View Full Version : So Which Round for Home Defense? You Decide.
Through my time here on this forum, I've learned alot about ballistics thanks to Doc and many others who have done their own tests and have gone through the same learning curve I did. I'm by no means a ballistic expert, but I've learned enough to at least have an idea. Through that time, I noticed that one of the most common questions regarding ballistics was "What round is the best for HD in terms of effectiveness against the target, AND will limit the possibility of friendly casualties if a round misses and passes through a wall into the next room?" Well, according to those who know way more than me, such as Doc, the short answer is, "Its not possible to have both."
It's ultimately about the software and not the hardware, knowing your target, its foreground and background, shot composition, and what may be behind the next wall. Once you have that, THEN try to maximize your hardware to meet the software. As far as hardware selection, it took me a while to accept the fact that the target that needs to be eliminated may not always be out in the open for a clear, unobstructed shot. Further, I had to accept that anything that will penetrate to the acceptable depth (terminally speaking) WILL present a threat to anyone on the other side of a wall if there is a missed shot or pass-through. The threat is priority number one, with consideration for friendly casualties a very close second.
So, enter the bonded soft point debate. You either use a bonded soft point that has acceptable wounding/penetration characteristics through barriers AND unobstructed shots or you use a fragmenting round that won't do as well through barriers, but good results for unobstructed shots....OR you don't educate yourself and use a round that has sub-par penetration numbers for the chance of midigating friendly casualties. I like options, and since I don't know what kind of threat I'll be faced with, I know which round I'd choose.
This leads me to a test that I've been wanting to do for a while now. I wanted to design a test to see what certain rounds would do through a "wall" such as you would find in your home, and the penetration depth they were able to obtain in gallon jugs of water (simulating tissue). There has been similar tests done with only sheetrock, or only water jugs, but as far as I know, never with both (unless Doc has done this and I haven't seen it yet?). And, yes, gelatin would have been much better than water, but it is what is readily available and easiest to work with for me.
I built a "box" with two pieces of sheetrock spaced 4" apart (approximate distance of the space in your walls) and gallon jugs of water to catch the projectile starting 12" from the second piece of sheetrock.
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0092.jpg
I used different pieces of sheetrock (all cut the same size from the same larger sheet that I bought from the hardware store) for each test performed (except for the XM223SP1, since I ran that one twice...more on that later). All water jugs were the same temperature, stored the same way, and placed the same way inside the box when the test was run.
As you can see below, my box didn't hold up as expected since I didn't account for the energy being imparted into the water by the rifle projectiles. The first two jugs were typically pretty well shredded, especially the first one, and the water pressure tore the side walls off! Below is the only pic I got of the aftermath, but was pretty typical for all the rifle rounds fired. The sole pistol round that I fired showed pretty obviously how much lower energy it carried when compared to rifle rounds...but the penetration might surprise you...more on that later too.
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/IMG_0093.jpg
Below are the results for the tests performed.
*These tests were all shot from a distance of 10yds. Rifle was a 14.5" AR and pistol was a G19.*
Rounds used were:
Federal XM556FBIT3 (62gr TBBC projectile)
Federal XM223SP1 (62gr Fusion projectile)
Hornady 75gr TAP T2
Federal 55gr XM193
Barnes 62gr RRLP (Reduced Ricochet Limited Penetration)
Speer 124gr Gold Dot (standard pressure)
**NOTE**
The first picture of each test will show the FRONT side of each section of wall, meaning entry holes, indicated by a "W1/W2". The second picture shows the BACK side of each section, meaning exit holes. In the case of the Fusion Projectile, "T1" indicates "Test 1" and "T2" indicates "Test 2".
Also, I didn't search for or pick out every tiny piece of lead that was left in the jugs...since my main goal is to show the "lethality" of various rounds after contact with a typical interior wall of a home, I didn't feel that the tiny flakes of lead that I could find in some of the jugs were significant enough to pick out. Anything that was large enough to cause potential injury was picked out and collected for the results.
Federal 62gr XM556FBIT3
Performed as expected, nice expansion and great penetration. Best performer of all rifle rounds tested.
