Editor asks: 9mm ammo for home protection

[martywinston]

As I mentioned in my first forum posting, I've been writing about personal protection and home protection handguns for about 6 months and my "poster child" weapon is the Smith & Wesson M&P 9mm with 4.25" barrel.

I've done a lot of homework into ammunition for this specific use and I am personally very impressed by the engineering that's going into many of the new offerings.

Let me define some precepts. In this defensive context, a cartridge should penetrate clothing and bloom when entering soft tissue but even if it should moss or exit soft tissue, it should not penetrate walls. It should be capable of penetrating a forearm held up to block the shot. Its goal is to stop the bad guy as assuredly as possible with as few shots as possible, but still do so within the 9mm 9x19 Luger limitation.

I've seen some interesting modifications of the +P JHP, perhaps most notably the Hornady Critical Defense cartridges.

But I'm here to learn from you, so please tell me your own nominees for best defensive ammunition, and what about them is behind your recommendation.

Along the same lines, I'd be happy to hear your rules of thumb; for example, whether you seek to optimize mass with more grains per bullet, or velocity, or some other factor - and again, why.

I would especially value any stories you'd care to share based on real-life experiences.

[Pisgah]

As most interior walls these day are nothing but a couple of sheets of sheetrock, any 9mm bullet that's not Nerf has a pretty good chance of penetrating. Interestingly, tests have shown that 45-55 gr. .223 hollowpoints penetrate walls less than just about any pistol or shotgun round. So maybe switch to a nice AR carbine...

[ACP230]

Cor-Bon has some interesting ammo with Barnes copper bullets.
I have used it in .38 Special carry guns, but so far, not in 9mms.

[StatesRightist]

You mention Hornady Critical Defense, I would suggest you take a look at it's results in 4 layer gel, they are not inspiring, I would not carry it. I bought some when it first came out thanks to industry/press hype only to find out it was all show and no go.

Have you looked at Doc Roberts FBI Gel results?

Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo

There is a short list of rounds that do well in gel results for 4 layer denim at the above link.

Check out Evan Marshall's findings as well, they are based on actual real world shooting results.

Based on that and my own personal and LEO experience there are not but a few rounds that combine real world success and Gel results that I would carry personally.

The 124 +p and 127 +p+ Winchester Ranger rounds, Ranger T and the Bonded are each a little better than the other in certain aspects. The bonded are better for barriers and the T for expansion.

Speer Gold Dot 124 gr +p rounds, the most street proven round.

The Corbon DPX offering

Any Federal HST offerings, the hydra shoks etc are older inferior rounds.

That would be about all I would carry, with one exception.

The Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel 124gr +P is a fantastic load for under 4 inch barrel pistols, the round is designed to expand at lower velocities and still has fantastic penetration.

That's my opinion, you can value it as you like, I am not representing myself as an expert.

[REM 3200]

First, there are no magic bullets.
After that there is, in no particular order, Gold-Dot, Ranger T and Federal HST. Take your pick.

[WR Moore]

The exact bullet you use is immaterial. SO LONG AS YOU HIT A VITAL AREA! If you don't hit a vital area, it's also immaterial what you use. As noted above, there is no magic bullet/caliber that will compensate for a lack of skill on the users part. Any of the JHP offerings from major manufacturers should do nicely if placed in the right spot.

Now then, any conventional projectile able to cause lethal injury will pass through drywall like it was tissue paper. You need to learn to know the safe firing lanes in your home and practice sufficiently to minimize the chance of misses.

That you've been writing "about personal protection and home protection handguns for about 6 months" and are only now asking basic questions is worrisome in the exteme.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by WR Moore

The exact bullet you use is immaterial. SO LONG AS YOU HIT A VITAL AREA!
- - -
That you've been writing "about personal protection and home protection handguns for about 6 months" and are only now asking basic questions is worrisome in the exteme.

My research does not support your oversimplification. There is first the question of hitting a vital area which has to do with a great deal more than where you aim. Thicknesses of leather have, for example, been documented to cause particular rounds to leave a bruise rather than a hole in the flesh beyond. Those are quite definitive examples of when the exact bullet you use is not at all immaterial.

As to finding my research worrisome, I'm not your Mother and will not advise you as to when you should or should not worry.

I have of course read a great deal of the published research, including the FBI findings and many gel tests. I have spoken directly with several of the ammunition manufacturers. And I have interviewed a good number of LEOs. Not one of them has shown your level of disrespect and not one of them has been dismissive of my questions.

