Solid copper bullets

[Drew78]

Having recently picked up a new Glock 42, I have been doing quite a bit of research on ammo for it. My lcp has been stocked with Hornady xtp, but recently came across the Lehigh .380 extreme penetrator round. I'm intrigued, but skeptical.

I've always been a "heavy for caliber jhp" guy for my 9mm ammo. I know. 380 is a way different game and it's an anemic round where jhp's aren't known for great penetration and expansion.

I was reading on the www that solid copper projectiles are harder on barrels and have higher chamber pressures vs conventional ammo. I did a search here on PF and read all the info and thoughts on the Lehigh round but didn't really come across any discussions where this was talked about.

Any truth to these claims?

For the record this would be for a Glock 42.

Thanks,
Drew

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Cooper? Designed by Jeff Copper?

Sorry :p

[Drew78]

Cooper? Designed by Jeff Copper?

Sorry :p

My bad, I was rushing my post due to my kids eating lunch and their needs. I'll try to edit later...

[5pins]

Here is a 22-page discussion about it.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?13392-Lehigh-Defense-Xtreme-Penetrator-Ammunition

[Drew78]

Thanks, I read that thread. It's 22 pages of 10mm and field pistol discussion regarding the Lehigh round.


Thanks for the spelling corrections Tom!

[Salamander]

In 9mm, I use xtreme penetrator as my woods carry load... because penetration. In that caliber I would not use it in town... because of overpenetration risk. I use 124 +p gold dots anyplace where humans are present in any numbers. I'd be OK with an all-copper hollow point like a Barnes load if I weren't already happy with what I've got.

But I have essentially no experience with .380 and thus am hesitant to extrapolate to that caliber.

[1942bull]

I use Underwood Extreme Defender and Penetrator in 380 and 9mm. They combine the Lehigh bullets with their load, which is generally a bit hotter than Lehigh so it acjeives greater velocity. I load Penetrator in my Remington 380 to make up for the short barrel, and I use Penetrator in 9mm when out hiking or camping. My S&W SD9VE is always loaded with Defender. It is my house gun. I also have a new Taurus G2C and it too is loaded with Defender. It is slowly becoming my EDC gun.

Most if not all reputable ammo makers comply with SAAMI specs. Underwood and Lehigh do. So you are not,going to get a dangerous round from them. Copper bullets are not maelable ans so take a bit more energy to drive down the barrel. But I have researched the affect of monolithic copper bullets on a gun, and I found no conclusive evidence that properly loaded they are more likely to damage a barrel. Foe me, even if they did cause more wear on the barrel I would,still.use them. My three guns are for self defense. There is an ever growing amount of evidence that the monolithic hydrostatic bullets cause greater wounds than hollow points. Since I al protected my life I am willing to give up some barrel life to have the most lethal round loaded in my guns.

[Clusterfrack]

I use the Underwood / Lehigh Extreme Penetrator load in my .380 LCP1.2. I don't carry that gun very much, but I've settled on this load as the best compromise in this caliber.

[That Guy]

There is an ever growing amount of evidence that the monolithic hydrostatic bullets cause greater wounds than hollow points.

What sort of evidence are you talking about?

I think most people here use non-expanding bullets for field carry, to increase penetration in case they need to shoot a large and dangerous animal. I believe those here who are legally able to, carry standard hollow points for anti-personnell use.

Sent from my Infernal Contraption using Tapatalk

[SWAT Lt.]

There is an ever growing amount of evidence that the monolithic hydrostatic bullets cause greater wounds than hollow points. Since I al protected my life I am willing to give up some barrel life to have the most lethal round loaded in my guns.

I am also interested in this evidence. Could you elaborate on it? Also, are you aware of any documented self defense shootings with it, especially any where they caused "greater wounds than hollow points"?

[1942bull]

On the subject of evidence.

There are two types of a,munition terminal ballistic evidence. First there is forensic, evidence based upon examination of actual wounds. The second is comparative testing. Neither tells the entire story of wound ballistics. I know of no conclusive forensic evidence that proves HP ammo is as effective as some claim. Forensic pathologist generally do not offer such opinions, but the few I have found stated that expansion is less important than penetration.

Forensic examination of wounds from hollow point are and have to be inconsistent because in any given caliber the HP performance is dependent upon bullet weight, velocity, and barrier interference. A HP bullet fired into a body through a barrier will do more or less damage depending upon whether the barrier be clothing, bone, auto glass, wallboard or other material. It is well known that the four sheet of denim barrier gel test often ends up with the HP clogged an not expanding. Barrier penetration is an important factor in wound ballistics. Hit a bone with HP and the bullet will immediately expand and that will slow it down upon entering tissue and that means inadequate penetration. Penetration has everything to do with reaching organs and major blood vessels. If the bullet does not go deep enough it’s lethality is vastly decreased. That is an observable fact.

