Tony_the_tiger
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2011
- Messages
- 905
Since I have no gelatin or other way to do standardized ballistic testing, and I wanted to compare different ammo for our S&W 296 .44 special snub (2.5" barrel, titanium cylinder, aluminum or scandium frame, centennial design), I settled on 1 gallon water jugs.
The purpose of this test was to see which I was most accurate with and then to put them through the water to see what happens and help me come to a decision about which rounds to carry.
Ammo Tested:
a) Buffalo Bore .44 Special 200 Grain Hardcast Wadcutter
b) Buffalo-Barnes .44 Special 200 Grain Tac-XP
c) Underwood .44 Special 200 Grain Gold Dot
d) Corbon .44 Special 200 Grain DPX
Results:
a) BB .44 special HC Wadcutter
Buffalo Bore advertises this as 913 fps out of a 296 revolver - exactly the gun I am shooting with today. Out of a bigger gun it approaches and eventually exceeds 1000 fps.
I found this round to be too much for the lightweight snub, and I am choosing not to carry it based on recoil and the amount of pain it did to my hand. I did shoot it through jugs and it penetrated through 4 gallon jugs completely before veering off into the great unknown (probably due to my accuracy). The bullet was not recovered. I'll save this round for a heavier gun. Awesome bullet profile and penetration through jugs, but inaccurate for me in a light gun. Time to move on.
b) Buffalo Barnes .44 special Tac-XP
Based on my cursory analysis, this 200 grain Tac-XP bullet from barnes is the same used by Corbon in their DPX branded ammo. The difference is how hot they are loaded.
Buffalo bore has clocked this at 1017 fps from a S&W 296, the gun I am using today. From a 4 inch barrel and larger, it is approaching 1100 fps - wow!
This round hurt my hand so much in the lightweight snub that I didn't want to shoot it any more. Not only that, but it was very inaccurate for me due to this. I think this would be a fantastic round for a heavier steel gun with a longer barrel. For the lightweight .44 special snub, this round is way too much to carry and due to the pain, I made a choice not to shoot this through the jugs.
c) Underwood Gold Dot
Underwood has taken the Gold Dot round and loaded it to 1100fps. However, Underwood does not specify the barrel length that it was tested on and when I called them they were unable to tell me or remember which barrel it was tested on. Given that, I have to assume they were not testing it on a snub. I have no idea how fast this bullet was going in the 296, however this had better accuracy and less perceived recoil than the Buffalo Bore rounds even though it is supposedly pushing a similarly weighted projectile at comparable speeds.
This round as fired out of the 2.5 296 snub penetrated 3 one gallon jugs completely and was recovered inside of the 4 water jug.
This round totally blew up the first water jug it entered, did respectable damage to the second jug, and was recovered in good shape - however, it looked like a petal would soon come off.
Back in 2009 a member of a different forum pushed the .200 grain .44 special gold dot to comparable velocity and found that it shattered (http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/78419-interesting-results-44-gold-dot.html)
My results are not consistent with their test. However as posted above it does look like it may be going pretty fast for the .44 special gold dot however I am pleased with the result - projectile recovered in tact, with pretty gnarly curves and just look at what it did to the first water jug:
I might carry this round but I want to test it again for accuracy and through some more jugs.
d) Corbon DPX 200 grain
This is likely the same bullet used in the Buffalo Barnes round. I first came to this rounds attention through the work of Stephen Camp (R.I.P) http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Corbon 44 Special DPX Report.htm
Stephen clocked it at 998 - 1046 fps out of a 3" Taurus 431.
Corbon themselves published them at 950 ft/s from a 4.0 inch test barrel.
However, two reports on the web I have read shooting this load out of snubs only achieved around 650 ft/s out of the round.
I have no idea how fast it is going out of the 2.5" S&W 296.
However, the round penetrated completely through 3 one gallon jugs and came to rest in the 4th jug.
A second shot penetrated through 3 one gallon jugs and bounced off the 4th jug.
This round was very accurate for me and had the least perceived recoil of the four rounds.
Discussion:
Based on my results today, and with exception to the fact that a water jug is not an ideal ballistic medium, I have limited my current carry choices to the .44 special Gold Dot by Underwood and the .44 special DPX by Corbon.
Both penetrated through 3 jugs completely. I daresay the DPX looks about perfect on expansion, which is the reputation they have. However, without a chronograph I have concerns about the low speeds published by others. I called Barnes and they noted 700 as the speed needed for this round to expand well. That still doesn't tell me how it performed in terms of velocity today.
Re: the Gold Dot, I do have concerns about the damage to the petal and reports on the web about .44 special gold dot failure. I'd love to know how fast these are going out of the 2.5" but that will be impossible until I get a chronograph. The Underwood Gold Dot had the most impressive damage to the water jug as evidenced above.
Right now I will probably carry the DPX for accuracy however, having narrowed down my options to 2 out of the original 4 choices I do think another range session is warranted where these rounds can be further tested for accuracy and water jug penetration/expansion.
I had considered carrying the Buffalo Bore rounds however in the snub, accuracy is king and I feel those rounds were designed for a heavier gun.
DPX and Underwood Gold Dot - winners of today's water jug shootout.
Thoughts, comments, and discussion are welcome. Do you think that Gold Dot looks damaged or within acceptable parameters? How do you feel about the DPX and Gold Dot penetrating completely through 3 water jugs even though we don't know how fast they are going?
