_I,_Sniper_ (fiction, forgot the author's name) says that boat-tails penetrate pane glass with less deflection, but even assuming that's true, it would be even less likely for a less massive round with much lower velocity. Add in some of the other points others have already made, and the demand for that design feature drops from small but real, to non-existent. I think.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

06 April 2018 at 7:59, phillip.batz@gmail.com wrote:
Reloading : Why are there no boat-tail handgun (at least in part)

1) They tend to be longer (duh) and pistol cases tend to be shorter so less room for the powder?

2) Room in the Mag or Cylinder

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In article <pa79db$77n$1@news.albasani.net>, phillip.batz@gmail.com
says...
#
# _I,_Sniper_ (fiction, forgot the author's name) says that boat-tails penetrate
# pane glass with less deflection, but even assuming that's true, it would be
# even less likely for a less massive round with much lower velocity. Add in some
# of the other points others have already made, and the demand for that design # feature drops from small but real, to non-existent. I think.
#
#
#

The boat tail is for a better balistic coefficent. This is most useful
at long range. With most handguns designed for shooting at under 50
yards the loss in velocity would not be all that much.

I am not looking at the handguns designed for longer range target
shooting, but just defensive hanguns. Some of them use rounds that are normally for rifles and therefor have boat tail bullets.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)