Speer Gold Dot G2 147 grain PT 9mm

[Handgun Planet]

To start off, I'm a noob here (literally registered today), but I searched for references to this round and only saw the carry ammo thread and the new 9mm testing thread. If I missed an older thread specifically devoted to this round, I apologize.

I got some of the new Speer Gold Dot G2 9mm recently, and although I haven't made it to the chrono or the range to to any gel testing yet, I wanted to post pics and first impressions for those of you who might be interested in this ammo. I'll also be happy to update the thread with any gel testing or chrono results I obtain in the next few weeks (hopefully no longer than that, but it might be).

http://handgunplanet.com/news/first-look-speer-gold-dot-g2-ammo/

http://handgunplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/G2.r1-640x300.jpg

http://handgunplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/G2.r3.jpg

I won't be too much help on questions just yet, but if there's something you want to know that isn't covered in the article, I'll either tell you or do my best to figure it out when I make it to the range. I know a lot of the people on here are very knowledgeable, so I'm not sure how much I can contribute, but I'll look forward to seeing you guys on the forums and I'll try to add what I can.

[JBP55]

Where is the G2 ammunition available and what does it cost?

[DiscipulusArmorum]

Welcome and thanks for posting!

Very much interested in calibrated bare gel/4LD (laminated auto glass would be nice but know that might be impractical) testing out of service size (G17/G19 etc.) and compact (G26/Shield) pistols.

[Mike C]

I would love to get my hands on some just to see if I could PM Doc to get permission to send it to him for testing. I love the 147gr load Speer produces now and can't wait to see what advantages the new offerings deliver. Inquiring minds certainly want to know where can I get my grubby hands on some?

[DocGKR]

Thank you, but we have had this ammo for a while. Unfortunately we were asked not to discuss the results. If possible, we'll try and put up some information in the near future. The Speer 9 mm 147 gr G2 is very good performing barrier blind ammunition! In fact modern 9 mm ammo like the G2 performs so well, that many large LE agencies are having no issues giving up larger caliber handguns in favor of easier shooting, more durable, higher capacity 9 mm handguns that offer terminal performance that only a few years ago was only possible with larger calibers like .40 S&W and .45 Auto.

[Handgun Planet]

Thank you, but we have had this ammo for a while. Unfortunately we were asked not to discuss the results. If possible, we'll try and put up some information in the near future. The Speer 9 mm 147 gr G2 is very good performing barrier blind ammunition! In fact modern 9 mm ammo like the G2 performs so well, that many large LE agencies are having no issues giving up larger caliber handguns in favor of easier shooting, more durable, higher capacity 9 mm handguns that offer terminal performance that only a few years ago was only possible with larger calibers like .40 S&W and .45 Auto.

Hey Doc. I figured you had it a while back when it appeared on "the list" :)

And I'm sure that Speer will add it to their website soon considering that they've supposedly been demoing it around the country for a little while. I do want to clarify, though: are you asking others not to discuss the results we get? They certainly aren't going to be as comprehensive as yours, but in fairness no one asked us not to discuss this round. I just want to make sure I understand you because I'm new here and I don't want to step on any toes, especially yours.

Thanks! (Edit: Also, lest something get lost in translation, none of this is sarcasm. I really did just want to clarify with you.)

[DocGKR]

What you do that is not covered by an NDA is up to you....

[Handgun Planet]

Welcome and thanks for posting!

Very much interested in calibrated bare gel/4LD (laminated auto glass would be nice but know that might be impractical) testing out of service size (G17/G19 etc.) and compact (G26/Shield) pistols.

Thanks! It'll probably just be bare gel or 4LD first, and likely out of a G17 and a 26. But I will see what I can do on some other barriers. For those who asked where to get it, that's the one thing that I can't say, but I will update and post the first public source for it that I find :)


What you do that is not covered by an NDA is up to you....

Thank you for the clarification. No NDA here; wouldn't make much sense for a member of the media to sign one. Until I have time to get to the range, though, I'm happy to hear that your results were so promising (and I'll certainly be on the lookout for them)! Take care-

[j.d.allen]

But where can we get it???

Oh sorry just saw that you can't tell us. Dammit...

[Mike C]

Thank you, but we have had this ammo for a while. Unfortunately we were asked not to discuss the results. If possible, we'll try and put up some information in the near future. The Speer 9 mm 147 gr G2 is very good performing barrier blind ammunition! In fact modern 9 mm ammo like the G2 performs so well, that many large LE agencies are having no issues giving up larger caliber handguns in favor of easier shooting, more durable, higher capacity 9 mm handguns that offer terminal performance that only a few years ago was only possible with larger calibers like .40 S&W and .45 Auto.

Thank you DocGKR for sharing what you could. It will be very interesting when you are able to post the results. Is there a chance that you can tell us what time frame the results might be shared with us? Thank you in advance.

[JHC]

Is there a film across the hollowpoint?

[ssb]

Is there a film across the hollowpoint?

Looks to be a clear polymer insert from here, which jives with DocGKR's statements.

[Handgun Planet]

Is there a film across the hollowpoint?

Not a film, but the cavity (which is shallower than the original Gold Dot) is filled with elastomer.

[DocGKR]

That would make it a PT (polymer tip), like a Hornady Critical Duty or Critical Defense instead of a JHP...

[Handgun Planet]

That would make it a PT (polymer tip), like a Hornady Critical Duty or Critical Defense instead of a JHP...

Not sure I'm following you on this...which are you saying it is? PT, correct? (Just assuming based on its title here (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4337-Service-Caliber-Handgun-Duty-and-Self-Defense-Ammo))

[lyodbraun]

So where do we buy this at ??..

[DocGKR]

The G2 has a solid polymer tip with no exposed hollow point, so it is a PT, not a JHP.

[JHC]

Looks to be a clear polymer insert from here, which jives with DocGKR's statements.

Must really be something to that design approach. Caleb's blog has an article about a deep penetrating 125 gr .357 load from Hornady. Not sure I've seen a relatively light .357 go that deep in a review before.

This G2 sounds pretty interesting. I wonder if it's destined to be the new FBI load.

[Handgun Planet]

The G2 has a solid polymer tip with no exposed hollow point, so it is a PT, not a JHP.

Ok, gotcha. Just making sure I wasn't off base with my thread title. I only had the box to go by so I tried to stick to that language for the most part.

http://handgunplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/G2.r4.jpg

[Chuck Haggard]

It makes me sad that I invented this sort of filled JHP ammo back in like 1978 and never wrote that idea down anywhere.


I'd be really interested in seeing some of the G2 in person. Sources tell me it tests REALLY well on the FBI test battery.

[BLR]

Ok, gotcha. Just making sure I wasn't off base with my thread title. I only had the box to go by so I tried to stick to that language for the most part.

http://handgunplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/G2.r4.jpg

Huh. I thought "Uni Cor" was a soldered core. That bullet has all the hallmarks of a tumble-electroplated swaged lead core.

I love GDs.

[Handgun Planet]

Huh. I thought "Uni Cor" was a soldered core. That bullet has all the hallmarks of a tumble-electroplated swaged lead core.

I love GDs.

Blr! Why am I not surprised to find you're on this forum too? :D

The ATK guys I have talked to in the past indicated it is plated like you mentioned. Can you explain how the process used for GDs might be better than some of the cheaper plated bullets that don't hold up to velocity?

[BLR]

Blr! Why am I not surprised to find you're on this forum too? :D

The ATK guys I have talked to in the past indicated it is plated like you mentioned. Can you explain how the process used for GDs might be better than some of the cheaper plated bullets that don't hold up to velocity?

I was thinking Hot Cor, not Uni Cor.

I'm a bullet collector - I have boxes of lathe turned Partitions, Zippedos, and some Hornadys punched out of 22LR empties (pet peeve - every time I hear someone say "casing" I just want to drown a hipster).

[GRV]

The G2 has a solid polymer tip with no exposed hollow point, so it is a PT, not a JHP.

The fine citizens stuck in New Jersey will be happy to hear that ;)

[Chuck Haggard]

The fine citizens stuck in New Jersey will be happy to hear that ;)

It should be legal from what I have seen in the past from there. Before I traveled to NJ a few years ago I got a letter from the NJSP Firearms unit that stated Federal EFMJ, Hornady Critical Defense and Cor Bon PowerBall were legal there, due to not being a "hollow point".

This was pre Critical Duty and such being out. I ended up carrying 124gr +P EFMJ in my G19 and wadcutters in my 638

[Savage Hands]

This might be my San Francisco ammo as well :cool:

[Chuck Haggard]

This might be my San Francisco ammo as well :cool:

Did they also ban hollow points? I must have missed that.

[DocGKR]

They are trying...

[JBP55]

The Gold Dot G2 should be announced at the 2015 SHOT Show and available after SHOT.

[Fire-Medic]

The Gold Dot G2 should be announced at the 2015 SHOT Show and available after SHOT.

Thanks good to know

[JHC]

This ammo is more accurate like OTM for rifles. Right? Just sayin'

[Jeep]

This ammo is more accurate like OTM for rifles. Right? Just sayin'

It is indeed more accurate.

[Jared]

Will this be available to the general public like the original Gold Dot, or is Speer going to go the "LE Only" route like HST and Ranger-T are? I realize that HST and Ranger are available to the public, I'm just mildly curious about this.

[Handgun Planet]

Will this be available to the general public like the original Gold Dot, or is Speer going to go the "LE Only" route like HST and Ranger-T are? I realize that HST and Ranger are available to the public, I'm just mildly curious about this.

I would bet that places already selling the 50-round boxes of HST and GD will be able to get this through the same channels. But as much as ATK is bound to sell when it first comes out (I'm sure the amount of contracts they ALREADY have is insane), I seriously doubt we'll see any 20-round non-LE marked boxes for a hot minute.

[JBP55]

I would bet that places already selling the 50-round boxes of HST and GD will be able to get this through the same channels. But as much as ATK is bound to sell when it first comes out (I'm sure the amount of contracts they ALREADY have is insane), I seriously doubt we'll see any 20-round non-LE marked boxes for a hot minute.

I agree, the local Glock LEA Dealer sells Gold Dot over the counter and keeps a good supply in stock.

[Molon]

It is indeed more accurate.

"More accurate" than what?

[Savage Hands]

Will this be available to the general public like the original Gold Dot, or is Speer going to go the "LE Only" route like HST and Ranger-T are? I realize that HST and Ranger are available to the public, I'm just mildly curious about this.

Ammunition Manufacturers did this to appease politicians by labeling them LEO Only and supposedly not selling them directly to non-leo instead of legislation banning them for non-leo after incidents like the 101 California Shooting in 1993.
Thankfully it makes it only slightly more difficult to buy at worse.

[Jeep]

"More accurate" than what?

Most FMJ 9 mm ammo--which ought to be good enough for a JAG opinion, I'd hope.

[Handgun Planet]

Ammunition Manufacturers did this to appease politicians by labeling them LEO Only and supposedly not selling them directly to non-leo instead of legislation banning them for non-leo after incidents like the 101 California Shooting in 1993.
Thankfully it makes it only slightly more difficult to buy at worse.

I think labeling this as appeasing legislatures is a misnomer. The evidence of that is the fact that all of the rounds (except T-Series) are also sold in 20-round boxes to civilians. The LE pricing and distribution are separate because state/local agencies don't have to pay the 11% FAET and regular sales do. Why companies mark it up more than 11% is another matter entirely, but they aren't marked "LE" just because of some fear that legislatures will ban them.

[Savage Hands]

I think labeling this as appeasing legislatures is a misnomer. The evidence of that is the fact that all of the rounds (except T-Series) are also sold in 20-round boxes to civilians. The LE pricing and distribution are separate because state/local agencies don't have to pay the 11% FAET and regular sales do. Why companies mark it up more than 11% is another matter entirely, but they aren't marked "LE" just because of some fear that legislatures will ban them.


Read up on what happened with the incident I posted above and the original AWB, things have changed after 20 years but the original intention still stands, just like removing the black lubalox coating on Black Talons and renaming them Ranger SXT.

[El Cid]

This G2 sounds pretty interesting. I wonder if it's destined to be the new FBI load.

It already is. I stopped by their office today. When I asked about the ammo, a box of G2 was produced from the agent's desk drawer. Pretty interesting design. I'm hoping to get my hands on some to try it out soon.

[Suvorov]

Actually if you look at the list SFPD has on their website, it lists three specific types of ammunition as being banned:
Black Talon, Federal premium tactical law enforcement, and hornady TAP. Or anything with the same ballistic characteristics. Now what does that term mean? Whatever the DA and the jury judge it to mean. Which COULD be any bullet of expansive or JHP design. Does it mean that? I don't know. And I think it's intentionally vague. But I looked at a box of HST I have and it says "Federal Premium Tactical Law Enforcement" so HST is actually specifically banned

That is my non-legal background interpolation as well. Kind of a pisser for me as I have invested in a couple cases of ranger T in both +p and +p+ loadings. *if* someone knew the history of them then a good argument could be made for ballistic similarity to the black talon as well as the fact they are marketed to LE only. All that said, the Gold Dot is marketed to both civilians and LE an other than a bonded jacket that makes for reliable expansion, is a traditional hollowpoint design.

[Symmetry]

Doc,

I know that you have usually favored 147gr HSTs, but will you still prefer them over the 147gr G2s?

[Wayne Dobbs]

I bet you guys can ask Gary all the questions you want without any solid answers as long as he is constrained by the NDA. The word may be out all over the place, but if he wants the placement with the ammo companies for advance news, T&E, etc., then he has to stay silent or not have the access anymore.

[Rich]

It should be legal from what I have seen in the past from there. Before I traveled to NJ a few years ago I got a letter from the NJSP Firearms unit that stated Federal EFMJ, Hornady Critical Defense and Cor Bon PowerBall were legal there, due to not being a "hollow point".

This was pre Critical Duty and such being out. I ended up carrying 124gr +P EFMJ in my G19 and wadcutters in my 638

The EFMJ expands a lot better in the steel test than the regular JHP.



BTW
OP or anyone know it there is going to be a standard pressure G2 124gr load?

[Chuck Haggard]

The EFMJ expands a lot better in the steel test than the regular JHP.



BTW
OP or anyone know it there is going to be a standard pressure G2 124gr load?

Once I start shooting through car doors I quit caring about expansion and worry about max penetration. But yeah, the EFMJ expands through basically everything, even dry sheetrock panels.

[Amurr]

JHP are 100% legal in NJ. (For the same of clarification and correct wrong information)

It is illegal to use a JHP "in a crime"

It is perfectly legal to own/shoot JHP ammo in NJ.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jeep]

JHP are 100% legal in NJ. (For the same of clarification and correct wrong information)

It is illegal to use a JHP "in a crime"

It is perfectly legal to own/shoot JHP ammo in NJ.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Amurr: I have studied that law carefully, and came to the conclusion that it is ok for target shooting or hunting, or home defense, but not ok if you are one of the very few people in NJ who qualifies for CCW. It is illegal to use JHP in a crime, which means that if your target shooting, hunting or home defense involves a crime then maybe it is not ok. For example, if you shoot HP out of a 16 round magazine, you might be guilty of two crimes. I'd be real careful on this because NJ is not a place that looks favorably on firearms ownership in the first place, even though the southern and northwestern counties are full of gun owners.

[Amurr]

I agree with your analysis. I live in NJ. I have piles of JHP. I avoid carrying illegally or robbing banks so I have nothing to worry. I just don't want the misconception that owning a JHP in NJ is illegals because that is clearly an incorrect statement. I apologies for thread derailment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chuck Haggard]

Ref the new G2, I was told that the Ranger Bonded 147gr that was the previous FBI 9mm issued load was named by the lab guys as "the bullet that don't give a fuck" due to being so consistent in testing across the board. That load tested equal to their 180gr .40 Bonded load, and better than their issued .45acp duty ammo. That loading was what they were using when the process to go to 9mms was started, it's a VERY good 9mm duty loading.

The G2 took the contract from that Bonded loading. Read what you want into that.

[Chuck Haggard]

I agree with your analysis. I live in NJ. I have piles of JHP. I avoid carrying illegally or robbing banks so I have nothing to worry. I just don't want the misconception that owning a JHP in NJ is illegals because that is clearly an incorrect statement. I apologies for thread derailment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ownership might not be, but carry most certainly was when I checked into it, even for coppers back then. Each round of JHP ammo was a felony, with a $1000 fine per round on top of jail time.

[Up1911Fan]

Ref the new G2, I was told that the Ranger Bonded 147gr that was the previous FBI 9mm issued load was named by the lab guys as "the bullet that don't give a fuck" due to being so consistent in testing across the board. That load tested equal to their 180gr .40 Bonded load, and better than their issued .45acp duty ammo. That loading was what they were using when the process to go to 9mms was started, it's a VERY good 9mm duty loading.

The G2 took the contract from that Bonded loading. Read what you want into that.

I like hearing this as the 147gr Ranger Bonded is my carry load and i'm sitting on over 1K of it!

[NotAnExpert]

Created an account to post this, as I saw it as useful information. I have a box of this ammo in hand that I acquired as just a lowly consumer. I hope this means that said NDA's are close to expiration as I want to see some data on this stuff.

What I have is identical to Handgun Planet except that mine is stamped 14 as opposed to 13.

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/10/27/0e0f59226d443a09ea97084419a68175.jpg

[GRV]

Can you post a picture of the flap side of the box that includes the model number? It should be either 54227 or 54226. Actually, if you can just go ahead and post pics of all the sides that'd be great :cool:

[Beat Trash]

Where did you find this, Vance"s?

[Rich]

Once I start shooting through car doors I quit caring about expansion and worry about max penetration. But yeah, the EFMJ expands through basically everything, even dry sheetrock panels.

yeah its the only bullet that I know that expands on the steel test.

I've shot car and trucks that accumulated at the farm. I even tried to blowing up a car with a half tank of gas using a 7.62 X39mm tracers. I thought for sure it would blow up. just punch through to leak gas out.

[Rich]

Ref the new G2, I was told that the Ranger Bonded 147gr that was the previous FBI 9mm issued load was named by the lab guys as "the bullet that don't give a fuck" due to being so consistent in testing across the board. That load tested equal to their 180gr .40 Bonded load, and better than their issued .45acp duty ammo. That loading was what they were using when the process to go to 9mms was started, it's a VERY good 9mm duty loading.

The G2 took the contract from that Bonded loading. Read what you want into that.

I use to carry a spare 12rd mag loaded with ranger 180gr B. I also have a box left of the PDX1 147gr B.

I notice the 9mm 147gr doesn't have the nose cuts like the 180gr B 40S&W

[JBP55]

Can you post a picture of the flap side of the box that includes the model number? It should be either 54227 or 54226. Actually, if you can just go ahead and post pics of all the sides that'd be great :cool:

Part #54226.

[GRV]

Part #54226.

I was asking NotAnExpert specifically because there are photos of both numbers going around. The FBI contract rumors point to 54227 and the photo floating around with that number is also marked "GOV". I'm curious to see if this is correlated to the year on the headstamp. Maybe Speer changed the number after it was awarded. Maybe there will really be a different number for the civilian sales. Maybe none of the above.

[Wayne Dobbs]

NotAnExpert,

Where did you acquire this and do they have any for sale?

[JBP55]

NotAnExpert,

Where did you acquire this and do they have any for sale?

It is available at Keislers for $40 a box plus shipping which is about $10 per box too much.




Kiesler Police Supply > AMMUNITION > SPEER/GoldDot Duty Ammo
GOLD DOT 2, 9MM, 147 GRAIN, 50 ROUND BOX.

Item# 54226

GOLD DOT 2, 9MM, HP,147 GRAIN, 50 ROUND BOX. LAW ENFORCEMENT PURCHASE ONLY. INDIVIDUAL BOX PRICE.


ABOUT GOLD DOT 2:
THE GOLD DOT 2 UPGRADE FEATURES A BULLET DESIGN THAT EXCELS IN THE FBI PROTOCOL FOR LE AMMUNITION. ITS SHALLOW, DISH SHAPED NOSE CONTOUR IS FILLED WITH ELASTOMER TO PROVIDE RAPID EXPANSION WHERE NEEDED AND MINIMIZE OVER PENETRATION WHERE ITS NOT. GOLD DOT G2'S UNI-COR CONSTRUCTION MOLECULARLY BONDS THE COPPER JACKET TO THE ALLOYED LEAD CORE, VIRTUALLY ELIMINATING SEPARATIONS.

Price: $39.95

[NotAnExpert]

When I get back home I'll post some photos of the different sides. If memory serves, mine is marked 54227 and GOV. A friend of mine came across it at the Westland Mall gun show earlier this month. Not sure of the seller. I only have one box as of now, so not really looking to sell.

Certainly keeping an eye out for more though, so if I spot any I'll be sure to post.

[GRV]

When I get back home I'll post some photos of the different sides. If memory serves, mine is marked 54227 and GOV. A friend of mine came across it at the Westland Mall gun show earlier this month. Not sure of the seller. I only have one box as of now, so not really looking to sell.

Certainly keeping an eye out for more though, so if I spot any I'll be sure to post.

Very interesting. The other picture I am referring to of the GOV 54227 (http://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=5&f=20&t=153088) was of a box obtained at a local gun show. I imagine these are the same channels through which other LE-sale-only ammo is sold to civilians: such as the 147gr HST and 50rnd boxes of Gold Dots.*

*Correct me if I'm wrong on that claim. I've been lead to believe those are only formally sold to LE, and I certainly don't see them on major websites, only local shops and a few independent sites.

