TexasCHLforum.com

Thane wrote:

I'm saddened that an American manufacturer like S&W wouldn't build their handguns with these realities in mind.

Actually, they do - they just don't advertise it, for a couple of reasons.

S&W, having been sued in the past, is understandably leery about anything lawyer-related. Because of this, they don't want to get sued by some police department for weapons failure, when the dept. only ran +P+ through their weapons, and experienced failures after only a (comparatively) few rounds. Multiple departments suing for replacement guns at once can cause some financial difficulties.

Second, there really is no upper limit to what defines +P+ pressures (at least, not according to everything I've read, both in loading manuals and online). +P has a definite upper limit by SAAMI standards; but a gross overload can still be "within +P+ standards." A .38 Special loaded to .357 Magnum pressures would be a +P+ round. Fire more than one in your old Model 36, and you'll quite possibly take the gun apart. Again, S&W doesn't want to get sued, this time by over-zealous handloaders claiming, "But the gun was rated for it, so now you have to replace it/pay my medical bills/pay me extra restitution!!!"

Even normal use of +P+ (at sane pressure levels) without properly heavy springs and recoil buffers can break guns after time and extensive use.

Frankly, if I needed that much more power, I'd switch to a bigger round (*ahem*1911*cough*.45ACP*ahemcough*).

LOL, too true...I recently purchased a USP45 but I don't use it for home defense yet, perhaps I'll eventually switch to it once I've got a thousand or so rounds through it. For now, it's too new (only 300 rounds downrange), whereas my old 92FS is tried and true!

Your point about products liability for S&W makes sense, particularly with radical handloads floating around at most funshows. Until I finally decide to "roll my own," I'll never trust handloads enough to use in any of my guns.

carlson1 wrote:

badkarma56 wrote:Still, I am surprised that a major manufacturer like S&W would make such a blanket statement. Perhaps this partly explains why none of their weapons seem to be standard issue these days...

I was shocked also. I was reading their manual online looking for some information about a trigger on a M&P and found on page 12 of their
manual. . . I like the Winchester 127 +P+, but I really like the 147 grain Winchester Ranger.

“Plus-P� (+P) ammunition generates pressures in excess of the
pressures associated with standard ammunition. Such pressures
may affect the wear characteristics or exceed the margin of safety
built into some revolvers and could therefore be DANGEROUS.
This ammunition should not be used in Smith & Wesson
medium (K frame) revolvers manufactured prior to 1958. Such
pre-1958 medium (K-frame) revolvers can be identified by the
absence of a model number stamped inside the yoke cut of the
frame. (i.e., the area of the frame exposed when the cylinder is
in the open position.
“Plus-P-Plus (+P+) ammunition must not be used in Smith &
Wesson firearms.

O.K., I can understand the prohibition against +P usage in old S&W revolvers, but I find the broad prohibition against +P+ in any S&W weapons a bit troubling. Modern firearms from reputable manufacturers should nearly all be engineered well enough to handle some use of +P+ ammo, particularly in the "military calibers" (i.e., 9mm/.45 ACP).

Depending on the manufacturer, NATO-spec 9mm "ball" ammo is always loaded to +P or +P+ pressures. Generally speaking, even commercial-grade European 9mm FMJ is loaded to +P pressures (not like the sedate American FMJ loads like Winchester "white box" Q4172)...I'm saddened that an American manufacturer like S&W wouldn't build their handguns with these realities in mind.

carlson1 wrote:

badkarma56 wrote:I use the hotter 127 gr +P+ Ranger-T load for carry purposes; the slower, standard-pressure 147 gr. load is more appropriate for domestic "close encounters."

Don't want to take this off topic, but I also love this round. I just read on the Smith and Wesson sight that this +P+ round voids the warranty in any Smith and Wesson firearm. It shocked me.

Interesting, Carlson1. S&W must not build their weapons to handle "hot" ammo. In all fairness though, even in weapons specifically constructed to handle +P/+P+ loads (like the H&K USP, Sig 226, and Beretta M9/92FS), continued use of "hot" ammo will significantly accelerate wear on the weapon's action, slide, and internal components.

Still, I am surprised that a major manufacturer like S&W would make such a blanket statement. Perhaps this partly explains why none of their weapons seem to be standard issue these days...

Xander wrote:

badkarma56 wrote:The shotgun is definitely a peacemaker, but I prefer using a handgun for home defense. The two primary reasons are increased precision and lower risk of over- penetration through sheetrock.

I've got a 16 year-old Beretta 92FS loaded with 15+1 rounds of 147 gr. Ranger-T's that serves as my personal "Department of Homeland Security"!

I use the hotter 127 gr +P+ Ranger-T load for carry purposes; the slower, standard-pressure 147 gr. load is more appropriate for domestic "close encounters."

Just a thought...You might want to re-think the Ranger-T for inside the home. It's got a nasty habit of over-penetrating after coming in contact with sheet-rock. The Ranger Bonded is better, and in some cases, *much* better. I just went and double-checked this particular load, and it actually looks fairly ok....It doesn't penetrate too much more after moving through sheet rock, but sheet rock still makes it penetrate deeper than no barrier at all, or any other intermediate barrier.

Winchester has a really cool tool for comparing the performance of their different loads, if you want to check it out. http://www.winchester.com/lawenforcemen ... flash.html

Xander,

I've seen that tool before and it is cool! Your apprehension is correct, and speaks to the inherently risky proposition of engaging a target inside of a thin-walled residential structure. The 147 gr. Ranger-T does tear through wallboard, however, it's fairly low velocity (990 fps) and heavier weight decrease the risks of unforeseeable ricochet and unintended distance (although all bullets tend to fly for a pretty long distance unless acted upon). So for me, it's a trade-off of one risk for another. The equivalent 147 gr. Ranger Bonded round actually exhibits greater penetration than the 147 gr. Ranger-T.

The lighter Ranger-T loads (i.e., Ranger-T 124 gr. +P, 127 +P+, and Bonded 124 gr. +P) offer less penetration but much more velocity (thus the ricochet potential is greater, and these faster rounds will likely travel farther beyond the target/outside the walls of the home). Not to mention that the lighter loads are all +P/+P+ which means they are louder and produce more recoil, thus further threatening your hearing (believe me, I don't look forward to firing an unsuppressed weapon inside of a house...talk about a ringing sensation) and potentially compromising your accuracy during a high-stress home defense scenario.

Ultimately, I'm most comfortable using a heavy/slow 9mm round for home defense. For the reasons that I've indicated, the risks seem to balance out better. However, make no mistake, having to employ any firearm inside the home is always going to present certain hazards. The best you can do is minimize them to the extent possible without sacrificing the effectiveness of your weapon. It'll also help to hit what you're aimin' at!

The shotgun is definitely a peacemaker, but I prefer using a handgun for home defense. The two primary reasons are increased precision and lower risk of over- penetration through sheetrock.

I've got a 16 year-old Beretta 92FS loaded with 15+1 rounds of 147 gr. Ranger-T's that serves as my personal "Department of Homeland Security"!

I use the hotter 127 gr +P+ Ranger-T load for carry purposes; the slower, standard-pressure 147 gr. load is more appropriate for domestic "close encounters."