A Word of Caution about Hornady’s Critical Defense Handgun Ammunition - by Shawn Do

[MitchellCT]

http://www.firearmstactical.com/tact...06/04/main.htm

Caution - if reading a well thought out article pointing out the pitfalls of a product you are emotionally invested in will upset you...

You need to read that article more than anyone.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Janq]

Thumbs up to this post...And agreed with the sentiment.

- Janq

[Saber]

Outstanding references and associated links.

[Bark'n]

Good article, and two very good posts by DocGKR linked at the M4carbine forum.


Thanks for the post!

[mcp1810]

I noticed that it says it's performance through these barriers is untested and unknown. So it seems to me that we have a whole lot of words here to say just that. Did I miss something or do they not give any test data showing that the ammo in question had inferior performance compared to the "recommended" stuff? I can't tell if it was even included in the test that produced the recommendations. I also don't see any performance data on the other ammo through these same barriers. So is this really telling us anything other than the author has no idea how this ammo will perform in the real world?

[OldVet]

"If you have to shoot through something like that in a personal defense situation you're probably going to jail."

That's quite an irrational statement from someone (Steve Johnson) who's in the SD ammo business, isn't it. I knew that the Hornady Critical Defense rounds were not designed for deep penetration as some others are, but jeez!
I'd like to see a good test of the leading SD brands against glass, sheet metal, and the likes. Till then, I guess I'll stick with my Gold Dots and PDX1s.

[peckman28]

mcp1810: I believe their statement concerning barrier penetration is based on manufacturer claims. Hornady designed it to reduce over penetration, with the obvious side effect that it will be less effective with barriers. I thought that was a good read. If you still want to use CD, go for it. Just know what it can and cannot do going in. Thanks for sharing OP!

[bsms]

I doubt ANY expanding ammo can be counted on to perform as designed after passing thru most anything. The tougher the thing to penetrate, to more it will impact performance.

I tend to prefer lots of sectional density, and if possible, I prefer a 44/45 over 38...it has expanded some before shooting. That said, I doubt any company spokesman is going to promise any specific level of performance after passing thru windshields, etc. Most SD ammo is not designed for deep penetration.

[mcp1810]

Actually Peckman28 I use Ranger +P+ in 9mm and their 230 +P in .45acp. so I have no dog in this fight so to speak.
I am just wondering why so many column inches are dedicated to something that can be covered in one sentence. As far as the link to thread at M4, we now know what this guy likes, but we have no context. The Hornady stuff could completely blow the others away, but we have no way of knowing that without an apples to apples comparison. Were the rounds he listed tested against auto body sheet metal and laminated safety glass? If so, where does he say that? Was the Hornady stuff included in the tests and failed? If so, where does he say that? Did the Hornady stuff even exist when these tests were done?
That whole piece could have been: "Hornady says they didn't design this ammo for barrier penetration and therefore didn't test for it, so it's performance is unknown."

[MitchellCT]

I doubt ANY expanding ammo can be counted on to perform as designed after passing thru most anything. The tougher the thing to penetrate, to more it will impact performance.

I tend to prefer lots of sectional density, and if possible, I prefer a 44/45 over 38...it has expanded some before shooting. That said, I doubt any company spokesman is going to promise any specific level of performance after passing thru windshields, etc. Most SD ammo is not designed for deep penetration.

Actually, federal, speer & winchester do all the time.

They offer the data to anyone who wants to see it, and field results bear it out.

[MitchellCT]

Were the rounds he listed tested against auto body sheet metal and laminated safety glass?

The ones DocGKR tested...you mean these?

9 mm:
Barnes XPB 105 & 115 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal Tactical 124 gr JHP (LE9T1)
Speer Gold Dot 124 gr +P JHP
Winchester Ranger-T 124 gr +P JHP (RA9124TP)
Winchester Partition Gold 124 gr JHP (RA91P)
Winchester Ranger-T 127 gr +P+ JHP (RA9TA)
Federal Tactical 135 gr +P JHP (LE9T5)
Federal HST 147 gr JHP (P9HST2)
Remington Golden Saber 147 gr JHP (GS9MMC)
Speer Gold Dot 147 gr JHP
Winchester Ranger-T 147 gr JHP (RA9T)
Winchester 147 gr bonded JHP (RA9B/Q4364)

