A couple of questions about MagSafe/Grizzly/RBCD
- Thread starter clintpup
- Start date
Rangerrich99
New member
Can't speak for the other two, but, as for MagSafe bullets beyond a certain distance, accuracy isn't great. Of course, they weren't meant to be target rounds in the first place. Inside 7 yards from my GP-100 or my PX4 .40 S&W, they run fine and are accurate enough for defensive purposes, IMO.
random guy
New member
My advice before buying such high performance ammo is to seek out end user chronograph and gelatin testing first. I looked at a lot of such testing on 9mm ammo just to get the lay of the land and figure out what the potential is.
tnoutdoors did a lot of good testing in this regard using the same or identical pistols. Underwood stood out as a high performance ammo maker who meets or exceeds advertised ballistics.
I think that most general market ammo makers leave a substantial margin for error. They have to account for tight bores, tight chambers, short throats, not to mention well worn guns and those that weren't that great to start with.
And they are loading for a market that doesn't really demand the best. Since getting my first .40 S&W recently, I've been shooting FMJ range ammo from a well respected manufacturer to build up brass. It wasn't shooting well and I thought maybe the gun just sucks. I chrono'ed some yesterday and think I've identified the problem. 250 fps ES and nowhere near advertised velocity.
Chrono'ed my first handloads at the same time. Problem solved. Had a similar problem when shooting 9mm FMJ (same manufacturer) but "only" 150 fps ES.
Looking at pressure tested reloading data shows that there is normally a lot more velocity to be had before even approaching maximum pressure. Look at Longshot powder in .40 S&W. Incredible.
That untapped potential is what the smaller ammo makers are using. In most cases, they are simply loading closer to maximum specs.
tnoutdoors did a lot of good testing in this regard using the same or identical pistols. Underwood stood out as a high performance ammo maker who meets or exceeds advertised ballistics.
I think that most general market ammo makers leave a substantial margin for error. They have to account for tight bores, tight chambers, short throats, not to mention well worn guns and those that weren't that great to start with.
And they are loading for a market that doesn't really demand the best. Since getting my first .40 S&W recently, I've been shooting FMJ range ammo from a well respected manufacturer to build up brass. It wasn't shooting well and I thought maybe the gun just sucks. I chrono'ed some yesterday and think I've identified the problem. 250 fps ES and nowhere near advertised velocity.
Chrono'ed my first handloads at the same time. Problem solved. Had a similar problem when shooting 9mm FMJ (same manufacturer) but "only" 150 fps ES. Looking at pressure tested reloading data shows that there is normally a lot more velocity to be had before even approaching maximum pressure. Look at Longshot powder in .40 S&W. Incredible.
That untapped potential is what the smaller ammo makers are using. In most cases, they are simply loading closer to maximum specs.
buck460XVR
New member
Ammo is one-na those things that generally "ya gets what ya pays for". Boutique type defensive ammo many times is produced in smaller lots using higher end components, thus giving better terminal and ballistic performance. Some(especially that loaded to +p+) is beyond SAAMI specs and may not be safe in all guns. Are velocity figures correct? Maybe, but many times test barrels and real life guns don't deliver that same velocities and those numbers on the box should only be used as comparison. In smaller calibers like 9mm or .380ACP, bullet construction is more important than .45ACP or .357. But choice of what to run in your EDC should be based on what you have the most confidence in, what is most reliable in the firearm and what shoots the most accurately outta it. Not what it claims in the full page ad in your monthly shooting rag.
Loosedhorse
Moderator
Yes. At least they were when Joe Zambone was loading them; that was (unfortunately; may he rest) a long time ago.
You are sacrificing penetration.
That's not a flaw, that's a feature: the "safe" in "MagSafe" meant as close to zero risk of over-penetration as you could get. I would expect none of the MagSafe rounds to meet FBI penetration specs.
random guy
New member
Regarding the accuracy of advertised ballistics, this may be interesting:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ep9Oj0HMbljjuKSg549itlcjKojFEu6cgwajT7XcuNw/edit#gid=0
It is limited to 10mm but covers quite a variety of loads from boutique and major manufacturers.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ep9Oj0HMbljjuKSg549itlcjKojFEu6cgwajT7XcuNw/edit#gid=0
It is limited to 10mm but covers quite a variety of loads from boutique and major manufacturers.
Loosedhorse
Moderator
YMMV
I have not done such extensive testing. However, I tested the DT 230 gr offering and got a little over 1150 fps average; in the table you referenced, the advertised velocity is given as 1120, actual as 999.
random guy
New member
Yeah, DT seems to be best known for hyped velocities:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/are-double-tap-velocities-exaggerated.620708/
Something that can change over time and hopefully has.
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/are-double-tap-velocities-exaggerated.620708/
Something that can change over time and hopefully has.
1) Yes but...
