Gelatin tests: .357 mag from carbine & 10mm 155 gr XPB

[Andrew Wiggin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dMXKHUxjgQ


.357 mag American Eagle 158 gr JSP fired from Marlin 1894C 18.5" barrel lever action carbine into calibrated gelatin.

BB: 585.6 fps, 3.7"

Impact velocity: 1,840 fps
Penetration: 15.1"
Retained weight: 153.8 gr
Max expansion: 0.892"
Min expansion: 0.674"

http://imageshack.us/a/img690/5927/01ps.jpg

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/1082/rdov.jpg

[Andrew Wiggin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg7D5902c6I


10mm Littlestone 155 gr Barnes XPB fired from 4.5" EAA Witness through four layers of denim into calibrated gelatin.

BB: 585.6 fps, 3.7"

Impact velocity: 1,128 fps
Penetration: 12.8"
Retained weight: 155.3 gr
Max expansion: 0.751"
Min expansion: 0.470"

http://imageshack.us/a/img850/9352/ftj3.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img585/8241/jnzr.jpg

[Andrew Wiggin]

For comparison, here's an older test of the same .357 load from a 4" revolver:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZ-Tfq_bRSU


Federal American Eagle 158 gr Jacketed Soft Point fired from 4" S&W Model 13 into calibrated gelatin through four layers of denim.

BB calibration: 607 fps, 3.4"

Impact velocity: 1,182 fps
Penetration: 22.1"
Retained weight: 157.3 gr
Max expansion: 0.398"
Min expansion: 0.363"

http://imageshack.us/a/img812/1239/ndpl.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img703/2120/f8t9.jpg

[Chuck Haggard]

I would have expected a bit more penetration from the 4" gun, did the bullet yaw?

[jetfire]

This test makes me want to set up one of those Ruger 77/357s with an RMR even more.

[Andrew Wiggin]

I would have expected a bit more penetration from the 4" gun, did the bullet yaw?

If you mean the 4" .357, yes. It's fairly typical for non-expanding bullets to turn 180 degrees at some point. In my own tests, this seems to happen with pistol bullets near then end of their "travels." If you look closely in the last photo, you can see the bullet facing backwards. I believe that what's happening is that, as the bullet slows down, the drag overcomes the spin stabilization and the bullet turns around because it is heavier in the base. Hopefully Doc will be along shortly to correct me.


Here's a closer pic:

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/8461/q7ib.jpg

One of the reasons that I believe the yaw occurs near the end is because you can see denim fibers right next to the final location of the bullet. The denim should only be stuck to the front of the bullet and fall off as soon as it yaws so if the denim is that deep, I expect the yaw occurred at or near that depth.

[Chuck Haggard]

That makes much more sense now. Bullets getting sideways slow down LOTS faster than if they stay point forward.

That appears to be a workable general purpose load for 4" plus .357 mags, widely available, cheap for .357 ammo

[jetfire]

This makes me feel like a smart person, because that's honestly what I carried for a long time in my .357s before I started buying "good" bullets. Pretty much because it was cheap and easy to find. Plus, I was a big believer back then in the mystique of the .357, and I had seen this load used to good effect on some various Indiana four legged critters.

[Chuck Haggard]

I would hesitate to carry it in town as a cop or for personal defense if I could get a JHP, but I think it's a great going to the woods load, and that guys back in the day that carried such ammo while doing stuff like highway patrol work were well served.

[jetfire]

I was in my early 20s when I carried it, because I *knew* that .357 Magnums were cool, but proper JHP ammo was like, expensive and stuff.

[Chuck Haggard]

My first center fire handgun was a stainless 4" Security-Six, bought by my dad for me when I was 17 and fresh back from Army basic. By then, 1982 time frame, I had read a bunch of Mas Ayoob's articles ref .357mag use by cops, in particular the experience at Indy PD red SPs vs JHPs, so I kept 125gr Federals in the gun, but my go to the woods/hiking/deer hunting load was this same Federal 158gr JSP

I found it to be crazy accurate ammo from a good gun. From roll over prone, shooting SA, I could keep a no BS 6" group going at the 100. With that ammo my -Six was more accurate than my model 94 30-30 and the first two SKSs I bought.

