25 acp Ammo

guys with the killing.. Self defense means stopping a Foe from inflicting bodily damage on you. You dont have to Kill to stop a Foe to stop a threat.

Killing is irrelevant, aslong as your Foe retreats and your no longer in danger.

All this .25 bouncing of paper plates and its not a good ammo.
Quote me on this I guarantee you not a single person here would put on a bullet proof vest and still volunteer to get shot by a .25 acp, and if you say you will prove it video and put on youtube,

look at this idiots
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tGZq1GT1bw
 
Yes but its like hunting white tail deer with a 22 hornet, it will kill it but not right away unless you get a well placed shot. In some cases I carry a 25 but it just to keep them off me till I can get to the truck and get something bigger.
Click to expand...

And then go to jail if the threat was already stopped with the 25, and you got to your truck where you could get away!:eek:

guys with the killing.. Self defense means stopping a Foe from inflicting bodily damage on you. You dont have to Kill to stop a Foe to stop a threat.
Click to expand...

Where's the thumbs up smilies.....about a dozen of them!
 
Well Roughedge, I understand what you're saying and also understand your distain for the .25 ACP. I have also seen people shot with the .25 ACP and as with any cartridge there is no such thing as a one shot stop I once saw a man who was shot 4 times in the chest area with a .45 from a distance of ten feet keep coming. My point? yes ,it is a small cartridge and there are perhaps better ( by choice I carry a ..32 and do not feel under powered or out gunned ), but I have seen the results of being shot with a .25 ACP in the morgue. The .25 can be a deadly little thing and has probably killed more people on the mean streets of our large cities than all the other calibers combined. JMHO and I have others out in the garage.:)
 
You're right Rjay, It wouldnt be my first choice but its better than nothing. For 15 year I built offices for VIP's and corprate big wheels so most of the doors and some wall was bullet resistant . We done a lot of testing on different material so I know what most bullets will do. I wouldnt put on a vest and let someone shoot it because if its over ten feet its not for sure you can hit the vest and not put my eye out. I bet if you hang a Carhart jacket from a wire and shoot it from 20 yards it may not go through it. If you like the 25 by all means carry it. Ive had mine 14 years and still have half of the original box of ammo because I cant hit nothing with it.
 
The mouse that roared!!!

Friends dont let friends carry a 25, unless you hit them just right it will just pi** them off.
Click to expand...

I agree with that statement a little, BUT, and there always is a BUTT in LIFE, a .25 in your hand whilst some folks guns are too big and heavy on a 95 degree day, thus in their glove box ... may save your life!

Here is a video where I shoot my girlfriends little Beretta Jetfire .25 at 100 yards, and it is even more deadly up close and personal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWLxbLKmR04

holes in the lungs will slow even the best down, and that might be enough to make it back home, but most of the time they will forget why they bothered you in the first place ... threat of death makes cowards of us all!
 
Last edited:
PS

Hardballs ... find make and companies that work in your gun ... I don't think these little guns can push a hollow point to work as advertised...

Millions have died in wars by the use of hard balls ... OK?
 
I had a little Beretta Model 20 for a while that was inherited, later passed on to other family members.. I ran a few boxes of FMJ through it and then a couple of mags of Hornady XTP 35gr. The Hornady fed flawlessly and had a decent little snap to it, much more so than the Federal and Fiocchi FMJ practice ammo.

At the ranges it was intended for (7 yards or so) I was able to pretty rapidly empty the pistol into center of mass of a silhouette target. I am not a proponent of the .25 ACP caliber, but 9 rounds of the Hornady XTP seems like it would do a fair job of deterring most assailants.

I would not personally carry the .25 if I had a different option, but if I did, the Hornady XTP is what I'd put in there.
 
35 grain XTP!? you sure that they're not meant for squirrels?

