.40 HST 165gr as a test subject?

**Dryw** · 04-08-11, 15:20

Long time lurker. Never found the need to ask a question directly before as 'search' has provided everything I ever want to know (and then some). No luck regarding HST 165gr however.

Curious to know if .40 HST 165gr has been an official test subject of DocGKR and crew. I'm aware it doesn't appear on 'The List', but I've seen it said many times that omission does not necessarily equal failure and could indicate no one has requested/paid for said tests.

Fairly certain I can infer appropriately should the answer be 'yes'.

Thanks in advance.

**DocGKR** · 04-08-11, 16:34

Can't say I know any agencies around here using it, so I don't believe we have tested it. Some data available here:

http://le.atk.com/pdf/HSTInsertPoster.pdf

http://le.atk.com/pdf/GoldDotPoster.pdf

**GJM** · 04-08-11, 16:45

Would the 165 HST be preferred to the 180 HST in a short barrel .40 like the P2000SK?

**Dryw** · 04-08-11, 17:15

Originally Posted by DocGKR

Can't say I know any agencies around here using it, so I don't believe we have tested it. Some data available here:

http://le.atk.com/pdf/HSTInsertPoster.pdf

http://le.atk.com/pdf/GoldDotPoster.pdf

Appreciate the follow-up. I find it interesting that the longer you stare at that chart, the more difficult it becomes to distinguish between 165/180. With the edge in "steel" penetration going to 165. Good to know if I'm facing down one of Skynet's T-800 series.

More evidence to support "stick with your most accurate, and practice". For the record: that's 165 out of a 4" Steyr on this end.

**DRT** · 04-08-11, 23:18

Personally, I'd go with the 180gr version of the HST. It does everything that the 165gr version does only better, particularly through some intermediate barriers. While I don't think it's a huge issue with the .40 s&w since it was designed around a 4" barrel, the 180gr version would probably also be better in a shorter barrel . The 180gr loses less velocity, both in absolute and % terms, than the 165gr when fired out of a shorter barrel. As a result, the 180gr should remain more centrally located within its designed velocity window.

**ST911** · 04-08-11, 23:20

I shot several whitetail last year with the 165gr HST (P40HST3). Obviously not a controlled or scientific experiment, but the test subjects were DRT and recovered projectiles showed performance as designed.

Feedback from those issued the 165gr HST is that it's quite a bit more brisk in recoil than the 180gr, and they don't like it. I have a few hundred rounds left of my own, but won't be getting any more.

**DocGKR** · 04-09-11, 02:06

Why would anyone NOT want to use a 180 gr .40?

**Dryw** · 04-09-11, 02:44

Originally Posted by DocGKR

Why would anyone NOT want to use a 180 gr .40?

Other than accuracy with a certain pistol? I'm now uncertain. That was my initial reasoning when a bought a 70/30 split of both weights as early on it seemed to shoot best out of a 4" Steyr. This likely needs to be revisited, and why I was curious about published data from which to make a more informed decision.

Considering the info provided by your tests and factoring in the vendor matrix: fairly obvious while the two weights are extremely similar in terms of performance, the 180 edges ahead in almost every category (excepting the aforementioned potential scenario facing down a futuristic killer cyborg). Your question hits it spot-on.

With 180 able to do everything the 165 does, with pluses in penetration and expansion, why indeed would one not choose the heavier hitter? Feeding (weapon specific), accuracy (weapon specific), and availability of 180 would be my theory. Other than that... I don't need more convincing.

**Dryw** · 04-09-11, 15:14

Neglected to say thanks for the feedback. Much appreciated.

This forum's been an excellent place to educate and separate the wheat from the internet chaff.