There was some expansion that occurred between the first and second pice of sheetrock, but the majority of it was done in the water jugs.
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0158.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0159.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0160.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0162.jpg
Test Results
Penetration Depth: 4 Jugs
Projectile Recovered: 4th Jug
Expanded Diameter: .467"
Retained Weight: 52.2 grains
Federal 62gr XM223SP1
This one actually surprised me. I was expecting similar results to the TBBC, but it didn't hold together like I thought it would. Every gel or water test I've seen, the projectile held together nicely. I actually ran this test twice because I thought it was a fluke, but got very similar results on both tests.
There seemed to be more rapid expansion within the "wall" (just judging by entry and exit holes) when compared to the TBBC, so I'm not sure if this contributed to the projectile breaking apart when hitting water. If someone (Doc) knows why this might have happened, I'm all ears. I still think its a great round though.
*Note the star shaped entry hole on the front side of the 2nd side of the wall*
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0154.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0155.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0156.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0157.jpg
Test 1 Results
Penetration Depth: 2 Jugs
Projectile Recovered: 2nd Jug
Expanded Diameter: N/A
Retained Weight: 25.2 grains
Test 2 Results
Penetration Depth: 3 Jugs
Projectile Recovered: 2nd and 3rd Jug
Expanded Diameter: .456"
Retained Weight: Overall 36.8 grains (7.4 grains in 2nd Jug / 29.4 grains in 3rd Jug)
Hornady 75gr TAP T2 (8126N)
This was, not surprisingly, the best performer of the fragmenting rounds that I tested. It did have more penetration than I expected and broke into a few fairly large pieces...which is why you would rather use a heavier fragmenting round than a lighter one (see the XM193 test below for comparison).
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0147.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0150.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0153.jpg
Test Results
Penetration Depth: 4 Jugs
Projectile Recovered: 2nd and 4th Jug
Expanded Diameter: N/A
Retained Weight: Overall 46.3 grains (17.2 grains in 2nd Jug / 29.1 grains in 4th Jug)
Federal 55gr XM193
The penetration and weight retention numbers of this one really surprised me as well.
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0166.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0167.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0168.jpg
Test Results
Penetration Depth: 2 Jugs
Projectile Recovered: 2nd Jug
Expanded Diameter: N/A
Retained Weight: 11.4 grains
Barnes 62gr RRLP
This performed as I expected since this is a RRLP round, meaning it basically disintegrated, but surprisingly wasn't too far off the XM193 numbers.
*Note the rapid fragmentation of the round between the first and second pieces of sheetrock. Finding even the pieces that I did was a chore. Did what it was designed to do IMO.*
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0163.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0164.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0165.jpg
Test Results
Penetration Depth: 2 Jugs
Projectile Recovered: 2nd Jug
Expanded Diameter: N/A
Retained Weight: 1.9 grains
Speer 124gr Gold Dot
As I said above, the energy of a handgun round into medium is noticeably lower than a rifle (yes, common sense, I know) but the penetration, in spite of the expansion, was on par with what Doc and others have said. However, it has been stated that through sheetrock, a hollowpoint can plug up with the material and act like a FMJ...this didn't happen here apparently, unless the expansion occurred after the sheetrock "plug" was washed out by the water. Who knows, this is where ballistic gelatin would have come in handy.
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0169.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0171.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0172.jpg
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0173.jpg
Test Results
Penetration Depth: 3 Jugs (I actually found the projectile sitting between the 3rd and 4th jug walls)
Projectile Recovered: 3rd/4th Jug
Expanded Diameter: .583"
Retained Weight: 124.0 grains
Ok, so here's the backstory on this one. I went hunting last season and was forced to use a rifle that I hadn't used in several years. Unfortunately, I didn't get a chance to confirm zero. Thinking that I would at least be fairly close since I had it put up for several years, I didn't worry too much about it. Well, that was a mistake. An audad came out 236 yds away one morning, I lined up the crosshairs behind the shoulder, and squeezed. He went down, great! However, my round impacted high and severed his spine. I didn't want him to suffer, so I went down and finished him with my 9mm loaded with Gold Dot at about a range of 10-15 yds. The Gold Dot did its job pretty quickly, and after skinning, I recovered the round underneath his hide on the opposite side of his neck that I shot him on. After we harvested the meat and put it on ice, my cousin wanted to see what his Winchester 124gr Talon would do against a chunk of meat, so we chose a part of the audad's neck to shoot at since that is the area I shot him with the Gold Dot. Keep in mind that the hide was not a factor since it was pulled off, and the meat was now a different temperature and consistency when we shot it with the Talon. The Gold Dot performance is more "real world" since the audad was alive when I shot it, but the Talon results will at least give you an idea.
