Federal HST- Impressive performance!

[USSA-1]

Marcus,

Have you seen some of these wound ballistic workshop results using the Federal HST rounds? If these results are valid (and they seem to be), this round is blowing the general expansion averages for calibers out the window!

High .80's for 9mm and .99's and higher for the 45's. I've been a Gold Dot fan for over a decade, but it might be time to jump ship.

http://le.atk.com/general/irl/woundballistics.aspx

Any thoughts?

[Marcus L.]

The ATK testing does make the HST look like a quantum leap in bullet technology. However, since ATK is essentially advertising Federal and CCI Speer ammunition my bias alert starts beeping at me. Their testing forum is a a LE sales convention to get the attending agencies to buy their product versus the competition. Their testing shows the Gold Dot beating out the Ranger Talon in several cases in expansion and that has never been the case for the Gold Dot. The GD has always been a better penetrator than expander. If you go to Winchester's website, their numbers seem to be more honest. A lot of their loads didn't do all that well and failed one or more of the FBI protocols........what kinda salesman would put up numbers like that unless they were being honest?

Dr. Roberts and his team tested the popular loads such as HST, Ranger Talon, Gold Dot, Golden Saber, and others. In his testing the HST was very similar to the other barbed expander......the Winchester Ranger Talon(SXT). His impression from his testing was that he thought the Talons were still a better overall load. They have no financial gain, and they have no bias to promote one brand over another. Hopefully Doc will correct me if I'm wrong.

Personally, I like Federal's loads very much. I normally carry their Tactical Bonded series for duty use. Federal designed the TB to make up for the standard HST's problem with shooting through barriers such as windshields. However, I am a little skeptical of the HST having that level of expansion based on past unbias testing and who's doing the testing. I think it's just as good as the Talon in terms of expansion, and Federal's bonded loads seem to have better expansion than the Gold Dots.

[Jim from Houston]

People have asked Dr Roberts about the HST versus Ranger T differences in the past, and his usual response is that when doing terminal ballistics tests, you need to shoot a sample of the rounds (like 5 shots of each type) and use the average performance as a gauge...if you look at the different ballistics workshops, the expansion for the HST rounds (while always more than Ranger T) is often all over the board...sometimes the .45 expands to .80, sometimes it expands to an inch...if you were to do the averages, I think there's much less of a difference between the HST and Ranger T...in its favor, the HST does seem to hold together better through auto glass in the tests I've seen data from...but I think the general consensus among folks in the know is that both are excellent rounds, and if both function well and are accurate in your particular weapon, you should probably just buy whichever you can get cheaper...

[Glock17JHP]

I tested Federal HST's, Speer Gold Dots and Winchester Ranger 'T', all in 147 grain HP configuration, using a Glock 17...

Although the Federal HST was pretty consistent, the Speer Gold Dot was a lot more consistent. The main reason I didn't like the Federal HST is that I felt that the penetration is a bit too shallow, due to expansion that I think is a bit excessive. The Speer Gold Dot had the opposite problem, I wish it expanded to a larger diameter.

The Winchester Ranger 'T' wasn't as pretty as the Federal HST and Speer Gold Dot after expansion, but it has better expanded diameter than the Speer Gold Dot, and better penetration depth than the Federal HST.

For the above reasons, all based on MY testing, I choose Winchester Ranger 'T' 147 grain RA9T...

[Marcus L.]

The main reason I didn't like the Federal HST is that I felt that the penetration is a bit too shallow, due to expansion that I think is a bit excessive.

That is a very accurate observation. Simply put, a 147gr 9mm bullet can be made to expand to .45acp levels, but it would not have enough momentum behind it to allow the bullet to penetrate up to 12"(unless the gel was calibrated wrong). The resistant force is too great for the bullet's low momentum to overcome. Which is why there is an expansion threshold for each caliber which is the ideal combination of penetration and expansion. Velocity makes little difference here either as we can observe in the case of the .357sig which expands to 9mm levels(around .62-.65"), but because it has similar or identical mass it does not penetrate any deeper than the 9mm. The .357magnum can utilize 158gr-180gr bullets which greatly increase its overall momentum and penetrate very deeply, but due to the caliber limitations in bullet construction it simpily will not expand beyond the .65-.68" threshold before the petals fold back and hug the bullet truck. When shooting soft targets, it would have made a lot more sense just to increase your caliber size to a .40S&W which is capable of creating a larger hole expanded or not.

