Lehigh has changed my idea of a field pistol

[GJM]

In the quest for a semi-auto pistol that would reliably launch a bullet with the reasonable possibility of penetrating a bear's skull, I went through a slew of pistols. After trying Glock 20 and 29 pistols, third Gen S&W 10mm models, and numerous .40 pistols with hard cast loads, I ended with the HK USP FS .45, and .45 Super loads, as this was hands down the most reliable pistol/cartridge combination I tested, and I found the others lacking in reliability when shooting penetrator style loads.

For the last year I have been testing the Lehigh Xtreme penetrator bullet as loaded by Underwood, in .45 Super, .45+P, .40 S&W and 9mm. My wife and I have shot this ammo in USP FS .45, HK45C, P2000 .40, PX4C 9, PX4 FS .40, Glock 22/23/27, USP FS .40, USP T 9, and probably some more types I have forgotten. We have yet to experience a single stoppage in any pistol we have tested the Lehigh Xtreme bullets in. I attribute this to the bullet being solid jacketed and despite having cutting edges, they are within a FMJ ball profile.

Since the Underwood Lehigh loads function reliably and by construction/velocity have the capability of penetrating a bear's skull, I have come to believe that any field pistol you have, that you verify function of this ammo, is now your "field pistol." Right now, I am partial to Underwood .40, as it is 140 grains at 1,200 fps which is right where I would like to be with a pistol penetrating load, it is still relatively soft shooting, and is very accurate in the pistols I have tested it.

[FPS]

Here is a guy shooting the 9mm load through a bear skull. Very encouraging.


https://youtu.be/1Dv5LSsss3U

[JHC]

Here is a guy shooting the 9mm load through a bear skull. Very encouraging.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dv5LSsss3U

Thanks for posting that. If comparable skulls were more widely available I think some would be surprised how well a lot of service pistol caliber ammo would work on them. Just a bet.

Right next to that one on youtube was this pretty fast bear charge with the shotgun stop. Russian I assume.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8R9fwsEA6M

Because "field pistol". And bear.

[Boxy]

I would be interesting to know how the subject bullet performs in actual field use in putting down animals.

[LSP552]

Thanks George, great info. This might actually be the only reason I've had to buy a Glock 22....

[JTQ]

Does Black Hills use the same bullet in their Honey Badger rounds?

http://www.brownells.com/ammunition/handgun-ammo/45-acp-135gr-honeybadger-ammo-prod103287.aspx?avs%7cCartridge_1=AXX_45+Auto+(ACP )&avs%7cManufacturer_1=black+hills+ammunition

[Dave Williams]

What is the consensus on these type of rounds for shooting people?

[Dagga Boy]

Much of your testing has changed a lot of my ideas about this stuff. I was lucky that during my one bear issue that luckily did not result in having to shoot the bear, I was carrying my Ruger Alaskan in .454 Casull that is still my current favorite back country fishing gun. I would have no issues now with going to my USP 45 Expert with the +P .45 as a universal woods and two legged gun. Federal +P .45 HST for people and the Underwood round in the back country. I would think POI would be really close with both loads, and my gun will be getting custom fixed sights that could be zero'd right to POI. Where I see huge potential for 9mm or .40 is for those who bicycle in the back country. My Bowen S&W 296 was my go to mountain biking gun in the Eastern Sierras and Big Bear, that would be easily replaced with a P2000SK or Glock 26/27. Good stuff George.

[5pins]

Does Black Hills use the same bullet in their Honey Badger rounds?

http://www.brownells.com/ammunition/handgun-ammo/45-acp-135gr-honeybadger-ammo-prod103287.aspx?avs%7cCartridge_1=AXX_45+Auto+(ACP )&avs%7cManufacturer_1=black+hills+ammunition


That looks like their Xtreme Defense, not the penetrator.

[scw2]

Thanks George, great info. This might actually be the only reason I've had to buy a Glock 22....

Good news! Saw new G22's on sale at Palmetto state armory for ~$400 this morning. Not sure what their shipping cost is on top of that or what your ffl costs might be, but seemed like a great price.

[Balisong]

In the quest for a semi-auto pistol that would reliably launch a bullet with the reasonable possibility of penetrating a bear's skull, I went through a slew of pistols. After trying Glock 20 and 29 pistols, third Gen S&W 10mm models, and numerous .40 pistols with hard cast loads, I ended with the HK USP FS .45, and .45 Super loads, as this was hands down the most reliable pistol/cartridge combination I tested, and I found the others lacking in reliability when shooting penetrator style loads.

For the last year I have been testing the Lehigh Xtreme penetrator bullet as loaded by Underwood, in .45 Super, .45+P, .40 S&W and 9mm. My wife and I have shot this ammo in USP FS .45, HK45C, P2000 .40, PX4C 9, PX4 FS .40, Glock 22/23/27, USP FS .40, USP T 9, and probably some more types I have forgotten. We have yet to experience a single stoppage in any pistol we have tested the Lehigh Xtreme bullets in. I attribute this to the bullet being solid jacketed and despite having cutting edges, they are within a FMJ ball profile.

Since the Underwood Lehigh loads function reliably and by construction/velocity have the capability of penetrating a bear's skull, I have come to believe that any field pistol you have, that you verify function of this ammo, is now your "field pistol." Right now, I am partial to Underwood .40, as it is 140 grains at 1,200 fps which is right where I would like to be with a pistol penetrating load, it is still relatively soft shooting, and is very accurate in the pistols I have tested it.

Thanks for sharing! Your posts on the field gun thread have given me a lot of food for thought. As I'm transitioning to the USP40C as my EDC I've been planning on eventually getting a USP45C and the +P Lehigh loads for my hiking gun. But I've also wondered if the .40 Lehigh would do the trick in the meantime since I already own that gun. I think this is the first time I've seen you mention the .40, but since you hold it in high regard, I'm sure it's good to go. Have you or anyone else seen any penetration testing or real life performance experience on the .40 vs +P 45 with this bullet?

[GJM]

Thanks for sharing! Your posts on the field gun thread have given me a lot of food for thought. As I'm transitioning to the USP40C as my EDC I've been planning on eventually getting a USP45C and the +P Lehigh loads for my hiking gun. But I've also wondered if the .40 Lehigh would do the trick in the meantime since I already own that gun. I think this is the first time I've seen you mention the .40, but since you hold it in high regard, I'm sure it's good to go. Have you or anyone else seen any penetration testing or real life performance experience on the .40 vs +P 45 with this bullet?

The actual testing as regards penetration on a bear has been sparse. The .40 is 140 grains at 1,200 fps and the .45+P is 200 grains at 1,000 fps. The .40 holds more rounds and you own it, so that is probably the way to go for the field niche, unless you are looking for a reason to get another pistol.

[Father of 3]

P30 Police Trades in 40 for $414

https://www.kingsfirearmsonline.com/products/semi-automatic-hk-hk-p30-v3

[Balisong]

The actual testing as regards penetration on a bear has been sparse. The .40 is 140 grains at 1,200 fps and the .45+P is 200 grains at 1,000 fps. The .40 holds more rounds and you own it, so that is probably the way to go for the field niche, unless you are looking for a reason to get another pistol.

Thanks. Yeah, I wouldn't feel underpowered with that 40 load. In my area the most dangerous wildlife would be javelina and mountain lion, and from what I understand the mountain lions are usually very skittish of humans. But also from what I understand javelina have very tough skulls, so I want a good penetrating round. Since these don't expand, I like the idea of the bigger heavier 45, but I'm sure the 40 will have more than adequate penetration for my needs

[David S.]

P30 Police Trades in 40 for $414

https://www.kingsfirearmsonline.com/products/semi-automatic-hk-hk-p30-v3

My pocketbook is happy that isn't a LEM.

[Dagga Boy]

I am going to give a bit of a multi decade assessment devoid of my normal fanboy. In 9mm, HK makes solid guns, but there is plenty of great competition and it is really a choice of what works best for you without many wrong answers. When it comes to .40 and .45 in a polymer framed gun shooting high performance loads, HK is the only thing I would consider....period.

[PD Sgt.]

After going through the field gun thread (and also wanting a DA/SA .45 for AIWB carry) I ditched my Glock 29 and picked up a HK45C. I wanted something that I could conceal relatively easily with the ability to change purposes from street to field as easily as changing magazines/ammo. I agree with Dagga that nobody overbuilds a polymer .45 like HK, so the choice was easy for me.

So far I have been vetting it on standard pressure and +P 230 grain HST. I need to get some Super to run through it as well but it has been a little hard for me to find locally. I will also be checking out Lehigh offerings as well.

[GJM]

After going through the field gun thread (and also wanting a DA/SA .45 for AIWB carry) I ditched my Glock 29 and picked up a HK45C. I wanted something that I could conceal relatively easily with the ability to change purposes from street to field as easily as changing magazines/ammo. I agree with Dagga that nobody overbuilds a polymer .45 like HK, so the choice was easy for me.

So far I have been vetting it on standard pressure and +P 230 grain HST. I need to get some Super to run through it as well but it has been a little hard for me to find locally. I will also be checking out Lehigh offerings as well.

The two loads I would look at first for the HK45C for field use are the Underwood .45+P and Underwood .45 Super loadings with the Lehigh Xtreme penetrator bullet. The +P is listed at 1,000 and the Super at 1,100 fps. If I was not around grizzly bears, I think I would go +P Underwood. The Buffalo Bore 230 FMJ-FP Super load has run in a half dozen HK45C pistols (but not the USP C), but I see no reason for it with the Underwood, and besides a better penetrating bullet, I think the Underwood will feed better.

[Jeep]

I am going to give a bit of a multi decade assessment devoid of my normal fanboy. In 9mm, HK makes solid guns, but there is plenty of great competition and it is really a choice of what works best for you without many wrong answers. When it comes to .40 and .45 in a polymer framed gun shooting high performance loads, HK is the only thing I would consider....period.

Personally I wouldn't use a G22--I've had bad luck with them and less-than-standard ammo--but I would be willing to carry my M&P .40. It has shot every weird and regular load I've put in it. They are very underrated pistols.

[Clusterfrack]

I've been meaning to work up and test a 10mm Lehigh load for the Glock 20...

[Dagga Boy]

Personally I wouldn't use a G22--I've had bad luck with them and less-than-standard ammo--but I would be willing to carry my M&P .40. It has shot every weird and regular load I've put in it. They are very underrated pistols.

I have pictures somewhere of my Glock 22 in two pieces.....so I am with you. If it wasn't an HK, I would go with an M&P in .40 or .45 as my next choice. In an all steel gun.......I got to shoot a good bit of someone else's ammo through the stainless SIG 10 mm and liked it, but a USP Expert with +P .45 or .45 Super would be my ideal for the Modern Semi-Auto Field Gun.

[Nephrology]

I have been very happy with my M&P45 but I have only fed it 230gr hardball. Might give some of Underwood's stuff a try... I've been very happy with my Glock 35 but probably wouldn't want to mess with very hot .40 in it.

[PD Sgt.]

The two loads I would look at first for the HK45C for field use are the Underwood .45+P and Underwood .45 Super loadings with the Lehigh Xtreme penetrator bullet. The +P is listed at 1,000 and the Super at 1,100 fps. If I was not around grizzly bears, I think I would go +P Underwood. The Buffalo Bore 230 FMJ-FP Super load has run in a half dozen HK45C pistols (but not the USP C), but I see no reason for it with the Underwood, and besides a better penetrating bullet, I think the Underwood will feed better.

Thanks, I picked this up with an eye towards hiking in the Colorado Rockies where the biggest concerns are mountain lions and black bears. I will definitely check these suggestions out.

[JonInWA]

I have pictures somewhere of my Glock 22 in two pieces.....so I am with you. If it wasn't an HK, I would go with an M&P in .40 or .45 as my next choice. In an all steel gun.......I got to shoot a good bit of someone else's ammo through the stainless SIG 10 mm and liked it, but a USP Expert with +P .45 or .45 Super would be my ideal for the Modern Semi-Auto Field Gun.

Dagga, while I certainly agree with the slant towards things HK, my immediate question regarding the jig-sawed G22: Was it a Gen 3 (or earlier) or a Gen4? My thought is that a Gen4 should be pretty much sufficient (unless your exploded one was a Gen4), but it might be worth a call into Underwood/Lehigh just to make sure.

I'm pretty pleased with using a .40 in the Pacific NW as a hiking/wilderness gun-specifically my Gen4 G22, HK VP40 and P30L in light LEM (today when we were hiking in the Snoqualmie/Issaquah Alps area, it was a P30L that was tasked). Any of them size-wise would be easier for my wife to handle than my Glock Gen 3 "Big Butt" G21, which I'll still use as a wilderness/hunting gun when she's not present.

Best, Jon

[GJM]

Data point -- my wife and I have three Gen 4 Glock 22 pistols, and two of them are problematic in terms of reliability. I have a couple year old Gen 4 23 that is north of 1,500 rounds, including Underwood Lehigh, and is yet to stumble.

[Nephrology]

Data point -- my wife and I have three Gen 4 Glock 22 pistols, and two of them are problematic in terms of reliability. I have a couple year old Gen 4 23 that is north of 1,500 rounds, including Underwood Lehigh, and is yet to stumble.

I had the exact opposite experience -a G4G35 at 1645 documented rounds with only 1 malfunction using older magazines; 0 malfunctions in the newest iteration. My G4G23 choked repeatedly, even with 180gr Federal HST.

[richiecotite]

Personally I wouldn't use a G22--I've had bad luck with them and less-than-standard ammo--but I would be willing to carry my M&P .40. It has shot every weird and regular load I've put in it. They are very underrated pistols.

Agree with the M&P 40.

I've been playing with some heavy bullets (200 gr xtp's and doubletap 200 gr WFNGC) and 800x after reading SDglock's heavy 40 thread over on glock talk. I've gotten some very impressive velocities using max load data, and the 100 rounds I've loaded and shot gave me no issues, recoil or feeding


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GJM]

I had the exact opposite experience -a G4G35 at 1645 documented rounds with only 1 malfunction using older magazines; 0 malfunctions in the newest iteration. My G4G23 choked repeatedly, even with 180gr Federal HST.

Bolke may be smarter than he looks on that HK 40/45 thing......

[Jeep]

Bolke may be smarter than he looks on that HK 40/45 thing......

I have a couple of Gen 4 G22's. They are fine with very standard ammo. They don't like hot loads. I had an (admittedly early) Gen 4 G23. That is back when they were saying that the Gen 4 .40 guns were fine and the only problem with the 9mm's was limp wristing. It choked on hot loads and was finicky about regular ones.

From my perspective, if those Lehigh rounds penetrate, and if your pistol will reliably fire 140 grain loads at 1200 fps, that is an about ideal combination. No brutal recoil so you can follow up rapidly and I think it will get more penetration than most .45 loads.

And, as an increasingly old guy, I like polymer pistols because they are lighter and cause less back pain.

[Dagga Boy]

While we were never a .40 agency, we were a big .45 one. The +P .45 HST was really hard on the older SIG's, Glock 21's and 1911's. My guys reported back to me after retirement that the one gun that they had zero issues with with the +P loads were the HK USP .45's.

My broke in half Glock was a Gen 3. I simply do not trust a 9 mm made into a .40, versus things built as .40's first and foremost.

[El Cid]

I've been meaning to work up and test a 10mm Lehigh load for the Glock 20...

I've been very happy with the Underwood loading in my 10mm G40. I'm trying to set up some testing.

[Lester Polfus]

I'm just not a fan of the .40 for many reasons. One of them is watching other people blow up .40's in the 90's and early 2000's, usually Glock. I think that had alot to do with the fact that you can get by with some sloppy reloading practices and using the book max load as a starting point when it comes to turn of the century cartridges like 9mm and .45 in modern guns.

There's just not that much "room" in the .40.

[JHC]

I have a couple of Gen 4 G22's. They are fine with very standard ammo. They don't like hot loads. I had an (admittedly early) Gen 4 G23. That is back when they were saying that the Gen 4 .40 guns were fine and the only problem with the 9mm's was limp wristing. It choked on hot loads and was finicky about regular ones.

From my perspective, if those Lehigh rounds penetrate, and if your pistol will reliably fire 140 grain loads at 1200 fps, that is an about ideal combination. No brutal recoil so you can follow up rapidly and I think it will get more penetration than most .45 loads.

And, as an increasingly old guy, I like polymer pistols because they are lighter and cause less back pain.

My Gen 4 G22 will have to blow up before I'd part with it. It is one I think a KKM barrel would be wasted on. Fantastic specimen.

In the context of .40 Lehigh loads as a field pistol; that's in lieu of what? Magnum revolvers?

Just as GJM isn't running 5 figures worth of training volume .45 Super, folks don't drill magnum wheelie loads like that either. If my G22 has a service life of 30K vs whatever 9mm's have I'll probably never find out.

During a lot of comparisons this year, I've proven to my satisfaction that in a "contextual" shooting challenge my G22 doesn't give up enough to my 17s to really worry about. It's the same thing GJM has demonstrated with his USP FS between the ACP+P and Super.

.40 seems to have a new niche as a service pistol caliber, field pistol in a carry friendly form factor vs horse pistols.

[JonInWA]

While we were never a .40 agency, we were a big .45 one. The +P .45 HST was really hard on the older SIG's, Glock 21's and 1911's. My guys reported back to me after retirement that the one gun that they had zero issues with with the +P loads were the HK USP .45's.

My broke in half Glock was a Gen 3. I simply do not trust a 9 mm made into a .40, versus things built as .40's first and foremost.

Again, while I agree with HK as probably being the strongest in terms of managing higher-pressure loadings, I do think that Glock has surmounted the 9-converted-to-.40 concerns with the Gen4 G22, which if anything over-compensated in the role, given the initial issues with the 9mm G17 Gen4s using the same RSAs and the .40 G22's initially.

But from what we're seeing here from trusted p-f members, it would seem that there's a greater likelihood of an HK running without operational issues with these higher-pressure loads than Glocks per se, although some Glocks seem to be running fine. It would seem that the prudent thing to do would be to test one's individual Glock with such loads prior to carrying them in harm's way in the wilderness (and, for that matter, any pistol, if only to establish familiarity with the load characteristics and POA/POI).

Best, Jon

[Dagga Boy]

The "some Glocks seem to be running fine" is the issue for me. Having had a bunch of running great Glocks, and a few complete fricking abortions, the "Generations", variants on Generations, and constant "evolvement" of parts is what has turned me off of basically conducting an experiment every time I have bought a post early Gen 3 Glock.

JHC...in the context you present, I agree. For someone buying a field pistol intending on a typical big bore Revolver Round count, they are likely viable, especially if set up and modified specifically for the task at hand. If it was me.....find a .45 GAP, convert it to .40 and that would be my .40 Glock Field Pistol.

[BigDaddy]

All this talk about G22 and G23 blowing up or failing make me love my 229 all the more.

[OlongJohnson]

My broke in half Glock was a Gen 3. I simply do not trust a 9 mm made into a .40, versus things built as .40's first and foremost.

I ran the numbers on hoop stress for the thin part of the chamber on the sides for a 9mm vs .40. Measured my G34 barrel, assumed the .40 chamber has the same clearance as the 9mm. It works out to ~32% more stress on the material for the same pressure due to the reduction in thickness of the thinnest part of the barrel.

A CIP proof load is 30% over max pressure.

So shooting .40 in a Glock is, at least with regard to the barrel's containment of the pressure in a hoop stress mode, slightly more severe (by a few percent) than running nothing but CIP proof loads in a 9mm. Given this analogy, it's less surprising that there seems to be a small but noticeable percentage of the population that reaches failure and splits the chamber vertically, even without defective loads or all the other excuses given.

Also of note, the stress is greatest on the ID of the hoop, so cracks will begin to form in the chamber wall, rather than on the external surfaces that are more easily inspected.

Personally, I wouldn't own a Glock in .40.

[Jeep]

All this talk about G22 and G23 blowing up or failing make me love my 229 all the more.

The 229, being built for the .40 handles it well. But there is that high bore axis issue for an already snappy round.

[Jeep]

The "some Glocks seem to be running fine" is the issue for me. Having had a bunch of running great Glocks, and a few complete fricking abortions, the "Generations", variants on Generations, and constant "evolvement" of parts is what has turned me off of basically conducting an experiment every time I have bought a post early Gen 3 Glock.



^This.^ The .40 is a useful round for many purposes but why go Glock and risk problems when there are numerous pistols built for the cartridge, including the UPS, M&P and 229?

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

This is precisely why I have landed at .40 S&W for all around use, as I cannot own more than a couple solid pistols at any given time to get more specialized niche filling. Very versatile cartridge, but again as others have said I will only own a small few pistol models in this cartridge. USP, P229 are likely the two best choices, but anything H&K would be solid also.

[Bigghoss]

Makes me think I ought to sell the LEO trade-in 2nd gen G22 I bought because it was $300 and buy an LEO trade-in M&P .40. Actually I should buy another PX4.

[entropy]

I had a duty HK USPc .40 that had over an honest 50k of 165gr GoldDot and 180 HST run thru it. It finally got swapped out after repeated breakage of the flatspring. (For whatever the reason.) Even then, being a LEM, it still fired abeit with the heavy pull.

I have the upmost confidence in any such HK pistol.

[Kimura]

^This.^ The .40 is a useful round for many purposes but why go Glock and risk problems when there are numerous pistols built for the cartridge, including the UPS, M&P and 229?

If you have GJM's mindset, "everything/all calibers", you probably wouldn't. But if you're a one type of gun guy and your edc is a Glock, you might also want your "woods" gun to be a Glock. Or if you don't like any of those other pistols, not a lot of choices left.

The one thing I haven't seen mentioned, though maybe I just missed it, why not try a 29 or 20 with a .40 conversion barrel? It would be fairly inexpensive to try. And I like the .45 GAP idea just because of the size of the pistol, but I don't think I've ever seen a .40 conversion barrel for it.

[Dagga Boy]

https://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/ati-glock-37-drop-in-conversion-barrel-45-gap-to-40-sampw?a=2078523

[GJM]

My experience is a Glock in .40 may (or may not) function reliably, but an HK in .40/45 will function reliably.

[OlongJohnson]

If it was me.....find a .45 GAP, convert it to .40 and that would be my .40 Glock Field Pistol.

The diameter difference between .45 GAP rim is ~44 percent greater than the difference between 9mm and .40, where many find they obtain acceptable function on the range but few claim the confidence to rely on it for defense. Does a .45 GAP slide and extractor run .40 cases sufficiently reliably for defense?

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

https://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/ati-glock-37-drop-in-conversion-barrel-45-gap-to-40-sampw?a=2078523

Or you could just keep things boring and get a brand new H&K online for roughly the same price as Glock's commonly sell for new...

[4gallonbucket]

The diameter difference between .45 GAP rim is ~44 percent greater than the difference between 9mm and .40, where many find they obtain acceptable function on the range but few claim the confidence to rely on it for defense. Does a .45 GAP slide and extractor run .40 cases sufficiently reliably for defense?

That 45 gap to 40 sw conversion barrel comes with a magazine follower and an extractor. Mag follower is because the Glock 22/23/27 mag will not hold slide open on empty in a 37/38/39 -- hence the follower tweak. Extractor is for the 40sw rim.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

FWIW, the only caliber conversion that is an OK idea with Glock's... or really ANY semiauto pistol is .40 to .357 Sig or vice versa. Even then, you can still have problems if the pistol wasn't designed/tested for this.

Case in point, H&K never got the .357 Sig to work well enough in the USP Full Size to warrant releasing... yet the USP Compact was sold factory .357 Sig. You can still drop in factory .357 Sig barrels for USPC, so that is one conversion I can get behind given H&K parts consistency.

The Glocksmith recommends only .40<.357, yet the .357 Sig in Glock platform has been alleged by Buffalo Bore to be dangerous regarding bullet set back due to the magazine sitting low in the frame vs Sig's pistol's which the cartridge was designed to work in. Maybe not a problem if you don't repeatedly chamber the same cartridge, but... kinda sorta.

I understand the desire to 'easily' have more than one caliber to a gun, but the reality is technology just really doesn't support this well yet... at least if you want something to work as it should/safely (and keep working as it should, safely). IF your name is Bubba and you like to drink while slapping/tickling shotgun triggers... this probably doesn't apply.

[JonInWA]

This may or may not be of concern, but one area where Glock absolutely shines pretty much over anything else is in terms of the ease of detailed disassembly/reassembly. For the vast, vast majority of shooters, field-stripping will fully suffice for all routine cleaning and lubing. However (and this is a potentially huge "however," at least for me situationally) is that should I a dump a gun into a muddy, silty or salty water (or for that matter, accidentally totally immerse it in any media that could intrusively gum up the action, either immediately or eventually if not expeditiously addressed), only a Glock is easily and quickly able to be partially or totally disassembled to clean, dry minimally lube, easily reassemble and move on.

Owning both Glocks and HKs (amongst others), I don't contest that, component-for-component an HK is of higher quality (and probably stronger steels). It will probably be at least slightly more accurate. I concur that there's a greater chance of an average .40 HK running with zero operational issues than much, if not most competitors. But while field-stripping, and even detail-disassembling an HK slide is no big deal, going down into the receiver is much more demanding, and more tool-intensive, and much more likely needing to be performed in an administrative, well-lit environment.

I think that it's worthy of note that some well-respected, vetted p-f members have reservations about .40 Glocks. I totally get that. Their individual and cumulative round counts on their .40 Glocks (and other platforms) is significantly greater than mine. I personally would be at least somewhat, if not extremely wary of running high-pressure loads through any pre-Gen4 .40 Glock. If I have a choice in choosing between Glock and HK, what I'd personally choose would significantly depend on the perceived potentially necessity of needing to perform a detail disassembly in the environment that I was in. If I'm doing a day hike, my choices are significantly larger than if I were on a protracted wilderness trip.

Another factor to consider in the selection process is if you genuinely need the higher pressure/greater penetration cartridges that have been discussed in the thread. In the lower 48 states, my feeling is that for black bear, cougar, mountain lions DocGKR-vetted duty ammo will probably suffice, but against an enraged moose, elk, brown/grizzly bear or similar, the higher-pressure, greater penetrative cartridges are more desirable. If you don't need the higher-pressure cartridges, I'm personally comfortable with a Gen4 G22 (or, to be totally fair and objective, a Gen4 G22 that has sufficiently proven itself as reliable). For the higher-pressure stuff, I'd be more inclined (with caveats as mentioned above) to go with an HK .40.

Regarding SIG P229s, I'd be wary of the component quality of post-Cohen era guns-post 2005 pieces. Intrinsically the SIGS are exceptionally well designed, but their durability may be questionable, given SIG's predilection to start with exceptionally high quality components, and then shift to lower cost/quality offshore alternative components over time in the manufacturing cycle. And a detailed disassembly/reassembly of a SIG is certainly more difficult that that of a Glock, but probably on par or marginally easier than that of an HK. The Smith & Wesson M&P .40s seem to have acquired a good reputation, but I'm afraid that my perception of M&Ps in general has been probably irrevocably tainted by their issues and S&W's wack-a-mole solution towards their fixes (or the perceived necessity to substitute aftermarket components for the OEM ones), when it's easy enough simply to default to other alternative platforms.

Regardless, one of the key take-outs out of this discussion for me is the viability of the .40 cartridge/platform as a wilderness selection.

Best, Jon

[GJM]

Another factor to consider in the selection process is if you genuinely need the higher pressure/greater penetration cartridges that have been discussed in the thread. In the lower 48 states, my feeling is that for black bear, cougar, mountain lions DocGKR-vetted duty ammo will probably suffice, but against an enraged moose, elk, brown/grizzly bear or similar, the higher-pressure, greater penetrative cartridges are more desirable. If you don't need the higher-pressure cartridges, I'm personally comfortable with a Gen4 G22 (or, to be totally fair and objective, a Gen4 G22 that has sufficiently proven itself as reliable). For the higher-pressure stuff, I'd be more inclined (with caveats as mentioned above) to go with an HK .40.

Best, Jon

A neat thing about the Underwood Lehigh loadings, is they are reasonably modest in power factor for their respective caliber, which I believe, along with their FMJ-like bullet profile contributes to their reliability.

If I wanted to take a Glock on an extended wilderness trip, it would likely be a 17 as it gives you user serviceability and reliability, while the difference in penetration between 9 and .40 Underwood is likely to be rounding error.

[JonInWA]

A neat thing about the Underwood Lehigh loadings, is they are reasonably modest in power factor for their respective caliber, which I believe, along with their FMJ-like bullet profile contributes to their reliability.

If I wanted to take a Glock on an extended wilderness trip, it would likely be a 17 as it gives you user serviceability and reliability, while the difference in penetration between 9 and .40 Underwood is likely to be rounding error.

Excellent points-or possibly going with a G34, where you'd reap benefits from the increased barrel length for both velocity and sight plane.

One of the reasons that I haven't felt inclined to re-travel the .357 SIG route (after owning and experimenting with several .357 SG platforms over the years) is my feeling that between a G34 with Winchester 127 gr +P+ in 9mm, or with some of the .40 selections/alternatives we're discussing, the purpose, position and rationales for .357 SIG are significantly eroded, if not eliminated, at least from a ballistic and operational standpoint.

Best, Jon

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Excellent points-or possibly going with a G34, where you'd reap benefits from the increased barrel length for both velocity and sight plane.

Best, Jon

Windows are for gaming, no place for them on a field/defense pistol IMO... unless it's a 92 variant... then it's probably OK.

[JHC]

A neat thing about the Underwood Lehigh loadings, is they are reasonably modest in power factor for their respective caliber, which I believe, along with their FMJ-like bullet profile contributes to their reliability.

If I wanted to take a Glock on an extended wilderness trip, it would likely be a 17 as it gives you user serviceability and reliability, while the difference in penetration between 9 and .40 Underwood is likely to be rounding error.

Yessiree! Right there!

[JonInWA]

Windows are for gaming, no place for them on a field/defense pistol IMO... unless it's a 92 variant... then it's probably OK.

Other than one possibly anecdotal story of an LEO jamming up his G34 or G35 with loose change that worked its way into the slide through the cut-out (and yeah, I'm a little curious how THAT occurred...) , I haven't heard of issues due to this, and there have been multiple organizations that have issued or authorized their use.

Best, Jon

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Other than one possibly anecdotal story of an LEO jamming up his G34 or G35 with loose change that worked its way into the slide through the cut-out (and yeah, I'm a little curious how THAT occurred...) , I haven't heard of issues due to this, and there have been multiple organizations that have issued or authorized their use.

Best, Jon

Sure, you can use them... and some obviously do for tactical work, but why introduce a gaping hole in the slide that COULD potentially tie your gun up. I seriously doubt much testing has been done to make any sort of claims as to just how unlikely this is to happen... I mean I'm sure the odds are rather slim... but why chance it?

[1slow]

Other than one possibly anecdotal story of an LEO jamming up his G34 or G35 with loose change that worked its way into the slide through the cut-out (and yeah, I'm a little curious how THAT occurred...) , I haven't heard of issues due to this, and there have been multiple organizations that have issued or authorized their use.

Best, Jon

In John Farnham's Instructor class in GA, a G34 dropped into fine sand. Captive recoil spring assembly ceased to work and needed to be replaced. YMMV. I do not want extra holes in a slide.

