The Rise (and Fall?) of The Hollow Point....

[Archer]

These gimmick rounds perform exceptionally well when it comes to separating the ignorant and gullible from their money.

 

[WrongHanded]

These gimmick rounds perform exceptionally well when it comes to separating the ignorant and gullible from their money.

I'm sure someone once said the same about hollow point ammunition. And we all got fooled.

 

[Pudge]

I'm sure someone once said the same about hollow point ammunition. And we all got fooled.

How would you even determine that hollow points were actually more effective?

 

[WrongHanded]

How would you even determine that hollow points were actually more effective?

You mean back when the first HPs were marketed to LE and (possibly) for self defense? PETA probably didn't have the reach then that they do now. So, tests on living tissue in a controlled environment?

 

[WheelGunMan]

These gimmick rounds perform exceptionally well when it comes to separating the ignorant and gullible from their money.

All new ammo has to be introduced sometime. I'm sure there were a lot of close minded naysayers when the hollow point was born.

 

[Pudge]

You mean back when the first HPs were marketed to LE and (possibly) for self defense? PETA probably didn't have the reach then that they do now. So, tests on living tissue in a controlled environment?

So performance in those tests could help us discern between improved designs and gimmicks?

 

[WrongHanded]

So performance in those tests could help us discern between improved designs and gimmicks?

I'm not sure our society will allow the shooting of pigs or other livestock in the quest for answers to questions of internal ballistics. It's not so much that you can't trap feral pigs and shoot them with different bullets to see what happens. It's that you might find yourself on the wrong side of animal cruelty accusations (or maybe even a law suit) if you try and publish the results.

Which is probably why no one has done so in an effort to either prove new a projectile design is superior, or that it's inferior. Because realistically, shooting some animals and observing the results would probably settle the debate pretty quickly.

 

[MaxP]

I have rather limited experience with this bullet design, but LeHigh Defense asked us to test them for the new DG line of ammo from Buffalo Bore. We ultimately settled on a flat-nosed design with a large meplat as the other design didn’t penetrate as deeply or produce the wound channel of the flat-nosed designs of the same caliber. We tested them on bovine flesh and NOT gel, where you get muscle, sinew, bone and skin to disrupt the ability of the bullet to go deep and straight. I don’t think any solid design will replace a good expanding bullet, nor should it be expected to. Horses for courses.

 

[Pudge]

I have rather limited experience with this bullet design, but LeHigh Defense asked us to test them for the new DG line of ammo from Buffalo Bore. We ultimately settled on a flat-nosed design with a large meplat as the other design didn’t penetrate as deeply or produce the wound channel of the flat-nosed designs of the same caliber. We tested them on bovine flesh and NOT gel, where you get muscle, sinew, bone and skin to disrupt the ability of the bullet to go deep and straight. I don’t think any solid design will replace a good expanding bullet, nor should it be expected to. Horses for courses.

Yep. The tests we have are what we have. Some believe their limitations are without significance, some disagree. There are those who believe that a SWC is the equal of a quality JHP. Those who rely on test data for their assurance that a JHP is superior, and dismiss a new design's performance in the same media as a gimmick seem inconsistent to me.

Whatever, placement is king, right up to the point where the bullet design is insufficient. We are lucky to have resources like the experience of those like you who have the opportunity to see and document the performance of a wide selection of bullet designs.

 

[WrongHanded]

I have rather limited experience with this bullet design, but LeHigh Defense asked us to test them for the new DG line of ammo from Buffalo Bore. We ultimately settled on a flat-nosed design with a large meplat as the other design didn’t penetrate as deeply or produce the wound channel of the flat-nosed designs of the same caliber. We tested them on bovine flesh and NOT gel, where you get muscle, sinew, bone and skin to disrupt the ability of the bullet to go deep and straight. I don’t think any solid design will replace a good expanding bullet, nor should it be expected to. Horses for courses.

Max, you say the penetration was less than wide flat meplat design. And I understand why you dislike that for hunting. It is however a plus for SD projectiles. But how was the tissue damage and wound track diameter? Did you take any measurements, or could you compare the damage to something else as a reference?

 

[tipoc]

This is the DG (Dangerous Game) line of ammo from Buffalo Bore. Other companies also have DG specific ammo.

https://www.buffalobore.com/

The LeHigh design bullets will not be replacing HP or a solid with a good meplat anytime soon, if at all. What they should hope for is a place at the table.

 

[golden]

Pudge,

Your forgetting about the "OTHER WAY" to test ammo, EXPERIENCE in the field. At one point, my agency used +P+ .38 Special and we had complaints of failure to stop situations during gunfights. We switched calibers and the problems went away. We switched calibers again and no complaints. Most large law enforcement organizations track what happens in the field these days. So does the military. If some ammo comes out and is issued, we can see what happens there.
After the supposed failure of the SILVERTIP ammo in the Miami gunfight, the FBI pushed for deeper penetration and heavy for caliber rounds. Then some of those agencies who followed that advice found it was poor advice. It took the ammo makers a while to catch up, but they have.

You can call the agencies around you and ask what they carry. I now carry the ammo my agency was issuing (FEDERAL 180 grain HST in my .40 S&W pistols) before our latest caliber change. We had no complaints from the field and it was used for almost a decade.

Even the NYPD went to hollow points and they are a very, very conservative agency.

JIm

 

[481]

This.

These gimmick rounds perform exceptionally well when it comes to separating the ignorant and gullible from their money.

It is interesting to note that no LE agencies are using these designs and I don't expect that they will anytime soon as the new 'majicked-up bullet designs' (Lehigh XP, XD designs, along with the G2 RIPs) offer more liability risk than any ''reward'' that they can promise—which is zero.

 

[JTQ]

I'll admit I don't know the correct answer

Your forgetting about the "OTHER WAY" to test ammo, EXPERIENCE in the field.

The observation I always have is the hunting community shoots a whole bunch more animals every year than anybody shoots people, and most of those hunters are looking for that one shot stop, as capacity is pretty much never a consideration for hunters.

It seems as if the bullets folks choose when using typical defensive handgun caliber rounds on human sized animal game are different than the ammo manufacturers/law enforcement/and defensive training community recommends for personal defense rounds.

I don't know who's right, but they are different.

 

[Pudge]

Pudge,

Your forgetting about the "OTHER WAY" to test ammo, EXPERIENCE in the field. At one point, my agency used +P+ .38 Special and we had complaints of failure to stop situations during gunfights. We switched calibers and the problems went away. We switched calibers again and no complaints. Most large law enforcement organizations track what happens in the field these days. So does the military. If some ammo comes out and is issued, we can see what happens there.
After the supposed failure of the SILVERTIP ammo in the Miami gunfight, the FBI pushed for deeper penetration and heavy for caliber rounds. Then some of those agencies who followed that advice found it was poor advice. It took the ammo makers a while to catch up, but they have.

You can call the agencies around you and ask what they carry. I now carry the ammo my agency was issuing (FEDERAL 180 grain HST in my .40 S&W pistols) before our latest caliber change. We had no complaints from the field and it was used for almost a decade.

Even the NYPD went to hollow points and they are a very, very conservative agency.

JIm

That's certainly accurate, but an awful lot plays into an agency's decision to use ammo. The performance of the 40 S&W is not why agencies switching are or have switched 9mm, nor was the performance of the .357 magnum the cause of the switch to semis. The question is not whether hollowpoints work, but rather can a different design equal their performance? Is that design's performance in test medium as valid as a known quantity's performance in the same medium? I think it is worth considering and not dismissing out of hand. The barrier blind nature of the projectile, the consistent performance, the lighter weight which can result in lower recoil, can all be seen as valid advantages IF the performance is there. Evaluating that performance is what I'm asking about, and just because there isn't loads of documented field success yet, does not make the design ineffective.

But I cannot find fault as to your reasoning regarding what ammo you carry for your defense, nor in your suggestion that it would be a valid basis for my decision.

 

[DustyGmt]

WRONGHANDED,

All the same, I will wait for proof from the LEO'S. I remember that NYPD was doing anything to avoid adopting hollow point ammo for their .38 Specials and tried a 158 Semi Wadcutter load (without a hollowpoint) and did not find it was anymore effective than the 158 grain Lead Round Nose ammo that they were already using.

Wasnt the .357 125gr LSWCHP the wonder load for a couple decades through the 70's and 80's before cops transitioned from revolvers to autos. I've heard that round was responsible for alot of one shot stops and cops loved it. If I still had a .357 that's probably what I'd carry

 

[DustyGmt]

I do believe that monolithic fluid transfer bullets like the Lehigh Extreme Defense and Extreme Penetrator bullets will eventually replace HP and JHP bullets. I adopted ammo with both Defense and Penetrator bullets as far back as 2014 and the Penetrator was the only solid bullet option in the Lehigh Extreme line. I’d I’d not do it on a whim. I researched the fluid transfer technology and it made perfect sense to me. A high pressure water stream can cut through flesh, and the fluid transfer bullets can also.

I am not a bullet belief missionary. To each his own. However, I am a person who wants to understand the science and the performance of technological ‘things.’ I have seen enough tests of the fluid transfer bullets in gel, through, barriers, through bone, windshield glass to believe they are better performers than HP particularly in shorter barred handguns from which velocities are often inadequate to assure HP expansion. The fluid transfer bullets do not depend upon expansion. They generate wound channel by high velocity fluid pressure tearing tissue. Bullet velocity increase their performance but even the low velocity 3 inch barrel 380 pistol will create substantial wound damage. The test I have seen showed that they were more effective than any JHP in 380 and 9mm. Logically, that would indicate it would be true for larger calibers too.

I considered these, I didnt really do alot of in depth analysis beyond watching a tnoutdoors review of the Xtreme Penetrators and I wasnt real jazzed about 30"+ penetration but the wound cavity was surprisingly impressive. I wouldnt carry these unless for predator defense or hunting Cape buffalo or elephants.

I'm aware they made a dialed back version down from 115gr solid copper to a 90gr solid with enhanced flutes, these are what you carry? Those might be worth checking out. I'm not sure about the claims saying that these are going to be the catalyst for sweeping all common HP bullets off the armory and store shelves... Do any agencies that anybody knows of even carry these Lehigh fluted bullets?

 

[1942bull]

In 380 LCP 2 carry Extreme Penetrator. Out of a 3” barrel they reach 14 to 15 inches penetration in denim and bare gel. In my 9mm PPS M2 I carry Extreme Defense ( the modified flute rebounds). They do not exceed FBI specs in either bare or covered gel. Like the Penetrator rounds they are barrier blind. One exception is when hiking in black bear country my load is 9mm +P Penetrator. I prefer an over penetrating round if Ever needed against a bear.

 

[FFGColorado]

I considered these, I didnt really do alot of in depth analysis beyond watching a tnoutdoors review of the Xtreme Penetrators and I wasnt real jazzed about 30"+ penetration but the wound cavity was surprisingly impressive. I wouldnt carry these unless for predator defense or hunting Cape buffalo or elephants.

I'm aware they made a dialed back version down from 115gr solid copper to a 90gr solid with enhanced flutes, these are what you carry? Those might be worth checking out. I'm not sure about the claims saying that these are going to be the catalyst for sweeping all common HP bullets off the armory and store shelves... Do any agencies that anybody knows of even carry these Lehigh fluted bullets?

What I carry(9mm and .380)..Xtreme DEFENDER, not 'penetrator'...Pretty expensive so I doubt any LEA carry/use them.

 

[MaxP]

The bullet we went with in the DG line is a flat-nosed solid by LeHigh. Again, we found that not only did the flat-nosed solids go deeper than their Phillips headed counterparts, they produced larger permanent wound channels on bovine flesh.

I’ve always felt this over penetration concern was somewhat comical in light of all of the misses in a shootout. Think about it.

 

[golden]

Dusty Gmt,

Yes, the 125 grain .357 magnum was the king of the hill of manstoppers in gunfights, based on analysis by several law enforcement agencies, mostly state police or troopers. The negative was that it kicked hard with a huge flame and a lot of muzzle blast. Before I went to the 9m.m., I qualified with my own S&W 681, an L-frame gun along with my issue model 13. When the firearms instructors saw that I had an L-frame, they handed me 6 boxes for "practice ammo", to get rid of it and then again, the next time I went.
We were using the 110 grain .357 ammo as our regular issue load, which is actually slower than the 125 grain, about 1250 to 1300 fps versus 1450 to 1500 fps.

In our K-frame model 13's, the 125 grain had fractured a forcing cone and was ordered not to be issued anymore. It had been issued as a substitute for our usual 110 grain ammo. Since I had an L-frame, I was considered safe to shoot it and I did, but I preferred the softer recoiling 110 grain load.

Based on police reports, the 125 grain was considered to be about 90 %, one shot effective against the 110 grain, which depending on which ammo was compared, was in the mid 80 % range. The 110 grain load had the same performance as the 9m.m. +P+ loads that we also issued.
I recently tried out some 110 and 125 grain REMINGTON sjhp ammo with 3 of each loaded into the cylinder of my RUGER Security 6 and a RUGER GP-100. I had no trouble telling the difference between the two loads. The recoil was less noticeable than the noise, flash and muzzle blast.

You get more power with the 125 grain, but the trade off was recoil, brighter flash, more muzzle blast and in the case of our model 13's, the possibility of the gun being damaged.
Still, when you wanted the best, that was the load to use.

Jim

 

[JTQ]

I’ve always felt this over penetration concern was somewhat comical in light of all of the misses in a shootout. Think about it.

While I can see over penetration as somewhat of a potential issue for LE, as they may find themselves in shootout in a crowd, for the civilian concealed carrier, the likely-hood of that is very small, to non-existent.

 

[Kleanbore]

While I can see over penetration as somewhat of a potential issue for LE, as they may find themselves in shootout in a crowd, for the civilian concealed carrier, the likely-hood of that is very small, to non-existent.

Why would you think that?

 

[JTQ]

Why would you think that?

If in a crowd, I would retreat rather than engage. Why would I get picked out of a crowd to be the sole victim rather than somebody else? Sure it's possible, but we're working our way down the list of likely possibilities.

 

[Kleanbore]

f in a crowd, I would retreat rather than engage.

You should always do that, if possible.

Why would I get picked out of a crowd to be the sole victim rather than somebody else?

If you do not appear to be "the intended vicim", you would be much wiser avoid the use of a firearm.