There are several other nice looking .44 special rounds however today's testing is limited to what I had on hand. .
Thanks for hearing me out.
-Triple T
The purpose of this test was to see which I was most accurate with and then to put them through the water to see what happens and help me come to a decision about which rounds to carry.
Ammo Tested:
a) Buffalo Bore .44 Special 200 Grain Hardcast Wadcutter
b) Buffalo-Barnes .44 Special 200 Grain Tac-XP
c) Underwood .44 Special 200 Grain Gold Dot
d) Corbon .44 Special 200 Grain DPX
Results:
a) BB .44 special HC Wadcutter
Buffalo Bore advertises this as 913 fps out of a 296 revolver - exactly the gun I am shooting with today. Out of a bigger gun it approaches and eventually exceeds 1000 fps.
I found this round to be too much for the lightweight snub, and I am choosing not to carry it based on recoil and the amount of pain it did to my hand. I did shoot it through jugs and it penetrated through 4 gallon jugs completely before veering off into the great unknown (probably due to my accuracy). The bullet was not recovered. I'll save this round for a heavier gun. Awesome bullet profile and penetration through jugs, but inaccurate for me in a light gun. Time to move on.
b) Buffalo Barnes .44 special Tac-XP
Based on my cursory analysis, this 200 grain Tac-XP bullet from barnes is the same used by Corbon in their DPX branded ammo. The difference is how hot they are loaded.
Buffalo bore has clocked this at 1017 fps from a S&W 296, the gun I am using today. From a 4 inch barrel and larger, it is approaching 1100 fps - wow!
This round hurt my hand so much in the lightweight snub that I didn't want to shoot it any more. Not only that, but it was very inaccurate for me due to this. I think this would be a fantastic round for a heavier steel gun with a longer barrel. For the lightweight .44 special snub, this round is way too much to carry and due to the pain, I made a choice not to shoot this through the jugs.
c) Underwood Gold Dot
Underwood has taken the Gold Dot round and loaded it to 1100fps. However, Underwood does not specify the barrel length that it was tested on and when I called them they were unable to tell me or remember which barrel it was tested on. Given that, I have to assume they were not testing it on a snub. I have no idea how fast this bullet was going in the 296, however this had better accuracy and less perceived recoil than the Buffalo Bore rounds even though it is supposedly pushing a similarly weighted projectile at comparable speeds.
This round as fired out of the 2.5 296 snub penetrated 3 one gallon jugs completely and was recovered inside of the 4 water jug.
This round totally blew up the first water jug it entered, did respectable damage to the second jug, and was recovered in good shape - however, it looked like a petal would soon come off.
Back in 2009 a member of a different forum pushed the .200 grain .44 special gold dot to comparable velocity and found that it shattered (http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/78419-interesting-results-44-gold-dot.html)
My results are not consistent with their test. However as posted above it does look like it may be going pretty fast for the .44 special gold dot however I am pleased with the result - projectile recovered in tact, with pretty gnarly curves and just look at what it did to the first water jug:
I might carry this round but I want to test it again for accuracy and through some more jugs.
d) Corbon DPX 200 grain
This is likely the same bullet used in the Buffalo Barnes round. I first came to this rounds attention through the work of Stephen Camp (R.I.P) http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Corbon 44 Special DPX Report.htm
Stephen clocked it at 998 - 1046 fps out of a 3" Taurus 431.
Corbon themselves published them at 950 ft/s from a 4.0 inch test barrel.
However, two reports on the web I have read shooting this load out of snubs only achieved around 650 ft/s out of the round.
I have no idea how fast it is going out of the 2.5" S&W 296.
However, the round penetrated completely through 3 one gallon jugs and came to rest in the 4th jug.
A second shot penetrated through 3 one gallon jugs and bounced off the 4th jug.
This round was very accurate for me and had the least perceived recoil of the four rounds.
Discussion:
Based on my results today, and with exception to the fact that a water jug is not an ideal ballistic medium, I have limited my current carry choices to the .44 special Gold Dot by Underwood and the .44 special DPX by Corbon.
Both penetrated through 3 jugs completely. I daresay the DPX looks about perfect on expansion, which is the reputation they have. However, without a chronograph I have concerns about the low speeds published by others. I called Barnes and they noted 700 as the speed needed for this round to expand well. That still doesn't tell me how it performed in terms of velocity today.
Re: the Gold Dot, I do have concerns about the damage to the petal and reports on the web about .44 special gold dot failure. I'd love to know how fast these are going out of the 2.5" but that will be impossible until I get a chronograph. The Underwood Gold Dot had the most impressive damage to the water jug as evidenced above.
Right now I will probably carry the DPX for accuracy however, having narrowed down my options to 2 out of the original 4 choices I do think another range session is warranted where these rounds can be further tested for accuracy and water jug penetration/expansion.
I had considered carrying the Buffalo Bore rounds however in the snub, accuracy is king and I feel those rounds were designed for a heavier gun.
DPX and Underwood Gold Dot - winners of today's water jug shootout.
Thoughts, comments, and discussion are welcome. Do you think that Gold Dot looks damaged or within acceptable parameters? How do you feel about the DPX and Gold Dot penetrating completely through 3 water jugs even though we don't know how fast they are going?
There are several other nice looking .44 special rounds however today's testing is limited to what I had on hand. .
Thanks for hearing me out.
-Triple T
Last edited: