Any reason not to purchase reloads?

[TonyDedo]

I found a source of reloaded ammo that is significantly cheaper than the standard manufactured ammo I have been buying. Is there any reason why I should not buy and shoot it?

I am a new shooter, so I don't need match grade ammo - just something I can practice with (and on the cheap, because I need a lot of practice). And I'm shooting a revolver (S&W 686), so I don't have to worry about a semi auto cycling it.

I bought a couple boxes of .38sp and .357 magnum, both 158 gr lead wadcutters, and had no problems with them. I can also get the copper jacketed stuff.

Retail prices are something like $5-7 cheaper per box (cheaper if I buy by the case, and even cheaper if I buy directly from the source).

Is there a reason the stuff is so cheap that I should be aware of, or did I find myself a good deal?

 

[Adam_MA]

As long as it's a reputable company (DO NOT POST THE NAME HERE) there is no reason what so ever from shooting it!

 

[icyclefar]

As long as it's a reputable company (DO NOT POST THE NAME HERE) there is no reason what so ever from shooting it!

+1000

 

[PistolPete]

Just buy a small supply to test out. Buy 200-500 rounds and see how they work. If there aren't any problems then save yourself money and keep buying from your source. Just don't use them for self defense.

 

[JonJ]

Maybe you can glean a bit of info from this thread:
http://northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=5980&highlight=kaboom

At the least it's an interesting read.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

Just buy a small supply to test out. Buy 200-500 rounds and see how they work. If there aren't any problems then save yourself money and keep buying from your source. Just don't use them for self defense.

Why's that Pete? Your post is kind of contradictory. If he shoots 200-500 rds with no problem, I think it would be more than safe to predict that the next 200-500 will perform as well. In a DA revolver, I'd carry reloads without hesitation. If a round fails to fire, you pull the trigger again.

 

[PistolPete]

Why's that Pete? Your post is kind of contradictory. If he shoots 200-500 rds with no problem, I think it would be more than safe to predict that the next 200-500 will perform as well. In a DA revolver, I'd carry reloads without hesitation. If a round fails to fire, you pull the trigger again.

Because if you use reloads in a self defense situation it will be used against you in a negative manner.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

Because if you use reloads in a self defense situation it will be used against you in a negative manner.

I've seen that rumor perpetuated on many a board, but never once has anyone ever posted a cite to prove that a case was ever made or broken over a reload used.
A shooting is either justified or its not, the ammo is irrelevant.
I carry my own reloads in my revolvers, always have and always will. If anything they are underpowered compared to factory carry ammo loads but I know their quality from the inside out.

 

[massnee]

the ammo is irrelevant.

I wish that statement were true. There was a man who was sent to prison last year for a self defense shooting...one of the jurors who convicted him listed his "killer bullets (hollow points) as one of the main reasons he convicted him.

 

[RKG]

I concur with the recommendation not to use reloaded ammunition in a carry gun, but for an entirely different reason. By definition, a round in a carry gun is exposed to more environmental challenges, and over a longer duration, than range ammo. Because of sealers, tighter tolerances, and the use of new components, factory rounds are more resistant to degradation leading to failure to fire as a result of moisture, humidity and lube migration than reloads.

 

[dwarven1]

There was a comment in a recent Combat Handguns in the column written by Massad Ayoob about someone who was convicted who was carrying reloads, and they did make a difference, IIRC. I'll have to see if I still have that issue.

 

[RKG]

There was a comment in a recent Combat Handguns in the column written by Massad Ayoob about someone who was convicted who was carrying reloads, and they did make a difference, IIRC. I'll have to see if I still have that issue.

Whether or not this anecdote is true (which has been debated) begs the question of whether one should draw a generalization from it.

The bottom line is that, should you ever find yourself in such a situation, anyone can argue anything they like. The argument that the defendant demonstrated malice by carrying handloads is no more (or less) valid than an argument that he demonstrated malice by carrying factory hollow points versus round nose lead slugs.

By definition, if you carry a weapon it is because you might need that weapon to defend yourself against an aggression threatening your death or serious bodily injury.

By definition, if you're in that situation, what you want (and need) to do is to cause the aggressor to stop what he is doing, right now, with as few rounds expended as possible.

By definition, rounds with greater terminal ballistic efficiency decrease the risk that you will fail to stop the aggressor, which means they decrease the risk that you will fail to avoid the death or injury to yourself that the aggressor threatens.

The risk that, assuming you are in a successful self-defense situation, for which you are prosecuted, and in which your legitimate self-defense claim is defeated because of your selection of ammunition specifically designed for effective self-defense has got to be small -- much smaller than the risk that by carrying ineffective ammunition, you will fail to stop the aggression.

From which it follows that selecting crummy ammo to avoid a speculative challenge to an otherwise valid self-defense claim is a perversion of risk avoidance.

Now, as I've said previously, I strongly recommend my students not carry handloads in carry situations, but for other reasons.

 

[MegaPlinker]

There was a comment in a recent Combat Handguns in the column written by Massad Ayoob about someone who was convicted who was carrying reloads, and they did make a difference, IIRC. I'll have to see if I still have that issue.

That was a good article. It explains exactly how reloads were used in court cases against the defendant in self defense and accidental death cases.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed-open-carry-121/1609-what-do-you-carry-factory-handloads.html

 

[vellnueve]

I use factory loads and would not trust handloads not just because I feel the factory loads will likely be more reliable, but because the most effective JHP rounds aren't to my knowledge sold in bullet form only. I may be completely wrong, but factory Hydra-Shoks and HSTs are good enough for me at this time.

That said, I shoot remanufactured .38s and .45s and they do just fine.

 

[drgrant]

IMO commercial reloads are fine, although many commercial reloaders water
down their cartridges to less than standard spec for whatever that particular
loading is. So if they feel "powder puffish" compared to normal factory
loads, don't be surprised.

Whatever you do, don't buy "gun show reloads"- eg, those guys
who have a myriad of crap packed into poorly labeled random boxes
that aren't proud enough to list the person that made them on it. IMO
those are pretty much a recipe for disaster. You almost never know
who loads them or what load they used, etc.

-Mike