Latest Lucky Gunner Labs tests

Very impressive, the layout and graphics are superb. Great resource

I give a major hat tip to the Lucky Gunner folks for doing that. Superb data in a great and easily understandable format!

Anyone else surprised by the Gold Dot failures?

Wad cutters over a firm charge is the way to go in the .38 snub.

Lucky Gunner's tests are really impressive in terms of the data and accompanying videos and photos.

I have to say, I was a little surprised at the performance of some of the .357 Magnum rounds and their lack of expansion. It seems like they're more dependent on velocity than I realized.

AZAndy

Thanks for posting the link and a big "thank you" to Lucky Gunner Labs for all of the testing and data that they compiled.

Cooldill said:

Wad cutters over a firm charge is the way to go in the .38 snub.

Click to expand...

Hornady FTX did well, too, but I was surprised by the ideal penetration of the 148-gr. Winchester wadcutter. I would have expected too much, but nearly 16" on the dot from a snubnose is perfect.

I would like to see numbers on the 150gr full wadcutters from Buffalo Bore.

Anyone else surprised by the Gold Dot failures?

Click to expand...

Yep. I might just start carrying wadcutters. Their penetration was consistent and we know they are accurate. Seems like 100 or so FPS makes a big difference when it comes to expansion with a lot of the rounds.

Madcap_Magician said:

I was surprised by the ideal penetration of the 148-gr. Winchester wadcutter.

Click to expand...

I personally think the 147gr bullets perform the best for 9mm

Maybe the 147gr-148gr weight range is ideal for the .355 - .357 inch bullet diameter.

AZAndy said:

Sheesh, what a let-down in the .38 Special department. (Results are here if you haven't seen the page yet.) I thought the good ol' LSWCHP from Federal, Remington, or Winchester would do better than that, and was bummed by the Hydra-Shocks especially because I used to carry those in snubnoses, and the XTPs I also used to carry didn't do any better. Ah woe, alack, and alas. I wish they'd done some BB LSWCHP, since I have a box of those on the shelf...

Good work from those folks, as always. I refer back to their semi-auto tests pretty regularly, so I'm glad to have the additional info.

Click to expand...

What stood out to me was the significant difference in performance of the 357 between the 2 in and 4 in barrels. That extra 2 inches appears to make all the difference.

fireman 9731 said:

Yep. I might just start carrying wadcutters. Their penetration was consistent and we know they are accurate. Seems like 100 or so FPS makes a big difference when it comes to expansion with a lot of the rounds.

Click to expand...

I ordered some to try out. Might be a good option; I'm interested in low-recoil rounds.

C0untZer0 said:

I personally think the 147gr bullets perform the best for 9mm

Maybe the 147gr-148gr weight range is ideal for the .355 - .357 inch bullet diameter.

Click to expand...

I am also a fan of 9mm loads with 147-gr. bullets. I'm curious about whether the .38 Special wadcutters tested were hard or soft cast. The recoil on that load is so low that the perfect penetration may make it a legitimate carry choice given the minimal expansion among most of the hollow point designs.

The only thing is that wadcutters are hard to reload under stress because there isn't a nice ogive on the bullet to guide the cartridges into the chambers. But for a backup fun carried without reloads, hmm...

Not much surprising there for 38. Rem 158s have a good rep for being soft. 4" barrels get more velocity so better expansion. I was fine with the GD 135 results. A 357 hole up to a 44 hole works for me. If I want bigger I would go 44 special with an ashtray.

Madcap_Magician said:

The only thing is that wadcutters are hard to reload under stress because there isn't a nice ogive on the bullet to guide the cartridges into the chambers.

Click to expand...

This is true. For those that opt to carry their revolver loaded with wadcutters, filling the speed-loader with ammunition having ogive configurations more suitable for a quick reload is a good idea, imo.

I like the Winchester 130gr.train and defend. It's standard pressure,penetrates and expands from a 2 inch barrel.

Even though the LSWCHP's failed to expand in the 2" (mostly) they penetrated well and if you watched the high-speed video actually create a deep and decent wound cavity which correlates well to their reputation on the street for the last 40+ years as working well in snubbies. Expansion isn't everything and as Elmer Kieth found many years ago that the SWC works better for some reason than you'd expect just from looking at it.

Gelatin isn't flesh and bone. Gelatin doesn't have adrenaline.

I read an article in the 90's (Guns and Ammo magazine or similar) that researched actual fatal shootings. The 357 was a one shot stop 95% of the time.

I'd like to see a modern retelling of that research, but I'll put my faith in actual real world results.

