Report : .40S&W JHPs versus Bone and Ballistic Gelatin

This thread is a great argument for big bore calibers. It seems that bullet expansion is hit or miss (no pun intended), where some bullets expand great but come with all sorts of caveats. Or you could simply blast your foes with a .44 or .45, where cheap, boring and reliable LRN's and LSWC's are still the same size as fully flattened 9mm's (and twice the weight).

Interesting test, thanks for sharing. I'll be sticking with HSTs from my M&P though.

I also have a Steyr M40 that really seems to like Federal 165gr EFMJ and wonder how they would perform against an assailant who possesses a bony exoskeleton.

Snowdog said:

I also have a Steyr M40 that really seems to like Federal 165gr EFMJ and wonder how they would perform against an assailant who possesses a bony exoskeleton.

Click to expand...

Yeah, like a giant crab or something.

Yeah, like a giant crab or something.

Click to expand...

You'd open something like that up like shooting a bucket of water. Little hole in the front and huge hole out the back.

Now THAT would be an interesting test, King crabs vs various 40 s&w loads
but don't be silly, it would have to be under water of course, where else would you encounter them

Good to know, because I use gold dots, for my backup, and ranger t in my firearm. I have always thought of the Corbon DPX, just need to fork out that money....

How would those Federal EFMJ rounds do? I'm guessing they still will expand considering that they thrive on the impact forcing the nose in, expanding the sides.

Very interesting test. I wondered about the Federal EFMJ as well but based on other tests, I would guess it would expand nicely but not go much deeper than 4 to 5 inches after the bone impact.

My other thought was these are being shot directly at a flat piece of "bone". I think the odds of hitting a bone perfectly flat like that is minimal. I would have like to see the bone simulant at an angle. Or somehow hitting the edge of the bone simulant as if hitting just part of a rib.

Yeah, like a giant crab or something.

Click to expand...

Or a skinny human hit square on a rib...

So whats the bottom line. If i shoot someone squared up with a bullet to the forhead or hip bone I willnot got expantion out of moust bullets. bet with a double tap ,I could live with that.
Biggest problem with all these different home brewed bullet test ,THERE NOT REAL WORLD. Put to in the heart or head and it does not matter much.

I would like to pose this question. When bone is hit does it just punch a neat clean hole through it? Unless I'm mistaken I would think it would cause a bit of shattering with bone fragments being propelled along with the bullet. This would likely aid in stopping an attacker (stopping power).

That could be a reason real life data seems to favor hollow points. If bone is missed you get expansion, if it is hit you get extra effectiveness from shattering bone.

The one thing that caught my attention about this test is the fact that out of the three Corbon's that were fired only one even reached the vaunted F.B.I. penetration oh so many wax and wane about in the great caliber wars.
And they were the only ones to fully expand.
Mean while back at the ranch or Wal-Mart parking lot the others have not expanded and have sailed through the intended bad guy target and met up with Regular and Ethyl as they were walking across the parking lot.
Not so good.

How would those Federal EFMJ rounds do? I'm guessing they still will expand considering that they thrive on the impact forcing the nose in, expanding the sides.

Click to expand...

Excellent question. I'm curious as well. Have been thinking of making the switch to EFMJ for a while now

What is an EFMJ??

Expanding Full Metal Jacket

So I'll aim my Fed 165 HST for the solar plexas.

I think it would be interesting to do a rib cage... some of the other posters are correct, since the ribs are rounded, bullet deflection and partial expansion seems to be common in a lot of actual shootings because of this.

Do the EFMJ next.

Or you could simply blast your foes with a .44 or .45, where cheap, boring and reliable LRN's and LSWC's are still the same size as fully flattened 9mm's

Click to expand...

No they aren't. Expanded 9mm bullets run from .65-.77" these days, not .43-.45".

I'd like to know how these particular rounds faired in real world shootings.

I'd like to know how these particular rounds faired in real world shootings.

Click to expand...

just a thought:
they are marketed as "law enforcement ammo" and each of these companies has tons of test equipment and brainpower.
If you ran a multi-million dollar ammo company, would you market ammo to LEO's that you felt was sub-standard?

Apocalypse-Now said:

here's four HST 147gr 9mm's i fired into dry phonebooks:

Click to expand...

No those are 124 grain Federal Tactical Bonded rounds according to the box. Did you put the wrong bullets in front of the box and if so why?

Also, you're not going to get expansion from dry phone books. You need the moisture to push the bullet open.

To the op:

Thank you for the test. Brass Fetcher has been one of the resources I use regularly when checking out bullets. You always seem to do a good job and the site presents a wide range of calibers.

On this test though I think you might have missed the mark slightly. When testing effectiveness against bone it is important to cast the bone in the gel. I'm no expert but every test I've seen where effect on bone is considerred it is done that way. Not just with bullets but swords, blunt weapons, and falls.

Every human has flesh and muscle in front of their sternum. Some of us have an inch and others have much more. Regardless we all have some and that should begin the expansion. I'm sure hitting bone will mean less expansion than gel alone. However, some is better than none, and we need to remain realistic.

I don't think most people have an inch or more of flesh in front of their sternum. I doubt it's more than .25-.5" inch.

Interesting (and strange) to see DPX outperform FTX. Perhaps we do well to remember that "bone simulant" is not live bone beneath live tissue.

But as DPX (and TSX) have been my preferred bullets for years, I guess I'm inclined to accept the results, rather than question them!