# 230 grain or 165 grain for 45 ACP?



## thardey (Jun 6, 2007)

I carry a glock 21, and have always used the 230 grain hollowpoints for personal protection. But at 13 rounds, it adds a bit of weight to the gun, which is fine for practice, but feels a little cumbersome for everyday carry. Recently I ran across some 165 grain hollowpoints for personal protection, and tried them out, they made the gun considerably lighter (a couple of ounces goes a long way) and seem to work ok, but I don't want to go through 1000's of rounds before I decide to use it, so I thought I'd ask for opinions here.

What are your thoughts? Does the 65 grain difference translate to stopping power? And has anyone had any problems with feeding while shooting the lighter load?

I could see the argument that I might as well carry a .40, if I'm going to shoot lighter bullets, but I first bought the .45 for hiking, where I'm not trying to keep it concealed, and the extra couple of ounces don't make as much of a difference. Besides, I now have a .45, not a .40, and it's cheaper to buy different bullets than another gun. I just want to know if a lighter bullet is a bad idea.


----------



## Obliquity (Jun 6, 2007)

I'm sure there will be several posts on this by those who know, but I always chose to go with 230 gr. +P. Ballistics tables and other records of actual effectiveness always pointed me that direction. You have to be able to handle whatever load you choose, however. That is important.


----------



## thardey (Jun 6, 2007)

I can handle the kick (I grew up shooting .357 magnums), it's the convenience of carrying that I like.

People will justify carrying a compact with only 6 shells because it's more convenient for size and weight. Is it foolish of me to apply that logic to a full size? 

I know there's a tendency to carry at full capacity, but some situations may call for a little less mass to hide, especially in the handle. I'm a big guy, so hiding the shape of the frame isn't hard. It's the weight that bothers me, depending of what clothes I'm wearing, and the situation I'm in. I can significantly reduce my carry weight, by limiting my power and ammo. 

I'm thinking that there may be times when (say, winter, heavy jeans with a jacket on), a 13 round 230g load won't be a problem, but other times (summer, IWB carry in khaki shorts under a hawaiian shirt) that a 10 round 165g. carry might disappear better.

I guess my question is -- ballistic tables aside, does the 165g. work or not? 
If it works, then I have another option, if not, I know not to rely on it when "real life" happens.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 6, 2007)

thardey said:


> What are your thoughts? Does the 65 grain difference translate to stopping power? And has anyone had any problems with feeding while shooting the lighter load?


I'm not very bright on ballistics but my thought to reading this was: "...hmm, I thought stopping power depended upon *where* you hit them as much as *what* you hit them with... I mean a .45 (at close range) to the brain case or center mass usually stops them... doesn't it?" ....


----------



## Carol (Jun 6, 2007)

Personally I don't think the the heavier bullets are necessary in a 45 ACP for everyday personal protection.  

I could envision an advantage to packing the +P when you are hiking there is a remote chance of an attack from something greater than human size.


----------



## Grenadier (Jun 6, 2007)

I find 165 grain loads to be too light for optimal performance, especially since you have a 4.6" barrel in that beautiful Glock.  

I have equal confidence in standard pressure 185 grain and 230 grain loads out of that 4.6" barrel.  

Remember, with today's premium hollowpoint designs, reliable expansion is no longer dependent on velocity nearly as much as it used to be, and these loads are designed to give a good blend of expansion and penetration.  

My favorite loads for my .45 Glocks are:

Remington Golden Saber 230 grain standard pressure BJHP
Remington Golden Saber 185 grain standard pressure BJHP
Speer Gold Dot 230 grain standard pressure JHP
Winchester Ranger 230 grain +P JHP
Winchester SXT 230 grain standard pressure JHP

I would use any of the above with equal confidence.