[NotAnExpert]

As requested, some pictures of the side panels.

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/10/28/82b8ba8a1a365cb0af8f2f8ea138f4cc.jpg

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/10/28/9e80886113a31f1543b8f780b46702d6.jpg

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/10/28/c38954fc66ebf7e76481b3672b52891a.jpg

[NotAnExpert]

Very interesting. The other picture I am referring to of the GOV 54227 (http://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=5&f=20&t=153088) was of a box obtained at a local gun show. I imagine these are the same channels through which other LE-sale-only ammo is sold to civilians: such as the 147gr HST and 50rnd boxes of Gold Dots.*

*Correct me if I'm wrong on that claim. I've been lead to believe those are only formally sold to LE, and I certainly don't see them on major websites, only local shops and a few independent sites.
I'm afraid I don't know the answer to that. It is possible even that the seller that had these received them by mistake for all I know.

[GRV]

Thanks for the pics!

[Handgun Planet]

The sku number difference (226/227) is interesting to me. Very cool.

[LtDave]

Ordered 3 boxes. Total w/shipping to AZ was $134.85. Ordering process is a little convoluted, but I managed to get it done.

[El Cid]

I saw the issued ammo today and it has 54227 on it. When my order from Keisler arrives I'll see if it's the same.

[Handgun Planet]

I saw the issued ammo today and it has 54227 on it. When my order from Keisler arrives I'll see if it's the same.

Keisler has their sku listed as 54226 for the product number, so I would bet that's what it's going to be.

[El Cid]

Keisler has their sku listed as 54226 for the product number, so I would bet that's what it's going to be.

I expect you are correct. Now I just need to find a friend with a chronograph and.compare the two.

[Handgun Planet]

Great idea. Since the Winchester service load portion of the contract lists Q4392, which is sold to other agencies as Ranger RA9B, I would bet that this is another example of the FBI contract getting a specific product number for the same ammo, but verifying is always good. Always.

Can't wait to see what you find. I expect to run some gel tests with mine in the next couple of weeks, but all of the G2 I have right now is 54226.

[El Cid]

I shot some of the new G2 (54227) with my G26 today. It impacted very high. At 25, lollipopping the bullseye, it was about 10" high. That was with the standard Trijicon3 dot sights. Didn't have any other 9mm's to test. Was planning to upgrade to HD's anyway so I'll try them next.

[JHC]

I shot some of the new G2 (54227) with my G26 today. It impacted very high. At 25, lollipopping the bullseye, it was about 10" high. That was with the standard Trijicon3 dot sights. Didn't have any other 9mm's to test. Was planning to upgrade to HD's anyway so I'll try them next.

Whoa. My Gen 4 G26 is VERY accurate but impacted high also so I use 10-8s on it because it was easier to get a taller front. HD fronts in taller sizes are available but pricey of course. I've tried standard HD sets on a couple of our high impacting Glocks (the aforementioned G26 included) and the POI was very high, close to what you described. So if it were me, knowing that, and really wanting this load, I'd seek out the .235 HD front or something.

[5pins]

Pretty much my experience with all 147gr 9MM ammo in any pistols I’ve used it in. Either a taller front or shorter rear sight needed. One of the reasons I stayed with the 124gr stuff. I hope there are plans to bring this new design to market with a lighter bullet.

[Rich]

Will ATK/Speer offer the G2 load to the public . Also does anyone know if they have a 180gr loading for the 40cal.

I doubt I will ever buy any 9mm unless they make it in 124gr.

[DocGKR]

If the 147 gr performs better, then why would someone want a 124 gr?

[Fire-Medic]

If the 147 gr performs better, then why would someone want a 124 gr?

Doc,

I'm assuming they're alluding to the change in POA/POI between the different weight projectiles........

[GRV]

10 inches? That doesn't sound like it's just due to the round. That's the sort of drop you'd see out at 100 yards with 9mm zeroed at 25, so it seems pretty drastic to see that much rise at 25. I haven't shot 147gr before, but I've read the recoil characteristic is different, and I'd wager that's whats going on. I wonder if that's something that can be fixed with more training with the round, or if it's unavoidable physics. Changing sight heights on a handgun is something I'm hesitant to do in general.

[Wayne Dobbs]

If you do have a true 10" error then you need a front sight that's 0.06" taller to get the correction to POA/POI. That's based on the formula of: Impact error x Sight radius divided by Range. So to keep all the dimensions in inches you have this:

10" (impact error) X 5.39" (G26 sight radius)/900" (25 yards converted to inches) = 0.059888 (~0.06")

That's a huge change and even the tallest normally available front sight for Glocks is .250" which is 0.035" taller than the standard .215" stock front sights by most makers.

[j.d.allen]

You can get a 10 INCH difference in POI by using a 147gr. bullet instead of a 124gr.??? :eek: Sounds kinda crazy to me. I've never seen even close to that much of a difference by switching bullet weights...

[DocGKR]

We recently had a chance to shoot 10 rd groups of 147 gr, 124 gr, and 115 gr projectiles at 25 yds on the same target from the same G19 pistol. The 147 gr was centered on the X, the 124 gr was about mid 9 ring, and the 115 gr was around the junction of the 7-8 rings. About a 2" change per ammo type. This is NOT the first time we have run such a test. We have NEVER seen a 10" shift at 25 yds when using the same pistol to fire various service caliber ammo loads of differing projectile weights and velocities.

[GRV]

We recently had a chance to shoot 10 rd groups of 147 gr, 124 gr, and 115 gr projectiles at 25 yds on the same target from the same G19 pistol. The 147 gr was centered on the X, the 124 gr was about mid 9 ring, and the 115 gr was around the junction of the 7-8 rings. About a 2" change per ammo type. This is NOT the first time we have run such a test. We have NEVER seen a 10" shift at 25 yds when using the same pistol to fire various service caliber ammo loads of differing projectile weights and velocities.

That lines up more with what I'd expect, relatively speaking. The absolutes are interesting though. I would have guessed that Glock factory zero and sight height was based on 25 yards with 124gr ammo. Did this G19 have sights whose height matched that of the ones it came with? 2" absolute at 25 yards could be explained by all sorts of things, hardware independent, but I'm just curious.

[El Cid]

Okay... The 54226 arrived today. The labels on each side are the same except for the 54226 v 54227.

The 227 (agency provided) is stamped 14 and appears to be shorter. It's on the left. I chose random rounds front the 226 and all were longer. Not sure if they are longer bullets or just loaded longer. The 226 is stamped 13.

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG0175_zps4371df62.jpg

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG0177_zpsa0533ffd.jpg

[NotAnExpert]

Interesting about the loaded length. Growing pains with a new production line maybe? Would be very interested to see if they clock similar numbers on a chrono.

[GJM]

What is the cliff notes version why this is enough better than the Gold Dot 124+P, to warrant a change with the attendant reliability checks and sight regulations checks that accompany the switch in a carry load?

Since I am always interested in penetration on four legged creatures, any sense whether this new load or the 124 +P is likely to penetrate better on a skull?

[Fire-Medic]

Okay... The 54226 arrived today. The labels on each side are the same except for the 54226 v 54227.

The 227 (agency provided) is stamped 14 and appears to be shorter. It's on the left. I chose random rounds front the 226 and all were longer. Not sure if they are longer bullets or just loaded longer. The 226 is stamped 13.

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG0175_zps4371df62.jpg

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG0177_zpsa0533ffd.jpg

Do you reload? Sacrifice one round of each and measure the projectiles and then you will see if one is just loaded longer than the other. Shoot send me one round of each and I'll do it lol. I have the tools to pull the rounds apart and the calipers to measure.

[DocGKR]

"Since I am always interested in penetration on four legged creatures, any sense whether this new load or the 124 +P is likely to penetrate better on a skull?"

The 147 gr G2.

[GJM]

The 147 gr G2.

Thanks. Any idea how it penetrates compared to quality .40 and .45 acp JHP loads? It would be really neat if I could get rid of the .40 and .45 pistols, where there is some chance of a four leg problem, and just maintain 9 and 10mm.

[JHC]

Thanks. Any idea how it penetrates compared to quality .40 and .45 acp JHP loads? It would be really neat if I could get rid of the .40 and .45 pistols, where there is some chance of a four leg problem, and just maintain 9 and 10mm.

Wouldn't one of several avail FMJ 9mm loads deliver even more penetration?

[JBP55]

Wouldn't one of several avail FMJ 9mm loads deliver even more penetration?


Absolutely.

[GJM]

Wouldn't one of several avail FMJ 9mm loads deliver even more penetration?


Absolutely.

Not sure. It seems like many FMJ ball loads are economy loads, and don't necessarily penetrate better than JHP. Until you get to 10mm with hard cast, the Trophy Bonded or boutique penetrator loads, it doesn't seem like the makers have optimized ball for penetration in 9, 40 and 45.

[JBP55]

Not sure. It seems like many FMJ ball loads are economy loads, and don't necessarily penetrate better than JHP. Until you get to 10mm with hard cast, the Trophy Bonded or boutique penetrator loads, it doesn't seem like the makers have optimized ball for penetration in 9, 40 and 45.

I do not have any skulls to shoot but Gold Dot 124+P, HST 124+P, Gold Dot 147, HST 147 and HST 147+P did not compare to the penetration of the 124 NATO rounds fired into water jugs.
The JHP rounds all expanded big time and the NATO rounds looked like they did before firing. All rounds fired from the same G34.

[Wayne Dobbs]

While water testing is useful, to a limited extent, to get relative soft tissue performance, it's not always useful for hard barrier testing. And I think most of us would agree a brown bear skull would be a bit of a hard barrier! Ball ammo can get really erratic on hard surfaces, especially when it impacts at angles less then perpendicular. It glances off skulls of all types and windshields are another big issue for it too.

[JBP55]

While water testing is useful, to a limited extent, to get relative soft tissue performance, it's not always useful for hard barrier testing. And I think most of us would agree a brown bear skull would be a bit of a hard barrier! Ball ammo can get really erratic on hard surfaces, especially when it impacts at angles less then perpendicular. It glances off skulls of all types and windshields are another big issue for it too.

I do not carry a pistol with ball ammunition so that would not be an issue for me.

[JHC]

Not sure. It seems like many FMJ ball loads are economy loads, and don't necessarily penetrate better than JHP. Until you get to 10mm with hard cast, the Trophy Bonded or boutique penetrator loads, it doesn't seem like the makers have optimized ball for penetration in 9, 40 and 45.

I was thinking a NATO load from a good manufacturer or a boutique brand. The Buffalo bore FMJ flatpoints looked the part, they were hot. They didn't group well at 25 yds from a couple of my pistols though.

