Gel test: 9mm & .45 ACP Polycase Inceptor ARX

[Andrew Wiggin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WW88w0xThY

Link for phones (https://youtu.be/1WW88w0xThY)


9mm 74 gr ARX fired from 4.5" Glock 22 with Lone Wolf 9mm conversion barrel and .45 ACP 114 gr ARX fired from 5" 1911A1.

Unfortunately, this block failed calibration but only by a small margin. This means that the penetration results are slightly inaccurate, but otherwise, it should still be a reasonably accurate representation of potential and still probably more accurate than Clearballistics gel. The BB calibration result was 498.1 fps and 4.1". Max allowed penetration is 3.75". That said, the gel blocks are approximately 14" long.

Full disclosure: This ammunition was provided at no cost to me by the manufacturer.

[Jeep]

Thanks again, Andrew. Both of these seem to have some nasty wounding potential in the first six inches, and might be effective if they hit enough blood vessels, etc., but otherwise the penetrating party of the round is pretty small and light.

[Andrew Wiggin]

I believe that the appearance of the track is deceptive. Here's an article I wrote about the test and the manufacturer's claims:

http://www.homedefensegun.net/polycase-arx-inceptor/

[Jeep]

I believe that the appearance of the track is deceptive. Here's an article I wrote about the test and the manufacturer's claims:

http://www.homedefensegun.net/polycase-arx-inceptor/

I agree with your article with one slight modification--the fragmentation (and the process of fragmentation) is going to create its own wound channels, and that might create bleeding. I think that is part of what we are seeing in the gel (though only part).

Still, I remember back in the 1970's, when people were driving 110 grain hollowpoints at high velocities from .357 magnums. Those bullets tended to semi-explode on contact, and made very nasty--but pretty shallow--wounds. So if you happened to hit a bunch of blood vessels, maybe they would create incapacitation, but they didn't penetrate very far(unless they failed to open) which meant that most of the time they had poor stopping performance. (Except on small rodents. They were sensational on small rodents).

I think that these rounds probably do somewhat the same. If you get a chance, hit a jack rabbit with one. I think you'll be impressed by the result.

[Andrew Wiggin]

The fragmentation is unintentional and, according to the manufacturer, rare. It's also worth noting that fragmentation at pistol velocity leaves the fragments close to there original wound track, which does little to increase the wound.

[Jeep]

The fragmentation is unintentional and, according to the manufacturer, rare.

I wonder about its rarity. I suppose it is possible but if it is truly rare it would be a real outlier for you to get fragmentation like that after firing one round. Any idea of the velocity, by the way? Given the bullet weight I'd guess it was considerable.

[Andrew Wiggin]

It's in the video. 1,200 or so, I think.

[Jeep]

It's in the video. 1,200 or so, I think.

I apologize--sadly my computer currently lacks sound capability. At speeds like that the risk of fragmentation has to be pretty high unless the jacket is very thick.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Yeah, I'd agree.

[bernieb90]

Directly from their website.


The flutes in the nose of the ARX® bullet harness the gain in kinetic energy accrued due to the increased velocity of fluid through the constriction designed into those flutes. Fluid passing through the ARX® flutes travels between one-and-a-half to two-times the velocity of the bullet. A 9mm ARX® bullet traveling at 1,500 fps will result in fluid flowing through the ARX® flutes at nearly 3,000 fps, resulting in a wound cavity in soft tissue that has been compared by some to be similar to that of a .223 75 gr BTHP. In soft tissue, the ARX® is designed to penetrate 12” to 14”, every time.

IMHO we are regressing again in our scientific understanding of wound ballistics. This seems to happen every few years. The last time I think was the RBCD/Le Mas debacle. In this case I think the issue is not what the ammunition is made of, but the claims made by the manufacturer. Attempting to improve the performance of pistol ammunition by eliminating expansion, and attempting to increase temporary cavity size shows a complete lack of understanding of wound ballistics. Also in the event that the bullet does fragment the fragments will not have sufficient energy to travel a significant distance from the wound track.

Dr. Gary Roberts

The tissue surrounding the permanent cavity is briefly pushed laterally aside as it is centrifugally driven radially outward by the projectile's passage. The empty space normally occupied by the momentarily displaced tissue surrounding the wound track, is called the temporary cavity. The temporary cavity quickly subsides as the elastic recoil of the stretched tissue returns it towards the wound track. The tissue that was stretched by the temporary cavity may be injured and is analogous to an area of blunt trauma surrounding the permanent crush cavity. The degree of injury produced by temporary cavitation is quite variable, erratic, and highly dependent on anatomic and physiologic considerations. Many flexible, elastic soft tissues such as muscle, bowel wall, skin, blood vessels, and empty hollow organs are good energy absorbers and are highly resistant to the blunt trauma and contusion caused by the stretch of temporary cavitation. Inelastic tissues such as the liver, kidney, spleen, pancreas, brain, and completely full fluid or gas filled hollow organs, such as the bladder, are highly susceptible to severe permanent splitting, tearing, and rupture due to temporary cavitation insults. Projectiles are traveling at their maximum velocity when they initially strike and then slow as they travel through tissue. In spite of this, the maximum temporary cavity is not always found at the surface where the projectile is at its highest velocity, but often deeper in the tissue after it has slowed considerably. The maximum temporary cavitation is usually coincidental with that of maximum bullet yaw, deformation, or fragmentation, but not necessarily maximum projectile velocity.


And

Projectile fragmentation in tissue can also greatly increase the permanent cavity size. When a bullet fragments in tissue, each of the multiple fragments spreads out radially from the main wound track, cutting its own path through tissue. This fragmentation acts synergistically with the stretch of temporary cavitation. The multiply perforated tissue loses its elasticity and is unable to absorb stretching that would ordinarily be tolerated by intact tissue. The temporary cavitation displacement of tissue, which occurs following the passage of the projectile, stretches this weakened tissue and can grossly disrupt its integrity, tearing and detaching pieces of tissue. Note that handgun bullets, regardless of whether they are fired from pistols or SMG’s, do not generally exhibit the fragmentation effects produced by rifle bullets. If handgun bullets do fragment, the bullet fragments are usually found within 1 cm of the permanent cavity; wound severity is usually decreased by the fragmentation since the bullet mass is reduced, causing a smaller permanent crush cavity.

[Andrew Wiggin]

I wholeheartedly agree. That they make ridiculous claims doesn't bother me near as much as the fact that hordes of the faithful defend this alchemy.

[DocGKR]

"A 9mm ARX® bullet traveling at 1,500 fps will result in fluid flowing through the ARX® flutes at nearly 3,000 fps, resulting in a wound cavity in soft tissue that has been compared by some to be similar to that of a .223 75 gr BTHP."

This is ABSURD.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Thank you for saying so. We all knew it to be so, but it's nice to be validated. Mind If I quote you for a blog post?

[Jeep]

"A 9mm ARX® bullet traveling at 1,500 fps will result in fluid flowing through the ARX® flutes at nearly 3,000 fps, resulting in a wound cavity in soft tissue that has been compared by some to be similar to that of a .223 75 gr BTHP."

This is ABSURD.

Yes, and it is also a bit disappointing. You would think that if they were going to write such nonsense they would have gone for the gold and added the word "tactical." For example, the vaunted "flutes" could have become "tactical flutes" and the "wound cavity" could have been a "tactical wound cavity." And instead of comparing it to a 70 grain .223 round they should have considered adding in something about how the real comparison is with a shotgun slug.

Snake oil salesmen had nothing on the guys who write advertising copy on new bullet designs.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Pfft. "Tactical is sooo last decade. Today's copy goes more like this: "The dynamic fluid displacement flutes dimensionally shift tissue and fluids through a 90° phase, altering angle of attack to achieve systematically awesomer wounding performance in the battlespace."

[DocGKR]

Exactly...that type of pseudoscientific babble seems to appeal to those individuals lacking critical thinking skills.

[Beat Trash]

Exactly...that type of pseudoscientific babble seems to appeal to those individuals lacking critical thinking skills.

Yet makers and promoters of ammunition like this will still find a market... the "Dumbing Down of America" scares me more and more each day.

There is good ammunition out there. The good Doc has a list of rounds that have been tested and vetted. But there is no "magic bullet" that will replace good shot placement and the usage of appropriate tactics. Especially if you apply good shot placement and appropriate tactics before your adversary can apply the same to you.

Maybe I've been a Police Officer for too many years. Instead of quoting psycho babble about dynamic fluid displacement, I just want to blow a big a**ed holes in someone trying to harm me. And act in a manner during the incident so that it makes it harder for the suspect to do the same to me.

Maybe I'm antiquated in my thinking...

[Jeep]

Pfft. "Tactical is sooo last decade. Today's copy goes more like this: "The dynamic fluid displacement flutes dimensionally shift tissue and fluids through a 90° phase, altering angle of attack to achieve systematically awesomer wounding performance in the battlespace."

Andrew:

You really have a gift. While I think focus-grouping will show that "tactical" remains a winner among the target audience, "dynamic" is spot-on and "dimensionally shift tissue and fluids through a 90 degree phase, altering angle of attack," is, in a word, brilliant. However, it is the use of the buzzword "battlespace" that truly seals the deal.