I have a substantial engineering background and I understand the physics of cartridges. I have looked at deconstructed examples of a number of "safe load" rounds. I have viewed the various bloom, mushroom and cutter edges of a large variety of rounds. I have seen tests involving sand, water, gel, board, block and more.

Whether or not I draw conclusions from those, whether or not I share those conclusions here, whether or not I allow any conclusions I state to bias the responses of others is, frankly, none of your business.

I am here on a fully disclosed agenda asking questions of a community that, in any reasonable expectation, has some degree of experience with any variety of ammunition. I am asking for anecdotal testimony as to their experience.

If you seek to respond by pontificating, please do so with greater credulity.

If I was looking for somebody to lecture and preach, I would have gone to church.

Are we clear now?

I continue to invite the good-natured and indeed helpful responses of the majority here.

Fell free to boycott my questions the next time you feel an urge to participate.

[Badkarma 1]

First choice: Speer 124+P Gold Dot.
Second choice: Federal 147gr. HST.
Honorable Mention: Winchester 124+P and 147gr. Ranger T. Dale

[StatesRightist]

Originally Posted by martywinston

My research does not support your oversimplification. There is first the question of hitting a vital area which has to do with a great deal more than where you aim. Thicknesses of leather have, for example, been documented to cause particular rounds to leave a bruise rather than a hole in the flesh beyond. Those are quite definitive examples of when the exact bullet you use is not at all immaterial.

As to finding my research worrisome, I'm not your Mother and will not advise you as to when you should or should not worry.

I have of course read a great deal of the published research, including the FBI findings and many gel tests. I have spoken directly with several of the ammunition manufacturers. And I have interviewed a good number of LEOs. Not one of them has shown your level of disrespect and not one of them has been dismissive of my questions.

I have a substantial engineering background and I understand the physics of cartridges. I have looked at deconstructed examples of a number of "safe load" rounds. I have viewed the various bloom, mushroom and cutter edges of a large variety of rounds. I have seen tests involving sand, water, gel, board, block and more.

Whether or not I draw conclusions from those, whether or not I share those conclusions here, whether or not I allow any conclusions I state to bias the responses of others is, frankly, none of your business.

I am here on a fully disclosed agenda asking questions of a community that, in any reasonable expectation, has some degree of experience with any variety of ammunition. I am asking for anecdotal testimony as to their experience.

If you seek to respond by pontificating, please do so with greater credulity.

If I was looking for somebody to lecture and preach, I would have gone to church.

Are we clear now?

I continue to invite the good-natured and indeed helpful responses of the majority here.

Fell free to boycott my questions the next time you feel an urge to participate.

Don't let it get to you.

Common sense says a round that expands wider than another round has a greater chance of hitting a vital area, giving a larger margin of error, increasing the crush zone, thereby causing more damage etc. Real life is not like shooting paper, you need all the edge you can get.

Then there is also the matter of a bullet that passes through deposits less energy than one that transfers all of it's energy in the body of the BG.

The point is to neutralize the attacker, only head or spine shots shut it down instantaneously. Otherwise, barring a psychological shut down of the BG, it's a matter of inducing shock, blood loss or hitting vital organs. Many of the rounds lack penetration enough to get to the vital areas and the smaller the caliber, the fewer the available rounds that offer both penetration and expansion ie the more important the round choice is.

So, yes accuracy is important, but so is bullet choice.

One other FYI, all of the people I know who've seen "safe rounds" Glaser etc say they cause spectacular looking wounds, but lack significant penetration.

Again, Just my opinion.

[NKJ nut]

Originally Posted by martywinston

My research does not support your oversimplification. There is first the question of hitting a vital area which has to do with a great deal more than where you aim. Thicknesses of leather have, for example, been documented to cause particular rounds to leave a bruise rather than a hole in the flesh beyond. Those are quite definitive examples of when the exact bullet you use is not at all immaterial.

As to finding my research worrisome, I'm not your Mother and will not advise you as to when you should or should not worry.

I have of course read a great deal of the published research, including the FBI findings and many gel tests. I have spoken directly with several of the ammunition manufacturers. And I have interviewed a good number of LEOs. Not one of them has shown your level of disrespect and not one of them has been dismissive of my questions.

I have a substantial engineering background and I understand the physics of cartridges. I have looked at deconstructed examples of a number of "safe load" rounds. I have viewed the various bloom, mushroom and cutter edges of a large variety of rounds. I have seen tests involving sand, water, gel, board, block and more.

Whether or not I draw conclusions from those, whether or not I share those conclusions here, whether or not I allow any conclusions I state to bias the responses of others is, frankly, none of your business.