2) Penetration, accuracy, handfuls of cash, and reliable function.
External ballistics is more complicated than a single number.
First, I think energy figures aren't generally useful except for when comparing entire classes of cartridges, and this is particularly true for pistol cartridges. I think momentum is generally a more useful figure, as momentum of similarly constructed bullets appears to more closely mirror performance. Even disregarding the construction of novelty cartridges, the low mass/high velocity rounds tend to have relatively low momentum. Note that this is the flip side of the claim of low recoil.
At any rate, it's physics. Lazily stated, energy = (1/2)mv^2 . A small increase in velocity makes a huge increase in energy, even if mass has to be decreased to do so.
How do you decrease the mass of the bullet while maintaining the same diameter and overall length? By grossly compromising its construction.
With Magsafe cartridges, the bullet is a copper jacket full of glue and a maybe a dozen birdshot pellets (depending on caliber).
When it hits, the first couple inches of the wound cavity are hamburger, and then the least deformed birdshot pellets make a few pinprick tracks 6-7 inches out.
That's grossly inadequate, and in naked boneless gel at that But that's the (original) purpose of prefragmented rounds. To limit penetration.
Except, in the real world, if the round hits drywall, it's not uncommon for the cavity to clog or the nose cap to crush shut and then perform not unlike a lightweight FMJ.
It's also difficult to uniformly distribute the glue and birdshot, so the rounds also tend to be unbalanced and offer poor accuracy. It's not really a problem at self defense distances, except one thing to note is that the rounds tend to shoot low due to the high velocity.
Also, to get the super lightweight bullet up to speed, they need to use super fast burning powder. This generates a screwy pressure curve outside of what pistols are designed for. This, combined with the Magsafe's generous nose cavity, is not unknown to cause reliability issues.
Magsafes/Glasers are ill considered novelty rounds, and are generally unsuitable for defense outside of a few edge cases. And maybe even then.
I don't really know anything about Grizzly or RBCD. I seem to recall that Grizzly's conventional loads are reasonably well regarded. The Grizzly Extreme appears to trade penetration for expansion, with one Youtuber comparing the wound track to that of a broadhead arrow. It performs unpredictably if it hits anything else.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_3VYszyyNU
I've never even heard of RBCD. A quick google pulls up the Box O' Truth, which suggests that their rounds are indeed the standard prefragmented nonsense.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-38-rbcd-ammo-vs-the-box-o-truth/
2) Penetration, accuracy, handfuls of cash, and reliable function.
External ballistics is more complicated than a single number.
First, I think energy figures aren't generally useful except for when comparing entire classes of cartridges, and this is particularly true for pistol cartridges. I think momentum is generally a more useful figure, as momentum of similarly constructed bullets appears to more closely mirror performance. Even disregarding the construction of novelty cartridges, the low mass/high velocity rounds tend to have relatively low momentum. Note that this is the flip side of the claim of low recoil.
At any rate, it's physics. Lazily stated, energy = (1/2)mv^2 . A small increase in velocity makes a huge increase in energy, even if mass has to be decreased to do so.
How do you decrease the mass of the bullet while maintaining the same diameter and overall length? By grossly compromising its construction.
With Magsafe cartridges, the bullet is a copper jacket full of glue and a maybe a dozen birdshot pellets (depending on caliber).
When it hits, the first couple inches of the wound cavity are hamburger, and then the least deformed birdshot pellets make a few pinprick tracks 6-7 inches out.
That's grossly inadequate, and in naked boneless gel at that But that's the (original) purpose of prefragmented rounds. To limit penetration.
Except, in the real world, if the round hits drywall, it's not uncommon for the cavity to clog or the nose cap to crush shut and then perform not unlike a lightweight FMJ.
It's also difficult to uniformly distribute the glue and birdshot, so the rounds also tend to be unbalanced and offer poor accuracy. It's not really a problem at self defense distances, except one thing to note is that the rounds tend to shoot low due to the high velocity.
Also, to get the super lightweight bullet up to speed, they need to use super fast burning powder. This generates a screwy pressure curve outside of what pistols are designed for. This, combined with the Magsafe's generous nose cavity, is not unknown to cause reliability issues.
Magsafes/Glasers are ill considered novelty rounds, and are generally unsuitable for defense outside of a few edge cases. And maybe even then.
I don't really know anything about Grizzly or RBCD. I seem to recall that Grizzly's conventional loads are reasonably well regarded. The Grizzly Extreme appears to trade penetration for expansion, with one Youtuber comparing the wound track to that of a broadhead arrow. It performs unpredictably if it hits anything else.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_3VYszyyNU
I've never even heard of RBCD. A quick google pulls up the Box O' Truth, which suggests that their rounds are indeed the standard prefragmented nonsense.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-o-truth-38-rbcd-ammo-vs-the-box-o-truth/