can you find a better 9mm ballistics gel test than this gold dot 115 gr?

[bullseyebob47]

the cutting imo seem to go about 9 inches and the penetration is 17 1/2 inches.

can you find a better .40 s&w ballistics gel test?

 

[the Black Spot]

the cutting imo seem to go about 9 inches and the penetration is 17 1/2 inches.

can you find a better .40 s&w ballistics gel test?

I believe the federal 147 jhp and 124 hydra-shok would be better.
In the 40sw i think #1 is the rem 165 gr golden sabre

 

[Jenrick]

Define better? More penetration, more expansion, what are you looking for?

-Jenrick

 

[bullseyebob47]

i like 14 to 18 inches of penetration and the longer the wound channel(cutting and tearing) the better.

 

[JR24]

147 grain HST is impressive stuff. I like to run it in my 9mms.

 

[CDW4ME]

Lots of 9mm, 40, 45 compared:
http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

 

[bullseyebob47]

lucky gunner uses a 3.5" 9mm barrel. my glock 19 has a 4". much difference?

 

[AZAndy]

lucky gunner uses a 3.5" 9mm barrel. my glock 19 has a 4". much difference?

I'd guess 25-50 fps. Not a whole lot, though it might matter to expansion with some bullets.

 

[JohnnyFlake]

The truth of the matter is, any of them will kill you, with the proper shot placement!

 

[Rock185]

Bullseye, I agree with JohnnyFlake, and I don't obsess over trying to find the ammo with the mostest, however one wants to define that. You might want to have a look at some of the gel test results for the later technology Federal HST ammo.......ymmv

 

[C0untZer0]

Is your goal to try to find a bullet that comes in just under 18" of penetration ?

I think something that comes in right around 15" and expands, probably has better terminal ballistics

Winchester 180gr Ranger "T" Series RA40

4x denim, .70" expansion, 14.3" penetration

but if you're looking for penetration:

Winchester RA40BA 165gr Bonded

4x denim .55" expansion, 19" penetration

 

[hdwhit]

Keep in mind that tests on ballistics gel are only comparable if everything is consistent. The gel has to be of the same composition, consistency and temperature. The distance to the target has to be the same. The angle of incidence has to be consistent. Vary any of the parameters and the tests are not comparable. And I have yet to see any televised or internet test where all parameters were disclosed to make comparability between different testers was practical.

 

[Jenrick]

The FBI has a specific set of criteria that they released, both in terms of how a round will be tested (there is a standard for both pistol and rifle rounds), and what the results need to be. Hornady has it up on the website IRCC if anyone wants to read through it. The FBI also does extensive controlled testing to see how various rounds perform. The data they gather is proprietary, and is not for public disclosure (get with the FBI if you have heartburn with this, I play by their rules) and is only available to LE agencies.

With that said, no major manufacture is going to release a round in this day and age that doesn't meet the FBI's testing requirements. No LE agency will buy it, and that's where the money in defensive ammo sales is, in large LE and Federal agencies. How each round performs is different from round to round of course, but here are some general guide lines.

Top Tier defensive ammo from the major manufactures (ATK, Hornady, Winchester, Remington) are all going to perform extremely well and you're probably going to need a micrometer and good steel machinist ruler to tell a difference on the tests. Bonded ammo does better on barriers, but gives up a little bit of performance in expansion. Non-bonded rounds tend to expand a little better, and a little worse on barriers. A round that expands more tends to penetrate less, and vice versa.

-Jenrick

 

[FL-NC]

I've never been in a gunfight with a block of jello. Its all theory. I just buy American made factory hollow points from a company like Remington, Winchester, Federal, or Hornady (don't need to worry so much about reliability cause Glock) and forget about it. Then I get the cheapest FMJ ball I can find, and practice as much as I can. Those magazines that hold lots of rounds? Don't be afraid to use more than 1 round if the time comes. There's a reason they hold more than 1 round.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

All these numbers are useless unless you hit what you shoot at. Slight differences in depth, diameter of bullet and "cutting" are meaningless if you miss. Find the ammo that is most accurate and reliable in your gun and stock up on it.

Most current ammo on the market today will do what it was made to do if you do your part first.

 

[Jenrick]

I've never been in a gunfight with a block of jello. Its all theory.

The FBI has a neat presentation where they show a recovered round from a block of gel, and a round recovered in an actual shooting. They look almost identical. You're right it's all a theory until you fire your round, from your gun, into your target. I'll however take the theory that has a whole lot of experimental evidence supporting it.

I will say there is a noticeable difference in performance between top tier rounds and "the cheap stuff." Even older generation rounds like Hyrda-Shok's have noticeably less performance then the current crop of top tier rounds.

-Jenrick

 

[TeaDub]

I admit that I find ballistics a fascinating topic. I am entertained watching "gel" tests. When searching for my carry ammo, those tests were another data point in those selections. Probably more important was information gleaned from real world usage (Dr Gary Roberts, et al.). Right now we are blessed with an abundance of fine choices and the ability to purchase a wide range of designs. For me, I have settled on Gold Dots or HST in all my carry calibers. I bought more than I immediately need for if/when the supply side breaks down again.

There are many good choices. I no longer chase the ever elusive "perfect" projectile. What I carry has been vetted on the street, so now I can concentrate on my skill level and training. I am still entertained by watching videos and reading on the subject..... I don't worry that my choices are suddenly sub-par because of the latest gel video.

 

[RPZ]

In .40, 9x19 and .45 there are several potentially very good loads. If you peruse the youtube gel tests (and bear in mind all gels are not created equal - it is just a guide and does not account for what happens if light bone or heavy bone is struck) there are a few in each cailber that indicate a good "best bet". Me, I would rather see objective tests done on live animals of approximate weight equaling an average man, say circa 170 lbs.

 

[Gen_Y_Ballistics]

TNOutdoors9 does good videos. The testing I did with 1100-1200 fps 115s was mostly with xtps, but what you see here is about par for the course. They will penetrate 15 to 18 inches in gel, dropping most of their velocity in the first 9" (the "cutting" or deceleration marks).

The last few inches of that penetration, though, is not vigorous, and in the real world can be stopped by a rib or the opposite hide/skin.

This load doesn't transmit much "shock" to the target. Faster Gold Dots do, when they try to turn inside-out. But a better option is a cup-and-core bullet that will fragment and shed its nose at about 5", then continue on.

 

[sgt127]

After more than 30 years working a lot of shootings in a major metropolitan area I'm not certain of anything a bullet may do, can do or won't do.

It's just bizarre. A guy who absolutely should be dead, bitches about being shot. A guy who looks like he should be fine, tips over dead.

I'm not certain the FBI tests are really set up to find the "best manstopper" but, the best round for Police administrators to latch onto for the least liability yet, generally work pretty well.

For me, the problem is that ALL the big boys in the ammo industry are trying to make a bullet preform exactly as the FBI criteria calls for. And, they do.

So, it's like NASCAR with 40 cars...bumper to bumper, door handle to door handle, for 500 miles.