testtest

New developments in ammo?

Do you have data on that? Or is it just your gut feeling?
See: lucky gunner tests, etc. Also did my own testing back in the day, using wet pack, mostly.

Premium JHP’s reliably expand, even through light barriers (eg, heavy clothing).

I doubt that the screwdriver bullets do anything better than ball.
 

stuartv

Operator
See: lucky gunner tests, etc. Also did my own testing back in the day, using wet pack, mostly.

Premium JHP’s reliably expand, even through light barriers (eg, heavy clothing).

I doubt that the screwdriver bullets do anything better than ball.

I looked up some LG tests. It certainly does look like modern HP rounds perform more reliably in ballistic gel than what the FBI stats say about how they perform in a human target from 30+ years ago.

I wonder how a test through "heavy clothing" and ballistic gel compares to real world conditions and human targets?

Got any data on HP performance in human targets?

The FBI says this: "Damage to the hollow point by hitting bone, glass, or other intervening obstacles can prevent expansion." A ballistic gel test through heavy clothing doesn't really address a lot of that.

The FBI says this: "Insufficient impact velocity caused by short barrels and/or longer range will prevent expansion." The LG tests are all shot at 10 feet. What will those premium, modern JHPs do when the distance goes up and velocity drops?
The FBI says this: "It is essential to bear in mind that the single most critical factor remains penetration. While penetration up to 18 inches is preferable, a handgun bullet MUST reliably penetrate 12 inches of soft body tissue at a minimum." In the LG data I'm looking at, all the top-performing 9mm rounds had average penetration around 13.5 - 14".

In 45ACP, there were 2 rounds that I see (both from Hornady) that had consistent expansion and averaged around 18 inches penetration. Everything else was either unreliable, under-penetrated, or over-penetrated.

So, if you are forced to shoot someone, and they happen to be a giant blob of a man, that you shoot from the side, do you really feel good carrying ammo that only reliably penetrates ballistic gel (not even any bone involved) to 12"? Or even only to 18"?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying any of those rounds are bad. The chance that any of us (non-LE/non-Military) are ever going to live or die based on the difference between using a Hornady 230 gr XTP +P versus generic 115gr 9mm versus Lehigh XD bullets is EXTREMELY slim.

I'm just saying that on the evidence (anecdotal as some of it is), I am convinced for myself that higher velocity and more penetration will serve me better than less reliable, slower, hollow points.

As for your doubts about screwdriver bullets, do you have any data to base that on? Or just your gut?

I found the guy that has actually shot hogs with both and compared the wound channels of both (HP and screwdriver bullets) to be pretty credible. Do you have ANY knowledge yourself of wound channel comparison in live targets between HP bullets and screwdriver bullets?
 
I looked up some LG tests. It certainly does look like modern HP rounds perform more reliably in ballistic gel than what the FBI stats say about how they perform in a human target from 30+ years ago.

I wonder how a test through "heavy clothing" and ballistic gel compares to real world conditions and human targets?

Got any data on HP performance in human targets?

The FBI says this: "Damage to the hollow point by hitting bone, glass, or other intervening obstacles can prevent expansion." A ballistic gel test through heavy clothing doesn't really address a lot of that.

The FBI says this: "Insufficient impact velocity caused by short barrels and/or longer range will prevent expansion." The LG tests are all shot at 10 feet. What will those premium, modern JHPs do when the distance goes up and velocity drops?
The FBI says this: "It is essential to bear in mind that the single most critical factor remains penetration. While penetration up to 18 inches is preferable, a handgun bullet MUST reliably penetrate 12 inches of soft body tissue at a minimum." In the LG data I'm looking at, all the top-performing 9mm rounds had average penetration around 13.5 - 14".

In 45ACP, there were 2 rounds that I see (both from Hornady) that had consistent expansion and averaged around 18 inches penetration. Everything else was either unreliable, under-penetrated, or over-penetrated.

