Holy Gel Tests Batman

[ReeferMac]

Folks over at Lucky gunner must have found a Ballistics Gel Blue-Light Special!

 

http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

 

Just about every size and brand of handgun ammo out there.

 

- Kevin

[Oh Shoot]

Looks like my Golden Saber 9mm 124gr +p have held up very well over time.

 

- OS

[Shepherd Master]

Interesting, thanks.

[felinesNfreedom]

Wow. Looks like I could spend a lot of time picking out my next PD round. Thanks 

[KKing]

Thanks for posting. I have to say there were a couple of surprises there for me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[crashgordan]

Nice

[WindHawk]

Thanks, Kevin.  Good info that I'll have to consider.

[musicman]

Kinda diggin' that Barnes Tac stuff. Looks amazing in each caliber. Super disappointed in the Remington HTP stuff.

I had been carrying a mix of Hornady Critical Duty or Critical Defense in 9 or 40, but I wasn't so impressed with the results for them. Especially in 40.

Awesome compilation of data!

[ReeferMac]

My pleasure folks. This board has been a great source of info, I'm glad to be able to return the favor!

Maybe throw the link up in that sticky-post on top about caliber efficiency?

 

I thought the fabric-supplement was a good idea, and pretty 'thick' (but would rather err on the long-side...).

The Federal Hydra-shok's seemed to do pretty good in all sizes? Wifey doesn't like the 9's we've tried, too much BANG, and I'm hesitant to get a .380 myself... but that crown looks pretty nasty, I imagine it'll do the job!

 

- K
 

[monkeylizard]

Federal HST in 9mm and .45 looked like a consistently good performer.

 

 

Nothing looks stellar in the .380 world. Not much of a surprise there.

[monkeylizard]

The Federal Hydra-shok's seemed to do pretty good in all sizes? Wifey doesn't like the 9's we've tried, too much BANG, and I'm hesitant to get a .380 myself... but that crown looks pretty nasty, I imagine it'll do the job!

 

 

If she doesn't like shooting a 9mm, she'll hate shooting a .380 in anything smaller than something like the Bersa Thunder. Way more felt recoil in most .380 guns than just about any 9mm.

 

As for the Sig 90gr V-Crown, notice that 2 rounds failed to reach 12" while one barely made it. Good expansion on all of them though. Based solely on this data, I'd take the Hornady 90 gr FTX Critical Defense if I had to use a .380. All of them reached 12", all 5 are consistent on their depth, and all 5 expanded well.

[peejman]

Great test report.... and pretty good ammo prices too. 

[nightrunner]

I like the Barnes stuff and carry it but I really dislike how they only use light for caliber bullets.

I have really been looking at the Nosler ammunition here lately. Haven't gotten a box yet though.

[bubbadavis]

Hydrashocks penetrated well but didn't expand much. Take a look at the images of the retrieved bullets.

 

I shot 38 SPL Hydrashocks into ballistic gel a couple of weeks ago - I bought new carry ammo the next week. The jacket barely peeled back and expansion was very minimal. 

 

Ballistic gel isn't cheap but it is reusable. Just melt it down and pour into a mold. I've got some ordered so I can do proper testing on my carry ammo in the future.

[TomXD9]

The Smith & Wesson M&P9c has a 3.5 inch barrel.  Most manufacturer data are tested with a 4 inch barrel.  shootingthebull410 has done some testing using a 3 inch barrel Sig P938.  The shorter barrel and resulting lower velocity affect the expansion and penetration.  You might find his work interesting and compare with the Lucky Gunner data..  He likes the Fed HST best, but several others are close, not necessarily the traditional self defense rounds FROM THE 3 INCH BARREL.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iA7FTjmLiQQ&list=PLgNSGOEQko_M90AMdRCDMgd-w4Yozc27i

[Patton]

I like the Barnes stuff and carry it but I really dislike how they only use light for caliber bullets.

The lightness of their projectiles is because they are all copper without lead. However, I have never seen an issue with the Barnes bullets being too light. In fact, the 110gr DPX is probably the second best 38spl load only to the 135 gr Gold Dot from in every test I can find.

I shot 38 SPL Hydrashocks into ballistic gel a couple of weeks ago - I bought new carry ammo the next week. The jacket barely peeled back and expansion was very minimal. 
 

Those 129gr Hydrashocks do perform poorly. I have some of the old 125 gr Federal jacket hollow points I would like to test. They were discontinued about ten years ago. Edited October 22, 2015 by Patton

[viscero]

Was just sharing this test around on FB.  Love that they spent the time and money to do it right!  So many youtubers, reveiwers, etc just fire off one or two shots into a single block and call it day.  I know there's no way for them to include EVERY type of ammo in their tests but I would have liked to see a FMJ ball rounds included as a baseline comparison as well.  Also, the Underwood/Lehigh Defense stuff is making a lot of waves.  Since they included the G2 RIP stuff I would have liked to have seen those as well.  I really like the way the 147gr Federal HST 9mm performed overall.  

[nightrunner]

The lightness of their projectiles is because they are all copper without lead. However, I have never seen an issue with the Barnes bullets being too light.

Correct. Lead is denser than copper and the Barnes has a massive and deep hollow point cavity. A 115gr. Barnes bullet is the same physical size as a 147gr lead JHP. Barnes expands larger than any other bullet on the market that I have seen.

I guess I just need to get over the fact that it's a bit unconventional, yet it works great.

[BigK]

Impressive set of test data. That took a lot of time to gather and present.

 

Glad to see my carry ammo in the upper middle to lower top of the penetration/expansion numbers.

[monkeylizard]

Barnes expands larger than any other bullet on the market that I have seen.

 

This test confirms that for the 9mm (of the ones they tested), but not the .40 and .45. Others expanded more than the Barnes in those calibers.

[jh225]

Been carrying Gold Dots in everything I carry for a gazillion years. Guess I made the right choice. :cool:

[East_TN_Patriot]

Looks like that pretty well puts to rest the old argument that a .380 round won't penetrate deep enough to be effective.  Those data also tell me that I would be just fine shooting 115 grain Gold Dot rounds rather than 124 or 147 grain.  Interesting results.

Edited October 23, 2015 by East_TN_Patriot

[monkeylizard]

Looks like that pretty well puts to rest the old argument that a .380 round won't penetrate deep enough to be effective.  Those data also tell me that I would be just fine shooting 115 grain Gold Dot rounds rather than 124 or 147 grain.  Interesting results.

 

Yep. It puts it to rest by sort-of confirming it. Half (if you count the V-Crown which was on the bubble, which I do) failed to reach 12" consistently. Add three and a half more showing significant over penetration, presumably from lack of expansion, and we end up with a 2/3 failure rate. Not good in my book. It tells me that most .380 ammo is not a good SD choice, but that there are some bright spots.

 

It shows me that SD ammo selection is important, but doubly so if you choose to carry a .380.

Edited October 23, 2015 by monkeylizard

[sschrick]

I was surprised (and disappointed) to see the 9mm 147gr. Speer Gold Dots did not have great expansion.  Probably due to lower velocity.  That is what I was carrying in my Springfield EMP.  And it only has a 3" barrel.  Definitely gonna think about switching to the 124+P.  This rounds seems to have a great balance of penetration and expansion. 

[Oh Shoot]

... Definitely gonna think about switching to the 124+P.  This rounds seems to have a great balance of penetration and expansion. 

 

Yeah, I've always considered 124gr +p to be the sweet spot, mainly because that's essentially NATO standard even though it's not a HP.

 

- OS