Have you ever thought of changing professions? If guys like this used your copy I think they could immediately charge $5 per round (letting potential customers know that if they don't think their life is worth $5 per round, that's ok. Go to the cheaper brands that don't dimensionally shift anything).

Of course, then you'd have to figure out how to convince the purchasers of the critical need to replace their carry ammo every 6 months or so (before it goes stale or something).

[Jeep]

Exactly...that type of pseudoscientific babble seems to appeal to those individuals lacking critical thinking skills.

When you think about it, it's a shame that San Francisco doesn't allow hollow points. It's politicians might otherwise be be obvious candidates to buy lots of this stuff, given their critical thinking ability. Maybe Nancy Pelosi could buy a bunch for her bodyguards.

[DocGKR]

Interestingly, their bodyguards do carry JHP...

[Hambo]

Pfft. "Tactical is sooo last decade. Today's copy goes more like this: "The dynamic fluid displacement flutes dimensionally shift tissue and fluids through a 90° phase, altering angle of attack to achieve systematically awesomer wounding performance in the battlespace."

Asymetrical battlespace.

[Jeep]

Interestingly, their bodyguards do carry JHP...

We really are becoming more like the old regime in France all the time, aren't we? The aristocracy passes laws that apply to the peasants but not to themselves and are amazed that anyone would think that the laws should apply to them. I think that you guys living in California are probably on the cutting edge of this trend.

[Jeep]

Asymetrical battlespace.

Simply brilliant. I don't know your present job, but your talents are obviously wasted there. You and Andrew could be the copywriters of choice for an entire industry.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Asymetrical battlespace.

Oooh, I just got chills.

[LSP972]

Of course, then you'd have to figure out how to convince the purchasers of the critical need to replace their carry ammo every 6 months or so (before it goes stale or something).

Uh... while I agree that the flowing prose is bullshit by another name (but GOOD bullshit :rolleyes: ), replacing one's carry ammo every six months is- like- a real good idea.

Opinions vary, of course; mine is that loading up with fresh carry ammunition on a regular basis- ESPECIALLY if one's weapon is exposed to the elements any significant amount- just makes sense. Then again, I am aware of incidents where not doing so came back to bite a few individuals in the ass; along with those slovenly and/or careless types who get too generous with lube around their ammunition, or re-chamber the same cartridge repeatedly, or don't clean and re-lube a carry piece regularly, etc., etc.

I am reminded of all the hoopla and excitement when Glaser Safety Slugs came out. Heralded as the ultimate stopper, at a dollar per round (when a box of fifty conventional rounds cost less than five bucks), it wasn't long before the truth came out. Against unprotected meat, they make a nasty wound. But ANY type of barrier would shut them down; there were numerous incidents of them blowing up on wallets and other stuff.

Beat Trash has it right; do unto others before they do unto you... and don't miss.

.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Actually, Glasers penetrated inadequately in tissue and did NOT tend to break up on hard barriers as they were supposed to. There is a test of Magsafe on my channel if you are interested. Basically the same thing.

[Jeep]

Uh... while I agree that the flowing prose is bullshit by another name (but GOOD bullshit :rolleyes: ), replacing one's carry ammo every six months is- like- a real good idea.

Opinions vary, of course; mine is that loading up with fresh carry ammunition on a regular basis- ESPECIALLY if one's weapon is exposed to the elements any significant amount- just makes sense. Then again, I am aware of incidents where not doing so came back to bite a few individuals in the ass; along with those slovenly and/or careless types who get too generous with lube around their ammunition, or re-chamber the same cartridge repeatedly, or don't clean and re-lube a carry piece regularly, etc., etc.

I am reminded of all the hoopla and excitement when Glaser Safety Slugs came out. Heralded as the ultimate stopper, at a dollar per round (when a box of fifty conventional rounds cost less than five bucks), it wasn't long before the truth came out. Against unprotected meat, they make a nasty wound. But ANY type of barrier would shut them down; there were numerous incidents of them blowing up on wallets and other stuff.

Beat Trash has it right; do unto others before they do unto you... and don't miss.

.

I agree on replacing carry ammo regularly (admittedly I'm not always quite timely about it--but think it is a good idea).

The point I was making is how do you get the people who would buy this asymmetric battle space ammunition to replace their $5 per bullet miniature neutron bombs every six months in order to keep sales up? I'm figuring that Andrew can come up with a plan for that. (And Andrew, given the mini-neutron bomb idea maybe you can use "atomic decay"?)

[LSP972]

Actually, Glasers penetrated inadequately in tissue and did NOT tend to break up on hard barriers as they were supposed to. There is a test of Magsafe on my channel if you are interested. Basically the same thing.

Dunno anything about MagSafe. I do know about several shootings involving Glasers; and I didn't say they penetrated adequately. I said they made a nasty wound on unprotected meat/flesh. And one definitely blew up on a wallet carried in the inner breast pocket of a sport coat, without penetrating the wallet. I was told of other, similar results.

.

[LSP972]

I agree on replacing carry ammo regularly (admittedly I'm not always quite timely about it--but think it is a good idea).

The point I was making is how do you get the people who would buy this asymmetric battle space ammunition to replace their $5 per bullet miniature neutron bombs every six months in order to keep sales up?

Okay.;)

.

[DocGKR]

Yup--Glasers had superficial shallow, but messy wounds that often failed to physiologically incapacitate and crapped out against intermediate barriers.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Dunno anything about MagSafe. I do know about several shootings involving Glasers; and I didn't say they penetrated adequately. I said they made a nasty wound on unprotected meat/flesh. And one definitely blew up on a wallet carried in the inner breast pocket of a sport coat, without penetrating the wallet. I was told of other, similar results.

.

Sounds about right.

[Jeep]

Yup--Glasers had superficial shallow, but messy wounds that often failed to physiologically incapacitate and crapped out against intermediate barriers.

And they continue to be sold. I can't tell you how many times someone who I previously thought had some actual knowledge about guns has whispered to me that I really should be carrying Glasers. The facts about a lack of penetration, you see, are invented by a conspiracy. It's what "they want you to think."

[Shawn Dodson]

Original Glasers had a flat nose.

The vague term "wound cavity" is deceptive because it implies permanent disruption when, in fact, the disruption depicted in gelatin is produced by the temporary cavity with very little tissue damage.

Somehow this magic bullet is able to propel tissues radially away from the wound track at twice the velocity of the bullet.

[LSP552]

Yup--Glaser had superficial shallow, but messy wounds that often failed to physiologically incapacitate and crapped out against intermediate barriers.

Marketing works, especially in the absence of real science. Junk science is just marketing with an attempt at justification. It got me as a young trooper. I'm pretty sure I was one of the first to actually plink a bad guy with a Glaser from a .38 special (1980). Nasty wound, very shallow, and wasn't the nuclear weapon/instant stop I was told it would be. At the time, I was working an extended Narcotics thing and was generally without surveillance or backup. I needed the nuclear weapon.

The shot was to the abdomen while we fought in the front seat of a UC vehicle, without surveillance or backup, other than the snitch in the back seat. Me trying to shoot every time my muzzle crossed his body, while trying to keep his from crossing mine. He didn't react at the shot, and I was fortunate enough to get more hits without taking any. The Glaser was loaded only as the 1st round.

I hope folks today realize how much we owe to real science and folks like you and Dr. Fackler. But this shit keeps popping up.

[LSP972]

Sounds about right.

So why did you contradict my earlier statement regarding a near-total lack of barrier penetration??? Not trying to get into an argument… just curious.

.

[LSP972]

It got me as a young trooper.

I bought a dozen of the damn things myself; loaded the J frame with 'em. Fortunately, I never had to try them out. But after hearing about the complete lack of effect yours had, then Damon Williams experiencing the same lack of effect in his shooting using them, I dumped them in the junk box.

To see just how retarded some folks could be back in those days, look up the 1973 "computer man" report generated by the government. They used a simulation program, plugged in some velocity/mass figures, and produced a rating chart for all commonly available handgun rounds.

On that chart, the 9mm Glaser was rated AHEAD of the 240gr full-patch .44 Magnum, IIRC. A real piece of work. I was told, years later by someone in a position to know, that study was done to justify the 9mm and .38 +P in law enforcement, for the benefit of the small-statured and crack troops that were starting to become more prevalent in LE and simply could not handle .357 recoil. Dunno how true that is, but the timing was certainly right, as the mid-70s was the beginning of the politically correct movement.

I was also told that bullshit "study", along with military medicine's refusal to climb out of their Civil War mindset, is what pushed Dr. Fackler over the edge and started his crusade. I asked him about it the first time we met; he just smiled and moved to another topic.

Gary Roberts knew him better than me; how about it, Doc; any truth to that?

.

[Andrew Wiggin]

I'm sorry. I misunderstood you in regard to tissue effect. As it pertains to barriers, my understanding is that performance is erratic.

[LSP972]

Okay.

.

[DocGKR]

The RII Computer man crap is what got Dr. Fackler and Duncan MacPherson together at the IWBA. See Wound Ballistics Review, Vol 1(2), p. 11-15, Winter 1992. Note that the Big Army's current terminal ballistic assessment used for the Modular Handgun is eerily similar in several ways to the old Computer Man methodology...

