# The great ammo debate



## TedDeBearFrmHell (Jul 1, 2011)

The ammo debate is a relatively new topic within the 1300 + years since the chinese first produced gun powder and "firelances". 

when the gun was first designed, it fired pebbles, rocks, nails, glass... anything that could harm someone and fit down a barrel.... 

at this time the main source of concern was the powder itself, usually of local manufacture, the quality varied based upon the recipe used. the biggest variable was the type of wood used to make the carbon.

the locals bought local powder.... the firearm was usually handmade.... the ammo was whatever was laying about, no debate.

then came the ball.... made from lead, handcast.... finally something that would fly mostly down range and hit near where you were aiming.... sort of....

again, no debate... the ball went in the direction you aimed it. 

then came rifling ... the barrels were rifled to make the balls fly straighter..... no debate here.... just a desire for accuracy .

then the minie ball..... again, no debate, the ball flew straighter and further....

then the self contained cartridge... speed of loading, better control of the powder conditions, mass produced.... but still no debate... 

so when did the great debates about the best ammo for this or that start.... when the very first gun magazine sold advertisements to rival manufacturers . soon there was a war of words to gain the customer.... "more pwoerful" "harder hitting" blah blah blah.... 

today it still rages on, daily ...here and on every other gun forum, in every magazine and gun show.... even in politics where cop killers, armor piercing, teflon coated are all EVIL bullets. 

people have forgotten that in order for the bullet to do what you intend it to do, it MUST be fired AND go where you want it to go. PERIOD. 

hundreds of years ago duelists knew the basic laws of surviving a duel, speed and accuracy. be the first one to acquire the target and HIT a vital area. shooting first and missing was suicide.... shooting first and wounding was pretty much the end of your days...
hitting your target with one shot and putting them in the ground was how you survived.

pioneers knew this too... the gun was security and also a larder for them. if you missed you and your family did not eat... there wasnt time to reload, the game was gone or the threat was upon you. 

nothing has changed, debate as you will about the best ammo for this or that.... it is all basically the same, marketing included.... and its the least of the equation. the best , most powerful ammo shot into the bad guys hand isnt as good as the cheapest .22 round into his forehead. 

its about shot placement, end of debate!


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

TedDeBearFrmHell said:


> ..._ts about shot placement, end of debate!_


_
Agreed!_


----------



## papahawk (Jun 12, 2012)

Amen


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

Hallelujah........


----------



## chessail77 (Mar 15, 2011)

Yep !!!


----------



## berettatoter (Sep 1, 2011)

TedDeBearFrmHell, you are 100% correct here. If one is trying to print ity-bity groups on paper, then maybe a better bullet will get you there, but most of us don't use guns to win competitions. This argument rages on because it gives people something to fight over.


----------



## genesis (Jun 18, 2012)

Rookies, newbies, and some others, talk about caliber, capacity, firepower, knock down factor, this bullet, that bullet, etc. Blah, blah blah, blah blah. We've all done it. It was fun and we learned quite a bit. Now that we're more seasoned, we preach about practice, skill, and presence of mind.

Don <><


----------

