"Scout" wrote in
:



"RD Sandman" wrote in message
...
"Scout" wrote in
:



"BDK" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:29:19 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

.410 buck (or a choice), .357/.38 ....

good obama blaster, criminal public servant controller, etc.
Could stop 'em from stealing you SW radio, golf clubs, other
guns, or save your arse when you wake up to the conspiracy and
the conspirators want you silenced!

http://bondarmsusa.com/

(make sure you watch the video!)

Would even fit in the san fransicko boys' purses!

Regards,
JS

**** that. This is a much better weapon.

http://www.ruger.com/products/sp101/index.html

Five shots, better reload time, much more accurate.

Leave it to Johnny Kook to pick a POS like a Bond Arms 2 shot.

Dozens of better guns out there.

Depends on what you're after.

On a shot per shot basis, the .410 is going to deliver more to
target.

effectively ten 30 caliber pellets to target in the time it takes to
pull the trigger twice.

A .410 handgun round contains 8 or 9 pellets if it is a #4 shot.

That's about right, the problem is you lose space because the pellets
are staggered. Thus a lot of the shell capacity is empty air.

It
contains 3 pellets if it is 000 which is approximately .36 caliber.

Maybe a few brands, but if you look around even in 2.5" you can get 4
pellets.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=533166

and in 3" (which I believe I mentioned somewhere) you get 5 pellets.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=170759

and .36 matches up nicely with the .357 caliber of the .38 and .357.


A
12ga shoots about 9 pellets in 00.

Again, with the 12, you lose capacity because the pellets are
staggered.

In the .410 they are neatly lined up, making maximum use of the
available space.

Use a buffered shot and you will get a nice tight group at close
ranges.

Whereas the Ruger is going to take 5 trigger pulls, a reload, and
than another 5 trigger pulls.

Nope. Go back and revisit the .410 load fired by a Judge.

Are you talking the regular Judge or the 3" Judge?

Both seem to contain the same number of pellets in 000. The difference
is in the powder charge, apparently.

One gives you 4 pellets of triple aught, the other gives you 5.

Not per wiki.

The Bondarm's Century 2000 derringer, the gun under discussion,
accepts up to a 3" .410 shell.

Hence the 5 pellets discussed.

Perhaps of 00.......but the heavy load mentioned was 000.

Of course, you could also load in a .410 with 5 pellets of 0000 buck
(0.375). Of course, you're probably going to need to mail order those,
and I think only a few manufacturers even make them.

:-)

That's not to say that one is a better gun than the other, but as in
so much it depends on what you're looking for it to do.

Also the .410 loading is generally reported to have a fairly high 1
shot stop percentage, since you are usually effectively hitting the
target multiple times in 1 shot.

Three, if all impact and you are shooting 000 buck.

Actually even if more than 1 hit, you will still be hitting the target
multiple times. :-)

Same with two trigger pulls on an SP-101.

However, if that's the case, odds are you didn't hit much of
consequence unless you're talking the head.

Both at close range would be effective to center mass....the edge going
to the .410.

You need to fire
both barrels in a Bond 2 shot to equal the number of rounds in an
SP-101.

Uh, an SP-101 in .38/.357 only holds 5 rounds. That's equal to the
number of pellets of triple or quad aught buck in a 3" shell.

Again, not per wiki on the .410 shotshell. Anyway, I have three SP-101s
(as you can tell, I hate them), two in .357 and one in .327Federal. The
latter holds six rounds.

So you would have to fire until empty, reload, and then empty again,
your SP101 to get an equal number of lead pieces headed downrange to
match those produced by 2 pulls of the Bond's trigger.

:-)

Not going to argue with you. You can see what wiki says as well as I
can.


Based on reports and testing, the rounds that produce the best one
shot stops are those that produce a nice hydrostatic shock wave in
the blood pressure that effectively shuts down the brain for a
period of time. Now that's not to say they are going to stay down,
only that they are going to drop on the first shot and stay down for
a bit. Shotguns do this quite effectively since they tend to dump a
large part of their energy to a broad section of the body inducing
such a hydrostatic shock. This, of course, depends upon a reasonably
direct impact to center mass.

So it all depends on your preferences, choices, and so on.

This is true.

My biggest objection would be the weight of the piece which IMO
makes it less of a carry piece. On the other hand it's flat which
again IMO makes it easier to conceal than a revolver.

True with the Bond derringer, not so with a Taurus Judge or the S&W.

Well, I wasn't intending this to be an in-depth review of all the
variations, only contesting Dudu's immediate and apparently arbitrary
dismissal of the Century 2000 as being unsuitable for self defense,
and challenging each of his talking points to establish that.

Dudu tends to run off half cocked over anything you say or suggest so I
don't pay much attention to him on those points. What got me going was
mention of the SP-101. It is one of the things he and I agree on. It is
an excellent gun.

About the only point that was really valid was the accuracy issue, but
at self defense ranges a gun doesn't need to be particularly accurate
hence my noting it as pretty much a moot point.

Fair enough.


--
Sleep well tonight,

RD (The Sandman)

WINE - Does not make you FAT....it makes you LEAN....
...against tables, chairs, floors, walls and ugly people...