and stopping the attacker quickly?

OK I'm done bashing you over the head now...Seriously I dont want to see anyone waste money and more importantly possibly make a mistake that could cause them permanent damage or worse.


Read the 5th post here (by DocGKR, the 7th paragraph deals with magsafe in particular)

http://www.tacticalforums.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000192.html


written by someone who knows more about this than you and I ever will.

[JFootin]

That's a very informative post, Mr. S. Thanks. He makes a good case against the ammo. I'm convinced. I won't waste any of my money.

It looks like a heavier 147gr HP load might be most effective in my 3" barreled CM9, huh? I saw a report where the Winchester failed to expand. He says the Remington will. I'll have to try some of that. Maybe some Buffalo Bore, too.

Of course, the Speer Gold Dot 124gr and Federal HST 124gr in my current inventory are no slouches, either.

I am glad you say you will stop bashing me over the head about this. It came across as personal and disrespectful—sort of like being harassed and bullied on a playground. I am severely crippled in my legs and hands, but I am not a wimp. And in person, I would probably have punched you in the nose quite a while back. Kind of hard to do over a computer. But maybe you didn't intend it that way, so I am willing to let bygones be bygones. Just try to be more respectful.

[JFootin]

Our bullet testing expert, Ljutic, posted results from his test of MagSafe ammo. I am impressed! It proves that this ammo performs as advertized. :) Here it is:

MagSafe 9mm Defender Clear Gel Test (http://www.kahrtalk.com/showthread.php?t=18463)

[Brian Edwards]

Let me just say at the beginning, I have not read the entire thread. I'm not going to try because there is too much inaccurate posting on the first page that any hope for the follow along pages being correct is practically nil.

There seems to be a great deal of people who don't know anything about terminal ballistics, that are commenting as if they do. People quoting energy numbers, as if that has any bearing on what makes a good handgun rounds. People quoting Marshall and Sanow's bogus One Shot Stop statistics. People mentioning of all things the Strassberg Tests. Folks, stop it.

You need to understand how to interpret shots fired into properly calibrated ballistic gelatin. You need to understand that FPE is not a wounding factor in handgun rounds, and why. Marshall and Sanow's One SHot Stop books and numbers have been efficiently and totally destroyed. The Strassberg Tests still have not been proven to have been held, and may be a work of fiction brought forth by an unscrupulous gun writer.

So I'm going to provide you some links. Many of them will come from the same website, as that happens to be where they are cached.

First and foremost is Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness. Written by an FBI Special Agent in the late 80's, it is the Holy Grail of terminal ballistics papers, and has withstood the test of time. If you cant bother to read 25 pages, don't bother to respond.

http://firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm

The next link shows gelatin shots and explains what is a wound and what is not. This is by one Dr Gary K Roberts (DDS, USNR LtCMDR, PAPDR, etc).

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=22323


As for Marshall and Sanow, the old International Wounds Ballistics Association, comprised of Combat Surgeons, Trauma Surgeons, Medical Examiners, Coroners, Police officers, EMTs from all over the world did a thorough and complete job of debunking them.

http://firearmstactical.com/afte.htm

http://firearmstactical.com/briefs8.htm

http://firearmstactical.com/briefs12.htm

http://firearmstactical.com/briefs24.htm

http://firearmstactical.com/briefs31.htm


If more proof was needed as to why FPE is not a wounding factory in service pistol ammunition, here's yet another data point:

http://firearmstactical.com/briefs3.htm


Moving on to the subject at hand, here is why MagSafe is garbage, and shouldn't be trusted for defense of your life, or others:

http://firearmstactical.com/briefs5.htm

http://firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/volume4/number3/article432.htm


Lets see who actually takes the time to read and learn, who prefaces their response with "I'm not going to read all of that" and then offers a weak excuse, and who will just do the internet equivalent of "nuh-uh!".

[ltxi]

Let me just say at the beginning, I have not read the entire thread. ..........

.............Lets see who actually takes the time to read and learn, who prefaces their response with "I'm not going to read all of that" and then offers a weak excuse, and who will just do the internet equivalent of "nuh-uh!".


How 'bout long put to rest and it's not clear anyone really cared all that much to begin with?

Hope all that didn't exceed your attention span.