spacecoast
New member
The American Rifleman that I received today has a fairly comprehensive set of tests on handgun ammunition. Rounds exceeding the group average for both penetration and expansion were labeled with an * (at least they were supposed to be). While you can read at your leisure and draw your own conclusions, here are a few observations:
Despite these calculation flaws (and substitution of humanly for humanely in the first sentence of the 2nd paragraph) it was still an interesting and informative study (assuming the numbers were fairly collected and printed accurately). I think the author's conclusion was to encourage the reader to find the right combination of expansion and penetration. No argument there, but it could have been presented a bit better.
These are just my observations, feel free to shoot holes in them.
- Unfortunately AR didn't exclude the non-expanding rounds from its average expansion factor in determining high performers. This served to bias the average penetration upwards in some cases. For instance, the hardcast Buffalo Bore .380 100 gr. +P penetrated 24+ inches with almost no expansion. Same for the Remington 88-gr. JHP. If those two had been discounted, the average penetration would have been 10.9 inches, and several rounds (including the BB 90-grain JHP would have been "high performers".
- Hornady's 90 gr. Critical Defense .380ACP round didn't fare well at all, surprising since I've seen lots of mention of how good it is.
- Also notable was that Remington's 9mm Luger 147 gr. JHP subsonic failed to expand (and penetrated over 20 inches as a result). Same with the 115 gr. JHP - little expansion, great penetration.
- The Federal 130 gr. Hydra-Shok seems to be a very low performer, penetrating only 9.5" and expanding by a factor of 1.26, much less than some .38 special loads.
- No .38 special rounds were labeled as high performers, again due to the Buffalo Bore 158 gr. +P that didn't expand (not sure if it's designed to be an expanding round or not). Several rounds would have been highly rated over the 10.3"/1.5 group average had the BB been excluded. Even so, the 135 gr. Speer Gold Dot SBPP exceeded the averages and should have been recognized with a *.
- Several .45 ACP rounds also suffered this same fate, biased by the Federal 230 gr. FMJ (not an expanding round) and the Federal 230 gr. JHP (which failed to expand at only 815 fps). The effect wasn't quite as bad given the large number of cartridges tested and two were rated high performers. It was also odd to throw the safety slugs in there.
- In the .45ACP category, the Federal 165 gr. Guard Dog .45 ACP just missed the group average but received a * mistakenly. The * should have been assigned to the Federal 230 gr. loads (HST and Hydra-Shok), the Remington 185 gr. Golden Saber and the Winchester 230 gr. Black Talon.
- Similarly, in the .40 S&W category, the Remington 180 gr. Golden Saber should have been recognized as a high performer. The same is true of the 102 gr. Golden Saber in the .380 ACP category, exceeding the averages but failing to receive a * for some reason.
Despite these calculation flaws (and substitution of humanly for humanely in the first sentence of the 2nd paragraph) it was still an interesting and informative study (assuming the numbers were fairly collected and printed accurately). I think the author's conclusion was to encourage the reader to find the right combination of expansion and penetration. No argument there, but it could have been presented a bit better.
These are just my observations, feel free to shoot holes in them.