.40 S&W:
Barnes XPB 140 & 155 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Speer Gold Dot 155 gr JHP
Federal Tactical 165 gr JHP (LE40T3)
Winchester Ranger-T 165 gr JHP (RA40TA)
Winchester Partition Gold 165 gr JHP (RA401P)
Federal HST 180 gr JHP (P40HST1)
Federal Tactical 180 gr JHP (LE40T1)
Remington Golden Saber 180 gr JHP (GS40SWB)
Speer Gold Dot 180 gr JHP
Winchester Ranger-T 180 gr JHP (RA40T)
Winchester 180 gr bonded JHP (Q4355 or S40SWPDB1)

.45 ACP:
Barnes XPB 160 & 185 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal HST 230 gr JHP (P45HST2)
Federal HST 230 gr +P JHP (P45HST1)
Federal Tactical 230 gr JHP (LE45T1)
Speer Gold Dot 230 gr JHP
Speer Gold Dot 230 gr +P JHP
Winchester Ranger-T 230 gr JHP (RA45T)
Winchester Ranger-T 230 gr +P JHP (RA45TP)


Yes. They passed the FBI protocols and the results are public record.

Manufacturer, FBI and various independent testing bear that out, as do street performance.

Hornady has basically stated inquiry into Critical Defense passing the FBI tests as useless when it admits it's not made to pass those tests.

Hornady has the facilities to test for FBI spec - the XTP load was one of the first designed to pass it, and still does in the Custom, TAP and FPD line.

CD? No. Not made for it.

[mcp1810]

MitchellCT,
Thank you for passing that along. I think the article would have been much better if that information had been included.

[boscobeans]

Hornady's Critical Defense 40S&W sends a 165grain bullet downrange at 1175fps (test barrel) with 506 ft.lbs. of energy.

Speer's GD sends a 165gr Gold Dot at 1150fps (test barrel) with 484 ft.lbs. of energy.

Winchester Supreme ElitePDX1 sends their 165gr. bullet at 1140fps (test barrel) with 476 ft.lbs. of energy.

Remington Golden Saber sends their 165gr.bullet out at 1150 (test barrel) with 485 ft.lbs. of energy.

What does the word "PERFORM" mean in his article. Penetration only , expansion only or penetration and expansion together.

The FBI tests deal with penetration (in gelatin) of a bullet after it passes through various obstacles such as clothing, glass, walls, car doors etc.

Hornady does not give results of their CD ammo based on the FBI method of testing. TRUE. Maybe it's a ploy to sell ammo without claiming it will go through brick walls and stop a bad guy dead in his tracks with one hit.

From the above given advertised data (sure it's manufacturers data and may be exaggerated to a degree to hype their products) I can't see how a small plug of polymer in the hollow point of a well designed bullet would suddenly make it turn into a nerf ball after contacting any of the same obstacles that the other bullets seem to penetrate.

If the Hornady stuff cycles well in your semi's ( my Walthers eat it up in both 9mm and .40 ) or you want to load up your wheelgun with 5 or 6 red tipped rounds, GO AHEAD.. It has numbers that compare to any of the top named defense rounds out there. Let's see how the others do in gelatin after passing through 2X4's and metal car doors (are there any metal car doors still out there.LOL) I for one would not like to be on the receiving end of any of them.


OMO

bosco

[Keltyke]

"If you have to shoot through something like that in a personal defense situation you're probably going to jail."

That's quite an irrational statement from someone (Steve Johnson) who's in the SD ammo business, isn't it. I knew that the Hornady Critical Defense rounds were not designed for deep penetration as some others are, but jeez!
I'd like to see a good test of the leading SD brands against glass, sheet metal, and the likes. Till then, I guess I'll stick with my Gold Dots and PDX1s.

Maybe not so irrational as you might think. In SC, for example, the BG must have:

A. The ABILITY to inflict serious bodily injury. He is armed or reasonably appears to be armed.
B. The OPPORTUNITY to inflict serious bodily harm. He is positioned to harm you with his weapon, and,
C. The INTENT (hostile actions or words) indicates that he means to place you in jeopardy - to do you serious or fatal physical harm.

There's a fine legal line as to whether someone on the other side of a closed, locked door or wall actually - at that moment - has all three of these criteria.

As for shooting through auto glass or sheet metal - in the first case, the first shot will probably shatter the glass, leaving the range of fire wide open. In the second case, simply move so your range of fire is unobstructed.

That statement is a good caveat from Hornady. There are no "magic" handgun rounds that will do every job, every time. No "one shot stoppers", no "instant stoppers". No "go through anything and still penetrate to vitals rounds". Police have very different criteria and requirements for their ammo than we do. What they carry may not be the best for us.

[bruce272]

"If you have to shoot through something like that in a personal defense situation you're probably going to jail."

Guys,,

Either my old age is really kicking in today, or I just missed the mark. Just what do you mean by the above statement "you'll probably be going to jail"?

Bruce