Self-defense pros and cons of Federal expanding full metal jacket rounds vs hollowpoints, please? I would think the efmj would feed better in some guns, but why use them over hollowpoints unless forced to in non-hollowpoint jurisdictions? Hollowpoints would of course cut flesh with the open metal petals better, what else? Just need some education, as I never considered using them; should I?
Federal EFMJ pros and cons?
- Thread starter becket
- Start date
- Status
Pros: legal in NJ, the UK, and other socialist regimes that ban HPs.
Cons: worse performance than a modern premium JHP. Smaller diameter and less penetration. Less reliable expansion through heavy clothing (contrary to Federal's marketing); apparently the clothing "cushions" the impact enough to mess with expansion. 20% don't expand at all, and 20% expand unevenly or only partially, on average, after hitting heavy clothing. And the broad meplat means they are just as likely to cause a jam as a JHP with a hollowpoint cavity the same size as the meplat.
Personally, I prefer heavier weight Remington Golden Sabers. They're a very robust design, and typically have excellent expansion, as well as excellent penetration. Especially in 9mm, they perform substantially better than most other loads. Only problem is that the lighter weight ones sometimes have a "problem" with core-jacket separation, though the seperation usually takes place after the 12" minimum penetration mark, so it's no big deal at all. And sticking to the heavier weight ones eliminates the problem.
Winchester Ranger Talons are okay, but some of the weights have shoddy and inconsistent performance (especially 155 gr .40 S&W), and Winchester's politics are abysmal (they refuse to do any ballistic testing whatsoever on their "personal defense" lines of ammo; only the law enforcement only ammunition gets tested). And in almost all calibers except for 230 gr .45 ACP (and even then, only some lots), the "talons" get folded back too far against the bullet shank to really be of much use, so they're mostly just a gimmick.
Gold Dots are also inconsistent in certain weights (9mm 115 gr, .40 S&W 165 gr, .45 ACP 200 gr), and may have troubles penetrating winter coats, as opposed to the generic IWBA "heavy clothing" (a recent shooting involving 180 gr .40 caliber Gold Dots had 4 out of 6 bullets failing to penetrate through the abdominal muscle of a very skinny beanpole of a perp, after going through a down parka). They're not a very robust design, and get screwed up more easily than bullets with tougher jackets.
Federal HST and Federal Tactical have impressive "on paper" expansion and penetration figures, but they most likely have the same problem as Gold Dots; lack of robustness, causing them to expand in very heavy clothing before even hitting the perp, resulting in ridiculously shallow penetration. That's only speculation on my part, though. But in general, bullet designs in which the lead core splits into "petals" along with the jacket/plating do tend to be less robust than other designs.
Hornady XTPs usually have problems expanding after encountering heavy clothing. But I guess that's better than overexpanding and underpenetrating, right?
Winchester Silvertips, Federal Hydra-Shoks, and other previous generation "premium" bullets all fall into the same category as the "budget" cheapos. Performance in bare gelatin is usually acceptable, but throw on some heavy clothing, and you've got the equivalent of an FMJ.
Cons: worse performance than a modern premium JHP. Smaller diameter and less penetration. Less reliable expansion through heavy clothing (contrary to Federal's marketing); apparently the clothing "cushions" the impact enough to mess with expansion. 20% don't expand at all, and 20% expand unevenly or only partially, on average, after hitting heavy clothing. And the broad meplat means they are just as likely to cause a jam as a JHP with a hollowpoint cavity the same size as the meplat.
Personally, I prefer heavier weight Remington Golden Sabers. They're a very robust design, and typically have excellent expansion, as well as excellent penetration. Especially in 9mm, they perform substantially better than most other loads. Only problem is that the lighter weight ones sometimes have a "problem" with core-jacket separation, though the seperation usually takes place after the 12" minimum penetration mark, so it's no big deal at all. And sticking to the heavier weight ones eliminates the problem.
Winchester Ranger Talons are okay, but some of the weights have shoddy and inconsistent performance (especially 155 gr .40 S&W), and Winchester's politics are abysmal (they refuse to do any ballistic testing whatsoever on their "personal defense" lines of ammo; only the law enforcement only ammunition gets tested). And in almost all calibers except for 230 gr .45 ACP (and even then, only some lots), the "talons" get folded back too far against the bullet shank to really be of much use, so they're mostly just a gimmick.