----------



## LawDog (Jun 6, 2007)

For self defense I prefer the 185 gr. bullet. I like the higher velocity that the 185 gr. gives. At close range a posted hollow cavity round can create a large shock cavity.
For straight paper punching I like the 185 gr. semi wad cutter. This bullet design stabilizes well with the 45's standard rate of twist.
For steel plate type shooting I prefer a 230 gr. in a flat nose design.
It has been my experience that the lighter weight rounds, under 185 gr, do not stabilize well with the 45's standard rate of twist. A faster burning powder has to be used with these light fast moving rounds.
For my wheel guns I load most of my own 357's,44's & 45's. Auto's, factory only.
:machgunr:


----------



## Callandor (Jun 6, 2007)

I'd go for lighter bullets at higher velocities.



Grenadier said:


> I find 165 grain loads to be too light for optimal performance, especially since you have a 4.6" barrel in that beautiful Glock.



Why so? <--mv = mv-->


----------



## Grenadier (Jun 6, 2007)

Callandor said:


> I'd go for lighter bullets at higher velocities.
> 
> 
> 
> Why so? <--mv = mv-->


 
Several reasons.

1) The last batch of Federal 165 grain Personal Defense JHP used a powder that gave a brilliant orange flash.  Not exactly ideal for defensive purposes, since such ammo should have flash suppressants.  

2) A 165 grain bullet designed to open up at low speeds in the .45 ACP isn't going to have much in the way of penetration.  Coming out of that 4.6" barrel, you may even get less penetration.  It's probably better for shorter barrel .45 ACP's.


----------



## Obliquity (Jun 6, 2007)

thardey said:


> People will justify carrying a compact with only 6 shells because it's more convenient for size and weight. Is it foolish of me to apply that logic to a full size? --snip-- I know there's a tendency to carry at full capacity, but some situations may call for a little less mass to hide, especially in the handle.


 

This is why I switched to a Khar K9. Concealed much easier and is much lighter. I know it's not a .45, which is my preference, but lugging around and concealing my double-stack Para-Ord got to me.


----------



## KenpoTex (Jun 7, 2007)

MA-Caver said:


> *I thought stopping power depended upon where you hit them as much as what you hit them with*... I mean a .45 (at close range) to the brain case or center mass usually stops them... doesn't it?" ....


  Exactly...handguns are anemic little weapons, regardless of what you're carrying, you have to hit the right spots if you want to put them down.

As long as it's a good round--good defined as "it performs the way it's supposed to" (penetration, expansion, w/o excessive muzzle-flash)--and shoots well through your gun, I don't really see that there's much difference.  That said, when I carried a .45, I used 230 gr. loads.


----------



## Grenadier (Jun 7, 2007)

Obliquity said:


> This is why I switched to a Khar K9. Concealed much easier and is much lighter. I know it's not a .45, which is my preference, but lugging around and concealing my double-stack Para-Ord got to me.


 
The old adage of "the .22 in hand beats the .45 left at home" always holds true!  

To the OP: Is there really that much of a difference in terms of sheer weight, comparing 165 grain cartridges to 230 grain cartridges?  At the most, you're looking at the weight of just a couple more rounds.  

On another note, Obliquity, did you ever try Kahr's .45?

http://kahr.com/pistols_KP4543.html


----------



## Monadnock (Jun 7, 2007)

I just picked up a G21 SF, and didn't plan on using anything other than the 230 gr. Like Grenadier said, expansion and penetration is pretty good all around with good ammo these days so shoot what you can handle.


----------



## thardey (Jun 7, 2007)

Grenadier said:


> To the OP: Is there really that much of a difference in terms of sheer weight, comparing 165 grain cartridges to 230 grain cartridges?  At the most, you're looking at the weight of just a couple more rounds.




Well that's just it -- 13 165g. rounds feel the same on my hip as 10 230g. rounds.

Since an empty Glock is so light, what I load in it makes a huge difference to how it feels. For the situations where I want a lighter carry, is it wiser to carry more lighter bullets, or fewer heavy bullets? That's why I want to know if the lighter bullets work. And if I really wanted to lighten up for some reason, is it justifiable to load only 6 bullets?

It sounds like the 185g. bullet is worth looking into, but most of the sporting goods stores around here only carry 230gr. Even the reloading suppliers. I sort of ran across the 165g. by chance as it was.


