Corbon DPX 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 ACP duty ammo vs. Fed HST as control

9mm Corbon 115 gr +P Barnes XPB JHP; ave vel=1229 fps (G19); gel cal= 9.5cm@593fps
BG: pen=14.8", RD=0.54", RL=0.48", RW=115.1gr
4LD: pen=15.1", RD=0.54", RL=0.49", RW=115.4gr

9mm Fed 147 gr HST JHP; ave vel=997 fps (G19)
BG: pen=14.6", RD=0.61", RL=0.39", RW=147.1gr
4LD: pen=15.6", RD=0.56", RL=0.53", RW=145.5gr

115 gr +P XPB vs. 147 gr HST--BG top/4LD bottom:
http://i459.photobucket.com/albums/q...g?t=1234757049

.40 S&W Corbon 140 gr Barnes XPB JHP; ave vel=1207 fps (S&W 4006); gel cal=9.5cm@590fps
BG: pen=12.6", RD=0.64", RL=0.49", RW=140.1gr
4LD: pen=11.5", RD=0.64", RL=0.49", RW=141.1gr

.40 S&W Fed 180 gr HST JHP; ave vel=959 fps (S&W 4006)
BG: pen=14.0", RD=0.70", RL=0.43", RW=181.2gr
4LD: pen=15.0", RD=0.56", RL=0.52", RW=180.7gr

140 gr XPB vs. 180 gr HST--BG top/4LD bottom:
http://i459.photobucket.com/albums/q...on140grJHP.jpg

.45 ACP Corbon 160 gr Barnes XPB JHP; ave vel=1101 fps (1911); gel cal=9.0cm@576fps
BG: pen=13.9" RD=0.66", RL=0.43", RW=159.7gr
4LD: pen=13.2", RD=0.64", RL=0.46", RW=160.1gr

.45 ACP Corbon 185 gr +P Barnes XPB JHP; ave vel=1097 fps (1911); gel cal=9.0cm@576fps
BG: pen=16.8" RD=0.65", RL=0.51", RW=185.3gr
4LD: pen=16.5", RD=0.66", RL=0.51", RW=185.9gr

.45 ACP Fed 230 gr +P HST JHP; ave vel=996 fps (1911)
BG: pen=12.2", RD=0.85", RL=0.41", RW=230.5gr
4LD: pen=14.6", RD=0.69", RL=0.46", RW=230.7gr

185 gr +P XPB vs. 230 gr +P HST--BG top/4LD bottom:
http://i459.photobucket.com/albums/q...g?t=1234757450

Like the HST loads, the Barnes XPB bullets performed very well in both bare gel and 4 layer denim; the only area of concern was a propensity for the Barnes XPB bullets to have difficulties with auto windshield intermediate barriers. The Barnes bullets would frequently begin to yaw off course after only a few centimeters of travel in gel and would often veer to 90 degrees and exit the gel blocks in under 10 cm--this phenomena requires further study.

I think I like the Federal 9mm 147 grain HST performance better from a Glock 19 than a Glock 17...

Great data - thanks Doc!

Looks like I need to update my FAQ over on Arfcom with some new data...

Quote:

---

"I think I like the Federal 9mm 147 grain HST performance better from a Glock 19 than a Glock 17..."

---

After accounting for lot to lot variations, the terminal performance is identical between a G19 and G17.

The 9mm HST went 14.6 inches in BG in the Glock 19...
I seem to recall about 12.5 inches in a Glock 17...
I prefer 14.6 over 12.5 inches...

I use RA9T for this reason specifically... I like BG to be at least 13-14 inches in my Glock 17...

Am I too picky??? :confused:

Yes...you will see that much variation lot-to-lot, even when fired from the same pistol.

Thanks, Doc... you just reminded me why we should not only test the load we carry, but we should re-test new lots, too!!!

Follow-up question about the 185gr DPX: Would you have expected the bullet to have a bigger RD in a non-+P load?

Also - why did you pick the HST in 230gr +P instead of the regular pressure load?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zhukov

Follow-up question about the 185gr DPX: Would you have expected the bullet to have a bigger RD in a non-+P load?

---

Like the Taurus version?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DocGKR

[b]

Like the HST loads, the Barnes XPB bullets performed very well in both bare gel and 4 layer denim; the only area of concern was a propensity for the Barnes XPB bullets to have difficulties with auto windshield intermediate barriers. The Barnes bullets would frequently begin to yaw off course after only a few centimeters of travel in gel and would often veer to 90 degrees and exit the gel blocks in under 10 cm--this phenomena requires further study.

---

Is this phenomenon limited to the XPB, or does it affect all Barnes x-bullets. For example, will a 62 grain .224 X-Bullet also deviate off course with regularity?