The sectional density is .072 while the sectional density of a single 00 buckshot pellet is .071

63ft/lbs of muzzle energy. You sure you want an expanding bullet? I don't think that bullet would be such a reliable penetrator, and that could be a significant problem, when trying to stop a threat.

It would essentially be like firing a single buckshot pellet at a bad guy with roughly 300-400FPS loss over common shotgun velocities, and on top of that add in the reduced penetration of an expanding bullet. That just doesn't seem like a reliable SD recipe, IMO.
 
I can't imagine using hollow points from a small .25 caliber pistol for defense. Just can't penetrate enough.
 
Curious? How many responders to this post have seen people that have been shot with the .25 a.c.p.?
Not something someone read about or heard from the infamous "my buddy"
but have seen the results of humans being shot with the .25 a.c.p.?
If you want, toss in the .38 revovler S&W ctgs .38 short), the .32 revolver & auto ctgs, & the lowly .22 l.r. from a handgun.
Primarily I'm interested in factual observations about humans taking one or more rounds from the .25 auto.
Strong statements such as a few recently made here demand strong data even if that data is mere observation.
 
jeager106 said:
...Strong statements such as a few recently made here demand strong data even if that data is mere observation.
Click to expand...
Okay, let's have an evidence based discussion of defensive handgun cartridges.

As I've said before:

There is data, and there are studies, and we have a good deal of knowledge about wound physiology. But we keep getting into these "ring-around-the-rosie" discussions because, I guess, a lot of people are dissatisfied that there really is no definitive answer.

Perhaps the real conclusion(s) with regard to self defense could be summarized as follows:

  1. Pretty much every cartridge ever made has at times succeeded at quickly stopping an assailant.

  2. Pretty much every cartridge ever made has at times failed at quickly stopping an assailant.

  3. Considering ballistic gelatin performance, data available on real world incidents, an understanding of wound physiology and psychology, certain cartridges with certain bullets are more likely to be more effective more of the time.

  4. For defensive use in a handgun the 9mm Luger, .38 Special +P, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, .357 Magnum, and other, similar cartridges when of high quality manufacture, and loaded with expanding bullets appropriately designed for their respective velocities to both expand and penetrate adequately, are reasonably good choices.

  5. And that's probably as good as we can do.

I've posted the following before and might as well post it again here:

Let's consider how shooting someone will actually cause him to stop what he's doing.

  • The goal is to stop the assailant.

  • There are four ways in which shooting someone stops him:

    • psychological -- "I'm shot, it hurts, I don't want to get shot any more."

    • massive blood loss depriving the muscles and brain of oxygen and thus significantly impairing their ability to function

    • breaking major skeletal support structures

    • damaging the central nervous system.

    Depending on someone just giving up because he's been shot is iffy. Probably most fights are stopped that way, but some aren't; and there are no guarantees.

    Breaking major skeletal structures can quickly impair mobility. But if the assailant has a gun, he can still shoot. And it will take a reasonably powerful round to reliably penetrate and break a large bone, like the pelvis.

    Hits to the central nervous system are sure and quick, but the CNS presents a small and uncertain target. And sometimes significant penetration will be needed to reach it.

    The most common and sure physiological way in which shooting someone stops him is blood loss -- depriving the brain and muscles of oxygen and nutrients, thus impairing the ability of the brain and muscles to function. Blood loss is facilitated by (1) large holes causing tissue damage; (2) getting the holes in the right places to damage major blood vessels or blood bearing organs; and (3) adequate penetration to get those holes into the blood vessels and organs which are fairly deep in the body. The problem is that blood loss takes time. People have continued to fight effectively when gravely, even mortally, wounded. So things that can speed up blood loss, more holes, bigger holes, better placed holes, etc., help.

    So as a rule of thumb --

    • More holes are better than fewer holes.

    • Larger holes are better than smaller holes.

    • Holes in the right places are better than holes in the wrong places.

    • Holes that are deep enough are better than holes that aren't.

    • There are no magic bullets.

    • There are no guarantees.

