Which center-fire rifle cartridge would you not trust for self defense?

[Dr_2_B]

This is more a thought question than a practical one... and may make for a little interesting discussion. It follows the premise that most rifles are sufficient for self defense.

So which (if any) center-fire rifle cartridge, fired through a rifle, would you not trust for self defense?

 

[Metal god]

I'm not sure trust is the right word for this . I would trust them all if it's the only one I had .

Are you asking only caliber or the bullet/load of any catridge ?

I do see what your saying about how this could get interesting . For me and if I had a choice . I would not want any of the big calibers 50 , 338 , win mag , ultra mag . To big , to loud , to much recoil . I may not even want any long guns for SD . Maybe just a good pistol that can hold 13 or more rounds .

 

[barnbwt]

Probably something too big or expensive to be shot effectively or frequently, respectively.

(this thread will indeed spark a lively discussion, I reckon...in before 5.7x28, then lock)

 

[Dr_2_B]

Are you asking only caliber or the bullet/load of any catridge ?

I'm really asking the question in the most generic sense... without reference to any particular loadings.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

The lowliest of rifles is more powerful than most any handgun that most of us would carry on a daily basis.

I really can't think of a rifle that I "would not trust" for self-defense.

If I had my Ruger 10/22 I'd be satisfied that I could do the job.

In terms of platform, I'd much prefer a semi-auto to a bolt action but about any cartridge would do the job.

No doubt, there's some esoteric cartridges out there that most people have never heard of but, in relatively common use, they'll all do the job.

 

[btmj]

The old 32-20 cartridge is a bit of a light weight in its original loading. 218 bee and 22 hornet are also a bit light. 204 ruger would seem marginal to me also. Any of the .17 caliber cartridges.

Any service-size handgun cartridge coming out of a carbine/rifle length barrel is going to be a good self defense choice. 9mm, 40 S&W, 357 mag, 45 ACP, 44-40, etc...

 

[johnwilliamson062]

Not one.

Of course, I also think 9mm is sufficient.
Even 7.62 Nagant.

 

[uradaisyifudo]

There is not a rifle cartridge i'd want to be on the other side of, but I'd think the less effective calibers lie at the extremes, the. 17 or the big buffalo bore variations. I agree a ruger 10/22 would be quite effective.

 

[Kiwi Hunter]

I wouldn't feel great holding a .17 - even though I have seen them turn bunnies, hares and goats into Jello on many occasions

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

A .204Ruger has about 3 1/2 times more energy than a 9mm.

If I could pick up a .204 AR15 or a 9mm anything, I'd pick the .204 every single time.

 

[johnwilliamson062]

True the 204 Ruger has more energy, but how much of that energy is going to be transferred to target? For varminting at long ranges you use up a good bit getting there.

At 100 yards the 204 is way ahead of the 9mm, especially when you factor in adjusting for drop, but inside even 20 yards how much of that energy is just going out the back of the target? I am guessing a lot no matter what bullet is used.

With the 9mm almost all of it can be delivered to target with good ammo.

 

[kraigwy]

which (if any) center-fire rifle cartridge, fired through a rifle, would you not trust for self defense?

Just about any of them. I'd probably grab an AR, since its light and fast handling.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

True the 204 Ruger has more energy, but how much of that energy is going to be transferred to target? For varminting at long ranges you use up a good bit getting there.

At 100 yards the 204 is way ahead of the 9mm, especially when you factor in adjusting for drop, but inside even 20 yards how much of that energy is just going out the back of the target? I am guessing a lot no matter what bullet is used.

With the 9mm almost all of it can be delivered to target with good ammo.

If you'd ever seen what a .204 does to woodchucks at 20 yards, you wouldn't doubt the effect it would have on a person.

It'll blow a 3" exit hole in a coyote at 175 yards.

The amazing thing is that it might not even exit a woodchuck at 40 yards. The innards are jello though.

I'd take a .204 over a 9mm every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Not just 9mm either. 40SW, 45acp, 10mm, 357sig or Mag.

Handguns SUCK. We only carry them because they're small and convenient.

There are hardly any situations where, if I needed to defend myself and I had a semiauto rifle of any caliber and a semiauto handgun of any caliber, I'd choose the handgun.

 

[btmj]

Brian,

Would you consider 40 - 45 grain 204 ruger to be roughly equivalent to 55 - 64 grain 223 ?

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Equivalent in what way?

 

[boattale]

I'd not ever choose a .17 for that purpose. Anything else would make me feel ten times better.

 

[JimDandy]

If my 6920 is good enough for the boys in blue, and a street legal version of what Uncle Sam hands out, it's hard to argue. Though I doubt I'd bother with steel penetrator tips...

 

[btmj]

Brian,

Sorry, it was a cryptic question... I was wondering if, in your experience with the 204 Ruger, do you consider it to have roughly equivalent wounding power to 223 (moderate weight 223 projectiles, not the really heavy stuff) ?

Kinetic energy levels are about the same, but the 223 projectile as 20% more cross sectional area, and a 62 grain bullet is 37% more massive than a 45 grain bullet... but the proof is in the real world performance on animal flesh.

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but from your description of coyote kills, it sounds like 204 Ruger IS comparable to 223. But I will let you say that...

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

I've never even fired a 223 rifle. I always thought the cartridge was a bit too "generic" for my tastes. I like "weird" ones. That's why I bought the 204 when it first came out. It's not unusual anymore but it was then.

I've killed and seen killed a ton of woodchucks with the 204 and 22-250 though. For the most part, they do about the same damage, with a slight edge to the 22-250, depending on the shot placement. Many times, you'd never know the difference.

Being that the 223 is sort of like a 22 caliber .204, I assume it would be very similar in its effect. Almost like the illegitimate love child of a .204 and a .22-250

 

[Erno86]

Probably off-topic: I would not trust any Iranian 1950's ammo for self defense, such as the 30-06 and the 8mm --- same goes for Yugo 8mm machine gun ammo; that have deep set primers.

I was at the range last Sunday...some guy was shooting corrosive Iranian 30-06, in his M-1 Garand. Besides misfires...the Garand emitted a huge flash signature. Mark Hartman, of James River Armory,{who test-fires his rifles there}, was shocked and agast that that the guy was shooting corrosive in his Garand; so much that he gave the guy some decent 30-06 ammo too shoot.