[Andrew Wiggin]

That load would work well when combined with a rifle as a sort of dual purpose woods defense ammo. When fired from a rifle it would be very effective against human targets and when fired from a handgun it should *hopefully* have enough penetration to get the job done if attacked by a large animal. Not ideal by any means but I'd rather use it against an animal than 125 gr Gold Dot.

Everything is compromise.

[JHC]

Great info. I just got a Rossi 92 big loop .357 and this sounds like a good deer load

[JHC]

I would have expected a bit more penetration from the 4" gun, did the bullet yaw?

More??????? ;)

22" I thought gigantic

[Chuck Haggard]

More??????? ;)

22" I thought gigantic


I've seen stuff like LSWCs, even from a hot .38 load, go well over 30" in gel so I figured something else was going on in this case.

[Andrew Wiggin]

It's pretty accurate in my wife's S&W Model 13, too. Haven't shot paper with it but I can hit 8" plates at 100 yards about half the time offhand.

[GJM]

I would have been hoping for more penetration out of the Barnes 155 10mm bullet, since I look to 10mm for use around four legged creatures. Have you shot XTP 200 grain loads? I have been thinking that might be a decent compromise load in the Glock 20/29.

[Andrew Wiggin]

I would have been hoping for more penetration out of the Barnes 155 10mm bullet, since I look to 10mm for use around four legged creatures. Have you shot XTP 200 grain loads? I have been thinking that might be a decent compromise load in the Glock 20/29.

A couple. ;^)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIeiWem_xSs

[Andrew Wiggin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEqEC8mZLg0

[Andrew Wiggin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc3_TaAldVo

[Andrew Wiggin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPs2EsdmQS0



I've also tested 10mm 200 gr Gold Dot (not a typo) and a lot of other 10mm factory and hand loads. Remember that all copper bullets just aren't going to provide the same performance level as lead core bullets. They are longer (a 155 gr TAC-XP is a tenth of an inch longer than a 200 gr XTP) so they reduce case capacity and increase bearing surface. That makes it difficult to push them anywhere near as fast as their lead core counterparts.

[GJM]

Looks like the 200 XTP should work for my purposes, and is available as a factory load. Other suggestions?

Neither the Corbon or Buffalo Bore 200 FMJ penetrator loads feed reliably in multiple Glock 20 pistols we have.

[Andrew Wiggin]

The only comments I'd like to add are that, as you can see from that series of tests, the 200 gr XTP is somewhat velocity sensitive. It seems to need at least 1,100 fps to expand, especially through heavy clothing. Also, some companies *cough* Double Tap *cough* are dishonest about their velocities so it's important to check for yourself or at least refer to what others have tested. Thankfully, Intercooler over at 10mm-firearms.com/ (http://10mm-firearms.com/) put together this handy dandy 10mm spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?hl=en&hl=en&key=0Ak5OC6bPsjO8dEh6eGZ3N3hpUU13SXM5cm9pZy16T0E&type=view&gid=0&f=true&sortcolid=8&sortasc=true&rowsperpage=250). It lists various loads by weight and gives relevant information such as advertised velocity, actual measured velocity, powder charge, and data from my gel tests where available. Just click on the tab at the top for the relevant weight range.

[GJM]

The only comments I'd like to add are that, as you can see from that series of tests, the 200 gr XTP is somewhat velocity sensitive. It seems to need at least 1,100 fps to expand, especially through heavy clothing. Also, some companies *cough* Double Tap *cough* are dishonest about their velocities so it's important to check for yourself or at least refer to what others have tested. Thankfully, Intercooler over at 10mm-firearms.com/ (http://10mm-firearms.com/) put together this handy dandy 10mm spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?hl=en&hl=en&key=0Ak5OC6bPsjO8dEh6eGZ3N3hpUU13SXM5cm9pZy16T0E&type=view&gid=0&f=true&sortcolid=8&sortasc=true&rowsperpage=250). It lists various loads by weight and gives relevant information such as advertised velocity, actual measured velocity, powder charge, and data from my gel tests where available. Just click on the tab at the top for the relevant weight range.

Great resource! I am pleased to see that Hornady is honest with their velocity numbers.

