Barnes 9mm 115gr +P TAC-XPD in Clear Ballistics Gel

Status
Not open for further replies.

5pins

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2003
Messages
240
Barnes has long been known for their solid copper rifle bullets with a well-established reputation in the hunting fields. Something that may not be as well known to some is their line of defensive ammo. This Barnes 9mm load is labeled as +P but the velocity seemed a little low in my sample. This ammo was shot using a Sig P229 with a 3.9-inch barrel. Shot into two 16 inch blocks of Clear Ballistics gel. Two round into bare gel than two rounds into gel covered with heavy clothing and then finally two rounds out of an M&P Shield with a 3.1-inch barrel.

h3HXjgrl.jpg

The first round into the bare gel had a velocity of 1047fps, penetrated to 13.5 inches and expanded to .68 inches. Round number two penetrated to 13.25 inches, expanded to .69 inches and had a velocity of 1067fps.

c5ODYcBl.jpg

The first shot into the heavy clothing gel did not register on the chronograph but penetrated to 12.5 inches and expanded to .70 inches. The second round also expanded to .70 inches, penetrated to 13 inches with a velocity of 1048fps.

h06AwcIl.jpg

The velocity out of the Shield dropped a bit with the first shot coming in at 997fps, penetrated to 12.5 inches and opened up to .69 inches. The second round also penetrated to 12.5 inches with a velocity of 980fps and expanded to .70 inches.

ZT3pAh3l.jpg
 
Those sure aren't +P velocities. They probably don't even meet the velocities of generic ball practice ammo. The expansion sounds good but the penetration is minimal.
 
Thank you for the test. I was looking at these loads for my partners 9mm shield since they are in the expansion>penetration camp. Surprisingly low velocities from a service length barrel and rather low from the shield, .38 special special territory.
 
If that bullet goes 12" into a perp expanding like that, how could that not be desirable for SD? Heck even 10" will hit most people in the heart!
 
For those remarking about the velocity relative to +P, +P DOESN'T MEASURE VELOCITY. It reflects a peak pressure above a defined threshold.

Because of their composition and geometry, Barnes bullets raise pressures... you will generally get less velocity for a Barns bullet of X weight at Y pressure versus a conventional bullet of X weight and Y pressure. Barnes' reloading materials make this clear.

The "value proposition" of the Barnes bullets is that their terminal performance is such that it is worth giving away velocity to gain the weight retention, consistency of expansion, integrity through barriers, etc., characteristics.
 
Yes, +P denotes higher pressure and not necessarily higher velocity, normally the two go together. However, it should be pointed out that Barnes advertises the velocity at 1125fps. That's an average of 75fps more than I got.
 
I don't think .1 inches is going to account for a 75fps drop in velocity.
 
Fair enough, I just read that Barnes's claimed velocity is from a 4" barrel. I had assumed a 4.5 or 5 inch, duty-gun length barrel.
 
Fair enough, I just read that Barnes's claimed velocity is from a 4" barrel. I had assumed a 4.5 or 5 inch, duty-gun length barrel.
You would assume right as that is normally the standard.

on a separate note. Big thing known fact to barnes is that they inflate a lot of data.
 
Last edited:
That expansion seems pretty impressive to me, even if it only penetrated 12 to 13". I can't think if any critical part of the body that would not be severely and quickly disabled by a .68 to .70 hole that as 12-13" deep.
 
Gel doesn't simulate a human being inch for inch. How could it?

Calculated gel is used as a standard test medium. 13" in gel does not mean 13" in a person. If that were true, the 18" maximum for FBI testing wouldn't make sense from straight on.
 
Regardless of the velocity, that's pretty impressive expansion. In addition, the heavy clothing seemed to have no ill effect on expansion.

On the other hand, it's almost a dollar a round, but I guess good ammo is going to cost you.
 
Gel doesn't simulate a human being inch for inch. How could it?

Of course it doesn't and anyone saying that gel ''simulates'' a human being inch for inch is demonstrating that they do not understand what gel actually represents. Calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin is a test medium that represents the average density of the human body, including bones, that would be encountered by the bullet being tested were it fired into a human being. Gel provides a consistent test platform against which any bullet can be tested and those results compared against others in an ''apples vs. apples'' comparison.

Calculated gel is used as a standard test medium. 13" in gel does not mean 13" in a person. If that were true, the 18" maximum for FBI testing wouldn't make sense from straight on.

Did you mean to say ''calibrated gel''? :uhoh:
 
Regardless of the velocity, that's pretty impressive expansion. In addition, the heavy clothing seemed to have no ill effect on expansion.

On the other hand, it's almost a dollar a round, but I guess good ammo is going to cost you.

Yeah.

Corbon DPX should be better even, and expand to .86 or so with about the same penetration

I usually carry a bullet that will penetrate deeper but I do find it attractive how consistent these solid copper bullets perform.
 
Thank you for correcting me on my correction to multiple wrong comments.

While it is called calibrated gel, could you consider your correction at my post while looking up the definition of calculated and calibrated? Please report the overwhelming difference.
 
When Remington bought Barnes, I think Cor-Bon, and especially PDX, was left behind?

Can't find it in any of the ammo searches or google.
 
When Remington bought Barnes, I think Cor-Bon, and especially PDX, was left behind?

Can't find it in any of the ammo searches or google.

Corbon took the bullet in-house and improved it a few years ago. In the video I linked above the 9mm expands to .86. I don't carry it but based on testing it seems superior to the Barnes although Barnes is still good...
 
Thank you for correcting me on my correction to multiple wrong comments.

While it is called calibrated gel, could you consider your correction at my post while looking up the definition of calculated and calibrated? Please report the overwhelming difference.

I thought that you were attempting a humorous juxtaposition of terms (that is, ''calculated'' for ''calibrated'') much in the way Carroll O’Connor's character, Archie Bunker, did frequently on the 70's sit-com, ''All in the Family''. One of his silliest quips, ''It's a proven fact that capital punishment is a well-known detergent to crime'' came to mind when I read your post; got me laughing again as I recalled that line.

At least you knew what you were talking about. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top