So, if you are forced to shoot someone, and they happen to be a giant blob of a man, that you shoot from the side, do you really feel good carrying ammo that only reliably penetrates ballistic gel (not even any bone involved) to 12"? Or even only to 18"?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying any of those rounds are bad. The chance that any of us (non-LE/non-Military) are ever going to live or die based on the difference between using a Hornady 230 gr XTP +P versus generic 115gr 9mm versus Lehigh XD bullets is EXTREMELY slim.

I'm just saying that on the evidence (anecdotal as some of it is), I am convinced for myself that higher velocity and more penetration will serve me better than less reliable, slower, hollow points.

As for your doubts about screwdriver bullets, do you have any data to base that on? Or just your gut?

I found the guy that has actually shot hogs with both and compared the wound channels of both (HP and screwdriver bullets) to be pretty credible. Do you have ANY knowledge yourself of wound channel comparison in live targets between HP bullets and screwdriver bullets?
Got any data on the screwdriver bullets in human targets?

And I e shot large game—deer—with conventional cup/core, and monometal (copper/Barnes X) to know that they are plenty effective without relying on mumbo-jumbo “fluid dynamics transfer” or such horse feces to damage tissue.
 

stuartv

Operator
Got any data on the screwdriver bullets in human targets?

No. Only anecdotal info on them in hogs. Can we agree that a bullet in a hog is more "like" a bullet in a human than a bullet through "heavy clothing" into ballistic gel is "like" a bullet in a human?

Also, you have not said anything about the FBI's statement that "it is essential to bear in mind that the single most critical factor remains penetration."

Agree or disagree?
 
No. Only anecdotal info on them in hogs. Can we agree that a bullet in a hog is more "like" a bullet in a human than a bullet through "heavy clothing" into ballistic gel is "like" a bullet in a human?

Also, you have not said anything about the FBI's statement that "it is essential to bear in mind that the single most critical factor remains penetration."

Agree or disagree?
Disagree.

The single most critical factor is placement.
 

stuartv

Operator
Got any data on the screwdriver bullets in human targets?

And I e shot large game—deer—with conventional cup/core, and monometal (copper/Barnes X) to know that they are plenty effective without relying on mumbo-jumbo “fluid dynamics transfer” or such horse feces to damage tissue.

Also, since I gather you like ballistic gel tests, here's a 9mm XD round outperforming a Federal HST. More penetration and bigger permanent wound cavity. With and without heavy clothing barrier. And through a rack of ribs, then two layers of pork ribs plus 4 layers of denim. He also shoots it into a dead pig to check for overpenetration.

 

stuartv

Operator
Disagree.

The single most critical factor is placement.

Also, that is kind of irrelevant. Obviously, if you don't hit your target, what bullet you shot does not matter at all (with regard to immediate incapacitation).

In other words, this whole discussion is predicated on a presumption that you hit your target. Further, whether you are shooting a JHP or a screwdriver bullet does not make any difference (useful to this discussion) to whether you hit your target.

So, to be more clear, assuming your hit your target, the FBI says the MOST critical factor in determining immediate incapacitation is penetration.

Agree or disagree?
 
Also, since I gather you like ballistic gel tests, here's a 9mm XD round outperforming a Federal HST. More penetration and bigger permanent wound cavity. With and without heavy clothing barrier. And through a rack of ribs, then two layers of pork ribs plus 4 layers of denim. He also shoots it into a dead pig to check for overpenetration.

Not permanent wound cavity with that test…gel exaggerates temporary cavity, and that’s what you’re seeing there.

The only tissue damaged is what the bullet physically touches (in most defensive handgun calibers—that is, temporary cavity is not a factor as it is in say, high velocity rifle rounds). I’d the bullet doesn’t expand, it damages the same tissue that a FMJ would.

Look—you’ve bought the snake oil. Good for you, but I’m not buying it, and I’ve got no problem calling it for what it is.
 

stuartv

Operator
Not permanent wound cavity with that test…gel exaggerates temporary cavity, and that’s what you’re seeing there.

The only tissue damaged is what the bullet physically touches (in most defensive handgun calibers—that is, temporary cavity is not a factor as it is in say, high velocity rifle rounds). I’d the bullet doesn’t expand, it damages the same tissue that a FMJ would.