My first priority is reliability, followed by penetration. I worry that the heavier/faster the loads get, the further out the reliability envelope you get with the G20/29. The 1911man has suggested I carry, surprise, a 1911, and I have a reliable Delta that has been worked over by a great shop, but I have resisted carrying it in the field because of weight and shape.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Remember that at typical 10mm velocity, temporary stretch cavity isn't a significant wounding factor. A 165 gr Gold Dot at 1,200-1,300 fps or a 180 gr XTP at 1,100-1,200 fps isn't exactly nookular but expands to a very respectable diameter and meets minimum penetration requirements. For human defense, all that extra recoil is probably unnecessary. Just because you CAN launch really powerful (for a pistol) ammunition, doesn't mean that it's really getting you any more effect on the target. The strength of the 10mm in my opinion is versatility. I carry a magazine of 165 gr Gold Dot at 1,300 fps and a magazine of 200 gr XTP at 1,200 fps. When I'm in town, I keep the Gold Dot in the pistol and when I go camping, I switch to the XTP. That extra power and penetration is a lot more important when large animals are the threat.


It's also important to keep things in perspective. It's still just a pistol. It's not really powerful; it's portable.

[Chuck Haggard]

Remember that at typical 10mm velocity, temporary stretch cavity isn't a significant wounding factor. A 165 gr Gold Dot at 1,200-1,300 fps or a 180 gr XTP at 1,100-1,200 fps isn't exactly nookular but expands to a very respectable diameter and meets minimum penetration requirements. For human defense, all that extra recoil is probably unnecessary. Just because you CAN launch really powerful (for a pistol) ammunition, doesn't mean that it's really getting you any more effect on the target. The strength of the 10mm in my opinion is versatility. I carry a magazine of 165 gr Gold Dot at 1,300 fps and a magazine of 200 gr XTP at 1,200 fps. When I'm in town, I keep the Gold Dot in the pistol and when I go camping, I switch to the XTP. That extra power and penetration is a lot more important when large animals are the threat.


It's also important to keep things in perspective. It's still just a pistol. It's not really powerful; it's portable.


Very well said.

[GJM]

I have no interest in 10mm beyond penetration, as for softer targets I think the 9, 40 and 45 have been better developed for JHP loads, with essentially boutique manufacturers doing most of the 10 loads.

I try like heck to have a long gun in my hands, but there are many times in Alaska when a handgun is it. Flying, fishing, paddling and a bunch of other activities work a lot better with two hands free. :)

[JHC]

With G20 popularity as an AK outdoors gun, what loads do most choose? I suppose most may not research or test extensively.

[JHC]

Andrew
Any handy number on depth of .45 ACP +P 230 gr FMJ Flat Point? (975-1000 fps?)

[Andrew Wiggin]

If my primary concern was large animals and I wanted a 10mm for that purpose, I'd probably choose a 220-230 gr solid with a wide meplat.

I don't know but I'd bet that a 10mm of the same weight would go deeper than a .45, even at the same velocity because of the higher sectional density. I doubt that .45 could push a 220 gr bullet to 1,200 fps, though.:rolleyes:

[GJM]

With G20 popularity as an AK outdoors gun, what loads do most choose? I suppose most may not research or test extensively.

If you ask most Alaskan folks carrying a G20/29 what load they are carrying, their reply is "10mm." Beyond that, I have observed most carrying generic 180 grain FMJ, no doubt chosen on the basis of cost and availability more than anything else.


If my primary concern was large animals and I wanted a 10mm for that purpose, I'd probably choose a 220-230 gr solid with a wide meplat.

I ran a Glock 22 part of this summer with a KKM barrel and DT wide meplat hard cast ammo. Unfortunately, the wide meplat ammo turned out to be less reliable, particularly in the lower cartridges in the magazine. I found the DT 200 FMJ penetrator load to run more reliably than the Corbon and Buffalo Bore penetrator loads in the G20/29. Unfortunately, even the DT loads would get stoppages when shot with an imperfect grip.

That has brought me back to the Hornady 200 XTP as a 10mm load with reasonable penetration but that is more in the middle of the G20/29 reliability envelope. I bought a mess of this ammo, and plan to test my 20/29 in all sorts of one hand and compromised positions this spring, before making a decision on this summer. If I don't like what see, I will likely run a P226R or equivalent (P30/PX4) with a load like the Ranger 180 Bonded, on the theory that reliability trumps penetration.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Who made the ammo that you bought?

[GJM]

Who made the ammo that you bought?

if you mean the 200 XTP, it is Hornady factory.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Check out Underwood's 200 gr XTP load.

