How Does the Handgun Ammo Used by the FBI Compare to Modern Duty Ammo?

[Tensaw]

So if we put the ammo used by the FBI up against HSTs and Gold Dots in gel testing, how would it stack up with regard to penetration and any other useful metric?

[HCM]

You question doesn't make sense since the FBI uses "modern duty ammo" such as Gold Dots (among others) and the FBI's ammo testing protocols are the generally accepted standard in the ammo industry and among other LE Agencies.

The FBI still issues Gold Dots in .40 and Gold Dot G2 in 9mm though there is a new contract for .40 caliber Critical duty. Prior issued ammo has included Winchester Ranger Bonded and Hydra shok.

HST in .40 is the standard .40 contract ammo for DHS agencies such as ICE, CBP, USBP and the US Coast Guard. It is also well vetted.

If you want test data on those loads per FBI protocols just look at Doc GKR's stickies in the ammunition section.

[Tensaw]

Shiiite..... Yup, that question makes no sense. Let's just say it was a long day yesterday...

The question is, how does current service ammo in 9mm and .40 compare to the handgun ammo used in the 1986 Miami Shootout? So, said another way, if we ran that 1986 ammo through current testing protocol, what kind of results would we get?

I am hoping that the answer will help the ".40 is more than 9" folks in my acquaintance understand why it is okay to "step down" to a 9mm. If we can understand that the ammo used in the incident that ultimately birthed the .40 to start with was inferior to current offerings, perhaps that will penetrate (pun intended) their mindset.

Thank you for your patience.

[Hambo]

If we can understand that the ammo used in the incident that ultimately birthed the .40 to start with was inferior to current offerings, perhaps that will penetrate (pun intended) their mindset.

Or not. If they haven't figured out that Miami was 30 years ago and there has been a shitload of improvement in those years, they probably won't care if you lay out the reasons why.

If you want to beat your head against the wall with them, search DocGKR's ammo threads, and check a thread here about 9BPLE. IIRC Doc posted in that one about old school JHP.

[HCM]

Shiiite..... Yup, that question makes no sense. Let's just say it was a long day yesterday...

The question is, how does current service ammo in 9mm and .40 compare to the handgun ammo used in the 1986 Miami Shootout? So, said another way, if we ran that 1986 ammo through current testing protocol, what kind of results would we get?

I am hoping that the answer will help the ".40 is more than 9" folks in my acquaintance understand why it is okay to "step down" to a 9mm. If we can understand that the ammo used in the incident that ultimately birthed the .40 to start with was inferior to current offerings, perhaps that will penetrate (pun intended) their mindset.

Thank you for your patience.

The short answer is bonded bullets.

Prior to bonded bullets 9mm did ok on people but had issues with adequete penetration and intermediate barriers. Slow bullets would not expand and would over penetrate. Standard velocity bullets like the win 115 silver tip in the Miami shooting did not consistently meet the 12" to 18" penetration range we use as a standard today. Light fast bullets like +P+ would open up reliably but often open up too much, retarding penetration, or they would break up with the core separating from the jacket, the resulting smaller, lighter pieces would also fail to penetrate.

.40 with standard non bonded bullets could be pushed fast enough to expand reliably while still staying in one piece, even through intermediate barriers, allowing enough retained mass for adequate penetration.

Bonded bullets allowed 9mm to be driven fast enough to expand reliably while still keeping the bullet together, which allows it to retain adequete mass to meet the 12" -18" penetration range.

As for your 40> 9 folks:

40 still works but at greater capacity, recoil / time and financial cost. The success of the .40 with non bonded bullets had more to do with the mass of the heavier bullets than the bore diameter.

Technology advances. You used to need to replace tires and do a tune up every 15,000 miles. Now tires last 30 to 60k and tunes ups are every 100k miles.

All this is my layman's understanding. If Doc GKR says anything which contradicts this - go with what Doc GKR says.

[TGS]

The question is, how does current service ammo in 9mm and .40 compare to the handgun ammo used in the 1986 Miami Shootout? So, said another way, if we ran that 1986 ammo through current testing protocol, what kind of results would we get?

Well, that's an easy question. Just google for some gel testing regarding 9BPLE 115gr +p+, Winchester Silvertip, and Super-Vel.

[El Cid]

If memory serves, it was the Miami shootout that led to testing standards and protocols.

As HCM said, if your friends are anti 9mm because of that incident... you likely can't fix them.