Gold Dots are also inconsistent in certain weights (9mm 115 gr, .40 S&W 165 gr, .45 ACP 200 gr), and may have troubles penetrating winter coats, as opposed to the generic IWBA "heavy clothing" (a recent shooting involving 180 gr .40 caliber Gold Dots had 4 out of 6 bullets failing to penetrate through the abdominal muscle of a very skinny beanpole of a perp, after going through a down parka). They're not a very robust design, and get screwed up more easily than bullets with tougher jackets.
Federal HST and Federal Tactical have impressive "on paper" expansion and penetration figures, but they most likely have the same problem as Gold Dots; lack of robustness, causing them to expand in very heavy clothing before even hitting the perp, resulting in ridiculously shallow penetration. That's only speculation on my part, though. But in general, bullet designs in which the lead core splits into "petals" along with the jacket/plating do tend to be less robust than other designs.
Hornady XTPs usually have problems expanding after encountering heavy clothing. But I guess that's better than overexpanding and underpenetrating, right?
Winchester Silvertips, Federal Hydra-Shoks, and other previous generation "premium" bullets all fall into the same category as the "budget" cheapos. Performance in bare gelatin is usually acceptable, but throw on some heavy clothing, and you've got the equivalent of an FMJ.
Lone_Gunman
Member
Some people say the EFMJ's will feed more like regular FMJ's and not be subject to hanging up as much as JHP's. But the EFMJ is not a round-nose design; its a truncated cone, and has a more blunt shape than most JHPs.
Nicky Santoro
Member
Some interesting info here.. http://www.raoulwagner.com/tests.htm
GunNut
Member
Here is how I would determine what to carry in your CCW/HD weapon:
1. www.tacticalforums.com
2. Click on "The Terminal Effects Forum"
3. Click on the 5th sticky titled "Recomended Duty/Self Defense Pistol Loads."
4. Pick a load listed in the recommended section.
Steve
1. www.tacticalforums.com
2. Click on "The Terminal Effects Forum"
3. Click on the 5th sticky titled "Recomended Duty/Self Defense Pistol Loads."
4. Pick a load listed in the recommended section.
Steve
Thanks all, lots of good info I was not aware of. EFMJ, out! I have carry GD, but haven't considered the super heavy clothing penetration factor here in Florida that much, but there are a few weeks it gets that cold. Lots of denim around though 
. I have heard poor things about the Federal personal defense rounds I carried before, so I switched to GD's. I have recently shot some of the Corbon XTP +P, and my pistols like them in 9mm and .40, so I may go with them instead. Bullet placement is the main thing of course, but only if you can get it into the place you're aiming at....
. I have heard poor things about the Federal personal defense rounds I carried before, so I switched to GD's. I have recently shot some of the Corbon XTP +P, and my pistols like them in 9mm and .40, so I may go with them instead. Bullet placement is the main thing of course, but only if you can get it into the place you're aiming at....Bobo
Member
Here's a few sites of people that have tested EFMJ's in various materials:
http://ammoman.com/40_EP_DESC.htm
http://stevespages.com/page8f.htm
http://www.brassfetcher.com/var919mm.html
http://ammoman.com/40_EP_DESC.htm
http://stevespages.com/page8f.htm
http://www.brassfetcher.com/var919mm.html
Those were some great sites. I would like to add some real life experiences with the EFMJ. When I could get them in 45acp, I shot them in my 5" Springfield 1911. I hunted with them twice on feral hogs here in Texas and they did the job quite nicely. One of the hogs weighed just below 300lbs and the bullet penetrated 14" and destroyed the heat and lungs. The other hog was a little over 200lbs and the bullet was found lodged between ribs on the other side of entry. That hog rolled like it had been hit by a 18 wheeler. Both mushroomed nicely but the one that wedged between the ribs had one of the brass extensions on each side missing. Both were shot within 50 yards of where I was standing.
I have also shot a large coyote at a little over 50 yards, with the same gun, and the EFMJ dropped him in his tracks. Man I wish I could still get them in 230gr 45acp. I would carry them without question.
I might try them in my 9mm.....just havent as of yet.
bigmike45
I have also shot a large coyote at a little over 50 yards, with the same gun, and the EFMJ dropped him in his tracks. Man I wish I could still get them in 230gr 45acp. I would carry them without question.
I might try them in my 9mm.....just havent as of yet.
bigmike45
- Status
