Need Objective Gel Testing Results: 147-gr. HST versus Ranger T


PDA






147 Grain
October 31, 2010, 01:26 PM
Looking for objective gel testing results that directly compares 9mm 147-gr. Federal's HST (P9HST4 +P or P9HST2 standard pressure) to Winchester Ranger (RA9T) 147-gr.

Thank-you in advance of your technical assistance!

If you enjoyed reading about "Need Objective Gel Testing Results: 147-gr. HST versus Ranger T" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ProCarryNAustin
October 31, 2010, 05:28 PM
Federal does a traveling demonstration.
http://le.atk.com/

I believe this one includes the comparison you are looking for.
http://le.atk.com/pdf/LosAngelesWBW.pdf

DonRon
October 31, 2010, 07:27 PM
I have never been attacked by gelatin but you might find some interesting stuff here.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/

ProCarryNAustin
October 31, 2010, 08:17 PM
I have never been attacked by gelatin but you might find some interesting stuff here.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/
Gelatin is used as a common test medium so that rounds can be compared against each other in a controlled environment. More consistent than wet newspaper and more politically correct and consistent than using living tissue.

DonRon
October 31, 2010, 09:45 PM
Gelatin is used as a common test medium so that rounds can be compared against each other in a controlled environment. More consistent than wet newspaper and more politically correct and consistent than using living tissue.
I allways dealt with the real thing in my OIS reports and in my Military career.


My unbiased opinion after 40 years, Any bullet shot from any gun is capable of inflicted a mortal wound on a human body.

KyJim
October 31, 2010, 09:52 PM
My unbiased opinion after 40 years, Any bullet shot from any gun is capable of inflicted a mortal wound on a human body.Nobody will dispute that. From the tone of your responses, however, I assume you carry a tiny Beretta in .22 short?

ProCarryNAustin
October 31, 2010, 11:14 PM
People can be very different in their physique and in their attitude of the moment. Each shooting is different. This makes it very hard to compare two different rounds.

I stand by my previous statement. Gelatin as a medium is used to test different rounds in a controlled environment.

KyJim,
Last I recall, DonRon's ammo of choice was 9mm FMJ. Only person I know that would even marginally recommend such a round given the other choices available.

DonRon
"Our Military uses 9mm 124 gr NATO FMJ with remarkable success and the are not being attacked by ballistic gelatin either. That's a no brainier for me. "

DonRon
October 31, 2010, 11:44 PM
People can be very different in their physique and in their attitude of the moment. Each shooting is different. This makes it very hard to compare two different rounds.

I stand by my previous statement. Gelatin as a medium is used to test different rounds in a controlled environment.

KyJim,
Last I recall, DonRon's ammo of choice was 9mm FMJ. Only person I know that would even marginally recommend such a round given the other choices available.

DonRon
"Our Military uses 9mm 124 gr NATO FMJ with remarkable success and the are not being attacked by ballistic gelatin either. That's a no brainier for me. "
I carry FMJ in my Kahr CW 40 and FMJ NATO in my Glock 26 and my wife carries FMJ NATO 9 mm in a Kel Tec PF 9. In a self defense gun I leave nothing to chance and the possible mis feed of a hollow point round. Now just tell me when you would like to stand in front of any of them to see how effective they can be. Once again, our Military is having remarkable success with FMJ in the sandbox. My son just returned from his 3rd deployment and tells me of his first hand knowledge as he has seen with his own eyes. There is no need to bash FMJ ammo sir.

DonRon
October 31, 2010, 11:54 PM
Nobody will dispute that. From the tone of your responses, however, I assume you carry a tiny Beretta in .22 short?
Well if nobody can dispute that then why if this discussion going forward. In your own words it is indisputable. Now with that said, if you want to waste your money on that hyped up jacked up ammunition far be it from me to dissuade you. It's your money.

Skribs
November 1, 2010, 12:10 AM
In a self defense gun I leave nothing to chance and the possible mis feed of a hollow point round.

First time shooting my XDM, a bad reload FMJ got stuck in the barrel and all the hollow points I shot went through just fine.

Any bullet shot from any gun is capable of inflicted a mortal wound on a human body.

I don't think that's what people are concerned about, however. From what I've read, people are concerned with thinks like, "Is this bullet likely to actually hit the person inside the denim vest?" "Is this bullet likely to dirty up my gun?" "Is this bullet likely to go through three walls and hit my neighbors kitty?" It's kind of like with math, when given the formula 5x5, you can go to a calculator and do 5+5+5+5+5 or you can do 5*5. They'll both get you to 25, but one does it more efficiently.

ProCarryNAustin
November 1, 2010, 09:30 AM
DonRon,

I am simply trying to resolve your statements about expanding ammunition against what I see in the world as they seem to be entirely contradictory. I see two camps.

On one hand...
The US military which has chosen to abide by certain international conventions and uses FMJ. From what I have read, neither of these conventions state that FMJ was chosen for its effectiveness.

On the other hand...
Every agency that has a choice and chooses not to use FMJ. These include both government and civilian agencies including the New Jersey Police and DOJ which you claim to have worked in. I have done a lot of searching recently and for the life of me, I cannot find a single agency that, when given a choice, opts for FMJ. Not a single one.

"Now with that said, if you want to waste your money on that hyped up jacked up ammunition far be it from me to dissuade you."

Seems like everyone, not just a majority, is lining up to waste their money on hyped up, jacked up ammunition. I would challenge you to find a single US government or non-government agency that has decided that FMJ is the way to go.

As far as your comments about 9mm FMJ and its effectiveness in the sandbox, yours are the only positive statements I have read. Everything else seems to be very negative... very, very negative.

FastMover
November 1, 2010, 09:55 AM
Eh hem...
Our military does not use expanding bullets because they are better. They use them because they are against NATO rulings. I thank your son for serving our country, however, I have several contradicting accounts of failure to neutralize from the M9 supplied by the USMC and also the BHP supplied to the Canadian's.



Law
The Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III, prohibits the use in international warfare of bullets which easily expand or flatten in the body, giving as example a bullet with a jacket with incisions or one that does not fully cover the core.[13] This prohibition was an expansion of the Declaration of St Petersburg in 1868, which banned exploding projectiles of less than 400 grams.

Because of the greater effectiveness in disabling or killing the target, the use of expanding rounds remains legal, or even required, in some circumstances. Examples of this are use of appropriately expanding bullets in hunting, where it is desirable to stop the animal quickly either to prevent loss of a game animal, or ensure a humane death of vermin, and in law enforcement or self defense, where quickly neutralizing an aggressor may be needed to prevent further loss of life.[14][15]

My reference cited is "Expanding Bullets" via Wikipedia.

MikeNice
November 1, 2010, 10:51 AM
Thanks for the information Pro Carry. It was definitely informative and interesting.

To everybody else, haven't we argued FMJ v. HP more than enough times. If people believe FMJ is the best choice for reliability, then let them. If they believe it is more effective in wounding or killing, roll your eyes and move on. At this point it is just derailing the original thread.

I have a question. Would the HST's performance be similar in a 3" barell? Would it be neccesary to run the +p for equal performance?

DonRon
November 1, 2010, 12:39 PM
Eh hem...
Our military does not use expanding bullets because they are better. They use them because they are against NATO rulings. I thank your son for serving our country, however, I have several contradicting accounts of failure to neutralize from the M9 supplied by the USMC and also the BHP supplied to the Canadian's.



Law
The Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III, prohibits the use in international warfare of bullets which easily expand or flatten in the body, giving as example a bullet with a jacket with incisions or one that does not fully cover the core.[13] This prohibition was an expansion of the Declaration of St Petersburg in 1868, which banned exploding projectiles of less than 400 grams.

Because of the greater effectiveness in disabling or killing the target, the use of expanding rounds remains legal, or even required, in some circumstances. Examples of this are use of appropriately expanding bullets in hunting, where it is desirable to stop the animal quickly either to prevent loss of a game animal, or ensure a humane death of vermin, and in law enforcement or self defense, where quickly neutralizing an aggressor may be needed to prevent further loss of life.[14][15]

My reference cited is "Expanding Bullets" via Wikipedia.
We have used FMJ and round nosed bullets in warfare for hundreds of years now with remarkable success. A LEO's first weapon of choice in a gun fight is a 12 gauge shotgun shooting 9 round .38 caliber size pellets at the aggressor.

