So you say you want a tumbling bullet?
#1. Tumbling as an effect is over exaggerated, often times used to push up the performance of an under performing non expanding bullet. Yes, for non expanding bullets, it is better to tumble than punch clean; however tumblers are less effective in most cases to expanding bullets.
#2. If you really, really want a tumbling pistol bullet, look no further than the British Army. The .38/200, or the .38 S&W, loaded with a 200 grain bullet, and later a 180 grain bullet, had a bullet and load designed to tumble. Low velocity and big, awkward tumbly bullet led to the bullet tumbling in people. Same with the .455 Webley, which shot a 265 grain bullet in different configurations, was awkward and slow, and tended to go end over end in targets. Other loads were certainly developed, but the 265 came back both in lead and full metal jacket, for the 455, to meet Hague convention status. Since expanding bullets were out of the question, the theory was to make the bullet tumble. If you can't expand, then smash.
So what makes the British rounds so much better than this? If one is going to choose the tumbling route, for whatever reason, bullet length and weight are the keys to damage. Balls technically tumble, but since they are so round, what difference does it make? If we shoot a very small projectile that is as long as it is wide, the tumbling may cause resistance and damage, but not really cause a very large cavity. To maximize tumble, we need a very long bullet, which will create a lot of disruption, more damage, and a wider wound track. If one is going to go the tumble route, the biggest, heaviest bullet that can be used is best. Longer bullet = wider wound track. That simple.
Some ammunition companies made rounds to do the same thing after WW2. If you look through old listings, and talk to some of the fellows here, there were low velocity 200 grain loadings for the .38 Special. They were later discarded with the advancements in expanding bullets, as well is with their extremely poor performance against barriers. But, the load was designed to tumble within people, making them superior to other non expanding bullets. Did they make it a high velocity, small bullet for this round? No, they went big, to maximize the effects.
80 grains in 9mm are junk. They aren't as good as heavier FMJ, they aren't good expanding bullets, and they aren't even good tumblers. I personally don't like anything under 124 grains, but anything under 115 is absolutely a gimmick.
