The YouTube videos I have seen the 9mm underwood defender out performs every hollow point in terms of wound channel and penatration. Does anyone have any Intel on real street perfomance?

Did those test take in heavy winter clothing that is worn in the East
when the temeratures drop?

Just looking for a fair test.

There are no magic bullets.

If you like ballistics and reading, there is a joint agency test that included the extreme defender in several of the most common pistol calibers. In every caliber the extreme defender was available for, it outperformed every other bullet type(fmj, jhp, tumbling rounds, etc.).
You can find the test easily by googling "2016/17 joint agency ballistic test"

__________________
Please no more EZs...

We've all seen a lot of new, overhyped projectiles come and go. Skepticism is healthy.
These fluted bullets actually look like the real deal. It'll take several years to get a bigger data base to know for sure.
I imagine there was a similar skepticism about hollow points too.

My biggest questions are how reliably they cycle and how these light, fast fluted bullets work on large, heavy dangerous animals.

Not very much bullet and YouTube is often less than a credible source.

Exactly.

I don't go around chasing special cartridges for this or that purpose or this or that gun. High-quality defensive ammunition from a top manufacturer is all that I require.

__________________
Come and take it!!

Interesting read, thank you for sharing,

That test is nonsense. There were no agencies involved in that so-called report. There is no mention of the agencies involved, half of the rounds tested were boutique ammo.

I would be reluctant to depend on a bullet that is so light for the caliber. I would think that penetration would be an issue. The FBI has their issues but they do pretty solid, reasonably scientific ammo testing.

...is that they don't rely on or are not even designed to expand, which is very iffy in many conditions. I worked really hard to find/buy reliable ammo for my wife's .380 ACP. The two types that I have are the most 'reliable' performers from testing, but .380s are not known for expansion reliability. I think that the Defenders might be a wise choice for the .380 pistols. . Penetration however, is reliable and repeatable. I haven't gone over to that side yet, but it does make me wonder.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

While I’m not a .380 guy, I’ve yet to see an Underwood load that doesn’t impress me…

__________________
Some Might Say.

Read the Acknowledgements on page 50. Shame about the briskets.

Although I haven't done any penetration testing. I have loaded the 68 grain in the 9mm and chronographed in my 3913 and was getting 1700 FPS with it with no pressure signs. Also, the accuracy was excellent for a carry pistol, easily <1" at 10 yards off sand bags.

When I picked them up, was $28 for 100, now they are like $60. So no more for me.

The biggest issue I have is light fast bullets in pistols are quite loud, far more than I would like in a self defense cartridge.

I do believe it will make an excellent bullet for the 380. But no real data to prove it.

I did find that it is best to not flare the case mouth with these bullets. They have a slight taper at the base and flaring made it more difficult to get a good purchase with the crimp. Even more of a problem with short necks like the 9x25 and 357 Sig. I did determine the 357 sig just isn't a good case to use this bullet in. Just not enough neck to grip it well enough to prevent setback.

Rosewood

If you take the (fairly small) number of non-LE defensive shootings, and factor in how many of those will involve someone using a specialty round that actually hits the target (operator dependent), one may be waiting a very long time for significant data to emerge. And this is not a dig at Underwood or any of the high-end defensive ammo makers, just statistics.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

Momentum is easy to understand.
weight x velocity = momentum
But is it correct?

Energy is not intuitive. Why do they give so much more credit to velocity than bullet weight when computing this?
It was worked out over 100 years ago.
E=mc²

I struggled with that for a long time.
It helps to study the terminal ballistics of a high-speed rifle bullet weighing, for example, 1/2 the weight of a handgun bullet but going twice as fast. Momentum would suggest equal results yet the light, fast rifle bullets do much more damage and have much more energy.

These fast, light fluted copper projectiles are as barrier blind and almost as deep penetrating as ball or SWC yet manage to cause a temporary wound cavity akin to a hollow point that actually expands.
Light weight lead bullets, especially hollow points don't generally have much penetration.

I think it is a good idea to keep an open mind on these projectiles. Too bad they are so expensive, being copper and all.

With the advent of the SIG P365, I view the .380 as obsolete.

A really light projectile at a very high velocity may very well be reliable. But you have to admit the 380 pistols produced in the past were never engineered for the super fast/light concept.

Uhh.. E=MC² is the equation for converting mass to energy in an atomic reaction. What you mean was KE= (1/2) MV².

But I see what you mean...

Rosewood

I load those for my 380, using data from the Lehigh site. I have tested function, casual accuracy testing was fine. My main gun with them is a Sig P238.

