Defensive Carry banner

TEST - 9mm JHPs through Bone Simulant into Gel

8K views 34 replies 15 participants last post by  grouse 
#1 ·
Ran across this the other day:

http://www.brassfetcher.com/9x19mm JHP Performance through Bone Simulant plates and Gelatin.pdf
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is the "Summary" with emphasis added by me:

Of the six brands tested, four of the six ammunition types failed to expand in the bone plate/gelatin target. The Cor-Bon 115gr +P DPX and Federal 105gr EFMJ projectiles performed effectively, by functioning similarly through the bone plate as they did in bare gelatin...

The wounding mechanism of a jacketed hollowpoint is the crushing of tissue through bullet expansion. Failing this, the lethality of a JHP is oftentimes lower than a full metal jacket which wounds through tumbling. FMJ bullet shapes lend themselves more readily to tumbling than a JHP that failed to expand – though many of the unexpanded JHPs did tumble, it was far too deep into the track to have influenced the lethality of the bullet to any extent.

We recommend using the Cor-Bon 115gr +P DPX and Federal 105gr EFMJ if bullet expansion after a bone hit is a priority. It should be said that the human body consists of many different bones, with shapes other than flat, so these results should be considered as generally indicative of the performance that you can expect in an actual target. In any event, the bullets that failed in these tests will not perform better against living bone.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It should be noted that the DPX did not get to the FBI desired level of 15 inches penetration after going through the bone simulant, though it did expand. It did meet the minimum of 12 inches.

The 105 gr EFMJ (which I consider too light) did not get to the minimum of 12 inches in any of these test shots, so I personally disagree with the author's recommendation with regard to that load. I do carry the 124 gr +P EFMJ, though it seems impossible to find any more of it.

These results do make you wonder about "premium" (and expensive) JHPs. :confused:

Do the folks here agree that FMJ rounds are more apt to tumble (and sooner in the wound track) than unexpanded JHPs?

ETA - Most folks say that "a JHP that fails to expand acts just like a FMJ, so what do you have to lose by using JHPs?" But - if what the authors say is true, you would actually be better off with FMJ (that tumbles) than an unexpanded JHP.

I'm curious if these results match the real-world experience from those with medical trauma and/or handgun hunting experience.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
This was the first time I have seen reference to a FMJ tumbling. By way of contrast, I read quite a bit about the .223 ammo used in guns like the FN57 which was specifically designed to tumble. In fact, in many of those articles it talks about how the bullet tumbles generating the wound, unlike a normal bullet.
Edit: I have also read a lot of material that talks about real world data on over penetration on an FMJ, which seems to indicate that it passes through with energy to spare rather than tumbling.
 
#3 ·
  • Like
Reactions: 10thmtn
#4 ·
#7 ·
Huh.

Well, I guess if I ever need to use JHP's against something with an exoskeleton, this test might have some bearing...
 
#8 ·
The bone simulant plate had a rubberized "skin" over it. Did you even read the report?

I have read of many JHPs that fail to expand in actual shootings. This testing protocol might have more bearing on actual shootings than shooting into bare gel covered with nothing more than clothing layers. Note how much of the vitals are covered by protectant bone.

If nothing else, it is certainly an interesting result.
 
#10 ·
with all the clothes my wife has been buying.....I guess I got some stuff coming my way.....:image035:
 
#16 ·
thats what we're issued, would be nice if they did another test with some different rounds
 
#15 ·
I'm just going to keep sticking to the Speer gold dot 124+p that I have. I've tried a bunch of different stuff, all of it pricey. But one thing I do notice is that the premium stuff shoots better... more accurate, cleaner, etc. I've had some FTEs with FMJ of various brands.

Ammo that shoots reliably and penetrate the BG adequately is more important to me than whether or not all the points on the round flared out every time.
 
#17 ·
More outstanding results for the Barnes XPB bullets (Corbon DPX).

I'll pick up a few more boxes on sale from Cabela's. :smile:
 
#18 ·
I'm curious if these results match the real-world experience from those with medical trauma and/or handgun hunting experience.
recovered 45 DPX bullet from autopsy

From the link, written by Mike Shovel, National Sales Manager of COR-BON/Glaser:

"This bullet was recovered from a shooting last week. The quality is poor because it's from a camera phone. I can't give in depth details because the pic and info are from an employee at the ME's office and they will probably get fired if discovered. (Please don't ask)

BG shot this guy with a sub caliber auto pistol, center chest. This guy drew and fired his 45 auto into the BG from the side. Round penetrated left arm breaking the bone, thru the upper chest taking out half his heart and exited out the right arm. Bullet was recovered nearby."

Skin Fashion accessory Ear
 
#19 ·
BG shot this guy with a sub caliber auto pistol, center chest. This guy drew and fired his 45 auto into the BG from the side. Round penetrated left arm breaking the bone, thru the upper chest taking out half his heart and exited out the right arm. Bullet was recovered nearby."
And how do we define "over penetration" ?
 
#23 ·
Don't know much about Newton, but I do know the cylinder rotates and the slide keeps cyclin as long as I'm pullin the trigger. So if the first don't getter done, second and third helpins of lead are a comin.
And they are heavy.
 
#26 ·
Newton's second law: Force equals mass times acceleration.
True, but you can't assume bullets of different weight are accelerated at the same rate.

Newton's second law is actually in favor of faster 9mm bullets as the lighter, faster bullets have more force than the slower, heavier bullets
Not quite. Lighter, faster bullets can have more kinetic energy, but not force. KE favors velocity (KE = 1/2 mass x velocity squared), but that's not to be found in Newton's Second Law, which relates force to acceleration.

Leave Newtonian physics out of it; that discussion relative to a bullet's terminal performance would necessarily have to include the energy required to deform bullets of different materials and construction, and probably lots more. What we do know by observation and experience is that heavier and more solidly-constructed bullets penetrate more deeply than lighter ones, at least within a defined velocity range.
 
#27 · (Edited)
True, but you can't assume bullets of different weight are accelerated at the same rate.



Not quite. Lighter, faster bullets can have more kinetic energy, but not force. KE favors velocity (KE = 1/2 mass x velocity squared), but that's not to be found in Newton's Second Law, which relates force to acceleration.

Leave Newtonian physics out of it; that discussion relative to a bullet's terminal performance would necessarily have to include the energy required to deform bullets of different materials and construction, and probably lots more. What we do know by observation and experience is that heavier and more solidly-constructed bullets penetrate more deeply than lighter ones, at least within a defined velocity range.
Yes, I realize now that I was inadvertently mixing up force with momentum. Physics.........

Anyways, what you say is true.

Edit: Grammar...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top