Look—you’ve bought the snake oil. Good for you, but I’m not buying it, and I’ve got no problem calling it for what it is.

You seem to be denying that fluid dynamics is real. That's fine, if you want. But, I went to engineering school and I know that it is real. Waterjet cutters are real. They work.

Properly curved channels, propelled through a viscous fluid at high speeds can scoop fluid and redirect it out to the sides at velocities that make it work similarly to a waterjet. Yes, I am inclined to believe that.

What is your basis for saying it is snake oil?

Why does a wound cavity in ballistic gel that is bigger than one produced by an expanded JHP and which remains behind after the temporary deformation goes away not mean that the same bullet would leave a bigger permanent wound cavity (than the JHP) in a live animal? I.e. what is your basis for saying that the wound channel in gel is bigger, but in a human it would not even be as big?

I talked to one guy who has shot a bunch of hogs with them and said they make bigger PWCs than JHPs. Of course, that is not data. That is an anecdote. But, have you heard of ANYONE who shot a live animal with them and said they performed the same as FMJ?

I'm not saying you are wrong. I am just trying to understand the basis for your conclusion. Is there science behind it? Do you have actual data? Do you even have anecdotal evidence? Or is it just your gut feeling?
 

southtex

Custom
Founding Member
I have recently started carrying the Norma MHP 108gr JHP in my sub compact 9mm's. After shooting at the range I find this to be a very easy shooting round with fast accurate follow shots. My 9mm compact/full-size I use Barnes Tac XPD 115gr JHP's. My .45acp choice is Winchester Ranger T 230gr JHP's. My 357 Sig is Federal HST/Buffalo Bore 125gr JHP's. While I do research ballistics I don't do testing myself,but I find the above rounds to be reliable and accurate when fired from my guns. Though the most important thing for me is having confidence that I will perform and so will the round.
 

wolfpack076

Master Class
Shot placement is the most important factor. Case in point case that happened many years ago not far from where I grew up. A really large man with the strength of a bull and a laundry list of mental health issues and history of fighting with Law Enforcement charged a State Trooper with a very large knife. The Trooper returned fire scored four out of six hits with a 357 magnum JHP's. Another trooper from some distance hit the suspect with one shot of double 00 buck from a 12 gauge. The suspect never missed a beat and still managed to fight with 4 state troopers and the paramedics and resulted in two of the Troopers being sent to the hospital. Took the suspect quite some time to bleed out. Two of the Troopers were my instructors in the Police Academy. Shot placement shot placement...
 

southtex

Custom
Founding Member
Shot placement is the most important factor. Case in point case that happened many years ago not far from where I grew up. A really large man with the strength of a bull and a laundry list of mental health issues and history of fighting with Law Enforcement charged a State Trooper with a very large knife. The Trooper returned fire scored four out of six hits with a 357 magnum JHP's. Another trooper from some distance hit the suspect with one shot of double 00 buck from a 12 gauge. The suspect never missed a beat and still managed to fight with 4 state troopers and the paramedics and resulted in two of the Troopers being sent to the hospital. Took the suspect quite some time to bleed out. Two of the Troopers were my instructors in the Police Academy. Shot placement shot placement...
Agree. Placement is a result of Performance. Our ability to perform under pressure is the #1 factor for success.
 

stuartv

Operator
Shot placement is the most important factor. Case in point case that happened many years ago not far from where I grew up. A really large man with the strength of a bull and a laundry list of mental health issues and history of fighting with Law Enforcement charged a State Trooper with a very large knife. The Trooper returned fire scored four out of six hits with a 357 magnum JHP's. Another trooper from some distance hit the suspect with one shot of double 00 buck from a 12 gauge. The suspect never missed a beat and still managed to fight with 4 state troopers and the paramedics and resulted in two of the Troopers being sent to the hospital. Took the suspect quite some time to bleed out. Two of the Troopers were my instructors in the Police Academy. Shot placement shot placement...

