More on snub ammo

Now that I’ve got my snub, I’m researching good carry ammo.

The trick is that a snub only has about a 2″ barrel, and that’s not a lot of time for velocity to build up. So you need a load that can get up to speed quickly. The consequence of that however tends to be making a stronger load which then can be harder to control in the already hard to control snub nose revolver.

The standard load is nicknamed the “FBI Load”, which is a .38 Special +P 158 grain LSWCHP (I believe that’s lead semi-wadcutter hollow point). An informal test. Another. More data. Even more.

I’ve heard that the semi-wadcutters are a good way to go. They will expand, at least somewhat, but more importantly they get good penetration. Again, with these short barrels you may risk not being fast enough to get enough oomph for reliable expansion. So if you wind up with a bullet that barely expands and doesn’t penetrate deep enough, what good is it? And even if it reliably expands but barely scratches the surface, is that any good? But if something maybe doesn’t get really big but at least gets to the heart of the matter, that’s arguable a better way to go.

Another load that keeps coming up is the Gold Dot 135 grain +P’s. Speer has been making a flavor of their Gold Dots for “short barrel” guns, optimizing characteristics for that situation. The Gold Dot seems to get a lot of positive support, from what Google turns up for me. Here’s some informal tests comparing the LSWCHP vs. the Gold Dot vs. some Corbon.

Now, all this Federal Nyclad stuff. The round seems interesting, and being standard pressure has a small appeal of being more managable out of an Airweight snub. But from what I can read, the original Nyclad’s were 158 grain +P loads and pretty respected in performance. But the new ones are 125 grain standard pressure loads and just aren’t going to perform out of a snub. Seeing this performance data bugs me.

I do read that Buffalo Bore makes a 158 grain SWCHP standard pressure and some regard it as the new gold standard. Something to consider.

I’ve been very curious about Hornady’s new Critical Defense ammo. But I just haven’t seen any sort of data. The theory seems sound, the marketing is good, but it’s such a new product and there just doesn’t seem to be a lot of data on the round yet.

Anyway, hit up Google. There’s much to be found on the topic. I’m only starting to scratch the surface.

I will admit I’ve got some of the new Nyclad (bought it with the gun) and we’ll see how it goes. But given what I’ve read so far, I suspect I’ll either go for a 158 grain wadcutter (Remington, if I have the choice, or maybe the Buffalo Bore), or maybe the short-barrel Gold Dot 135 grain.

Researching is fun. 🙂

Updated: Went looking for more information on Hornady Critical Defense.

7 thoughts on “More on snub ammo

  1. Hornady’s Critical Defense ammo is the tits. It’s a “defensive ammo” design inspired by their LeverRevolution hunting ammo, which was .45 Colt, .357, etc. I actually use the .45 Colt LeverRev stuff as defensive ammo in my carbine. While I can’t directly speak for the terminal performance of the .38 and 9mm stuff, I whacked a 200 pound hog with the .45 Colt LeverRev stuff – one shot, DRT. I’m drinking the kool-aid.

    • I must admit the Critical Defense stuff is VERY intriguing to me. While hollow-points are generally the way to go for defensive ammo, there’s always that pesky issue of the cavity filling up and they work to address that yet have reliable and good expansion. So I want to drink the Kool-Aid here, just, as I’ve said, I’d like to see more data.

      But your personal experience here is a good starting point! Thanx!

  2. Pingback: Ammo for snubbies « Gun Nuts Media

  3. Pingback: Hornady Critical Defense ammo « Stuff From Hsoi

  4. Pingback: Snub ammo trials « Stuff From Hsoi

Comments are closed.