Monday, October 3, 2016

Handgun Ammo Selection: The best ever!





It has been an interesting month. Over the last four weeks I have taught several Vehicle Combatives courses along with a special event for Ruger at the FTW Ranch in Texas. In all of these events, I have been involved in a variety of handgun ammunition tests that have led me (once again) to state we have THE BEST combative handgun ammo ever!

It started in 1987 when several FBI Agents died in a shoot out with several armored car robbers in Miami, Florida. One of the two suspects fought like a rapid dog even after taking fatal wounds and it was later determined one of the 9mm bullets did not penetrate deep enough to reach vital organs. While this determination has been disputed and debated, what did happen was a revolution in handgun ammunition design and development. Yes, we worked our way though the 10mm Lite and the .40 S&W…and these were useful additions at the time…but we have once again settled on the 9mm or .45 as the aforementioned R & D into combative ammunition has pretty much eliminated any advantage the .40 had over the 9.

I have seen proof of this over the last few weeks as bullet after bullet has been fired into vehicles, though wallboard and into typical clothing on its way to ballistic gelatin, the international standard for testing ammo effectiveness. What I have seen time and again in the last few weeks is a wide selection of rounds punch though a variety of intermediate barriers, expand and penetrate to a depth that is potentially fatal to anyone on the wrong end of the bullet. While I will be the first to tell you ballistic gelatin in not the same as a human torso, it is a valid test when comparing one round against another. There is just no way to know how any small arm round will affect an amped up, attacking human being…there never will be until we can place our “Phasers on stun”. That said, ballistic gelatin is the best alternative to human tissue, but the smart student of wound ballistics will combine street data with laboratory testing…something I have tried to do for decades now.

While in Kalamazoo, Michigan, students fired a number of 9mm and .45 rounds through auto glass into paper targets to determine deflection, something that is greatly affected by the slant of any windshield. That said, rounds like the Federal HST, Speer Gold Dot, Hornady Critical Duty/Defense and Barnes-X all copper hollow points worked quite well. A few weeks later, I traveled to FTW and witnessed a VERY extensive ballistic laboratory put on by Hornady showing the across the board effectiveness of their Critical Duty ammunition in all of the FBI protocols. The impressive thing here is Hornady set up each protocol side-by-side and shot through each barrier one after another. The blocks of gelatin were next to each other so the participants in attendance could see the consistent expansion and penetration right down the line.

A week later, I headed to Brainerd, Minnesota for another Vehicle Combatives course where several Vista Outdoor (Federal/Speer) employees were students and brought along a nice supply of ballistic gelatin so students could see what their chosen load would do not only though auto glass, but what the bullet would do in the gel after it has passed through the glass. In every Vehicle Combatives course I teach, I set aside a block of time for each student to test their carry load against various parts of a vehicle for their own edification. In this case, the folks from Vista placed blocks of gel in the vehicle so the student could see the whole picture. What was unique about this set up was actual cars were used, not pieces of auto glass placed in a brace a set distance from the gelatin block.

Of course, with all of this ballistic gelatin available, students wanted to see as much of the FBI protocol as they could and the folks from Vista were more than happy to oblige. They had a nice supply of Federal 147 grain HST, Speer 147 grain Gold Dot 2 (the new FBI load), Speer 124 grain Gold Dot +P (the NYPD load) and Federal 165 grain HST .40. The results of the test were impressive! Every round penetrated and deformed as they passed through various barriers and penetrated 10 inches plus. The clothing used was not swatches of cloth, the old coats and shirts the students brought along. Great participation! While I had read some very critical tests of the Gold Dot 2 on line, I did not see anything like what I read during this test…and this was done with real cars, clothing and the like…not a laboratory setting in any way.

What the past month has done is make me rethink is my selection of the 9mm all copper hollow point as my carry load. While I still believe the all copper bullet has a bright future, in the most recent testing I witnessed I did not see a level of superiority over the bullets discussed here. In addition, as I travel to from class to class, I have received complaints from students about the all copper hollow points as they are hard to get, expensive and in the case of one company, they are treated rudely by employees when inquiries are made in regards to availability. Indeed, I have been blown off by this company myself over the last half year! This will certainly affect anyone’s viewpoint of a particular product and the desire to endorse it, no matter how good it is.

No worries, however, as we have THE BEST combative handgun ammo in history…of that I am convinced. I only know of one shooting with the new Gold Dot 2…certainly not enough to establish a track record…but the round performed as designed so this is certainly encouraging. The Federal HST is THE choice for American law enforcement and it has an increasingly impressive performance record in the street…something that can also be said for the NYPD’s 124 grain +P Gold Dot. Combine this with impressive test results and it would appear the choice is clear, right? Not so fast you say? There are other good choices? You are right, of course…but the choice/search is certainly much easier than ever before…

Thanks for checking in…

12 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. While it has not benefitted as much from all the R & D as has the 9mm, it is still much improved! I would look at the 200 plus grain versions from the same product lines as the best 9mm choices.

      Delete
  2. Great post, Dave. Within the HST family, any thoughts about bullet weight or +P vs standard pressure, or are they all pretty comparable?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The 147 +P HST is being discontinued as it only offered 50 fps. In the 124 HST I would certainly go with the +P. The 124 +P Gold Dot is a VERY proven load.

      Delete
  3. Hey Dave, recently discovered your site and enjoy the wisdom you give. What are your top recommendations for .40 ammo ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The 165 HST looked good in the recent tests, though I would lean towards the 180 HST and Gold Dot.

      Delete
  4. I just read last night of a case where a perp soaked up 17 .45 Gold Dots (including head shots) before going down with a brain hit. That's not to say Gold Dots aren't great, just sayin handguns aren't great.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I did not see any mention of the hugely popular Winchester SXT Ranger loads...perhaps none was available for testing??

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dave, I recently came across your web sight. I've been aware of you for years. Great info with believable/professional presentation. Thanks. Do you have any experience or thoughts on Underwood Penetrator or Defender ammo?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I found ammo in PostGun but i don't know what best ammo for my taurus pistol.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Dave,

    Thanks for all of the great info that you put out. I really value and rely on your opinions. Don't let the naysayers get to you.

    I have a question about lighter for caliber bullets such as the 115 grain Gold Dot and 115 grain Hornady Critical Defense. I almost always hear/read that 115's aren't sufficient for defensive purposes. What's your opinion on this? Have you heard of any actual shootings that took place with either of these loads, or other comparable 115 grain 9mm rounds?

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete