I did a search and didn’t see a thread on this topic (surprisingly)
There is a perception that .45ACP hollowpoints won’t expand reliably out of any handgun other than one with a 5" barrel (aka 1911).
I’m not talking subcompact here. I was thinking in terms of the SIG P220 Carry/Compact models. These have a 3.9" barrel. Other than a dedicated short barrel load (most likely the 230gr Gold Dot), should I worry about other premium ammo failing to expand?
Once you get substantially below a 4"barrel, some .45 ACP loads can begin to have issue with proper expansion, especially through heavy clothing.
It has been my experience that the P220 is the worst classic service pistol Sig makes (carefully worded to exempt the odious P250). I was issued a German made, rolled slide P220 nearly 2 decades ago; it was so problematic that I got rid of it within 6 months and purchased a S&W 4566 which was a joy in comparison.
4" should be good in regards to either 230gr GD you mentioned or most quality .45 self defense ammo.
Are you talking about shorter than 4"?
Speer has a line of short barrel loads. They list 4" as short for a .45.
The Barnes Copper bullet used in Corbon DPX & Taurus HEX ammo is expand to expand at 650fps.
Anyone know of any gel testing with ~4" barrel guns?
Some good advice here. The primary issue with the P220 is the feeding mechanism. The magazine sits low, so when a cartridge is stripped off the magazine the feeding angle up the ramp is too steep to chamber the cartridge. So, instead of reliably sliding up the breech face and into the extractor claw resulting in a smooth chambering like you have with 9mm Sigs, the P220 .45acp cartridge pops up out of the magazine a split second before the breech face slams home on it. This is a chaotic, and inefficient method of feeding. It also reeks havoc on extractors which are usually pushed out of the way in the P220 to allow the cartridge rim to seat properly. You can customize a P220 by having a gun smith to a good ramp job on it along with a few other tricks to help, but in the long run you’re better off buying a stock .45acp that runs well right out of the box. M&P .45 and HK .45 are good examples. I’ve messed around with the P220 platform for years and could never get beyond the design issues to trust it for duty/defense purposes. A well made 1911 would be more reliable in the long run than the P220.
The problem with .45acp pistols is that they need a certain amount of powder burned in the chamber and barrel in order to have adequate velocity, and velocity is a key component to reliable bullet expansion. The larger the caliber, the more burn time it needs in the chamber and barrel to get that larger bullet accelerated. As the barrel gets shorter and shorter, you reach a point where too much powder charge is wasted and it burns outside the barrel instead of inside the barrel. 4" still seems to be that crucial barrel length limit in the .45acp. However, when selecting equipment to be used in a deadly force situation…why choose to risk getting so close to that margin of error which could mean the difference between an effective hit on the badguy or not? Just for referrence, the 9mm, .40S&W, and .357sig are better suited for barrel lengths of 3.5-4" as they maintain their performance better in short barrels.
I guess I’ve been lucky, but I’ve been carrying and shooting P220’s since I bought my Browning BDA 220, through a department letterhead deal circa 1979, and I’ve bought several more since. I don’t recall ever having a malfunction that wasn’t ammunition related, and I’ve run an easy 30,000+ rounds through 4 pistols. The early split back mags started coming apart after being loaded for months at a time, but I was 10-4 on that and replaced them before they became problematic. SIG replaced them for free, even after 4 or 5 years. But, my guns are older, my understanding is the newer ones are POS’s.
The 645 I had broke an extractor after less than 500 rounds, and neither it or the 4506 I had were anywhere near as reliable as the 220.
No doubt the old West German P220s were better made, and if I had to carry a P220 again that is what I’d go with. “generally” they will run okay when the recoil spring, magazine spring, and extractor are changed out every service cycle with proper cleaning and lube. Things get more iffy when you get the gun dirty, or deviate from the standard barrel over mag shooting position. So, if you are barrier shooting while turning the gun sideways or upside down the gun is much more prone to malfunction than the other classic Sig caliber models. That’s because gravity will now pull that .45 cartridge which has popped out of the magazine left/right/up and screw up the alignment. If the gun is well lubed with good springs, then it can do this drill okay. As the slide cycle slows down from weak ammo, lack of lube, weak springs, or limp wristing(common with these shooting positions), don’t be surprised if you get multiple malfunctions. Can you make the old P220s work for you?..sure. They are accurate, are well balanced, and have a natural pointability. They certainly aren’t as trusted as other alternatives though in terms of harsh conditions reliability. Now days, there are simply much better alternatives for hard use .45acps.
To the original thread poster, I wouldn’t trust anything from Sig that was produced since 2005. Design, parts, materials, and quality controls have gone to hell in a handbasket and the problem only seems to be getting worse. It even seems to be effecting parts imported from Germany. If you insist on going Sig, an old West German gun will be the best in terms of quality. 9mm would be the best choice as the classic Sig design is opimized around the caliber. Plus, the 9mm Sigs will go much longer between needed servicing, are much less likely to break parts, and the overall wear and tear will be reduced. You’re going to want those features in a discontinued pistol in which it will be hard to get good quality replacement parts. That sums up my duty W. German P226 9mm and P228 9mm which have been great pistols over the years, but since my agency shows no indication of switching to something other than Sig…I’ll need to keep the ole girls running well for many years to come.
Khan,
That’s actually very interesting, it explains a lot of the negatives I’ve heard about recent P220 (broken extractors especially.) The move to MIM parts probably hasn’t helped.
Eliminating the SIG issue, I would assume moving to faster burning powder would eliminate some of the velocity issues. I’m sure that’s one of the thing Speer did with the sort barrel ammo.
Nope, Speer uses the same powder in all their pistol loads. If you look at ATK, the short barrel velocities are quite a bit slower with a .45 4" test barrel. Using a faster burning powder to make up for short barrels could be dangerous if used in longer barrel pistols and carbines. This could be a serious liability concern for Speer. From my understanding the difference is in the bullet design which is hollowed out a little more to allow lower velocity expansion. How well it works I do not know.
For 9mm, .40, and .357sig Speer tests their short barrel loads with a 3.5" barrel…and a 4" test barrel for their standard loads.