[GJM]

Check out Underwood's 200 gr XTP load.

Can you elaborate?

[Andrew Wiggin]

It's probably hotter than the Hornady stuff. More expansion, less penetration but still pretty deep.

[GJM]

Looking at your tests, and the velocities listed on the spreadsheet, wouldn't the Hornady factory penetrate better since it is at lower velocity than the Underwood, and also be more likely to function reliably in the G20/29 since it is 250 fps slower and closer to "factory spec" 10mm ammo the pistol was designed for?

[Chuck Haggard]

This sort of thing has made me wonder what would happen if a guy modified factory JHPs to expand less or not at all. Would be rather easy to dump solder or JB Weld into the hollow point and turn the bullet basically into a solid.

Back in high school before the world had reliable JHPs we would experiment with stuff like that, except in reverse. I invented a rubber tipped Critical Defense type ammo in the 1970s. True story.

[DocGKR]

How many agencies currently issue 10mm? As a result very few quality loads are produced and no ammo development has been done in quite a while.

For duty/CCW, the Federal 10mm XM1003A 190 gr bonded JHP offers very good terminal performance, as does the Federal 10mm LE10T1 180 gr JHP. Winchester made a 200 gr Talon load that worked well, but I have not seen it in a while.

These days I'd likely go with GJM's idea and just carry a .40 in the field.

[Andrew Wiggin]

GJM, yes, Lowe velocity should mean more penetration.

Doc, there are several loads that meet minimum standards, according to my own informal testing. 10mm might not be an ideal personal defense cartridge but it offers versatility similar to .357 and in a rimless package suitable for autoloaders.

[Alaskapopo]

With G20 popularity as an AK outdoors gun, what loads do most choose? I suppose most may not research or test extensively.

I use 200 FMJ's when in the woods for bear protection that I had load to 1200 fps. Some use hard cast bullets. With big critters you want penetration over expansion.
Pat

[Chuck Whitlock]

My first center fire handgun was a stainless 4" Security-Six, bought by my dad for me when I was 17 and fresh back from Army basic. By then, 1982 time frame, I had read a bunch of Mas Ayoob's articles ref .357mag use by cops, in particular the experience at Indy PD red SPs vs JHPs, so I kept 125gr Federals in the gun, but my go to the woods/hiking/deer hunting load was this same Federal 158gr JSP

I found it to be crazy accurate ammo from a good gun. From roll over prone, shooting SA, I could keep a no BS 6" group going at the 100. With that ammo my -Six was more accurate than my model 94 30-30 and the first two SKSs I bought.

You are making me incredibly depressed over the 4" Security-Sixes I've let slip through my fingers. :(

[JHC]

I use 200 FMJ's when in the woods for bear protection that I had load to 1200 fps. Some use hard cast bullets. With big critters you want penetration over expansion.
Pat

What brand of bullet do you choose for that load? I've seen recently some factory fmj training ammo uses some pretty fragile stuff. I'm not in the know about reloading component details lately but reckon Sierra is still a high quality slug.

[JHC]

How many agencies currently issue 10mm? As a result very few quality loads are produced and no ammo development has been done in quite a while.

For duty/CCW, the Federal 10mm XM1003A 190 gr bonded JHP offers very good terminal performance, as does the Federal 10mm LE10T1 180 gr JHP. Winchester made a 200 gr Talon load that worked well, but I have not seen it in a while.

These days I'd likely go with GJM's idea and just carry a .40 in the field.

I thought GJM's logic of a deep penetrating .40 pretty solid when I first saw him mention it; esp vis a vis the size and handling properties of the .40 guns.
Who'da ever thunk that might be a niche the .40 "slow and weak" moved into? ;)

[LSP552]

I'm going to be up in Alaska in August and have been struggling with what pistol to bring for both knocking around day hikes and around town. I was leaning toward buying a 10mm Glock, but you have me thinking about a .40 now……or maybe I need to play with some .357 loads. Or I could use it as an excuse to buy a 4" .44 for the trail and bring one of my normal carry blasters for around town.

Ken

[JHC]

I'm going to be up in Alaska in August and have been struggling with what pistol to bring for both knocking around day hikes and around town. I was leaning toward buying a 10mm Glock, but you have me thinking about a .40 now……or maybe I need to play with some .357 loads. Or I could use it as an excuse to buy a 4" .44 for the trail and bring one of my normal carry blasters for around town.