[GJM]

We had this discussion in one of the threads discussing service pistols around animals, which one I can't remember, about penetrating loads in .40. Chuck or Gary, as I recall, educated me that the common .40 ball loads are not properly constructed for penetration, and may not even do as well as a good JHP. That got me off on the KKM barrel and hard cast in the G22, which didn't pan out on account of unsatisfactory reliability.

The beauty of the G2 load, if it pans out, is you can carry a pistol in a caliber that is likely reliable and durable, while doing double duty -- good performance on softer targets, and the ability to get through a hard target if necessary.

From my anecdotal knowledge, a flat point seems better at penetration than a traditional ball load.

[JHC]

We had this discussion in one of the threads discussing service pistols around animals, which one I can't remember, about penetrating loads in .40. Chuck or Gary, as I recall, educated me that the common .40 ball loads are not properly constructed for penetration, and may not even do as well as a good JHP. That got me off on the KKM barrel and hard cast in the G22, which didn't pan out on account of unsatisfactory reliability.

The beauty of the G2 load, if it pans out, is you can carry a pistol in a caliber that is likely reliable and durable, while doing double duty -- good performance on softer targets, and the ability to get through a hard target if necessary.

From my anecdotal knowledge, a flat point seems better at penetration than a traditional ball load.

Roger all of that.

I'm fixing to send a few boxes of the Hornady Critical Duty 135 gr 9mm and their 180 XTP up to junior in AK just because. This G2 stuff in very cool.

[Rich]

While water testing is useful, to a limited extent, to get relative soft tissue performance, it's not always useful for hard barrier testing. And I think most of us would agree a brown bear skull would be a bit of a hard barrier! Ball ammo can get really erratic on hard surfaces, especially when it impacts at angles less then perpendicular. It glances off skulls of all types and windshields are another big issue for it too.

+1

A friend of mine was shot right in the knee dead center with 9mm 147gr HC Flat Point . The bullet slid behind the knee cap and continued straight down towards the back of his ankle were it came out.

[Rich]

If the 147 gr performs better, then why would someone want a 124 gr?

Because I don't care for the impulse the 147gr loads have in my P30S.

Strange I know.

One day I will get another Beretta or Sig? They seem to shoot softer for me.

[nycnoob]

And I think most of us would agree a brown bear skull would be a bit of a hard barrier! Ball ammo can get really erratic on hard surfaces, especially when it impacts at angles less then perpendicular. It glances off skulls of all types and windshields are another big issue for it too.


Do any of the penetration tests use curved surfaces? (ie simulate a skull) I know that there are some which use oblique angles but I believe the surface is flat. I was just thinking of all the anecdotal stories about bullets bouncing off or tracing around a skull.

[Chuck Haggard]

One of the reasons I think the 9mm Ranger-T line is so effective is the sharp leading edge that is rather wadcutter-ish. I have seen these bullets dig in on shots to sheet metal that cause other bullets to ricochet off.

Meplat and ogive make a big difference in what happens in such angle shots on hard surfaces.

[Jeep]

Meplat and ogive make a big difference in what happens in such angle shots on hard surfaces.

Velocity matters also. The faster the round the more likely it will be to penetrate a hard surface, although given the relatively low velocity of most pistol bullets, meplat and ogive might well matter more.

[VT1032]

I finally got a chance to hit the range with these. I had yet to see a picture of an expanded G2 anywhere on the interwebs, so I did a completely non scientific and probably wildly inaccurate water jug test, just to see what the expansion profile looked like. As many suspected, the end results looked a lot like a gold dot and an hst had an illegitimate love child. I only did one shot as I only had 5 jugs so take any "results" with a grain of salt, again, not a scientific test whatsoever. Expansion was pretty awesome, averaging somewhere in the .67-.73 range, but uneven as you can see in the picture. There were definitely some surprises in the results. Two of the most expanded petals almost broke off. There was a definite "tear" at the seam, but it held together. Penetration, from what I can tell from a jug test, was very good with it going through 3 jugs, poking a hole in the 4th, but settling in the bottom of the third. Overall, from this very limited "testing", I am impressed with this round. I'll be carrying it from now on. These were the 54226's.

http://i.imgur.com/TaBnNvr.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/TmlGEJG.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Xkl2OLO.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/1EfHXCy.jpg

[JDM]

Cool pictures! Thanks!

[Suvorov]

Interesting. I'm kind of surprised by the lack of uniformity of the expansion here. Water jugs usually give "picture perfect" expansion in my experience.

[VT1032]

That was sort of my thoughts as well. The two big petals had started to separate and had torn about halfway through the jacket. I tried to do a 147 HST for comparison, but I only had 2 jugs and another partially full one and it went through them.

My suspicion is that it was designed to do so well through barriers/heavy clothing that perhaps just jugs almost caused it to over perform. It almost reminds me of the underwood 147 gold dots where the expansion is huge, but the velocity is stretched to the point that the bullet is starting to come apart.

[RJ]

Very interesting thread.

I hope this G2 ammo takes off in sales; maybe I'll finally be able to find some regular GD 124+p in stock at sgammo.com now. :p

[JBP55]

My Gold Dot 124+P penetrated three water jugs breaking the plastic on the fourth jug and fell inside the third jug with expansion like I have never seen on a 9mm round.
My HST 147+P penetrated the fourth jug and fell between the third and fourth jug and had normal expansion with all the petals pressed against the base of the bullet.
HST 147+P average expansion .699"
Gold Dot 124+P average expansion .936"
No petal breakage on either.

On another note all three 124gr. NATO rounds exited the side of the seventh jug near the rear not striking the #8 jug and were never found.
Was this side exit due to loss of velocity causing the round to go left or right?

[Trajan]

Forgive my ignorance of ballistics, but how does this round outperform the 147gr HST?

[JBP55]

Forgive my ignorance of ballistics, but how does this round outperform the 147gr HST?

Better penetration in Gel, Heavy Cloth, Steel, Wallboard, Plywood, Safety Glass.

[Molon]

Most FMJ 9 mm ammo--which ought to be good enough for a JAG opinion, I'd hope.

This projectile is obviously designed to expand, where as the Sierra MatchKings were not.

[Molon]

Better penetration in Gel, Heavy Cloth, Steel, Wallboard, Plywood, Safety Glass.

Care to post some data to support those claims?

[Symmetry]

Care to post some data to support those claims?

+1

The HSTs that I have just tested have expanded much more robustly, and reliably in water jug tests than the G2 photos that have been posted.

[JBP55]

Care to post some data to support those claims?

The specs. for the current Gold Dot and HST are on the ATK website and the 147gr. Gold Dot has more penetration than the 147gr. HST in every test.
The FBI is Big on Penetration one would expect the new Gold Dot 147gr. G2 to perform better than the current 147gr. round.
Maybe the new G2 ammunition will penetrate like a Gold Dot and expand like a HST.

[Molon]

The specs. for the current Gold Dot and HST are on the ATK website and the 147gr. Gold Dot has more penetration than the 147gr. HST in every test.
The FBI is Big on Penetration one would expect the new Gold Dot 147gr. G2 to perform better than the current 147gr. round.
Maybe the new G2 ammunition will penetrate like a Gold Dot and expand like a HST.

No one is talking about the the current Gold Dots. You claimed that the new Gold Dot G2 has "better penetration in Gel, Heavy Cloth, Steel, Wallboard, Plywood, Safety Glass" than the 147 grain HST. Those are pretty specific claims to be making if you don't have any actual data on the Gold Dot G2 to support those claims.

[Savage Hands]

No one is talking about the the current Gold Dots. You claimed that the new Gold Dot G2 has "better penetration in Gel, Heavy Cloth, Steel, Wallboard, Plywood, Safety Glass" than the 147 grain HST. Those are pretty specific claims to be making if you don't have any actual data on the Gold Dot G2 to support those claims.


I think he's repeating what was said or implied earlier in the thread by the SME's who have tested it but are bound by an NDA. I can't wait for the actual data myself.

[JBP55]

I think he's repeating what was said or implied earlier in the thread by the SME's who have tested it but are bound by an NDA. I can't wait for the actual data myself.

This, and I will buy Molon a Coke if the new Gold Dot 147gr. G2 does not perform as well as the current Gold Dot 147gr.

[DocGKR]

Much like the Hornady Critical Duty and Winchester Ranger Bonded, the Speer G2 is engineered to perform more consistently across the full spectrum of FBI barrier test protocols. Other loads offer better performance in specific test criteria, but don't do as well against other scenarios. Each end user must decide what performance parameters are most important to their possible engagement scenarios and what features are lawful in their jurisdictions.

[VT1032]

+1

The HSTs that I have just tested have expanded much more robustly, and reliably in water jug tests than the G2 photos that have been posted.

That could be, but I wouldn't take my photos out of context. I only did one round. For all I know, that was the black sheep of the bunch or something. Agreed, it wasn't pretty, but it DID punch very deep and expand with near as I can tell 100% weight retention to over .68 when averaged and .73 when not. It's not necessarily better then the best HST's have done in tests, but it's right up there with most HST tests I've seen I have seen, AND it's a bonded bullet! Show me any other non boutique manufacturer 147gr bonded round that will expand like that. It wasn't gorgeous, and I wasn't as impressed as I had hoped to be, but I was still impressed enough to retire my HST's and that says quite a bit.

[VT1032]

Much like the Hornady Critical Duty and Winchester Ranger Bonded, the Speer G2 is engineered to perform more consistently across the full spectrum of FBI barrier test protocols. Other loads offer better performance in specific test criteria, but don't do as well against other scenarios. Each end user must decide what performance parameters are most important to their possible engagement scenarios and what features are lawful in their jurisdictions.

I know you are bound by an NDA, but just a few questions if you can answer them.

Were the results I got in the photos above at all consistent with what you have been seeing or was this a fluke and they normally hold together better in actual gel tests? I was surprised that it almost shed 2 of the petals in just water.

Would you consider these overall to be superior to the 147 HST's? Like I said above, I tried to use my remaining jugs to get one for comparison, but it passed through.

If you can't answer any questions, understood, but any input is appreciated.

[DocGKR]

Polymer tip handgun bullets do some strange things in water testing--that would not be my first choice in testing these...

As always, mission requirements and expected engagement scenarios drive equipment choices.

For my current needs, I am perfectly comfortable using the 147 gr HST I was issued for free.

[Chuck Haggard]

My Gold Dot 124+P penetrated three water jugs breaking the plastic on the fourth jug and fell inside the third jug with expansion like I have never seen on a 9mm round.
My HST 147+P penetrated the fourth jug and fell between the third and fourth jug and had normal expansion with all the petals pressed against the base of the bullet.
HST 147+P average expansion .699"
Gold Dot 124+P average expansion .936"
No petal breakage on either.

