SFsc616171
Moderator
Hi folks!
Who among us, is still using what the Glock crowd is calling 'outdated ammo'?
Me? If it is 9mm, and chambers and cycles correctly, and has been a working load by manufacturers for years, why not? Example: Remington L9MM1.
If it is .38 Special, and I'm sure that you have heard that there are a boatload of ammo tests in .38 Special on YouTube, by credible people, and it is an old-school manufactured round, why not?
Two examples: 158 grain LSWC-HP +p via Winchester, Remington or Federal; or, 158 grain LSWC no hollowpoint and no +p, via Georgia Arms, The Hunting Shack, Federal, Bitterroot Valley, Magtech, or Ultramax. Might be a few more, but I don't recall them, right now.
Personally, I've watched with hope, a LOT of the .38 Special +p and non+p hollow point ammo tests ... always coming back to the 158 grain LSWC - no hollow point to fail, velocity is good, and penetration is good, too.
Who among us, is still using what the Glock crowd is calling 'outdated ammo'?
Me? If it is 9mm, and chambers and cycles correctly, and has been a working load by manufacturers for years, why not? Example: Remington L9MM1.
If it is .38 Special, and I'm sure that you have heard that there are a boatload of ammo tests in .38 Special on YouTube, by credible people, and it is an old-school manufactured round, why not?
Two examples: 158 grain LSWC-HP +p via Winchester, Remington or Federal; or, 158 grain LSWC no hollowpoint and no +p, via Georgia Arms, The Hunting Shack, Federal, Bitterroot Valley, Magtech, or Ultramax. Might be a few more, but I don't recall them, right now.
Personally, I've watched with hope, a LOT of the .38 Special +p and non+p hollow point ammo tests ... always coming back to the 158 grain LSWC - no hollow point to fail, velocity is good, and penetration is good, too.