  • With regard to the issue of psychological stops see

    • this study by Greg Ellifritz. And take special notice of his data on failure to incapacitate rates:


      ​


      As Ellifritz notes in his discussion of his "failure to incapacitate" data (emphasis added):
      Greg Ellifritz said:
      ...Take a look at two numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful. This tells us a couple of things...

      In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don't want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will. Any bullet or caliber combination will likely yield similar results in those cases. And fortunately for us, there are a lot of these "psychological stops" occurring. The problem we have is when we don't get a psychological stop. If our attacker fights through the pain and continues to victimize us, we might want a round that causes the most damage possible. In essence, we are relying on a "physical stop" rather than a "psychological" one. In order to physically force someone to stop their violent actions we need to either hit him in the Central Nervous System (brain or upper spine) or cause enough bleeding that he becomes unconscious. The more powerful rounds look to be better at doing this....
      Click to expand...

      1. There are two sets of data in the Ellifritz study: incapacitation and failure to incapacitate. They present some contradictions.

        • Considering the physiology of wounding, the data showing high incapacitation rates for light cartridges seems anomalous.

        • Furthermore, those same light cartridges which show high rates of incapacitation also show high rates of failures to incapacitate. In addition, heavier cartridges which show incapacitation rates comparable to the lighter cartridges nonetheless show lower failure to incapacitate rates.

        • And note that the failure to incapacitate rates of the 9mm Luger, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, and .44 Magnum were comparable to each other.

        • If the point of the exercise is to help choose cartridges best suited to self defense application, it would be helpful to resolve those contradictions.

        • A way to try to resolve those contradictions is to better understand the mechanism(s) by which someone who has been shot is caused to stop what he is doing.

      2. The two data sets and the apparent contradiction between them (and as Ellifritz wrote) thus strongly suggest that there are two mechanisms by which someone who has been shot will be caused to stop what he is doing.

        • One mechanism is psychological. This was alluded to by both Ellifritz and FBI agent and firearms instructor Urey Patrick. Sometimes the mere fact of being shot will cause someone to stop. When this is the stopping mechanism, the cartridge used really doesn't matter. One stops because his mind tells him to because he's been shot, not because of the amount of damage the wound has done to his body.

        • The other mechanism is physiological. If the body suffers sufficient damage, the person will be forced to stop what he is doing because he will be physiologically incapable of continuing. Heavier cartridges with large bullets making bigger holes are more likely to cause more damage to the body than lighter cartridges. Therefore, if the stopping mechanism is physiological, lighter cartridges are more likely to fail to incapacitate.

      3. And in looking at any population of persons who were shot and therefore stopped what they were doing, we could expect that some stopped for psychological reasons. We could also expect others would not be stopped psychologically and would not stop until they were forced to because their bodies became physiologically incapable of continuing.

      4. From that perspective, the failure to incapacitate data is probably more important. That essentially tells us that when Plan A (a psychological stop) fails, we must rely on Plan B (a physiological stop) to save our bacon; and a heavier cartridge would have a lower [Plan B] failure rate.

  • Also see the FBI paper entitled "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness", by Urey W. Patrick. Agent Patrick, for example, notes on page 8:
    ...Psychological factors are probably the most important relative to achieving rapid incapacitation from a gunshot wound to the torso. Awareness of the injury..., fear of injury, fear of death, blood or pain; intimidation by the weapon or the act of being shot; or the simple desire to quit can all lead to rapid incapacitation even from minor wounds. However, psychological factors are also the primary cause of incapacitation failures.