I am here on a fully disclosed agenda asking questions of a community that, in any reasonable expectation, has some degree of experience with any variety of ammunition. I am asking for anecdotal testimony as to their experience.

If you seek to respond by pontificating, please do so with greater credulity.

If I was looking for somebody to lecture and preach, I would have gone to church.

Are we clear now?

I continue to invite the good-natured and indeed helpful responses of the majority here.

Fell free to boycott my questions the next time you feel an urge to participate.

Hi Marty. i am writing a book on internet etiquette. Do you mind if I include the text of the above post in my book? With proper attribution of course.

I've got a chapter that it would fit right in.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by StatesRightist

So, yes accuracy is important, but so is bullet choice.

Thanks - that's exactly my point in this research - trying to find ammo that disappoints among ammo that performs.

I have some field testing planned but I need to make sure I'm surveying the right selection of products.

[Doc TH]

Very good, NKJ. Funny, I was thinking the same thing

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by NKJ nut

Hi Marty. i am writing a book on internet etiquette. Do you mind if I include the text of the above post in my book? With proper attribution of course.

I've got a chapter that it would fit right in.

I could hardly refuse - this is a public forum and my posting here constitutes an act of publication - so you would be free to cite me without asking permission - but the fact that you asked makes me all the more happy to grant it.

[logictox]

Opinions about ammo are like backsides, we all have one. A legend in the hi power world passed away last year named Stephen Camp. He did a lot of research and spent a great deal of time testing different 9mm ammo. His reads are still online and well worth the read.

Stephen Camp

[NKJ nut]

Originally Posted by martywinston

I could hardly refuse - this is a public forum and my posting here constitutes an act of publication - so you would be free to cite me without asking permission - but the fact that you asked makes me all the more happy to grant it.

Thanks Marty. Could you please be so kind as to tell us what publications you write for? Otherwise I am going to knock myself out looking through every gun-zine in the rack to see if you have an article in it. Magazines are so expensive these days.

[ElectroMotive]

First, I'd suggest you heed the advice previously stated, and review the data presented by Dr Gary K Roberts (online handle DocGKR) on M4Carbine.net

Next I suggest you read the International Wounds Ballistics Association papers made available on FirearmsTactical.com - Home. In specfic, I reccomend the timeless terminal ballistics paper written by SA Urey Patrick entitled "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness".

A book you may be interested in is by Dr Duncan MacPherson, Bullet Penetration: Modeling the Dynamics & the Incapacitation Resulting from Wound Trauma.


Dont waste your time with Ayoob, Marshall, Sanow, or Courtney

[ElectroMotive]

Things to consider with service pistol caliber ammo, after accuracy, the most important thing is penetration. Without it you are not going to reach the CNS, vital organs, arteries, and major vessels all which enhance and expedite incapacitation.
The reasons for the minimum desired amount of penrtration being 12 inches is because badguys hold things in front of them, like weapons, and your bullet must penetrate them. Furthermore, badguys dont always stand front and center, their torsos can be canted, presenting oblique angles which increase the need for penetration.

A distant second is expansion. For expansion to be effective, the bullet must expand after encountering soft intermediate barriers like clothing, and hard intermediate like car bodies, laminated auto glass, among others. Its best that the expansion be jagged so that tearing and cutting occurrs as opposed to shoving tissue aside.

[ElectroMotive]

If you dont mind me asking, what publication are you writing? Who is your editor? I ask because I have some friends that a writers for some firearms magazines.

[WR Moore]

Originally Posted by martywinston

I could hardly refuse - this is a public forum and my posting here constitutes an act of publication - so you would be free to cite me without asking permission - but the fact that you asked makes me all the more happy to grant it.

Marty, I don't think you felt the breeze. Had you opened with the reply to my comments, minus the personal invective, I think things would have gone much better for you.

Now then, some of the literature you've reviewed is relevent, some is not. Very briefly, the bullet designs and performance of today are far more advanced than 20 odd years ago, hence my comments. In addition, if you really paid attention to the FBI testing protocols, you'd see that many of the tests are not relevent to most self defense shootings. Indeed, the protocols specifically state that one should eliminate testing phases that do not match your expected usage. However, your engineering background should also have tipped you that the FBI didn't conduct enough tests on individual rounds to exclude random chance from affecting results.

Perhaps the biggest issue is the warning in the FBI test protocols that the testing is to provide a level playing field and uniform test procedures to compare the performance of projectiles, the results do not pretend to predict performance in the real world.

Speaking of the real world, having shot a statistically significant number of man sized critters (in vital areas) with Glasers, I find the penetration inadequate even without an intervening object.

I'd suggest the writings of Dr. Vincent DiMaio, specifically "Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics and Forensic Techniques".

[rojodiablo]

Okay, I will give you real world testing on 3 types of ammo, and what I think of them. (These have all been used by myself- all 3 in hunting situations, at close range as the 9mm is my backup sidearm while hog depredation shooting at night. 2 of the 3 have been used in defense, not hunting.)
1. Speer Lawman. 124gr and 147 gr. The 147 grain is a good hunting round, but the 124gr is better. It's faster, and more accurate. I say this because several very fast and close shooting situations with hogs have left me rather impressed by the manageable recoil and it still hits hard, and does not fall apart easily. The bullet holds a good bit of weight; 80% even when shooting bones. The 124gr also works well in self defense. Did not see what the bullet looked like after it was fired.
2. Federal Hydra shock. 147 grain. These hit hard, fly straight, and penetrate well. They retain their weight, between 80-95% and have been able to break big bones on hogs; femurs, hips, spines, skulls. On a 200lb hog, they do not go thru and thru. They go in about 10" to 13" and STOP. Coincidentally, so does the hog! These bullets have saved my life. They go thru car doors and make hits.
3. Remington Golden Sabre. 124 gr. So far, hogs have not enjoyed this bullet much. On the side, I do not like it much. Weight retention was terrible; the bullets came apart completely. The jacket flowered beautifully; nearly 3/4". But the core separated, and the jacket stopped after a measly 3" of penetration (No bone contact) the core broke upon impact on bone, and one piece was approx. the size of a .22LR bullet, while the rest was in pieces that were tiny. Total penetration was less than 6". I will not buy these bullets again; but if you want a bullet that opens up FAST, and yes, has impact power?? This might be your bullet.

I will forever be partial to the Hydra Shock. If I am ever in that position again where I am depending on a bullet, I want it to have as much hit power as it possibly can. And a 9mm is not likely to go too far, but it will do it's job cutting thru most barriers for you.

[Sebago Son]

Originally Posted by martywinston

Are we clear now?

I continue to invite the good-natured and indeed helpful responses of the majority here.

I once shot a shark in the head with a Gold Dot... does that help?

PS: The shark died without any further agression... I have photos, measurements and the recoved slug if you'd like it for your article....

PPS: If you think that this is a "Public Forum" just go ahead and P.O. the Big Silver Griller ...

[NKJ nut]

Originally Posted by Sebago Son

I once shot a shark in the head with a Gold Dot... does that help?

PS: The shark died without any further agression... I have photos, measurements and the recoved slug if you'd like it for your article....

PPS: If you think that this is a "Public Forum" just go ahead and P.O. the Big Silver Griller ...

Yes the Big Griller packs a punch. In fact his Stopping Power is legendary.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by NKJ nut

Thanks Marty. Could you please be so kind as to tell us what publications you write for? Otherwise I am going to knock myself out looking through every gun-zine in the rack to see if you have an article in it. Magazines are so expensive these days.

I sent you a private message - send me your e-mail address and I'll send you a few recent back issues of the Newstips Bulletin, the only place I've written for during the past 30 years.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by ChattanoogaPhil

Discussions on bullet designs and such are interesting. Though, I am reminded of this information which shows little difference among most all calibers used in handguns. An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power

Thanks - an interesting read.

Also interesting to find a Chattanooga Buckeye.

A lot of that data is tactical, and I regard the requirements for tactical weapons and ammunition as being different from either home protection or personal protection.

I believe stopping the bad guy is a first priority they all have in common, but tactical shots may need to penetrate into vehicles or through walls whereas in home protection it would be better/safer to not penetrate walls (with personal protection somewhere in between, especially in the case of a carjacking).

I am not convinced that any arbitrary penetration - like the oft-cited 15" - is a watershed as to whether or not a shot has stopping power. Certainly there needs to be enough momentum to penetrate both a forearm and a secondary bone (like a rib or a skull) and plow its way through several inches of wet meat and I'm not sure there is any direct spec that can reflect that.

One of my initial concerns is the armoring effects of clothing layers; if you don't get through that, you may as well just try spanking the bad guy.

Still, it's an interesting read and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by ElectroMotive

First, I'd suggest you heed the advice previously stated, and review the data presented by Dr Gary K Roberts (online handle DocGKR) on M4Carbine.net

Next I suggest you read the International Wounds Ballistics Association papers made available on FirearmsTactical.com - Home. In specfic, I reccomend the timeless terminal ballistics paper written by SA Urey Patrick entitled "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness".

A book you may be interested in is by Dr Duncan MacPherson, Bullet Penetration: Modeling the Dynamics & the Incapacitation Resulting from Wound Trauma.


Dont waste your time with Ayoob, Marshall, Sanow, or Courtney

Thanks - some of that was already part of my research - I've just read more and I've tagged a few for reading later.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by ElectroMotive

If you dont mind me asking, what publication are you writing? Who is your editor? I ask because I have some friends that a writers for some firearms magazines.

I am writing for the Newstips Bulletin - and I am its editor.

It's been about 35 years since I wrote for magazines - and most of those had words like science, mechanics, electronics or robotics in their titles.

My best to your friends - the Newstips Bulletin has been a weekly publication for the past 30 years and in all of that time all of its readers have all been journalists (writers, reporters, authors, reviewers, editors, producers, analysts, etc.) - so we may be more than colleagues.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by rojodiablo

I will forever be partial to the Hydra Shock. If I am ever in that position again where I am depending on a bullet, I want it to have as much hit power as it possibly can. And a 9mm is not likely to go too far, but it will do it's job cutting thru most barriers for you.

That is a gem of useful, relevant information and I thank you for it.

[retarmyaviator]

Originally Posted by NKJ nut

Hi Marty. i am writing a book on internet etiquette. Do you mind if I include the text of the above post in my book? With proper attribution of course.

I've got a chapter that it would fit right in.

I know a chapter or two that text could fit in too, neither of which would cast the comments or the writer in a positive light.

[BSA]

Marty,

As a engineer you know for any results to be accepted as valid it must be able to be replicated in the laboratory. The sciencific method calls for eliminating all of the varibles and then introducing them one at a time to see what effect it has.

In the study you are conducting it is impossible to control the varibles. Futhermore you lack a test media (living humans). Also your use of Interent comments makes it impossible to judge the relibility of your sources as well as talking to a few LEO's.

The most serious attempt to measure handgun stopping power was Evan and Marshall.

p.s. Spending some trigger time testing various rounds in different test media might upset the information you have read and heard about.

[elm_creek_smith]

Besides bullet performance, ammunition needs to be examined in the light of 'How does it function in your firearm?' I was given some Federal 147 grain Hydrashok 9mm +P ammunition that absolutely failed to function in my daughter's 9mm pistol. I gave the ammo to my brother in whose KelTec 2000 9mm carbine it worked wonderfully. My daughter's 9mm is currently loaded with Winchester standard pressure 115 grain Silvertips which have proven to be the most accurate in her pistol.

Me, I'm a .38 Special kinda guy.

ECS

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by BSA

Marty,

As a engineer you know for any results to be accepted as valid it must be able to be replicated in the laboratory. The sciencific method calls for eliminating all of the varibles and then introducing them one at a time to see what effect it has.

In the study you are conducting it is impossible to control the varibles. Futhermore you lack a test media (living humans). Also your use of Interent comments makes it impossible to judge the relibility of your sources as well as talking to a few LEO's.

The most serious attempt to measure handgun stopping power was Evan and Marshall.

p.s. Spending some trigger time testing various rounds in different test media might upset the information you have read and heard about.

Your message reflects presumptions about my methods; I have neither described nor proscribed my methods.

Nor am I doing so now.

But I am pleased to see that you understand scientific methodology, and that you understand some of engineering analysis.

I suggest that you also consider how market factors, human factors and media interests fold into the mix.

Reminder:

I am asking for individuals to nominate the ammo they would consider a top choice in a home protection or personal protection context. Personal experiences, war stories and anecdotal evidence are perfectly at home in this element of my research - don't hesitate to just share what you believe in without worrying too much about the ballistics or physiology of it.

[team sidewinder]

I use Hornady Critical Defense in the winter due to the fact that where I live most people are wearing heavy clothing and the Hornady CD has a polymer tip to keep from getting the HP clogged up from the heavy clothing material, thus better bullet expansion. If a HP round plugs with heavy clothing material it is not much better than a full metal jacketed round with very little bullet expansion.

In the summer in the home and outdoors I carry Winchester 124gr bonded PDX1 ammo.

I do have a S&W 629 44mag but would never even consider it for home defense. Too much recoil, too much muzzle flash, too much bullet penetration. I have more confidence in my 9mm than my 44 as far as HD goes.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by team sidewinder

I use Hornady Critical Defense in the winter due to the fact that where I live most people are wearing heavy clothing and the Hornady CD has a polymer tip to keep from getting the HP clogged up from the heavy clothing material, thus better bullet expansion. If a HP round plugs with heavy clothing material it is not much better than a full metal jacketed round with very little bullet expansion.

In the summer in the home and outdoors I carry Winchester 124gr bonded PDX1 ammo.

Thanks - that's consistent with my other research into Critical Defense - it was amusing to see it being criticized for doing what it says - but that may be part of why Hornady just launched Critical Duty.

[team sidewinder]

Originally Posted by martywinston

Thanks - that's consistent with my other research into Critical Defense - it was amusing to see it being criticized for doing what it says - but that may be part of why Hornady just launched Critical Duty.

I will have to check out the Hornady Critical Duty ammo.

Guess I should have added that IMHO the 9mm is as good as any cartridge and better than most for home defense as I don't worry too much about bullets exiting my residence and into a neighbors should the need arise. I also feel the controlable 9mm is sufficent to cause most bad guys to cease whatever they are doing in my/your home
Thanks

[StatesRightist]

Marty,

Since you are defending Hornady Critical Defense, please cite the evidence you have that shows it is effective. It has failed every unbiased Gel test I've seen on it. I would like to review my thoughts on it if you have concrete data that shows otherwise. Thanks.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by StatesRightist

Marty,

Since you are defending Hornady Critical Defense, please cite the evidence you have that shows it is effective. It has failed every unbiased Gel test I've seen on it. I would like to review my thoughts on it if you have concrete data that shows otherwise. Thanks.

Am I defending it?

Hornady claims that Critical Duty will penetrate barriers like windshield glass but that Critical Defense is intended to only penetrate barriers like clothing - and I'm paraphrasing there.

But let's take one expectation off the hook right now.

When I publish my results, this is not where I'll publish them.

My planned ammunition tests have not yet begun.

And just so you know, I am not that easily goaded.

[StatesRightist]

Originally Posted by StatesRightist

Marty,

Since you are defending Hornady Critical Defense, please cite the evidence you have that shows it is effective. It has failed every unbiased Gel test I've seen on it. I would like to review my thoughts on it if you have concrete data that shows otherwise. Thanks.

Here is a link showing Hornady CD--it is .38 though a complete failure through denim, compared to two rounds that actually work
Hornady critical defense ammo - yea or nay? - M4Carbine.net Forums

This one shows good penetration, but miserable expansion.

GoldenLoki.com

Here is another showing miserable expansion.

Ballistics Gel Hollow Points Part 10 Two More Ftx Critical Defense Rounds

I cannot comprehend supporting this ammo based on the tests I have seen.

It also fails if you value the heavier bullets school of thought. The obvious exception to this school being the all copper rounds. I'm not sure I buy the heavier bullet concept, but many do. Doc Robert's clearly stated the only 115 grain round he's ever tested that worked well was the Barnes Copper Round.

[StatesRightist]

"Goaded", if you are perceiving that I am attempting to annoy you, your perceptions are misplaced. You asked for thoughts, I'm giving them to you and at the same time asking you if you have information to the contrary. That is about the extent of what I was attempting, dialogue.

Thanks.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by StatesRightist

"Goaded", if you are perceiving that I am attempting to annoy you, your perceptions are misplaced. You asked for thoughts, I'm giving them to you and at the same time asking you if you have information to the contrary. That is about the extent of what I was attempting, dialogue.

Thanks.

I am only perceiving that you are asking me to provide test results and I'm not sure that I've made it clear that I haven't yet performed any tests - as I said up top, this thread is my search for the best candidates for testing.

I also thought that perhaps the mischaracterization of what I passed along as some sort of endorsement might have been there to get a rise out of me - but if not, I apologize for jumping to the wrong conclusion.

It's easy to perceive a lot of wry wit behind many of the postings here but being just text, it's sometimes hard to perceive the tone we might hear in a spoken metier.

[StatesRightist]

Agreed, I do not know how many times wrongly perceived "tone" causes problems through email ect, but it's substantial. Good luck with your efforts!

[Stu Honea]

I would also defer to Doctor Gary Roberts most recent testing along with the IWBA and FBI requirements and recommendations.
I have,however done some testing on my own with both
9mm and 45ACP. What I have been finding is that all of the better recommended loads do perform as advertised.
The 9mm is my primary defensive pistol,although I do occasionally use other calibers and carry revolvers a lot of the time.
My personal favorites for 9mm are the Federal 147gr. HST's in standard pressure and the RA9T Winchester ranger,also 147gr.
The 147's are the most accurate is my pistols,but the 124gr.+P versions are both working just as well. Some guns like different bullet weights better than others.
I will not use a 115gr. load for anything,not even practice as I have some experience with them,all bad. The one exception would be the Barnes X bullet,such as the DPX loaded by Corbon.The construction of these bullets is a game changer for sure.
The testing has already been done for us,and the proof lies in the street results with these loadings. The info is available and the best part is,it's free.

