Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Flat Nose FMJ vs Round Nose FMJ

Discussion in 'Handguns: General Discussion' started by Ben86, Dec 4, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ben86

    Ben86 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,185
    Location:
    MS, USA
    I know that this is a somewhat silly question, but is there any difference between the ballistic performance of flat and round nose fmj?

    The reason I ask is because I only carry fmj in my .380. On one hand I want the round nose because I know it's shape is more condusive to reliable feeding. However it seems like the flat nose bullet would depart more of it's energy to the target and be less prone to bounce off of bone due to its shape. Is this just a mute point?
     
  2. Deus Machina

    Deus Machina Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    2,206
    Location:
    Brandon, Florida
    That's about right.

    In the flight and likely in POI, no difference that you will see in a defense ranges.

    In the terminal ballistics, I've been lead to believe that a flat-nosed FMJ doesn't penetrate quite as deep, and imparts a slightly larger wound cavity. A combination from the shape of energy dissipating outward (temporary cavity) and the nose 'punching' or 'crushing' instead of 'cutting' through (permanent).

    I still say Barnes DPX beats any other .380 hands-down, but to each their own.
     
  3. David E

    David E Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,455
    Back in the 80's when the military was looking for a 9mm to replace the 1911, the flat nose FMJ in 9mm was touted as being "just as lethal" as the round nose .45 FMJ.

    Some folks bought into this.

    The military, however, issues round nose FMJ for their 9mm's and, as far as I know, never issued the flat point version.

    That said, there is probably little, if any, difference in performance between the two.
     
  4. wesessiah

    wesessiah Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    113
    from what i understand, the hydrostatic shock is more intense (probably marginally) from more of the surface area of the flat nose impacting upon entrance. i have nothing to confirm this, sounds plausible, but i doubt someone getting shot with both will be able to tell the difference between the two.
     
  5. Jed Carter

    Jed Carter Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    1,410
    Location:
    LEXINGTON, KY
    I have only seen the truncated cone FMJs common to .40 S&W in .357SIG .40 .45 and 9mm, not in .380. Round nose bullets feed better in most .357SIG has virtually no feed issues. I would use the conical FMJ bullets for more reliable feed and let the recipient deal with the terminal ballistics, if need be shoot em again.
     
  6. wesessiah

    wesessiah Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    113
    ^ agreed, if i want more damage i would just stick with jhp... which i do.
     
  7. KBintheSLC

    KBintheSLC Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    3,197
    Location:
    Stalingrad, USA
    In my informal ballistic tests (wet phone books), flat nose bullets in every caliber caused a larger and more defined permanent wound cavity than their round nose counterparts. The round stuff seemed to just push the mass around it and close up behind it. The flat stuff punched nice clean holes, like a paper hole puncher. If I carry FMJ or hard cast lead, it is usually flat point for this very reason. It seems that the more tissue that is permanently destroyed, the faster they will bleed out.
     
  8. MICHAEL T

    MICHAEL T Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,011
    Location:
    outback Kentucky
    carry a good HP like Corbon or Gold dot These will do the job better than ball and feed well also . Even if the fail to expand you still got better FPS and Ftlbs than ball
     
  9. Ben86

    Ben86 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,185
    Location:
    MS, USA
    I just worry about underpenetration with jhp .380. Especially in winter with jackets.

    It just seems like ball point would be more prone to bouncing off bone than flat point would. I have noticed that softpoint hunting rounds are usually flat point.
     
  10. JTQ

    JTQ Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    5,424
    Location:
    NW Florida
    Here is an article explaining the difference between a flat point and round nose and how they penetrate differently. It is in reference to dangerous game hunting, but it should apply to handgun ammo. Don't hunt elephant or buffalo with your .380 though.

    http://www.gsgroup.co.za/articlepvdw.html
     
  11. makarovnik

    makarovnik Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,677
    I like carrying Buffalo Bore flat nose FMJ in my slower pistols. I would think the flat nose would be less likely to ricochet off of bone, probably penetrate less than round nose and not feed quite as well as round nose.

    I have never seen (in person) round nose FMJ for .40 S&W, only flat nose. But then I've only had my .40 for a few months.
     
  12. smoketheresfire

    smoketheresfire Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    93
    I don't think they make em. Otherwise they couldn't fit 40 cartridges in guns framed for 9mm. Hence the flat nose.
     
  13. Publius1688

    Publius1688 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    460
    Location:
    Knoxville TN
    I can't see how, in .380, there would be any significant difference between flat and round. Possibly a nominal increase in wound cavity area with flat, but how much, really?
    If you have to carry a .380, go with JHP, as hot as you can get; that's my two cents.
     
  14. Sunray

    Sunray Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2003
    Messages:
    10,803
    Location:
    London, Ont.
    "...a mute point?..." Absolutely silent.
    If you're going to carry a .380, forget FMJ's altogether. An FPFMJ won't do anything differently than an RNFMJ, except maybe give you feeding issues. Neither will do anything but make a neat little round hole in anything. Phone books aren't flesh.
     
  15. Skipper

    Skipper Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2004
    Messages:
    194
    Location:
    Middle Georgia
    I was in a classroom several years ago where Col. Cooper told us of his experience with FMJ,RN compared to FMJ,TC in the .45 ACP.
    He told of shooting many jack rabbits with round nose ball only to have them hop away without SEEMINGLY being affected, where jacks shot with the trucated cone bullets went down instantly. I load TC bullets in my .45 ACP handloads, and as long as proper OAL is strickly adhered to, feeding is flawless, even in "stock" pistols.
    Note than hard cast bullets made for putting big game down quickly, is gonna have a wide,flat nose.
    Having said all that, I generally chose a fast moving HP for defense with the "sub" calibers.

    Skip
     
  16. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    +1
    Any of the major manufactures make perfectly fine .380 JHP ammo.

    Even the worst of them will perform as well or better then FMJ-FP.

    The only FMJ-FP .380 I know of is Winchester Wallyworld bulk-pack.
    But it is loaded so light it will not give near the velocityl compaired to other brands of FMJ-RN and any of the premimum brand JHP loaded to 900+ FPS..

    rc
     
  17. colorado_handgunner

    colorado_handgunner Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2008
    Messages:
    538
    Location:
    Florence, SC
    Remington sells a rounded .40 fmj that I have shot in the past. Don't shot it much due to $18 per box.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page