All bullets do damage through hydrostatic shock. When a bullet is slowed down its hydrostatic shock is decreased. That is physics. The greater the surface area of a bullet the more resistance it encounters in tissue. That is why ball ammo penetrates much more deeply than HP. Still the HP and the FMJ are creating hydrostatic shock as they spin. But one is slowing faster and deeper than the other while one is creating a wider wound channel.

The above analysis led bullet designers to consider a bullet design that would achieve adequate penetration and achieve a bigger wound channel than FMJ without the excessive penetration of FMJ. Like FMJ they wanted a bullet that would not lose its lethality penetrating everyday barriers.

Hydrostatic shock is a product of velocity, bullet weight , and the RPM of the bullet. Put of a 2.5 inch barrel os achieving about 65,000 rpm as it leave the gun. When all bullets hit tissue they turn some of it into dense fluid. That fluid creates wound channel expansion over the bulletin diameter. By making flutes in the bullet it could create more fluid and at high RPM make that fluid do more tissue damage. Fluid under high pressure damages tissue. At the same time the modified ball round would slow down fastener than FMJ reducing penetration.

The scientific evidence of comparative Porcine Ballistic Gelatin testing is sound. It is why the FBI uses porcine gel to make comparisons of different ammo. No one claims that gel tests are indicative of human tissue damage. However porcine gel is made from pig tissue and that is very comparable to human tissue. There is no way to comparatively test bullet ballistics from different ammo in the human body so a substitute comparative medium has to be used. That medium is porcine gel. Fired out of the same gun at the same distance from the gel the ballistic performance of different bullets can be compared. It is reasonable to expect that if one bullet performs better than another in gel it will also do so in human tissue. Scientific deduction is valid means of presenting evidence

However when shooting a person barriers are also to be considered. Clothing and bone are two barrier that human targets present. There is an abundance of proof that HP does not perform as expected once it encounters such barriers. It expands to soon and slows down and achieves less penetration and lethality and penetration are linked. Shooting through auto glass, sheet metal, wood, wallboard will defeat HP. It will not defeat bullets like the Extreme Penetrator and Defender. There are test that,prove that.

In my assessment I have relied upon scientific testing therefore evidence. I have no forensic pathological reports to prove the effectiveness of fluted monolithic rounds or HP. I do know more people have been killed by ball ammo than any other kind because militaries use ball ammo. I know that fluting the solid ball bullet will stop over penetration. I believe based upon gel tests it will rip up tissue better than HP.

We will choose to disagree. we at human and believe what we come to believe. So be it. I am not going to further respond in this thread.

[5pins]

Actually, most barriers tend to retard expansion and increase penetration. Auto glass on the other hand tends to retard both penetration and expansion.

[DocGKR]

"There is an ever growing amount of evidence that the monolithic hydrostatic bullets cause greater wounds than hollow points.'
No.


"All bullets do damage through hydrostatic shock.'
No. Penetrating projectiles damage tissue by directly crushing it (permanent cavity) and stretching it (temporary cavity).


"I believe based upon gel tests it will rip up tissue better than HP.'
Not likely.

[1942bull]

Of course blunt force causes wound damage. However, my understanding is that blunt force also causes hydrostatic shock. If that effect can be multiplied it cause more damage. The following is from scientific writing on the topic.


It is not generally recognized that when a high velocity missile strikes the body and moves through soft tissues, pressures develop which are measured in thousands of atmospheres. Actually, three different types of pressure change appear: (1) shock wave pressures or sharp, high pressure pulses, formed when the missile hits the body surface; (2) very high pressure regions immediately in front and to each side of the moving missile; (3) relatively slow, low pressure changes connected with the behavior of the large explosive temporary cavity, formed behind the missile. Such pressure changes appear to be responsible for what is known to hunters as hydraulic shock—a hydraulic transmission of energy which is believed to cause instant death of animals hit by high velocity bullets (Powell (1)).

I see no reason to continue to engage in this debate. I am sure we all have our own reasons to make our choices. I have made mine.

[BehindBlueI's]

I see no reason to continue to engage in this debate. I am sure we all have our own reasons to make our choices. I have made mine.

Sure. Just some of us have reasons rooted in reality and some have reasons rooted in a misunderstanding of the subject and marketing shenanigans. DocGKR is an industry recognized expert in this field. Everyone can have an opinion, not all opinions are equally valid. Doc's is pretty high up that food chain.

Literally zero organizations, civilian or military, that engage in gun fighting as part of their profession issue these. Groups like the US military's Spec Ops and the FBI who have ENORMOUS resources for testing ammunition in both the lab and the real world are all choosing quality hollow point ammo that retains weight (ie, bonded). That, to me, tells me that if my goal is to succeed in gun fights and my reasons conflict with that huge level of real world experience and the amount of research and talent that goes into vetting these rounds prior to the face shooters getting them that my reasons are probably the faulty ones. If my goal isn't people shooting, or I'm using odd ball calibers that aren't prevalent in duty guns, that can change the equation a bit. But for shooting people who need shot...

[farscott]

I am no ammunition expert, and I do not shoot people. But I have hunted small game with .22 LR with both monolithic lead bullets and with lead hollow point bullets of the same weight at the same velocities (40-grain at about 1240 fps). The hollow points do a lot more damage on the same size game. It is one of the reasons I now use solid bullets and take head shots as the amount of damage to squirrels on body shots with hollow points left nothing to eat.

[1942bull]

Had to share a bit of research about military and police use of hollow points. It is interesting I think.

The Extreme bullets are only made by Lehigh under their patent. Several ammo makers incorporate those bullets in to some of their ammo. There is no way Lehigh could ever keep up with production for the military. Furthermore when you make something under a mil-spec the US government owns the patent to that specific item. Lehigh is not going to sign over the patent, and the military does not want their bullet. In fact it might not even be aware of it.

When the RPF for the MHS handgun went out ever bidder had to develop a lethal bullet for that gun. SOG worked with Remington who will produce the JHP for the MHS.
According to Military.com, a site I visit daily, only the Army has approved the use of JHP and only the specified cartridge and in,y for the MHS. As of now only a battalion of Airborne is testing the MHS. After the field tests the guns will be issued to line units first.

I seen evidence that the other services have authorized JHP and most have only received,a few for testing. The Marine Corps is expecting to begin to take delivery of the MHS in 2019

So the notion that JHP is widespread in the Military is overstated.

Police forces are not going to adopt the new bullet for much the same the same reasons the military is not. It is too new, too expensive, and PSs do not spend a lot of time looking for innovative weaponry.

The Extreme bullets were meant for,personal self defense. They are produced in limited quantities that sometimes leads to the cartridges being out of stock among the ammo makers that use them.

If the military was so good a choosing ammo the Marines and Army would not be out looking for more lethal ammo for the M16 and it’s variants. it had terribly inferior lethality in Nam and ever since.

[PearTree]

Had to share a bit of research about military and police use of hollow points. It is interesting I think.

The Extreme bullets are only made by Lehigh under their patent. Several ammo makers incorporate those bullets in to some of their ammo. There is no way Lehigh could ever keep up with production for the military. Furthermore when you make something under a mil-spec the US government owns the patent to that specific item. Lehigh is not going to sign over the patent, and the military does not want their bullet. In fact it might not even be aware of it.

When the RPF for the MHS handgun went out ever bidder had to develop a lethal bullet for that gun. SOG worked with Remington who will produce the JHP for the MHS.
According to Military.com, a site I visit daily, only the Army has approved the use of JHP and only the specified cartridge and in,y for the MHS. As of now only a battalion of Airborne is testing the MHS. After the field tests the guns will be issued to line units first.

I seen evidence that the other services have authorized JHP and most have only received,a few for testing. The Marine Corps is expecting to begin to take delivery of the MHS in 2019

So the notion that JHP is widespread in the Military is overstated.

Police forces are not going to adopt the new bullet for much the same the same reasons the military is not. It is too new, too expensive, and PSs do not spend a lot of time looking for innovative weaponry.

The Extreme bullets were meant for,personal self defense. They are produced in limited quantities that sometimes leads to the cartridges being out of stock among the ammo makers that use them.

If the military was so good a choosing ammo the Marines and Army would not be out looking for more lethal ammo for the M16 and it’s variants. it had terribly inferior lethality in Nam and ever since.I see you joined two days ago and I'm sure you don't know who DocGkr is. But he is one of the leading experts in wound ballistics, and he was very gentle in my opinion in his response to you. Nothing you have said up to this point has any fact or real world results to back it up, it's all opinion.

