9mm Bullet performance


PDA






baccusboy
August 27, 2010, 09:16 PM
There is a guy on Youtube that does excellent scientific reviews of bullets and how they react after being fired into 1 gallon milk jugs filled with wet paper. Sometimes, he does denim tests, too.

The 147 grain Federal HST is arguably the best performer he's tested. 124gr. ain't bad, either. Notice how the pedals are cut, and thinner, to open at lower velocity -- and excellent example of bullet technology improvements. He does multiple bullets by different manufacturers:

147gr Federal HST Standard Pressure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpO5kPuQYrA&feature=related

Federal 124gr:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPLoSoGxsBA

Winchester Ranger Bonded 147gr:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZMgyqWgW7M

Speed Gold Dot 9mm 147gr (with comparo to the federal at end):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5aGOjyV6CU&feature=related

And here's the same Federal 147gr. going through bone, water jugs, denim, and paper:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtphDu3aBRc&feature=related



There is a 3rd Youtube test done by an individual on there that showed the same results. SO...... 3 independent tests showed the 147gr. Federal (for example) in standard pressure DID expand, and even after hitting bone. They're all impressed. You can hear what they have to say.

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm Bullet performance" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MikeNice
August 27, 2010, 11:46 PM
Some times we have to be careful listening to experts when they tell us what does and doesn't work. That is why I like visual tests.

I went searching for some of Ayoobs views on the 147 after reading the other thread. It appears that even he gets it wrong from time to time.



The LASD chose to go from the excellent 115 gr. Federal 9BP jacketed hollowpoint to a 147 gr. subsonic load. Nature took its course. The deputies discovered in the field that, when loaded with low-velocity hollowpoints, the 9mm was the impotent manstopper that Jeff Cooper had warned them about.

-Ayoob, Massad: “Safety, Safety, Safety.” American Handgunner, January/February 2001


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Sir, the information provided by Mr. Ayoob regarding poor performance of the 147gr 9mm is incorrect. This Department uses the Winchester [147gr] SXT and the performance of this bullet is outstanding."

-Bruce Harris, Training Bureau, Weapons Training, Biscailuz Center Range, Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (e-mail to Shawn Dodson, January 2001)



I found it in an article that criticizes many of Ayoobs works. However, I will not get in to that. One because it is not on topic, and two because Ayoob isn't here to defend his position.

I believe that we have to take anything that a "expert" tells us or shows us with a grain of salt. People get their information wrong sometimes for various reasons. The best thing to do is set up your own jugs and take some shots with the ammo you want to use.

It shouldn't cost you more than $10 for ten one gallon jugs of water, an old pair of pants, and the price of a bullet.

DasFriek
August 28, 2010, 12:41 AM
I have never been attacked by a milk jug, denim or a glob of gelatin in my life. Has anybody else ever been? I carry 124 grn NATO FMJ in 9 mm just like our military does. I know it works on bad guys because I have seen it work. Worst ammo choice ever!
If the GI's could they would use HP's over a fmj anyday.

basicblur
August 28, 2010, 12:46 AM
I went searching for some of Ayoobs views on the 147 after reading the other thread. It appears that even he gets it wrong from time to time.
Check the date on that (2001)-newer stuff from Ayoob sez he's now changed his stance on the 147 gr. due to design updates.
Check out this link (http://books.google.com/books?id=wiiUeexIMLIC&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=Ayoob+147&source=bl&ots=rvyacqOa8s&sig=dWqxampBtUDTB3obJ5i5M0-0ntI&hl=en&ei=e4V4TNP1FMKclgeS9eDrCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&sqi=2&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false) and read the section Since The Last Edition.
BTW-Ayoob's not the only one that was reporting problems with old 147 gr bullets.

Not gonna get into all the Ayoob bashing (true or not?), but I know there is one fella that apparently really has it in for him-someone in one o' these THRs posted the reason said fellow had it in for him was he was in a class taught by Ayoob, he was making a bit of an arse of himself, and Ayoob put him down PDQ with a Kubaton. Seems after that bit of embarrasment, the fellow really had it in for him.

True or not? :scrutiny:

Tilos
August 28, 2010, 12:47 AM
MikeNice:
um...he is here, I've read his posts

jon_in_wv
August 28, 2010, 01:42 AM
I have never been attacked by a milk jug, denim or a glob of gelatin in my life. Has anybody else ever been? I carry 124 grn NATO FMJ in 9 mm just like our military does. I know it works on bad guys because I have seen it work.