[LSP972]

Note that the Big Army's current terminal ballistic assessment used for the Modular Handgun is eerily similar in several ways to the old Computer Man methodology...

No kidding? That doesn't bode well…

Duncan MacPherson. I always felt like the class retard in the presence of Albert Einstein when I talked with him. Not that he was condescending; he was just so brilliant, and constantly thinking/talking about things I could barely comprehend.

.

[Jeep]

No kidding? That doesn't bode well…

.

I don't blame Mr. Glaser or any of the other inventors for coming up with new bullet designs that look promising but don't deliver. At least they tried and we benefit from inventors looking for better mousetraps.

But I have little tolerance for bureaucrats announcing standards based on objectively wrong information when it is easy to discover what the best science shows. All they need to do is to call the FBI and they could get an extensive briefing of decades of experimentation that correlates very well to what happens in the real world. Yet, that somehow doesn't happen. Perhaps it is as simple as "not invented here." Whatever the case it is not only a terrible waste of our tax dollars but is the type of stuff that can get folks killed.

[TiroFijo]

The RII Computer man crap is what got Dr. Fackler and Duncan MacPherson together at the IWBA. See Wound Ballistics Review, Vol 1(2), p. 11-15, Winter 1992. Note that the Big Army's current terminal ballistic assessment used for the Modular Handgun is eerily similar in several ways to the old Computer Man methodology...

Doc, please spill the beans...
What kind of gel are they using?
What kind of intermediate barriers?
Any stipulation of desired/max/min penetration?
Any measurement of permanent and temporary cavity?
Hi speed films of impact required or not?
Anything regarding desirability (or not) of expansión, fragmentation, early yaw, etc.?
Are they still measuring energy dump in X inches of penetration?

[LSP972]

I don't blame Mr. Glaser or any of the other inventors for coming up with new bullet designs that look promising but don't deliver. At least they tried and we benefit from inventors looking for better mousetraps.



Agreed; but when the "technology" has been pretty well proven to not work as advertised, and a company continues to hawk it, well...

IIRC, Glaser was a German industrialist who financed the development of the Glaser Safety Slug back in the 70s. An American fellow named Jim or Jack Cannon actually designed the thing.

I think it quite fitting that CorBonThe Magic Bullet Company continues to offer us this pig in a poke.

.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Ruger lent their name to the bullet with a line of Ruger branded ARX ammunition. One of the guys at Polycase tells me it is "slightly different" from the Inceptor that I tested but didn't elaborate on how. He did offer to send some for testing.

[Chuck Haggard]

I had some word on the move by the .mil to potentially going to JHPs several months before that became public. I hate being right sometimes, and in this case I specifically told a couple of people involved that if we ended up with crappy JHPs then we might have indeed been better off sticking with M882 NATO ball for the 9mms.


Ref Glasers, the two cases involving that ammo I have seen bear out everyone else's real world observations; poor penetration, underwhelming tissue damage. All hype, and bullshit, almost zero performance.
I note that there are many newer versions of the light for caliber/high velocity idea still being produced, the Liberty ammo being one of the newer flavors of snake oil.

[Jeep]

I hate being right sometimes, and in this case I specifically told a couple of people involved that if we ended up with crappy JHPs then we might have indeed been better off sticking with M882 NATO ball for the 9mms.




You certainly noted that view here and sadly you might be right.

And of course the truth is that for guys like you and the many other really good shots here, M882 probably would work fine. The trouble will come when some tank driver who gets 50 rounds per year to train with gets a marginal hit or two. Soldiers like that are the ones who really need a round that with increased terminal effectiveness--it won't be a magic bullet, of course, but it might very well make all the difference in the world for them. It is thoroughly maddening that the Army might disregard everything learned in the past 35 years to pursue some snake oil.

[Chuck Haggard]

You certainly noted that view here and sadly you might be right.

And of course the truth is that for guys like you and the many other really good shots here, M882 probably would work fine. The trouble will come when some tank driver who gets 50 rounds per year to train with gets a marginal hit or two. Soldiers like that are the ones who really need a round that with increased terminal effectiveness--it won't be a magic bullet, of course, but it might very well make all the difference in the world for them. It is thoroughly maddening that the Army might disregard everything learned in the past 35 years to pursue some snake oil.

In my observation JHPs, larger calibers, etc., in no way make up for getting bad hits. Now we may see issued ammo have the very same problems we saw with police duty ammo before the FBI/Miami fight.

At least M882 gets through quite a bit of the stuff that troops wear, stuff like canteens, mag pouches, etc. It also tends to yaw on shots that cross through enough meat to allow that to happen, and they certainly penetrate more than enough. If we buy crappy JHPs we won't even have that going for us.

[Jeep]

In my observation JHPs, larger calibers, etc., in no way make up for getting bad hits.

But if it expands, it will make a bigger hole--maybe .50 caliber rather than something less than a full .355 for M882--and while the increase of the hole size might do nothing, it also might mean that arteries, nerves or organs end up getting nicked. So maybe the tank driver just ends up angering his opponent, but a quality JHP might make a difference. Of course, providing adequate training would be a better option, but I think this is a case in which a hardware solution to a software problem might be somewhat better than no solution.

Bad JHPs, of course, will probably be worse than both.

[witchking777]

In regards to 9mm fmj,which causes the most trauma? 115 gr,124 gr,or 147 gr FP?

[Hauptmann]

In regards to 9mm fmj,which causes the most trauma? 115 gr,124 gr,or 147 gr FP?

I would think that the one that is more likely to destabilize and yaw/tumble. No gel comparison, but a .45acp FMJ will punch a nice clean entrance and exit hole in a 1 gallon water jug since it doesn't not yaw. Most of the time a 9mm 124gr FMJ will often begin to yaw in that jug, causing it to burst like an expanding JHP, and leaving a keyhole exit hole. The 9mm 147gr FMJ is longer, so in theory it would generate a larger permanent cavity should it yaw. It would just be a question of which bullet destabilizes easier with a greater amount of weight in the rear of the bullet.

[Aksarben]

Seen and read a lot of info on the web about the ARX, so bought some in .380, 9mm +P both the 80 and 65 grain, and the .45 ACP. They penetrate 4 layers denim like it didn't exist, yet stop at around 14". I've also shot Winchester Ranger T .45 RA45T that Olin took back because they failed to expand and many only partially expanded. One was pretty much a FJM. Clothing can cause real issues with hollow point, as that "Hollow" is necessary for proper fluid pressure to disrupt the bullet. There is no "hollow" on the end of ARX. Getting a Winchester Talon to properly open up all the time would be very nice. However, if it doesn't open up, as sometimes worn tooling doesn't "score" the inside properly, then you have a tumbling piece of copper/lead bullet. Tumble is not bad, but it's not what the Ranter T was designed to do.

One other feature about Ruger ARX bullets that I've personally noticed is reduced recoil. I have no issues with recoil, even in my age, but my wife "barely" will shoot the .380 Bersa due to her arthritis and other pain ailments. With the ARX, it gives her a FJM that can penetrate heavy cloth, and deliver a temporary wound cavity, and shoots about like a .22 LR. For others, it is a lighter loading of magazines, and quicker follow up shots.
Just saying. And, no I don't work for PolyShield nor get any free stuff from them, just intrigued by modern engineering and an Army Ranger's desire to improve the field of ammunition.

[Andrew Wiggin]

ARX and Lehigh Extreme Defender/Pretender/etc are gimmick BS. They perform exactly as you should expect for a light, relatively fast solid.

[orionz06]

And, no I don't work for PolyShield nor get any free stuff from them, just intrigued by modern engineering and an Army Ranger's desire to improve the field of ammunition.

How does this stuff allegedly do so?

[Aksarben]

How does this stuff allegedly do so?
I think, if I understand your question, that this fast ARX bullet works using the special designed 3 slots in the side to both slow the bullet down in hydraulic medium, so it does not over penetrate, and because it is not hollow point, there is nothing like denim and other cloth to plug up and defeat the purpose of the hollow point. A FMJ will always penetrate cloth barriers, and bone, and pretty much remain the same shape.... smooth slight olgive, and good at making holes AND penetration. Unless it tumbles, and many do, the FJM would be inferior to the ARX with it's inverse "wings" or slots that direct fluid away from the bullet at higher velocities. And, as it quickly slows it too, will tumble. The only reason I can think of that this design is not incorporated into a regular FMJ lead/copper bullet is that it is heavy and would be difficult to achieve velocities needed to create a "cavitational" effect. Comes to mind a boat propeller spinning very fast out of water, and very little wind, as air, is a thinner material than water (think density) then when the spinning boat propeller is lowered into the water, being a lot more dense than air, that creates the forceful agitation and displacement of the water.

I have seen a skeptic on Youtube shoot some tests and was quite surpirsed. Shooting through a 2X4 and then the bullet continued on 12 inches in gelatin would give an indication that hitting an arm or rib that the bullet would not deform and would continue on it's path.

It would be VERY interesting to find actual data reports of anyone that may have been shot by this ARX and the actual results. Barring that, Feral pig hunting and results would also be useful.

[Andrew Wiggin]

ARX is terrible after barriers. It shatters easily. Even fragments in bare gel sometimes. The penetration is a result of the low sectional density, not the magical faerie flutes. The "damage" seen in gel is not representative of damage in real tissue. You need at least 2,000 fps to start setting tissue damage from temporary stretch cavity.