Ken

I expect to be up there this Summer seeing one of my Soldiers up there and have been turning around the same ???. I've reviewed several good threads in the Ammunition section where several smart folks, incl GJM provided a fair bit of their experience and knowledge.

A couple days ago I went out and worked 5 "quick" hits on a 4x6 card (vertical) at 10 yards. My 4" 629 with full loads was just brutal. Harsh and necessarily slow (I may have ridiculous expectations from years of fast and fancy 9mm shooting). I think I'll go 1911 with judicious load selection or Gen 4 G22. Trying not to buy another pistol. I guess I might take a 12 ga 870 too.

[Andrew Wiggin]

No matter what handgun you settle on, it's going to be a serious compromise. Even "powerful" handguns aren't much when the target is one of them Alaskan nookular powered bears. .44 mag or 10mm, each with heavy solids would be high on my list for a sidearm for Alaska. A pump or auto 12 ga loaded with slugs would be preferable but that's not always practical.

GJM, I presume you've experimented with extra power recoil springs. Most people with a G20 swap out the barrel for a Lone Wolf and swap the spring for an extra power Wolff recoil spring. There's no fundamental reason you shouldn't be able to get heavy (220-230 gr) solids to work reliably.

[Chuck Haggard]

You are making me incredibly depressed over the 4" Security-Sixes I've let slip through my fingers. :(

Yeah, I used to have three of them, and a 2 3/4", and a Speed Six. Only have the original left sad to say.

[GJM]

A good start is to define your mission. Alaska is a big state, and there are almost unlimited scenarios possible, ranging from handgun hunting large costal brown bears on the Alaska Peninsula, to mostly hanging around Anchorage. Depending upon how you answer the mission question will obviously influence your handgun selection.

Seems like there are four variables that impact your handgun choice(s) -- caliber, capacity, reliability and portability. To restate the obvious, caliber isn't important, until it is important, at which point it becomes very important (thanks, John Hearne). Same for capacity, not important until you need more cartridges to solve the problem. Reliability not so important, until you are shooting support hand only with half a grip, trying to shoot a bear off your other arm. Portability not an issue until you decide your .500 S&W is so heavy, it isn't on you when you need it.


No matter what handgun you settle on, it's going to be a serious compromise. Even "powerful" handguns aren't much when the target is one of them Alaskan nookular powered bears. .44 mag or 10mm, each with heavy solids would be high on my list for a sidearm for Alaska. A pump or auto 12 ga loaded with slugs would be preferable but that's not always practical.

Sounds sensible. However the longest running study of bear attacks in Alaska says otherwise. Handguns, with many in non "bear" calibers like .45 and .357, have a slightly higher statistical success rate than long guns. Probably because bears don't like to be shot, like many people, and there are psychological stops even with calibers unlikely to kill a determined bear. Of course there are also bears that will continue to attack until stopped with a CNS shot, probably a brain shot if you have a handgun.

I wouldn't try to pick your handgun without understanding your mission, but in recent years there are a lot of Alaskans packing high cap semi auto pistols in .40 and 10mm, as a compromise choice that while not optimized for any one use, attempts to cover all the bases with one handgun that is relatively easy to carry, and holds in relative terms a bunch of rounds. I wouldn't rule out bear spray as part of your defensive package, especially if you have others in your party that are unarmed, or not highly skilled, and willing to carry and deploy the spray.



GJM, I presume you've experimented with extra power recoil springs. Most people with a G20 swap out the barrel for a Lone Wolf and swap the spring for an extra power Wolff recoil spring. There's no fundamental reason you shouldn't be able to get heavy (220-230 gr) solids to work reliably.

I have experimented with non captive guide rods, extra power Wolff springs, and after market barrels (Barsto and KKM). We have experienced the reliability issues with the heavy/hot loads across at least a half dozen Glock 20 and 29 pistols, so I am confident the issue isn't with a single pistol. When I discussed this with my friend at Glock, he said he wasn't aware of any systematic factory testing of the 20/29 with very heavy/hot 10mm ammo. He had also heard of reliability issues with these heavy/hot loads by some government field users in Alaska. He helped inform my thinking on the concept of a reliability envelope a model pistol is built around, and how getting to the edges essentially makes you a test pilot.