[Totem Polar]

If we are doing history, then I would suggest that the SAC-approved 145 grain .357 silvertip would probably be the top performing 80s FBI bullet put against their own modern protocols. We’d have to ask Doc where the currently scarce winnie 145 ST stands in that testing protocol.

I do know that Doc has stated that it was one of the better old-school loads (and, again, I’d love to hear his perspective on this load), and a couple of hairy, hoary HITs guys have noted that it was a good load, IIRC. Certainly seemed to do the trick, assuming that a wheelie is acceptable. Low speed guy that I am, I could roll through the woods with this .357 load and, say, one of the original no-lock "bloodwork" 8-shot N-snubs and not be worried, except that a G19 is just more better.

Carry on.

[blues]

If we are doing history, then I would suggest that the SAC-approved 145 grain .357 silvertip would probably be the top performing 80s FBI bullet put against their own modern protocols. We’d have to ask Doc where the currently scarce winnie 145 ST stands in that testing protocol.

I do know that Doc has stated that it was one of the better old-school loads (and, again, I’d love to hear his perspective on this load), and a couple of hairy, hoary HITs guys have noted that it was a good load, IIRC. Certainly seemed to do the trick, assuming that a wheelie is acceptable. Low speed guy that I am, I could roll through the woods with this .357 load and, say, one of the original no-lock "bloodwork" 8-shot N-snubs and not be worried, except that a G19 is just more better.

Carry on.

This quote by Doc puts some of this topic in the 'nuff said category as far as I'm concerned...


Bullet designs like the Silver Tip, Hydra-Shok, and Black Talon were state of the art 15 or 20 years ago. These older bullets tend to plug up and act like FMJ projectiles when shot through heavy clothing; they also often have significant degradation in terminal performance after first passing through intermediate barriers. Modern ammunition which has been designed for robust expansion against clothing and intermediate barriers is significantly superior to the older designs. The bullets in the Federal Classic and Hydrashok line are outperformed by other ATK products such as the Federal Tactical and HST, as well as the Speer Gold Dot; likewise Winchester Ranger Talons are far superior to the old Black Talons or civilian SXT's.

Hence the remaining boxes of old school service ammo I still have on hand from back in the day will be used for training purposes only, and has been for some time now.

[HCM]

If we are doing history, then I would suggest that the SAC-approved 145 grain .357 silvertip would probably be the top performing 80s FBI bullet put against their own modern protocols. We’d have to ask Doc where the currently scarce winnie 145 ST stands in that testing protocol.

I do know that Doc has stated that it was one of the better old-school loads (and, again, I’d love to hear his perspective on this load), and a couple of hairy, hoary HITs guys have noted that it was a good load, IIRC. Certainly seemed to do the trick, assuming that a wheelie is acceptable. Low speed guy that I am, I could roll through the woods with this .357 load and, say, one of the original no-lock "bloodwork" 8-shot N-snubs and not be worried, except that a G19 is just more better.

Carry on.

The 158 grain +p 38 Spl Lead SWC HP which was standard issue worked fine for a handgun round.

The real lesson from Miami was not matter how much of an admin pain in the ass it is, bring your long guns.

[Totem Polar]

blues, oh absolutely. i’ve seen that quote reposted in numerous places—I’m just saying that, of the old loads, that chunky .357 silvertip seemed to hold together well, penetrate, and expand, most of the time. It wasn’t technology, rather, a happy marriage of horspower vs mass. The 145 ST strikes me a bit as the Lamborghini Miura of duty loads; enough ahead of its time to still be a thrilling (if not loud) performer, even if completely superseded by the advancing of technology.
HCM meet the new gunfight lesson, same as the old gunfight lesson, yes?

[HCM]

blues, oh absolutely. i’ve seen that quote reposted in numerous places—I’m just saying that, of the old loads, that chunky .357 silvertip seemed to hold together well, penetrate, and expand, most of the time. It wasn’t technology, rather, a happy marriage of horspower vs mass. The 145 ST strikes me a bit as the Lamborghini Miura of duty loads; enough ahead of its time to still be a thrilling (if not loud) performer, even if completely superseded by the advancing of technology.
HCM meet the new gunfight lesson, same as the old gunfight lesson, yes?

It is a lesson the FBI has learned. Today a majority of Agents have take home long guns ensuring they are available when neede.

[Tensaw]

Thanks for all that. Was not trying post and run but went on an overnight canoe trip yesterday and am just getting back To clarify, none of my guys are saying "9mm is no good because Miami." I hope that if testing shows that HST penetrates 12" on Gel Test X, and the old load only penetrates 8", and oh, by the way, your beloved .40 penetrates 13" - perhaps the light bulb might start to flicker. I will check the net for testing on the old school loads mentioned. Thanks.

