No 230gr. EFMJ?


PDA






DirtyBrad
November 14, 2006, 04:13 AM
I like what I've read about expanding full metal jacket ammo, like the EFMJ from Federal and the Pow'r Ball from Corbon, but both only come in lighter bullets for the .45. Anyone know of a similar ammunition that comes in "regular" 230gr.? It's pretty easy to find Golden Saber, Hydra-Shock, etc in 230; don't know why these would be different. Thanks.

If you enjoyed reading about "No 230gr. EFMJ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Waywatcher
November 14, 2006, 04:46 AM
My uneducated guess is that the rubber ball in those rounds takes up more space than a hollow point.

Or, possibly a high velocity is require to get them to reliably expand.

I'm just speculating though.

DRMMR02
November 14, 2006, 04:54 AM
Are there .223 EFMJ rounds?

mete
November 14, 2006, 08:25 AM
IIRC they first had 230 but then went to a lighter weight bullet. As long as it works it doesn't matter. BTW the EFMJ doesn't work as well as a good JHP.....

das028
November 14, 2006, 09:31 AM
DirtyBrad,

Research that particular brand of ammo and how it works, and I'm sure you would understand. Doesnt take a genious to realize why the bullet is usually lighter than conventional bullets when you understand hyow it works.

NORTEXED
November 14, 2006, 11:11 AM
I bought 4 boxes of 9mm EFMJ from Midway when it came out, and shot 2 boxes (20 rnds ea) to test function and expansion. I am very pleased with both, and carry them in my P11 now. The 9mms are 105 gr. and come out pretty snappy. Maybe not +P, but they are Personal Defense, and a little easier on follow-up shots. Expansion from 2 wet phonebooks and soft dirt were both textbook, with penetration in the phonebooks at about 8", which for my taste, is fine. To make a 230 gr. EFMJ in .45, would take a MUCH longer projectile, as in the 9mms, the silicon rubber portion appears to be about 1/4 - 1/5 of total bullet length. That would protrude greatly on the powder space to keep the loaded round at SAAMI spec total length. If I could find them in .32, I would be carrying them now in my P32, I'm a believer.

ps: I'm looking for a donor auto, for glass and door penetration tests, volunteers??? ;-)

MD_Patrick
November 14, 2006, 12:55 PM
Good information. Still like to know if anyone makes one in 230.

das028
November 14, 2006, 01:28 PM
"Good information. Still like to know if anyone makes one in 230."


READ THE PREVIOUS POSTS! Should be able to answer your question!

Just_a_dude_with_a_gun
November 14, 2006, 01:42 PM
If you replace lead with rubber, you're putting that round on a diet. :neener:

DirtyBrad
November 15, 2006, 01:51 AM
das, thank you for the friendly and helpful responses.

Previous posts:

2: "My uneducated guess..."
3: "Are there .223..."
4: "IIRC, they first had..."
5: "Research that brand..."
6: "I bought 4 boxes of 9mm..."

Please explain to me where re-reading these posts will answer the question of whether a manufacturer makes a round similar to the EFMJ but in 230 gr.

If the 230 gr. is too heavy to move fast enough for reliable expansion, I'd be curious to see that stated definitively. It seems possible, but I've yet to see any concrete evidence of this.

It's tough for me to imagine how a 230 gr. hollow point could expand fine, but a rubber ball filling that hole instead of fluid wouldn't work, but what do I know.

The Federal EFMJ 9mm and .45 both use lighter bullets than their Hydra-Shocks, so that seems like it may be right. But their .40 EFMJ is the same weight as a Hydra-Shock, so maybe not.

As far as rubber weighing less than lead, air weighs less than lead, but I have 230 gr. FMJ and 230 gr. hollow-points that look about the same size to me, so it doesn't seem prohibitive to add the rubber up front.

I'm mostly just speculating, though. I'm guessing that since no one has responded in the affirmative, that no one makes one. If anyone has anything firm to point to as to why, I'd love to see it. Or, if you just want to holler in caps and exclamation points, I'm always up for that, too.

Dr.Rob
November 15, 2006, 02:05 AM
you move that much lead you've got to make up for it somewhere... like a thicker jacket or heavier filler than lead.

There just isn't enough room to keep it cheap.

Coronach
November 15, 2006, 02:13 AM
What they're getting at, but not saying 100% directly, is that they don't have a 230gr EFMJ because they cannot make one, at least not one that works right.

230gr is a heavy bullet. It is heavy because it is filled with lead, probably about as much lead as you can fit into a .45 ACP bullet. When you add rubber, which is very non-dense, you have to remove something else, and that something else is some of the lead, which is very dense. So, you're replacing a dense material with a non-dense one, and keeping volume constant. This means the EFMJ is going to weigh less than a HP or FMJ round.