[orionz06]

I think, if I understand your question, that this fast ARX bullet works using the special designed 3 slots in the side to both slow the bullet down in hydraulic medium, so it does not over penetrate, and because it is not hollow point, there is nothing like denim and other cloth to plug up and defeat the purpose of the hollow point. A FMJ will always penetrate cloth barriers, and bone, and pretty much remain the same shape.... smooth slight olgive, and good at making holes AND penetration. Unless it tumbles, and many do, the FJM would be inferior to the ARX with it's inverse "wings" or slots that direct fluid away from the bullet at higher velocities. And, as it quickly slows it too, will tumble. The only reason I can think of that this design is not incorporated into a regular FMJ lead/copper bullet is that it is heavy and would be difficult to achieve velocities needed to create a "cavitational" effect. Comes to mind a boat propeller spinning very fast out of water, and very little wind, as air, is a thinner material than water (think density) then when the spinning boat propeller is lowered into the water, being a lot more dense than air, that creates the forceful agitation and displacement of the water.


My question: How does the ARX ammo improve the field of ammunition?




I have seen a skeptic on Youtube shoot some tests and was quite surpirsed. Shooting through a 2X4 and then the bullet continued on 12 inches in gelatin would give an indication that hitting an arm or rib that the bullet would not deform and would continue on it's path.

What does this actually show?



It would be VERY interesting to find actual data reports of anyone that may have been shot by this ARX and the actual results. Barring that, Feral pig hunting and results would also be useful.

Likewise. I suspect it would show similar results to FMJ if not a little less penetration due to a reduced mass relative to a standard FMJ round.

[Aksarben]

From Alf :) : "My question: How does the ARX ammo improve the field of ammunition?" I see it as adding a self defense load for small calibers, like the .380, that have had problems with penetrations and cloth barriers with many of the self defense loads. I also see it for someone like my wife, who as arthritis and Fybromialgia (pain) and cannot tolerate too much recoil. This load has a noticeable reduced recoil. And I think the ARX design of uniquely shaped flutes, or channels, the company calls Power Blades help. The flutes act to displace the target material using the bullet’s forward and rotational momentum, or “lateral force dispersion.” Better than a FMJ, lighter to carry, and could have definite psychological affect on the bad guy.

And "What does this actually show?" The shooting through a 2X4 should illustrate that even though the bullet has encountered "other fluid flesh" a barrier, although not bone, it is likely to continue and enter deep enough to cause damage. I would suspect that on a arm bone that hitting it would break the arm at that point, also causing trauma, but not effectively stopping the bullet from entering the body.

[Andrew Wiggin]

The flutes act to displace the target material using the bullet’s forward and rotational momentum, or “lateral force dispersion.”

Do you have a source to support this claim, other than the company's own marketing materials? Otherwise it sounds like:

"But they're magic beans!"
"How do you know?"
"The guy who sold them to me told me so!"

[Andrew Wiggin]

Also, this is the barrier performance I was talking about:

https://youtu.be/6TlBSiIeTCI

[Kyle Reese]

Should I replace my stock of 9mm 147 grain HSTs for ARX? Why not Glasers and Black Talons?

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[orionz06]

From Alf :) : "My question: How does the ARX ammo improve the field of ammunition?" I see it as adding a self defense load for small calibers, like the .380, that have had problems with penetrations and cloth barriers with many of the self defense loads. I also see it for someone like my wife, who as arthritis and Fybromialgia (pain) and cannot tolerate too much recoil. This load has a noticeable reduced recoil. And I think the ARX design of uniquely shaped flutes, or channels, the company calls Power Blades help. The flutes act to displace the target material using the bullet’s forward and rotational momentum, or “lateral force dispersion.” Better than a FMJ, lighter to carry, and could have definite psychological affect on the bad guy.

And "What does this actually show?" The shooting through a 2X4 should illustrate that even though the bullet has encountered "other fluid flesh" a barrier, although not bone, it is likely to continue and enter deep enough to cause damage. I would suspect that on a arm bone that hitting it would break the arm at that point, also causing trauma, but not effectively stopping the bullet from entering the body.

Upon further review of your postings elsewhere it's not in the best interest of the forum to further this particular discussion. We are fortunate to have DocGKR here and he's already posted at length.

Good day, sir.

[Andrew Wiggin]

I know you're being facetious TYR, but please use a smiley to indicate that to folks who might not know better.

[Andrew Wiggin]

Upon further review of your postings elsewhere it's not in the best interest of the forum to further this particular discussion. We are fortunate to have DocGKR here and he's already posted at length.

Good day, sir.

Thank you. I didn't want to engage in the fallacy of appeal to authority, but you're right.

[Kyle Reese]

I know you're being facetious TYR, but please use a smiley to indicate that to folks who might not know better.
[emoji1]

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[Aksarben]

Well, every right to be skeptical... it's new and made of a material other than lead or solid copper. Only time will tell how well it remains. I have some in the safe, regardless, so if it is a here-today-gone-tomorrow, I can look back at it as a sort of collector item. :) From many years ago, lead has been the projectile of choice, do to it's malleability, and ability to recycle. Many a pot and winter supply put up with nothing more than lead bullets. Through wars and improvements, there was always some new design to the lead bullet. 1963 saw the introduction of commercially available Lead copper Jacketed Hollow Points. The ammo manufactures work on improving each year, even forgoing lead for just copper.

In New Jersey, though, Hollow Points are illegal for carry by private and off duty officers. Their only choice, besides these, is FMJ.

[orionz06]

Well, every right to be skeptical... it's new and made of a material other than lead or solid copper. Only time will tell how well it remains. I have some in the safe, regardless, so if it is a here-today-gone-tomorrow, I can look back at it as a sort of collector item. :) From many years ago, lead has been the projectile of choice, do to it's malleability, and ability to recycle. Many a pot and winter supply put up with nothing more than lead bullets. Through wars and improvements, there was always some new design to the lead bullet. 1963 saw the introduction of commercially available Lead copper Jacketed Hollow Points. The ammo manufactures work on improving each year, even forgoing lead for just copper.

In New Jersey, though, Hollow Points are illegal for carry by private and off duty officers. Their only choice, besides these, is FMJ.


High velocity but slower than rifle velocity rounds aren't new and unless I missed something aren't worth a damn.

[DocGKR]

"Their only choice, besides these, is FMJ."

There are other approved choices--EFMJ, G2, Critical Defense/Duty, Powerball, etc...

Windshields are a much better replicator of bone than a wood 2x4.

The ARX flutes are virtually irrelevant, for example see what happens when the bullet yaws through 180 deg and goes base forward.

As noted, the ARX are not barrier blind.

[TiroFijo]

There are other approved choices--EFMJ, G2, Critical Defense/Duty, Powerball, etc...

Nothing screams "idiotic laws" and "ignorant lawmakers" louder than when they put "hollow point" instead of "expanding"... :p

[Aksarben]

If they had put "expanding" as illegal, that would certainly have shot down the Critical Duty/Defense, and other.

I just wish Winchester/Olin would pay a bit better attention to their QC regarding their Ranger T !! I have been carrying regular RA45T and switched over to RA45TP (the +P version) per Dr. Gary Roberts piece I was sent in an email. It appears the tooling that makes the score and cuts the talon on the copper jacket gets worn to the point of not doing a very good job. I believe I have this right. Anyway, out of my Shield 45 with 3" is hard to get the velocity needed for upsetting with standard pressure IF the bullets are not up to par. If they are made with good tooling everything works fine.

I was carrying the +P version of Ranger T 230gr before I started looking into the Ruger ARX bullets. pic of a RA45T (standard) fired through my Sig P320 45. Should do better!

https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2920/34189633965_97aa7f7253_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/U6dP2F)

[Caballoflaco]

This idea is nothing new. The French experimented with basically the same idea but without the magic flutes back in the late 70's early 80's with the THV pistol bullets. They never really caught on. That should be a clue.

16662

Enough time has passed that this idea been forgotten and re-invented, and another circle of stupid continues to spin.

Here's a short read on the subject.


https://www.quarryhs.co.uk/THV.htm

[Aksarben]

I'm just a consumer, curious, open, but no degree in aerodynamic concerning fluids. However, there are those that seen these that are impressed that are more learned than myself. Dr. Martin D Topper wrote an article and it has this very interesting video link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/r0uq45mx3568w8w/Polycase%20Media%20Day.mp4?dl=0.

My field is more in chemistry, as I am an Associate Winemaker. I have a working knowledge of aerodynamic and worked some years ago for Boeing Airplane Company in Seattle, WA. Whenever they had new ideas, created on the drawing board by their engineers, there was always testing of such in wind tunnels, testing flow, disturbance, turbulence, etc. but they had the advantage of using injections of "smoke" in the wind tunnel to see the effects of various changes and could see the results in the air in the wind tunnel. The one way a person could do similar with something such as the ARX, would be a light coating of some very staining chemical, like Bromosol Green (and others) that would release from the bullet upon impact into clear gelatin and throw a track. High speed photography would almost certainly be a must to see the results.

[Kyle Reese]

Why not just use Federal HST?