On another note all three 124gr. NATO rounds exited the side of the seventh jug near the rear not striking the #8 jug and were never found.
Was this side exit due to loss of velocity causing the round to go left or right?

Your NATO rounds likely started to yaw, which normally means a change in direction also.

[nycnoob]

DocGKR I have been hearing that "modern ammo" (like last 5 years) outperforms the older stuff. This has struck me as strange
as I do not hear much about incremental ammo improvements. Do you think I was hearing about agencies using the new G2?
or has all the ammo actually been getting better the last few years?

[Beat Trash]

DocGKR I have been hearing that "modern ammo" (like last 5 years) outperforms the older stuff. This has struck me as strange
as I do not hear much about incremental ammo improvements. Do you think I was hearing about agencies using the new G2?
or has all the ammo actually been getting better the last few years?

Or it can take forever to get approval to change ammo. We carried the Winchester 147 gr JHP white box loading until 2012. A lot of people had to be convinced there was an issue with the issued ammunition in order to justify the switch. When this load work, it worked well enough. But sometimes it plugged up with clothing and body matter. This was the selling point that got us authorization to switch to the Winchester Ranger T 147 loading. Only because new leadership was able and willing to gather the data of inconsistent expansion during several of our recent (at that time) OIS incidents.

When I retire and I run out of the issued 147 gr Ranger ammunition, I'll most likely try to obtain some of this new G2 loading to carry in my guns. But for now, I'm more concerned about shot placement and good tactics than I am about carrying the Ranger T 147 load.

[Chuck Haggard]

I'm not sure why nycnoob, I see and hear about stuff like this regularly, although much more a few years ago than now.

Even within a line of ammo improvements happen. The first version of the 124gr +P Gold Dot didn't perform nearly as well as the current version, I got to see those improvements first hand and be a party to talking to Speer about what we were seeing on the street.

[Jeep]

This projectile is obviously designed to expand, where as the Sierra MatchKings were not.

Yes--but if the purpose of the expansion is to avoid over-penetration and the resulting potential injury to civilians, one could argue that "customary international law" recognizes that as a greater good that trumps the pre-engineered bullets provisions of the Hague convention, and point to the fact that the world's police forces are now moving to expanding bullets for that purpose.

To put it in a slightly different context, if the groups now campaigning against land mines could be persuaded to also campaign against FMJ pistol bullets because of their potential for wounding children do you have any doubt that the bureaucrats at the State Department might try to persuade the military to adopt hollow point pistol rounds?

These days most "international law" has little to do with law but much to do with the currents among political liberals in Europe and North America. Tap into that and this restriction could be eliminated, I believe.

[Sparks2112]

2765

I was VERY surprised when I shot the G2 in gel. Top row is all G2. There is a fifth round that made it through 32" of Gel that was not recovered. I assume it failed to expand as well. Bottom row is 124gr +P GD, 147gr HST, and 115gr +P Barnes respectively.

I assume I have a bad lot of ammo, but it was still interesting to see.

[MVS]

That is very interesting John.

[Sparks2112]

That is very interesting John.

It'd be a little more interesting to me if I hadn't just purchased 1800 rounds of very very expensive FMJ... :(

[John Hearne]

What's that old saw? A 9mm may expand but.....

[VT1032]

It'd be a little more interesting to me if I hadn't just purchased 1800 rounds of very very expensive FMJ... :(

No kidding. Between yours not expanding and mine falling apart, I'm tempted to go back to the hst. I really hope we are both wrong and when hard data comes out, these don't suck as much as appears...

[Sparks2112]

What's that old saw? A 9mm may expand but.....

2766 yeah yeah.

[hurley842002]

No kidding. Between yours not expanding and mine falling apart, I'm tempted to go back to the hst. I really hope we are both wrong and when hard data comes out, these don't suck as much as appears...
No offense, but I don't know why you would have left the HST to begin with. I realize Speer and the gold dot are probably the most proven round out there, but this variation has no more (that I'm aware of) street cred than the Hornady critical duty. Hopefully for you guys, the tests were just from a bad box.

[DocGKR]

Was that fired into true type 250A calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin at 4 deg C or some type of synthetic gel of dubious correlation with real tissue?

Particularly with the PT bullets, you need to use properly fabricated ordnance gel--not water, not some alternative gel that is "almost as good".

[Sparks2112]

Was that fired into true type 250A calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin at 4 deg C or some type of synthetic gel of dubious correlation with real tissue?

Particularly with the PT bullets, you need to use properly fabricated ordnance gel--not water, not some alternative gel that is "almost as good".

Clear Gel. I was looking for a consistent test medium to use that was easily available to me. :: shrug::

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why every other load I shot into the block(s) behaved exactly the way they're advertised as behaving in bare gel, yet the G2 didn't. What am I missing?

I'm more than willing to send a box from the lot I have to you Doc to see if my results are repeatable under better testing conditions.

[GRV]

Clear Gel. I was looking for a consistent test medium to use that was easily available to me. :: shrug::

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why every other load I shot into the block(s) behaved exactly the way they're advertised as behaving in bare gel, yet the G2 didn't. What am I missing?

I'm more than willing to send a box from the lot I have to you Doc to see if my results are repeatable under better testing conditions.

Well, the PT is a fussy thing by design, right? You want it to make it through all sorts of light barriers unexpanded, yet expand when it hits flesh. So, it makes sense that it might not expand in the wrong type of gel. However, my first guess would be that gels are closer to each other than any are to what would be considered a "barrier". So, if the G2 expansion is really that sensitive to the gel composition, I wonder if one can really trust even the proper ordnance gel to accurately reflect what it will do in a body. That is, if this is entirely attributable to a gel difference, I'm kinda wondering if we really need to wait for field reports before trusting any terminal ballistics claims. I'm curious to hear what Doc has to say.

[Trooper224]

I'm kinda wondering if we really need to wait for field reports before trusting any terminal ballistics claims.

I find that to be generally advisable with any new product.

[MDFA]

I find that to be generally advisable with any new product.

This

I'm a believer in seeing actual street results. And Doc's published data.....

[Chuck Haggard]

I'm curious between two trains of thought;

Either the run of bullets John has are somehow defective (wouldn't be the first such premium LE duty ammo to fail to expand if this is the case).

Or; There is something in the differences between the clear gel and FBI spec gel that allow this anomaly to occur in the polymer tipped handgun bullets. If this is the case it also wouldn't be the first time someone discovered that weird shit happens when you shoot bullets into stuff.


The 124gr +P Gold Dot is currently legendary for how it performs in real life, it wasn't always so. Our first few OISs with that load showed that it underexpanded/overpenetrated rather badly.
In one case we had a solid torso shot on a bad guy, the bullet expanded to about .45cal, penetrated through said bad guy including blasting though the heavy part of the scapula, exited the exterior wall of the house, went though a privacy fence, and entered through the exterior wall of the house across the alley.
We contacted Speer ref our concerns and they actually took the info into consideration, the bullet used in the 124gr loadings was tweeked to allow more expansion, this is the bullet we know today as working so very well on the street.

[VT1032]

No offense, but I don't know why you would have left the HST to begin with. I realize Speer and the gold dot are probably the most proven round out there, but this variation has no more (that I'm aware of) street cred than the Hornady critical duty. Hopefully for you guys, the tests were just from a bad box.

I normally wouldn't, but these appeared to have already been heavily tested and given the seal of approval, even if I hadn't seen the results. They are on "the list" and they are the new FBI load so they must be doing something right. That said, I think I'll be switching back to hst for now.

[El Cid]

2765

I was VERY surprised when I shot the G2 in gel. Top row is all G2. There is a fifth round that made it through 32" of Gel that was not recovered. I assume it failed to expand as well. Bottom row is 124gr +P GD, 147gr HST, and 115gr +P Barnes respectively.

I assume I have a bad lot of ammo, but it was still interesting to see.

Sparks, were these from a box with the 54227 label or 54226? I still haven't been able to chrono the ones I have but I'm wondering if the 54226 being sold on the open market isn't stuff that was pre-final design.

[Chuck Haggard]

I do think a crono reading needs to be done on said ammo..........

[GJM]

I normally wouldn't, but these appeared to have already been heavily tested and given the seal of approval, even if I hadn't seen the results. They are on "the list" and they are the new FBI load so they must be doing something right. That said, I think I'll be switching back to hst for now.

I sure am disappointed -- I thought this new G2 was going to turn the 9 into a .40 or .45. :)

[Beat Trash]

I'm not disappointed. Sometimes weird things happen when testing ammo. We hosted ATK and Winchester in 2011. The 147 gr HST loading failed to expand twice during one portion of the test. Do I think the HST is a bad loading? Not at all. But sometimes odd things happen.

I do think the testing done by Sparks is interesting. It is also an example of why it is nice if you can include a crono into the testing when shooting gel.

I do know that there has been a lot of testing on the G2 load. And unfortunately there have also been a lot of ND agreements preventing this testing from becoming general knowledge. It will be interesting to see the data on the G2 load and it's development, once the information becomes available.

Once I retire and have to buy my own ammunition, I may look at this G2 load for my guns. But for now, I won't loose any sleep carrying the Winchester 147 gr Ranger T ammunition that is issued to me.

I'm more worried about shot placement and appropriate tactics, and doing so before my opponent can do the same to me.

[Sparks2112]

A chronograph has been ordered. I'm also going to try and cook up a batch of FBI Gel + order some more clear Gel to see if there's some sort of discrepancy between the two.

The simplest answer to me still remains bad bullets. When I have a total of 7 other rounds fired into the same material, out of 3 different firearms, that all performed ideally (penetration in the 12"-15" range, perfect expansion) and 5 rounds of G2, 4 of which failed, then it's hard for me to draw any other conclusion. I've been told by multiple sources that polymer tipped bullets act differently. I guess I'll snag some critical defense and critical duty to see how they perform as well.

[VT1032]

Sparks, were these from a box with the 54227 label or 54226? I still haven't been able to chrono the ones I have but I'm wondering if the 54226 being sold on the open market isn't stuff that was pre-final design.

I had this thought as well. Mine are the 54226's. The 54227's are the gov marked ones and presumably the FBI load.

[Mike C]

Well, the PT is a fussy thing by design, right? You want it to make it through all sorts of light barriers unexpanded, yet expand when it hits flesh. So, it makes sense that it might not expand in the wrong type of gel. However, my first guess would be that gels are closer to each other than any are to what would be considered a "barrier". So, if the G2 expansion is really that sensitive to the gel composition, I wonder if one can really trust even the proper ordnance gel to accurately reflect what it will do in a body. That is, if this is entirely attributable to a gel difference, I'm kinda wondering if we really need to wait for field reports before trusting any terminal ballistics claims. I'm curious to hear what Doc has to say.

