All of these velocity tests are awesome, but I was wondering if anyone has (or will take on) similar data for average penetration and expansion. Looking for something to compare to the FBI standards and get an idea of what is better for 2 legged perps vs. woods carry. Particularly interested in the Underwood stuff as that 135 JHP is nasty, but curious as to if the penetration is adequate for self defense.
Their are a good many YouTube videos in wax tubes but not many Gel tests. In another month when tnoutdoors9 gets his Glock 20 we will have all the answers. Any of those Underwood rounds will serve you well loaded with the Gold Dots and the 135's might be the bomb for HD. I know they work well on Deer too and are nasty. If you have bigger things in mind the 200 XTP's are amazing at 1300 FPS.
I have been waiting on his next 9mm Underwood test and he just posted it minutes ago. Subscribe and wait for the 10's!
Wax
Subscribe to both.
The second video is from Carrier21 in Alabama, he was active at that time on Glock Talk. He is a nice guy, but he has sort of backed off from the forums...I sent him some of my 156gr cast Lyman devastator bullets to test, that video is somewheres as well.
Carrier is good people and I miss his contributions. Well I guess it was the blonde or Glocktalk and the blonde won. ;)
In response to this test,id bet the XTP controlled expansion would fair better.200 grain.
PAcop I would like to see TNoutdoors test the 200 grain XTP load. I think we would see penetration out the back of his sim test block into the water jugs.
OTOH, I don't think all the bullet disintegration we saw is necessarily a bad thing. The bullet still penetrated 17 inches, and that expansion and fragmentation would wreak havoc in the human torso. I have a friend (Snowman92D on Glocktalk) who has been to an autopsy where a 10mm bullet was used by a police officer to shoot a felon. Snowman said the 10mm bullet turned the guy's insides to mush.
I would also like to see TNoutdoors test the Underwood Delta Elite load, which is the 180 Gold Dot driven slightly slower, to 1240 fps, due to the less chamber support of this platform.
Marc, thanks for posting. I was waiting to see this test. Hopefully there will be more.
4949shooter.I think the Golden Saber would do the same if tested.Reason i mentioned the XTP was more controlled expansion.Your right,it would blast thru gel.
The 200 grain XTP was my backup gun load when I hunted predators at night in your state last year, north of Milford. I called in a few bears while calling for coyote.
Perhaps I don't fully understand what's expected, but a weight retention of 98% for the projectile isn't what I'd call fragmented. Obviously not a perfect mushroom nor rose petal visual.
A quite excellent video either way........good presentation of velocities and of the bullet channel in the media. Thanks for posting. Most videos I skip as I can't read the chrono digital displays very well in the video format.
I think that test was just fine and think the load tested would be great for PD with all the damage in the block.
The test is a perfect example of exceeding the bullet design parameters. ::) The bullet will expand to its maximum and with the extra velocity (Underwood's 1300 fps) it will fold back beyond the maximum diameter as shown in this test! This is why you don't see manufacture's loadings at max loaded velocities, they want max diameter not total penatration. Also bullet's are designed more for 40S&W than for 10mm ballistic performance.
But keep in mind not all shooting senerios happen close in, therefore 10mm would work nicely at distance as velocity drops off! ;D
Quote from: The_Shadow on September 02 2012 05:37:51 PM MDT
The test is a perfect example of exceeding the bullet design parameters. ::) The bullet will expand to its maximum and with the extra velocity (Underwood's 1300 fps) it will fold back beyond the maximum diameter as shown in this test! This is why you don't see manufacture's loadings at max loaded velocities, they want max diameter not total penatration. Also bullet's are designed more for 40S&W than for 10mm ballistic performance.