[JTQ]

Other than one possibly anecdotal story of an LEO jamming up his G34 or G35 ...
Best, Jon
I agree it would be freakishly unlikely to happen. However, with all the weak 9mm Glock ejection comments we've seen on the forum, I'm wondering if you can stick an empty case in that opening and lock the slide?

[JonInWA]

In John Farnham's Instructor class in GA, a G34 dropped into fine sand. Captive recoil spring assembly ceased to work and needed to be replaced. YMMV. I do not want extra holes in a slide.

Gen4, I assume? Reportedly that concern is why Tier One units are sticking with Gen 3 Glocks.

Best, Jon

[Jeep]

Sure, you can use them... and some obviously do for tactical work, but why introduce a gaping hole in the slide that COULD potentially tie your gun up. I seriously doubt much testing has been done to make any sort of claims as to just how unlikely this is to happen... I mean I'm sure the odds are rather slim... but why chance it?

Some guys at Ft. Bragg who shoot a lot and have a reputation for being very careful about their gear are reputedly using 34's right now. Personally, I wouldn't like holes like that in a slide for carrying in swamps etc., but in urban environments I don't see problem.

[Kimura]

https://www.sportsmansguide.com/product/index/ati-glock-37-drop-in-conversion-barrel-45-gap-to-40-sampw?a=2078523

Thanks.

[OlongJohnson]

This thread is about field pistols. There is another thread ongoing right now about function testing pistols in field conditions, which may be wet and/or muddy. (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27143-HK-P30-Beretta-PX4-and-Glock-17-Adverse-Conditions-Test) It seems to be especially relevant in any non-urban or otherwise potentially dirty environment. I know when I'm doing construction work overhead, my front pockets end up with debris in the bottom. I figure any holster not fully covered by a garment would be susceptible to the same.

I'm convinced that the reason the Rex Zero 1 does better in MAC's dirt tests than the actual Sig is simply that the dust cover of the Rex Zero 1 goes all the way forward on the slide, like a Glock. Because of that, when the pistol is pressed into the sticky debris, the debris only sees the dust cover. On the Sig, the sticky debris sticks to the side of the slide that's exposed ahead of the dust cover. The debris is drawn back into the interface between slide and frame rails when the action cycles, and it jams up almost immediately. Not to mention the damage done to the rails on the frame... So keeping foreign matter outside the gun in a foreign-matter-rich environment really does count for something.

In the case of a G34, G35 or G17L used as a field pistol, even a little bit of sand or debris of the right/wrong size making its way to the barrel could jam it up when the slide cycles. Maybe someone could come up with an insert that would lock in and fill the hole in the slide, not interfere with the operation, and be inherently reliable.

I suspect the Beretta 92 variants may be a little less susceptible to this because they are SO open.

Dagga Boy's notion of a USP Expert (or Elite) provides the additional barrel length without the open slide, and they are available in all three calibers. Only odd thing is that if your grip is not adequately vise-like, the slide cycle may seem surprisingly slow.

[JHC]

A neat thing about the Underwood Lehigh loadings, is they are reasonably modest in power factor for their respective caliber, which I believe, along with their FMJ-like bullet profile contributes to their reliability.

If I wanted to take a Glock on an extended wilderness trip, it would likely be a 17 as it gives you user serviceability and reliability, while the difference in penetration between 9 and .40 Underwood is likely to be rounding error.
I KNOW we can pop a bruin brain pan with a good 9mm. I just haven't proved it yet. :D

[Duelist]

Back when I was in college the first time, a guy I worked with raised hogs. He used a 9mm Beretta to the brain to put them down when he slaughtered them. Bang-flop, every time. I know butchering hogs isn't the same thing as field use on dangerous animals, but it does kind of indicate that the 9mm can do a lot more than it's given credit for.

[GJM]

This thread is about field pistols. There is another thread ongoing right now about function testing pistols in field conditions, which may be wet and/or muddy. (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27143-HK-P30-Beretta-PX4-and-Glock-17-Adverse-Conditions-Test) It seems to be especially relevant in any non-urban or otherwise potentially dirty environment. I know when I'm doing construction work overhead, my front pockets end up with debris in the bottom. I figure any holster not fully covered by a garment would be susceptible to the same.

I'm convinced that the reason the Rex Zero 1 does better in MAC's dirt tests than the actual Sig is simply that the dust cover of the Rex Zero 1 goes all the way forward on the slide, like a Glock. Because of that, when the pistol is pressed into the sticky debris, the debris only sees the dust cover. On the Sig, the sticky debris sticks to the side of the slide that's exposed ahead of the dust cover. The debris is drawn back into the interface between slide and frame rails when the action cycles, and it jams up almost immediately. Not to mention the damage done to the rails on the frame... So keeping foreign matter outside the gun in a foreign-matter-rich environment really does count for something.

In the case of a G34, G35 or G17L used as a field pistol, even a little bit of sand or debris of the right/wrong size making its way to the barrel could jam it up when the slide cycles. Maybe someone could come up with an insert that would lock in and fill the hole in the slide, not interfere with the operation, and be inherently reliable.

I suspect the Beretta 92 variants may be a little less susceptible to this because they are SO open.

Dagga Boy's notion of a USP Expert (or Elite) provides the additional barrel length without the open slide, and they are available in all three calibers. Only odd thing is that if your grip is not adequately vise-like, the slide cycle may seem surprisingly slow.


The Expert and Elite have fitted barrels, and because of these tighter tolerances. The USP full size and Tactical do not have fitted barrels, and are reputedly at least theoretically more reliable.

[OlongJohnson]

Does the fitting go beyond just the use of the O-ring? I wasn't aware of a difference in fitting between the Tactical and other models that use the O-ring.

I always thought the O-ring was brilliant, providing essentially zero-clearance lockup repeatability like a target-fitted bushing without the zero-clearance reliability risk. Instead, it should tend to wipe debris out of the muzzle/slide interface. Have you ever spoken with anyone at HK about using them without the O-ring?

[GJM]

Does the fitting go beyond just the use of the O-ring? I wasn't aware of a difference in fitting between the Tactical and other models that use the O-ring.

I always thought the O-ring was brilliant, providing essentially zero-clearance lockup repeatability like a target-fitted bushing without the zero-clearance reliability risk. Instead, it should tend to wipe debris out of the muzzle/slide interface. Have you ever spoken with anyone at HK about using them without the O-ring?

A high level person at HK, was via another PF member, the source of the info that the Expert/Elite had hand fitted barrels and to go with a USP FS or Tactical for ultimate reliability. I have read where people shot with and without the O ring, detecting no difference in accuracy, and that now exhausts my O ring knowledge.

[GJM]

Another thought before I forget. I have USP FS 45, 40 and 9mm pistols. I primarily use the 9mm USP models (FS, T and Expert) as sub-caliber trainers for the .40 and 45 USP models. Given how many great shooting 9mm pistol choices there are, almost all of which are easier to shoot than the USP FS 9, it is hard for me to justify a USP FS 9 for actual carry.

Both the USP .40 and 45 are so reliable launching field loads, that they have a special niche for me. I go back and forth on which I prefer. The 45 pistols seeem to have slightly better hybrid match LEM triggers and the recoil is slightly more pleasant. The USP .40 is just enough smaller than the 45 to handle better, it holds more cartridges, and the Trijicon HD sights regulate perfectly tip of the front sight when used on the .40 FS (45 is more drive the dot).

[OlongJohnson]

After further research, I agree that the standard FS model is the way to go for an ultra-reliable, all-conditions defensive tool.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Another thought before I forget. I have USP FS 45, 40 and 9mm pistols. I primarily use the 9mm USP models (FS, T and Expert) as sub-caliber trainers for the .40 and 45 USP models. Given how many great shooting 9mm pistol choices there are, almost all of which are easier to shoot than the USP FS 9, it is hard for me to justify a USP FS 9 for actual carry.

Both the USP .40 and 45 are so reliable launching field loads, that they have a special niche for me. I go back and forth on which I prefer. The 45 pistols seeem to have slightly better hybrid match LEM triggers and the recoil is slightly more pleasant. The USP .40 is just enough smaller than the 45 to handle better, it holds more cartridges, and the Trijicon HD sights regulate perfectly tip of the front sight when used on the .40 FS (45 is more drive the dot).

This is very much why I went with the USP 40, as it was originally designed for .40 it will be optimized for this over the 9mm which was adapted. It is at the ragged edge for me though of being 'too much gun' for my small hands to use, so that ruled out the .45 USP easily for me. The dual recoil spring setup is a carryover from the Mark 23, which was actually designed for .45 Super type loads so it is the best fit for super hot loads in a polymer pistol.

It is interesting that all pistols H&K made after the USP Full Size were released, they went away from the dual spring system (no, the SK's do not have the same type spring). The supposed reason was due to size contraints, as it required too much real estate up front on the dustcover. 9mm USP only makes sense as a small caliber trainer or also high volume of +P+ loads as the spring is just so much overkill for garden variety 9mm.

[SamAdams]

Another option is a 10mm Glock with 40 conversion barrel. I haven't tested the Lehigh loads with this yet, but have no concerns about durability. Since I already have a couple of 20sf pistols & Lone Wolf barrels this is probably the best option for me. And if I drive from the woods into a local town to stock up on provisions, I'd switch out a mag of Speer 40 GD.

[okie john]

If I wanted to take a Glock on an extended wilderness trip, it would likely be a 17 as it gives you user serviceability and reliability, while the difference in penetration between 9 and .40 Underwood is likely to be rounding error.

Would you consider a 9mm Glock with Underwood ammo--even though it clearly does NOT offer full USP/45 Super performance--to be an acceptable back-country choice?


Okie John

[SamAdams]

I imagine George's answer on the 9mm might be different for Alaska vs most of the Lower 48 ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Would you consider a 9mm Glock with Underwood ammo--even though it clearly does NOT offer full USP/45 Super performance--to be an acceptable back-country choice?

Okie John

Not GJM, but IMO perfectly acceptable assuming you don't hang out with Grizzly bears much.

[okie john]

I imagine George's answer on the 9mm might be different for Alaska vs most of the Lower 48 ?

Yes, lower 48. I should have made that clear.


Okie John

[rangerover]

Thanks for all the great info. I have some Speer Lawman 147g FMJ ammo. Do you think there is an appreciable difference in performance between that and the Lehigh? The densest woods I encounter are in the UP of Michigan. Thanks.

[El Cid]

Thanks for all the great info. I have some Speer Lawman 147g FMJ ammo. Do you think there is an appreciable difference in performance between that and the Lehigh? The densest woods I encounter are in the UP of Michigan. Thanks.

I wouldn't expect regular FMJ of any brand to be in the same ballpark as the solid copper Extreme Penetrator bullets.

[GJM]

My opinion is just that, so take it with a grain of salt.

In lower 48, I would happily go forth with my 9mm loaded with 124+P Gold Dot. I would carry an extra magazine or two of Underwood Lehigh ammo if I was concerned about bears, and switch to those magazines when in the field around bears. Of course, if I was really worried about bears, I would want my Benelli and Brenneke slugs.

If you have a reliable .40 or .45, and want to carry it in the field, it might be a skosh better than the 9 with Lehigh, but I wouldn't carry a less reliable or significantly harder to shoot gun just because of bears.

This is my multi-step process for bears.

1) Wait as long as possible to give the bear a chance to leave on its own.

2) Consider a warning shot as the bear closes, if you have capacity and conditions are favorable (good background, no family or dogs down range).

3) If time and distance allows, invest one round on a body shot, on the theory that bears don't like being shot, and that may cause the bear to run off.

4) If steps 1-3 are ineffective, shoot the brain with everything you have left, using a bullet that has the potential of penetrating to the brain.

[JHC]

My opinion is just that, so take it with a grain of salt.

In lower 48, I would happily go forth with my 9mm loaded with 124+P Gold Dot. I would carry an extra magazine or two of Underwood Lehigh ammo if I was concerned about bears, and switch to those magazines when in the field around bears. Of course, if I was really worried about bears, I would want my Benelli and Brenneke slugs.

If you have a reliable .40 or .45, and want to carry it in the field, it might be a skosh better than the 9 with Lehigh, but I wouldn't carry a less reliable or significantly harder to shoot gun just because of bears.

This is my multi-step process for bears.

1) Wait as long as possible to give the bear a chance to leave on its own.

2) Consider a warning shot as the bear closes, if you have capacity and conditions are favorable (good background, no family or dogs down range).

3) If time and distance allows, invest one round on a body shot, on the theory that bears don't like being shot, and that may cause the bear to run off.

4) If steps 1-3 are ineffective, shoot the brain with everything you have left, using a bullet that has the potential of penetrating to the brain.

IMO your numero uno gem of wisdom in this context which you told me before I visited AK a couple years back was that reliability and utter unconscious competence in handling the pistol chosen is more important than raw horsepower.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

I tend to agree with Tim Sundles of Buffalo Bore's approach to outdoors related stuff like this....

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=108

Also, here's a cool story of "The little 9mm that could" bring down a grizzly... using Buffalo Bore Hardcast.

https://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2016/8/10/alaska-outfitter-defends-fishermen-from-raging-grizzly-with-9mm-pistol/

[5pins]

I just finished loading up six 200gr penetrators in .45. I’m going to chrony then tomorrow and see how they do. Later I’m going shoot some into some Clear Ballistics gel and see how many blocks it takes to stop them.

19409

[SamAdams]

GJM - is bear spray part of your anti big bear strategy ?

Thanks


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[GJM]

I just finished loading up six 200gr penetrators in .45. I’m going to chrony then tomorrow and see how they do. Later I’m going shoot some into some Clear Ballistics gel and see how many blocks it takes to stop them.


Look forward to your testing. Underwood lists the +P Lehigh at 200 grains at 1,000 fps, and the Super at 1,100.


GJM - is bear spray part of your anti big bear strategy ?

Thanks


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

We have it to loan to people that don't possess adequate firearms skills, and we are happy to have someone in our party carry it and walk in front to deploy it. So far no takers. Notably, one long time friend I have worked with for twenty years, who is anti-gun, said "do you have your gun, as soon as we encountered bear poop on a hike back in July."

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

We have it to loan to people that don't possess adequate firearms skills, and we are happy to have someone in our party carry it and walk in front to deploy it. So far no takers. Notably, one long time friend I have worked with for twenty years, who is anti-gun, said "do you have your gun, as soon as we encountered bear poop on a hike back in July."

Funny how people change their tune once they realize they are responsible for their own safety and perceive a potential threat.

[GJM]

FIFY



Funny how people change their tune once they realize you are responsible for their safety and perceive a potential threat.

[okie john]

My opinion is just that, so take it with a grain of salt.

In lower 48, I would happily go forth with my 9mm loaded with 124+P Gold Dot. I would carry an extra magazine or two of Underwood Lehigh ammo if I was concerned about bears, and switch to those magazines when in the field around bears. Of course, if I was really worried about bears, I would want my Benelli and Brenneke slugs.

If you have a reliable .40 or .45, and want to carry it in the field, it might be a skosh better than the 9 with Lehigh, but I wouldn't carry a less reliable or significantly harder to shoot gun just because of bears.

This is my multi-step process for bears.

1) Wait as long as possible to give the bear a chance to leave on its own.

2) Consider a warning shot as the bear closes, if you have capacity and conditions are favorable (good background, no family or dogs down range).

3) If time and distance allows, invest one round on a body shot, on the theory that bears don't like being shot, and that may cause the bear to run off.

4) If steps 1-3 are ineffective, shoot the brain with everything you have left, using a bullet that has the potential of penetrating to the brain.

Thanks. This makes a lot of sense.


Okie John

[Doc_Glock]

I had picked up some 147 grain BB Outdoorsman 9mm hard cast for my woods load.

It is smoky, but seems reliable. Honestly it is so expensive I only ran maybe 50 rounds through the gun to test reliability.

Should I swap to the Underwood/Lehigh?

This is for a Glock 9mm.

[GJM]

I had picked up some 147 grain BB Outdoorsman 9m hard cast for my woods load.

It is smoky, but seems reliable, but honestly it is so expensive I only ran maybe 50 rounds through the gun to test reliability.

Should I swap to the Underwood/Lehigh?

This is for a Glock 9mm.

I would, both on account of hard cast and Glock barrels, which is not fully settled in my mind, and because the Lehigh bullet profile is more conducive to reliability.

[Chuck Haggard]

On Larry Mudget's site he recommends the 147gr hard cast boutique loads for the 9mm, but also lists the 147gr Speer Lawman as a recommended loading for woods defense. The Lawman uses a bullet plated in the same process as the Gold Dots, so in theory better than other FMJ loads at not falling apart.

That LeHigh 140gr .40 at just over 1000fps should be a mid range load, as far as recoil and slide velocity, so a G22 should run just fine. When we had issues back in 2006 and dumped the .40 I noted the 165gr Gold Dot was running near 1200fps, the 180gr load around 1080fps, both were kind of stout.

If I was going to buy a $300 gen 3 G22 and maybe carry it in the woods I'd likely use the LeHigh round for predator defense, Critical Defense or the mid range 165gr Gold Dot for in town.

All of this talk reminds me that discussions like this have been around awhile...

19424

[Chuck Haggard]

What is the consensus on these type of rounds for shooting people?

To steal a quote from Pat Rogers, when he was talking about using .38special 158gr LSWC duty ammo when he was on NYPD, "It worked pretty good, if you could shoot".

Ammo such as that in discussion will work fine on people, as far as effectiveness, but I'd hope no one else was down range anywhere close.

[Super77]

Any thoughts on whether or not one of the coated hard cast lead bullets (e.g. Bayou 147 flat point at 16 brinell) loaded to max act like sort of a poor-man's field-penetrator?

[dsa]

Any thoughts on whether or not one of the coated hard cast lead bullets (e.g. Bayou 147 flat point at 16 brinell) loaded to max act like sort of a poor-man's field-penetrator?

Bayou uses a "hard ball" alloy of 2/6/92, it has a BHN of 16-18 and will be a little too brittle (it will shatter upon impacting bone) to penetrate like you are looking for. Search for a bullet offered in Lyman #2 alloy or a caster that specializes in hard cast bullets for field use.

[GJM]

Bayou uses a "hard ball" alloy of 2/6/92, it has a BHN of 16-18 and will be a little too brittle (it will shatter upon impacting bone) to penetrate like you are looking for. Search for a bullet offered in Lyman #2 alloy or a caster that specializes in hard cast bullets for field use.

Then make sure your bullet feeds reliably in your pistol, as that has been the problem with many of the hard cast loads I have tried in various platforms. The beauty of the Underwood Lehigh is it has a good profile for feeding, and has proven reliable in all the platforms I have tried it in.

[PNWTO]

A bunch of great knowledge.

GJM, forgive me if this has been talked over but what is your experience with the 10mm Lehigh loadings in a G20 or G29?

[GJM]

GJM, forgive me if this has been talked over but what is your experience with the 10mm Lehigh loadings in a G20 or G29?

Haven't tried them in any 10mm, but my bet is they would be fine, based on how well they feed in everything else we have tried them in.

[PNWTO]

Haven't tried them in any 10mm, but my bet is they would be fine, based on how well they feed in everything else we have tried them in.

Thanks, knowing that do you ever see yourself giving the G29 any substantial carry-time again?

[GJM]

Thanks, knowing that do you ever see yourself giving the G29 any substantial carry-time again?

I hate to say never, but we are completely satisfied with the HK45C in the small gun niche, given how completely reliable a bunch of them have been for my wife and me.

[flyrodr]

George,

On the 9mm Xtreme Penetrator 115g bullet, have you tried both the Underwood and Lehigh loadings? I see the Underwood is listed as 100fps faster than the Lehigh loading. Just wondering if there was any noticeable difference in performance (flash, feeding, recoil, whatever).

Actually, same question for .45.

Thanks.

[GJM]

George,

On the 9mm Xtreme Penetrator 115g bullet, have you tried both the Underwood and Lehigh loadings? I see the Underwood is listed as 100fps faster than the Lehigh loading. Just wondering if there was any noticeable difference in performance (flash, feeding, recoil, whatever).

Actually, same question for .45.

Thanks.

All my Lehigh shooting has been in Underwood loaded ammo.

[Doc_Glock]

All my Lehigh shooting has been in Underwood loaded ammo.

Is there a reason you have a preference, or was it just price or availability?

[GJM]

Is there a reason you have a preference, or was it just price or availability?

I previously had bought from Underwood, started getting the Lehigh loads from them, and since they functioned and were accurate, kept buying from them.

[El Cid]

I previously had bought from Underwood, started getting the Lehigh loads from them, and since they functioned and were accurate, kept buying from them.

I chose the Underwood because they use nickel cases where Lehigh uses brass.


GJM, forgive me if this has been talked over but what is your experience with the 10mm Lehigh loadings in a G20 or G29?

Not GJM, but they work perfectly in my G40. When I get my butt to AK for some back packing it is what will be on my belt.

[5pins]

Bears vs Handguns: Defending Yourself in Bear Country



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlaJsnEzjNE

[Duelist]

Man, that dude talks a lot.

[Bigghoss]

Man, that dude talks a lot.

Yeah. But most of his other videos are pretty funny. The mailbag series is hilarious.

[Bigghoss]

Bears vs Handguns: Defending Yourself in Bear Country



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlaJsnEzjNE

I actually linked this thread and few other PF threads in the comments of that video but he's probably already settled on a .44 mag. Which is fine but I get the impression he's not putting enough emphasis on follow up shots.

[RevolverRob]

Is there a consensus/set of thoughts on penetrators like the Lehigh vs. a +P HST for black bear?

[GJM]

Is there a consensus/set of thoughts on penetrators like the Lehigh vs. a +P HST for black bear?

My thought is the HST +P will make a bigger hole, if it expands, and hopefully cause more blood to leak out. The Lehigh will make just a caliber sized hole, but that hole will likely penetrate a black bear and exit. I don't know how deep the HST will penetrate in a black bear, but I suspect it depends on how big the bear is and where the bullet strikes.

For virtually every situation, bear and otherwise, besides penetrating a bear's skull, I would rather have a good JHP. For reaching the brain, I would rather have the Lehigh. I would be tempted to carry a good tough JHP and an extra magazine of Lehigh. I carry the Critical Duty 220+P as my JHP in my USP FS .45, but I would defer to Doc and others on the JHP, and of course consider what is reliable and accurate in your pistol.

[RevolverRob]

My thought is the HST +P will make a bigger hole, if it expands, and hopefully cause more blood to leak out. The Lehigh will make just a caliber sized hole, but that hole will likely penetrate a black bear and exit. I don't know how deep the HST will penetrate in a black bear, but I suspect it depends on how big the bear is and where the bullet strikes.

For virtually every situation, bear and otherwise, besides penetrating a bear's skull, I would rather have a good JHP. For reaching the brain, I would rather have the Lehigh. I would be tempted to carry a good tough JHP and an extra magazine of Lehigh. I carry the Critical Duty 220+P as my JHP in my USP FS .45, but I would defer to Doc and others on the JHP, and of course consider what is reliable and accurate in your pistol.

Thanks George.

This is in line with my general thinking as well. I'm in the early stages of a planning a fossil hunting expedition that will take my crew into high population black bear country. For the most part, I'm unconcerned with black bears, as we will be one large and loud crew (which should keep them away). But I never want to chance it. We will go with a couple of shotguns loaded with Brennekes in addition to a handgun that I will carry and my initial thought was to just go with a .45 of some type loaded with quality +P JHPs.

I really hope Crye Precision gets their shit together and drops the Six12 soon(ish). I see up to three big advantages of the cylinder fed shotgun as a field gun. The first being administrative unloaded/loading will be simplified with a removable cylinder. The second being rapid follow-up shots ala a semi-auto. And the third being the ability to suppress. Which, when we're going to be working in caves and around close-in rock formations should be a serious consideration.

[GJM]

Depending upon your crew's background, given the size of your party, I would be a lot more worried about getting shot with a Brenneke than mauled by a bear. Condition three might be really good as a ready position, absent a bear sighting!

[5pins]

I have hunted black bears in Eastern Washington and have help skin a few. After seeing how much fat they have, I personally would not carry a hollow point.

[rangerover]

I will be taking a driving/hiking trip from Phoenix around the Grand Canyon and up to Salt Lake City. Assume I will be bringing my G26. I could bring HST 147g, Gold Dot 147g, Gold Dot 124 +p or I could buy some Lehigh extreme penetrator to bring. Please give me your thoughts as to what ammo to bring. Since we have a car to park, I don't see us straying more than a few miles from the car at a time.

If you think I should bring some Lehigh extreme penetrator, should I buy the +p or +p+ they offer? Thanks.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

I would always default to the deepest penetrating load when I don't know what sort of humans/game I will be encountering. I'd say any of those should do OK in MOST situations, it is the low probability situations where they may fail.

This to me is the reason to increase caliber, to achieve consistent/sufficiently deep penetration through a variety of mediums. This is where the whole notion of 9mm is just as good as any service caliber falls flat on it's face... we know 9mm leaves something to be desired when looking to penetrate the largest variety of mediums.

If I was to carry 9mm, it would be something solid/bonded/monolithic/flat point/Lehigh and at the very least I would chose Speer Lawman 147 (cheapest, bonded). Lehigh Penetrator would likely be the best bet, with a second going to Buffalo Bore 124 FP +P+. Whatever you choose (especially heavier pressure loads) be sure to test fire plenty of them in your smaller G26 pistol.

[Duelist]

I will be taking a driving/hiking trip from Phoenix around the Grand Canyon and up to Salt Lake City. Assume I will be bringing my G26. I could bring HST 147g, Gold Dot 147g, Gold Dot 124 +p or I could buy some Lehigh extreme penetrator to bring. Please give me your thoughts as to what ammo to bring. Since we have a car to park, I don't see us straying more than a few miles from the car at a time.

If you think I should bring some Lehigh extreme penetrator, should I buy the +p or +p+ they offer? Thanks.

There aren't that many bears in that general area, and Arizona and Utah only have black bears. There are also mountain lions - which any 9mm round from DocGKR's list will handily take care of. I would take your preferred flavor of Gold Dots or HST, and some 147gr Lawman. When in the car/restaurants/gas stations, keep the normal Gold Dot/HST loaded in the gun. When hiking, choose: keep the carry magazine of HP in the gun and carry a spare magazine of 147gr Lawman, or switch the in gun magazine for the 147gr Lawman and carry a spare magazine of HP.

What I did on my recent run to Utah? G26, 2 magazines of 124gr Gold Dots (one in gun, one in pocket), one spare magazine in vehicle of 147gr JHP, and a 100 rd box of target ammo for shooting up with my dad and his friends. What I will hike with in my gun this weekend will probably be 124gr Gold Dots, with a spare magazine of 147gr Lawman. I run into a lot more people than bears in my local mountains. If I'm in a high # of bears area, like I camped in early this summer, I'll switch for the 147gr Lawman and drive on.

[rangerover]

Thanks for the replies. We won't be doing any camping. Wife will walk around in the woods but only if it's followed by a nice hotel room and expensive dinner. <G>. I think I'll bring my 147g Lawman along with my 147G HST's for around town. I was unaware the Lawman was bonded. That's what I usually practice with and I carry the 147G HST in the G26 so I'm comfortable these loads have been vetted.

[El Cid]

I was unaware the Lawman was bonded.

I freely admit I could be wrong - but I don't believe it's bonded. It is a TMJ which may help over traditional FMJ (lead base is exposed).

[5pins]

I finally got around to shooting a .45ACP round into some Clear Ballistics gel. It didn't performe as well as I had hoped. You can read about it here.

https://generalcartridge.wordpress.com/2017/09/07/lehigh-defense-45-200gr-xtreme-penatrater-in-clear-balistics-gel/

[GJM]

I finally got around to shooting a .45ACP round into some Clear Ballistics gel. It didn't performe as well as I had hoped. You can read about it here.

https://generalcartridge.wordpress.com/2017/09/07/lehigh-defense-45-200gr-xtreme-penatrater-in-clear-balistics-gel/

Very interesting. Sure would like to see .45 Super, 9mm and .40 Underwood Lehigh tested. I would be happy to send you some cartridges to test......

[JHC]

I finally got around to shooting a .45ACP round into some Clear Ballistics gel. It didn't performe as well as I had hoped. You can read about it here.

https://generalcartridge.wordpress.com/2017/09/07/lehigh-defense-45-200gr-xtreme-penatrater-in-clear-balistics-gel/

Very interesting, thanks much. I have not focused on pistol ballistics for a few years like I did in the 90's so I may be off here.

But, isn't it generally found that when it comes to penetration on soft stuff (gel) that bullet mass is a big factor in penetrating deeper whereas when it comes to breaking through hard things (the standard sheet metal tests, glass and perhaps bone?) that high velocity comes into it's own for penetrating? Magnified a lot by rifle velocities but sort of why the 55 grain M193 penetrates some stuff the heavier M855 didn't.

Or something. ;)

[richiecotite]

Would a P30 in .40 be as robust and hold up to wear as well as the USP for hot/heavy 40 cal woods loads?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GJM]

Would a P30 in .40 be as robust and hold up to wear as well as the USP for hot/heavy 40 cal woods loads?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Define hot and heavy? The Underwood Lehigh, for example, is 140 at 1,200, so pretty mild for .40. Hard cast is usually how you get hot/heavy, and I wouldn't plan on that in an HK. Bet a P30 does all you need it too, especially a L.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

If you wanted the deepest penetration in .40, you'd be hard pressed to find a better load than this one...

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=347


Would a P30 in .40 be as robust and hold up to wear as well as the USP for hot/heavy 40 cal woods loads?

Not likely, comparatively speaking anyways.... but any H&K will be a solid choice for .40 however. The USP recoil assembly was designed to limit the forces acting on the frame, while the P30 has a plastic buffer on the guide rod... I imagine it will still transmit quite a bit of force just upon how stiff it is.

That being said, the USP Compact .40 has been demonstrated by H&K in agency testing procedurs to go well over 30,000 rounds so it may be a moot point depending on how much you plan to shoot it... consider P30 is basically in a lot of ways to the P30.

P30 actually has less slide mass than USP Compact, so that may lead to more accelerated wear. P30L has more slide mass than either so to me if you can go full size... USP is king in durability w/ P30L in second place.


Define hot and heavy? The Underwood Lehigh, for example, is 140 at 1,200, so pretty mild for .40. Hard cast is usually how you get hot/heavy, and I wouldn't plan on that in an HK. Bet a P30 does all you need it too, especially a L.

Hard Cast is just fine in H&K assuming it chambers reliably and has the correct brinell hardness/powder combo for the caliber such... as loadings from Buffalo Bore. This is a myth, regarding hard cast not being safe to fire in polygonal bores... nothing could be further from the truth.

The actual truth is lead bullets and hard cast are two completely different animals, even though hard cast does have lead in it to some degree. Buffalo Bore has a technical article aimed at destroying this myth that just won't die...

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=54

Also, for anybody interested in playing around with rolling their own woods loading... these are the bullets that Buffalo Bore loads in their Outdoorsman loadings....

https://rimrockbullets.com/xcart/-40-10mm-200-gr-tc-the-outdoorsman-per-500.html

[GJM]

If you wanted the deepest penetration in .40, you'd be hard pressed to find a better load than this one...

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=347



Not likely, comparatively speaking anyways.... but any H&K will be a solid choice for .40 however. The USP recoil assembly was designed to limit the forces acting on the frame, while the P30 has a plastic buffer on the guide rod... I imagine it will still transmit quite a bit of force just upon how stiff it is.

