Lucky Gunner Ammo Tests - Some "Sacred Cows" Take A Hit

My three personal load choices are:

1) Buffalo Bore +P 158 grain LSCWHP-GC which out of my 2" M60-7 has consistently chronographed @ 1025 fps. Not only is it the best I know of (IMO of course) but it has always been super accurate and consistent - and I've NEVER had a failure of any type!

2) Speer 135 grain Short Barrel GDHP which does about 835 through my chronograph out of my M60-7. Not quite as powerful and has a lot less ME but has a great reputation, consistent expansion and does not kick as hard which allows for faster follow up shots.

3) Buffalo Bore 158 grain Standard Velocity LSWCHP. Does a consistent 850 out of the 2" M60-7. While it does have more ME than the Speer GDHP I find they do not expand as reliably - still a very very viable load.

So there are my top 3 picks in that order. I have not carried Remington or Winchester due to some FTF, very low velocities (despite what they state on the packaging) and lack luster performances from my own testing out of my M60-7 2" bbl. Federal ammo has been much more reliable than Win & Rem however their stated velocities fall very sort as well.

Buffalo Bore's stated performance is the ONLY Company that is 100% honest, accurate reliable out of the guns we actually carry. They do not use test barrels and state exactly what gun they are posting results from. Once I purchased a Chronograph 20 some odd years ago my eyes were widely opened up!
 
chief38 said:
Buffalo Bore's stated performance is the ONLY Company that is 100% honest, accurate reliable out of the guns we actually carry. They do not use test barrels and state exactly what gun they are posting results from. Once I purchased a Chronograph 20 some odd years ago my eyes were widely opened up!
Click to expand...

The consistancy of thier product is very high, as measured by grouping and by SD over a Chrony.
 
No matter.

I'm still loading the "sacred cows" into my .38 Special revolvers' cylinders for serious social purposes. I can't really believe in jello tests.
 
Well, so far nobody has commented about Luckygunners tests being clear gel, which is NOT accepted by any agencies or formal testing facilities, its in the realm of hobby use, because it doesnt correlate well to organic gel tests. Luckygunner uses it because its cheaper, and easier to use, but its not the same material as organic gel.

True ballistic gel isnt exactly like living tissue, but, over the years, it has been shown to react very similarly to actual shooting results with the same loads, so it does serve a valid purpose. water jugs, wet newspaper, and clear gel, not so much. interesting and fun, but not in the same class as organic gel. So, while interesting and perhaps entertaining, I wouldnt make any judgements on loads based on clear gel results compared to organic gel tests.
 
Last edited:
For sure there is no magic handgun bullet when it comes to personal defense. But I cannot help but wonder if the combination of a 180-200 grain bullet moving at 1000-1200 fps might just be the best combination.

Back in the day, the .38-40 was a popular sixgun round. In the 1960s, the .41 Magnum was introduced as an ideal police round. In the 1980s, the 10mm was loaded light for the FBI. In 1990, the light loaded 10mm was made into the .40 S&W - a most popular police cartridge. The one thing all of these rounds have in common is a load that is 180-200 grains or so moving at about 1000-1200 fps or so. Even the best .45 ACP hollow points are often the 185 or 200 grain loads moving at 1000 fps.

I am starting to think that the best defensive cartridge lies somewhere in those parameters.
 
bmcgilvray said:
No matter.

I'm still loading the "sacred cows" into my .38 Special revolvers' cylinders for serious social purposes. I can't really believe in jello tests.
Click to expand...

Maybe if the jello contained some whipped cream or grapes or strawberries or pineapple chunks it would better simulate real world conditions.
 
I guess we should worry if we are attacked by jello but in the real world the CHI Load has a proven track record so I will continue to carry it in my Chief's Special and M10. They are also very accurate in both guns.
 
Winchester's 38 offerings confuse me. They have PDX1 Defender, Ranger Bonded, and Train and Defend, all in 130 grains. Other than some velocity difference are these really that different from each other. ?

