Underwood 68gr defender out performs every hollow point

[marathonrunner]

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?

 

[Nevada Ed]

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

Just looking for a fair test.

 

[Rammer Jammer]

There are no magic bullets.

 

[Michaelp57]

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"

 

[Autonomous]

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.

 

[rockquarry]

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

 

[ISCS Yoda]

There are no magic bullets.

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.

 

[Octagun]

Interesting read, thank you for sharing,

 

[edl]

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"

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.

 

[robertrwalsh]

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.

 

[rwsmith]

One thing I can say for these....

...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.

 

[Valmet]

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

 

[glenwolde]

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.

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

 

[rosewood]

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

 

[murphydog]

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?

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.

 

[Autonomous]

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.

 

[Yendor357]

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.

 

[rosewood]

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.

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

 

[sourdough44]

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.

 

[Michaelp57]

Why?

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.

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.