I think the point dove brought up is very interesting. It makes me wonder which is more critical in the causing expansion of the G2 in gel, velocity window or the elastomer. I wonder if variance in the density of the elastomer could cause complete failure to expand. If the proper expansion of the round is completely reliant upon the elastomers calibrated density, (within velocity threshold) I don't know that I would want to rely upon it. Doc, can you shed light upon any of this without breaking any NDA's?

[Symmetry]

Those gel tests sure bring quite a bit of doubt about the G2 in my mind. If it takes a secret gel recipe and specific velocity windows to get some reliability out of the round, then "thanks, but no thanks".......especially considering the price. I considered getting a few hundred based on Doc's endorsement, but I have too may doubts now.

[ST911]

Some bullet folks much smarter than I have told me that bullet tests conducted outside of the established industry protocols range from possibly interesting at best to more commonly worthless, and to treat them accordingly. Does that remain valid?

[GRV]

I'm curious between two trains of thought;

Either the run of bullets John has are somehow defective (wouldn't be the first such premium LE duty ammo to fail to expand if this is the case).

Or; There is something in the differences between the clear gel and FBI spec gel that allow this anomaly to occur in the polymer tipped handgun bullets. If this is the case it also wouldn't be the first time someone discovered that weird shit happens when you shoot bullets into stuff.
[...]


I think the point dove brought up is very interesting. It makes me wonder which is more critical in the causing expansion of the G2 in gel, velocity window or the elastomer. I wonder if variance in the density of the elastomer could cause complete failure to expand. If the proper expansion of the round is completely reliant upon the elastomers calibrated density, (within velocity threshold) I don't know that I would want to rely upon it. Doc, can you shed light upon any of this without breaking any NDA's?

Another thing going through my mind is that there seems to be a lot of variation in body composition. Fat, flabby person; average person; hard, muscular person, etc. I'm no expert on ballistics gel, in fact I have no experience at all with it, but my first inclination is to think that it, at best, can only simulate one point on the spectrum. I also wonder what materials are closer in variance: ballistics gels or different bodies. I realize the snafu with gels is that if you don't have a standardized product then you have no idea what you're really looking at and you might as well be shooting into a box of leftovers from whatever's on today's specials menu at the local restaurant. However, the human body strikes me as a relatively high-variance thing, and I know first hand that science and engineering models are just that, models, and that every model is only of limited usefulness.

What I'm wondering now is if the G2 has been designed to ace the test, inadvertently or not. You all know how it goes with standardized tests, PFTs, etc. The best way to ace them is to learn how to take them, not necessarily by being amazing at the fundamentals supposedly being tested. If that's what is happening here, then the G2 would be a demonstration in the limitations of current FBI testing protocol. It wouldn't be the first time the FBI came to such a conclusion after some difficult fact-facing in the field: that the test is flawed. The "high-tech" feel of the G2 seems gamey enough to make this possibility not seem farfetched, and we really don't have a ton of hard field data on PT ammo in general, if I understand correctly.

Bear in mind, this is all armchair fun---unqualified pondering. I have no experience with ballistics gel, and I think we are all getting ahead of ourselves. First we should wait to see the data, which should be showing up in the next few months I'd imagine. Beyond that, I agree with the sentiment echoed by a few here that it'd really be wise for anyone thinking about switching to wait on a good deal of hard field data. We already have awesome candidates for carry ammo with battle-proven pedigrees; is anyone really hurting for something better? The FBI has basically made the decision to beta-test this new idea, and we should be extremely grateful for that, because that means we'll get to see a ton of data, data that none of us could generate, for free and without taking the risk. Meanwhile though, it is fun to pass the time playing Sherlock Holmes, and I'm definitely looking forward to seeing some more homebrew tests :cool:

I too am curious about the role of the 54226/54227-GOV issue here.

[Sparks2112]

I spoke with an engineer at ATK. He was VERY concerned about my test results. I'm sending him some of my ammo to see if he can duplicate my results. Glad to see them taking this seriously.

[El Cid]

I spoke with an engineer at ATK. He was VERY concerned about my test results. I'm sending him some of my ammo to see if he can duplicate my results. Glad to see them taking this seriously.
Does your ammo have product number 54226 or 54227 on the box?

[DocGKR]

dove--Please review the Wolberg SDPD study comparing autopsy results in OIS incidents with effects in 10% ordnance gelatin.

Properly prepared and calibrated 10% ordnance gel at 4 deg C is not some kind of magical secret; it has been the industry standard now for 30 years for good reason.

[Jeep]

I spoke with an engineer at ATK. He was VERY concerned about my test results. I'm sending him some of my ammo to see if he can duplicate my results. Glad to see them taking this seriously.

When you do the test again, perhaps it would be good to use the 4 layers of denim as well (my assumption being that you didn't use it in the first test)? That might be an important variable.

[El Cid]

As a follow-up to my post about the G26 hitting 10" high with the G2 ammo, I spoke with Eric at Trijicon and he mentioned a LEO in GA has done a bunch of research on the matter. On his recommendation I installed a standard HD rear and a .245" high HD front. As you can see the group is where it needs to be at 25 yards.

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/Mobile%20Uploads/IMAG0247_1_zps1ceaa69a.jpg

[JBP55]

For a G19 the standard HD rear is.231 and the front is .215. You changed the height of the front sight by .030 which would change your POI approximately 5" at 25 yards.
What happened to the other 5"?

[Jay Cunningham]

That's what she said.

[Sparks2112]

When you do the test again, perhaps it would be good to use the 4 layers of denim as well (my assumption being that you didn't use it in the first test)? That might be an important variable.

I told him how I tested the rounds in question, and the results I got with my control rounds. He said "They shouldn't be doing that." or something along those lines. In hearing some of the results they've gotten in their testing, including an interesting one involving a G26, I believe him.

Curious to see what the problem ends up being.

[El Cid]

For a G19 the standard HD rear is.231 and the front is .215. You changed the height of the front sight by .030 which would change your POI approximately 5" at 25 yards.
What happened to the other 5"?

The sights used the other day were the Trijicon"regular" night sights (GL01), not HD's. The target I posted is with HD rears and the taller HD front. I asked them about what would work if I switched to HD's - not what front would fix the older sights.

[NotAnExpert]

By definition, a model is a simplified version of a system that intentionally ignores certain details and complexities to focus on key factors of interest. Not all models are created equal, but good models are useful as long as they can consistently and accurately predict results in the real world.

There is a lot of support out there for the adequacy of proper ballistics gel testing, and our resident expert says so as well.

So can someone design a product from the ground up to perform well in, or even ace a given test? I'd say yes. But if this test is a good model for bullet performance in the real world, why wouldn't you aim to ace that test?

[El Cid]

So can someone design a product from the ground up to perform well in, or even ace a given test? I'd say yes. But if this test is a good model for bullet performance in the real world, why wouldn't you aim to ace that test?

Good point, especially since the failure in real world shootings will still mean the product fails and falls into disuse.

[nycnoob]

Properly prepared and calibrated 10% ordnance gel at 4 deg C is not some kind of magical secret; it has been the industry standard now for 30 years for good reason.

Doc, my reading of MacPherson is that even "Swedish Soap" could be used with the correct protocolls:
(for this quote you need to know that "high velocity" is defined as over 600 ft/sec)


"the high velocity penetration model is qualitatively the same in soft solids and low viscosity liquids. This somewhat counter intuitiveresult is not only true for ordnance gelatin but also for soft solids that do not appear at all like tissue (eg soap). This model shows that the only relevant soft solid stimulant parameter at high velocity is density. Most popular stimulants (soap gelatin at any mixture) have densities close to that of tissue and so give good simulation of tissue in high velocity penetrations (but not necessarily at low velocities when viscosity effects are important)." P77 of Bullet Penetration 2nd edition.


It would seem to me that even if it was tested in some nonstandard gell that would expect "similar" results though not exactly something that you would want to publish the data points of.
It would seem that bullet expansion should be robust with respect to the test medium.

[Sparks2112]

Doc, my reading of MacPherson is that even "Swedish Soap" could be used with the correct protocolls:
(for this quote you need to know that "high velocity" is defined as over 600 ft/sec)



It would seem to me that even if it was tested in some nonstandard gell that would expect "similar" results though not exactly something that you would want to publish the data points of.
It would seem that bullet expansion should be robust with respect to the test medium.

The ATK engineer didn't suggest even once that the gel had anything to do with why the bullets didn't expand. His immediate reaction was that there was something wrong with the ammunition I had.

[Sigfan26]

I'm gonna stick with the stuff i got (Doc's list, minus the G2). If it works in clear gel AND ordnance gelatin, I'm not gonna doubt it!

[GRV]

dove--Please review the Wolberg SDPD study comparing autopsy results in OIS incidents with effects in 10% ordnance gelatin.

Properly prepared and calibrated 10% ordnance gel at 4 deg C is not some kind of magical secret; it has been the industry standard now for 30 years for good reason.

Thanks for the reference! I just gave it a read. It looks like bodies are indeed pretty high variance, but the gel does a good job of being a guideline for the average overall performance. I didn't doubt that, because in 30 years, if it wasn't damn good, we wouldn't have stuck with it; the faults would have been exposed.

What I'm getting at is something that Wolberg's scientifically prudent language leaves open:

[...] it is concluded that this gelatin can be a useful predictor of this bullet's penetration and expansion characteristics in shots in the human torso.
(emphasis added)

Ballistics gelatin has worked for 30 years, but the Critical-Duty/G2-style PT is a new innovation, as I understand it, and it seems like a pretty significant deviation from the past 30 years of design, with purposefully different dynamics. Based on my experience in seeing highly trusted models overturned elsewhere in the sciences, it just strikes me as the sort of turning point that might lead to such a paradigm shift.

I'm definitely not looking to ruffle any feathers here, and I personally think it is probably nothing so grand at work here, but rather something much more mundane like a bad batch of rounds. Like I said I'm just tossing thoughts around to pass the time :p

[NotAnExpert]

Ballistics gelatin has worked for 30 years, but the Critical-Duty/G2-style PT is a new innovation, as I understand it, and it seems like a pretty significant deviation from the past 30 years of design, with purposefully different dynamics. Based on my experience in seeing highly trusted models overturned elsewhere in the sciences, it just strikes me as the sort of turning point that might lead to such a paradigm shift.

This is certainly a possibility, as far as modeling is concerned. I am by no means implying that such rounds can't be modeled by ballistics gel. I have not the data nor the experience to make a judgement one way or the other.

But, by no means should we jump to conclusions based off of the limited, non-scientific testing we have seen on this ammo thus far.

[GRV]

But, by no means should we jump to conclusions based off of the limited, non-scientific testing we have seen on this ammo thus far.
Absolutely agreed. I hope I didn't give the impression that I was concluding anything here. The chain of events just has my brain pondering the possibilities.

[Symmetry]

I'm gonna stick with the stuff i got (Doc's list, minus the G2). If it works in clear gel AND ordnance gelatin, I'm not gonna doubt it!