That being said, the USP Compact .40 has been demonstrated by H&K in agency testing procedurs to go well over 30,000 rounds so it may be a moot point depending on how much you plan to shoot it... consider P30 is basically in a lot of ways to the P30.

P30 actually has less slide mass than USP Compact, so that may lead to more accelerated wear. P30L has more slide mass than either so to me if you can go full size... USP is king in durability w/ P30L in second place.



Hard Cast is just fine in H&K assuming it chambers reliably and has the correct brinell hardness/powder combo for the caliber such... as loadings from Buffalo Bore. This is a myth, regarding hard cast not being safe to fire in polygonal bores... nothing could be further from the truth.

The actual truth is lead bullets and hard cast are two completely different animals, even though hard cast does have lead in it to some degree. Buffalo Bore has a technical article aimed at destroying this myth that just won't die...

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=54

Also, for anybody interested in playing around with rolling their own woods loading... these are the bullets that Buffalo Bore loads in their Outdoorsman loadings....

https://rimrockbullets.com/xcart/-40-10mm-200-gr-tc-the-outdoorsman-per-500.html

Just out of curiosity, how much heavy hard cast loads have your shot out of an HK and what models? The Buffalo Bore .45 Super hard cast load has turned a USP FS45/USP 45T, for example, into a one shot pistol for several forum members.

The reason a number of us have focused on the Underwood Lehigh, is it functions reliably in a bunch of different semi-auto pistols, and reliability comes ahead of bullet goodness in a field pistol. The back story of how I ended up with the USP series, is lack of reliability with hard cast and heavy loads in the Glock 20/29, Glock 22 and S&W 1066/1076 pistols.

[5pins]

Very interesting, thanks much. I have not focused on pistol ballistics for a few years like I did in the 90's so I may be off here.

But, isn't it generally found that when it comes to penetration on soft stuff (gel) that bullet mass is a big factor in penetrating deeper whereas when it comes to breaking through hard things (the standard sheet metal tests, glass and perhaps bone?) that high velocity comes into it's own for penetrating? Magnified a lot by rifle velocities but sort of why the 55 grain M193 penetrates some stuff the heavier M855 didn't.

Or something. ;)

I think you are right.

I also think that sectional density has something to do with it. The 230gr ball has a better SD (.162) than the 200gr XP (.140) so that may have something to do with it. I think the Lehigh also expended some of its energy by creating more damage. Whereas the ball rounds just slipped through.


Here is a video of the 230gr handload going through the gel blocks. You may notice the bullet makes a sharp downward turn before going into the catch block.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m47v2ve7iMI

[5pins]

Here is a video by tnoutdoors9 on the 9mm Xtreme Penetrator loaded by Lehigh.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYLbmSp5itA&amp;index=3&amp;list=PL727CAFF8A6C0D3B F

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Just out of curiosity, how much heavy hard cast loads have your shot out of an HK and what models? The Buffalo Bore .45 Super hard cast load has turned a USP FS45/USP 45T, for example, into a one shot pistol for several forum members.

The reason a number of us have focused on the Underwood Lehigh, is it functions reliably in a bunch of different semi-auto pistols, and reliability comes ahead of bullet goodness in a field pistol. The back story of how I ended up with the USP series, is lack of reliability with hard cast and heavy loads in the Glock 20/29, Glock 22 and S&W 1066/1076 pistols.

USP 45 was designed for .45 ACP, along with all their other .45 pistols excepting maybe the Mark 23... which I believe may have been designed for those pressures.

I would not be surprised at any .45 H&K having reliability problems with ultra hot and heavy hard cast .45 Super if left in stock condition... sure they won't blow up but as you said not reliable.

Have you tried using .45 ACP hard cast in that particular pistol?

[FPS]

I've personally experienced problems with Buffalo Bore hardcast in both 10mm and 9mm (feeding issues). I have 100 rds of Lehigh 9mm Xtreme penetrator to test. If it works, I may just dump 10mm for good and definitely liquidate remaining Buffalo Bore hardcast ammo.

[GJM]

USP 45 was designed for .45 ACP, along with all their other .45 pistols excepting maybe the Mark 23... which I believe may have been designed for those pressures.

I would not be surprised at any .45 H&K having reliability problems with ultra hot and heavy hard cast .45 Super if left in stock condition... sure they won't blow up but as you said not reliable.

Have you tried using .45 ACP hard cast in that particular pistol?

According to the HK a manual, the USP FS was designed for standard pressure, +P, and +P+ ammo. I have no interest in testing different hard cast loads in my HK pistols, given my experience with hard cast in other pistols, the experience of others here with heavy hard cast in HK pistols, and since I have already vetted the Underwood Lehigh Super load in multiple USP FS and HK45C pistols.

Do you have experience shooting heavy hard cast loads through HK pistols?

[Jaywalker]

I think if you could be sure of a 90° impact angle .45 ACP hardball or .40 lead hard cast would be fine. If the angle is likely to vary, e.g., bear or boar skulls from the front, then you need something that bites, digs in and doesn't glance off - the Lehigh X-shaped copper-ish meplat, for example. Hardball, at least, used to be known for glancing off, if I remember correctly. I thought windshields used to be a problem for it, and I do recall a colorful example of writer's craft when someone described .45 hardball and car doors, ~"... a 45 has a hard time entering a car unless someone opens the door for it..." FWIW

ETA: Assuming the bullet functions in your pistol, of course.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

According to the HK a manual, the USP FS was designed for standard pressure, +P, and +P+ ammo. I have no interest in testing different hard cast loads in my HK pistols, given my experience with hard cast in other pistols, the experience of others here with heavy hard cast in HK pistols, and since I have already vetted the Underwood Lehigh Super load in multiple USP FS and HK45C pistols.

Do you have experience shooting heavy hard cast loads through HK pistols?

Mine have been fine, running Buffalo Bore exclusively... agree to disagree... not trying to start a flame war.

[GJM]

Mine have been fine, running Buffalo Bore exclusively... agree to disagree... not trying to start a flame war.

What exact load, what model HK pistol, what quantity fired?

I am sincerely interested in your experiences, and I am certain others are as well. We are all trying to figure this out.

I am not anti-hard cast, I use it in my revolvers.

[JPedersen]

This and GJM's other field pistol thread have me on the hunt for an H&K 45. Just to be clear - GJM : you are finding the Lehigh to be good to go in BOTH the USP 45 FS and the HK45C ? (Both 45 , +p, and 45 Super)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[richiecotite]

Define hot and heavy? The Underwood Lehigh, for example, is 140 at 1,200, so pretty mild for .40. Hard cast is usually how you get hot/heavy, and I wouldn't plan on that in an HK. Bet a P30 does all you need it too, especially a L.

By hot and heavy for a .40, I'm talking a 200 gr hard cast at 1000 fps


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GJM]

This and GJM's other field pistol thread have me on the hunt for an H&K 45. Just to be clear - GJM : you are finding the Lehigh to be good to go in BOTH the USP 45 FS and the HK45C ? (Both 45 , +p, and 45 Super)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As I understand it, it is just the MK23 and USP FS 45 that HK is fine with Super ammo. I have vetted both the Underwood Lehigh 45 Super and 45+P loads in multiple USP FS pistols. While not "approved" by HK, I have tested enough of these same two loads in the HK45C to feel it is fine in limited quantities. If I wasn't worried about grizzly bears, I would go Underwood Lehigh 45+P.

[JPedersen]

As I understand it, it is just the MK23 and USP FS 45 that HK is fine with Super ammo. I have vetted both the Underwood Lehigh 45 Super and 45+P loads in multiple USP FS pistols. While not "approved" by HK, I have tested enough of these same two loads in the HK45C to feel it is fine in limited quantities. If I wasn't worried about grizzly bears, I would go Underwood Lehigh 45+P.

GJM - thank you for the quick response and being willing to share. Frankly - the form factor of the HK45C would make it more practical in a handful of other rolls outside of only the field pistol setting for me. (Potentially shooting / carrying it at the times I am now using a P30 - potentially consolidating on one pistol) idea would be function test the super to determine reliability in my example of HK45c then train with 45 and carry 45 +p in non brown bear / big predator field setting and carry the super when the context could call for it.
Thanks for your time and effort as well as sharing this with the community!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

What exact load, what model HK pistol, what quantity fired?

I am sincerely interested in your experiences, and I am certain others are as well. We are all trying to figure this out.

I am not anti-hard cast, I use it in my revolvers.

Box of 200 gr BB Outdoorsman through P30L & USP 40

[Duces Tecum]

As I understand it, it is just the MK23 and USP FS 45 that HK is fine with Super ammo. I have vetted both the Underwood Lehigh 45 Super and 45+P loads in multiple USP FS pistols.

These might be recent changes, but the copy reads like these three pistols have (perhaps similar) mechanical recoil reduction systems making all of them fine with .45 Super, no?

H&K .45 Compact website: (http://tinyurl.com/ycfb6n2a)
"Using HK’s unique internal mechanical recoil reduction system reduces the recoil forces imparted to the weapon and shooter by as much as 30%, improving shooter control during rapid firing and increasing component service life."

H&K .45 Full Size website: (http://tinyurl.com/yba57qg4)
"Using HK’s unique internal mechanical recoil reduction system reduces the recoil forces imparted to the weapon and shooter by as much as 30%, improving shooter control during rapid firing and increasing component service life."

H&K USP Full Size website: (http://tinyurl.com/y8zr6jzf)
"Using a modified Browning-type action with a special patented recoil reduction system, the USP recoil reduction system reduces recoil effects on pistol components and also lowers the recoil forces felt by the shooter. This same recoil reduction system has been tested and proven in the HK Mark 23 pistol developed for the U.S. Special Operations Command. The USP recoil reduction system is insensitive to ammunition types and requires no special adjustment or maintenance. It functions effectively in all USP models."

[Lester Polfus]

Box of 200 gr BB Outdoorsman through P30L & USP 40

So I'm not trying to be a dick, but one box through each firearm (assuming you didn't mean you split a single box through both guns) really doesn't establish much as far as reliability. A super hot load with a wide meplat bullet is pretty far outside the normal envelope for those guns and I'd want to run some number of hundreds of rounds through them before trusting them.

That's an awfully expensive proposition when we are talking Buffalo Bore prices.

In 10mm, I've managed to duplicate the BB loads bullet profile and overall length, but not quite the velocity, because truth be told, I think they are loaded too hot. What I've found with the Glock 20, and what I believe GJM has found with several handguns, is that they will run ok with a strong two hand grip, but the second you compromise your grip, say by shooting one handed, you start to see malfunctions.

I've done some limited testing with a 200 grain hard cast, loaded to a shorter overall length, with a velocity of 1050 FPS and it runs pretty good, even one handed with a looser grip. It will still malfunction if I shoot it left handed with only my index and thumb hanging loosely onto the gun, but then again so will my Glock 19 with Gold Dots.

One of my winter projects will be to load up several hundred rounds of that and see how it works out.

The Lehigh's look interesting, but light for caliber. They are still new, so I'm going to let other people beta test them for a while.

[Clusterfrack]

Interesting results, Lester. I've given up on the Beartooth Hardcast for my G20. I have some Lehigh on the way, and if they don't work, I'll be putting the G20 up for sale.

[spyderco monkey]

Not personally a .40 guy, but my shooting buddy, who is an avid reloader, is quite enamored with the caliber, as high end HST and Gold Dot pulls are available quite cheap these days as folks migrate to 9mm.

He's at over 2000rds of .40 +p out of his G35 w/ factory barrel, no evident wear beyond some rubbing of the plastic before the frame rails. The slide and frame has also shot 5000+ full power (1500fps+) .357 sig handloads.

He's launching
-155's at 1300-1375fps
-180's at 1100-1180fps

He's pretty OCD - keeps track of his loads and round count through an Excel spreadsheet.

At least for him, high powered .40 has worked out quite well.

[Olim9]

just wanted to leave this here since I just placed an order for a USP 45.

https://coppercustom.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=952

They also have trade-in USP 40's for sale as well. This is going to be my first HK and my first non 9mm handgun so I'm quite excited!

eta: This is assuming I don't die from Irma, Jose and Katia

[Lester Polfus]

Interesting results, Lester. I've given up on the Beartooth Hardcast for my G20. I have some Lehigh on the way, and if they don't work, I'll be putting the G20 up for sale.

Well, keep in mind that I've shot a grand total of about a hundred of them, but early results were encouraging.

There's two problems when it comes to high velocity, hard cast bullets in the Glock: the recoil impulse and the bullet profile.

When it comes to the recoil impulse, you can drive the slide faster than it can pick up a new round. Some folks try to fix this with a stronger recoil spring. That can help, but it also can hurt, because you're just running the slide forward faster. This is one area where hammer fired guns have an advantage, as you can retard slide rearward momentum with a heavier main spring, and by changing the geometry of the firing pin stop, without putting in a heavier recoil spring, which just slams the slide home that much harder.

When it comes to the wide meplat bullets in a double stack magazine, the nose of the bullet can actually rub against the walls in a way that more conventional profiles won't. This is exacerbated when you push the OAL out there to compensate for using a max load. There used to be a great illustration of this on a site devoted to the .38 super that I can't find right now. It looks like it might be defunct. IIRC the Beartooths you referenced have the widest meplat out there for a 10mm bullet. Rimrock and Montana Bullets make bullets that are a little smaller, but still impressive.

SpycerCo Monkey's buddy is loading his .40 pretty hot, but the HST and Gold Dot bullet profile isn't as extreme as the wide meplat hard cast. These two things compound on each other, I think.

I bet those LeHigh's will run quite well in your G20. It's a really easy bullet profile and they aren't that hot.

FWIW, I refuse to shoot hot loads with 200 grain bullets out of a .40 S&W. I think there just isn't enough margin of error in that combination.

[Clusterfrack]

Lehighs "aren't that hot"? ... they will be when I'm done loading them [emoji3]

[richiecotite]

Interesting results, Lester. I've given up on the Beartooth Hardcast for my G20. I have some Lehigh on the way, and if they don't work, I'll be putting the G20 up for sale.

Have you tried the doubletap 200 gr WFNGC?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clusterfrack]

Have you tried the doubletap 200 gr WFNGC?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have not. I'm working up my own backcountry loads. That way I can test heavily enough to be confident.

[Lester Polfus]

Lehighs "aren't that hot"? ... they will be when I'm done loading them [emoji3]

At the risk of telling you something you already know: be careful. Those bullets are sort of an odd duck. They are light, but being all copper, are pretty long. The load data on the Lehigh website is pretty mild.

I also question how hot they really need to be. I feel the same way about the heavy hard cast rounds. Once they are going fast enough to pop a skull, I don't think there is much to be gained by making them go that much faster.

[Clusterfrack]

At the risk of telling you something you already know: be careful. Those bullets are sort of an odd duck. They are light, but being all copper, are pretty long. The load data on the Lehigh website is pretty mild.

I also question how hot they really need to be. I feel the same way about the heavy hard cast rounds. Once they are going fast enough to pop a skull, I don't think there is much to be gained by making them go that much faster.

Careful for sure. I always work up my loads and watch for pressure signs.

1100 fps from Lehigh? --might as well use a .40. Underwood (https://underwoodammo.com/shop/10mm-auto-140-grain-xtreme-penetrator/) claims 1500 fps from their 140gr XP 10mm loads, so that's what I'm going to try for in my handholds.