That help?

Mike

DirtyBrad
November 15, 2006, 02:28 AM
I can see that, but still remain slightly skeptical. Respectfully :)

I'm looking now at an FMJ and Hydra-Shock 230 gr. side by side. The FMJ is actually slightly longer. That, plus the cavity of the HS, make it look like the FMJ has way more volume. I'm guessing that the HS extends farther down into the case than the FMJ.

Either way, it doesn't seem completely crazy to pop a rubber ball on the end there. Like I said, the 130 gr. .40 is offered in both HS and EFMJ, so at least one caliber is doing it.

Sorry to go on and on about this. It's more about curiosity at this point than actually finding the ammo.

Thank you again for the responses.

joneb
November 15, 2006, 03:02 AM
BTW the EFMJ doesn't work as well as a good JHP.....
By work as well, do you mean under penatrate :confused:

Lone_Gunman
November 15, 2006, 09:16 AM
Why do you prefer the expanding FMJ to a standard JHP?

I bought some when they first came out, thinking I would get the expandsion of a hollowpoint, and the feed reliability of a FMJ, kind of the best of both worlds. But the EFMJ is flat nosed, not round nosed. Its profile is not round like a FMJ, but flat and more like a JHP.

So I don't see how it would feed better, and some people have said they don't penetrate as much as JHPs.

So maybe EFMJ's give the worst of both worlds, instead of the best.

KurtC
November 15, 2006, 09:33 AM
I only carry .45 EFMJ, as hollowpoints are prohibited in New Jersey. Federal originally made them with 200gr bullets, in 50 round cardboard boxes. They are still available from some distributors. Current ones are 165gr +p, in small plastic cases.

DirtyBrad
November 15, 2006, 10:04 AM
You can't have hollow points in NJ, but you can have expanding full metal jackets? It's almost like those making the laws have no idea what they're talking about...

I don't prefer them. I've never used them. I just liked what I read about them expanding more reliably, especially with clothing, drywall, etc. Seems like a promising idea.

Just_a_dude_with_a_gun
November 15, 2006, 11:48 AM
Brad,

"you" or I Can't carry in NJ to begin with, so the JHP possession thing is just an add on to a weapons charge. A cop might be able to carry off duty, and I don't know what they load up with.

You can, absolutely, buy, transport, keep at home, and use hollow point Ammo at a range or while hunting. Those who are making the laws are 100% against guns,
and yes, they only know what liberal politician police chiefs tell them.

clt46910
November 15, 2006, 11:50 AM
I use the 200 gr EFMJ in my S&W 1911Sc. In my unprofessional test of them, I found they expanded more reliable with clothes and wood then the 230 gr HP's I normally carry in my other guns. They will not penetrate wood or drywall as well as the 230 gr HP's. But then most of the HPs did not expand very well in the wood or drywall.

I hang old coats, shirts, and pants over the target (a old barrel) to test how they worked through clothes. The EFMJ did expand more consistent then the HP I was using.

With metal barrels and old car fenders and doors, The EFMJ do not seem to deform as bad as the HPs did. They both seemed to penetrate about the same. Which means they both went completely through.

I believe they would be more consistent on a human target, especially with heavy clothing. But they would not penetrate as well if you needed to shoot though a wall or heavy wood door.

NORTEXED
November 15, 2006, 12:10 PM
Chuck, your results and evaluation are exactly like mine, (that's 2 folks with the same results, which I think adds credance), I just did not have the metal barriers to test on. Thanks for confirming what I supposed on deformation and penetration of metal.;)

ps: I also think the expansion amount and shape on the EFMJs is more of a mechanical "given" than relying on hydrostaic pressure to open a hollowpoint (the scived jacket around the silicon spacer acting as a mushroom limiter).

DirtyBrad
November 15, 2006, 05:27 PM
Very good information and backs up my interest, thank you. I'm more concerned with over-penetration than under.

Do they still make the 200? I thought I only saw 165 on the Federal website.

Rotorflyr
November 15, 2006, 06:19 PM
The only one's I've ever seen on the shelves are the 165's, might be some 200's around (gun show's, distributors etc.....)

KurtC
November 16, 2006, 05:40 AM
The NJ law was written before concealable body armor was available to police. It was an attempt to keep the "new" lethal hollow point ammuntion off the streets, and less likely to be used against a police officer.

We all know such laws are useless, but NJ is a liberal state and gun laws do not get removed from the books. We therefore now have to circumvent the literal wording of the law in order to avoid prosecution. Expanding and frangible ammunition is not prohibited, as long as it does not physically look like it has a hollow point.

Federal specifically designed the EFMJ for use in such jurisdictions. Up until then most of us used Glaser or Magsafe.

If you enjoyed reading about "No 230gr. EFMJ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!