When you consider how many Glock 9 and 40 users there are, and the relatively homogenous nature of 9 and 40 duty loads, it is easy to understand there is a lot of data as to what and what does not work. Considering how few 20/29 pistols there are out there by comparison, how different 10mm loads are, going from 135 to 230 grains, and the range of bullet profiles (classic JHP and ball to wide meplat hard cast), it is easy to understand why we have less data on what does and does not function. I don't know anyone shooting tens of thousands, or even thousands of rounds a year of hot/heavy 10mm loads.

I absolutely get long guns, and spend some hours almost every day in the summer with a shotgun or rifle in my hands, while out in Alaska. As to handguns, I have stuff ranging from a .500 S&W and Bowen Ruger Alpine, through the standard 629/329 S&W .44's, to 10mm and .40 semi-auto pistols. While I am very confident about my long guns choices, the handgun question is still not satisfactorily answered and subject to continued experimentation.

[Chuck Haggard]

Are you seeing the rounds in the 10mm failing to feed? I'm curious if it's the same thing we saw so much of in the .40s, with the nose of the bullet stubbed into the front of the mag tube without even getting up to the feedramp. If so, excessive slide velocity is the culprit.

[Alaskapopo]

A good start is to define your mission. Alaska is a big state, and there are almost unlimited scenarios possible, ranging from handgun hunting large costal brown bears on the Alaska Peninsula, to mostly hanging around Anchorage. Depending upon how you answer the mission question will obviously influence your handgun selection.

Seems like there are four variables that impact your handgun choice(s) -- caliber, capacity, reliability and portability. To restate the obvious, caliber isn't important, until it is important, at which point it becomes very important (thanks, John Hearne). Same for capacity, not important until you need more cartridges to solve the problem. Reliability not so important, until you are shooting support hand only with half a grip, trying to shoot a bear off your other arm. Portability not an issue until you decide your .500 S&W is so heavy, it isn't on you when you need it.



Sounds sensible. However the longest running study of bear attacks in Alaska says otherwise. Handguns, with many in non "bear" calibers like .45 and .357, have a slightly higher statistical success rate than long guns. Probably because bears don't like to be shot, like many people, and there are psychological stops even with calibers unlikely to kill a determined bear. Of course there are also bears that will continue to attack until stopped with a CNS shot, probably a brain shot if you have a handgun.

I wouldn't try to pick your handgun without understanding your mission, but in recent years there are a lot of Alaskans packing high cap semi auto pistols in .40 and 10mm, as a compromise choice that while not optimized for any one use, attempts to cover all the bases with one handgun that is relatively easy to carry, and holds in relative terms a bunch of rounds. I wouldn't rule out bear spray as part of your defensive package, especially if you have others in your party that are unarmed, or not highly skilled, and willing to carry and deploy the spray.




I have experimented with non captive guide rods, extra power Wolff springs, and after market barrels (Barsto and KKM). We have experienced the reliability issues with the heavy/hot loads across at least a half dozen Glock 20 and 29 pistols, so I am confident the issue isn't with a single pistol. When I discussed this with my friend at Glock, he said he wasn't aware of any systematic factory testing of the 20/29 with very heavy/hot 10mm ammo. He had also heard of reliability issues with these heavy/hot loads by some government field users in Alaska. He helped inform my thinking on the concept of a reliability envelope a model pistol is built around, and how getting to the edges essentially makes you a test pilot.

When you consider how many Glock 9 and 40 users there are, and the relatively homogenous nature of 9 and 40 duty loads, it is easy to understand there is a lot of data as to what and what does not work. Considering how few 20/29 pistols there are out there by comparison, how different 10mm loads are, going from 135 to 230 grains, and the range of bullet profiles (classic JHP and ball to wide meplat hard cast), it is easy to understand why we have less data on what does and does not function. I don't know anyone shooting tens of thousands, or even thousands of rounds a year of hot/heavy 10mm loads.

I absolutely get long guns, and spend some hours almost every day in the summer with a shotgun or rifle in my hands, while out in Alaska. As to handguns, I have stuff ranging from a .500 S&W and Bowen Ruger Alpine, through the standard 629/329 S&W .44's, to 10mm and .40 semi-auto pistols. While I am very confident about my long guns choices, the handgun question is still not satisfactorily answered and subject to continued experimentation.