My goal is to try for a 10mm Grizzly defense load that will work for a head shot, and hopefully do some vital damage if I miss and get a body shot. If I can't get the 10mm to work, I'll be sticking with my .44 wheelgun with BB 340 gr hardcast at 1360fps.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Functionally, I do not have the money to run significant amounts of Buffalo Bore for testing. They are not really a wide meplat, basically standard .40 dimensions... which is why I like .40 since it wasn't designed around FMJ Round Nose. Maybe it is not reliable, I guess I am just dumb then.


just wanted to leave this here since I just placed an order for a USP 45.

https://coppercustom.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=952

They also have trade-in USP 40's for sale as well. This is going to be my first HK and my first non 9mm handgun so I'm quite excited!


I saw this yesterday, made me feel a bit silly for what I paid on my like new USP 40 recently... tempted to try and get a second one from them for backup duty and dry fire practice.

[richiecotite]

I have not. I'm working up my own backcountry loads. That way I can test heavily enough to be confident.

Sorry if it wasn't clear, I was only talking about the projectile. Doubletap sells their Bullet as a component.

If you wanted to try it out, I'd send you a few, no charge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[iveschris]

If this is too much of a departure from the OP, please amend or shift.

I've been working with my Glock 20 for MT and WY trips. My '20 has KKM and BarSto "drop-in" barrels (had to hand fit the latter) as I had issues with the pressure smile with the OEM barrel (and with the other Glock 10mms I've owned). With the KKM barrel the gun wouldn't run with anything heavier than 180gr'rs in any bullet profile and wouldn't run with the Federal JSP load. Hmmm.... Pulled the KKM and put in the BarSto. Now I'm in business with 200r'r Double Tap FMJ-FPs and Buffalo Bore's version (though the former is more accurate).

The hard-cast loads don't consistently feed, especially when there are only a few rounds left in the magazine. I do run a 22# captive recoil spring assembly. Ordered some Wolff x-tra power mag' springs but don't really want to go there. Which brings me to two questions.
If as on other threads folks make 9mm, .357 Magnum, .357 Sig, and .45 ACP work while others seem willing to try to make .40 or other calibers work out of semi auto pistols they're most familiar with, why doesn't running 10mms with 180gr'rs with FMJ-FP or other conventional penetrating loads work?

If one's decided to run a semi auto they're familiar with, is there any real deficit in performance between a 180gr projectile likely to penetrate well at 1200 fps or so that runs and runs in your gun? At what point is the maybe perfect the enemy of the darned good?

As an aside, I have two Deltas that will feed 200gr'rs of any bullet design with no issues but don't like anything heavier. Actually, one prefers 150gr Corbon JHPs or Barnes 155gr XPs; the other likes the old-school W-W 175gr Silvertip (both have Colt barrels with fitted NM bushings, big links, and pins).

Go figure.

Lester Polfus' comments above about the friction of the wide meplat rounds bears, so to speak, much consideration.

[Clusterfrack]

Sorry if it wasn't clear, I was only talking about the projectile. Doubletap sells their Bullet as a component.

If you wanted to try it out, I'd send you a few, no charge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Copy that. Let me see how my Lehigh XP experiment goes. Thanks dude.

[GJM]

Wow, lots if great info in this thread while I was away from the web this afternoon. In no particular order.

When I was running DT hard cast in my G22 with KKM barrel, it was far down in the magazine that feeding issues surfaced. On a G29, using BB 200 penetrator FMJ, I would get a stoppage every few rounds.

White Crane, I appreciate your candor. I was pretty excited with how various pistols ran hard cast until they didn't run them. Nobody wants to shoot thousands of rounds to vet, but a few hundred really seems necessary and with various grip (strong, light, one hand, different mag loadings) to give Murphy a chance to rear his head.

Cluster, Garrett is 1,020 with their hard cast defender load for the Scandium 329. Even considering hard cast penetrates better, I think 1,100-1,200 is safe to penetrate a skull with a proper bullet like the Lehigh. More velocity may just reduce follow up shot speed and overall reliability.

On HK recoil systems, the USP FS have that dual recoil spring system, and the HK45 and USP Compact do not. The USP 45 FS really is the best non MK23 HK for a heavy diet of Super.

Personally, I really have to believe my pistol will run reliably, or I will just carry a 329/629/Mountain gun with Garrett Defender ammo.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

What you are describing is really just an inherent 'feature' of polymer pistols, IMO.... even aluminum frames are not immune to this. Low frame mass means they have to be gripped hard... I would expect most ammo would have problems if you don't give it a firm grip using anything but a solid steel frame.

[GJM]

What you are describing is really just an inherent 'feature' of polymer pistols, IMO.... even aluminum frames are not immune to this. Low frame mass means they have to be gripped hard... I would expect most ammo would have problems if you don't give it a firm grip using anything but a solid steel frame.


I have been unable to make the USP FS and HK45C pistols puke, no matter how I hold them.

[El Cid]

Careful for sure. I always work up my loads and watch for pressure signs.

1100 fps from Lehigh? --might as well use a .40. Underwood (https://underwoodammo.com/shop/10mm-auto-140-grain-xtreme-penetrator/) claims 1500 fps from their 140gr XP 10mm loads, so that's what I'm going to try for in my handholds.

My goal is to try for a 10mm Grizzly defense load that will work for a head shot, and hopefully do some vital damage if I miss and get a body shot. If I can't get the 10mm to work, I'll be sticking with my .44 wheelgun with BB 340 gr hardcast at 1360fps.

I got 1500+ from Underwood's load, but with a 6" G40.

Post 40: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?13392-Lehigh-Defense-Xtreme-Penetrator-Ammunition&p=448763&viewfull=1#post448763

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

I have been unable to make the USP FS and HK45C pistols puke, no matter how I hold them.

Interesting, is that all of the USP FS models?

[GJM]

Interesting, is that all of the USP FS models?

While I have not specifically tested the USP FS 9 and 40, the way I did the USP FS 45, I have not noted sensitivity to grip in my thousands of rounds of shooting them. I specifically tested the USP FS 45 and HK45C with Super ammo and firm to light grip, and no issues noted.

[OlongJohnson]

Always a fun video.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh9JhCyFFxA

[Lester Polfus]

If one's decided to run a semi auto they're familiar with, is there any real deficit in performance between a 180gr projectile likely to penetrate well at 1200 fps or so that runs and runs in your gun? At what point is the maybe perfect the enemy of the darned good?



I think that's an excellent question. One useful thing when comparing cartridges is to compare sectional densities. A 230 grain bullet from a .45 ACP has a sectional density of .162. A 180 grain 10mm/.40 S&W bullet has a sectional density of .161. That's close enough that I'm willing to call them "the same."

So a 180 10mm bullet really is pretty heavy for caliber already. If that's all I could get to run in my gun, I wouldn't be upset. The ability to get a 200 grain bullet to run is just gravy (and the equivalent sectional density to a 255 grain .45 ACP bullet)

[GJM]

Always a fun video.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh9JhCyFFxA

Like that USP!

[richiecotite]

GJM, or anyone else shooting the Lehigh bullet:

The ad copy says that "The permanent wound cavity of the XP is from two to four times greater than what a flat or ball nose bullet generates and often larger than traditional expanding bullets. So what you get is exceptional penetration coupled with a larger permanent wound cavity."

I think we can mostly agree that for penetration, the XP bullet is a very good choice, and I'm sure it does produce a wound cavity larger than ball ammo. Does anyone think there's anything to the larger wound channel claims? Especially compared to a good modern JHP? If true, it would seem theres no downside to this bullet in a woods/field semiauto pistol role, right?

[Jaywalker]

... If true, it would seem theres no downside to this bullet in a woods/field semiauto pistol role, right?

Downside is cost - loaded Underwood 9mm is $38 for 20 cartridges.

[richiecotite]

Downside is cost - loaded Underwood 9mm is $38 for 20 cartridges.

Or $38 for a box of 50 for those that roll their own

[5pins]

GJM, or anyone else shooting the Lehigh bullet:

The ad copy says that "The permanent wound cavity of the XP is from two to four times greater than what a flat or ball nose bullet generates and often larger than traditional expanding bullets. So what you get is exceptional penetration coupled with a larger permanent wound cavity."

I think we can mostly agree that for penetration, the XP bullet is a very good choice, and I'm sure it does produce a wound cavity larger than ball ammo. Does anyone think there's anything to the larger wound channel claims? Especially compared to a good modern JHP? If true, it would seem theres no downside to this bullet in a woods/field semiauto pistol role, right?

In the Clear gel I shot, the Winchester ball had the largest permanent “wound cavity” followed by the Lehigh and then my handload was a clearly in last place with very little “wound cavity”. I’m not sure how meaningful the “wound cavity” is in gel but that’s what I see.

I took some pictures but when I up loaded them there was too much glare to see them well. I will try again next week.

As far as penetration, both 230gr ball rounds did better. Theoretically the Lehigh should do better on hard objects but so far I haven’t seen any anything yet to support that.

[GJM]

The advantage of the Lehigh bullet, is by construction, I believe it is a monolithic solid. I would worry about the typical, jacket over soft lead constructed FMJ ball bullet coming apart when it hit something hard like a skull, or deflecting.

[5pins]

The advantage of the Lehigh bullet, is by construction, I believe it is a monolithic solid. I would worry about the typical, jacket over soft lead constructed FMJ ball bullet coming apart when it hit something hard like a skull, or deflecting.

I agree. I also think this bullet design benefits from higher velocity. Something the .45 just can't give it. One thousand feet per second may be a lot for the .45 but I don't think its fast enough for this bullet.


Here is a very informative video on the 10mm Lehigh shot into bullet proof glass.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDvzul3rvTk

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

The Lehigh is also using false marketing claims on the wound channel, ballistics gel is NOT intended to display wound characterstics in any way... excepting penetration... which can vary greatly depending on tissue/bone makup. Saying four times wound diameter over hollow point just is a flat out lie when you are saying that based of ballistics gel wound appearances.

[GJM]

The Lehigh is also using false marketing claims on the wound channel, ballistics gel is NOT intended to display wound characterstics in any way... excepting penetration... which can vary greatly depending on tissue/bone makup. Saying four times wound diameter over hollow point just is a flat out lie when you are saying that based of ballistics gel wound appearances.

I defer to DOCGKR on what ballistics gel is designed to test, but I have a absolutely shocked face that a boutique ammo manufacturer would make wild claims.

[Jeep]

I defer to DOCGKR on what ballistics gel is designed to test, but I have a absolutely shocked face that a boutique ammo manufacturer would make wild claims.

Next they will tell us that gambling is going on at Rick's place!

[Velo Dog]

I finally got around to shooting a .45ACP round into some Clear Ballistics gel. It didn't performe as well as I had hoped. You can read about it here.

https://generalcartridge.wordpress.com/2017/09/07/lehigh-defense-45-200gr-xtreme-penatrater-in-clear-balistics-gel/

From https://www.lehighdefense.com/collections/ammo/xtreme-penetrator

Inches of penetration into FBI standard 10% ballistics gelatin after 4 layers of denim

44 Remington Magnum 220gr Xtreme Penetrator @ 1,200 FPS...32.0 inches
45 Colt 250gr 30,000 PSI High Pressure Load @1,100 FPS........32.0 inches
9mm Luger 115gr @ 1,150 FPS............................................30+ inches
45 Colt 250gr @ 850 FPS............................................... ....28.0 inches
44 Special 220gr @750 FPS............................................... .27.5 inches
45 ACP +P 200gr @950 FPS............................................... .27.0 inches
357 Mag 140gr @ 1,250 FPS from 4" barrel............................27.0 inches
357 SIG 115gr @ 1,325 FPS............................................... 27.0 inches
10mm Auto 140gr @ 1,200 FPS...........................................26.0 inches
40 S&W 140gr @ 1,050 FPS............................................... .21.5 inches
38 Special +P 140gr @ 850 FPS...........................................17.0 inches
380 Auto 90gr Xtreme Penetrator @ 950 FPS.........................17.0 inches

[GJM]

Kind of makes 9mm look not that bad for poking holes through a bear's skull.

[Velo Dog]

It's been a while since I read Sixguns by Keith, but I seem to remember Elmer Keith writing about a man who had hunted bear with a Luger pistol.

[Jaywalker]

Phil Shoemaker and his 9mm bear kill, though no head shots: https://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2016/8/10/alaska-outfitter-defends-fishermen-from-raging-grizzly-with-9mm-pistol/

[SamAdams]

Kind of makes 9mm look not that bad for poking holes through a bear's skull.

A Gen5 G17 with Lehigh is starting to look real interesting.

[GJM]

Bill Wilson and I were discussing his summer hog shooting experiences yesterday. With the caveat that he was shooting rifle calibers, the summary was:

1) shot placement

2) then bullet construction

3) then caliber

With the caveat you need a bullet capable of penetrating a bear's skull, this probably holds true for pistols as well.

[SamAdams]

Quite a departure for those of us who have always thought in terms of 'big & heavy' for outdoors sidearms.

But if a pistol is marginal in terms of big bear defense - unless there's a CNS hit - it makes sense to up your odds of accurately hitting the intended target. If the Lehighs live up to their promise, this is a potential game changer.

[Salamander]

This thread has forced re-evaluation and change. I've now picked up Lehigh's/Underwoods in 9mm +p, .45 ACP, and .357 magnum and am in the early stages of testing. The 9mm's of course ran perfectly in my P2000 last night (so does everything else I've tried). The .45's will be tested later in a USPc. Here in northern California, 9mm is likely to get most of the woods carry for the near future.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Bill Wilson and I were discussing his summer hog shooting experiences yesterday. With the caveat that he was shooting rifle calibers, the summary was:

1) shot placement

2) then bullet construction

3) then caliber

With the caveat you need a bullet capable of penetrating a bear's skull, this probably holds true for pistols as well.

The problem with this logic is you cannot rely on shot placement after the attack has already begun. The reason 'center mass' became so widespread is it represents a realistic target that can be expected to be hit on a fast moving flesh and blood target. There is simply no way to duplicate this type of event in training, so I wouldn't bet on headshots myself.

All the traditional 'grizzly' revolvers are chosen with this logic in mind, assuming all I can get is center mass hit reliably....which has the best chance of doing enough damage to turn the tides in my favor? There are not many great choices here, even .44 Magnum is not something I'd feel great about doing the job here even with an excellent stout loading.

There is simply no way in a dark, cold hell that anything fired out of ANY autoloading pistol is going to give you a solid chance here. Phil Shoemaker was extremely lucky to have not been killed before the bear expired, though it does make yet again a great case for hard cast.... again assuming it runs without problem in your pistol.

[JHC]

Quite a departure for those of us who have always thought in terms of 'big & heavy' for outdoors sidearms.

But if a pistol is marginal in terms of big bear defense - unless there's a CNS hit - it makes sense to up your odds of accurately hitting the intended target. If the Lehighs live up to their promise, this is a potential game changer.

IMO definitely yes and it is yes independently of the Lehigh.

I have read accounts that some of the real monster Linebaugh type revolver loads can treat a large bruin about like a heavy 45-70 or .375 with body hits but I don't know how practical that is for the majority of us and our purposes.

[JHC]

The problem with this logic is you cannot rely on shot placement after the attack has already begun.

But gunmen do it quite frequently, especially in man to man combat but also stopping dangerous game charges. It is quite remarkable how many AK bear are stopped with less than monster handguns.

There is no choice but to deliver shot placement.

"Center mass" on a 700 lb bear could hit anything and a lot of things that won't stop him from 10 yards and closing.

[SamAdams]

Kind of makes 9mm look not that bad for poking holes through a bear's skull.

If anyone else said that, I'd likely dismiss it. GJM's experience living & working in Alaska and with big bears gets my attention. He's always seeking to improve his gear since its more than an armchair exercise for his wife and himself. I look forward to see any future testing he may do of the concept of a 9mm shooting Lehigh bullets as a bear defense pistol. (What does one even use to simulate a grizzly bear skull ? I've seen videos where the 9mm Lehigh didnt penetrate bullet proof glass while the 10mm did. Whatever significance that has - maybe none.)

[GJM]

The problem with this logic is you cannot rely on shot placement after the attack has already begun. The reason 'center mass' became so widespread is it represents a realistic target that can be expected to be hit on a fast moving flesh and blood target. There is simply no way to duplicate this type of event in training, so I wouldn't bet on headshots myself.

All the traditional 'grizzly' revolvers are chosen with this logic in mind, assuming all I can get is center mass hit reliably....which has the best chance of doing enough damage to turn the tides in my favor? There are not many great choices here, even .44 Magnum is not something I'd feel great about doing the job here even with an excellent stout loading.

There is simply no way in a dark, cold hell that anything fired out of ANY autoloading pistol is going to give you a solid chance here. Phil Shoemaker was extremely lucky to have not been killed before the bear expired, though it does make yet again a great case for hard cast.... again assuming it runs without problem in your pistol.

All things equal with bullet placement and construction, a larger heavier bullet will always be an advantage if you are relying on blood leakage to kill. However, inside twenty yards with a handgun, the brain is the only switch I would rely on to stop a bear instantly, to prevent the bear from hurting you until it realizes it is dead. It is the same reason Professional Hunters in Africa, even when using very large rifles, shoot the brain and not center of mass, on charging buffalo, elephants and hippos. So regardless of whether shooting a semi-auto with Lehigh, or a heavy revolver with hard cast, I am shooting for the brain to stop a close in charge.

[MSparks909]

Timers and switches...both are extremely important when dealing with two and four legged predators. Body shots (unless they clip the spinal cord) are timers, as in there is a time countdown until the recipient slips into unconsciousness due to blood loss (which doesn't always happen with only one or two shots). Lots of holes = a faster time until unconsciousness and possibly death. You want to switch something off? Gotta hit the CNS (sometimes repeatedly). DeFoor gives a great lecture about this in his classes.

[5pins]

This looks interesting.

https://cuttingedgebullets.com/45-200gr-handgun-solid


This 200 grain HG Solid™ designed for handguns requiring a .4515" diameter bullet is an excellent choice for Big Game Hunting, Dangerous Game Hunting, or Target applications. The HG Solid is a non-expanding, solid copper bullet that out-penetrates any other handgun bullet on the market. The HG Solid also features our patented SealTite™ band technology, and is 100% lead free.

19924

[Boxy]

I am very much inclined to go with buffalo bore type lead bullets over the all copper in pistols. Seems that bullet setback has created a kaboom from an Underwood loading where bullets were a bit under sized. Aftermarket Glock barrel would solve the problem with Glocks and lead bullets.

[El Cid]

I am very much inclined to go with buffalo bore type lead bullets over the all copper in pistols. Seems that bullet setback has created a kaboom from an Underwood loading where bullets were a bit under sized. Aftermarket Glock barrel would solve the problem with Glocks and lead bullets.

How do hard cast lead penetrate compared to solid copper in 9/40/10? The Underwood copper bullet zipped through bulletproof glass. I can't imagine hard cast lead doing that.

[GJM]

I am very much inclined to go with buffalo bore type lead bullets over the all copper in pistols. Seems that bullet setback has created a kaboom from an Underwood loading where bullets were a bit under sized. Aftermarket Glock barrel would solve the problem with Glocks and lead bullets.

Not sure how much of this thread (and similar ones) you have read, and this is a long one, but the issue with hard cast is not their performance. They perform great. The issue is getting them to feed reliably, regardless of OEM or after market barrel. Reliability trumps bullet performance on my priority list.

[Boxy]

Not sure how much of this thread (and similar ones) you have read, and this is a long one, but the issue with hard cast is not their performance. They perform great. The issue is getting them to feed reliably, regardless of OEM or after market barrel. Reliability trumps bullet performance on my priority list.

Understand reliablity. Been following. Catastrophic failure due to factory ammo load quality control gives one pause when it is attributed to the bullet diameter tolerances.

Middle of the road solution may be full metal jackets for reliability in 10mm G20. I have more time behind Glocks or I would use the S&W 629 for woods / trail gun.

[richiecotite]

This looks interesting.

https://cuttingedgebullets.com/45-200gr-handgun-solid


Comes in 3 flavors of 41 . That's more than most major bullet companies. Looks like they don't have a 9mm option though.

[Beendare]

Appreciate you starting this thread GJM....timely after slogging along in grizz country for the last couple weeks.

Reliability is the reason I have stuck to my SW 629 on my yearly forays into big bear country on my bowhunting trips. This thread has me reconsidering. When I was doing hog depredation, I used to scratch my head on the ineffectiveness of the .357/158 gr hollow points I was using at the time. I think these Solids/hardcast bullets are a game changer.

The addl penetration not only works for head shots but can get you to the spine, CNS or significant bone structure with the capability of breaking the bear down. Bleeding them out in that scenario is not a good option and I've seen enough big animals hit with big bullets ...then shake it off to say the old 'Bullet shock' theory may work with bad guys....but it rarely stops a massive adrenaline charged animal quickly.

Of note; I'm NOT one of those guys that can shoot anything...in fact its work for me to shoot anything decently. I ran into a snag in my pre hunt rituals this year. After spending a lot of time training with my Glocks/H&K's switching to the grip on my big revolver just never felt right. I can't get up high on it like the semi autos though I kept wanting to....and it just felt funny. This made it tough on fast followup shots...and it was worse when shooting my buddies SW329PD [he was willing to loan me]

Thx to those contributing quality info......I am going to play with these cartridges in my H&K's this winter.

What do you guys like for a field holster for H&K USP and compact? [Has to be belt for me, chest rig interferes with binos]

[GJM]

If I had just one shot to stop a bear, I would take the Smith 629 and hard cast for sure. On the flip side, the semi-auto,is:

A better shape and weight for me to carry.

Works appendix or in a Safariland ALS (that is how I carry in the field).

Has better sights.

Carries more cartridges.

Reloads faster.

Is easier for me to shoot fast.

Conceals better.

Works on a wider range of threats.

Is probably more resistant to dirt and more reliable.

Does not hurt me when I shoot it.

And is what I shoot thousands of rounds a year with.

[SteveB]

And is what I shoot thousands of rounds a month with.

FIFY

[JonInWA]

I use a Tactical Tailor custom tanker holster for my Ruger Blackhawk, and a Tactical Tailor thigh holster for my back-up semi-auto; which has been a Gen 3 G21 with Buffalo Bore 230 gr hollowpoints, but which may be my Gen 4 G22 with HSTs or Gen 3 G34 with Winchester Ranger 127 gr +P+ this hunting season.

The thigh holster is still a work in progress in the field; last year I encountered thigh strap slippage when the rig got wet from heavy dew when walking through brush and tall grass (actually, quite a bit of slippage, to the point of where the rig was loose enough to be uncomfortably slapping against my leg when moving); Tactical Tailor performed some hardware mods (a second set of retention buckles/fasteners to both upper and lower leg straps); we'll see if that works this season. I like the thigh rig concept for hunting/wilderness use because if provides access without interference from my rucksack, and also allows for easy rucksack donning and removal.

Best, Jon

[That Guy]

Any chance of a picture of those holsters? I'm only aware of Tactical Tailors MOLLE holsters (and not a fan of their thumb break).

[Doc_Glock]

While we are on holsters: what is the prevailing wisdom on flap type holsters? I personally prefer the Safepacker for my field activities which fits in that category. But for me concealment in plain sight outweighs quick access.

Any open top holster in the field has to get all kinds of sticks, mud and debris in it with any serious use.

I have noticed that the Safepacker is excellent at pistol protection. And in the days of the world wars, flap holsters were absolutely the norm to keep the weapon ready to go.

Are today's pistols dirt and mud resistant enough to just trust them to an open too holster during field use?

Is the speed of access that critical an issue?

The answer to both I suppose is: it depends.

What are y'alls individual priorities?

Perhaps this holster discussion should be split into another thread.

[ranger]

I am interested in the field holster question also - especially for hunting backup. I am thinking about using a Safariland 6004 thigh style holster for a FS Beretta PX4 with Lehigh 9mm after watching these threads - to clear hunting ruck sack. I have worm 6004 in uniform - I will ear it as high as possible.

[GJM]

If your pack is not too heavy (large padded waist belt cinched tight), appendix works great. Concealed, covered from elements and fast. If you need to hang it below a waist belt, Safariland rig.

[That Guy]

I've been meaning to ask about flap holsters myself, actually.

Sent from my Infernal Contraption using Tapatalk

[Lester Polfus]

I've used a Safariland ALS thigh rig, Wilderness Safepacker, and a Hill People gear kit bag.

The Safepacker was by far the slowest of the three for me. You have to undo a fast-tex buckle, which can be difficult with gloves, then dig the gun out. Also, since the Safepacker is attached to the pack hip belt, the gun goes with the back pack. A secondary issue is that it doesn't work with a tree stand harness.

The Safariland ALS holster is quick and very secure. I wear it as high as I can and still clear the hip belt or harness I'm wearing. It is the opposite of discreet, which I don't worry about while I'm out hunting with a gun or bow, but is a concern on family hiking and backpacking trips. It's not the most comfortable thing to wear when riding a mountain bike.

I've done quite a bit of work with the Kit Bag and have about a three second draw stroke with it. It keeps the gun covered up, both from prying eyes and mud, dirt and rain. If I take the pack off, the kit bag is still there. I can shoot a rifle or 68" longbow while wearing it with no problem, and it doesn't interfere with mountain biking.

[Doc_Glock]

I've been meaning to ask about flap holsters myself, actually.

Sent from my Infernal Contraption using Tapatalk

Started new thread.

[Clusterfrack]

I'm done with 10mm Lehigh XP 140gr load development and have settled on 10.5gr 800X at 1.260" COL. I get 1420fps from my G4 Glock 20 with a 24# Glockmeister recoil assembly.

So far, I've not had any malfunctions. I will do more testing SHO and WHO and report back. So far so good!

[Bigghoss]

I'm kinda tempted to get a .40 for a woods gun now. Mainly because I'm trying to justify to myself buying a cheap trade-in G22 gen 4 or M&P40. I've finally settled on just buying $300 worth of gear and parts for guns I already have and focusing on my M&P45 for that role for the time being. Still, I can't help myself from browsing armslist and lowballing anything of interest on gunbroker.

[5pins]

I Just picked up a Colt Delta Elite 10mm slide to play with. Right now it's on my .45 frame but seems to work most of the time. Right now I just want to try out some different loads, maybe later I will pick up a deadcated lower for it.

[sharps54]

Here's a question. Assuming a competent shooter (removing the administrative handling advantage a revolver has with less dedicated shooters) do revolvers still have a place as field pistols in the lower 48 or better yet in non-grizzly country? We know there are a ton of things the bottom feeder does better, the only things I can think a revolver offers are less rounds needed to verify reliability and (possibly) better functioning with a bad grip from wounds or position due to a clinch with a bear.

I'm not trying to make a case for the wheel gun, I'm trying to make sure I stay objective. I have a S&W 25-5 I had bought as a field sidearm but honestly I'm not seeing a functional reason to use it in that capacity opposed to my carry gun (G19 or even G26) with Lehigh penetrators...

[Clusterfrack]

Here's why I carry a Glock loaded with 147 HST everywhere except grizzly country. I don't have any experience fighting grizzlies, but from what I've seen/read they terrify me. If I could legally carry a M203 in grizzly country, I would. I have tangled with a few aggressive black bears. I have not shot a black bear, but have turned them with rocks and warning shots. I had an informative discussion with Tim Sundles of Buffalo Bore about black bear and cougar defense. Tim told me that black bears and cougars typically run if shot with any caliber. So, my thinking is that the same gun and ammo that I carry for defense against human attackers will work against black bears and cougars.

If anyone with more experience can evaluate this, I'd certainly appreciate it.

[SamAdams]

Here's a question. Assuming a competent shooter (removing the administrative handling advantage a revolver has with less dedicated shooters) do revolvers still have a place as field pistols in the lower 48 or better yet in non-grizzly country? We know there are a ton of things the bottom feeder does better, the only things I can think a revolver offers are less rounds needed to verify reliability and (possibly) better functioning with a bad grip from wounds or position due to a clinch with a bear.

I'm not trying to make a case for the wheel gun, I'm trying to make sure I stay objective. I have a S&W 25-5 I had bought as a field sidearm but honestly I'm not seeing a functional reason to use it in that capacity opposed to my carry gun (G19 or even G26) with Lehigh penetrators...

IMO, in country without grizzlies or particularly large black bears, a big bore revolver does have a potential role. As someone who has experienced a bit of high frequency hearing loss & wants to preserve what hearing he has, I like the lessened muzzle blast of lower pressure rounds like 44 Special and 45 Colt. (There's less advantage in this regard for 45acp). If you need to use your sidearm for an emergency Right Now, you may not be able to put on hearing protection beforehand. A big lead slug moving at modest velocities can be quite effective.

My ear doc told me people vary in their vulnerability to the effects of muzzle blast. But, once hearing ability is lost, the damage is permanent.

BTW - gun writer Brian Pearce has mentioned this advantage. He's worked on cattle ranches and in the outdoors all his life.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Jaywalker]

IMO, in country without grizzlies or particularly large black bears, a big bore revolver does have a potential role. As someone who has experienced a bit of high frequency hearing loss & wants to preserve what hearing he has, I like the lessened muzzle blast of lower pressure rounds like 44 Special and 45 Colt. (There's less advantage in this regard for 45acp). If you need to use your sidearm for an emergency Right Now, you may not be able to put on hearing protection beforehand. A big lead slug moving at modest velocities can be quite effective.

My ear doc told me people vary in their vulnerability to the effects of muzzle blast. But, once hearing ability is lost, the damage is permanent.

BTW - gun writer Brian Pearce has mentioned this advantage. He's worked on cattle ranches and in the outdoors all his life.
Interesting. As a guy who wears Vet Admin hearing aids I also look for ways to minimize further damage.

I'm a little dubious, however, about the low-pressure vs high-pressure loading differences, especially when the low pressure has twice the powder as a charge.

When hunting in the past I wore an earplug in one ear and a Walker Game Ear in the other. The Game Ear was a hearing amplifier that ran through a tube in an ear plug; the game ear would automatically shut off sound in case of a muzzle blast. I plan to start wearing it again in bear and cougar country.

[SamAdams]

SAAMI spec max pressure for 45 Colt is 14,000 psi. 44 Special is 15,500 psi. 9mm Luger (standard) is 35,000 psi and 38,500 psi for +P. 40 S&W is 35,000 psi. 357 Magnum is 35,000 psi.

In general, higher pressure means greater muzzle blast & potential for hearing damage. Of course there are factors such as barrel length, barrel-cylinder gap, etc, etc that come into play too. But a 357 Mag going off makes you cringe, if you don't put on the hearing protection, for a reason.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Robinson]

A note from personal experience related to the above posts: I'm not going to argue whether low-pressure rounds are more or less likely to cause hearing damage because I'm not an expert. However, the incident that caused most of my hearing loss and tinnitus involved a few rounds of .44 Special fired outdoors at a range when I was not wearing hearing protection. It could be that since the gun was a revolver fired off to my left side, the blast coming from the gap between the cylinder and forcing cone hit me directly -- it's hard to say. What I do know is that the dynamics of acoustic trauma are complex and some people are more susceptible to hearing damage than others.

One more thing -- I always double up on earpro when I shoot indoors. But even doubled up I've noticed that shooting .45ACP, usually considered a low pressure round, bothers my ears a lot more than shooting 9mm.

[sharps54]

Interesting discussion. I have a hard time thinking a 4” 45 revolver shooting a 255 gr bullet at 900 fps would be any more hearing safe than a semi auto considering the cylinder gap but have no hard facts to back that up. I don’t want to risk my hearing but I’m willing to risk it in the remote case of bear defense. There is probably a greater chance of defending myself against other humans and no one is advocating ear pro while walking around town. I do use electronic protection in the stand.

