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!

quote:

Originally posted by FlareGun:
I dont hear too much about this wonder ammo anymore.

No doubt!

I love the name

Nope. No reason to, given the current availability of self defense ammo that actually have a proven track record.

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.

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.

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!

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."

It's ok to like the name "Thunderzap" though, isn't it?

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.

For some reason that cartoon ad reminded me of...



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

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?

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.

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?

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.

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.