With the 380, often hollow points have poor expansion. I can’t see how these bullets would be any worse. If one had a larger round, may be fewer reasons to use them. I don’t buy them if the price is to high.

I’m not really a bullet snob, but I do feel the 380 can use any help it can get, to preform.

Attached Images

IMG_0849.jpg (79.6 KB, 34 views)

To be fair, I have never personally seen the original version that mentions which agencies were involved, but I don't really see the relevance to that anyway. The point of sharing that test was not to imply that this bullet design is the best thing ever, but to point out that the design has some merit to it, and no apparent cons. Why does the inclusion of boutique ammo nullify the results though? They had boutique ammo going up against tried and true hollow points, so I see that as a GOOD comparison. I don't understand the logic behind your complaints. I carry the extreme defender in my shield .45 and have never felt as though I made a poor decision.

__________________
Please no more EZs...

A few years back, Cabelas was selling lead fluted SD ARX ammo for 380, 45ACP, and a few others. I bought a lot of it, all of the 380 was for my work friends who owned and carried 380's. The 45ACP for myself. I still have about 150 of the 45's. Then I discovered the Lehigh copper 120gr 357's for 38 and 357. I bought several hundred, and worked up loads. I won't mention powders and amounts, and as I don't own a chrono, no speeds.

The 38 - probably +P - would turn two water jugs inside out and "sometimes" stop in the third, but usually the fourth. Never any expansion or distortion. Major disruption. This was from my GP100, and a few from my model 60 to see if it was viable. Groups were 1 1/2" from the GP100, 2" - 2 1/2" from the 60 at 10 yards. It's viable, and I trust the reloads I made as good SD rounds.

Attached Images

Lehigh 120gr 357.jpg (186.3 KB, 25 views)

__________________
Heavily armed old man.

I know a guy personally that helped develop the Lehigh bullets. I’m pretty sure Underwood is loaded with Lehigh projectiles and if not, it’s the same concept. They work. I’ve seen a lot of the testing and data. Best thing about them to me is they are not defeated by clothing like can happen to hollow points. The larger calibers also work extremely well on animals like hogs that require major penetration

Yes the Underwood does use Lehigh bullets. The fact that they do not rely on expansion is what sold me on them. I'd really like to see what kind of performance these get out of a longer barrel. Have any of you guys chronographed these out of a pcc?

__________________
Please no more EZs...

Yes the Underwood does use Lehigh bullets. The fact that they do not rely on expansion is what sold me on them. I'd really like to see what kind of performance these get out of a longer barrel. Have any of you guys chronographed these out of a pcc?

__________________
Please no more EZs...

Best thing about them is they scare the Luddites...

Truth be known, most of us don’t shoot bad guys very often. That being the case, we are left with various testing methods.

Shot Placement is everything!!

Yep, and this is a good thing.

By my observations, fast ultra light bullets in most pistol calibers have performed miserably.

They don’t even come close to minimum expansion and penetration standards.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

The point is that the people who wrote the so-called study are lying and have no credibility.

380s will do significantly better in 9mm cases.

I'm old school. In the Police Locker Room we would have our coffee and a cigarette and critique recent shootings. We were allowed to carry 9mm and .45 ACP off duty in the "Days of Revolvers". We were issued .38 Special ammunition but we had to supply are own 9mm and .45 ACP ammunition.

So that is how the Speer .45 ACP 200 grain HP got such a great reputation. Tom, Dick and Harry all had one shot stops so that was good stuff.

Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow rocked the firearms world with the release of Handgun Stopping Power and Street Stoppers. Both books predicted the effectiveness and that were on the right track 40 +/- years ago.

Plus the willingness to be hits on a human being. Without Professional Training the "Fight or Flight" Response takes over.

Marshall/Sanow findings right on track?

Depends on who you ask.

I didn’t drink the koolaid..

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

The Marshall Sanow one-shot stop percentages are nonsense because they deliberately exclude situations when one shot was not enough to stop someone and additional shots had to be fired.

Successes are meaningless unless you factor in failures. And Marshall & Sanow's numbers do not factor in situations when one shot was not enough, therefore they have no meaning.

Further, many agencies who Marshall and Sanow claim to have gotten their shootings from have come forward and said that not only did they not provide any information to Marshall & Sanow, and that the shootings that Marshall and Sanow have attributed to them do not match any of the shootings that they have on record.