----------



## thardey (Jun 7, 2007)

kenpotex said:


> Exactly...handguns are anemic little weapons, regardless of what you're carrying, you have to hit the right spots if you want to put them down.
> 
> As long as it's a good round--good defined as "it performs the way it's supposed to" (penetration, expansion, w/o excessive muzzle-flash)--and shoots well through your gun, I don't really see that there's much difference.  That said, when I carried a .45, I used 230 gr. loads.



"Anemic little weapons" is perfect! Even a 230g. isn't really all that powerful, my .45 feels like a pop gun next to my .357mag, which is a pop gun compared to just about any rifle.

So it sounds like there's some debate on whether the 165g.  "performs the way it's supposed to" and that's exactly what I wanted to find out.


----------



## thardey (Jun 7, 2007)

Grenadier said:


> Several reasons.
> 
> 1) The last batch of Federal 165 grain Personal Defense JHP used a powder that gave a brilliant orange flash.  Not exactly ideal for defensive purposes, since such ammo should have flash suppressants.
> 
> 2) A 165 grain bullet designed to open up at low speeds in the .45 ACP isn't going to have much in the way of penetration.  Coming out of that 4.6" barrel, you may even get less penetration.  It's probably better for shorter barrel .45 ACP's.



So you're saying that the higher muzzle velocity (from a longer barrel) may make the thin shell of the lighter hollow point open up too soon?  How does that affect the wound if I shoot them in the chest?

I've never considered that a flash is bad -- why exactly? Wouldn't the brilliant flash (and the noise) in someone's face affect them psychologically, when they're pumped up on adrenalin and the bullets feel like "bee stings"?


----------



## LawDog (Jun 7, 2007)

Sometimes the "flash" from a handgun is caused by using a short barrel, the type of powder,(fast vs slow burn), using compressed loads etc. The size of a shock cavity does not change much when the barrel length of a 45 cal. changes slightly. A 45 cal. round can only hold so much powder and the 45 chamber can only with stand so much pressure.
Heavy rounds, 230 gr. - 250 gr. are great when deep penetration is require, 
1) against a large person,
2) someone wearing heavy winter clothing etc. 
The 185 gr range is also a good round but will not do as well against someone who is wearing heavy winter clothing. 
The problem with the lighter 165 gr round is the bullet is still a 45 dia., it will meet with the same amount of surface resistance as the heavier rounds when striking a soft object. It has less mass behind this resistance to help push into an object. The 230 - 250 gr round has more mass behind it, this will help it over come the 45 dia. surface resistance.


----------



## Grenadier (Jun 7, 2007)

thardey said:


> So you're saying that the higher muzzle velocity (from a longer barrel) may make the thin shell of the lighter hollow point open up too soon? How does that affect the wound if I shoot them in the chest?


 
It all depends on the design of the bullet.  Today's premium hollowpoint bullets are designed to give you an optimal blend of expansion and penetration, as long as they are used in the manner that they're supposed to be used.  

The 165 grain Hydrashok bullet (used in the Personal Defense load) was designed to expand at lower velocities, since Federal wanted to produce a lighter-kicking load for people who are recoil-sensitive.  You are correct, that in general, if you do push that bullet faster, you could end up getting more expansion, and it could be that the bullet may open up too quickly to get that optimal blend.  

Don't get me wrong though; you'll still ruin the bad guy's day.  

The effect is even more pronounced when people try to use premium hollowpoint ammo in carbines (longer barrels, more velocity), and find that the bullets have actually given them less penetration than the ones fired out of handguns.  




> I've never considered that a flash is bad -- why exactly? Wouldn't the brilliant flash (and the noise) in someone's face affect them psychologically, when they're pumped up on adrenalin and the bullets feel like "bee stings"?


 
True, but the flash is worse for the shooter.  Most defensive shootings will probably occur in lower light conditions, and the last thing you want is a bright flash temporarily blinding you.  That's why almost all premium loads are constructed with flash suppressants in the powders.


----------



## arnisandyz (Jun 8, 2007)

200gr going a little over 1000fps is good "compromise"


----------