Its hard to argue with that logic.............


I would not use the word "scientific" to describe the tests above but I do think there is something to be learned from them. Heck I've conducted my own tests with my carry ammo and you do learn a bit from them. I had some Federal EFMJs on hand and I couldn't for the life of me get them to expand on anything I shot them at. I fired them at water filled jugs and sent two rounds through 6 jugs. I put a plywood backstop on the second shot and the bullet went straight through all six jugs and hit the plywood har enough to dent it and not one sign of expansion. Needless to say I'm not impressed with that it will never be a carry round for me. (BTW I tried it in wet newsprint and zero expansion again) I've gotten pretty interesting results from other rounds in those same tests. They aren't scientific but it does give you a little insight to what happens with these bullets, how they are constructed, how they penetrate, how apt they are to expand, etc..............I enjoyed his tests on YouTube.

918v
August 28, 2010, 03:26 AM
Here is a scientific study of an ancient 147gr JHP design:

http://www.reocities.com/alancook.geo/winchester_9mm.pdf

Bottom line, ancient 147gr JHP's work pretty well and Aboob is wrong.

Shadow 7D
August 28, 2010, 03:40 AM
Try www.boxotruth.com

they don't try to be scientific, rather they shoot stuff to see if what 'everybody says' is true or not... BTW, check out their articles about HD and drywall, sad truth is if it penetrates a human, going to do the same to a house. As for Mas, he is here, look him up on members, so he can defend what he has said and written

As for EFMJ, actually, dude, you prove they do what they are supposed to. I.E. the penetrate barriers like a FMJ with some expansion when the encounter human tissue, which BTW, water jugs are a poor simulation of.

Full Metal Jacket
August 28, 2010, 04:28 AM
i'm not a fan of 147 grn 9mm jhp's. it's a cartridge designed to perform best at weights of 115-124grn.

having said that, the HST 147 is the best performing one of that weight, and is the only one i would use if 147grn were my only choice. the rest don't expend very much, or with much consistency.

124grn HST's & 127 grn talons are some of the best.

MikeNice
August 28, 2010, 10:50 AM
Thank you to those that corrected me about Ayoob being here. I had not seen a post from him, and honestly assumed he would be too busy for internet forums.

I will look him up and send a PM to see if he will respond in this thread. Either way my post was not an attack on Massad. It was more to say that you should do your own research when possible. Anybody can make a mistake.

I have never been attacked by water jugs, jello, or denim. However, short of buying a pig carcass or shooting a person that is what we have. I rather have some form of test that shows me that a bullet performs properly. Trusting the manufacturer doesn't sit well with me when it comes to my life.

Shawn Dodson
August 28, 2010, 11:14 AM
I have never been attacked by a milk jug, denim or a glob of gelatin in my life.

From a terminal performance perspective gelatin is AN ENGINEERING EVALUATION TOOL to examine a bullet's behavior (penetration, deformation, fragmentation, and yaw) when it strikes and penetrates soft tissues.

From a wound ballistics perspective gelatin provides A REASONABLE INDICATION of a bullet's wounding characteristics in soft tissues.

massad ayoob
August 28, 2010, 12:54 PM
Mike, thanks for the PM.

The original 147 grain was not optimal, which is why LA County went to the SXT, with which they had much better luck. I believe they may be currently using its successor, the Ranger-T, also in 147 grain.

Technology has greatly improved the 147 grain subsonic over the years. The Federal HST, as some have noted, is another excellent example.

Time marches on. While I still prefer 124/127 grain JHP at P/+P+ velocity, there's no question that the 147 grain subsonic has improved over the years.

Best to all,
Mas

MikeNice
August 28, 2010, 01:38 PM
Massad, I have seen that Georgia Arms is marketing a 147gr +P HP.

