finally! 10mm 180gr gold dot gel shot at 1300fps. video!

[Jack-O]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl_n_...7pjF4WnkMzA3dw

Not too bad actually IMHO. guy did a fairly decent job at it overall. wish we could have gotten some better measurements tho.

So... is it really considered a failure of the bullet if it looks like that? I mean obviously overdriven, but it did hold together. average diameter is .653 with penetration to 17.5"

I dont think this is a surprise to anyone but those gold dots are certainly well built!

[Reagans Rascals]

I actually think that is one of the best ballistic test videos I have seen

[BigLarge]

I'm sure ATK would call it a "failure," however, I dont see how it would be an issue unless it was complete separation.

Great video, thanks for sharing.

[Jack-O]

after looking at some of his other gel shots with known performers, that 10mm wound channel was twice as large as the service calibers. I didnt expect that actually, but it does jive with hunting pics I've seen.

[BufordTJustice]

I'm sure ATK would call it a "failure," however, I dont see how it would be an issue unless it was complete separation.

Great video, thanks for sharing.

It IS a failure if you look at the big picture. As soon as that projectile hits anything hard (sheetrock, bone, auto glass, wood, etc.), it's f*cked and it's gonna fall apart.

Underwood appears to make quality ammo...but they would be better off downloading that by at least 50fps.

I've never seen a GDHP have a core-jacket interaction like that coming out of a handgun barrel. The fact that the bullet didn't completely shit the bed is a testament to the ruggedness of the Gold Dot's design...but every design has its limits. I think we found the limit of the 180gr .40/10mm projectile.

[Microalign]

I would be interested in hearing from the experts on this, but from my perspective this test result is a two edge sword. Yes the bullet penetrated to 17", but due to the excessive velocity the GD bullet shrank after expansion. In fact, this is why the bullet penetrated to 17", because the petals of the hollow point overexpanded, and folded back. Based on what we see in the video, the recovered diameter(proper method for measuring expansion) of that bullet is only about .50" which is less than a common .40S&W load for which these hollow points were designed for in the first place. As for the wound cavity in the gel, I'd take that with a grain of salt. Human tissue is highly elastic, while ballistic gel is soft. You can poke your finger through it with minimal pressure, not so against flesh. Gel is not meant to be a substitute for tissue(some ppl can't get this through their thick skulls), it is simply a media for use as a testing standard(penetration/expansion) for ammunition performance.....not what a bullet would do to the body. If it does wierd things to the gel.......so what, it doesn't duplicate the tissues of the body, and was never meant to. That is why Fackler and the IWBA did extensive swine tests. Even with the power house .357magnum loads(more powerful than 10mm offerings) used in those swine tests, there was no significant damage to the animals outside of the permanent wound channel. The determination was that you need to get into low end rifle calibers like a .30 Carbine which generates around 950ft-lbs of energy before you start seeing damage to surrounding tissue.

Perhaps I am off base, but I read a lot. Based on proven ballistics research, I would prefer to use a .40S&W for which that 180gr GD was designed for and benefit from the larger bullet expansion of the slower velocity load. Dr. Roberts tested some .40 Double Tap loads a while back just as a comparison:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...ighlight=155gr

[ramairthree]

Well,
as someone that has had a 10mm since back in the day,
and only begrudgingly even got a .40 or two to play with in the past year,
I had to take a peek.

It is always nice/ fun to see 10mm new out of the new box shooting the crazy fps it was originally intended to instead is typically offered now.

As for the GD performance, it may not have offered the penetration Crockett and Tubs needed to shoot down a helicopter, but other than that, GTG.

[Jack-O]

I would be interested in hearing from the experts on this, but from my perspective this test result is a two edge sword. Yes the bullet penetrated to 17", but due to the excessive velocity the GD bullet shrank after expansion. In fact, this is why the bullet penetrated to 17", because the petals of the hollow point overexpanded, and folded back. Based on what we see in the video, the recovered diameter(proper method for measuring expansion) of that bullet is only about .50" which is less than a common .40S&W load for which these hollow points were designed for in the first place. As for the wound cavity in the gel, I'd take that with a grain of salt. Human tissue is highly elastic, while ballistic gel is soft. You can poke your finger through it with minimal pressure, not so against flesh. Gel is not meant to be a substitute for tissue(some ppl can't get this through their thick skulls), it is simply a media for use as a testing standard(penetration/expansion) for ammunition performance.....not what a bullet would do to the body. If it does wierd things to the gel.......so what, it doesn't duplicate the tissues of the body, and was never meant to. That is why Fackler and the IWBA did extensive swine tests. Even with the power house .357magnum loads(more powerful than 10mm offerings) used in those swine tests, there was no significant damage to the animals outside of the permanent wound channel. The determination was that you need to get into low end rifle calibers like a .30 Carbine which generates around 950ft-lbs of energy before you start seeing damage to surrounding tissue.

Perhaps I am off base, but I read a lot. Based on proven ballistics research, I would prefer to use a .40S&W for which that 180gr GD was designed for and benefit from the larger bullet expansion of the slower velocity load. Dr. Roberts tested some .40 Double Tap loads a while back just as a comparison:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...ighlight=155gr

As I mentioned in my post above the guy actually did measure the projectile correctly and averaged the diameters to come out with .653, a still respectable number.

for comparison look at the differences in the wound channels in the same media with loads we KNOW work and have been tested by DocGKR and others.


here is a 357 mag 158 gold dot video


357 mag 125gr PDX1

Remington 9mm 147gr Golden Saber

Winchester 40 165gr PDX1 bonded


Federal 180gr HST


Speer 45acp 200gr+p gold dot

Federal 115gr +p+ 9BPLE

Federal 45acp 230gr HST


federal 357 sig 125gr HST


and the 9mm Underwood gold dot 124+p+


I'll preface the following comments by noting that I am a fan of the 10mm and as such, while I try to remain impartial, my views will be colored in favor of the 10mm.


I may be flawed in reading gel shots correctly but it appears to me that there is a difference in the way the 10mm reacts and the way other service calibers react in that test media. Does that correspond to flesh? I dunno, but in almost every other test, we saw a very close correlation between existing 10% gel shots with known performers, and what his testing showed.

the 10mm is certainly still well inside the handgun performance range, but what I take from this is that it is also into the magnum handgun performance envelope.

[Swatdude1]

I would have liked to have seen him test the Underwood XTP 180 gr. This bullet is actually designed for the velocities they're loaded too. I would consider 10mm overkill for personal defense due to penetration, but as a hunting round, penetration at the expense of some expansion is preferred.

[Jack-O]

drop him a note, I'll bet he'll do it for you.

I dont have the youtube, so I cant do it otherwise I'd do it.