Are you sure about that. While I don't have the source material. What I read a while back was handguns had a 50% success ratio on stopping bear attacks. Not usually by killing the bear but by making it run off. I have not seen any stats on long guns. Unfortunately I have had to kill my share of bears down where I am at. 2 were situations in which I was charged. One thing I can say is these are tough critters and I would not want to have to use a handgun unless it was all I had. All the bears I killed have been with shotgun slugs. Another observation is that where you hit them matters more than what you hit them with. In one instance where I was charged from 20 feet the bear did not change course until my 5 shot and he was 2 feet in front of me at my feet. He crawled past me to my left and then one of the Troopers who was behind me finished it with a spine shot from a 45-70 my shotgun was dry at that point. Having you gun go click really is a loud noise when you want a bang. Other situations in which I was able to shoot the bear when it was stationary the shot had a much greater effect on the animal. I have never had one go down instantly with just one round. I have pretty much always shot until the animal goes down and that has varied between 3 and 4 slugs in a short amount of time. I have gotten some grief about this but I don't want a wounded animal running around I want it down where I shot it. Shooting bears has shown me just how tough a creature can be and you should not expect it to stop in its tracks with just 1 round.
Pat

[Andrew Wiggin]

Great post, GJM. I hadn't heard of any specific reliability issues with the G20. I doubt many people shoot as much as it sounds like you do.

[GJM]

Are you seeing the rounds in the 10mm failing to feed? I'm curious if it's the same thing we saw so much of in the .40s, with the nose of the bullet stubbed into the front of the mag tube without even getting up to the feedramp. If so, excessive slide velocity is the culprit.

With a variety of loads we have experienced a range of issues. What you described sounds like what we saw with the Buffalo Bore penetrator loads.

After testing, we settled on the DT 200 FMJ load because it seemed to run in our testing of several hundred rounds (which cost an arm and a leg). A year ago September we had just finished moose hunting, during which I strained my right wrist paddling a canoe far and heavy. Back at our cabin, I came upon a spruce hen, which I decided to harvest with my Glock 29SF with the DT 200 FMJ. My wrist (dominant hand) somewhat compromised my grip, but I made a perfect shot, in the head. Unfortunately, it resulted in a stove pipe. Kind of put me back to ground zero on that load.

In my testing of multiple Glock 17 and Sig 226 pistols, I can't make them malfunction with any grip I tried. That got me thinking about a .40 with bonded or FMJ ammo, on the theory that reliability triumphs penetration.


Are you sure about that. While I don't have the source material. What I read a while back was handguns had a 50% success ratio on stopping bear attacks. Not usually by killing the bear but by making it run off. I have not seen any stats on long guns. Unfortunately I have had to kill my share of bears down where I am at. 2 were situations in which I was charged. One thing I can say is these are tough critters and I would not want to have to use a handgun unless it was all I had. All the bears I killed have been with shotgun slugs. Another observation is that where you hit them matters more than what you hit them with. In one instance where I was charged from 20 feet the bear did not change course until my 5 shot and he was 2 feet in front of me at my feet. He crawled past me to my left and then one of the Troopers who was behind me finished it with a spine shot from a 45-70 my shotgun was dry at that point. Having you gun go click really is a loud noise when you want a bang. Other situations in which I was able to shoot the bear when it was stationary the shot had a much greater effect on the animal. I have never had one go down instantly with just one round. I have pretty much always shot until the animal goes down and that has varied between 3 and 4 slugs in a short amount of time. I have gotten some grief about this but I don't want a wounded animal running around I want it down where I shot it. Shooting bears has shown me just how tough a creature can be and you should not expect it to stop in its tracks with just 1 round.
Pat

This is what I put about that study, in a previous post on PF:

By chance, I just realized the July/August issue of Alaska Magazine has an article on the use of firearms with bears, written by Tom Smith and Stephen Herrero. Herrero wrote "Bear Attacks -- Their Causes and Avoidance," and Smith is with BYU and has written a number of things on this topic.

Interestingly there were not statistically significant difference between handguns and long guns, with 84 per cent of handgun users and 76 per cent of long gun users successfully able to stop an attack. They gave an edge to the shotgun, with 16 successes and 2 failures, but for example, a .357 handgun was successful five times, with just one failure.