D.B. Cooper said:

Gelatin isn't flesh and bone. Gelatin doesn't have adrenaline.

I read an article in the 90's (Guns and Ammo magazine or similar) that researched actual fatal shootings. The 357 was a one shot stop 95% of the time.

I'd like to see a modern retelling of that research, but I'll put my faith in actual real world results.

Click to expand...

That must have been the Fackler studies. They... Had their own data integrity issues. For one we don't know the firearm or bullet type used in any of the shootings he collected, but most of them were police shootings, so it's probably fair to say that the 4" .357 is overrepresented in the sample.

That is awesome! Tons of info and great layout. I am on kind of a .357 kick these days and that just kicked it into overdrive.

Madcap_Magician said:

That must have been the Fackler studies. They... Had their own data integrity issues. For one we don't know the firearm or bullet type used in any of the shootings he collected, but most of them were police shootings, so it's probably fair to say that the 4" .357 is overrepresented in the sample.

Click to expand...

I believe it was the Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow One Shot Stop theories and articles that are being referred to. You can use the search function here and read a good deal about their research and critiques of it.

Anyway;

The Federal 158 Gr. LSWCHP+P did quite well in penetration in both the 2" and 4" barrels. Expansion was better in the 4" than the 2".
The Hornady Custom 158gr. XTP had similar results as the Federal.

The Remington 158 gr. LSWCHP +P did adequately in penetration with both 2 and 4". Expansion was OK with the 2" and quite good from the 4".

The Winchester Super X 158 gr. LSWCHP+P offers uniform penetration from both 2 and 4" and quite good and uniform expansion from the 4".

You'd probably do OK with any of these. But note that those that clog with cloth tend not to expand much. Of penetration or expansion penetration is more important, but it is good to have both.

Lucky Gunner uses clear gel which is not as uniform as 10 % ballistic gel. Neither do they calibrate the gel. Brass Fetcher does use 10% and 20 % ballistic gel and calibrates it. So compare the results there with here.

Assuming for a moment that 357 is over represented, I would still argue that these studies are more valid that gelatin tests. The only possible argument against these studies would be to make the case that had more 9mm or 45acp shootings been considered in the studies, that would have increased their overall performance. While this is true, it doesn't negate the fact that, in 95% (or whatever the number was...90 something percent) of cases, the 357 was a one and done shooting. This means that in only 5% (or a similar small number)of shootings where a 357 was use, was a second shot required. Kind of hard to argue with that.

D.B.,

It wasn't all loads of the .357. Only some bullets and some loads.

What Marshall and Sanow were trying to show was what bullet designs, loads, bullets and calibers produced the best results, or resulted in a One Shot Stop at a higher % than other bullet designs, etc. So they developed a criteria of what made up a OSS and they interviewed or got written records from shooters involved in shooting someone. They collected these accounts for a number of years. They concluded that in .357 Magnum a 125 gr. jhp of a certain design made by a particular company (or companies) produced OSS about 98% of the time. Other bullets in the same weight or different weight produced less than that 98%.

They also concluded that certain loads from some manufacturers in a 115 gr. 9mm produced about 97% OSS and that some 45 acp rounds in 230 gr. did about 96% or so OSS. But all most folks recall is the figures for the 125 gr. .357 Magnum.

They ran into some trouble right away as people questioned their criteria for what constituted a OSS. Folks asked to see their data. They never showed it to any of their major critics, professionals in the field of ballistics, forensics, etc. So that raised questions about the evidence and how it was collected and presented. They produced 3 books and many articles on their methods and results. Marshall and Sanow seemed to get away from their central point into a defense of the OSS theories. A very large debate raged from the 1990s till the first decade of this century. Then it faded away. The OSS theories were largely de-bunked.

D.B. Cooper said:

Assuming for a moment that 357 is over represented, I would still argue that these studies are more valid that gelatin tests.

Click to expand...

Well what you're doing is comparing apples to oranges. This is because gel tests aren't set up to show what round will be more likely to produce a stop than another. They are set up to show what bullets pass a set of criteria (a physical test of penetration and expansion) and therefore can lead to improvements in design. It also shows that in passing a specific test that maybe that bullet will work better for you than another that fails the test.

M&S started to try to do a similar thing with a different method. But they got lost along the way.

The Hornady FTX bullets seem like the most reliable for expansion in 38 and almost all other calibers. Since the bullet opens up quickly, it likes a hotter loading to get good penetration. The +P loading of the Hornady FTX Critical Defense seems like a great choice.