The July 1992 Law and Order Magazine has several letters to the editor, as well as a statement by the magazines’ editor, further illustrating the lack of truth and serious errors in the Marshall and Sanow's “data”. Several papers have been published in the peer reviewed IWBA Wound Ballistics Review which have discussed the lack of credibility of Marshall and Sanow. The review wrote that "It was clear in our review and in from the investigations by others that Marshall & Sanow had lied, fabricated data, and did not follow scientific protocols. Their information is fraudulent and meaningless. Please do not stake your life on this garbage.”


Their work has been refuted by the International Wound Ballistics Association.

Go to Update your browser to use Google Drive, Docs, Sheets, Sites, Slides, and Forms - Google Drive Help

and download download the 1997 issue, volume 3 number 1 and read pages 26-35 which contain the articles:
Fackler, Martin L., MD.: "Book Review: Street Stoppers: The Latest Handgun Stopping Power Street Results." Wound Ballistics Review, 3(1); 26-31: 1997.
MacPherson, Duncan: "Sanow Strikes (Out) Again." Wound Ballistics Review, 3(1): 32-35; 1997.

and download 1999 volume 4 no 2 which contains the following articles:
Van Maanen, Maarten: "Discrepancies in the Marshall & Sanow 'Data Base': An Evaluation Over Time." Wound Ballistics Review, 4(2); 9-13: Fall, 1999.
Fackler, Martin L., MD.: "Undeniable Evidence." Wound Ballistics Review, 4(2); 14-15: Fall, 1999.
MacPherson, Duncan: "The Marshall & Sanow 'Data' - Statistical Analysis Tells the Ugly Story." Wound Ballistics Review, 4(2); 16-21: Fall, 1999.

I believe Lehigh is now owned by Wilson. Is this the same Wilson who makes 45's in Arkansas? He loves the Lehigh believes all the info that others are saying about them.

It has been said many times on this forum that handguns stink when it comes to stopping power, whatever that is. I have always felt that way. Either they stop the fight or they don't...and you wont really know until such time as you need to.
This was driven home to me years ago. It was one of the last shootings I investigated while working basic patrol. A man attempted to break into a home in the middle of the day via the front door. He was putting the boots to the old solid oak door when the homeowner yelled at him to go away. Our burglar ignored him. The homeowner was on the other side of the door with a Marlin 30-30 loaded with Federal 170 grain bullets. As the door lock gave way the owner fired from the hip at the bad guy. The bullet hit the door frame, traveled through 6 inches of wood, expanded nicely (judging by the big hole in the frame) struck the burglar in the chest completely penetrating his chest and exiting his back. The burglar did not fall. He was not blown back like in the movies. He spun and ran like a deer. He covered a good 8 blocks (as I remember) and slowed to a walk. People sitting on their front porch saw him bleeding and sat him down on their steps and called an ambulance. They did not know the circumstances of him being shot. The ambulance arrived and took him to the hospital. He made a complete recovery. Investigation revealed that the burglar never lost consciousness. If he was armed and of a mind he could have put more than a few rounds into the homeowner. He kept trying to kick the door in because he didn't think the homeowner was armed. He didn't know what kind of gun he was shot with, he just knew he was shot. At the hospital, the ER doctor said that it was a miracle that the bullet struck nothing vital. It hit the mid/upper right chest and exited the upper back, punching a large hole in his scapula. The Doctor said he was lucky as an inch or two in another point of impact it would have been a different story.

In my simple mind, any advantage gained by bullet design, power, velocity or caliber is negated by poor shot placement. I'm sure a 30-30 round looks real good in gelatin tests and then some. I'm sure it exceeds any portable handgun made. But it can still fail. And as I have witnessed, effectiveness is directly related to bullet placement.

Bottom line for me is I want ammo that is dependable, accurate and penetrates. Depending on caliber, that may be accomplished with a hollow point, or maybe a SWC. These new "trick" bullets don't even rate my attention. I try to carry what others have carried and worked as well as can be expected from a handgun. If one round doesn't stop the fight, keep shooting, keep hitting until it does. Carry a gun that allows you to keep shooting and hitting, within your abilities. Then practice, practice, practice.

I carry NOVX engage extreme, fluted poly copper 65 gr bullet, two piece case, head area I believe is stainless steel to deal with pressure rated at 1,750 FPS. I carry it in my ultra lite Bul armory the loaded gun is noticeably lighter with the NOVX. They also make a plus p version of this round, but i did not more penetration.

__________________
Len

It takes energy to cause a JHP to expand, energy that could have been used for penetration or tissue disruption. The fact that this Lehigh design can cause more tissue disruption than FMJ w/o expanding seems to make it more energy-efficient design. I find this interesting.