Estimated penetration of the Gold Dot was somewhere around 8-10 inches (he had a thick hide).
Expanded diameter and Retained weight of the Gold Dot are shown below.
Penetration couldn't be determined, but diameter and retained weight of the Talon are shown below.
Gold Dot-Left / Talon-Right
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0061.jpg
Gold Dot
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0057.jpg
Gold Dot Retained Weight
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0067.jpg
Gold Dot Expansion
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0066.jpg
Talon
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0059.jpg
Talon Retained Weight
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0068.jpg
Talon Expansion
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/bgonzo8/Ballistic%20testing/IMG_0064.jpg
vicious_cb
09-07-12, 15:03
Thanks for posting this. Pretty interesting results with the XM223SP1, I mean isnt this stuff supposed to work through auto glass which is a much tougher barrier? Since the gold dot is of similar construction I wonder if it will exhibit the same results. I really like the 64gr gold dot and now Im wondering if the stuff in my mags is good enough. :confused:
Thanks for posting this. Pretty interesting results with the XM223SP1, I mean isnt this stuff supposed to work through auto glass which is a much tougher barrier? Since the gold dot is of similar construction I wonder if it will exhibit the same results. I really like the 64gr gold dot and now Im wondering if the stuff in my mags is good enough. :confused:
No problem man, been wanting to do this for a while.
Yeah I was really surprised about the SP1 myself, and I really couldn't tell you why it didn't stay together. The only thing I could think of was how much it expanded so early (between the sections of wall), and the force it hit the water with, thus (maybe) tearing it apart. I would like to hear other opinions from those who have tested it as well. It did hold together slightly better on my second test though...
In all honesty, I'm not sure I would go switching my ammo out just from my test. I still think its great ammo, and probably more accurate than the TBBC as a factory loaded round.
There has been similar tests done with only sheetrock, or only water jugs, but as far as I know, never with both (unless Doc has done this and I haven't seen it yet?).
People at "theboxotruth" do that regularly no? Been a while since I looked but having various bullets go through various common barriers and into water jugs their forte I thought.
Regardless, thanx for the info and time taken to post it. :cool:
polymorpheous
09-07-12, 15:24
Great thread!
I'm very impressed by the Gold Dot's performance compared to the rifle cartridges.
Curious how the 124gr +P load would have performed.
That FBI load looks like the winner here for the 5.56.
Thanks for taking the time to do this.
People at "theboxotruth" do that regularly no? Been a while since I looked but having various bullets go through various common barriers and into water jugs their forte I thought.
Regardless, thanx for the info and time taken to post it. :cool:
That was one of the tests that I inferred there. As far as I know, they only did multiple sections of sheetrock to simulate the number of walls the round will pass through. I could be wrong though.
And no prob :)
That Talon looks more like Winchester Bonded/PDX? Did you confirm his ammo was Ranger Talon?
BTW, Great info....thanks for putting the time into and sharing your results!
That was one of the tests that I inferred there. As far as I know, they only did multiple sections of sheetrock to simulate the number of walls the round will pass through. I could be wrong though.
Or I could be, not sure. Nicely done!
Great thread!
I'm very impressed by the Gold Dot's performance compared to the rifle cartridges.
Curious how the 24gr +P load would have performed.
That FBI load looks like the winner here for the 5.56.
Thanks for taking the time to do this.
Thanks.
The penetration numbers for the Gold Dot was in line with what Doc has said for a long time, something that I hope people will start to understand. Paraphrasing: "If you're ok with shooing a handgun round in a defensive situation indoors (in terms of over-penetration), then you should be ok with shooting a bonded softpoint rifle round." That info held true here.
