SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Ammunition    Anyone else carry Thunderzap?

Moderators: LDD, parabellum
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Anyone else carry Thunderzap? Login/Join 
Member
posted
I dont hear too much about this wonder ammo anymore.

This stuff, only in 45 ACP out of a German P220

Its no HST, but HST aint movin 3000 FPS!



 
Posts: 5 | Registered: January 05, 2018Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Moderator
Picture of Chris Orndorff
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by FlareGun:
I dont hear too much about this wonder ammo anymore.



No doubt!


__________________


"Owning a handgun doesn't make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician." -Jeff Cooper


Now an FFL licensee, working on SIGs and other assorted firearms. My email is in my profile.
 
Posts: 8329 | Location: UT | Registered: December 05, 1999Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Not really from Vienna
Picture of arfmel
posted Hide Post
I love the name




 
Posts: 23095 | Location: Young American Teen Club | Registered: January 30, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Nope. No reason to, given the current availability of self defense ammo that actually have a proven track record.



"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts." Sherlock Holmes
 
Posts: 1044 | Registered: February 26, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Fighting the good fight
Picture of RogueJSK
posted Hide Post


There's no way I'd rely on this 30-year-old, short-lived gimmick round for self defense. There's a reason it was only around for a few years in the late 80s/early 90s.

It not only lost velocity really quickly due to its very light weight, it was also designed to fragment completely upon impact. The result is short range and extremely shallow penetration.

It's the handgun equivalent of the old "load your shotgun with birdshot for home defense" myth.
 
Posts: 21284 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
His diet consists of black
coffee, and sarcasm.
Picture of egregore
posted Hide Post
quote:
There's no way I'd rely on this 30-year-old, short-lived gimmick round for self defense. There's a reason it was only around for a few years in the late 80s/early 90s.
Look at those (claimed) ballistics. I have a hard time believing the gun would function with ammo so far outside the norm. This is far more important than how big or deep a hole the bullet makes when it hits.
 
Posts: 20950 | Location: Johnson City/Elizabethton, TN | Registered: April 28, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I understand your skepticism.

Allow me to post some real world results.

3" hole in a "side of beef." It doesn't get much better than that!

 
Posts: 5 | Registered: January 05, 2018Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Fighting the good fight
Picture of RogueJSK
posted Hide Post
It gets a lot better than that, in fact.

Understanding of handgun ballistics has come a long way since 1980-whatever. It's now understood that sufficient penetration is more important than wound size/width. (Though ideally you'd want a round with both sufficient penetration and a large wound cavity.). And modern ballistic testing consists of more than simply anectdotes collected from shooting a piece of meat once.

A 3 inch wide hole does little good if it's only a couple inches deep. Sure, it's better than just harsh language, but messy yet shallow wounds will not reliably stop a threat. Such wounds would likely be painful, but pain compliance is not a reliable factor when using deadly force. Instead, you should rely on stopping the threat by being capable of reaching and damaging a vital organ with your rounds. This requires shot placement plus sufficient penetration.

An extremely lightweight bullet made from a fragile material, that is designed to fragment immediately upon impact and cause wide but shallow wounds, will not be able to provide the 12-18 inches of penetration considered ideal for defensive handgun ammo in modern ballistic testing.

There are any number of better choices in modern handgun ammo. I'd even rather carry simple FMJ than this gimmick round.

And regarding the supposed benefit of it not penetrating interior walls or ricocheting... To paraphrase jljones, one of the forum's most prominent firearms trainers: "You should not be choosing your defensive ammo based on what's the best round to miss with." Wink
 
Posts: 21284 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Not really from Vienna
Picture of arfmel
posted Hide Post
It's ok to like the name "Thunderzap" though, isn't it?




 
Posts: 23095 | Location: Young American Teen Club | Registered: January 30, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
His diet consists of black
coffee, and sarcasm.
Picture of egregore
posted Hide Post
quote:
And regarding the supposed benefit of it not penetrating interior walls or ricocheting...

If it won't make a hole in a wall, it won't make a hole in a man.
 
Posts: 20950 | Location: Johnson City/Elizabethton, TN | Registered: April 28, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Plowing straight ahead come what may
Picture of Bisleyblackhawk
posted Hide Post
For some reason that cartoon ad reminded me of...



All kidding aside...I would not trust my life to that.


********************************************************

"we've gotta roll with the punches, learn to play all of our hunches
Making the best of what ever comes our way
Forget that blind ambition and learn to trust your intuition
Plowing straight ahead come what may
And theres a cowboy in the jungle"
Jimmy Buffet
 
Posts: 8632 | Location: Southeast Tennessee...not far above my homestate Georgia | Registered: March 10, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by egregore:
quote:
And regarding the supposed benefit of it not penetrating interior walls or ricocheting...

If it won't make a hole in a wall, it won't make a hole in a man.


Can I shoot your cat with one?

He would be just fine right?
 
Posts: 5 | Registered: January 05, 2018Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Fighting the good fight
Picture of RogueJSK
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by FlareGun:
Can I shoot your cat with one?

He would be just fine right?


I wouldn't want my pet to be shot by a pellet gun, but that doesn't make a pellet gun a good choice for self defense.
 
Posts: 21284 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RogueJSK:

I wouldn't want my pet to be shot by a pellet gun, but that doesn't make a pellet gun a good choice for self defense.


I agree.

But you stated above that this ammo wont make a hole in a wall, let alone a man, so it should be safe for a pet, right? Wink
 
Posts: 5 | Registered: January 05, 2018Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Before anyone gets too excited, I dont actually carry thunderzap. Just posting some pics of vintage ammo. This thread brought to you by Makers 46. Smile
 
Posts: 5 | Registered: January 05, 2018Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Fighting the good fight
Picture of RogueJSK
posted Hide Post
I didn't state that about the wall. That was member "egregore".

I'm glad to hear you're not actually relying on this for defense purposes.
 
Posts: 21284 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Ammunition    Anyone else carry Thunderzap?

© SIGforum 2018