Maybe go to the ammunition forum and read the stickied threads from Doc, it is the Bible when it comes to ammunition and wound ballistics. Also, a lot of Dr Facklers writings are in a PDF in a thread as well that is great reading.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[SWAT Lt.]

Had to share a bit of research about military and police use of hollow points. It is interesting I think.

The Extreme bullets are only made by Lehigh under their patent. Several ammo makers incorporate those bullets in to some of their ammo. There is no way Lehigh could ever keep up with production for the military. Furthermore when you make something under a mil-spec the US government owns the patent to that specific item. Lehigh is not going to sign over the patent, and the military does not want their bullet. In fact it might not even be aware of it.

When the RPF for the MHS handgun went out ever bidder had to develop a lethal bullet for that gun. SOG worked with Remington who will produce the JHP for the MHS.
According to Military.com, a site I visit daily, only the Army has approved the use of JHP and only the specified cartridge and in,y for the MHS. As of now only a battalion of Airborne is testing the MHS. After the field tests the guns will be issued to line units first.

I seen evidence that the other services have authorized JHP and most have only received,a few for testing. The Marine Corps is expecting to begin to take delivery of the MHS in 2019

So the notion that JHP is widespread in the Military is overstated.

Police forces are not going to adopt the new bullet for much the same the same reasons the military is not. It is too new, too expensive, and PSs do not spend a lot of time looking for innovative weaponry.

The Extreme bullets were meant for,personal self defense. They are produced in limited quantities that sometimes leads to the cartridges being out of stock among the ammo makers that use them.

If the military was so good a choosing ammo the Marines and Army would not be out looking for more lethal ammo for the M16 and it’s variants. it had terribly inferior lethality in Nam and ever since.

Dude, you are new here and it may be a good idea to read more and post less for a while. Hopefully, you will be able to learn from folks here (like DocGKR and others with a great deal of real world experience). I say this because it is obvious from your above posts that you really don't know what you are talking about.

[1942bull]

Dude, you are new here and it may be a good idea to read more and post less for a while. Hopefully, you will be able to learn from folks here (like DocGKR and others with a great deal of real world experience). I say this because it is obvious from your above posts that you really don't know what you are talking about.


Dude? Really?

This dude is 76years old. Took his first shot with a Savage Model 29 at the age of 7. Fired guns from that day to this. Spent 6 years on active duty in the Marine Corps. Qualified on the M1, M14, M3A1, M1911. Spent 15 months in Nam. Marine tours were only 13 months, but went with relief force to reinforce KheSan spent 14 week’s in that hell hole getting blasted with every weapon the NVA had. Pulledmout with my unit to go to Hue City to fight to regain the City. Worst 27 days of my life. Got out three days before the battle ended. Had to get a chest wound to do that. That ended my hopes for career in the Corps. As a civilian I have had guns since 1970 when I was discharged.

I am well aware of Doc GKR and others. I have read his commentaries for years. He is a foremost authority, and I respect that. I would never call him or you or anyone Dude. But I am allowed to have a different opinion than an expert. I do sometimes.

However, when you who knew nothing about me told me since I had in,y been here for days that I should post less and read more I just had to respond. I know a good deal about guns, ammunition, battle wounds, and more. I even know that getting shot at suck and getting shot sucks even more.

Please do not call me Dude.

[Sigfan26]

Dude? Really?

This dude is 76years old. Took his first shot with a Savage Model 29 at the age of 7. Fired guns from that day to this. Spent 6 years on active duty in the Marine Corps. Qualified on the M1, M14, M3A1, M1911. Spent 15 months in Nam. Marine tours were only 13 months, but went with relief force to reinforce KheSan spent 14 week’s in that hell hole getting blasted with every weapon the NVA had. Pulledmout with my unit to go to Hue City to fight to regain the City. Worst 27 days of my life. Got out three days before the battle ended. Had to get a chest wound to do that. That ended my hopes for career in the Corps. As a civilian I have had guns since 1970 when I was discharged.

I am well aware of Doc GKR and others. I have read his commentaries for years. He is a foremost authority, and I respect that. I would never call him or you or anyone Dude. But I am allowed to have a different opinion than an expert. I do sometimes.

However, when you who knew nothing about me told me since I had in,y been here for days that I should post less and read more I just had to respond. I know a good deal about guns, ammunition, battle wounds, and more. I even know that getting shot at suck and getting shot sucks even more.

Please do not call me Dude.

Bro, if being called Dude offends you on the Internet.... It’s not necessarily the place for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clusterfrack]

Can we close this thread? Please?

[Sigfan26]

Can we close this thread? Please?

For the love of Christ. Please do this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk