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

Totally unscientific amateur ballistic test

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by TarDevil, Jun 8, 2012.

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

    TarDevil Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,490
    Location:
    NC Coast
    I use both Speer Gold Dots and Winchester PDX1 ammo for self defense.

    Below, Speer Gold Dot on the left, Winchester PDX1 on the right.

    2012-06-08110023.jpg

    2012-06-08105927.jpg

    Both were shot at 4 gallon milk jugs of water lined up from a distance of 6 feet with a Ruger SR9c.

    Both expanded to approximately .63 (point .68 on the PDX1 if you include the little spurs on the petals... wonder if those spurs do any extra damage transiting through the body?)

    The PDX1 ripped some big holes in the first jug, decent holes in the second, entered the third and stopped with only an entry hole. None of the jugs were displaced.

    The Gold Dot shredded the first jug (covering my hands, gun and face with water) and knocked it into the air over and behind the other three. Bullet proceeded through the second with significant damage, entered the third and stayed, though it created holes on both sides of the jug. The fourth jug was knocked on it's side.

    I don't know how to scientifically evaluate my little game, but that Gold Dot created one heck of shower! Think I'll use up the PDX1's and get more Gold Dots.
     
  2. Skribs

    Skribs Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    5,807
    Location:
    Lakewood, Washington
    Just curious - what were the bullet weights on each?
     
  3. TarDevil

    TarDevil Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,490
    Location:
    NC Coast
    Oh, sorry. Both 124 gr +P.
     
  4. Texan Scott

    Texan Scott Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,184
    Location:
    The Texas Hill Country
    hmmm... good photography, btw... my totally unscientific amateur ballistic opinion is that both look like very good SD rounds, and neither is likely to be capable of anything the other isn't.
     
  5. TarDevil

    TarDevil Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,490
    Location:
    NC Coast
    Yeah, I'm confident in either... just was impressed with the explosive reaction created by the Gold Dot. Don't know if that means squat in real life situation.
     
  6. Thompsoncustom

    Thompsoncustom Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,000
  7. JEB

    JEB Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,074
    Location:
    Douds, IA
    pretty good results from both. gold dot is just about my favorite SD bullet. nice pics too!
     
  8. C0untZer0

    C0untZer0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,121
    Location:
    Illinois
    IMO PDX is a good round, I have my HD handgun loaded with the 9mm 147gr version. But I am going to get Winchester Ranger T 147gr - RA9T
     
  9. lathedog

    lathedog Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    270
    If it is repeatable then it actually is "scientific".

    That, and you need to be wearing a labcoat.
     
  10. TarDevil

    TarDevil Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,490
    Location:
    NC Coast
    Pics were made with a Samsung phone. Thanks for that video, Thompsoncustom. Quite a mess of meat! I was actually wondering about the little spurs on the tip of the petals... like little hooks sticking up.

    Working on it! I drink a lot of milk (with Nestle's Quik... just something I never grew out of!)
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2012
  11. Wishoot

    Wishoot Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,336
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Now you need to compare HST's with the GD's and PDX1's.
     
  12. NG VI

    NG VI Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    Messages:
    4,884
    Location:
    Maine
    Jug reaction may not be much different, but I really like the design of the HSTs and the non-bonded Ranger-Ts. If you see them on Brassfetcher, their recovered diameters are averaged, so pretty much every single legit defense bullet comes out with apparently identical expanded diameters.

    With the HST and Ranger-T though, that doesn't really tell the whole story. The human body does not average out it's wounds, if each petal reaches a little further from the core of the bullet, each petal is going to be drastically more harmful to the body, even if there is some space between the petals that tissue can pass through. I actually think a six-pointed star is probably a more destructive object to pass through the body than a round object with the same frontal surface area.

    But the water jugs will react to frontal surface area, mass, and velocity, especially velocity. Which is why you've got be careful with them. People react differently, and have a lot more volume than a gallon jug of water, so you can't really get any explosive effects out of pistol-speed bullets. It's all psychological and physiological effects you are aiming for with a human attacker.

    It's fun shooting jugs though and these days good bullets tend to look about identical whether they go through water, gel, or soft tissue. Definitely helps inspire confidence in your carry ammo though. That alone is enough reason to self-test bullets.
     
  13. TarDevil

    TarDevil Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,490
    Location:
    NC Coast
    NG VI:

    Completely agree with you. Much like the blades of an arrow broadhead, massively cutting arteries as it passes through. Then you wait for the bleed-out.

    Again, I can't help but be impressed with the violent results to the Speer milk jug. Damage is damage, and though the human body IS different than water and plastic, energy is being imparted nonetheless and seemingly with more blunt trauma.

    I was also impressed that the Speer seemed to penetrate further. but that seems at odds with the notion (not necessarily yours, mine) that the PDX was doing more cutting while the Gold Dot was doing more clobbering. If any of that reasoning makes sense or holds water (no pun intended), I would've thought the PDX would penetrate further.

    I've learned a lot, but the more I learn the more I realize how much I don't know.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page