    The individual may be unaware of the wound and thus have no stimuli to force a reaction. Strong will, survival instinct, or sheer emotion such as rage or hate can keep a grievously wounded individual fighting....
    Click to expand...
  • And for some more insight into wound physiology and "stopping power":

    • Dr. V. J. M. DiMaio (DiMaio, V. J. M., M. D., Gunshot Wounds, Elsevier Science Publishing Company, 1987, pg. 42, as quoted in In Defense of Self and Others..., Patrick, Urey W. and Hall, John C., Carolina Academic Press, 2010, pg. 83):
      In the case of low velocity missles, e. g., pistol bullets, the bullet produces a direct path of destruction with very little lateral extension within the surrounding tissue. Only a small temporary cavity is produced. To cause significant injuries to a structure, a pistol bullet must strike that structure directly. The amount of kinetic energy lost in the tissue by a pistol bullet is insufficient to cause the remote injuries produced by a high-velocity rifle bullet.
      Click to expand...

    • And further in In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 83-84, emphasis in original):
      The tissue disruption caused by a handgun bullet is limited to two mechanisms. The first or crush mechanism is the hole that the bullet makes passing through the tissue. The second or stretch mechanism is the temporary wound cavity formed by the tissue being driven outward in a radial direction away from the path of the bullet. Of the two, the crush mechanism is the only handgun wounding mechanism that damages tissue. To cause significant injuries to a structure within the body using a handgun, the bullet must penetrate the structure.
      Click to expand...

    • And further in In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 95-96, emphasis in original):
      Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much-discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable....The critical element in wounding effectiveness is penetration. The bullet must pass through the large blood-bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid bleeding....Given durable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of the hole made by the bullet....
      Click to expand...

  • And sometimes a .357 Magnum doesn't work all that well. LAPD Officer Stacy Lim who was shot in the chest with a .357 Magnum and still ran down her attacker, returned fire, killed him, survived, and ultimately was able to return to duty. She was off duty and heading home after a softball game and a brief stop at the station to check her work assignment. According to the article I linked to:
    ... The bullet ravaged her upper body when it nicked the lower portion of her heart, damaged her liver, destroyed her spleen, and exited through the center of her back, still with enough energy to penetrate her vehicle door, where it was later found....
    Click to expand...

  • But take special note of the quote in the third bullet point in item V., above:

    • In In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 95-96, with my emphasis):
      ... the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of the hole made by the bullet....
      Click to expand...

    • So a sub-caliber, .22 lr, .25 ACP, or similar, can kill and can, under some circumstances, stop an attacker. But the odds are that something larger will be more likely to be effective. A sub-caliber might fill a special need, such as a need for deep concealment or if one can't handle something larger; but if someone has a choice, a sub-caliber will not be the best choice.
 
I carry a Beretta .25 Jetfire and feel comfortable with it. I am a very senior citizen with severe arthritis in both hands and weak grasping power. The Beretta 950 is a pleasure for me to shoot. At 7 yards it is very easy for me to quickly put all 9 rounds in a good group on a paper plate. For me, this is plenty adequate.

Most of what has been written about lack of penetration is nonsense. The .25 will penetrate three 7/8" pine boards (see Book of Pistols & Revolvers by W.H.B. Smith). That is a lot tougher than a leather jacket. For what it's worth, Fiocchi makes the most powerful load in this caliber and that is what I use.
 
Been said, I'll corroborate

Wild Bill said:
Hardball ... find make and companies that work in your gun...
Click to expand...
What he said.

I do not recommend .25 ACP as a primary defense weapon. I am also aware there are oftentimes more to the story.

So I will add my voice to those who doubt the effectiveness of the lighter, hollow point bullets. The 50 grain FMJ bullets have two advantages; they work in the device better than any other configuration (usually) and penetrate fairly reliably.

However, I suggest one shops around and finds the highest velocity ammunition that will function properly AND register on target properly. (A 'hot' round that doesn't function properly and or doesn't strike where intended is of limited value.) That might involve a bit of expenditure and time, but nothing in life is free.

I also strongly suggest one tests the firearm to make sure the weapon itself works properly and will continue to work past the first three days.

By the way, the last two paragraphs apply to all firearms carried for self-defense, in any caliber.
 