That Talon looks more like Winchester Bonded/PDX? Did you confirm his ammo was Ranger Talon?
BTW, Great info....thanks for putting the time into and sharing your results!
Not a problem, my pleasure.
I'm only going off what he told me...which to be quite honest, I don't know the accuracy of. He doesn't shoot much, and I'm pretty sure that same ammo has been in his Beretta 92 for at least a couple years. He didn't have a box or anything for confirmation, so you may very well be right. What makes you think its the Bonded PDX?
What makes you think its the Bonded PDX?
I could be wrong, but the all of the Talon ammo I have shot tends to show more core jacket separation especially when shot into water...not completely separating but not folding back like like that one pictured. That one had a Gold Dot/Bonded Bullet look to it the way it expanded down to the "dot" left over from where the hollow point was punched. There's also the lack of Talons from what I can see...I could be wrong though
Not trying to derail your thread so let me know if you'd prefer to take the pic comparisons down as its no prob at all?
Here are pics of PDX
PDX on Left and Talon on Right
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb244/a996hawk/DSC01247.jpg
PDX 2nd from Left
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb244/a996hawk/DSC01244.jpg
All that said, it looks like they both performed well with the GD having a slight edge.
I could be wrong, but the all of the Talon ammo I have shot tends to show more core jacket separation especially when shot into water...not completely separating but not folding back like like that one pictured. That one had a Gold Dot/Bonded Bullet look to it the way it expanded down to the "dot" left over from where the hollow point was punched. There's also the lack of Talons from what I can see...I could be wrong though
Not trying to derail your thread so let me know if you'd prefer to take the pic comparisons down as its no prob at all?
All that said, it looks like they both performed well with the GD having a slight edge.
Not a problem at all with the pics man, it only adds to the thread if anything. But I do see what you're saying, and it may very well be PDX. I'll try to get a confirmation on it with him when I get a chance and will update here if its not Talon.
Ironman8, have you thought about doing this test with the 50gr TSX ammo?
By the way thanks for the great info.
Ironman8, have you thought about doing this test with the 50gr TSX ammo?
I was planning on it, and wish I did, but I didn't get my reloading press up and running in time...maybe next time.
ETA: Just saw you said "50gr". I was planning to load up the 55gr for my test. The BH 50gr TSX would have been nice to test as well since its apparently a different projectile (construction wise)...
PA PATRIOT
09-07-12, 16:25
I also shot some XM223SP1 from my M-4 Clone and a friends 16" Colt (Six shots from each) into water jugs from seven yards last February and I had several fragment the same way yours did.
Now the water that filled my jugs was from a creek and cold but not so cold to have ice form and if I recall correctly the air temperature was around 40 degrees.
I cant explain why it occurred to some and not others but all rounds shot were from the same 20rd box.
I didn't take any pictures but I plan on repeating the test sometime in the fall.
IronMan,
Thanks for taking the time to do this and post all the pics. Very informative and always good to see stuff for yourself rather than the mall ninja confirmation that something is GTG.
Great work.
Is that the RRLP from me?! I was just about to PM you to get your address so I can send some down but saw you had it up!
BufordTJustice
09-07-12, 18:38
I've added this thread to my personal bookmarks. Out-****ING-standing thread, Ironman8! :D
packinaglock
09-07-12, 18:41
Cool test, thanks.
I did some water testing with the 9mm Ranger T-Series (RA9TA) a while back. If my memory serves me correct, I don't believe it is bonded. I had no core/jacket separation in the ten or so rounds that I fired. Maybe that is what your friend had?
ETA: And thank you for the testing!