In theory do you believe that a +P loading could help the 147gr round overcome some of its shortcomings? I am not asking asking about the Georgia Arms load in particular. I am more interested in why such a load is not more actively persued.

mec
August 28, 2010, 04:22 PM
these were shot through beef brisket and into a three gallon water jug. The performance appears about the same regardless of pistol barrel length. Bullet expansion is also about the same whether the media is beef brisket or plain jugged water or even wet pack telephone books.

jon_in_wv
August 28, 2010, 04:48 PM
As for EFMJ, actually, dude, you prove they do what they are supposed to. I.E. the penetrate barriers like a FMJ with some expansion when the encounter human tissue, which BTW, water jugs are a poor simulation of.

I understand that. BUT they are also supposed to expand on frontal impact with the target. After impacting the plywood they should have shown some expansion and they did not. I also disagree that they were designed to be some "smart" bullet that knows the difference between barriers and human tissue. They aren't and in my tests they failed and I have no faith in them compared to more proven rounds. You may like them just fine but I don't. Fair enough.

massad ayoob
August 28, 2010, 04:59 PM
Mike, I've never run across a shooting with a 147 grain +P 9mm.

best,
Mas

Full Metal Jacket
August 28, 2010, 07:30 PM
MikeNice:
um...he is here, I've read his posts

lol!

....or he could just be a "mas groupie"....:eek:

jon_in_wv
August 29, 2010, 10:36 AM
I have never been attacked by a milk jug, denim or a glob of gelatin in my life.

Chances are most people have never been attacked by ANYTHING in their life so using that logic, then its silly to carry a weapon at all.

ChCx2744
August 29, 2010, 08:12 PM
DasFriek
Worst ammo choice ever!
If the GI's could they would use HP's over a fmj anyday.
HP does seem a bit more suitable for SD application in pistol calibers, but FMJ has a history of cycling more reliably. Also, even FMJ's do some nasty damage if you aim for the right places. Shot placement is key.

basicblur
August 29, 2010, 09:36 PM
If the GI's could they would use HP's over a fmj anyday.
Different tools for different circumstances?
I'd imagine (conventions/agreements aside) the military probably wants more penetration, figuring the other side is probably going to be wearing some type of protection (helmets, body armor, accessories/barriers hung off a vest, etc).

Since I'm guessing your local home invader/public attacker is not going to be decked out like a battlefield combatant, think I'll stick with hollowpoints.

DasFriek
August 29, 2010, 09:41 PM
Thats odd as i dont remember seeing the Taliban wearing any body armor. Just the same clothes a citizen there wears.
Maybe in Iraq they seen more military armament on the soldiers, So i could see it there.

But for a everyday CCW i find fmj completly wrong for the job, Its just my opinion tho.

sxshep
August 30, 2010, 05:14 AM
I carry 147gr. HST +P in both my carry weapons... mostly because I picked up 100 rounds for $50, but also because the HST's have pretty impressive expansion and penetration

Ben86
August 30, 2010, 01:47 PM
I wouldn't say fmj is the wrong tool for the job, just not the ideal one. It gets the job done with proper placement, but the jhps will get it done much better. Also keep in mind that proper placement is a little difficult when you are being shot at, so you want the ammunition that will do the most damage.

Saying that you use it because the military does is ignoring the fact that they use it for reasons that do not apply to you. From what I undertand they use fmj because of the silly Hague convention, fmj is cheapest, functions most reliably, penetrates barriers better and is widely abundant. They also do not have to worry much at all about overpenetration from fmjs zipping threw skinny bad guys like we have to in a civilian setting.

More stopping power+decreased risk of overpenetration, the choice is obvious. It's better for you and the public at large. I'd love to be able to just stick with cheap fmj in my guns, but physics being what they are, it just doesn't make sense. I do purposely carry fmj when walking about my woods because a threat will most likely be a coyote, wild hog or bear and I want to make sure I have enough penetration to pierce their tough hide.

easyg
August 31, 2010, 11:15 AM
Comparing inches of penetration and milimeters of expansion is fun and all, but just about every modern 9mm load will penetrate deep enough to reach the vital organs of the average human.
Penetration is seldom the problem with the 9mm.
Heck, the 9mm FMJ will often over-penetrate the human body but perform even less effectively than the less penetrating 9mm hollow-point.

And sure, some will expand a bit while others will not....but we're only talking about a slightly larger hole.
This is why we all know that shot placement is king.

But there is more to bullet effectiveness than just penetration and expansion.
And from decades of folks getting shot with 9mm rounds, it seems that real life shootings just don't favor the 147g 9mm load so much.
Humans seem to go down faster when hit with the lighter and faster 9mm loads (like 115g).

Just my 2 cent's worth.

Shawn Dodson
September 1, 2010, 12:25 PM
And from decades of folks getting shot with 9mm rounds, it seems that real life shootings just don't favor the 147g 9mm load so much.
Humans seem to go down faster when hit with the lighter and faster 9mm loads (like 115g). "Seems" isn't supported by valid and verifiable data.

gofastman
September 1, 2010, 12:40 PM
"Seems" isn't supported by valid and verifiable data.
This is where someone brings up Marshal and Sanow's average incapacitation time "data" :rolleyes:

918v
September 1, 2010, 12:40 PM
Comparing inches of penetration and milimeters of expansion is fun and all, but just about every modern 9mm load will penetrate deep enough to reach the vital organs of the average human.
Penetration is seldom the problem with the 9mm.


That's only if you are considering frontal COM shots. Remember that gel represents an average penetration through a human. There are going to be some that underpenetrate and some that overpenetrate. If you read the link my previous post, you'll see that some of the 147gr bullets penetrated only 10". 115/124gr bullets would have penetrated even less, as they average about 20% less than the 147. I would be uncomfortable with a load whose penetration ranges from 8 to 16. A 10-18" load is better IMHO.

Ben86
September 1, 2010, 01:03 PM
People seem to place more importance on bullet weight when estimating penetration when the powder charge and actual physical design of the bullet are more important variables of penetration.

easyg
September 1, 2010, 04:36 PM
"Seems" isn't supported by valid and verifiable data.
Some folks will not believe that they're standing in a rainstorm unless the weatherman confirms it with "verifiable data". :rolleyes:

easyg
September 1, 2010, 04:42 PM
I would be uncomfortable with a load whose penetration ranges from 8 to 16. A 10-18" load is better IMHO.
Just shoot 9mm FMJ, of about any weight, and you should easily get that kind of penetration in the average human.

But as I stated earlier, there's more to stopping a human than bullet penetration.

Shawn Dodson
September 1, 2010, 07:30 PM
Some folks will not believe that they're standing in a rainstorm unless the weatherman confirms it with "verifiable data". You got evidence to share or just more unsupported opinion?

ohwell
September 1, 2010, 09:31 PM
I prefer the Hornady CD I dont want over penetration you should check with your state laws remember if you actually ever have to shoot, your responsible for that bullet from the time it leaves your gun until the time it stops. Your also only allowed to shoot until the threat is stopped. If he runs or drives away and you shoot through his car door your most likely going to jail, maybe for a long time. You need to pay a little more creed to the state and federal laws and less to FBI bullet penetration ratings.

918v
September 2, 2010, 02:19 AM
Actually, you are allowed to use deadly force to make a felony arrest in most states.

bds
September 2, 2010, 07:50 AM
gofastman:
This is where someone brings up Marshal and Sanow's average incapacitation time "data"
Not this time, as this thread is about 147 gr specific bullet improvement/performance. :D

AIT and ballistic pressure wave/hydrostatic shock is more relevant to 1200-1300+ fps generated by lighter/faster 115-124 gr bullets compared to sub 1000 fps generated by heavier 147 gr bullets.

However, I am happy to see enhancements being made to all calibers and bullet weights. More ammunition choices for us consumers, the better.

Ben86
September 2, 2010, 11:33 AM
Actually, you are allowed to use deadly force to make a felony arrest in most states.

This allowance has been lessened by the supreme court case Tennessee v Garner. In a nutshell you can use deadly force to stop a fleeing felon, but only if he is a clear and present danger to society if he gets away (terrorist, serial killer, active shooter). Even so, it is still frowned upon. If a citizen were to shoot a fleeing felon you can bet that person will catch all kinds of hell.

9mmepiphany
September 2, 2010, 02:22 PM
For those who might be interested in discussing the use of deadly force in felony situations, you can start a thread about it in the Strategies and Tactics sub-forum. Let try to stay on point here.

Thanks

Sidenote: this thread had more life in it than I thought, especially when you considered that I pruned it from a necro thread

Ben86
September 2, 2010, 03:38 PM
Sidenote: this thread had more life in it than I thought, especially when you considered that I pruned it from a necro thread

Good job Dr. Frankenstein. ;)

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm Bullet performance" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!