cougar gt-e
New member
Marketing hype.
If you want power, get a 460 rowland conversion for your 1911
If you want power, get a 460 rowland conversion for your 1911
.45 ACP+P?
- Thread starter rmocarsky
- Start date
Aguila Blanca
Staff
I don't know of any current production 1911s that AREN'T rated for +P.Super Sneaky Steve said:
In what world is a polymer framed pistol like the Ruger P345 going to be more "sturdy" than a steel 1911?
230gr +P .45ACP runs 8-12% hotter than standard velocity stuff. For self defense use, I'll take that extra all day long. Before retiring my duty load was Ranger T 230gr JHP +P, I still use it in my carry guns. Never had any trouble in 1911s or the FNP45 Tactical I carried at work. I use standard pressure 230gr FMJ for training, competition, and qualifying.
I run a 17lb spring in all my full size .45ACP 1911s, whether they get any +P or not. But, I run all my 1911s with a slightly heavier than stock recoil spring in all calibers.
The last thing a 1911 with proper spring weights needs is a rubber buffer, they cause more problems than they're worth.
Too much worry over the frame. It's the slide and upper barrel lugs that catch all the hell.
The slide and barrel assembly is the gun. The frame is the gun mount. It doesn't suffer any stresses from firing...only a little impact after the firing has ended...and the slide just doesn't hit the frame all that hard.
Last edited:
DAVID NANCARROW
New member
If it has the accuracy and I can do quick follow ups with it, I don't mind a +P load in my 1911s.
I like 230gr +P, specifically the Federal HST and Winchester Ranger but regular pressure is fine too. Some don't think the extra recoil is worthwhile and I do understand that, I personally can't tell a huge difference so I'm okay with the extra velocity.
For bigger power the .45 Super is good, Rowland too but at that point you need a comp and frankly it just adds to the size of the gun so that's almost counter productive in a carry sense.
For bigger power the .45 Super is good, Rowland too but at that point you need a comp and frankly it just adds to the size of the gun so that's almost counter productive in a carry sense.
As a general rule I do not use +P ammo. The small difference between it and non +P ammo is not worth the extra recoil and time spent on follow-up shots. I do not understand the logic of using a +P when the non +P passes all the FBI tests. It is not really going to make a difference in short barreled guns since most ammo these days are designed to work in the many short barreled guns carried by civilians.
Bamashooter
New member
I buy 45acp+p and shoot the hell out of it in my pt-145 and Para 1911 because I can.
Overkill777
New member
Couldn't have said it better myself.
.45+P
rmo:
There will be as many different opinions to your question as there are people with answers. Here's something to think about:
After 40 years at the bench, I've learned this: At *standard velocities* (Misnomer #1), the shape of the [heavier] bullet's nose will play a larger part in its terminal effectiveness than the lighter bullet weight/higher velocity/more muzzle energy thought.
The original round-nose configuration of the 230gr .45 hardball (FMJ) was designed to ensure positive feeding in the early 1911 model, as it does to this day, not just strictly in the '11 model, but in all semi-autos. The major drawback to this design is that the round nose *pushes through* tissue and imparts less hydrostatic shock in and through the more (fluidal) part of the body than a bullet with a flatter nose design. [ Think ~torpedo~] The sharper the nose, the less resistance in flesh and fluid, so......less damage. Even the more rounded noses of bullets impart less shock/damage than any flat or truncated nose design at the same [impact velocity] and tend to injure more than kill ... (Which was a contributing factor in using this configuration in the HAGUE ACCORD.) Even a wide hollow-point which happens to fill up with clothing/debris and does not expand will impart more hydrostatic shock than any round-nosed bullet due to the flat meplat.
As for +P and +P+ designations, it [they] may stand for either higher pressure OR higher velocity (for any given weight) Most persons will automatically assume that +P etc. means higher pressure and they will be correct----to a point. Different powder selection by some factories will give higher velocities without higher pressures (think slower powder/burn rates). If any out there dispute this... look in any loading manual and see where the slower-burning powders [generally] give the higher velocities, (and the manufacturers will not exceed SAAMI pressures. If you still disbelieve me, ask the manufacturers directly and hear it for yourselves. Moot point be that it may, it is still one aspect worth considering when selecting +P or +P+ ammo.
The *short and sweet* of all this is; If you have an '11 model or any (Gov't Style) semi with a barrel link and you don't want to subject your firearm to excess pressures with possible extra wear-and-tear without having it set up for those higher pressures, then look for standard velocity ammo with a flat/truncated nose design and check to see if it will *reliably* feed in your barrel with no problems and perhaps at least polish the feed ramp for trouble-free feeding.
As for the lighter-weight/higher-velocity crowd, The higher impact velocity could possibly produce a superficial/shallow wound cavity and may not be effective enough
for a quick stop on an aggressive attacker, be it two, or four-legged....Here is where lower velocity/heavy weight/penetration-deep penetration- will be
preferred to higher velocity/lighter weight/shallower penetration. And, the flat nose will impart more damage than the round nose with less probability of through-and-through *perforation* giving concern to possible danger to innocent bystanders beyond the intended threat.....Which the round-nosed bullet is more apt to do. [One reason the 158gr RNL .38 SPL. was referred to as the "Widow Maker" and replaced with the SWC and SWC-HP of the same weight].
Just my $.02 worth from a few years as a LEO/Firearms Instructor with a State LEA, and something for which to give some thought....And it matters not the caliber; The principle is the same.
WILL.
rmo:
There will be as many different opinions to your question as there are people with answers. Here's something to think about:
After 40 years at the bench, I've learned this: At *standard velocities* (Misnomer #1), the shape of the [heavier] bullet's nose will play a larger part in its terminal effectiveness than the lighter bullet weight/higher velocity/more muzzle energy thought.
The original round-nose configuration of the 230gr .45 hardball (FMJ) was designed to ensure positive feeding in the early 1911 model, as it does to this day, not just strictly in the '11 model, but in all semi-autos. The major drawback to this design is that the round nose *pushes through* tissue and imparts less hydrostatic shock in and through the more (fluidal) part of the body than a bullet with a flatter nose design. [ Think ~torpedo~] The sharper the nose, the less resistance in flesh and fluid, so......less damage. Even the more rounded noses of bullets impart less shock/damage than any flat or truncated nose design at the same [impact velocity] and tend to injure more than kill ... (Which was a contributing factor in using this configuration in the HAGUE ACCORD.) Even a wide hollow-point which happens to fill up with clothing/debris and does not expand will impart more hydrostatic shock than any round-nosed bullet due to the flat meplat.
As for +P and +P+ designations, it [they] may stand for either higher pressure OR higher velocity (for any given weight) Most persons will automatically assume that +P etc. means higher pressure and they will be correct----to a point. Different powder selection by some factories will give higher velocities without higher pressures (think slower powder/burn rates). If any out there dispute this... look in any loading manual and see where the slower-burning powders [generally] give the higher velocities, (and the manufacturers will not exceed SAAMI pressures. If you still disbelieve me, ask the manufacturers directly and hear it for yourselves. Moot point be that it may, it is still one aspect worth considering when selecting +P or +P+ ammo.
The *short and sweet* of all this is; If you have an '11 model or any (Gov't Style) semi with a barrel link and you don't want to subject your firearm to excess pressures with possible extra wear-and-tear without having it set up for those higher pressures, then look for standard velocity ammo with a flat/truncated nose design and check to see if it will *reliably* feed in your barrel with no problems and perhaps at least polish the feed ramp for trouble-free feeding.
As for the lighter-weight/higher-velocity crowd, The higher impact velocity could possibly produce a superficial/shallow wound cavity and may not be effective enough
for a quick stop on an aggressive attacker, be it two, or four-legged....Here is where lower velocity/heavy weight/penetration-deep penetration- will be
preferred to higher velocity/lighter weight/shallower penetration. And, the flat nose will impart more damage than the round nose with less probability of through-and-through *perforation* giving concern to possible danger to innocent bystanders beyond the intended threat.....Which the round-nosed bullet is more apt to do. [One reason the 158gr RNL .38 SPL. was referred to as the "Widow Maker" and replaced with the SWC and SWC-HP of the same weight].
Just my $.02 worth from a few years as a LEO/Firearms Instructor with a State LEA, and something for which to give some thought....And it matters not the caliber; The principle is the same.
WILL.
Nowadays when I think "45 +P" I think a 250gr XTP at 1,400, or this little
200gr XTP at 1,500 fps.
Unfortunately, 45 Win Mag isn't something I can carry.
But seriously, the 45 Auto is just such a wonderful round, I see no reason not to take advantage of it with higher performance ammo--if it truly is 'higher performance'. But, I feel that if you can't practice with equivalent ammo for whatever reason (cost, recoil), then it's not that attractive to carry it.
200gr XTP at 1,500 fps.
Unfortunately, 45 Win Mag isn't something I can carry.But seriously, the 45 Auto is just such a wonderful round, I see no reason not to take advantage of it with higher performance ammo--if it truly is 'higher performance'. But, I feel that if you can't practice with equivalent ammo for whatever reason (cost, recoil), then it's not that attractive to carry it.