Thanks for posting this. Pretty interesting results with the XM223SP1, I mean isnt this stuff supposed to work through auto glass which is a much tougher barrier? Since the gold dot is of similar construction I wonder if it will exhibit the same results. I really like the 64gr gold dot and now Im wondering if the stuff in my mags is good enough. :confused:
The gold dot really really shines from sbr length weapons. It was always meant for them in particular, I think. That is why they use such a fast powder and good flash suppressant and why they load to .223 velocity in an attempt to keep the rounds more or less in tact from longer barrels when used. I know people say its because of people using the 5.56 in .223 chambers, but I think that's not really it. The speer gold dot is loaded by federal. Federal loads plenty of 5.56 pressure rounds and has even expanded that line up. The fusion is a hunting bullet and expected to perform further down range than most police or home defense situations. The velocity window for this projectile is very wide, but shifted toward the low end. Lower even than the Barnes tsx 70gr. That is why from a 14.5" barrel at very short distances, its not the best. Launch it from a 10.5 or from a further distance, and watch it shine.
Just my .02 and a lot of reading between the lines.
Thanks for posting this. Pretty interesting results with the XM223SP1, I mean isnt this stuff supposed to work through auto glass which is a much tougher barrier? Since the gold dot is of similar construction I wonder if it will exhibit the same results. I really like the 64gr gold dot and now Im wondering if the stuff in my mags is good enough. :confused:
My thought is that the rounds aren't actually the same.
The only way to know is to use the real GD in a test.
C4
Scotter260
09-07-12, 22:56
Very interesting stuff. Like you, I'm surprised by the XM223SP1 based on what others have posted. It would be nice to see how the GD would have done.
Regarding the 64 GD being .223 over 5.56, Molon tested the 5.56 pressure 64 grainer some time ago but he was only getting something like 20 more fps than the .223 version. Pure speculation but perhaps Speer didn't see any reason to have two versions when their velocities were so similar.
Great stuff, thank you for your efforts.
BufordTJustice
09-07-12, 23:21
Let's all remember that the 62gr weight is marketed as the Federal Fusion under their hunting line and the 64gr weight is marketed as the gold dot.
Doc says they are identically constructed.....but if there is a difference, we would have to test the 64gr weight to verify. XM223SP1's projectile is a 62gr Fusion.
I've seen them pulled and sectioned and the two weights appear to be identically constructed to me...with very similar jacket profiles and ogive profiles. I can't say for the 64gr weight as to how it compares terminally.
I've used the Federal Fusion 62gr (Federal Fusion brand) for hunting feral hog here in FL and have had great success with it.....I have only seen substantial fragmentation when the round hits heavy bone like the shoulder blade/cart plate, etc. They were usually quite mangled whether they fragged slightly or not.
vicious_cb
09-08-12, 00:52
So why have a 64gr and 62gr version anyway? I highly doubt that a 2 grain difference would have any effect on the trajectory at all.
BufordTJustice
09-08-12, 01:34
So why have a 64gr and 62gr version anyway? I highly doubt that a 2 grain difference would have any effect on the trajectory at all.
I have asked the same thing many times. :rolleyes:
You'd think that unless these two projectiles performed in meaningfully different ways, that it would be easier and more cost effective to streamline production down to only two weights (55 gr and 62/64gr).
Could be a difference in the antimony of the core or something not visible as such.
BufordTJustice
09-08-12, 03:02
Could be a difference in the antimony of the core or something not visible as such.
Very good point....much like Brenneke uses higher levels of antimony to make a harder shotgun slug.
Rounds used were:
Federal XM223SP1 (62gr Fusion projectile)
Ironman8, thank you for this field test of the SP1. Very valuable information.
I had set my sights on this round because it is readily available and 'reasonably' priced. But now it looks like that while the SP1 is good hunting ammo for 100+yds, it may not be a great do-it-all self defense ammo.
I also shot some XM223SP1 from my M-4 Clone and a friends 16" Colt (Six shots from each) into water jugs from seven yards last February and I had several fragment the same way yours did.
Now the water that filled my jugs was from a creek and cold but not so cold to have ice form and if I recall correctly the air temperature was around 40 degrees.
I cant explain why it occurred to some and not others but all rounds shot were from the same 20rd box.
I didn't take any pictures but I plan on repeating the test sometime in the fall.
