Double Tap Ammo...

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZO6Vettever

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
181
Location
Central, Fl.
I ordered 3 boxes of Double Tap Ammo. Everything I have read about it is positive. The ballistics are awesome. The velocity of S&W40 and the ft. lbs. of 45ACP in 9mm.

9mm+P 115gr JHP 50rds. $36.95

These loads are low flash. They are a great option for personal defense.

Bullet : Remington JHP

Ballistics : 115gr @ 1415fps / 511ft. lbs. from a G17.


The tests with 4 layers of denim + "T" shirt cloth into ballistic gel showed average penetration of 13.5". 200 rounds fired into beef had them opening up from .068 to .080 and liquified the beef. What do y'all think?

We have been using Federal premium hydra-shox's but these pack a lot more punch.
 
I think they've switched from the Rem 115gr to the Barnes TAC solid copper hollowpoint bullet (same as used in the Corbon DPX line, but the DT has about 80fps more velocity), haven't they?

In any case, with either bullet i would definitely agree that the DT rounds offer a heck of a lot more wallop than Hydrashok.
 
Thumbs up!

I've only used Double Tap in 38spl and 357mag revolver ammo, but it's top shelf.
 
Impressive velocity and muzzle energy, but 13.5" penetration is barely passing the recommended 12" minimum penetration standards set by FBI ballistics, since 18" is optimal. So this is another bullet that flies fast & opens early.

I have no problems with Double Tap, nor in their earnestness in wanting to manufacture an effective bullet, but you should expect all handgun bullets to have substandard performance against humans.

Personally, I wouldn't even think a bullet is reliable for my pistol until I've fired 200+ rounds out of my personal SD/HD pistol. Buying 3 boxes and depending on test firings into a side of beef isn't enough for me to believe in a bullet.
 
Recently there have been some complaints about DT. The biggest have been getting Montana Gold Bullets substituted for Gold Dot or SXT, without mentioning the change. And ordering 200 grain bullets and actually getting 180 grain bullets.

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1178403#post14663326

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1174877

http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?108135-Double-Tap-Barnes-offerings

Other such complaints can be found on most gun sites.

Also some have questioned the actual chrono's vs stated speed of many rounds.
 
I think he pretty much has that corrected now...he tells you exactly what bullet you are getting where possible....it seems he can't claim the gold dot/speer name anymore so that is reffered to as "Bonded Deffense" and has been largely unavailable lately...I have some in .45 from a couple months back...and they are good ole gold dots. Then there is the controlled expansion....now these used to be Hornady XTP but I think in some calibers they may be his montana gold....which looks a lot like a golden saber....but I'm not sure if that's what it is or that's just what it looks like...afterall winchester ranger LE HP's look a lot like XTP's from the outside. Bullets can look alike certainly.

FWIW I have had excellent performance from what I've ordered...I haven't tested it all yet but what little I have has been accurate and consitently cycles 100% Personally I'd wait for him to come back out with the kick-butt 124gr GD load he used to have....seems subject to bullet availability. He's using a LOT of barnes and Noslers right now...I've actually found the Noslers very accurate and hold together well...the harder you push them the better they expand....which is good...his loads push em HARD! I hate to say it but I'd still carry 124gr GD+P from speer over a lighter wizz-bang load with a lesser bullet...even if I do like his ammo.
 
Last summer I had the opportunity to fire 1000 rounds of double tap 9mm+p 124 gold dot, through two guns: a sig 228 and a glock 19. Needless to say, the glock only got 200 of the rounds. :D

Great ammo, in my opinion, after that test. Accurate, and it felt consistent.
 
I ordered 3 boxes of Double Tap Ammo.
200 rounds fired into beef...

Okay, so you had ordered 150 rounds of Double Tap and then proceeded with a test involving 200 rounds?

Are these results you've included a test that someone else has done?
 
I have no problems with Double Tap, nor in their earnestness in wanting to manufacture an effective bullet, but you should expect all handgun bullets to have substandard performance against humans.

Just FYI... DT does not manufacture any bullets. They manufacture ammunition that uses 3rd party bullet's from various makers.
 
Impressive velocity and muzzle energy, but 13.5" penetration is barely passing the recommended 12" minimum penetration standards set by FBI ballistics, since 18" is optimal. So this is another bullet that flies fast & opens early.
So you don't like it because it exceeds the FBI requirements?

Well, that's interesting.

I consider 18" to be excessive penetration in an urban defense load.

I think that if I wanted to throw a 9mm round at top velocity, then I would just get a .357Sig pistol or a .357 magnum revolver.
A .357sig holds less bullets, and the ammo is more money and less commonly available. A .357 magnum is not compatible with autoloaders.

9mm+P+ gives you the best of both worlds without having to sacrifice compact size, capacity, or your autoloader.
 
Snowdog Quote:
I ordered 3 boxes of Double Tap Ammo.

Quote:
200 rounds fired into beef...

Okay, so you had ordered 150 rounds of Double Tap and then proceeded with a test involving 200 rounds?

Are these results you've included a test that someone else has done?