Walt Sherrill
New member
The part I underlined, above, is key. So is, as you say, practice... (which lets you evaluate how that ammo performs in your guns in your hands...)
Just because a round performs at a higher pressure level (or is different in ways that causes the ammo maker to give it a different designation) doesn't automatically mean that ammo is more effective.
If the +P and +P+ ammo discussed performs as well in ballistic gelatin -- penetrating as deeply and expanding as well and you can shoot it with at least the same accuracy as other Self Defense Ammo, then by all means, use it! As I wrote in an earlier response -- using ammo that lets you put the holes in the right places (in vital organs or the CNS) is what really matters -- so your ability to shoot it accurately remains the key!
Will,
Its not an either or situation. Some big slow bullets and some light fast bullets a poor performers. It is not that simple, that dogmatic thinking big and slow vs small and fast came about in the 1970's in the 9mm vs 45 arguments, the medium fast beats them both. Think 357 magnum, 357 Sig, 10mm.
On average you will gain 100 fps with a 45 ACP +P vs non +P. There is a very small pressure difference between the 2. What kind of benefit is there to 100 fps? I doubt we can quantify it, but I will take any advantage I can get.
Its not an either or situation. Some big slow bullets and some light fast bullets a poor performers. It is not that simple, that dogmatic thinking big and slow vs small and fast came about in the 1970's in the 9mm vs 45 arguments, the medium fast beats them both. Think 357 magnum, 357 Sig, 10mm.
On average you will gain 100 fps with a 45 ACP +P vs non +P. There is a very small pressure difference between the 2. What kind of benefit is there to 100 fps? I doubt we can quantify it, but I will take any advantage I can get.
.45+P
Nanuk:
My point was not a [slow-heavy vs. fast-light] comparison. If you will read the post a little closer, you might see where I intended to stress that a flat-pointed bullet [be it TFN, RNFP, wide hollow point] or any other design with a flat nose, will transmit more hydrostatic shock and will, therefore be more effective at [standard] velocities...and I use that term loosely...As there is no *standard* velocity ascribed (read that--attributed or assigned) to any .45 ACP hardball ammunition--by any manufacturer. It's all relevant. There are too many variables in the factory loadings for there to be any*standard* loading(s). There are certain parameters, however, in that SAAMI pressure levels are recognized and even then, velocities often span 75-100+ FPS for the *standard* hardball loads.
The flat [flatter] point bullet will---ALWAYS--- be more effective than ANY round nosed bullet [at the SAME terminal velocity], by virtue of the facts and reasons stated in my post......Regardless of caliber.
[More violent] hydrostatic shock (flat points, et al)) beats [mediocre] hydrostatic shock (round noses, et al) anytime... IF you can accept that the round-nosed bullet can/will impart any appreciable amount of hydrostatic shock in the first place, as it mostly just pushes aside muscle and tissue and [plows] right through. Kill? Yes it can, and does kill....But definitely not as quickly and effectively as the flat point bullet, or the well-designed hollow-point, which opens--Reliably--to effect a W I D E, flat, point....Which will, in turn, as said before--regardless of caliber-- get the point across....PUN INTENDED.
WILL.
Nanuk:
My point was not a [slow-heavy vs. fast-light] comparison. If you will read the post a little closer, you might see where I intended to stress that a flat-pointed bullet [be it TFN, RNFP, wide hollow point] or any other design with a flat nose, will transmit more hydrostatic shock and will, therefore be more effective at [standard] velocities...and I use that term loosely...As there is no *standard* velocity ascribed (read that--attributed or assigned) to any .45 ACP hardball ammunition--by any manufacturer. It's all relevant. There are too many variables in the factory loadings for there to be any*standard* loading(s). There are certain parameters, however, in that SAAMI pressure levels are recognized and even then, velocities often span 75-100+ FPS for the *standard* hardball loads.
The flat [flatter] point bullet will---ALWAYS--- be more effective than ANY round nosed bullet [at the SAME terminal velocity], by virtue of the facts and reasons stated in my post......Regardless of caliber.
[More violent] hydrostatic shock (flat points, et al)) beats [mediocre] hydrostatic shock (round noses, et al) anytime... IF you can accept that the round-nosed bullet can/will impart any appreciable amount of hydrostatic shock in the first place, as it mostly just pushes aside muscle and tissue and [plows] right through. Kill? Yes it can, and does kill....But definitely not as quickly and effectively as the flat point bullet, or the well-designed hollow-point, which opens--Reliably--to effect a W I D E, flat, point....Which will, in turn, as said before--regardless of caliber-- get the point across....PUN INTENDED.
WILL.