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[orionz06]

I'm just a consumer, curious, open, but no degree in aerodynamic concerning fluids. However, there are those that seen these that are impressed that are more learned than myself. Dr. Martin D Topper wrote an article and it has this very interesting video link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/r0uq45mx3568w8w/Polycase%20Media%20Day.mp4?dl=0.

My field is more in chemistry, as I am an Associate Winemaker. I have a working knowledge of aerodynamic and worked some years ago for Boeing Airplane Company in Seattle, WA. Whenever they had new ideas, created on the drawing board by their engineers, there was always testing of such in wind tunnels, testing flow, disturbance, turbulence, etc. but they had the advantage of using injections of "smoke" in the wind tunnel to see the effects of various changes and could see the results in the air in the wind tunnel. The one way a person could do similar with something such as the ARX, would be a light coating of some very staining chemical, like Bromosol Green (and others) that would release from the bullet upon impact into clear gelatin and throw a track. High speed photography would almost certainly be a must to see the results.

That's a lot of money and effort to show that they're still shitty.

[Aksarben]

Why not just use Federal HST?

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

Very good option. I might get some sometime soon. I've always had very good luck with Federal and shoot it for my daily practice ammo.
Right now I'm awaiting a shipment from Olin for the replacement of the 2 boxes of RA45T they sent me after the review of my pictures. According to their Tech Rep. this new stuff is an brand new 8 talon design that is supposed to overcome the lack of reliable upset in shorter barrels. Not out on the market, yet, so there is no write up anywhere about it. Hopefully it arrives soon. Talked with Haley at C.S. a couple of days after sending her my drivers license and CPL, if she had a time they were shipping. She said they don't pass that info back to her, but will have to sign for them. So, just waiting....

[Aksarben]

At this link: http://www.cabelas.com/product/POLYCASE-RUGER-ARX-AMMO/2105678.uts reading the overall reviews of the Ruger ARX one might see some actual "defense use" in the near future. With so many leaving feedback that they are carrying this as their main SD ammunition, it stands to reason that there are probably 100 others that bought it for that but don't bother with giving feedback. Just hoping it works well for them.

[orionz06]

At this link: http://www.cabelas.com/product/POLYCASE-RUGER-ARX-AMMO/2105678.uts reading the overall reviews of the Ruger ARX one might see some actual "defense use" in the near future. With so many leaving feedback that they are carrying this as their main SD ammunition, it stands to reason that there are probably 100 others that bought it for that but don't bother with giving feedback. Just hoping it works well for them.

If none of the reviews are from folks who used them for their intended purposes are they even valid? In all honesty I'd bet that the fact that they all went bang was enough for most of those folks.

[BehindBlueI's]

At this link: http://www.cabelas.com/product/POLYCASE-RUGER-ARX-AMMO/2105678.uts reading the overall reviews of the Ruger ARX one might see some actual "defense use" in the near future. With so many leaving feedback that they are carrying this as their main SD ammunition, it stands to reason that there are probably 100 others that bought it for that but don't bother with giving feedback. Just hoping it works well for them.

I'd certainly rather base my decision on an anonymous review online vs respected testing and hundreds of LEO shootings.

I've seen a lot of people shot. I carry heavy for caliber bonded ammo. You can carry a starter pistol if you want, I don't care. You strike me as sometime trying to make the facts fit your hypothesis, though.

[KhanRad]

The firearm self defense industry is at least 75% snake oil, and 25% concrete facts. Reason being, the overwhelming majority of those who fall for the hype will never use the product for which it is advertised and thus will never prove or disprove the salesman's propaganda. When organized military and LE get involved though, you tend to see a scientific approach to separating the jewels from the crap. Every few years a new product hits the market that makes mythical claims and often the product is shot down when the professionals get involved to evaluate it. Anybody remember the Blended Metal bullet technology?......even the History Channel was promoting it as a smart bullet technology and the way of the future. Turned out it was crap technology that was a deception from materials to performance. It was almost legendary in its use of fictitious battle field exploits, and when Dr. Roberts and some other pros tested it the designer defended it by stating that you needed to shoot the bullets in actually living tissue it order for the bullets to do their magic.

It is kind of a money making loophole. Design a magic bullet for self defense purposes, sell it for 10x the price of other proven ammo designs, and then ride the gravy train for 5-10years until it is proven to be BS and then you move onto the next project.

[Aksarben]

It is kind of a money making loophole. Design a magic bullet for self defense purposes, sell it for 10x the price of other proven ammo designs, and then ride the gravy train for 5-10years until it is proven to be BS and then you move onto the next project.

The thing is, though, is that I bought a box of 25 for 9mm ARX at Field & Stream for $18.99 and a box of .45 ARX for $20.00. In reality they are not 10X the price of HST, which sells locally in Walmart at $23.99 for a box of 20. My Ranger T I bought was around $38.00 before shipping.

[Sigfan26]

The thing is, though, is that I bought a box of 25 for 9mm ARX at Field & Stream for $18.99 and a box of .45 ARX for $20.00. In reality they are not 10X the price of HST, which sells locally in Walmart at $23.99 for a box of 20. My Ranger T I bought was around $38.00 before shipping.

9mm HST is routinely available online $17.50 for 50. The .45 is 25-30 for 50


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[orionz06]

The thing is, though, is that I bought a box of 25 for 9mm ARX at Field & Stream for $18.99 and a box of .45 ARX for $20.00. In reality they are not 10X the price of HST, which sells locally in Walmart at $23.99 for a box of 20. My Ranger T I bought was around $38.00 before shipping.

Does the price matter if it's work vs doesn't work...?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Aksarben]

Does the price matter if it's work vs doesn't work...?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No it does not. Range ammo and SD ammo are 2 different things. Good reliable, consistent range ammo that does not cost an arm and a leg is always appreciated. Single point was, the ARX was not 10 times the cost of other SD ammo, at least not in my area.

I bought som Sig V-crown in 9mm and .45 and thought it would be excellent due to it's large hollowpoint. Simple tests into water jugs show how nice it mushrooms out. However, there is the Lucky Gunner page that does not show such a wonderful story. http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ It apears the Sig V-Crown has a tendency, as do several, to get that HP plugged up with denim, and give little to no expansion. Their (Lucky Gunner) tests on my Winchester Ranger T were excellent, but I had found in my case, that my ammo failed to upset completely and sometimes not at all. Doctor Gary Roberts wrote something about this on the internet and I received the info from Dr. Roberts from a friend that sells Ranger T in Wisconsin. Sometimes the tooling that make the talons, and scoring is no longer sharp and fails to do a good job. This creates a bullet that is not up to par with lower velocities, but "as I understand it" work alright out of long "grease gun" type .45s. The +P, even though the tooling might be worn had enough velocity in short barrels to expand reliably.

This is the standard RA45T shot from my Sig P320 (note these were returned back to Olin)


https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2856/34189633425_b189ea2022_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/U6dNSn)

This is 2 of the newer boxes of RA45T +P I had also bought online, and following Dr. Gary Roberts notion that +P helped, it certainl seems to have helped in expected expansion. One if from my S&W Shield, and one if from my Sig P320: Ranger -T .45 ACP +P

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4181/34565054095_a440a0cf4c_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/UEoWmx)

[orionz06]

No it does not. Range ammo and SD ammo are 2 different things. Good reliable, consistent range ammo that does not cost an arm and a leg is always appreciated. Single point was, the ARX was not 10 times the cost of other SD ammo, at least not in my area.

I bought som Sig V-crown in 9mm and .45 and thought it would be excellent due to it's large hollowpoint. Simple tests into water jugs show how nice it mushrooms out. However, there is the Lucky Gunner page that does not show such a wonderful story. http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ It apears the Sig V-Crown has a tendency, as do several, to get that HP plugged up with denim, and give little to no expansion. Their (Lucky Gunner) tests on my Winchester Ranger T were excellent, but I had found in my case, that my ammo failed to upset completely and sometimes not at all. Doctor Gary Roberts wrote something about this on the internet and I received the info from Dr. Roberts from a friend that sells Ranger T in Wisconsin. Sometimes the tooling that make the talons, and scoring is no longer sharp and fails to do a good job. This creates a bullet that is not up to par with lower velocities, but "as I understand it" work alright out of long "grease gun" type .45s. The +P, even though the tooling might be worn had enough velocity in short barrels to expand reliably.

This is the standard RA45T shot from my Sig P320 (note these were returned back to Olin)


[img]https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2856/34189633425_b189ea2022_z.jpg[/i mg] (https://flic.kr/p/U6dNSn)

This is 2 of the newer boxes of RA45T +P I had also bought online, and following Dr. Gary Roberts notion that +P helped, it certainl seems to have helped in expected expansion. One if from my S&W Shield, and one if from my Sig P320: Ranger -T .45 ACP +P

[img]https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4181/34565054095_a440a0cf4c_z.jpg[/im g] (https://flic.kr/p/UEoWmx)

Then don't carry Sig ammo?


I'm having a hard time seeing how it's this difficult for you to choose HST or Speer Gold Dot, both of which have been proven to work, don't rely on gimmicks, and are readily available for more than reasonable costs based on how things have been over the last several years.

[Aksarben]

I'll do some searching for the HST. I have always liked Federal and at the price mentioned before it seems to be a pretty good deal, even around the price of shooting a lot of it at the range. Just locally Federal HST has not been very economical, hence my main target ammo has been Federal 230 gr FMJ.