Yeah I'm not really sure what's going on and was surprised to see my results when I've seen others' test results. My first thought was that the early expansion you see in the sheetrock may have tore the projectile apart when it hit water at the velocity it did. So it may be either the velocity or different bullet altogether (as was said by WS6 and Grant), or possibly that some Fusion rounds aren't made the same as others...a QC/QA issue :confused:
The gold dot really really shines from sbr length weapons. It was always meant for them in particular, I think. That is why they use such a fast powder and good flash suppressant and why they load to .223 velocity in an attempt to keep the rounds more or less in tact from longer barrels when used. I know people say its because of people using the 5.56 in .223 chambers, but I think that's not really it. The speer gold dot is loaded by federal. Federal loads plenty of 5.56 pressure rounds and has even expanded that line up. The fusion is a hunting bullet and expected to perform further down range than most police or home defense situations. The velocity window for this projectile is very wide, but shifted toward the low end. Lower even than the Barnes tsx 70gr. That is why from a 14.5" barrel at very short distances, its not the best. Launch it from a 10.5 or from a further distance, and watch it shine.
Just my .02 and a lot of reading between the lines.
My thought is that the rounds aren't actually the same.
The only way to know is to use the real GD in a test.
C4
I think I would like to do this at some point...along with some TSX
Is that the RRLP from me?! I was just about to PM you to get your address so I can send some down but saw you had it up!
Yes sir it is :) I had a few more rounds so decided to use it and see how it performed. I still wonder if this would be a nice round to use in an apartment. This is where a gel block behind the sheetrock would have come in handy...
I've added this thread to my personal bookmarks. Out-****ING-standing thread, Ironman8! :D
Haha I'm honored! :D
Cool test, thanks.
IronMan,
Thanks for taking the time to do this and post all the pics. Very informative and always good to see stuff for yourself rather than the mall ninja confirmation that something is GTG.
Great work.
Thanks guys, glad y'all found it useful.
I did some water testing with the 9mm Ranger T-Series (RA9TA) a while back. If my memory serves me correct, I don't believe it is bonded. I had no core/jacket separation in the ten or so rounds that I fired. Maybe that is what your friend had?
ETA: And thank you for the testing!
No problem, glad you liked it. He actually just sent me a pic of the rounds that he carries (same one tested on the audad). I'll try to get it up. Haven't had a chance to compare it to the pic Wahoo put up, but he mentioned that he thinks its Ranger...possibly the RA9TA...I'll get the pic up.
Very interesting stuff. Like you, I'm surprised by the XM223SP1 based on what others have posted. It would be nice to see how the GD would have done.
Regarding the 64 GD being .223 over 5.56, Molon tested the 5.56 pressure 64 grainer some time ago but he was only getting something like 20 more fps than the .223 version. Pure speculation but perhaps Speer didn't see any reason to have two versions when their velocities were so similar.
Great stuff, thank you for your efforts.
Ironman8, thank you for this field test of the SP1. Very valuable information.
I had set my sights on this round because it is readily available and 'reasonably' priced. But now it looks like that while the SP1 is good hunting ammo for 100+yds, it may not be a great do-it-all self defense ammo.
Keep in mind that training will always trump round selection...and this is only a test of TWO rounds. There might be something to what WS6 says about the round performing better at lower velocities...or as Grant says, it may not even be the same round as the GD.
I still think this is a viable self defense round based on the other tests I have seen. I've seen more tests where it has held together like a typical bonded round than I have the type of results I got. Now, if I had the choice between TBBC and SP1/GD, I'd still go with the TBBC as long as I was getting decent accuracy out of it...which is what I did and why I sold off my SP1.
IM8, I have some various Speer GD available to you if interested. I would also be willing to spare some RARE brown tip (70gr TSX 5.56). ;)
C4
Is the .mil issued optimized brown tip much different than the 70 gr loadings you can get from say SSA?
IM8, I have some various Speer GD available to you if interested. I would also be willing to spare some RARE brown tip (70gr TSX 5.56). ;)
C4
Is the .mil issued optimized brown tip much different than the 70 gr loadings you can get from say SSA?
I cannot answer this (sorry).
I have the real deal brown tip and am not familiar with the SSA product.
C4
IM8, I have some various Speer GD available to you if interested. I would also be willing to spare some RARE brown tip (70gr TSX 5.56). ;)
C4
That would be awesome Grant! I would only really need one round of each, but I'll have to let you know when I'd be able to run the test again. I had to trash the box that I made since it was tore up from the exploded water jugs. It might be a little while before I'm ready (or have the time) to run the test again...