There is absolutely no evidence that hollow point bullets stop human beings any faster the solid ones. I use FMJ for another reason, They break hip bones easier. Blood loss kills an aggressor. You can blow his heart out his back with a super duper hollow point and it will still take several minutes for blood loss and lake of oxygen to the brain to shut down the central nervous system causing death. A lot can happen in that time. Especially if he is hyped up on drugs and feeling no pain. We ran into this with the VC in Nam. You could blast them with a .45 three or four times and they would just keep coming. We started hip shooting to knock them down. The .38 revolvers were better for this if you had to use a handgun. The 5.56 NATO was very effective at this.

DonRon
November 1, 2010, 12:44 PM
DonRon,

I am simply trying to resolve your statements about expanding ammunition against what I see in the world as they seem to be entirely contradictory. I see two camps.

On one hand...
The US military which has chosen to abide by certain international conventions and uses FMJ. From what I have read, neither of these conventions state that FMJ was chosen for its effectiveness.

On the other hand...
Every agency that has a choice and chooses not to use FMJ. These include both government and civilian agencies including the New Jersey Police and DOJ which you claim to have worked in. I have done a lot of searching recently and for the life of me, I cannot find a single agency that, when given a choice, opts for FMJ. Not a single one.

"Now with that said, if you want to waste your money on that hyped up jacked up ammunition far be it from me to dissuade you."

Seems like everyone, not just a majority, is lining up to waste their money on hyped up, jacked up ammunition. I would challenge you to find a single US government or non-government agency that has decided that FMJ is the way to go.

As far as your comments about 9mm FMJ and its effectiveness in the sandbox, yours are the only positive statements I have read. Everything else seems to be very negative... very, very negative.
Just to prove a point, I spoke to some of the returning troops at Ft. Campbell KY 101 Airborne where my son has a command and they stated the M9 with NATO FMJ is far superior to the 1911 for combat. This is also where I get my 9MM NATO ammo from.

ProCarryNAustin
November 1, 2010, 01:04 PM
Again DonRon, please feel free to provide a single government or non-government agency not bound by the Hague convention that has opted for FMJ over hollowpoint bullets.

That way it would not be your personal opinion against every agency I have ever heard of including ones you have claimed to serve in (New Jersey State Police and DOJ).

FastMover
November 1, 2010, 01:28 PM
I suggest we start a new thread about this so not to derail the OP's thread. Let's keep it civil. I believe we can have an educated debate without getting out of control.

Please see. "Ammunition Effectiveness"

mljdeckard
November 1, 2010, 02:51 PM
Most of the kids in the army have never handled anything other than their issue sidearm, if they were issued one at all, which isn't most of them. And almost none of the ones that were issued one actually shot anyone with it. Soldiers aren't trained about anything other than the weapon and ammunition they carry, they have no knowledge or background to compare it to.

dom1104
November 1, 2010, 02:59 PM
There is absolutely no evidence that hollow point bullets stop human beings any faster the solid ones. I use FMJ for another reason, They break hip bones easier. Blood loss kills an aggressor. You can blow his heart out his back with a super duper hollow point and it will still take several minutes for blood loss and lake of oxygen to the brain to shut down the central nervous system causing death. A lot can happen in that time. Especially if he is hyped up on drugs and feeling no pain. We ran into this with the VC in Nam. You could blast them with a .45 three or four times and they would just keep coming. We started hip shooting to knock them down. The .38 revolvers were better for this if you had to use a handgun. The 5.56 NATO was very effective at this. .


I gotta be honest, I just dont have patience for stuff like this anymore.


5 minutes ago I thought to myself "Hey, I will pop in on THR, see whats going on there, havent been there in a long time"...

Not the best idea I have had in a while.

DonRon
November 1, 2010, 03:05 PM
I gotta be honest, I just dont have patience for stuff like this anymore.


5 minutes ago I thought to myself "Hey, I will pop in on THR, see whats going on there, havent been there in a long time"...

Not the best idea I have had in a while.
Now I will be honest. Any caliber bullet regardless of caliber or shape is capable of inflicting a mortal wound on the human body. That is indisputable! Don't make this into a caliber war. Lets just deal with facts and not speculation and personal preferences.

dom1104
November 1, 2010, 03:08 PM
DonRon, in the last few minutes I have read your... many posts, I just dont have time for you.

You obviously know everything already, carry on in peace and with my blessing. Its America, carry whatever you like.

withdrawn34
November 1, 2010, 03:12 PM
We've used swords in combat very effectively for tens of thousands of years; it doesn't mean there isn't something better. Same thing could be said for FMJ vs. JHP.

I carry Gold Dots (JHP) in 45 ACP as my carry round. You don't have to.

DonRon
November 1, 2010, 03:16 PM
We've used swords in combat very effectively for tens of thousands of years; it doesn't mean there isn't something better. Same thing could be said for FMJ vs. JHP.

I carry Gold Dots (JHP) in 45 ACP as my carry round. You don't have to.
Actually, a sword is more lethal than a bullet. Just research how many people actually survive hand gun wounds. You are in for a real surprise just how ineffective the handgun really is.

DonRon
November 1, 2010, 03:19 PM
DonRon, in the last few minutes I have read your... many posts, I just dont have time for you.

You obviously know everything already, carry on in peace and with my blessing. Its America, carry whatever you like.
Best wishes to you friend!

DonRon
November 1, 2010, 03:24 PM
Most of the kids in the army have never handled anything other than their issue sidearm, if they were issued one at all, which isn't most of them. And almost none of the ones that were issued one actually shot anyone with it. Soldiers aren't trained about anything other than the weapon and ammunition they carry, they have no knowledge or background to compare it to.
That's a bold uninformed statement. You are saying that every solder never had any gun experience, went hunting with his father of uncle or had a .22 caliber plinker. This is the absence of fact that creates misinformation. I call it blind speculation.

Airborne Falcon
November 1, 2010, 03:37 PM
I allways dealt with the real thing in my OIS reports and in my Military career.

My unbiased opinion after 40 years, Any bullet shot from any gun is capable of inflicted a mortal wound on a human body.


Oh Good Lord. They are everywhere these days. There is no escaping them.

Anyways, thanks for the links ProCarryNAustin and, fwiw, I agree with you 100%. And I do have enough military background and history, both as one of Uncle Sugar's elites and in the Private Contractor arena, to know that what you are stating is correct.

With regard to 147's OP, it's an interesting, although common, question.

Here is a decent video test of the HST:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpO5kPuQYrA

Supposedly, the Hornady FTX beats them all these days. Here is that test:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD6Re_Gwcwc

And then you asked about the Winchester Ranger SXT, here you go:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY05GU8ZNfc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZMgyqWgW7M

Hope this might answer your question to some degree, although not under the exact standards you dreamed-up.

Sevenfaces
November 1, 2010, 03:40 PM
Wow, another thread where Donron just spouts off nonsense while trying to start an argument.

mljdeckard
November 1, 2010, 03:46 PM
I don't speak in absolutes. You do. I said most. Not every. Not none. And yes, most soldiers have had little or no experience handling firearms prior to joining the army.

I have trained MANY soldiers to use handguns, as recently as THIS MORNING, I don't see how this could be either blind OR speculative.

mljdeckard
November 1, 2010, 03:48 PM
The only one making bold statements unsupported by fact is RonDon. I invite others to join me in rendering him the honor of being the second member in my long THR history to go into my ignore list.

Happy 7000th post to me, btw.

mljdeckard
November 1, 2010, 03:54 PM
And if you need to modify posts to avoid looking foolish, perhaps you should write them more carefully in the first place.

Airborne Falcon
November 1, 2010, 03:55 PM
I had to look for it, but by comparison, here is what I carry when I am carrying my handloads - and I've always like the Speer Gold Dot - I have no idea why there are so many other favorite flavors out there these days, but there are:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5aGOjyV6CU

KyJim
November 1, 2010, 09:00 PM
There is absolutely no evidence that hollow point bullets stop human beings any faster the solid ones.
There is absolutely no evidence that a 9mm bullet stops humans any faster than a .177 caliber pellet.

See how easy it is to make an outrageous statement? See if you can disprove this statement. I can for the same reason a hollow point with adequate penetration is generally better than a FMJ in the same caliber.

"Stopping power" (I hate using the term) depends upon adequate penetration first and permanent would cavity second. If an expanding bullet penetrates adequately, the expansion causes a larger wound cavity. That's a fancy way of saying a bigger hole bleeds faster than a smaller hole. Bleeding faster means physical shock sets in faster.

There's a wealth of information about this out there and I'm certainly not going to waste my time finding it for you because you obviously won't even consider it.

If you enjoyed reading about "Need Objective Gel Testing Results: 147-gr. HST versus Ranger T" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!