Gee. That sounds a lot like what the FBI white paper I linked said.

If you don't hit the central nervous system, it doesn't really matter what you're shooting. You're not going to get immediate incapacitation. If you hit the heart, they could fight for another 10 - 15 seconds. If you don't hit either, they could keep fighting for a long time.

You have to hit the correct target, which means hitting in the right spot AND penetrating enough to actually destroy what you're trying to hit.

So, what is more important - a fat, heavy bullet, or hitting in the right spot and penetrating? Answer: Hitting the right spot and penetrating. And if you do that, the difference between the diameter of an expanded 9mm and an expanded 10mm or expanded 45 is going to matter a MINISCULE percentage of the time.
 
Gee. That sounds a lot like what the FBI white paper I linked said.

If you don't hit the central nervous system, it doesn't really matter what you're shooting. You're not going to get immediate incapacitation. If you hit the heart, they could fight for another 10 - 15 seconds. If you don't hit either, they could keep fighting for a long time.

You have to hit the correct target, which means hitting in the right spot AND penetrating enough to actually destroy what you're trying to hit.

So, what is more important - a fat, heavy bullet, or hitting in the right spot and penetrating? Answer: Hitting the right spot and penetrating. And if you do that, the difference between the diameter of an expanded 9mm and an expanded 10mm or expanded 45 is going to matter a MINISCULE percentage of the time.

What makes the 9mm magic that you’ll place it correctly, and not the .45?

Not sure about you, but I’m pretty sure a big, fat, heavy bullet placed well that punches deep is going to be better than a smaller bullet placed similarly.

Remember: the entire raison d’etre behind hollow points, or even “fluid dynamics”, is to make small bullets act like big bullets.
 

nmedge

Custom
I have recently started carrying the Norma MHP 108gr JHP in my sub compact 9mm's. After shooting at the range I find this to be a very easy shooting round with fast accurate follow shots. My 9mm compact/full-size I use Barnes Tac XPD 115gr JHP's. My .45acp choice is Winchester Ranger T 230gr JHP's. My 357 Sig is Federal HST/Buffalo Bore 125gr JHP's. While I do research ballistics I don't do testing myself,but I find the above rounds to be reliable and accurate when fired from my guns. Though the most important thing for me is having confidence that I will perform and so will the round.
Thats why military complained about 5.56 ammo. Guy hit in Iraq with 5.56 several times and still is in the fight. Finally one placed in the head and taken out of action. Shot placement,, you bet!
 

stuartv

Operator
What makes the 9mm magic that you’ll place it correctly, and not the .45?

Not sure about you, but I’m pretty sure a big, fat, heavy bullet placed well that punches deep is going to be better than a smaller bullet placed similarly.

Remember: the entire raison d’etre behind hollow points, or even “fluid dynamics”, is to make small bullets act like big bullets.

What makes 9mm better? Nothing - well, except that you can probably achieve better shot placement on shots after the first.

Other than that, the FBI white paper I linked addresses your concerns.
 

NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN AMMO?​

Polymer Cased Ammunition

No not Polymer coated steel/aluminum cased ammo, the case is made of polymer.

PCP_Ammunition_Polymer_Cased_Rifle_Ammo_Coyote_School_Blog_11-1024x680.jpg



Being developed by the Army for their new Machine Gun, the idea being reduce the weight of the rounds, means soldiers can carry more into combat.

Me, I'm thinking cheaper ammo means I can carry more to the range.

What they found, with Polymer than can better form and shape the inside of the case and mass produce it more consistently. That means more accurate ammo.

So what is premiering on the market right now, is very expensive exotic rounds with polymer cases for extreme accuracy.

Note, the base and rim of the case is steel, where the polymer can't stand the pressure without support of the chamber.
 
What makes 9mm better? Nothing - well, except that you can probably achieve better shot placement on shots after the first.

Other than that, the FBI white paper I linked addresses your concerns.
So that white paper you keep referencing…read it decades ago.

Also—do you know what circumstances lead to its being written, and what the FBI’s actions following it were?
 
Top