[thedane]

Marty,

This thread, although of an extremely serious nature, has provided me with much enjoyment.

I would imagine that most members of this forum have given extensive consideration to what gun, caliber, bullet etc. to use for personal protection.

The 9mm is probably not the best choice for personal protection. But that is your baseline.

There are so many variables that can affect the outcome of a gun fight that it is almost mind boggling.

I would recommend that you read up on training techniques, strategy and be as prepared as possible for the use of deadly force. Maybe you have already done this and the only thing that remains is to pick a cartridge. Maybe this is just an intellectual exercise. That's fine.

Consider a concealed carry class, learn the laws etc.

I don't have any anecdotes or personal experience to share.

I am attaching a link to handloads.com. They have published information on shootings and stopping power per various calibers. This is based on actual shootings. This should be valuable info to you. While you're looking at this check out some of the other calibers.

9 mm Stopping Power

[ElectroMotive]

Originally Posted by BSA

Marty,

The most serious attempt to measure handgun stopping power was Evan and Marshall.

Just to let you know:

Its not Evan & Marshall, its Marshall & Sanow, as in Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow.

Both Marshall and Sanow, as well as their so called data, have had all credibility completely destroyed. Their so-called data should not be taken as factual data.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by thedane

Consider a concealed carry class, learn the laws etc.

Thanks for the link - good info indeed - though I wish it covered a lot more cartridges.

Since there has been some concern over my personal preparedness, I'm happy to share that after scoring 100% on the written exam and placing every shot in the center black or wherever else proscribed in the trange test, my Ohio CCW was issues on 12/20/11.

I paid a lot of attention to the legal aspects of decisions to shoot.

And I can tell you from past experience in other realms that I have no compunction or hesitation about doing whatever I need to do to stop myself or a family member from coming to harm.

I agree that most gun owners never quite understand that impact until it's upon them and tend to be torn about what is or is not appropriate to do.

I'm not judging them or me to simply state that I'm past that.

As I stated earlier, I intend to do tests on a variety of 9mm ammunition to determine - most specifically - if there is anything about them that should disqualify them from consideration as a home protection choice.

I've made some preliminary choices but I want to canvas the forum members here to see if there are other nominees I should also consider.

One thing I've noticed is that regardless the huge number of new product launches for 9mm ammunition in the past year (let alone the past several), much of the data that I'm presented with predates those choices.

And something we haven't even touched upon - there's a vivid reluctance by many out there to spend more than about a buck a round when buying ammo. (I regard that as a great reason to own multiple magazines).

[OKFC05]

In this defensive context, a cartridge should penetrate clothing and bloom when entering soft tissue but even if it should miss or exit soft tissue, it should not penetrate walls. It should be capable of penetrating a forearm held up to block the shot

Unfortunately, any 9mm pistol bullet that will penetrate a forearm and body will zip right through an interior home wall of sheetrock if it misses the target. Even the "safe" fragmenter rounds.

Suggest you change the criterion to "unlikely to penetrate a body AND the wall beyond." The misses are going through ordinary walls.

Suggest you look at a site called "The Box of Truth" for graphic examples.

Since you mentioned your engineering background, I'll mention that my degrees are in physics, and I've amused myself with calculations of various shooting situations and problems over the years. I shoot Gold Dots for carry, and try to be very concious of where the misses will go.

In building stages for IDPA, I've noticed that even thick wooden doors and 2X4s will not stop a 9mm. In fact, I've shot through wooden barriers accidentally and still gotten nice round holes in the targets, bullets neither stopped nor deflected, either jacketed or cast lead.

[ElectroMotive]

Originally Posted by martywinston

I believe stopping the bad guy is a first priority they all have in common, but tactical shots may need to penetrate into vehicles or through walls whereas in home protection it would be better/safer to not penetrate walls (with personal protection somewhere in between, especially in the case of a carjacking).

Physics says you simply cannot have it both way.

With a pistol round you either get a bullet that will reliably penetrate deeply into the torso after passing through various obstacles, affecting vital structures, andthus reducing the number of rounds fired/needed.

Or you use pre-fragmented bullets that wont get deep in the torso, but might stop in a wall or two. This will force the shooter to fire more rounds in the hopes for more blood loss. That takes time.

Originally Posted by martywinston

I am not convinced that any arbitrary penetration - like the oft-cited 15" - is a watershed as to whether or not a shot has stopping power. Certainly there needs to be enough momentum to penetrate both a forearm and a secondary bone (like a rib or a skull) and plow its way through several inches of wet meat and I'm not sure there is any direct spec that can reflect that.

Why?

One need only point to the infamous FBI Miami Shootout 26 years ago. One suspect was shot in the arm by a 115gr Winchester Silvertip. The round breached the arm, and penetrated into the thoracic cavity. It was a bullet designed for limited penetration (aluminum jacket, 115gr). The bullet stopped about an inch from the heart. While a destroyed heart doesnt guarantee instant incapacitation or even death, it does increase the chances of both.

That is why there are minimum standards for penetration of ammunition. With large people, even more penetration is needed. 12 inches is just the bare minimum. Desired penetration is more like 14-18 inches.

Originally Posted by martywinston

One of my initial concerns is the armoring effects of clothing layers; if you don't get through that, you may as well just try spanking the bad guy.

Perhaps this is the case with pre-fragmented ammo. It is not the case, even with the crappiest JHP. Those terrible JHPs will still get through clothing, they may not open up, but leather, denim, cotton, etc will pose no armor threat to them. The JHPs listed in Dr Roberts recommendations will not only defeat clothing, but expand after encountering it.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by OKFC05

Unfortunately, any 9mm pistol bullet that will penetrate a forearm and body will zip right through an interior home wall of sheetrock if it misses the target. Even the "safe" fragmenter rounds.

Suggest you change the criterion to "unlikely to penetrate a body AND the wall beyond." The misses are going through ordinary walls.

Your point is well-taken.

And I've enjoyed Box of Truth - I even had a sudden urge to visit a big-lots butcher - but happily, I talked myself out of it.

[ElectroMotive]

If you want the best of both worlds; superior terminal performance, AND reduced over-penetration risk within the house, the only answer is a 5.56x45/.223Rem bullet with an Open Tip Match north of 68grs in weight. Anything less than that will suffer from under-penetration which is dangerous.

[martywinston]

Originally Posted by ElectroMotive

Why?

Thanks - challenges like this help me shape my definitions.

I have been trying to differentiate a circumstance where you might try to deliberately shoot through a wall (to hit a bad guy who just ducked behind it, for example) - a circumstance I regard as tactical - versus having enough stopping power for the bad guy while limiting what happens to the round after that. (The genesis of the JHP, right?)

It's not that I get nervous about holes in walls - just a little about what may be on the other side of a wall.

And - from the physics/math perspective - I was trying to refer specifically to penetration into the torso when I said that I thought any perception of needing 18" (or whatever) into a torso is a bit convoluted. A shot doesn't have to travel that far into a torso to penetrate every vital organ in its path; but I can see that it's a tweak to account for penetration through clothing or forearms when simply viewing pentration in a gel path.

I have no intention of diving that deeply into the ballistics; without telling everybody exactly the tests I plan to perform, they're designed to deliver fairly binary (go/no-go) results.

I view the pre-fragmented "safety" ammo with some suspicion; it's up in the air whether I will test any of it, but I may feel compelled to do so if only to disclose the results.

I love "Have Gun Will Travel" because of the great lengths Paladin took to avoid having to shoot anyone.

[Stu Honea]

Originally Posted by ElectroMotive

Just to let you know:

Its not Evan & Marshall, its Marshall & Sanow, as in Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow.

Both Marshall and Sanow, as well as their so called data, have had all credibility completely destroyed. Their so-called data should not be taken as factual data.

This is exactly correct,thank you ElectroMotive. The credibility of their so called testing and reports has been destroyed long ago by serious ballisticians.
Any serious student of "terminal ballistics"can easily find the correct data to intelligently select a load for their specific purposes by referring to the sources I mentioned in my first post. It has also been proven that when using modern well designed ammunition that there is very little difference in bullet performance in actual shootings.

The 45 makes a bigger hole than the 40,the 40 makes a slightly bigger hole than 9mm,etc.,etc,and so forth and so on.
There is no such thing as stopping power except as the term applies to disc brakes, period!
Central nervous system hits(brain/spinal cord) or multiple hits from ANY CALIBER to increase blood loss and drop blood pressure,are the only ways to shut down a violently aggressive
human being. Rifles may have stopping power,but pistols,all pistols,are woefully lacking in this regard.To even think otherwise can get you killed.

As I stated previously,there is very good information available simply for the looking, from credible sources.
Marshall and Sanow's data is the biggest hoax that has ever been perpetrated against the shooting public,and to follow their suggestions is an extremely dangerous journey.

Yes,this is a very serious subject. I thought this silliness had been settled long ago,and I pray that those less knowledgeable do not fall into this trap.