The only way to increase the size of the hole made and penetrate to adequate depths with consistant reliability is to increase the caliber size and bullet mass. Of the common service calibers that consistanly penetrate 12-13" in bare gel:
-9mm expands .61-.65"
-.357sig expands .61-.65"
-.40S&W expands .66-70"
-.45acp expands .70-.75"

Occasionall you'll get more or less, but the vast majority of tested loads will not exceed these thresholds and still maintain ideal penetration. These restrictions are not so much dependent on weapons technology, so much as they are dependent on the limitations of physics.

[Glock17JHP]

The .357magnum can utilize 158gr-180gr bullets which greatly increase its overall momentum and penetrate very deeply, but due to the caliber limitations in bullet construction it simpily will not expand beyond the .65-.68" threshold before the petals fold back and hug the bullet truck.

Agree with your previous post overall... but the Winchester Supreme Partition Gold 180 grain JHP may be one of the only exceptions to the above comment on .357 Magnum loads. I consider that load in a class by itself!!! The petals don't fold back past about 90 degrees...

[Marcus L.]

Agree with your previous post overall... but the Winchester Supreme Partition Gold 180 grain JHP may be one of the only exceptions to the above comment on .357 Magnum loads. I consider that load in a class by itself!!! The petals don't fold back past about 90 degrees...

I haven't seen any stats on that load. Do you have any numbers? Definately an expensive bullet none the less with the complex construction. The only places I've seen this round for sale it runs for no less that $1.60 a shot versus a Ranger Talon which run for about $.40 a shot. Now days Gold Dots and other modern bonded loads run for about $.50 a shot.

http://www.winchester.com/products/c...hZ251bQ==&bn=5

Doesn't look like Winchester makes it for anything other than revolver hunting loads with very high sectional density and bullet weight. The bullet length would probably be too long for the common service calibers. At 180gr the .357mag load has a sectional density of .204 which is up there with a rifle bullet. Just for comparison, a 125gr .357mag/.357sig bullet has a SD of .142. The heaviest weight 9mm, .40S&W, and .45acp bullets don't exceed .17. Keep in mind, that is for a typical 180gr with a full lead core. The Partitian Gold has a copper divider which would lengthen the bullet even more. Probably why it is only used in revolver calibers with lots of case space. For 10mm, you'd need a 230gr bullet to match that SD, but for Partitian Gold the copper divider might lengthen the bullet beyond the case capacity.

[Jim from Houston]

Marcus - Winchester used to offer the Partition Gold for service calibers in their Ranger line...a 124 gr 9mm called the "RA91P" and a 165gr .40 called "RA401P". Both are included on DocGKR's list of recommended loads...unfortunately, as with many good things in life, folks didn't appreciate them, they were expensive, and so Winchester cancelled them...I think they were under pressure to go with a "Bonded" line instead in order to compete with all of the ATK products...so voila, now instead of SXT and Partition Gold, we have T-Series and Ranger Bonded...

Interestingly, Winchester's other heavy hunting revolver bullet, which they only offer in large Magnum calibers, is the "Platinum Tip" which is actually the same bullet as the SXT/T-Series...

Here's an old Winchester web page that I found that has some Partition Gold Test Data...check out that RA401P performance against auto glass...looks pretty good! The 9mm doesn't look quite as impressive through glass...too bad they had to go away though...more options are always nice...

http://www.winchester.com/LawEnforce...esting_pg.aspx

[Marcus L.]

Those are some impressive numbers, Jim. Looks like Winchester really engineered a superior bullet design. Unfortunately, it seems to cost 3-4 times as much to produce it over the other common defensive loads on the market. When you weigh the cost to benefit ratio, it doesn't make logical sense to use it.

[Glock17JHP]

Marcus L,

Email me through this site, and give me your email address...
I will email my .357 Magnum data to you that includes the Winchester Partition Gold, including 2 pictures...