But keep in mind not all shooting senerios happen close in, therefore 10mm would work nicely at distance as velocity drops off! ;D
In reality, the bullet did fail it's design parameters, but one can not deny the damage it caused. :-*
I have to respectfully disagree about "FAILURE", the Gold Dot bullets are designed to work within a specific velocity parameter. Any thing exceeding or short of the design parameters does not constitute failure. Even Hornady has set velocity ranges for the XTP line as well. This can also be seen in suggested loading data tables for most JHP designs and Self defensive situations call for strict protocols to maintain performance to meet that criterior. We as handloaders push the limits for different reasons, some for hunting at longer distances and still have acceptable bullet performance.
Because Underwood exceeded the Gold Dot bullet design velocity by producing ammo at 1300+ fps, this allowed the over expansion and jacket seperation as a secondary affect is not a failure of the bullet as designed by Speer. Speer has bullets designed for short barreled guns which do not produce enough velocity for standard velocity projectiles to expand properly!
Would the Underwood's ammo have done it's job by exceeding the bullet's design specification? Yes it would have done a remarkable job but may have passed thru the subject...
Quote from: The_Shadow on September 03 2012 03:22:48 PM MDT
I have to respectfully disagree about "FAILURE", the Gold Dot bullets are designed to work within a specific velocity parameter. Any thing exceeding or short of the design parameters does not constitute failure. Even Hornady has set velocity ranges for the XTP line as well. This can also be seen in suggested loading data tables for most JHP designs and Self defensive situations call for strict protocols to maintain performance to meet that criterior. We as handloaders push the limits for different reasons, some for hunting at longer distances and still have acceptable bullet performance.
Because Underwood exceeded the Gold Dot bullet design velocity by producing ammo at 1300+ fps, this allowed the over expansion and jacket seperation as a secondary affect is not a failure of the bullet as designed by Speer. Speer has bullets designed for short barreled guns which do not produce enough velocity for standard velocity projectiles to expand properly!
Sorry, I thought that is what you meant, is the bullet failed. I was relying more on the comments of tn9outdoors video, simply because I do not know truly for myself. Now as to wounding human tissue, that I understand. I agree with what you are saying, I think the 135-155 gr. would do better and penetrate as deep as the 180 did. Sorry for the mix up.
Would the Underwood's ammo have done it's job by exceeding the bullet's design specification? Yes it would have done a remarkable job but may have passed thru the subject...
Lost my post to The_Shadow, but I basically said I agree with you about the faliure point, I was going off the comment made by tn9outdorrs. Getting into this end of shooting is new to me, so I am learning a lot. Althought I do know the human body well and if that had been a body, well I don't think they would be around to speak of it.
I now think a better option would be the 135-155 grain loads, as I don't think they would have over penetrated as the 180 did.
Pike County for bear 4949shooter.And your Jersey.Ill be Stripe Bass fishin soon,Island Beach,Point Pleasant,Cape May.
Quote from: Panzer on September 05 2012 01:32:41 PM MDT
I now think a better option would be the 135-155 grain loads, as I don't think they would have over penetrated as the 180 did.
On top of that I also suspect they would do even more damage specifically within the penetration depth of the heart and lungs.
Well, if we knew what we'd have to shoot, and under what conditions, we'd carry a mag for every occasion.
Put your gel behind a car door and shoot it. Window up, then down. Add a forearm, and some winter clothes. Maybe a thick layer of leather (belt/holster/bomber jacket).
Gel tells you nothing, but what a bullet does.... in gel. Real SD targets aren't gel. Regardless of how "realistic" you make it, we aren't confronting the fat, middle aged SOB in a speedo.
If your bullet doesn't do the same or as well, bare gel, as well as through a 2x4, 4 layers denim, latigo, and a belt buckle or check book, it might as well be a 9mm. There's a REAL reason the FBI were looking for more, and went in the direction of the 10mm. And, it wasn't a 135 gr. bullet going fast. They already had that, and it got them killed.
Quote from: DM1906 on September 06 2012 12:40:58 AM MDT
Well, if we knew what we'd have to shoot, and under what conditions, we'd carry a mag for every occasion.
Put your gel behind a car door and shoot it. Window up, then down. Add a forearm, and some winter clothes. Maybe a thick layer of leather (belt/holster/bomber jacket).
Gel tells you nothing, but what a bullet does.... in gel. Real SD targets aren't gel. Regardless of how "realistic" you make it, we aren't confronting the fat, middle aged SOB in a speedo.
If your bullet doesn't do the same or as well, bare gel, as well as through a 2x4, 4 layers denim, latigo, and a belt buckle or check book, it might as well be a 9mm. There's a REAL reason the FBI were looking for more, and went in the direction of the 10mm. And, it wasn't a 135 gr. bullet going fast. They already had that, and it got them killed.
I understand what you are saying, but how can we explain the excellent street record the 125gr. 357 magnum round that goes really fast too.
Second, do you yourself favor the 180gr. load?
I can't speak for DM1906.
I carry a 180 grain load for personal defense. Of course, it is not unusual here in the mountain west for a run to the convenience store to un-expectedly end in a hike in bear country.
I have considered moving to the 135 grain load. But, to be honest that is really driven by how cheap I can buy Nosler 135 gr JHP's. And, I have largely decided against the move.
Quote from: DM1906 on September 06 2012 12:40:58 AM MDT
Well, if we knew what we'd have to shoot, and under what conditions, we'd carry a mag for every occasion.
Put your gel behind a car door and shoot it. Window up, then down. Add a forearm, and some winter clothes. Maybe a thick layer of leather (belt/holster/bomber jacket).
Gel tells you nothing, but what a bullet does.... in gel. Real SD targets aren't gel. Regardless of how "realistic" you make it, we aren't confronting the fat, middle aged SOB in a speedo.
If your bullet doesn't do the same or as well, bare gel, as well as through a 2x4, 4 layers denim, latigo, and a belt buckle or check book, it might as well be a 9mm. There's a REAL reason the FBI were looking for more, and went in the direction of the 10mm. And, it wasn't a 135 gr. bullet going fast. They already had that, and it got them killed.
Yes and no. Gel does tell you something. It puts all bullets/cartridges on an even playing field toward honest comparison, one to another.
And no, the 115gr Silvertips did not get any FBI Agents killed. Also, the FBI was not just looking for
more either. They would have been happy to stick with the 45 Auto after all their testing, but the 10mm wussy load they chose did do a hair better in the accuracy department, and since they needed all new platforms anyway, they simply decided to give the 10mm a whirl. Then Federal and S&W came along offering the same ballistics in a smaller package and the 10mm got dumped in favor of that (40 Short and Wimpy), and the rest is history.
As for myself I bought 500 rounds of Underwoods 135's and 150 of 155 grain bonded to try. Yes, bear country does really need that 180 load. I am really looking at carrying the 135's as my logic based on the 357 magnum performance and street record, a little bit more weight at 1600 fps has to atleast equal the performace of said 357.
However, I think it will exceed the preformance of the famed 357 round. I have learned a lot on this forum, thanks to all who engage in the discussion.
Quote from: Panzer on September 06 2012 09:06:28 AM MDT
Quote from: DM1906 on September 06 2012 12:40:58 AM MDT
Well, if we knew what we'd have to shoot, and under what conditions, we'd carry a mag for every occasion.
Put your gel behind a car door and shoot it. Window up, then down. Add a forearm, and some winter clothes. Maybe a thick layer of leather (belt/holster/bomber jacket).
Gel tells you nothing, but what a bullet does.... in gel. Real SD targets aren't gel. Regardless of how "realistic" you make it, we aren't confronting the fat, middle aged SOB in a speedo.
If your bullet doesn't do the same or as well, bare gel, as well as through a 2x4, 4 layers denim, latigo, and a belt buckle or check book, it might as well be a 9mm. There's a REAL reason the FBI were looking for more, and went in the direction of the 10mm. And, it wasn't a 135 gr. bullet going fast. They already had that, and it got them killed.
I understand what you are saying, but how can we explain the excellent street record the 125gr. 357 magnum round that goes really fast too.
Second, do you yourself favor the 180gr. load?