__________________
His Universe, His rules.

Interesting story. My guess is if that .30-30 bullet didn't shed energy passing through 6" of wood, and more of it transmitted into the wounded guy, that the outcome might have been quite different.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

Are we talking about that 2016/2017 "testing" done by these folks?

Link to Viper Weapons LLC site where the testing document is available:

Ballistics Testing

Uh huh.

Even an average government agency would've known that "Forward" ought to have been spelled Foreword.

"Amount of shots" and "Amount of hits" instead of number of shots/hits? That's scientific?

Those were some of the more charitable questions raised when that company's advertising of their "testing" document was first making the rounds on some internet gun forums.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

I'm generally not lining up to be a beta tester.

I'll wait for the windshield and other intermediate barrier results compared to conventional stuff issued to police today...

__________________
I'm only allowed 30 characters

I don't put much stock in handgun bullet wound tracks in ballistic gel. It makes for interesting viewing and speculation but that's it. Human tissue has an elastic limit which requires quite a bit more velocity than is typically produced from handguns. Think 2200+ fps.

Very interesting video on this subject:
https://youtu.be/T6kUvi72s0Y?si=72vOu84SFK8z3bvI

That said, I do carry Underwood's 55 gr +P Xtreme Defender in my Seecamp .32 because I don't want expansion. They are also reliable and accurate at 975 fps.

Gel results are interesting and allow apples to apples comparisons between various offerings. However, there's a sentence about the results that nearly everyone ignores: Test results are not predictive of real world performance.

The test medium, if properly prepared, is uniform. Real world bodies are not.

Interesting test https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDvz...dsYXNzIA%3D%3D

I have always been and will continue to be a location, location, location guy. As long as you use good ammo and hit the right spots you will do okay. Your mindset is also important. You have to have the mental fitness to understand that if you have your gun out it is for a good reason and there is a likelihood that you may get shot also. Stay in the game until the bad guy is incapacitated or running the other direction.

Having said all that, I found this group very interesting:

G9 Defense | #1 Premium Defense Ammunition

My protection!

Attached Images

IMG_3187.jpg (60.2 KB, 14 views)

__________________
USN Retired, EDC BG 2.0

I carried a Colt Mustang daily for about 20 years.
At the time Hydrashocks were my choice.

They are interesting. I tend toward heavier loadings for non-magnums and go light with the magnums, at least for 2 legged defensive purposes. But my wife's Shield is loaded up with 100gr Pow'r Ball ammo --- not because it's fast, which it is, but because it has a FMJ profile. Her immediate action skills aren't all that great. It needs to go bang every time until the slide locks back.

IMO, in order of importance with a handgun, it's:

Mindset (will you pull the trigger first or when needed)
Skill (can you score hits under stress)
Reliability of the weapon (with the chosen ammo)
Accuracy of the weapon (both mechanical and ergonomic)
Bullet construction

Some discount accuracy, but there have been a number of high profile defensive encounters at longer ranges in the last decade. Most modern handguns have very high mechanical accuracy, but some fall short in ergonomic accuracy (like snub revolvers or pocket autos).

Bullet construction came under a lot of scrutiny, especially in the 1980s (the Miami FBI shootout and others), and is still important, just subordinate to the other key elements, IMO.

I like the above story about the .30-30. There are so many like it in history. American Rifleman has several every month. Unless a CNS hit is made, the other shooter tends to keep shooting. There was a video of a police shooting in Spanaway, WA recently that's pretty instructive. Police kept lighting up the perp, who was hit, but he kept shooting. As he lost blood, his shots became slower and he slowly degraded, but it took time. Fortunately, the police had significant standoff and weren't hit, but they also couldn't put the guy down. The Hollywood "blow the guy off his feet" simply doesn't happen and doesn't make sense from a physics perspective. Most people who are shot tend to fall forward, if at all.

__________________
Psalm 27:2

Ballistic self defense weapons work by penetration. Ideally, a self defense bullet will fully penetrate an assailant, then fall on the ground behind them.

Size matters. A larger hole is better than a smaller hole. Expansion is not a viable path to a larger hole. The classic mushroom is a ROUND NOSE.

I recommend the largest caliber one can handle. Flat point ammo, with largest meplat possible. I carry FPFMJ in .380 and 9mm.

To wit, DON'T BUY defensive ammo. It's way over priced, like up to 3X what it should be, and likely not as effective as flat point target loads.

Best defensive bullet? Hard cast wadcutter, with hard cast SWC close second.

__________________
I've still got it made.