I recall reading someplace that Speer is the only bullet manufacturer that makes a pistol bullet specifically for short barrels, while all the other just use same bullets.

[Kyle Reese]

Lots of 9mm and .45 HST ammo available here.

https://www.bonefroggunclub.com/collections/ammunition

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[Aksarben]

Lots of 9mm and .45 HST ammo available here.

https://www.bonefroggunclub.com/collections/ammunition

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

Wow! Thanks!!!d I checked Eagle Eye Guns http://www.eagleeyeguns.com/default.asp and M.A.H. Supplies http://mahsupplies.net/ and both places were sold out. They have my OLN on record and were the first places I looked.

[KhanRad]

Kyle's Gunshop is also another good source for HSTs in 50rd boxes:
www.kylesgunshop.com

[Aksarben]

Need something in rifle velocity for the ARX bullet, Alexander Arms has it in .50 Beowulf ... http://www.alexanderarms.com/news-events/160-new-50-beowulf-polycase-inceptor-arx

[orionz06]

Need something in rifle velocity for the ARX bullet, Alexander Arms has it in .50 Beowulf ... http://www.alexanderarms.com/news-events/160-new-50-beowulf-polycase-inceptor-arx

Why would one choose this at all?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Caballoflaco]

16739

Brave Sir Orionz06

[Aksarben]

I found it interesting that 2 well known arms manufacturers Alexander Arms, and Sturm Ruger have adopted the ARX bullet. Who's next?? Smith & Wesson? Sig Sauer?

[KhanRad]

I found it interesting that 2 well known arms manufacturers Alexander Arms, and Sturm Ruger have adopted the ARX bullet. Who's next?? Smith & Wesson? Sig Sauer?

Glaser Safety Slugs were loaded by Winchester, Federal, and Remington when they first came out decades ago. It is crap ammo, based on myth, folklore, and junk science. Corbon still loads this crap too.

Just because ARX is being loaded by several other companies doesn't mean that it is good for self defense. ARX is a market niche for the those willing to buy the snake oil hook, line, and sinker and make the companies manufacturing it some short term money on the side.

[ack495]

No it does not. Range ammo and SD ammo are 2 different things. Good reliable, consistent range ammo that does not cost an arm and a leg is always appreciated. Single point was, the ARX was not 10 times the cost of other SD ammo, at least not in my area.

I bought som Sig V-crown in 9mm and .45 and thought it would be excellent due to it's large hollowpoint. Simple tests into water jugs show how nice it mushrooms out. However, there is the Lucky Gunner page that does not show such a wonderful story. http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ It apears the Sig V-Crown has a tendency, as do several, to get that HP plugged up with denim, and give little to no expansion. Their (Lucky Gunner) tests on my Winchester Ranger T were excellent, but I had found in my case, that my ammo failed to upset completely and sometimes not at all. Doctor Gary Roberts wrote something about this on the internet and I received the info from Dr. Roberts from a friend that sells Ranger T in Wisconsin. Sometimes the tooling that make the talons, and scoring is no longer sharp and fails to do a good job. This creates a bullet that is not up to par with lower velocities, but "as I understand it" work alright out of long "grease gun" type .45s. The +P, even though the tooling might be worn had enough velocity in short barrels to expand reliably.

This is the standard RA45T shot from my Sig P320 (note these were returned back to Olin)


https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2856/34189633425_b189ea2022_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/U6dNSn)

This is 2 of the newer boxes of RA45T +P I had also bought online, and following Dr. Gary Roberts notion that +P helped, it certainl seems to have helped in expected expansion. One if from my S&W Shield, and one if from my Sig P320: Ranger -T .45 ACP +P

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4181/34565054095_a440a0cf4c_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/UEoWmx)
Your results regarding the standard pressure Win ranger 230gr ammo is a bit worrisome. This is my departments carry load for our glock 21's. Which, should get enough velocity to expand. However we have some plain clothes officers who are issued and allowed to carry glock 36's. I'll have to get some velocity readings to see where they are at.

I just purchased a shield 45 for off duty/court carry. I took it to the range the other day and chronographed these rounds out of the 3.3" barrel. I did two six shot strings and the avg FPS was 810 and 804 respectively. So slow! Standard deviation was excellent at 7 and 11. Temp was about 76°, 64% humidity, at sea level for those wondering.

But I figured this velocity was very low and I probably wouldn't get reliable performance.

I have a couple of boxes of Speer gold dot 230gr, so that what I'm carrying in my new shield for now. I've seen nothing but good short barrel results from those.

I'm going to have to talk to the admin about switching to the +P version for future ammo orders or get more info on this new 8 talon version coming out.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[KhanRad]

Your results regarding the standard pressure Win ranger 230gr ammo is a bit worrisome. This is my departments carry load for our glock 21's. Which, should get enough velocity to expand. However we have some plain clothes officers who are issued and allowed to carry glock 36's. I'll have to get some velocity readings to see where they are at.

I just purchased a shield 45 for off duty/court carry. I took it to the range the other day and chronographed these rounds out of the 3.3" barrel. I did two six shot strings and the avg FPS was 810 and 804 respectively. So slow! Standard deviation was excellent at 7 and 11.

But I figured this velocity was very low and I probably wouldn't get reliable performance.

I have a couple of boxes of Speer gold dot 230gr, so that what I'm carrying in my new shield for now. I've seen nothing but good short barrel results from those.

I'm going to have to talk to the admin about switching to the +P version for future ammo orders or get more info on this new 8 talon version coming out.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

.45acp 230gr JHPs have always had some expansion issues with various brands of ammo over the years. It's a complex equation of impact energy relative to the thickness the petals that must expand. .45acp has very thick expansion petals, and it needs quite a bit of hydraulic force to get them to open. This is also why the .45acp is more prone to "plugging" than the smaller, faster calibers. When the FBI released their recommended .45acp JHPs they listed the 185gr load as being superior, because it had enough velocity and impact energy to more reliably opening up the hollow point.

If you'll notice in the last couple of years, the major ammo makers have drastically boosted their .45acp LE loads to better meet the FBI tests. The Federal 230gr HST is nice in that it has reliable expansion at a moderate velocity(I chronoed them out of a P220 at 845fps). However, they are borderline in the FBI tests for penetration through various materials. For LE loads, Federal, Speer, and Winchester all sell their bonded loads at +P levels. Winchester RB 230gr is 918fps from a P220, Federal TB 230gr+P is 921fps from a P220, and the Speer G2 230gr+P is advertised at 910fps(haven't gotten ahold of any yet). Personally I find these hot loads to be too hot for effective shooting under high stress conditions. I have seen a significant number of our officer's shooting skills deteriorate using this +P level ammo. Heck, Officer Tim Grammins came to the same conclusion after his G21 gun fight using standard pressure 230gr Gold Dots.

Back on topic......in general the .45acp has always been finicky with JHP reliability, and I think the problems will persist as the .45acp is being phased out of most of the military and many domestic LE agencies. Market priority has shifted to the 9mm in most circles, with the .40 as likely a secondary priority.

[Tamara]

Who's next?? Smith & Wesson? Sig Sauer?

The latter is highly unlikely, and the former doesn't make ammo, just licenses their brand name. If enough ballistic illiterati gobble it up to make it look crazy profitable, maybe they will. After all, they cynically jumped on the Judge bandwagon with their own derpy revolving shot pistol.

[ack495]

.45acp 230gr JHPs have always had some expansion issues with various brands of ammo over the years. It's a complex equation of impact energy relative to the thickness the petals that must expand. .45acp has very thick expansion petals, and it needs quite a bit of hydraulic force to get them to open. This is also why the .45acp is more prone to "plugging" than the smaller, faster calibers. When the FBI released their recommended .45acp JHPs they listed the 185gr load as being superior, because it had enough velocity and impact energy to more reliably opening up the hollow point.

If you'll notice in the last couple of years, the major ammo makers have drastically boosted their .45acp LE loads to better meet the FBI tests. The Federal 230gr HST is nice in that it has reliable expansion at a moderate velocity(I chronoed them out of a P220 at 845fps). However, they are borderline in the FBI tests for penetration through various materials. For LE loads, Federal, Speer, and Winchester all sell their bonded loads at +P levels. Winchester RB 230gr is 918fps from a P220, Federal TB 230gr+P is 921fps from a P220, and the Speer G2 230gr+P is advertised at 910fps(haven't gotten ahold of any yet). Personally I find these hot loads to be too hot for effective shooting under high stress conditions. I have seen a significant number of our officer's shooting skills deteriorate using this +P level ammo. Heck, Officer Tim Grammins came to the same conclusion after his G21 gun fight using standard pressure 230gr Gold Dots.

Back on topic......in general the .45acp has always been finicky with JHP reliability, and I think the problems will persist as the .45acp is being phased out of most of the military and many domestic LE agencies. Market priority has shifted to the 9mm in most circles, with the .40 as likely a secondary priority.

I am a patrol officer on the firearms training staff but I had a major hand in the ammunition selection. Based of course on DocGKR's suggestions. We just got away from the .40 last year after 15+ years. We gave every officer a choice between Gen 4 Glock's in 9mm or .45. Patrol officers assigned to plain clothes assignments, detectives, court, records, etc. got second gun choices of the glock 26 or 36. So we just shifted to both 9mm and .45.

When we switched calibers, our ATK distributor was completely out of 9mm HST 147gr. We were already using Winchester 5.56 RA556B in our patrol rifles, so the natural choice was to keep it simple and slight less expensive, to stay with Winchester ammo across the board. So the 147gr T-series was our choice in the 9mm. I should have done more research and just spoke up in regards to the .45 ammo. Myself, among others, tried the Win .45 +P rangers and we could not tell any perceived recoil difference between them and the standard pressure. Unlike the HST's which you can tell you were shooting +P. Regardless, we chose to just stick with the standard pressure version. Regretting that now.

[KhanRad]

Regardless, we chose to just stick with the standard pressure version. Regretting that now.

Winchester has cranked up the velocity on all of their lineup. The regular 230gr Ranger Talons run at 878fps from my P220 which is too hot, and the +P version is at 923fps. In a .45acp, pretty much anything over 860fps starts to become a hinderance on followup shot speed, shooter fatigue, and shooter anticipated recoil. The original GI load was a 230gr bullet at 830fps from a 5" all steel 1911.

I wish I could say that all this turbo charging of the .45acp has resulting in some spectacular OIS results. Not so much, in fact the officers are often shaken afterward after seeing no effect after multiple .45acp JHP hits on their target. Keith Borders and Tim Grammins are great examples. In fact, here is a pod cast with Grammins on his incident:
http://proarmspodcast.com/090-officer-tim-gramins-skokie-police-dept/

[ST911]

I am a patrol officer on the firearms training staff but I had a major hand in the ammunition selection. Based of course on DocGKR's suggestions. We just got away from the .40 last year after 15+ years. We gave every officer a choice between Gen 4 Glock's in 9mm or .45. Patrol officers assigned to plain clothes assignments, detectives, court, records, etc. got second gun choices of the glock 26 or 36. So we just shifted to both 9mm and .45.

What's the thinking behind allowing a choice of 9mm or .45?

[ack495]

Winchester has cranked up the velocity on all of their lineup. The regular 230gr Ranger Talons run at 878fps from my P220 which is too hot, and the +P version is at 923fps. In a .45acp, pretty much anything over 860fps starts to become a hinderance on followup shot speed, shooter fatigue, and shooter anticipated recoil. The original GI load was a 230gr bullet at 830fps from a 5" all steel 1911.

I wish I could say that all this turbo charging of the .45acp has resulting in some spectacular OIS results. Not so much, in fact the officers are often shaken afterward after seeing no effect after multiple .45acp JHP hits on their target. Keith Borders and Tim Grammins are great examples. In fact, here is a pod cast with Grammins on his incident:
http://proarmspodcast.com/090-officer-tim-gramins-skokie-police-dept/
Thanks for that podcast link. Very interesting first hand account of an OIS. I will definitely be forwarding this link to everyone at work to listen to it.

I am going to request a box of the + P's from my Winchester distributor, just to shoot them again and run through the Chrono. I really remember them being indistinguishable. Everything I've read on them seems to echo that as well.

Seems like a win-win. It's only loaded a slightly hotter, with no perceived increase in recoil. And getting the bullet to a fast enough velocity to expand more reliably in our shorter barrel guns.

What's the thinking behind allowing a choice of 9mm or .45?
Short answer is that it made everyone happy. We all agreed the .40 was out. No one liked the recoil and it doesn't do anything the 9mm couldn't. I was in the 9mm camp for everyone for all the reasons we all know, more ammo, faster follow up, better for the marginal shooter, etc. But some guys just wanted the .45, especially some of the people making the purchasing decisions. I couldn't convince them otherwise. I wasn't exactly trying to talk them out of the .45 as it's a great round. I just felt the 9mm was better for everyone. But our chief was fine with both, so everyone wins.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[KhanRad]

I am going to request a box of the + P's from my Winchester distributor, just to shoot them again and run through the Chrono. I really remember them being indistinguishable. Everything I've read on them seems to echo that as well.

Seems like a win-win. It's only loaded a slightly hotter, with no perceived increase in recoil. And getting the bullet to a fast enough velocity to expand more reliably in our shorter barrel guns.


Really you are going to need a lot more than one box to get a decent assessment, and comparison to the standard pressure load before you come to any conclusions.
Here's some ideas for your test:
-Run some tests single handed, particularly weak handed. Hand injuries are common in a gun fight, and it is best to select equipment based on how proficient we can be at our worst.....not how well we can do at our best.
-Perform a timed course of fire with multiple targets. This way the shooter will be forced to keep the splits tight, and shift from target to target requiring on the fly adjustments in stance and grip. Use a standard paper target to score them.
-Do some testing at night. Often +P ammo has considerable more flash resulting in more difficulty in making accurate follow up shots. This is why we no longer authorize the 147gr+P HST....big flash.
-Perform long shooting strings at the targets of at least 10-15 rounds for speed......this will emphasize the negative effects of recoil which breaks down the shooter's grip with each shot, brings about the onset of fatigue, and challenges the shooter to not jerk the trigger.

I did some extensive .45acp testing several years ago with 3 other guys before I put my P220 in the safe and chose to carry 9mm. Most of us could handle low volume shooting strings for time with two hand stances. When we pushed ourselves by simulating more stressful conditions, that became the achilles heel of the .45acp. Not to mention we performed several car shoots which convinced most of us to use 9mm or .40S&W.

[ack495]

Very good. Sounds like solid advice. Thanks.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Joe in PNG]

.45acp 230gr JHPs have always had some expansion issues with various brands of ammo over the years. It's a complex equation of impact energy relative to the thickness the petals that must expand. .45acp has very thick expansion petals, and it needs quite a bit of hydraulic force to get them to open. This is also why the .45acp is more prone to "plugging" than the smaller, faster calibers. When the FBI released their recommended .45acp JHPs they listed the 185gr load as being superior, because it had enough velocity and impact energy to more reliably opening up the hollow point.

If you'll notice in the last couple of years, the major ammo makers have drastically boosted their .45acp LE loads to better meet the FBI tests. The Federal 230gr HST is nice in that it has reliable expansion at a moderate velocity(I chronoed them out of a P220 at 845fps). However, they are borderline in the FBI tests for penetration through various materials. For LE loads, Federal, Speer, and Winchester all sell their bonded loads at +P levels. Winchester RB 230gr is 918fps from a P220, Federal TB 230gr+P is 921fps from a P220, and the Speer G2 230gr+P is advertised at 910fps(haven't gotten ahold of any yet). Personally I find these hot loads to be too hot for effective shooting under high stress conditions. I have seen a significant number of our officer's shooting skills deteriorate using this +P level ammo. Heck, Officer Tim Grammins came to the same conclusion after his G21 gun fight using standard pressure 230gr Gold Dots.

Back on topic......in general the .45acp has always been finicky with JHP reliability, and I think the problems will persist as the .45acp is being phased out of most of the military and many domestic LE agencies. Market priority has shifted to the 9mm in most circles, with the .40 as likely a secondary priority.

This may be worth a thread in itself- the classic assumption around the gun counter is that .45acp is THE JMB blessed Hammer of Thor, able to throw baddies as if they were tied to ropes.
That .45 ACP ball is a bit of a disappointment comes as a surprise to none here, but that .45 JHP is struggling to perform is.

[Tamara]

re: 230gr .45ACP +P

In both HST and Ranger-T, the only ones with which I've really done a reasonable amount of chrono testing over a variety of guns, I've found that the velocity difference between the standard pressure and +P offerings is smaller than lot-to-lot differences in velocity. In other words, going back through my notebook, it's not uncommon to find that the +P I'm shooting this month is putting up slower numbers than the standard pressure I chronoed in a test last year.

[Aksarben]

In the Winchester Ranger T (RA45T) there is also the little known fact that new and fresh tooling that makes the talons and scores the jacket make the bullet behave well, even in standard pressure out of short barrel pistols. But, when the tooling wears, and they keep making bullets when they should have stopped to change out tooling, then you get copper jackets that are irregular in consistent expansion. Sometimes only 2/3 will expand, sometimes none with the standard pressure round. Out of longer barrels, the issue is less pronounced... IE longer is better for these standard RA45T. The +P only have 2000 psi extra over the others, but when it comes to short barrels, it seems to make a difference and ESPECIALLY when the bullet has not been properly scored.

Fired some RA45TP yesterday out of my S&W shield .45 and it worked admirably. below is a pic (and I've seen very similar on Google search) of 2 talons completely unaffected, and still folded inside.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2815/33805557930_34d764d180_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/TvhjB5)

[Tamara]

In the Winchester Ranger T (RA45T) there is also the little known fact that...

I realize you just joined up this month, but that fact is not really all that "little-known" around here. If you do a forum search here on "RA45T DocGKR", you will probably find out lots of "little-known" stuff. :)

[Ed L]

re: 230gr .45ACP +P

In both HST and Ranger-T, the only ones with which I've really done a reasonable amount of chrono testing over a variety of guns, I've found that the velocity difference between the standard pressure and +P offerings is smaller than lot-to-lot differences in velocity. In other words, going back through my notebook, it's not uncommon to find that the +P I'm shooting this month is putting up slower numbers than the standard pressure I chronoed in a test last year.