There's no substitute for pure brute force. And yes, I do favor the 180.
Quote from: pacapcop on September 05 2012 07:11:46 PM MDT
Pike County for bear 4949shooter.And your Jersey.Ill be Stripe Bass fishin soon,Island Beach,Point Pleasant,Cape May.
We might be looking at the same bears, Lol..
Quote from: Panzer on September 05 2012 01:32:41 PM MDT
I now think a better option would be the 135-155 grain loads, as I don't think they would have over penetrated as the 180 did.
The 135's will basically blow up, you'll have very shallow penetration. Better served as an HD loading if you are living in an appartment perhaps. The bullet has a better chance of detroying itself on the structure should you miss your target.
The 155's can frag badly as well at their velocities from a G20. I personally don't mind a bit of frag but I don't want something that will totally destroy itself on a hard barrier either (SD type scenario). I like the 155grn-165grn out of the G29. If I eventually go to the slightly extened Storm Lake bbl for my G29, and it's reliable enough for carry, the lowest I would go is 165grn because of the velocity gain (SD). It will still probably frag a bit.
Quote from: REDLINE on September 06 2012 04:12:42 PM MDT
Quote from: DM1906 on September 06 2012 12:40:58 AM MDT
Well, if we knew what we'd have to shoot, and under what conditions, we'd carry a mag for every occasion.
Put your gel behind a car door and shoot it. Window up, then down. Add a forearm, and some winter clothes. Maybe a thick layer of leather (belt/holster/bomber jacket).
Gel tells you nothing, but what a bullet does.... in gel. Real SD targets aren't gel. Regardless of how "realistic" you make it, we aren't confronting the fat, middle aged SOB in a speedo.
If your bullet doesn't do the same or as well, bare gel, as well as through a 2x4, 4 layers denim, latigo, and a belt buckle or check book, it might as well be a 9mm. There's a REAL reason the FBI were looking for more, and went in the direction of the 10mm. And, it wasn't a 135 gr. bullet going fast. They already had that, and it got them killed.
Yes and no. Gel does tell you something. It puts all bullets/cartridges on an even playing field toward honest comparison, one to another.
And no, the 115gr Silvertips did not get any FBI Agents killed. Also, the FBI was not just looking for more either. They would have been happy to stick with the 45 Auto after all their testing, but the 10mm wussy load they chose did do a hair better in the accuracy department, and since they needed all new platforms anyway, they simply decided to give the 10mm a whirl. Then Federal and S&W came along offering the same ballistics in a smaller package and the 10mm got dumped in favor of that (40 Short and Wimpy), and the rest is history.
I am correct in what I say. Shooting gel, or any other test medium, is only the most basic means of comparison. It simulates unobstructed animal tissue, but poorly for use as a baseline for practical use. General live tissue density and composition (muscle vs. fat, for example) vary so greatly, you cannot expect to see the same results. Gel is only a test medium, and can only be applied to practical use if used for projectile capture after the bullet has passed through the real test medium (obstructions). The projectiles can then be examined for post-performance, but still in a very basic sense.
I wasn't referring to the 9mm specifically, but the previous, less-powerful calibers available as a whole. They were inadequate, and yes, they did result in dead agents and innocents. Stopping power results since the adoption of the .40 greatly improved. It's a statistical fact, although not entirely attributed to the weapon upgrade alone. Other changes were made at the same time, such as training and tactics, so how much weight the weapon bares is not specifically known.
No, they (I) wouldn't have been happy sticking with the .45ACP. It was inadequate, according to the test standards. Only the 10mm (in reduced power form), with the .357 very close behind, succeeded to meet all the test criteria. The FBI didn't specify the 10mm, 200 gr. bullet at 1200 FPS. Norma did. That's what they developed and offered. In the end, it wasn't the cartridge that wasn't accepted by the FBI, it was the platform. The .40 S&W was later developed and introduced in more familiar and reliable platforms, based on the 645/4506. It was a natural transition, and a no-brainer at the time.
Quote from: uz2bUSMC on September 08 2012 07:56:18 AM MDT
Quote from: Panzer on September 05 2012 01:32:41 PM MDT
I now think a better option would be the 135-155 grain loads, as I don't think they would have over penetrated as the 180 did.
The 135's will basically blow up, you'll have very shallow penetration. Better served as an HD loading if you are living in an appartment perhaps. The bullet has a better chance of detroying itself on the structure should you miss your target.
The 155's can frag badly as well at their velocities from a G20. I personally don't mind a bit of frag but I don't want something that will totally destroy itself on a hard barrier either (SD type scenario). I like the 155grn-165grn out of the G29. If I eventually go to the slightly extened Storm Lake bbl for my G29, and it's reliable enough for carry, the lowest I would go is 165grn because of the velocity gain (SD). It will still probably frag a bit.
I did get three boxes of 155grn, gold dots. In your opinion, these would be a better for (SD) out of a G20sf?
Based on uz2bUSMC's statements above I would bet he is going to vote more like 180 from a 4.6" Glock 20 barrel.
But, ultimately it is what you would bet your life on when it comes to carry ammo.
I don't view the FBI's testing protocol the same way many people do I think. I don't see that they really set out to duplicate the results of shooting tissue and bone in a living organism. I think they set up a standard and repeatable protocol against which different rounds could be measured. They created the protocol with the types of barriers a bullet may have to breech in mind. Those barriers are easily replicated, and so the are. But the gelatin is just a medium which does provide expansion and a basis for comparison.
I carry 180's currently, from Buffalo Bore. I have some 200's on order that will probably become my defensive load for the next year. I do load 135's in the safe gun that my wife would use for a threat in the home. I have a variety of considerations that make my choices unique, and I am sure you do to.
Does seem that heavier bullets are most favored by this group, good discussion thanks for everyone's input.
Quote from: DM1906 on September 09 2012 11:06:11 AM MDT
I am correct in what I say. Shooting gel, or any other test medium, is only the most basic means of comparison. It simulates unobstructed animal tissue, but poorly for use as a baseline for practical use. General live tissue density and composition (muscle vs. fat, for example) vary so greatly, you cannot expect to see the same results. Gel is only a test medium, and can only be applied to practical use if used for projectile capture after the bullet has passed through the real test medium (obstructions). The projectiles can then be examined for post-performance, but still in a very basic sense.
A basic means of comparison is a use, which is what I said, and the reason I said ballstic gel is not useless. That was all I said toward comparison of all loads available anyone might want to compare. Yes it is basic. By the same token it is the best we've got until some large group of individuals agree to line up to be shot willingly. Overall it seems we are in agreement.
QuoteI wasn't referring to the 9mm specifically, but the previous, less-powerful calibers available as a whole. They were inadequate, and yes, they did result in dead agents and innocents. Stopping power results since the adoption of the .40 greatly improved. It's a statistical fact, although not entirely attributed to the weapon upgrade alone. Other changes were made at the same time, such as training and tactics, so how much weight the weapon bares is not specifically known.
Fair enough that you weren't only refering to the 9mm. But that still doesn't change my main point which is that it is wrong to say that 9mm and other less powerful calibers/cartridges (within reason) as a whole get people killed. If you're going to say that then you have to say it about all cartridges in existence. I don't care if it is 9mm Luger or 10mm Auto or 454 Casull or 30-30 Win or 338 Lapua or 50 BMG.....there are ways to circumvent them all. In the case of the very well know FBI Miami shootout the adversaries were wearing body armor.....the 9mm Silvertip load used was far from the only cartridge involved in the fight which included rifle rounds. To simply blame the death of FBI agents on the 9mm rounds used because a bullet didn't penetrate an extra inch or so, especially in the given scenario is lame at best. A whole lot of stuff failed that day, and the 9mm was only a fraction of all failures. To suggest a 10mm (or any higher powered common LE caliber/cartridge as a whole) would have changed the outcome on its own is simply wrong.
Lastly, I don't know what your definition of "
greatly improved" is in regard to you suggesting it being statistical fact that stopping power results have been greatly improved since the adoption of the 40. I'm calling BS. If you've got conclusive data to back that up, I'll happily eat crow. But, you don't, because it doesn't exist, unless you are simply using some small data set of a limited nature not showing the whole picture, that will easily allow me to come back with a different limited nature scenario showing different.
FYI, mostly where you're messing up here is suggesting that every load available in 9mm is equal to all other loads in 9mm, and similarly for 40 S&W. That is certainly not true. It is also certainly not true that every load in 40S&W is better than every load in 9mm. And even to suggest that all loads of 40 S&W overall show greatly improved stopping power results over 9mm and, within reason, other less-powerful calibers available as a whole, is at best a stretch, and possibly not true at all using any honest methodology.
QuoteNo, they (I) wouldn't have been happy sticking with the .45ACP.
Well obviously, as they chose the 10mm. But that is not what I said. And in regard to what I said, they said; "...the difference between the two
(10mm and 45 Auto) is marginal and had the Director said "go with the .45", we would have done so gladly."
QuoteIt (45 Auto) was inadequate, according to the test standards.
No, it wasn't, as you will understand further within the link I posted below, and can clearly be seen just in the comment from the FBI that I posted above.
QuoteOnly the 10mm (in reduced power form), with the .357 very close behind, succeeded to meet all the test criteria.
The 357 Magnum was never tested, as they already had predermined they didn't want it.
The loads tested included and were limited to:
.38 - 158gr LHP+P FBI load that was really on in the test as a minimum standard
9mm - 147gr subsonic load (I believe the Hydra-Shok)
.45 - 185gr JHP (best .45 load then available
according to them)
10mm 180gr JHP subsonic developed by FBI
QuoteThe FBI didn't specify the 10mm, 200 gr. bullet at 1200 FPS. Norma did. That's what they developed and offered.
Who in the heck said they did?!? Nor did the FBI ever consider any 200gr Norma load.
QuoteIn the end, it wasn't the cartridge that wasn't accepted by the FBI, it was the platform. The .40 S&W was later developed and introduced in more familiar and reliable platforms, based on the 645/4506. It was a natural transition, and a no-brainer at the time.
Kind of.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf (http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf)
Quote from: Panzer on September 09 2012 07:58:45 PM MDT
Quote from: uz2bUSMC on September 08 2012 07:56:18 AM MDT
Quote from: Panzer on September 05 2012 01:32:41 PM MDT
I now think a better option would be the 135-155 grain loads, as I don't think they would have over penetrated as the 180 did.
The 135's will basically blow up, you'll have very shallow penetration. Better served as an HD loading if you are living in an appartment perhaps. The bullet has a better chance of detroying itself on the structure should you miss your target.
The 155's can frag badly as well at their velocities from a G20. I personally don't mind a bit of frag but I don't want something that will totally destroy itself on a hard barrier either (SD type scenario). I like the 155grn-165grn out of the G29. If I eventually go to the slightly extened Storm Lake bbl for my G29, and it's reliable enough for carry, the lowest I would go is 165grn because of the velocity gain (SD). It will still probably frag a bit.
I did get three boxes of 155grn, gold dots. In your opinion, these would be a better for (SD) out of a G20sf?
It depends. I do tend to favor middle weight bullets more but in some of my testing, the 155's came apart (blew up) at high velocity. This was on a pork shoulder, no denin, no hard barrier. The reason I would be aprehensive about using those as SD loads is I don't know how they will hold up through a hard barrier. Might be erattic because although velocity helps get through barriers it can destroy the bullet if it's moving too fast depending on what it hits. Even civilians may have to shoot through their own car, so barrier penetration and the ability for the bullet to do work on the bad guy afterwards is important.
The other possible problem is that the bullet may literally blow up if it were to hit your targets arm leaving no chance for it to reach vitals. I would make a strong guess that the arm will not be even remotely usable afterwards, but you will still need to continue firing if you need to finish the job.
So, I think the 165-180 are your best bet personally. These are still moving way fast for a good temp cavity (yes, I believe a temp cavity contributes) and hopefully will hold together better.
ETA: Man, I typed this post up too fast. Had to change some things I didn't like without more explanation..
This was all that was left of the 155grn gold dot fired from 6" LWD bbl, loading was Double Tap.
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b23/uz2busmc/DSC00554.jpg)
Panzer,
I also should note that even though the 155grn in my example was shot out of a 6" bbl, since it was Double Tap ammo it will most likely be running a bit slower and most likely comparable to an Underwood load out of a standard length bbl or in the ball park.
Uz2bUSMC,
Ya, I figured if that happened with the DT load, the Underwood would be just as bad. I agree with the temporary stretch cavity, it is additional blunt trauma in my view. It just hard to figure which is best, many people favore the faster and lighter is better and other go slower and heavy. Not to say a 180 10mm is slow, but I think I like your logic behind the heavier bullet, think it's time to get some 180's from Underwood and develope my skills with that load.
Thank you very much, your picture and logic has given me a more clear view on the heavy bullets.
Quote from: Panzer on September 11 2012 01:10:28 PM MDT
Uz2bUSMC,
Ya, I figured if that happened with the DT load, the Underwood would be just as bad. I agree with the temporary stretch cavity, it is additional blunt trauma in my view. It just hard to figure which is best, many people favore the faster and lighter is better and other go slower and heavy. Not to say a 180 10mm is slow, but I think I like your logic behind the heavier bullet, think it's time to get some 180's from Underwood and develope my skills with that load.
Thank you very much, your picture and logic has given me a more clear view on the heavy bullets.
Not to confuse you, but just so you know... if two given bullet weights do what I want them to do through a barrier, I would choose the lighter of the two i.e. 165 vs 180. The 165 would tend to be more violent upon impact given the same bullet construction. Sometimes these things are hard to explain without the conversation going way off on a tangent. Also, these subjects tend to be discussed with much passion. Since this forum has such a friendly atmosphere, I tend to keep my terminal ballistic discussions on another forum. The nice thing about the 180 grn in 10mm is that it becomes your proverbial cake and eat it too package. It's heavy AND really fast!
I do like the UnderWood 165 G/S's.It's my carry round.
Quote from: uz2bUSMC on September 11 2012 02:26:31 PM MDT
Quote from: Panzer on September 11 2012 01:10:28 PM MDT
Uz2bUSMC,
Ya, I figured if that happened with the DT load, the Underwood would be just as bad. I agree with the temporary stretch cavity, it is additional blunt trauma in my view. It just hard to figure which is best, many people favore the faster and lighter is better and other go slower and heavy. Not to say a 180 10mm is slow, but I think I like your logic behind the heavier bullet, think it's time to get some 180's from Underwood and develope my skills with that load.
Thank you very much, your picture and logic has given me a more clear view on the heavy bullets.
Not to confuse you, but just so you know... if two given bullet weights do what I want them to do through a barrier, I would choose the lighter of the two i.e. 165 vs 180. The 165 would tend to be more violent upon impact given the same bullet construction. Sometimes these things are hard to explain without the conversation going way off on a tangent. Also, these subjects tend to be discussed with much passion. Since this forum has such a friendly atmosphere, I tend to keep my terminal ballistic discussions on another forum. The nice thing about the 180 grn in 10mm is that it becomes your proverbial cake and eat it too package. It's heavy AND really fast!
No confusion, the information has been great as I am new to the 10mm and it is good to hear from people who have been using the round far longer than I.
Quote from: uz2bUSMC on September 10 2012 03:43:46 PM MDT...the 155's came apart (blew up) at high velocity. This was on a pork shoulder, no denin, no hard barrier.
I'ld like to see that same test you did, but with the Underwood 10mm 155XTP load (rated at 1500fps from a G20), and from a G29.