Snowdog, I never said I tested these. I said "I ordered 3 boxes", (I haven't even got them yet for cryin' out loud). Read the OP before y'all start flappin' your fingers. After 2400 and some posts y'all should have better idea of proper manners. Remember, we are all on the same side! Just sayin', not trying to make enemies here.
Well, after visiting your page and looking at your posts I believe I may have jumped the gun a little. I got the impression you were kinda a "smart@$$" but your posts paint a differant picture. Seem to me a good guy. Sorry, I could delete this but feel I owe you an apoligy for jumpin' on you. No hard feelings, I hope!
 
Last edited:
So you don't like it because it exceeds the FBI requirements?

Well, that's interesting.

If I may interject, it slightly exceeds the FBI's minimum penetration requirement. 18" is considered optimum for human targets by the FBI, and more effective than 12" or 13.5" (keeping in mind that any load you select will be a series of compromises, of course).

I consider 18" to be excessive penetration in an urban defense load.

I think it's a fair estimate of what it takes to penetrate virtually any human torso of any size from virtually any angle, thereby maximizing a bullet's shot placement potential. We have to be sure of what's around and behind our targets regardless of how much a bullet usually penetrates.
 
If you exceed the requirement, you exceed the requirement. I think 12-15" is ideal, personally. 18" is not considered optimum by the FBI, it is considered to be the upper end of their requirement.

Very few modern defense rounds penetrate 18", including in .357 sig. 5.56mm doesn't even penetrate that deep in gelatin.

By the way, the most legendary handgun stopping round of all time barely penetrated 10" in FBI gel tests. The Fed/Rem .357 Magnum 125gr SJHP.
 
If you exceed the requirement, you exceed the requirement. I think 12-15" is ideal


What are your qualifications?

Do you understand the purpose of penetration studies with handgun bullets? It is to measure how much tissue can be potentially destroyed by bullet wounding channels. The deeper the wound, the more tissue damage leading to blood-loss incapacitation. Making the hole itself doesn't incapacitate an aggressor.

Why go for minimum?

Here's the FBI Ballistic Test Protocol:
A handgun bullet must consistently penetrate a minimum of 12 inches of tissue in order to reliably penetrate vital organs within the human target regardless of the angle of impact or intervening obstacles such as arms, clothing, glass, etc. Penetration of 18 inches is even better.

FBI Academy Handgun Wounding and Effectiveness Manual:
While penetration up to 18 inches is preferable, a handgun bullet MUST reliably penetrate 12 inches of soft body tissue at a minimum

Here 's another quote you should consider:
No law enforcement officer has lost his life because a bullet over penetrated his adversary, and virtually none have ever been sued for hitting an innocent bystander through an adversary. On the other hand, tragically large numbers of officers have been killed because their bullets did not penetrate deeply enough.

And please don't compare rifle bullets to handgun bullets.
 
Look at enough test data and what I see is pretty well any load in a decent chambering where weight is centered around that chambering's balance-point -and loaded to reasonable levels with decent premium HP's =pretty much you are going to get 12-18" in bare ballistic jello and open up well (cause it's bare jello and shooting it into water is about the only thing that will do better at making ANYTHING expand well) you are going to get 16-20+" in denim covered jello and expand less notably. You can see it again and again in 9,.40 and .45 and the bigger the caliber the closer the results for a given weight. Most of these tests really do more to show the very poor performing bullets and weights and simply point out that loads further away from the balance-point of a given chambering don't work as well as those near it.

It's not anything you should base your ammo picks on completely...because it sometimes makes lighter faster loads look like they ought to be more reliable stoppers....like in .45....where I think most folks realize a 230gr HP going slower is really more what that round is all about. Double-tap seems to go for the "speed is king" aproach...and in some rounds -I like that! (124gr. in 9mm as fast as you can load it with a GD thanks....and in .40 I like the light fast 135gr loads...and theirs rocks) In .45 I carry 230gr and their GD round is faster than it needs to be clocking nearly 1000FPS out of a G21...but it expands better for it and in that gun the added recoil is not that notable (you can feel it...but it doesn't slow things down much on follow-ups) in a 1911 I think I'd preffer the standard speer load a little slower. It is a great woods-walking round though...as is the nuclear hot 185gr load clocking almost 1200fps from a 21SF and presumably almost 600 pound of whoop-down. Though I'll tell you what...if it was a 300+ pound hog trying to eat me up I'd rather have a standard presure 230gr bonded speer....even at just 850-900 fps! Yet in 9mm you couldn't give me a 147gr load! -no matter how hot!!...it's just out of balance for what that round is designed for.

(in truth I'll take my .44 with 240gr JHP XTP's doing darn near 1400 or a hard cast 240gr anywhere from 1250-1350! But in town -the difference between a 9mm and .40 or a .45 loaded as prescribed above...I seriously doubt would make much if any difference in a deffensive shooting. If ballistics tables and jello tests where really "where it was at" -we'd all still be packing .357's and .44's! All you can do is pick one of the best bullets in a weight that suits the chambering and feeds and shoots well in your gun in a loading that feeds and shoots well in your gun. And ballistics tests and tables help...but they are just one way to look at the choices..one piece of the puzzle if you will...not a buyers guide!
 
All of these tests were done using 10% ballistic gelatin provided by Vyse gelatin using all FBI protocols and 4 layers of denim and two layers of light cotton T-shirt in front of the gelatin.

DoubleTap 9mm+P Penetration / expansion

115gr. Gold Dot JHP @ 1415fps - 12.00" / .70"
124gr. Gold Dot JHP @ 1310fps - 13.25" / .70"
147gr. Gold Dot JHP @ 1125fps - 14.00" / .66"

DoubleTap .40 S&W

135gr. Nosler JHP @ 1375fps - 12.10" / .72"
155gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1275fps - 13.00" / .76"
165gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1200fps - 14.0" / .70"

DoubleTap .357 Sig

115gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1550fps - 12.25" / .71"
125gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1450fps - 14.5" / .66"
147gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1250fps - 14.75" / .73"

DoubleTap .357 Magnum

125gr. Gold Dot JHP @ 1600fps - 12.75" / .69"
158gr. Gold Dot JHP @ 1400fps - 19.0" .56"

DoubleTap .45ACP

185gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1225fps - 12.75" / .82"
200gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1125fps - 14.25" / .88"
230gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1010fps - 15.25" / .95"

Ballistic gelatin test results : 10mm Auto [Archive] - THR
 
If you exceed the requirement, you exceed the requirement.

Even if you exceed the minimum requirement by 1.5", as in the example we're looking at, my point was that one can still do better, at least according to the FBI (CWL has that issue well covered). Penetration performance keeps getting better up to and including 18", after which it is estimated that practically every bad guy will have been penetrated completely. 17" would be slightly inferior, and 19" would be a slight waste but not inferior as long as expansion isn't compromised substantially.

The reason that the FBI has both an optimum and minimum requirement is that their test protocol takes into account the varying depth of penetration that any given load will achieve when passing through various barriers. If they could get a load that gives them a perfect 18" in every case, they'd certainly take it, but anything that gives them at least 12" in every case (and more in some) would still be worth considering.

I think 12-15" is ideal, personally.

And you're completely entitled to your opinion, as we all are. It just differs from that of the FBI, that's all.

18" is not considered optimum by the FBI, it is considered to be the upper end of their requirement.

It may be an upper bound of what is useful, but in this case performance keeps getting better until that upper bound is reached, after which it declines not because of penetration but the reduced expansion that is implied.

Very few modern defense rounds penetrate 18", including in .357 sig. 5.56mm doesn't even penetrate that deep in gelatin.

That's true enough, which is why they selected the Ranger Bonded/PDX1 180 grain .40 S&W load, which in the most common cases (four layers of denim and heavy cloth) penetrated an average of 21.8" and 19", respectively, in their tests. Expansion was still pretty decent, and of course it penetrated at least 12" in every test. I use the very same load for the same reasons they do.

By the way, the most legendary handgun stopping round of all time barely penetrated 10" in FBI gel tests. The Fed/Rem .357 Magnum 125gr SJHP.

Well, there's legend and then there's measured, demonstrated performance. Obviously actual performance in human targets is going to be subject to many unpredictable variables, and is very difficult to analyze as well, but controlled, calibrated gelatin tests at least tell us how different loads compare to one another so that we can see and decide for ourselves which would give us the greatest odds of success overall.
 
Is this a good time to bring up that most .380 SD rounds penetrate 12" in gel?

Of the test results I have, most .380 ACP JHPs penetrate a bit less (and with surprising expansion), although Federal Hydra-Shok does get about 12" with approximately 51% expansion. That's good performance for .380 ACP, although the caliber is also capable of penetrating around 22" with FMJ bullets. The FBI would say that the Hydra-Shok load meets their minimum penetration standard for law enforcement ammunition (not counting their entire protocol necessarily, just the basic penetration aspect in the absence of hard barriers), but it's telling that the 10mm Auto and .45 ACP loads they most seriously considered after deciding to move away from 9mm had average penetration depths of 17.9" and 19.95", and that's with expansion, of course (their current .40 S&W load, as described in my last post, is comparable). It would be interesting to know whether they'd choose a JHP or FMJ load if they were forced to use .380 ACP pistols. Personally, I'd probably choose FMJ in this caliber, favoring penetration. I don't know what kind of terminal performance to expect from loads from the likes of DoubleTap and Buffalo Bore, and I prefer to use standard loadings anyway (well, I do have a box of the DoubleTap .40 S&W hard-cast load because I know what to expect from it, and I have some other hot loads just for fun and variety, but I don't use them for defense against humans).

Of course, it probably goes without saying that the reason the FBI is invoked so often when discussing these issues is that they're the main source of the 12" penetration standard, which in turn is often misunderstood (of course, because everything in life is always so easy and smooth :rolleyes:;) ).
 
Last edited:
Problem is DT ammo doesn't know how to properly evaluate ballistic results and can't even measure bullet expansion correct with the industry standard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top