BrokenArrow:
http://greent.com/40Page/general/EFMJ.htm
Michael Orick's informal tests also showed that the .40's have trouble, but that the 9's apparently work as advertised. No real reason seems to be given. He didn't do any tests on the .45 as it wasn't available yet. It would be interesting to see why. Where's ol' Tom B. when you need him?
Regarding the idea of the EFMJ, I tend to agree that it seems to be designed to not perform as radically as the HP, but that it is deisgned to work all the time. What interests me is your tests which seem to show that the EFMJ doesn't penetrate very far even when it doesn't expand. This would seem to suggest to me that something else must be slowing it down then, otherwise, why else would it not penetrate all the way through like ball right?
Two theories on that one. One is that the bullet is butt heavy, and it is tumbling, that's got to increase the wound cavity right? The other, is that a flat pointed bullet is more efficient (ala Wadcutter) at wounding tissue than a round nose which will tend to push flesh out of the way, rather than crushing it.
Also, regarding it's performance in the FBI tests, I definitely don't think it was designed for passing the FBI tests. However, I'm not particularly worried about them, I tend to prefer IWBA's guidelines. The FBI itself IIRC stated that when the designed the tests that they saw their needs as rather unique. The general trend seems to be that going through auto-glass is NEVER good for bullet performance, front windshields anyway... I don't think that side windows would offer as much of a hindrance to a well designed HP, or the EFMJ.
The other perk I see to the EFMJ is that it will expand in dry media. Federal calls it a Controlled Soft Point I believe, I think it behaves like a super soft point. It limits penetration in all media. The only problem with it is that the silicon in the nose is soft, in the pictures I've seen of the EFMJ going through glass, it appears the expanded part gets cut off. This is something that could perhaps is fixed with a better form of silicon/stronger jacket combination. Getting back to the point of this paragraph. Expanding in dry media is very advantageous in preventing wounding of innocents who are behind walls. And a desireable trait.
Your thoughts on all this?
End BrokenArrow specific reply [\B]
Just obeying my nit-picky nature here the PoweRBall, uses a Ceramic ball on the tip, the EFMJ uses silicon. Not plastic. Additionally, PoweRBall is not a new or novel idea Winchester developed a bullet that is suprisingly similar a while ago. Called the Winchester Expanding Point. Here's a link with a picture (a way down the page, which happens to be in German (sometimes) and rather poorly put together): http://home.snafu.de/l.moeller/Geschossbilder.html
EFMJ isn't entirely original either, it's just a really soft soft-point, but the design I find isn't a near identical copy of something another manufacturer introduced, not that long ago.
-Morgan