In the places I hunt (NC & VA) it sounds like I should just stick with the 9mm tupperware for carrying in the woods.

[Duces Tecum]

I have not shot a black bear, but have turned them with rocks and warning shots. I had an informative discussion with Tim Sundles of Buffalo Bore about black bear and cougar defense. Tim told me that black bears and cougars typically run if shot with any caliber. So, my thinking is that the same gun and ammo that I carry for defense against human attackers will work against black bears and cougars.

There are two approaches to self defense. One is to defend against "what he will do". The second is "what he can do". People who prepare against what their opponents can do tend, I think, to live longer.

[Malamute]

A note from personal experience related to the above posts: I'm not going to argue whether low-pressure rounds are more or less likely to cause hearing damage because I'm not an expert. However, the incident that caused most of my hearing loss and tinnitus involved a few rounds of .44 Special fired outdoors at a range when I was not wearing hearing protection. It could be that since the gun was a revolver fired off to my left side, the blast coming from the gap between the cylinder and forcing cone hit me directly -- it's hard to say. What I do know is that the dynamics of acoustic trauma are complex and some people are more susceptible to hearing damage than others.

One more thing -- I always double up on earpro when I shoot indoors. But even doubled up I've noticed that shooting .45ACP, usually considered a low pressure round, bothers my ears a lot more than shooting 9mm.


I think a large part of the difference or damage is you were to the side of it rather than behind it. Ive noticed a difference in blast effect bothering my hearing or just perceived blast depending on if I was behind it rather than to the side. Certain compensators profess to direct blast away from the shooter, and seem to do so, as some brakes or compensators seem to make many things seem to be louder, depending on design of gas venting or directing.

I'm curious if theres a way to test pitch (or whatever the correct term is) of various cartridges muzzle blast. I suspect decibels isnt necessarily the entire story. 357 mag has always seemed much more piercing and bothered me more than 44 mag. We know that we can have hearing damage that affects certain ranges of hearing, and the common complaints of many about the sharp piercing muzzle blast of many calibers/chamberings seems to indicate there may be a pitch difference of some sort that may have a bearing on the outcome. This may also be different in various individuals.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Decibels are not the whole story, though play a larger part. Impulse length also plays a large factor, this could explain why .45 ACP can *seem* louder... though technically less decibels than 9mm (generally). Also, as noted previously these blasts can consist of differing frequencies... I can't even begin to say how that would change things.

[GJM]

Decibels are not the whole story, though play a larger part. Impulse length also plays a large factor, this could explain why .45 ACP can *seem* louder... though technically less decibels than 9mm (generally). Also, as noted previously these blasts can consist of differing frequencies... I can't even begin to say how that would change things.

Also, proximity to your ear. A short barrel shotgun is more painful than a 18 inch barrel. I think part of that is the short barrel, and part how much closer the end of the barrel is to your ear.

[GJM]

Decibels are not the whole story, though play a larger part. Impulse length also plays a large factor, this could explain why .45 ACP can *seem* louder... though technically less decibels than 9mm (generally). Also, as noted previously these blasts can consist of differing frequencies... I can't even begin to say how that would change things.

Also, proximity to your ear. A short barrel shotgun is more painful than a 18 inch barrel. I think part of that is the short barrel, and part how much closer the end of the barrel is to your ear.

[Robinson]

Decibels are not the whole story, though play a larger part. Impulse length also plays a large factor, this could explain why .45 ACP can *seem* louder... though technically less decibels than 9mm (generally). Also, as noted previously these blasts can consist of differing frequencies... I can't even begin to say how that would change things.

I've transitioned completely to shooting 147gr 9mm as it is subsonic. Less boom than .45ACP and no sonic crack like the lighter 9mm rounds. Really trying to protect what's left of my hearing.

[Robinson]

I think a large part of the difference or damage is you were to the side of it rather than behind it. Ive noticed a difference in blast effect bothering my hearing or just perceived blast depending on if I was behind it rather than to the side. Certain compensators profess to direct blast away from the shooter, and seem to do so, as some brakes or compensators seem to make many things seem to be louder, depending on design of gas venting or directing.

I'm sure you're right about that. I think the gun was fired to my left side and just slightly in front of me but I really don't remember exactly -- or I didn't notice the position in sufficient detail to recall. Revolvers do tend to bother my ears more when shooting vs. semi-autos though, and I think it might be due to the cylinder gap.

[GJM]

Bill Rogers prefers 147 grain 9mm at their school for reduced concussion. He says an unsurpressed 5.56 under 14 inches is the quickest flinch inducer known to man. Stand under the roof at the school, next to a .40 or .357 Sig, and you want to move away.

[Clusterfrack]

I'm done with 10mm Lehigh XP 140gr load development and have settled on 10.5gr 800X at 1.260" COL. I get 1420fps from my G4 Glock 20 with a 24# Glockmeister recoil assembly.

So far, I've not had any malfunctions. I will do more testing SHO and WHO and report back. So far so good!

Update:

Good news! 38 rounds SHO, WHO, with weak grip, and rapid fire. Zero malfunctions.

1400 fps.

Ejection was 9+ yds. With the 24# spring.

[psalms144.1]

Bill Rogers prefers 147 grain 9mm at their school for reduced concussion. He says an unsurpressed 5.56 under 14 inches is the quickest flinch inducer known to man. Stand under the roof at the school, next to a .40 or .357 Sig, and you want to move away.If you ever want to test your flinch resistance, shoot under cover with a team shooting Mk16s with CQB 10.5" barrels. Forget about inside an actual building or vehicle - brutal!

[SamAdams]

What's the old joke ? How can you tell that a man was an old time shooter or field arty guy ? Every other sentence he says is 'Huh ?'

Of course, whatever firearm you choose has to be up to the job required of it. In grizzly country I go with higher pressure & muzzle blast rounds knowing it's better to end up half deaf rather than full dead if I need to use it.

That said, I need to test the Lehigh bullets out of my 45 Colt Mountain Gun. I wonder what kind of penetration it would provide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[GJM]

Update:

Good news! 38 rounds SHO, WHO, with weak grip, and rapid fire. Zero malfunctions.

1400 fps.

Ejection was 9+ yds. With the 24# spring.

I am not at all surprised, as the Lehigh bullet profile seems conducive to reliable feeding, and has yet to cause a stoppage in any of the calibers and platforms I have tried it in. I do wonder if 1,400 isn't more velocity than you need to penetrate anything living in North America.

[Clusterfrack]

I am not at all surprised, as the Lehigh bullet profile seems conducive to reliable feeding, and has yet to cause a stoppage in any of the calibers and platforms I have tried it in. I do wonder if 1,400 isn't more velocity than you need to penetrate anything living in North America.

Recoil was manageable--not as heavy as the hard cast load I worked up. Confident in penetrating a grizzly skull for sure. Hopeful that a body shot with this load could slow it down?

[5pins]

It seems to do well on level IIIA plates.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMuJAWCjtok

[5pins]

I did shoot one of my .45 loads into IIIA soft body armor and was easily stopped.

http://i.imgur.com/X3pukzmm.jpg?1 (https://imgur.com/X3pukzm)

[GJM]

It seems to do well on level IIIA plates.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMuJAWCjtok

Wow, lots to think about with this video.

[Clusterfrack]

Midway has the 140gr XP 10mm Underwood load on sale
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/423983/underwood-ammunition-10mm-auto-140-grain-lehigh-xtreme-penetrator-lead-free-box-of-20

[5pins]

Midway has the 140gr XP 10mm Underwood load on sale
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/423983/underwood-ammunition-10mm-auto-140-grain-lehigh-xtreme-penetrator-lead-free-box-of-20

Unfortunately they are out of just the bullets.

[SamAdams]

Hmmm . . the Underwood 45 Super Lehigh Xtreme Penetrator load is a 200 gr bullet doing 1100fps. Their standard pressure (14,000psi) Lehigh 45 Colt load is a 250 gr Xtreme Penetrator bullet doing 1000fps. I emailed Underwood and they confirmed this is a standard pressure load. It can even be used in Colt SAA type revolvers. But, its not a cowboy action load & actually uses the full potential of the standard loading.
I mention this because someone earlier in the thread asked if there is still a role for the revolver as a field sidearm.

[StraitR]

Wow, lots to think about with this video.

Indeed. If I were one of the brave men and women in blue, this would concern me.

[Lester Polfus]

Indeed. If I were one of the brave men and women in blue, this would concern me.

I get that, and....

Even when I quit in 2002 there was handgun ammo out there that would go through our vests. We never saw any assholes out there with it. I was much concerned about running into an asshole armed with any one of the millions of garden variety hunting rifles that would go through our vests.

[Bigghoss]

I'm under the impression that garden variety thugs don't know enough about guns to be packing this ammo to kill cops. Am I wrong? I'm more worried about it getting banned as armor piercing.

[GJM]

What interests me about the video is that the Lehigh bullet apparently has a shape that enhances penetration, and based on the experience of 5pins, there is apparently a minimum velocity threshold required. Depending upon that velocity, it could influence what caliber I used with the Lehigh bullet.

[rangerover]

Looks like Underwood make a 115g +p penetrator and also a 115g +p+ version in 9mm. Any thoughts which would be the better option as a woods round?

[El Cid]

Looks like Underwood make a 115g +p penetrator and also a 115g +p+ version in 9mm. Any thoughts which would be the better option as a woods round?

I snagged a box of the regular +p to test when I test the 10mm. Plan to shoot it at bulletproof glass like in the one video that has been posted before. I also plan to shoot through a windshield.

[Bigghoss]

Looks like Underwood make a 115g +p penetrator and also a 115g +p+ version in 9mm. Any thoughts which would be the better option as a woods round?

Based on what I've read just in this thread, +P+ if you have an H&K, +p if you have anything else.

[StraitR]

I get that, and....

Even when I quit in 2002 there was handgun ammo out there that would go through our vests. We never saw any assholes out there with it. I was much concerned about running into an asshole armed with any one of the millions of garden variety hunting rifles that would go through our vests.


I'm under the impression that garden variety thugs don't know enough about guns to be packing this ammo to kill cops. Am I wrong? I'm more worried about it getting banned as armor piercing.


New thread made for discussion in GD, as to not derail this one... https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27846-Armor-Defeating-Pistol-Ammunition

[rangerover]

Based on what I've read just in this thread, +P+ if you have an H&K, +p if you have anything else.

I have a Glock. Never thought +p+ would be too much for a Glock.

[GJM]

Based on what I've read just in this thread, +P+ if you have an H&K, +p if you have anything else.

Underwood lists the +P at 1,250 and +P+ at 1,350 fps. I didn't even know the +P+ load existed, and only have tested the +P, which has functioned in numerous 9mm pistols. I am not sure that the extra 100 fps will be meaningful in penetration, but I worry about it being more at the edge of the reliability envelope. Thoughts?

[Bigghoss]

I have a Glock. Never thought +p+ would be too much for a Glock.

It's not going to explode, but it'll wear out much faster.



Underwood lists the +P at 1,250 and +P+ at 1,350 fps. I didn't even know the +P+ load existed, and only have tested the +P, which has functioned in numerous 9mm pistols. I am not sure that the extra 100 fps will be meaningful in penetration, but I worry about it being more at the edge of the reliability envelope. Thoughts?

You'd know a lot better than I would so I'll defer to you on that. I'm mostly thinking of the lifespan of the pistol it's being used in. +p would be the safe bet since it ought to do what someone would need of it

[StraitR]

I was pretty content to get the Speer TMJ offerings, but I'd like to try some of the LeHigh 45+P and the 9mm+P for reliability. Is there a preferred place to buy factory/boutique loaded?

[GJM]

I was pretty content to get the Speer TMJ offerings, but I'd like to try some of the LeHigh 45+P and the 9mm+P for reliability. Is there a preferred place to buy factory/boutique loaded?


Underwood is where I get it. I have tested the 45 Lehigh bullets in the HK45C, and USP FS .45. Tested the +P 9 in the PPQ, 17/19/26, PX4C, P30L. Tested the .40 in the Glock 22/23/27, PX4, USP FS, USP C and PPQ. Super is HK45C and USP FS. Yet to have a bobble in any pistol.

[SamAdams]

The thread, in PF fashion, has taken various interesting twists & turns. We're talkin field pistols - potentially for bear defense. Has anyone come across a media/method to (half accurately) simulate a grizzly bear skull ? I'd like to test some of the factory loads and my own handloads using the Lehigh bullet. I've got plenty of 'stuff' I can shoot through; have no idea if performance through it reflects what it would do on said bear skull made of angled surfaces.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[GJM]

The thread, in PF fashion, has taken various interesting twists & turns. We're talkin field pistols - potentially for bear defense. Has anyone come across a media/method to (half accurately) simulate a grizzly bear skull ? I'd like to test some of the factory loads and my own handloads using the Lehigh bullet. I've got plenty of 'stuff' I can shoot through; have no idea if performance through it reflects what it would do on said bear skull made of angled surfaces.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

My thoughts exactly. I am not interested in shooting body armor, but very interested in performance on bear skulls.

[SamAdams]

My thoughts exactly. I am not interested in shooting body armor, but very interested in performance on bear skulls.


I'm looking for performance adequate to the task. If a Lehigh can crack a griz skull at modest velocities, all the better. Less recoil, muzzle blast, and recovery time between shots.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Jaywalker]

My thoughts exactly. I am not interested in shooting body armor, but very interested in performance on bear skulls.
Maybe a bull skull? The animals can be about the same weight and the bull's designed for heavy-duty head banging. The skull might well be thicker, and if so, a test failure wouldn't be determinative, but a successful one would be. Probably easier to come by, too.

[SamAdams]

Maybe some college professor type in Alaska or Canada has knowledge on this. Would be good to know how a live noggin differs from a dried skull. And even bull skulls could be challenging to get (though I'm in farm country so its a possibility here.) Other more common equivalent materials would definitely be more convenient. Could set them at an appropriate sloping angle (whatever that is) and see what happens.

[JHC]

Maybe some college professor type in Alaska or Canada has knowledge on this. Would be good to know how a live noggin differs from a dried skull. And even bull skulls could be challenging to get (though I'm in farm country so its a possibility here.) Other more common equivalent materials would definitely be more convenient. Could set them at an appropriate sloping angle (whatever that is) and see what happens.

DocGKR has posted before that windshield glass is more or less a reasonable facsimile. If you make any AK contacts that might have a line on this info see if they can trace back to the AK troopers testing on DNR supplied intact brown bear heads. I read of it many years ago but have long since been unable to track down that AK hunter's website were he reported on that.

FWIW, he said that they found all the service pistols would penetrate the brain pan hit through the muzzle and mouth but they and larger magnum revolvers like the .44 would fail if hit glancing against the angled surfaces of the skull.

[SamAdams]

DocGKR has posted before that windshield glass is more or less a reasonable facsimile. If you make any AK contacts that might have a line on this info see if they can trace back to the AK troopers testing on DNR supplied intact brown bear heads. I read of it many years ago but have long since been unable to track down that AK hunter's website were he reported on that.

FWIW, he said that they found all the service pistols would penetrate the brain pan hit through the muzzle and mouth but they and larger magnum revolvers like the .44 would fail if hit glancing against the angled surfaces of the skull.

Thanks. I also vaguely recall that AK trooper/DNR report. Of course we wonder if the Lehigh Xtreme Penetrator bullet changes the game when it comes to the angled surface of bear noggins.

[SteveB]

Wondering about accuracy with these bullets, I shot a couple of 5-shot groups at 25 yards. Lehigh penetrator 115 in a CZ P-10c averaged 2 3/8”. As a control, American Eagle 147 averaged 1 3/4”. Lehigh penetrator .44 Special 220’s, 1 group of 2 7/8” out of a 4” 624.