[psalms144.1]

Tensaw - I also deal with folks who believe the .40 is Mjolnir while the 9mm is slightly less powerful than .22 short. Most of them are former military whose only real world experience (first hand or second-9th hand) is the performance of 9mm FMJ. I also have a couple former NYPD who were also seeing less than stellar performance from 9mm FMJ.

Despite numerous and several attempts to show them proof (such as DocGKR's testing) that there's not an ant's fart worth of difference, none of them are swayed. Don't get me started on the "if you hit a guy with a .45 in the foot, it'll tear his whole leg off" people. Generally, I have lots of time talking to these .40 fans, as most of them either barely pass our qualification, or fail repeatedly until I coach them to success. If I had a nickle for every problem shooter not making grade while insisting on shooting a G27, .40 S&W Shield, or the like, I could say f*** this s**+ and retire today...

I guess my point is I wish you all the luck in the world trying to convince any one that their pet caliber (or pistol, or holster, or NS, or whatever) isn't "all that."

[Beat Trash]

Every now and then you'll still find someone with limited knowledge who wants to parrot cute little phrases to win an argument. We issue 9mm's and the county Sheriff's issue the same gun in 40. We also have about 1,100 officers compared to their 250 road deputies, and we average a LOT more OIS incidents per year. We police a city and they deal with the suburbs. They can actually go a year or two without a single OIS incident.

Last year our S&W LE sales rep was doing a demo for the then new 2.0. at our facility. While there, one of the Deputies butted into a ballistics conversation I was having with the S&W rep. The Deputy's only comment was something along the lines of, "Real men use a Forty...". I stopped my conversation and asked the Deputy if he was aware that his "Forty" actually fires a 10mm bullet? Does he really thing that the extra 1mm diameter bullet will turn his handgun into a death ray?

I am more than happy to have a grownup conversation about ballistics with someone willing to have an actual discussion on the topic. But lately Ive found that I'm too old to tolerate stupid anymore.

Go to any level 1 trauma center that services an inter-city community and talk with the Chief of Staff for the Emergency Department. If I were to take three GSW victims, all with a similar build and all shot in the same location of the torso, one shot with a 9mm, the second with a 40 and the third with a 45. And assume that all three rounds using the same design of bullet, could the Doctor tell the caliber by looking at the wound or the damage? Hint, the answer will be, Nope.

The FBI Miami shootout was a pivotal moment for Law Enforcement in regards to duty ammunition. But it was also a pivotal moment for Law Enforcement in regards to tactics as it relates to weapon selection (right tool for the job, AKA bring a long gun to a long gun fight) and tactics as it relates to conducting a Felony Traffic Stop.

Have a reliable handgun in a duty caliber. Utilize good shot placement and appropriate tactics, before your opponent can do the same to you. I am convinced that this is the recipe for success in a violent encounter if limited to a handgun.

[DocGKR]

Well said!

[John Hearne]

The real lesson from Miami was not matter how much of an admin pain in the ass it is, bring your long guns.

While long guns matter, missing with a long gun is really no more effective than missing with a handgun.

For me, the major lesson of Miami is to never take a bureaucrat's word that you are "qualified" and good enough. Every agent there had met the mandated standards of the agency and many were "good shots" by agency standards. Those shooting standards in no way, shape, or form reflected the difficult marksmanship problems they faced that day. Partial targets, environmentally obscured targets, moving targets, targets at long range, target in close proximity to friendlies, and targets that were shooting back were all faced that day. Being able to hit anywhere on the bowling pin of a "Q" target did not prepare anyone for the work that needed to be done.. The standards required that day bear a very strong resemblance to what Bolke and Dobbs demand of their students.

The agents displayed remarkable courage that day. To charge across the street, while hearing a 5.56 rifle discharging, when you are armed with just a J-frame is not the act of a coward. The problem is that once you decide to close with the enemy, you have to be able to deliver meaningful hits in a reasonable time frame.

Contemporary ammunition tends to penetrate deeper than what was issued back in 1986. IIRC, that generation of Silvertip only penetrated ~8" of ballistic gelatin. The fact is that the bullet performed exactly as it was designed. In fact, the deep hit that transected the arm and drove into the lung performed way better than one could reasonably expect. This penetration is an asset, but only if the deep path of the bullet coincides with the vital structures of the body.

[HCM]

While long guns matter, missing with a long gun is really no more effective than missing with a handgun.