I tried to find a link to it online, but couldn't.


In my experience, the single most effective load is the warning shot that makes the bear(s) run away. Beyond that, I have shot bears from a little (one shot at 15 yards that killed the bear), to a lot (and had them run off and subsequently charge).

Pat, your post underscores some points I made earlier in this thread regarding caliber and capacity.

[GJM]

For those interested, here is a link to the article I referenced in the previous post:

http://www.arcticwild.com/blog/efficacy-of-firearms-for-bear-deterrence-in-Alaska.pdf

Journal of Wildlife Management, Efficacy of Firearms for Bear Deterrence in Alaska

[LSP552]

Thanks GJM, great info in the article and your responses.

Ken

[Chuck Haggard]

I wish I could find the article, well known gun writer, Vietnam vet, wrote about using service caliber handguns for large animal defense. Basic premise was that if it wasn't big enough to break shoulder bones and such then your only hope was a brain shot, so use something you shoot well at speed, with good penetration.

[GJM]

I wish I could find the article, well known gun writer, Vietnam vet, wrote about using service caliber handguns for large animal defense. Basic premise was that if it wasn't big enough to break shoulder bones and such then your only hope was a brain shot, so use something you shoot well at speed, with good penetration.

Not sure about "only hope," since based on the statistics apparently many bears terminate their attack even when shot with non-fatal shots. However, if you have a determined bear, who doesn't stop with a non-fatal shot, then the upper CNS is probably your best chance to stop the attack. The $64 question being what is the minimum load capable of reliably penetrating a brown bear's skull inside 10-20 yards?

I have a vague recollection of Pat describing a Trooper buddy of his shooting brown bear skulls with various calibers to test penetration. Pat, do you remember that, and what he learned?

[Chuck Haggard]

Pat Rogers relates a case of an NYPD copper killing a polar bear DRT with one hit from a 4" model 10 using 158gr RNL. Was a near contact shot. Not a stunt I would be in a hurry to try myself.

[Alaskapopo]

Not sure about "only hope," since based on the statistics apparently many bears terminate their attack even when shot with non-fatal shots. However, if you have a determined bear, who doesn't stop with a non-fatal shot, then the upper CNS is probably your best chance to stop the attack. The $64 question being what is the minimum load capable of reliably penetrating a brown bear's skull inside 10-20 yards?

I have a vague recollection of Pat describing a Trooper buddy of his shooting brown bear skulls with various calibers to test penetration. Pat, do you remember that, and what he learned?

Yes He was shooting brown bear skulls with .40sw 180 grain FMJ loads, and JHP loads and 357 sig loads. Forgot what else he tested. After that he was pretty enamored with the .357 sig and I was getting out of the caliber at the time and I sold him one of mine. But anyway the 180 grain FMJ 40 cal loads from a Glock 22 penetrated the bear skulls the 180 grain JHP duty loads did not. All of the .357 sigs he tested at the time penetrated but back then all you could get was 125 grain FMJ 125 grain Federals and 125 grain Golddots.
pat

[Alaskapopo]

Pat Rogers relates a case of an NYPD copper killing a polar bear DRT with one hit from a 4" model 10 using 158gr RNL. Was a near contact shot. Not a stunt I would be in a hurry to try myself.

Like everything else its shot placement. I can't relate if this story is urban legend or not but it goes like this. A man is out small game hunting in Kodiak with a .22 rifle. He surpises a bear and it rears up and he throws his rifle up in a hurry and shots and then runs. Pretty soon he realizes the bear is not chasing him. He goes back and finds the bear dead. The bullet went into its mouth and through the roof and into the brain.

I had a strange experience this summer. We use cracker shells to haze bears away from town. They are a 12 gauge launched M80 basically. Anyway I am trying to haze this bear and I end up getting closer than I wanted to to it and I shot it with the cracker shell. I hear a muffled explosion and it runs off. I thought it was a dud round which we get a lot of unfortunately. I go around the block to make sure its out of the city and I find it dead on the street. Turns out the cracker shell at close range (10 feet or so) had enough energy to penetrate a soft spot under the animals ribs and the shell exploded inside the animal killing it. I was very lucky that it died rather than just getting wounded. learned a valuable lesson.
1. Being know your ammunition inside and out.
2. Get everyone training on cracker shells.

Pat