I might just go ahead and grab a box for testing, but I do agree that I would have MUCH more trust in a modern, traditional HP design like the HST. The only time I want my projectiles to expand is when they encounter a hydraulic media such as tissue, and that projectile should expand under a broad range of tissue densities and water concentrations. It seems that the shallow HP cavity, combined with the polymer filling on the G2 was setup to make the ogive section of the projectile more durable and increase case capacity.....likely to ace the windshield test. At this point I would give the technology some more time to mature(if it has merit), before I trust it with my life.

[El Cid]

The ATK engineer didn't suggest even once that the gel had anything to do with why the bullets didn't expand. His immediate reaction was that there was something wrong with the ammunition I had.

And would that ammunition be in a box like the one on the left? Or the one on the right? Thanks!

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/G2AmmoBoxes_zps59f448b5.jpg

[Sparks2112]

And would that ammunition be in a box like the one on the left? Or the one on the right? Thanks!

http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/G2AmmoBoxes_zps59f448b5.jpg

54226, but that shouldn't matter either. The only difference between the two is the intended end user.

[GRV]

54226, but that shouldn't matter either. The only difference between the two is the intended end user.

That was my speculation, but I'm not sure if we've seen any conclusive evidence to suggest that, besides the GOV marking on the 54227. Didn't we find that the headstamps on the 54227 floating around are 2014 and the 54226 are 2013?

Did the ATK engineer confirm this or offer any other details on the G2 you can share?

[Sparks2112]

That was my speculation, but I'm not sure if we've seen any conclusive evidence to suggest that, besides the GOV marking on the 54227. Didn't we find that the headstamps on the 54227 floating around are 2014 and the 54226 are 2013?

Did the ATK engineer confirm this or offer any other details on the G2 you can share?

I know for a fact that the only difference between the 54227/54226 is the intended end user. Let's just leave it at that for now. :)

[DocGKR]

That is correct--same ammo.

[Chuck Haggard]

I have to wonder if the variable is in the polymer filler in the hollow point cavity, and if there is any aging effect that occurs when the ammo gets older that hasn't been previously discovered i testing.

[nycnoob]

I have to wonder if the variable is in the polymer filler in the hollow point cavity, and if there is any aging effect that occurs when the ammo gets older that hasn't been previously discovered i testing.

Do you have any info that lead to this conclusion? IT appears to be a big leap from "its a bad batch in our new product" to a very specific hypothesis.

[Chuck Haggard]

Just thinking about possible variables that would effect the testing.

[Sparks2112]

Just thinking about possible variables that would effect the testing.

I believe that has been ruled out.

[Gio]

I posted this group in a thread on the Marksmanship forum, but it may be relevant here as well. This is a 5 shot group I fired at 25 yards tonight with this 147gr GD2 ammo standing/unsupported with my stock gen4 Glock 19. POI/POA was right on (held center of upper A zone). POI did not differ at all from 147gr Winchester Ranger Bonded or 147gr Gold Dot.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e342/givo08/IMG_4066.jpg

[Savage Hands]

Nice job!

[El Cid]

I posted this group in a thread on the Marksmanship forum, but it may be relevant here as well. This is a 5 shot group I fired at 25 yards tonight with this 147gr GD2 ammo standing/unsupported with my stock gen4 Glock 19. POI/POA was right on (held center of upper A zone). POI did not differ at all from 147gr Winchester Ranger Bonded or 147gr Gold Dot.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e342/givo08/IMG_4066.jpg

Good shooting. Which sights were you using?

[Jeep]

I posted this group in a thread on the Marksmanship forum, but it may be relevant here as well. This is a 5 shot group I fired at 25 yards tonight with this 147gr GD2 ammo standing/unsupported with my stock gen4 Glock 19. POI/POA was right on (held center of upper A zone). POI did not differ at all from 147gr Winchester Ranger Bonded or 147gr Gold Dot.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e342/givo08/IMG_4066.jpg

I envy your ability to see the upper A zone at 25 meters! Nice shooting, by the way.

[Sparks2112]

Should have some "official" test results sometime next week.

[GeeDeeTee215]

As with any new product, one is likely to encounter a few teething problems initially. But without stepping into new territory, we'd never make any technological advances.

[Rich]

Will the regular JHP gold dots be replaced with the newer bullet JHP w/PT

[DocGKR]

No--both will be available.

[Gio]

Good shooting. Which sights were you using?

That is with standard trijicon 3 dot sights.

[Rich]

No--both will be available.

Than you

Do you have any plans on testing the Winchester low recoil standard pressure 38spl 130gr & 9mm 147gr Both bonded

[delta59]

I picked up two 50 round boxes of it yesterday at a Gun Show in Harrisburg PA. At a price of $30 a box, it was being sold at the same price as the 124gr+P rounds. I had already bought a couple boxes of the 124+P from him, but asked if I could trade it back when he showed me the G2. Its a small outfit out of Ohio, I have the receipt at home and can post their contact info... after I pick up a few more boxes at the Gun Show he will be at next weekend.

[Sparks2112]

2880
ATK sent me a different lot of ammunition to test. The 4 on the right are the old batch, 4 on the left are the new. Same testing procedure, so apparently I'm not crazy after all. ;)

[Wayne Dobbs]

What was the test protocol?

[VT1032]

What was the expansion and penetration on those? Did you measure?

[Symmetry]

Anybody run these through a chronograph yet?

[Rich]

I think Ill will stick with the older 9mm ammo for now .

[ILoveSigs]

Any updates?

I'd love to see chrono numbers on this stuff, I'd love to see gel data even more.

[2alpha-down0]

This guy claims to have some 180gr .40 G2. Legit, or someone with standard GD and a hot glue gun?

http://www.armslist.com/posts/3696543/nova-ammo-for-sale---40-s-w-speer-gold-dot-g2-duty-180-gr--boxes-of-50

[JBP55]

What's up with him selling it for half price!

[lyodbraun]

To bad he don't ship it, I'd love to test some into some gel...

[hurley842002]

This guy claims to have some 180gr .40 G2. Legit, or someone with standard GD and a hot glue gun?

http://www.armslist.com/posts/3696543/nova-ammo-for-sale---40-s-w-speer-gold-dot-g2-duty-180-gr--boxes-of-50
If you look closely at the picture, there are "cuts" down the outside of the bullet, certainly not standard gold dot and hot glue.

[LSP972]

2880[/ATTACH]
ATK sent me a different lot of ammunition to test. The 4 on the right are the old batch, 4 on the left are the new. Same testing procedure, so apparently I'm not crazy after all. ;)



Sparks, the ones I shot in the water tank yesterday must have been from that same "bad" batch. Spotty to none expansion, yet they didn't "penetrate" into the tank any further than other various JHPs I've fired into that same tank. These cartridges came from a friend interested in this stuff; no clue where he got them, what the box marking was, etc. The first three were shot out of his G26, two of which didn't expand at all. The second three were shot out of his G17; all three of these expanded somewhat but not impressively. They did, however, make it about a foot farther, penetration-wise.

All in all, rather unimpressive (to me). That said, I am certain that the feebs have exhaustively tested this stuff before choosing it. If I was still working (and carrying a 9mm), I might give it a shot for the improved penetration. However, anything I might be unfortunate enough to have to shoot will likely be unprotected meat; so I'll stay with HST, thank you.

.

.

[abu fitna]

LSP972, would love some images of the partially expanded test samples if you can manage this. I am very curious about test results for this ammunition.

Do you have any evidence to indicate that water testing (vice gel) for expansion would produce different results for this round than any other designs? Have you seen any differences with EFMJ or with Critical Duty / Critical Defense testing?

[LSP972]

LSP972, would love some images of the partially expanded test samples if you can manage this. I am very curious about test results for this ammunition.

Do you have any evidence to indicate that water testing (vice gel) for expansion would produce different results for this round than any other designs? Have you seen any differences with EFMJ or with Critical Duty / Critical Defense testing?

The only EFMJ "experience" I have is with two examples of 9mm Federal Guard Dog that came out of deceased miscreants. In both cases, they expanded as advertised and both individuals were DRT, according to the reports. That is some interesting ammunition, and one of the low-priority projects we have here is to examine the concept further, for our own edification. If the locals will stop shooting each other... and at the po-lice... long enough to give us a breather, we might actually get around to it.

In regards to the other request, check your PM.

.

[Chuck Haggard]

I have some 124gr +P EFMJ I can send you if you'd like. Left over from my trip to NJ a few years ago.

[LSP972]

I have some 124gr +P EFMJ I can send you if you'd like. Left over from my trip to NJ a few years ago.

I accept.

You make it back from the hinterlands okay?

.

[Chuck Haggard]

I accept.

You make it back from the hinterlands okay?

.

Yes, sort of. My ebola flared back up. Was kind of a miserable trip.

[LSP972]

Have you seen any differences with Critical Duty / Critical Defense testing?

I just realized I forgot to answer this part of your question. What made me realize it was the several little red plastic pellets floating around in our test tank. This is the cheif thing I've noticed about Critical Duty/Critical Defense (whichever one features that). It is a big-time PITA for us, as those little buggers must all be retrieved before draining the tank (which we do bi-monthly) or they will totally FUBAR the filtration system.

IOW, we've shot some of them, as reference matches in a few cases (and obviously recently), but with the existence and relatively easy obtainability of HST and Ranger T, I personally have simply had no interest in them, and noting of note (good or bad, excepting those triple-damned little pellets) that I know of has come up about them. Now that I think about it, I've yet to see a "meat bullet" example of them come through here.

Sorry I don't have anything positive to tell you.

.

[Chuck Haggard]

A friend in Gary was seeing the Defense ammo regularly in local murders during the great ammo drought. His theory was that the bangers couldn't find their normal ball ammo and had to spring for the more expensive ammo. He noted that the cases involving .38s, 9mms and .40s we saw showed that the rounds worked as intended, although one of the incidents with a .40 involved shed jackets in the victim.

[El Cid]

Interesting article.

http://www.policeone.com/police-products/firearms/accessories/ammunition/articles/8175806-2-ammo-lines-unveil-new-bullets-at-SHOT-Show/

"The G2 bullet starts life the same way as the traditional Gold Dot bullet, as a lead core with an electrochemically-bonded copper jacket. A star-shaped punch is used to stab the bullet's nose and cut all the way through the jacket, forming stress risers. At the base of these cuts is a circular ring around the outside of the jacket that Speer engineers call the "hinge," whose purpose is to limit the amount of expansion as the petals of the bullet open up.

Interestingly, when the bullet is run through the final shaping dies, there is only a shallow dish of a cavity left in the nose. This dish is filled with liquid elastomer, which hardens as it cures. Upon bullet impact, this plug forces the bullet to open up along its star-shaped fissures and initiate the expansion that is limited by the hinge.