Just curious. I like Speer 135 grain Short Barrel but have a few boxes of Winchester PDX1 around which I get when I can't find Speer.
 
Probably the major problem with the FBI tests-like many other testing protocols-is that most folks never read the whole thing. They just turn to the results.

Right up front, the FBI notes that all the tests may not be relevant to your particular need. When they started the program over 50% of their encounters involved adversaries in cars, so metal & glass penetration was a big deal. (When I got told that by an agent, I remarked that was a clue that they shouldn't be relying on handguns. He agreed.). You are supposed to look at the testing that applied to your situation and choose accordingly.

Now about the FBI load: I noticed the penetration/lack of expansion of certain "FBI" .38 loads some years back. I ran into some sources that noted that hitting the sternum was a good way to help out expansion. Of course that may not be an issue. There's no doubt the load has been effective over the decades, but it was due to shot placement and penetration, not expansion. If over penetration may be a concern, it probably isn't your best choice.
 
Last edited:
So using this protocol a .38 S&W Special .357 diameter 148 grain LHBWC that penetrates 17" but does not expand is somehow inferior to a 40 grain .223 diameter bullet that expands to .375" and penetrates 13". Really, in what universe.
 
Well... maybe...

Consider a few things, and let's discuss .38 special ammo.

The Luckygunner tests showed the non +P Winchester Train and Defend expanded very well, and were some of the best rounds for reaching FBI protocol depth. AND they were lower recoil.

Great, right?

Then you look at Paul Harrell's video, and we see a completely different story in his "meat target" at the end. None of them expanded.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8u2EoWTw3U[/ame]

Isn't that interesting?

I go for bullets that do consistently well across multiple tests. The one round I have found does well in virtually every test is the Remington Golden Saber 125gr. .38 +P

By the way... too bad LuckyGunner did not test .38 round nose. Much of the expensive hollowpoint ammo, from various brands, never opened up, and basically reached within FBI threshold for depth. If they had expanded, they would not have made it.

I was fairly impressed with the wadcutters, myself.
 
I would also like to point-out some statistically glaring inconsistencies with the LuckyGunner tests.

Take this case:

Look at the 9mm Federal HST 147 grain, and compare that to the Federal 147 grain Hydrashock. Notice the bullet speeds, average expansion, and distance traveled. The HST's opened-up fully, yet only traveled an average of around 2 inches less in the gel -- compared to the unopened (then essentially round-nosed) Hydrashock. Those Hydrashocks should have traveled a lot further, given their speed (or the HST's a lot less).

Some of these numbers just don't computer, for me. That tells me there may have been some real inconsistencies in the gels.
 
baccusboy said:
I would also like to point-out some statistically glaring inconsistencies with the LuckyGunner tests.

Take this case:

Look at the 9mm Federal HST 147 grain, and compare that to the Federal 147 grain Hydrashock. Notice the bullet speeds, average expansion, and distance traveled. The HST's opened-up fully, yet only traveled an average of around 2 inches less in the gel -- compared to the unopened (then essentially round-nosed) Hydrashock. Those Hydrashocks should have traveled a lot further, given their speed (or the HST's a lot less).

Some of these numbers just don't computer, for me. That tells me there may have been some real inconsistencies in the gels.
Click to expand...

I believe that the inconsistent results are part of the reason clear gel isnt used or results recognized by serious testers.

Higher velocity doesnt always mean deeper penetration. Higher velocity generally means more rapid and violent expansion, which can reduce penetration.

Clear gel usually shows deeper penetration than organic gel, but not by a consistent amount from what I understand. Its all interesting, but difficult to compare clear to organic because of the differing results and inconsistencies. So to say "FBI load does X in gel... and this other bullet does Y in (clear 'gel'(as if all gel was the same)" is pretty meaningless when trying to compare to another load in a different type of test medium.