Frank Ettin:
Very, very, good post.
I like all you said personally & the data you posted.
I have personally witnessed humans shot with the .25 auto.
Lots of people unfortunatley.
Toss in the .32 auto & .38 S&W (short) round.
Where I worked crooks didn't carry Kimbers, Sigs, etc.
Raven, Titan, F.I.E., & very old top break revovlers in .38 S&W, a few
.32 revolver loads. Re: the older weapons. The ammo was most all the time
older ammo also & once in a while the wrong ammo for the firearm.
Reasonable penetration is a must have.
( I won't even go into the common 12 bore s.g.---devestating)
Suicide (just a couple). A person know to us, a hospital employee, depression & alcoholism. Raven .25 auto to the right temple, thru & thru head wound.
Found bullet where it bounced off wall on the floor.
The guy was very slight of build. He simply bled to death from the head wound. (Most people that get shot in the noggin with sub caliber mouse guns simply bled to death...if they die.)
A dispatcher buys a Raven .25 auto, dispondant over a marrital issue.
Shoots self in rt. temple. Bleeds out a lot. Then wakes up. & shoots self in head again & bleds out!!!! No kidding.
Burglar breaks into old mans house. Old man wakes up, confronts crook with break top .38 S&W. Crook produces knife. Old man shoots crook between the eyes.
Crook is ******, says " I'll get my gun & kill you!" We catch crook with gun returning to old mans house! Bullet cracked skull, ringed under scalp, stops at crown of head.
Go figure?
I could relate another dozen or so such stories but most get the point.
Many holes better than one, large holes better than little holes..........:D
 
WildBill45 said:
I don't think these little guns can push a hollow point to work as advertised...
Click to expand...
Depends how one defines "as advertised". ;)

Based on the gel tests I've seen, both of the available commercial 35gr XTP loads expand fairly reliably in ballistic gel... but this results in sub-optimal ~7" penetration.

The Winchester Super-X 45gr load doesn't expand consistently at all... but this provides the somewhat ironic unintended(?) consequence of yielding adequate 11"-14" penetration when it doesn't "work as advertised". :)
 
Quote:

Most of what has been written about lack of penetration is nonsense.

Really?
I SAW a female shot in the hip with a Raven .25 auto.
The bullet hit the rivet in the corner of her jeans pocket.
The rivet was pushed thru the jean material but not her undies leaving
quite a nasty welt on her skin.
SAW another shooting victim shot at bad breath distance in the knee with a .25 auto.
Bullet lodged in his knee cap. The victim ran from the shooter then walked over a mile to the E.R.
Penetration nonsense hey?
I've SEEN & investigated shooting incidents in which victims were wounded, & some killed. I didn't read about it, & "bubba" didn't relate stories.
These things I SAW. I know TWO men that were shot THRU the heart, one with a f.m.j. .22 magnum, the other a .22 revovler 40 grain solid.
Both ran off, were hospitalized, & survived.
Fellow shot with the .22 solid required 2 whole days in the hospital.
Niether had surgery.
I seldom give advice on such nonsense as what cailber, which bullet, what handgun, etc. but I will relate actual situations in which I was involved.
Incidents I witnessed first hand, things I saw, things I did.
I was a detective for 10 years, 3 of which I was Chief of Investigations, photographed autopsies, assisted in 7 of them so know just a wee bit about
real life & death balistics.
For what it's worth.
Feel free to use what you want to defend lives & I'll do the same.
 
And I have done a lot of shooting .25 automatics in years past. I shot Brownings, Berettas, Colts and Astras-good guns. Nothing I saw indicated a quality .25 with good ammunition would bounce off a pants rivet. Maybe from an oversize bore or with bad ammunition. I saw a woman shot 5 times with a .25 in the torso. The bullets penetrated very well. (She lived, BTW.)
I also know someone who was shot in the chest at 8 feet with a 12 ga. He ran 35 yards before he dropped from blood loss. He lived, too. I knew the man who shot him.
Just food for thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top