For me, the major lesson of Miami is to never take a bureaucrat's word that you are "qualified" and good enough. Every agent there had met the mandated standards of the agency and many were "good shots" by agency standards. Those shooting standards in no way, shape, or form reflected the difficult marksmanship problems they faced that day. Partial targets, environmentally obscured targets, moving targets, targets at long range, target in close proximity to friendlies, and targets that were shooting back were all faced that day. Being able to hit anywhere on the bowling pin of a "Q" target did not prepare anyone for the work that needed to be done.. The standards required that day bear a very strong resemblance to what Bolke and Dobbs demand of their students.

The agents displayed remarkable courage that day. To charge across the street, while hearing a 5.56 rifle discharging, when you are armed with just a J-frame is not the act of a coward. The problem is that once you decide to close with the enemy, you have to be able to deliver meaningful hits in a reasonable time frame.

Contemporary ammunition tends to penetrate deeper than what was issued back in 1986. IIRC, that generation of Silvertip only penetrated ~8" of ballistic gelatin. The fact is that the bullet performed exactly as it was designed. In fact, the deep hit that transected the arm and drove into the lung performed way better than one could reasonably expect. This penetration is an asset, but only if the deep path of the bullet coincides with the vital structures of the body.

While long guns obviously hit harder than handguns, I believe the greatest advantage of long guns is they are much easier to hit with.

[John Hearne]

While long guns obviously hit harder than handguns, I believe the greatest advantage of long guns is they are much easier to hit with.

In theory, yes. In practice, not so much. If you think police handgun training is bad, you should see the long gun stuff.

The most common mistake I see with my folks is failing to deploy a long gun when it is utterly appropriate and the smart thing to do. They all "feel" more comfortable with their handgun since that's where they get the majority of their (limited) training time.

[HCM]

In theory, yes. In practice, not so much. If you think police handgun training is bad, you should see the long gun stuff.

The most common mistake I see with my folks is failing to deploy a long gun when it is utterly appropriate and the smart thing to do. They all "feel" more comfortable with their handgun since that's where they get the majority of their (limited) training time.

I see it all the time - kinda did that for a living full time for several years.....

While your average officers M4 skills are nothing to write home about, their odds of making a 15 yard headshot or hitting an 8" circle at 25 yards are still much greater with an M4 than with a handgun.

We run our guys through some drills like the half and half with both the rifle and the pistol to let them see this fir themselves. While the results are not great, they are noticeably better with the rifle than the handgun.

For those who are not gun people and are only really familiar with their service pistol, the M4 is a much easier jump than the shotgun, particularly pump shotguns.

[Joe in PNG]

Go to any level 1 trauma center that services an inter-city community and talk with the Chief of Staff for the Emergency Department. If I were to take three GSW victims, all with a similar build and all shot in the same location of the torso, one shot with a 9mm, the second with a 40 and the third with a 45. And assume that all three rounds using the same design of bullet, could the Doctor tell the caliber by looking at the wound or the damage? Hint, the answer will be, Nope.


Sadly, the Derp merchants online say the exact opposite thing. Had one dood claim that as part of his training to treat gunshots, you try to ascertain what caliber the person was shot with.
Which makes me wonder what Recon Delta Seal this dude got his "first aid training" from.
Ultimately, they wed themselves to the +4 because ego boost.

[John Hearne]

I see it all the time - kinda did that for a living full time for several years..... While your average officers M4 skills are nothing to write home about, their odds of making a 15 yard headshot or hitting an 8" circle at 25 yards are still much greater with an M4 than with a handgun. ... We run our guys through some drills like the half and half with both the rifle and the pistol to let them see this fir themselves. While the results are not great, they are noticeably better with the rifle than the handgun. ... For those who are not gun people and are only really familiar with their service pistol, the M4 is a much easier jump than the shotgun, particularly pump shotguns.

My observations have been that once they've "warmed up" the hits are definitely easier with a long gun. I've had my folks shoot our pistol course with their rifles, starting at the 25 yard line and working in so they don't know what they're doing, and almost everyone shoots 100%.

Give me four hours and I can get their short range rifle skills tuned up really nicely. They'll be working sight offset, running the safety like it's natural, and delivering quick snap shots. The problem is it might be 20 months since their last short range class when they have to use the rifle.

My problem is that a lot will struggle to get the shotgun into the fight (we require hammer back, safety on carry) and unless you remind them of it, the manual safety and sight offset on the AR are ugly (we require empty chamber, safety on carry of the M-16). The distance of the Miami fight would have likely made sight off-set an issue.

To me, it still comes back to individual skill level and the responsibility of not taking anyone's word that you're good enough - whether it's a pistol, shotgun, rifle, or super soaker. :)

(Our rifle course is all shot at 50 yards. 30 seconds per stage to fire five rounds - standing, kneeling, sitting, prone, high barricade, and low barricade. Target is a Transtar with a round in the 4 or 5 scored as a hit. No requirements to chamber a round from cruiser carry or to use the safety. Nothing in this prepares you for a Miami style event)

[Jeep]

Our rifle course is all shot at 50 yards. 30 seconds per stage to fire five rounds - standing, kneeling, sitting, prone, high barricade, and low barricade. Target is a Transtar with a round in the 4 or 5 scored as a hit. No requirements to chamber a round from cruiser carry or to use the safety. Nothing in this prepares you for a Miami style event

So here is the tough question. Given that level of training are you better off with them simply using their pistols when the distance gets a bit longer, or is it better to risk that they will fumble with getting a round into the chamber and perhaps thereafter with the safety? (I'm assuming better rifle training is simply not in the picture because training time (and perhaps ammo) is simply too expensive.

[LtDave]

In theory, yes. In practice, not so much. If you think police handgun training is bad, you should see the long gun stuff.

I just had the opportunity to glance at a TX police department’s shotgun and handgun qualification courses of fire. It was a total of 3 rounds from the shotgun at not very far (can’t recall exactly, but it wasn’t much). The handgun qual course maxxed out at 15 yards. All but 5 rounds were fired from 10 yards and in. I thought the times allowed were very generous given the distances involved.

[HCM]

My observations have been that once they've "warmed up" the hits are definitely easier with a long gun. I've had my folks shoot our pistol course with their rifles, starting at the 25 yard line and working in so they don't know what they're doing, and almost everyone shoots 100%.

Give me four hours and I can get their short range rifle skills tuned up really nicely. They'll be working sight offset, running the safety like it's natural, and delivering quick snap shots. The problem is it might be 20 months since their last short range class when they have to use the rifle.

My problem is that a lot will struggle to get the shotgun into the fight (we require hammer back, safety on carry) and unless you remind them of it, the manual safety and sight offset on the AR are ugly (we require empty chamber, safety on carry of the M-16). The distance of the Miami fight would have likely made sight off-set an issue.

To me, it still comes back to individual skill level and the responsibility of not taking anyone's word that you're good enough - whether it's a pistol, shotgun, rifle, or super soaker. :)

(Our rifle course is all shot at 50 yards. 30 seconds per stage to fire five rounds - standing, kneeling, sitting, prone, high barricade, and low barricade. Target is a Transtar with a round in the 4 or 5 scored as a hit. No requirements to chamber a round from cruiser carry or to use the safety. Nothing in this prepares you for a Miami style event)

Back in the day, our rifle training was similar, which was one of the things which lead me to Pat Rogers. Now things have improved a bit. Our in-service course on the M4 includes things like VTAC 9 hole drills, half and half drills at 20/10/5 yards etc. We also run the same drills with both pistol and rifle to illustrate the difference in "shootability."

Our rifle course:

100 yards - start standing, loaded, Safety on. - 5 rounds kneeling, 5 rounds prone in 60 seconds.
50 yards - 5 rounds standing, 5 rounds kneeling, 5 rounds prone in 40 seconds.
25 yards - 5 rounds standing, emergency reload while transitioning to kneeling, 5 rounds kneeling in 15 seconds.
7 yards - 2 rounds in 2 seconds
7 yards - 2 rounds in 2 seconds
7 yards - 2 rounds in 2 seconds
7 yards - 9 rounds burst or a 9 round NSR if using a semi auto - in 6 seconds.

Target is an ICE QT / "thug" target scored the normal 5/4/ anything else in the silhouette is a 2. If 100 yards is not available, as is the case on many LE ranges, the first stage is shot at 50 with a half sized target.

It's not "blaze ops" but it is a bit more balanced than what you describe.

As with out handguns, we must qualify quarterly to use the rifle in the field.

[JBP55]

I just had the opportunity to glance at a TX police department’s shotgun and handgun qualification courses of fire. It was a total of 3 rounds from the shotgun at not very far (can’t recall exactly, but it wasn’t much). The handgun qual course maxxed out at 15 yards. All but 5 rounds were fired from 10 yards and in. I thought the times allowed were very generous given the distances involved.

The P O S T Course for shotguns in Louisiana start at 50 yards and the handgun course starts at 25 yards. I know some States have reduced the distance to 15 yards.