Nice tests ironman if you do any further testing and have your press set up i can send you some projectiles for testing. I have bunches of good bullets. I have 50&62grain ttsx, 53,55,62, and 70grain tsx, 60grain partitions, 64grain bonded solid base, 64grain power points, 65grain gamekings.
I also have some factory pistol ammunition in 9 and 45 (rangerT, HST, PDX1,) and some others.
If your interested in that anything you might want to shoot through your set up i would send them out just to see the results.
That would be awesome Grant! I would only really need one round of each, but I'll have to let you know when I'd be able to run the test again. I had to trash the box that I made since it was tore up from the exploded water jugs. It might be a little while before I'm ready (or have the time) to run the test again...
Just drop me a line when ready.
C4
Nice tests ironman if you do any further testing and have your press set up i can send you some projectiles for testing. I have bunches of good bullets. I have 50&62grain ttsx, 53,55,62, and 70grain tsx, 60grain partitions, 64grain bonded solid base, 64grain power points, 65grain gamekings.
I also have some factory pistol ammunition in 9 and 45 (rangerT, HST, PDX1,) and some others.
If your interested in that anything you might want to shoot through your set up i would send them out just to see the results.
Just drop me a line when ready.
C4
I'll take both of you up on this, thanks guys.
Also, I'd really rather keep this to rifle rounds and only used the Speer GD in the original test to prove Doc's point that a handgun round will penetrate as much or more than a rifle round...mostly for those who still think that a handgun round is a better option for HD...
However, if enough people want to see it, then I could probably get it done.
I'll take suggestions on different ammo too, but right now it looks like the various GD and TSX/TTSX rounds are in for sure.
Is the .mil issued optimized brown tip much different than the 70 gr loadings you can get from say SSA?
The SSA 70 grain TSX does not have crimped/sealed primer or sealed case mouth. From my understanding, the military version has these features.
There are companies that were considered for the contract but didn't get it and still sell the ammo but have to call it "brown-tip/optimized replica" even though it is VERY similar, if not identical, to the real deal. Again, usual difference is the crimp/seal and sealed case mouth. Place I have contacted will do it but only for large quantity orders.
I cannot answer this (sorry).
I have the real deal brown tip and am not familiar with the SSA product.
C4
The SSA 70 grain TSX does not have crimped/sealed primer or sealed case mouth. From my understanding, the military version has these features.
There are companies that were considered for the contract but didn't get it and still sell the ammo but have to call it "brown-tip/optimized replica" even though it is VERY similar, if not identical, to the real deal. Again, usual difference is the crimp/seal and sealed case mouth. Place I have contacted will do it but only for large quantity orders.
I thought I had read somewhere that the TSX in the issue ammo was slightly different than the TSX in the commercial loadings, probably just interwebz BS though...
I sure would like to get my hands on a little legit 'brown tip' just for good measure, same with the white tip RRLP.
I thought I had read somewhere that the TSX in the issue ammo was slightly different than the TSX in the commercial loadings, probably just interwebz BS though...
I sure would like to get my hands on a little legit 'brown tip' just for good measure, same with the white tip RRLP.
I can't say 100% but have had enough people tell me it's the same now that I'm beginning to believe it.
Just like the 50 grain being so different from the 55 and 62 though, it's possible that there could be some difference in construction.
Hopefully have a sample coming from a company in Texas and will sacrifice a few water bottles to catch a few and then compare to ones from ASYM to see if any notable difference. Won't end the debate but should be a help.
I'll take both of you up on this, thanks guys.
Also, I'd really rather keep this to rifle rounds and only used the Speer GD in the original test to prove Doc's point that a handgun round will penetrate as much or more than a rifle round...mostly for those who still think that a handgun round is a better option for HD...
However, if enough people want to see it, then I could probably get it done.
I'll take suggestions on different ammo too, but right now it looks like the various GD and TSX/TTSX rounds are in for sure.