Since expansion is mechanically driven, and not hydrostatically driven (as it is on the standard Gold Dot), the G2 bullet performs more consistently after penetrating barriers, which can plug or deform open cavity designs and alter penetration depth.

In fact, Speer engineers tell me that penetration consistently reaches the 14 to 16 inch optimum range of the new FBI standards. This exceeds the typical 12 to 14 inch penetration achieved by the older Gold Dot, which was engineered to meet an earlier specification that could sometimes encourage shallower penetration.

The new G2 bullet will be loaded into nickel cases using low flash powders, and will initially be offered as a 147 grain 9mm, a 180 grain .40 S&W, and a 230 grain .45 ACP +P."

[Jeep]

The new G2 bullet will be loaded into nickel cases using low flash powders, and will initially be offered as a 147 grain 9mm, a 180 grain .40 S&W, and a 230 grain .45 ACP +P."

That .45 +P is interesting. I wonder if that implies that they couldn't get the bullet to work correctly at normal .45 velocities, and thus wanted to get it into the same velocity window as the 148 and 180 grain rounds?

[Sigfan26]

That .45 +P is interesting. I wonder if that implies that they couldn't get the bullet to work correctly at normal .45 velocities, and thus wanted to get it into the same velocity window as the 148 and 180 grain rounds?

Guessing somebody with enough purchasing power wanted a +p version, so initial efforts were focused on it.

[Rich]

This guy claims to have some 180gr .40 G2. Legit, or someone with standard GD and a hot glue gun?

http://www.armslist.com/posts/3696543/nova-ammo-for-sale---40-s-w-speer-gold-dot-g2-duty-180-gr--boxes-of-50

I would think Speer would offer other calibers. 40S&W / 357sig 45ACP.

How about a G2 38spl +P that weights 158gr

[2alpha-down0]

I would think Speer would offer other calibers. 40S&W / 357sig 45ACP.

How about a G2 38spl +P that weights 158gr

I never imagined that Speer would stop with just a 9mm offering. I just find it odd that, as far as I know anyway, this guys auction was its first public appearance.


Sent from my iThingy using Tapawhatsit

[VT1032]

New article on this round.

http://americanhandgunner.com/atk-ammo-test-results/

[eyemahm]

2880
ATK sent me a different lot of ammunition to test. The 4 on the right are the old batch, 4 on the left are the new. Same testing procedure, so apparently I'm not crazy after all. ;)

Can you post the new and old lot numbers?

tnoutdoors9 had similar expansion issues with lot M10V21, which I believe refers to December 10, 2014 production, lot 21.

[Rich]

New article on this round.

http://americanhandgunner.com/atk-ammo-test-results/

Not to impressed with 15inches bare gel. I bet the regular 147 GD comes close to that

[JBP55]

Not to impressed with 15inches bare gel. I bet the regular 147 GD comes close to that

On the Speer website the 147gr. Gold Dot shows 12.58 in Gel.

[JBP55]

Shot some Gold Dot G2 into water jugs today and they expanded like a typical 147gr. Gold Dot and stopped in the 4th jug. The 124+P Gold Dot stayed in the 3rd jug and dented the 4th jug.
The 147+P HST stayed in the 3rd jug but left a hole in the 4th jug. All expanded as expected.

[eyemahm]

How many rounds of each? Any pics?

[JBP55]

How many rounds of each? Any pics?

Only 2 rounds of each before I ran out of jugs. I do not know how to post pictures.

[Chuck Haggard]

Only 2 rounds of each before I ran out of jugs. I do not know how to post pictures.

If you wanna e-mail me the picks I'll post them for you.

[JBP55]

If you wanna e-mail me the picks I'll post them for you.

Sent by a member of the local LEA FTU.

[Chuck Haggard]

31523153

[JDM]

Does this bullet do something the other 9MM loads on the list don't?

(Spare me the "yeah, it doesn't expand" jokes please.)

[Jeep]

I believe that the theory was that--on average--it would have better expansion and penetration than anything else and would do well on barriers.

But, as Doc says, it is still early days.

[JHC]

Interesting article.

http://www.policeone.com/police-products/firearms/accessories/ammunition/articles/8175806-2-ammo-lines-unveil-new-bullets-at-SHOT-Show/

"The G2 bullet starts life the same way as the traditional Gold Dot bullet, as a lead core with an electrochemically-bonded copper jacket. A star-shaped punch is used to stab the bullet's nose and cut all the way through the jacket, forming stress risers. At the base of these cuts is a circular ring around the outside of the jacket that Speer engineers call the "hinge," whose purpose is to limit the amount of expansion as the petals of the bullet open up.

Interestingly, when the bullet is run through the final shaping dies, there is only a shallow dish of a cavity left in the nose. This dish is filled with liquid elastomer, which hardens as it cures. Upon bullet impact, this plug forces the bullet to open up along its star-shaped fissures and initiate the expansion that is limited by the hinge.

Since expansion is mechanically driven, and not hydrostatically driven (as it is on the standard Gold Dot), the G2 bullet performs more consistently after penetrating barriers, which can plug or deform open cavity designs and alter penetration depth.

In fact, Speer engineers tell me that penetration consistently reaches the 14 to 16 inch optimum range of the new FBI standards. This exceeds the typical 12 to 14 inch penetration achieved by the older Gold Dot, which was engineered to meet an earlier specification that could sometimes encourage shallower penetration.

The new G2 bullet will be loaded into nickel cases using low flash powders, and will initially be offered as a 147 grain 9mm, a 180 grain .40 S&W, and a 230 grain .45 ACP +P."

New FB I penetration standards. I can't recall seeing explanations out and about re those or why that came to be. Is that years old news or what?

[DocGKR]

The FBI penetration standard remains 12-18".

[El Cid]

Spoke with an agent today. The FBI has issued a recall for the G2 ammo. They are using the Winchester Ranger in the mean time.

[Handgun Planet]

Haven't seen anyone answer this, but I was getting 988-1000 through a Glock 17.

They have the consistency part down from a velocity standpoint if they can get the other issues fixed.

[the Schwartz]

Sparks, the ones I shot in the water tank yesterday must have been from that same "bad" batch. Spotty to none expansion, yet they didn't "penetrate" into the tank any further than other various JHPs I've fired into that same tank. These cartridges came from a friend interested in this stuff; no clue where he got them, what the box marking was, etc. The first three were shot out of his G26, two of which didn't expand at all. The second three were shot out of his G17; all three of these expanded somewhat but not impressively. They did, however, make it about a foot farther, penetration-wise.

All in all, rather unimpressive (to me). That said, I am certain that the feebs have exhaustively tested this stuff before choosing it. If I was still working (and carrying a 9mm), I might give it a shot for the improved penetration. However, anything I might be unfortunate enough to have to shoot will likely be unprotected meat; so I'll stay with HST, thank you.

.

.

I am kind of surprised to hear this. Anything that won't expand in water is unlikely to do well in ordnance gel.


For Symmetry:

From my plain-Jane stock Glock 17, the 54226 gave me the following chronograph data...

1002
995
991
994
973
988
987
999
1001
992

Hi- 1002
Lo- 973
Avg- 992.2
ExtSpr- 29
SD- 8.02

Elev- 635 ft ASL, Temp 51F

[MKE.guns]

What is the current status of the Speer Gold Dot G2 147 grain 9mm, has it been recalled? I have 10 boxes of the stuff not sure what to do with the stuff since it does not expand reliably.

I have switched to Federal HST's 147 grain +P 9mm for now.

Thank you.

[mag360]

Shoot it into wet phonebooks covered in denim and use as paperweights

[DocGKR]

There is a re-designed version of the G2 out now that purportedly works as intended.

[Luke]

How will we be able to tell the difference in the new vs old? Did they pull all the old G2 from the shelves? (Sorry if this has been covered in the last 24 pages)

[gruntjim]

At what lot number does the redesign start?

[DocGKR]

Don't know yet. The new and improved stuff came in a white box with black lettering, unlike the old version which was in a black box.

[JBP55]

Don't know yet. The new and improved stuff came in a white box with black lettering, unlike the old version which was in a black box.

Will Speer exchange New Design G2 for Old Design G2?

[DocGKR]

Since I don't work for Speer, I have no idea.

Did the old ammo not meet your contract specification? Does it demonstrate poor accuracy? From a terminal performance perspective it is no worse than Hydrashok, XTP, or numerous other JHP designs that people still purchase, so I am not sure you will be able to return it for that reason unless your contract specifically mandated specific terminal performance criteria...

[Jeep]

Let's hope that Speer does the right thing and swaps new boxes for old. Makes good business sense, too. The response that "hey, it's not any worse that Hydrashok" is unlikely to win them many fans.

[lyodbraun]

So have there been any updates on this new ammo??? Is it working like it should be and expanding 100% ??? Haven't heard any more chatter on this?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Hauptmann]

Would like to hear more about this ammo. We have a bunch of the black box stuff in the armory that I am wondering if it should be moved to the training ammo stack.

[Gio]

So have there been any updates on this new ammo??? Is it working like it should be and expanding 100% ??? Haven't heard any more chatter on this?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Yes, the white box version is good to go and one of, if not the best, 9mm service round available.

[Trajan]

Has there been an official recall? ATK is dumping some sort of G2.
http://i.imgur.com/HJuhP1j.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/SxfFzMi.jpg

[Luke]

Where did you get that and how much??

[JBP55]

Yes, Speer recalled the first shipments of Gold Dot G2 in the Black box. The Gold Dot G2 ammunition was revised and the newer Gold Dot G2 is in a White box.

[GRV]

Anyone have a picture of the new, white box? I can't find one on the internet yet.

Also curious to see if any of the markings or model numbers have changed.

[JBP55]

Anyone have a picture of the new, white box? I can't find one on the internet yet.

Also curious to see if any of the markings or model numbers have changed.

I was told Quantico would receive their ammunition before it became readily available elsewhere.

[Wayne Dobbs]

Has there been an official recall? ATK is dumping some sort of G2.
http://i.imgur.com/HJuhP1j.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/SxfFzMi.jpg

Can you advise the source vendor and approximate price on this?

[Trajan]

Can you advise the source vendor and approximate price on this?

A local PD distributor. $199 for 1050 rds packaged in 350 round boxes (loose).

[Luke]

A local PD distributor. $199 for 1050 rds packaged in 350 round boxes (loose).

That's smokin! If you wanna sell some I might know a guy :)

[Trooper224]

I still fail to understand why people are so dertermined to get their hands on this stuff right N-O-W. We have plenty of loads that work quite well with excellent track records. Why do you feel the need to immediately jump on this new bandwagon? The rounds already had one glitch. I just don't see the logic in off handedly throwing out what is known to work in favor of something that's as yet untested. Don't be so quick to taste the flavor of the week, let the feebs be the beta testers and shoot some folks with it first.