If you look at the chronograph results here http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ the difference between the Winchester Ranger in .45 for the standard velocity and +P loads is 4 feet per second.

With the Federal HST there is 22 feet per second difference between the standard velocity load and the +P load.

[orionz06]

I realize you just joined up this month, but that fact is not really all that "little-known" around here. If you do a forum search here on "RA45T DocGKR", you will probably find out lots of "little-known" stuff. :)

Like an entire list of ammo that works and posts on ammo that is a scam?

[KhanRad]

If you look at the chronograph results here http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ the difference between the Winchester Ranger in .45 for the standard velocity and +P loads is 4 feet per second.

With the Federal HST there is 22 feet per second difference between the standard velocity load and the +P load.

I'm not surprised by all the variations ppl are getting with Winchester. Their .45 loads have been all over the place in the last decade. Also one thing to keep in mind is that velocities can differ greatly depending on your location. When I transferred from Colorado to Louisiana, the exact same box lots of 9mm 147gr duty loads were 20-30fps slower when chronoed at the new location.

[Tamara]

If you look at the chronograph results here http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ the difference between the Winchester Ranger in .45 for the standard velocity and +P loads is 4 feet per second.

With the Federal HST there is 22 feet per second difference between the standard velocity load and the +P load.

But I don't need to look at Lucky Gunner's results*. :) Like I said, over the last several years my own chronograph results show that the difference between std. pressure and +P from both manufacturers is smaller than the lot-to-lot variation.


*Although I think the Lucky Gunner Lounge is one of the best sources of low-derp-content writing on the internet, and I don't say that just because several members of this board are published there. :)

[Tamara]

Also one thing to keep in mind is that velocities can differ greatly depending on your location. When I transferred from Colorado to Louisiana, the exact same box lots of 9mm 147gr duty loads were 20-30fps slower when chronoed at the new location.

All my chrono testing is done at one of two locations, either 860' or 740' ASL.

[Ed L]

Not everyone has online access to the results from your chrono available in one place:p

[KhanRad]

All my chrono testing is done at one of two locations, either 860' or 740' ASL.

Another comparison that I did in Colorado and Louisiana was a 9mm 147gr HST and the +P version. In Colorado the standard pressure load averaged 982fps from a Sig P226, and the +P version was 1012fps. In Louisiana, the standard pressure load averages 966fps, and the +P version 1003fps. Manufacturers are changing powders all the time(sometimes primers), and all powders have different burn characteristics in different environments.

[Tamara]

Not everyone has online access to the results from your chrono available in one place:p

Touche! :D

[ack495]

If you look at the chronograph results here http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ the difference between the Winchester Ranger in .45 for the standard velocity and +P loads is 4 feet per second.

With the Federal HST there is 22 feet per second difference between the standard velocity load and the +P load.
One thing I found a bit head scratching with Lucky Gunners results regarding the standard pressure .45 Win rangers was how fast they got out out of a 3.5" barrel. I can understand the notion of different powders/primer's being used in different lots. And of course the environmental conditions factor in, but to be about 100fps faster using a barrel only .2" longer than my Shield. Doesn't make sense to me.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Tamara]

One thing I found a bit head scratching with Lucky Gunners results regarding the standard pressure .45 Win rangers was how fast they got out out of a 3.5" barrel. I can understand the notion of different powders/primer's being used in different lots. And of course the environmental conditions factor in, but to be about 100fps faster using a barrel only .2" longer than my Shield. Doesn't make sense to me.

The extreme spread from the last ten-shot string of standard pressure RA45B I tested was 73.88 fps. If you can see almost seventy-five feet per second variation between two rounds in the same box, then 100fps average difference between two different guns of different barrel lengths from different lots at different elevations is certainly within the realm of possibility.

[ack495]

The extreme spread from the last ten-shot string of standard pressure RA45B I tested was 73.88 fps. If you can see almost seventy-five feet per second variation between two rounds in the same box, then 100fps average difference between two different guns of different barrel lengths from different lots at different elevations is certainly within the realm of possibility.
I guess so, huh. That's a big spread. It just sucks the crap shoot you get with some of Winchesters ammo.

Other than the horrible ES, how is the ranger bonded load working out? Doesn't seem like they can get their shit together with the load unlike the 9mm ranger bonded which seem to be very successful.

Lucky Gunner had awful results in their short barrel test. Doc replied to me in an email about it once, also stating inconsistent performance. That was a few years ago. Still not on his list for a reason I guess.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US5133261-1.png

From Devel's patent in 1992; there is nothing new....

And no, it did not work better than other conventional projectiles.

[KhanRad]

Lucky Gunner had awful results in their short barrel test. Doc replied to me in an email about it once, also stating inconsistent performance. That was a few years ago. Still not on his list for a reason I guess.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Notice that Doc's list of acceptable duty ammo is much shorter for .45acp than .40 or 9mm. It is actually pretty hard to engineer a reliable JHP that meets FBI protocols in the .45acp since it is delicate balancing act of cranking up the velocity high enough to punch through barrier materials, while at the same time keeping the velocity low enough to make the gun controllable and not prematurely destroy the gun from accelerated wear. For me now days, it is a no-brainer that for LE work it is best to use 9mm or .40S&W. Naturally, it's harder to find a .40 platform that is reliable, durable, and shootable as 9mm. I've found Sig P229s(particularly with mounted light) to work pretty well in .40, along with the H&K USP and S&W M&P.

[Ed L]

The extreme spread from the last ten-shot string of standard pressure RA45B I tested was 73.88 fps. If you can see almost seventy-five feet per second variation between two rounds in the same box, then 100fps average difference between two different guns of different barrel lengths from different lots at different elevations is certainly within the realm of possibility.

Greattt--and I just bought a few boxes of Winchester Ranger standard velocity because I remember it used to feed reliably in my Springfield Professional that I have not fired in years . . .

[Alembic]

Why would one choose this at all?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Do Not Engage"

[Chuck Haggard]

Asymetrical battlespace.

But, was it disruptive?

[Chuck Haggard]

I realize you just joined up this month, but that fact is not really all that "little-known" around here. If you do a forum search here on "RA45T DocGKR", you will probably find out lots of "little-known" stuff. :)

and not just in .45acp either.....

Me and Spencer Keepers had some of his 127gr +P+ fail to expand from a G34 when I was shooting gel down in OK during a demo at the end of his class, needless to say velocity was NOT the issue....

[orionz06]

and not just in .45acp either.....

Me and Spencer Keepers had some of his 127gr +P+ fail to expand from a G34 when I was shooting gel down in OK during a demo at the end of his class, needless to say velocity was NOT the issue....

I've had RA9TA expand less than optimally when Tom Givens was up here. Since then I've switched to HST which was functional in all firearms and the barriers it was supposed to work through.

[Chuck Haggard]

I've had RA9TA expand less than optimally when Tom Givens was up here. Since then I've switched to HST which was functional in all firearms and the barriers it was supposed to work through.

My go-to ammo has become Gold Dot or HST in service pistol calibers....

[KhanRad]

Winchester duty ammo quality is definitely going down in the last 5-10yrs. These days I stick with HST or latest generation G2s.

[Aksarben]

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US5133261-1.png

From Devel's patent in 1992; there is nothing new....

And no, it did not work better than other conventional projectiles.

You may be comparing apples to oranges. The Devel patent was a solid metal bullet,if I recall, it weighed more and was harder to slow down in body tissue. The Polycase ARX, sold by Ruger et al, is copper-polymer composite, designed to penetrate denim and bone and muscle and to slow down sufficient to not exit. The Devel bullet was designed with fins for the purpose of cutting tissue. I believe the real issue was unreliable feeding.

[Aksarben]

The Devel patent was 25 years ago. Edison had failed at many light bulb designs before he found one that worked. Now, his invention, is quickly being replaced by LED lighting, more efficient, longer life, less energy used. Not saying lead bullets are bad, but saying there should always be searching for ways to improve things. Guns & Ammo even gave PolyCase an award of Ammunition of the Year 2015. http://www.polycaseammo.com/5218/

[BehindBlueI's]

The Devel patent was 25 years ago. Edison had failed at many light bulb designs before he found one that worked. Now, his invention, is quickly being replaced by LED lighting, more efficient, longer life, less energy used. Not saying lead bullets are bad, but saying there should always be searching for ways to improve things. Guns & Ammo even gave PolyCase an award of Ammunition of the Year 2015. http://www.polycaseammo.com/5218/

Oh gosh, Guns & Ammo liked it? Well, holy shit, then it's got to be good. Load them up in your Taurus Curve (which they also glowingly reviewed) and go get'em Vern.

You didn't come here to learn, you came to preach. You're preaching bullshit. Perhaps you really believe your bullshit, but it's bullshit none the less. The good news is you'll probably never be called upon to prove your bullshit when your life is on the line. You have the luxury of carrying your shark repellent in your pocket through the woods and assuming it works because no shark attacked you. The only reason people like DocGKR bother to respond to you is so that someone else who doesn't know what they don't know don't stumble upon your bullshit unchallenged and believe it.

Bullshit information can get people hurt. G&A at least gets paid to broadcast bullshit into the public realm.