Just let me know when. I love seeing this stuff. I also have some nosler 64 grain bonded solid base bullets. They are similar to the tbbc it is the bullet loaded in the winchester fbi loading (zq3313 i think that is the name of it). There has been some gel tests and info, but i would like to see it to compare it with your tbbc test. I don't have a lot of them, but would be willing to give up some to see the results.
Thanks for taking the time to make this available to all of us. Just send me a message a little bit before your ready to test and ill send out whatever you need for the test. Even if you need primers, brass, or powder just say the word and you got it.
Just let me know when. I love seeing this stuff. I also have some nosler 64 grain bonded solid base bullets. They are similar to the tbbc it is the bullet loaded in the winchester fbi loading (zq3313 i think that is the name of it). There has been some gel tests and info, but i would like to see it to compare it with your tbbc test. I don't have a lot of them, but would be willing to give up some to see the results.
Thanks for taking the time to make this available to all of us. Just send me a message a little bit before your ready to test and ill send out whatever you need for the test. Even if you need primers, brass, or powder just say the word and you got it.
Thanks, I'd like to see that as well! I'm also very interested in the performance of the 60gr partitions and the 65gr Gamekings...these were the two I was looking at as a reloading component before I found some TBBC pulls...still gotta load those up and test for accuracy...
Thanks, I'd like to see that as well! I'm also very interested in the performance of the 60gr partitions and the 65gr Gamekings...these were he two I was looking at as a reloading component before I found some TBBC pulls...still gotta load those up and test for accuracy...
I have the 60 grain partitions and the 65 grain gamekings. When you purchased the bear claws was there anymore available? I have been looking for some. Speek discontinued them and now that federal is selling them as components i still can not find the .224 diameter. If you don't mind giving up your source for the pulls send me a pm. If you do not want to give up your source i understand.
I have the 60 grain partitions and the 65 grain gamekings. When you purchased the bear claws was there anymore available? I have been looking for some. Speek discontinued them and now that federal is selling them as components i still can not find the .224 diameter. If you don't mind giving up your source for the pulls send me a pm. If you do not want to give up your source i understand.
No I don't mind at all, although I'm not sure that what I can tell you will help you much...Rocky Mountain Reloading is the source I got the TBBC from (owner's name is Jake). I was actually in contact with him for some Fusion projectiles since I heard he gets them every now and then, but he said he didn't have any and never knows when he will get them. Then maybe a day later, he called me and told me that he just got a line on some TBBC pulls and asked me if I might be interested in them, uh yeah...I'll take em all! :p
I'd at least call him and ask...wouldn't hurt. He's a nice guy.
BTW...what do you mean by the following??:
Speek discontinued them and now that federal is selling them as components i still can not find the .224 diameter.
I'm guessing you meant "Speer", but I thought Federal always produced the TBBC? And what is sold as components now?
Yeah i meant speer if you look at the old boxes with the brown label they are made by speer. Now the are done by federal premium. A while back speer discontinued the .224 diameter projectiles.
I have not been able to find the 224 bullets from federal premium. Im not sure if they are making them or not.
I was just wondering where you got the pulls not if you knew where to get them from federal ill check out rmr and try ro get some next time he has some. Sometimes people do not like to up there source on such rare bullets.
Great job. I'd love to send you a box of what my dept issues for duty use to compare to others already suggested like the BH 50 gr TSX and other Speer GD loads. I'll also send you some FMJ ammo for your troubles. Just lemme know.
jadams951--There is a strong likelihood that your agency ammo has already been tested....
Keep in mind that tests shooting through intermediate barriers, including interior wall replicas, have been routinely done for many years.
For example, we shot 2 shotgun, 3 handgun, and 24 .223/5.56mm loads into bare gel and through intermediate barriers in this paper: Roberts GK “Law Enforcement General Purpose Shoulder Fired Weapons--The Wounding Effects of 5.56mm/.223 Carbines Compared With 12 ga. Shotguns and Pistol Caliber Weapons using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant”. Wound Ballistics Review. 3(4):16-27, 1998.
That is how we develop wound profiles such as this:
http://i459.photobucket.com/albums/qq319/DocGKR/Interior_wall_shots_zps66defaff.jpg?t=1348099245
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.