Organic gel is a pain in the behind to make and use, it needs to be made a certain amount of time before testing, refrigerated, kept at a consistent temp until the test, calibrated before testing (a bb fired at a certain velocity and its penetration depth recorded, and that should be included in test info, exactly what the calibration was or that it was properly calibrated). All this is why clear gel is popular, its just not the same results, so hard to compare straight across to organic gel test results.
 
Too bad we can't get more bad guys lining up to volunteer as media for penetration and expansion tests. ;)

Until that happens I guess we'll just have to rely on ballistics gelatin tests to compare relative performance. While recognizing the limitations of the media of course :D
 
I believe in in "Placement Under Pressure." You can get killed by a 22 bouncing around or survive a 44 mag. Ballistic gel makes pretty flower bullets. That and a crystal ball will tell you how it will react in a real world shooting scenario. Practice, practice, practice. Location, location, location. That is the key to survival. 5 or 6 38's in the nose are sure that one is going to hit something important.

BUT, having said all that, it still might not matter. Just do your best that if you are going to be on a slab in the coroner's office that you make sure the bad guy is there with you.
 
We have a fairly good supply of actual shootings to compare information with of various loads to ballistics gel tests, and we know the bullets/loads tested in organic gel perform pretty similarly to actual shooting results, even with bones and the variety of things bodies consist of. This is an ongoing field of research and study, not something seldom done ages ago, dusted off periodically to try to justify its existence. The ongoing study is why we have continually improving bullet designs, and bullet designs that dont clog up with clothing, can shoot through windshields, car doors, etc and still expand and penetrate well afterwards.
 
You will die of a well placed .22 CB cap. And survive a miss from a .458 Winchester Magnum.:rolleyes:
 
I remember when I was given some gel test results from factory testing by Winchester, done, if I recall correctly, sometime in 2002. (I probably have that paper somewhere in the bins of materials I collected, but then packed away after I retired.)

I thought I recalled that the "average" expansion in their own testing was something like .36" (meaning little deformation).

I also remember being told that the Remington version (R38S12?) of those earlier years had yielded some better expansion in some state testing, likely (supposedly) because of the softer swaged lead used in their LHP bullet.

I'd not be at all surprised if encountering a heavy bony structure (like the sternum) might result in more deformation and expansion ... but ... arguably, the "effectiveness" of any particular "hit" is still more likely to depend on placement, and damaging critical tissues, structures and organs, than the degree of expansion.

At least having a hollow nose cavity might offer some potential for deformation and mushrooming effect, and perhaps even some "cookie cutter" effect, but remember that the long 158gr SWC-profile bullets may easily yaw right after impact, and the length of the bullet might actually present a "wider" surface that might come into contact with more anatomical tissues than a nicely rounded, mushroomed front meplat.

Placement, placement, placement.

Speed of getting that first (or maybe only) 1 or 2 hits, of course, but with good placement.
 
BC38 said:
Too bad we can't get more bad guys lining up to volunteer as media for penetration and expansion tests. ;)

Until that happens I guess we'll just have to rely on ballistics gelatin tests to compare relative performance. While recognizing the limitations of the media of course :D
Click to expand...

Or, you could go out and look at documented shootings of actual humans, in "real life" events, where
the round and it's effects were captured, then sift through thousands of shootings, and tabulate the relative effects of different calibers, types and brands of bullets, etc.

Oh, wait...Sanow & Marshall already did that...:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Narragansett
Your Take on Tariffs and Ammo Prices?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
2K
GypsmJim
GypsmJim
T
Some old 45 ammo
Replies
7
Views
1K
AJ
AJ
R
9mm HORNADY American Gunner 124gr XTP +P Review
Replies
0
Views
1K
RDub
R
Narragansett
Steel Cased Ammo
2 3
Replies
41
Views
1K
old tanker
old tanker
Z
Help, Ammo ID
Replies
1
Views
323
Alk8944
Alk8944

Latest posts

Back
Top