Jacket skiving variations between different lots of Federal 9mm 147gr HST (P9HST2)

[Moonshot]

Thought I might bump this to the top. It's been almost a year since anyone was talking about this new 147gr HST. Anyone have any more data on it? Are these new 147gr HSTs supposed to be better than the old 147gr HSTs, or just cheaper to manufacture? I'm not sure what other reason would cause Federal to change what many had regarded as one of the best 9mm rounds out there.

I remember a comment a Glock rep told me once regarding changes to Glock magazines - when I asked why the change in magazines, his reply was "Engineers change things because they can - it gives them something to do".

I hope Federal had a better reason than that.

[Moonshot]

Bumping this again, to see if there is any new info.

It seems Federal changed the P9HST2 (and possibly the P9HST4 - I don't know) by giving the newer rounds shorter and shallower skives, as well as slowing the rounds by about 50 fps.

What did this accomplish? Less cost to manufacturer, or a change in performance, and if so - what and why?

[QED]

These were shot into water from a Sig P239. The older projectiles are on the left and the newer projectiles are on the right in all pictures. These are all the same two projectiles.

Attachment 7367
Attachment 7368
Attachment 7369

The HST version on the right is preferable; the one on the left would probably barely reach 12" penetration (in 10% "real" gel). Water is just fine for checking to make sure that a JHP DOESN'T expand too much -- and thus underpenetrate. One can then use a penetration model, MacPherson's for example, to get a very good idea of how much such expanded JHP would penetrate in 10% "real" gel and, presumably, in "average" soft-tissue.

[GuanoLoco]

Thought I might bump this to the top. It's been almost a year since anyone was talking about this new 147gr HST. Anyone have any more data on it? Are these new 147gr HSTs supposed to be better than the old 147gr HSTs, or just cheaper to manufacture? I'm not sure what other reason would cause Federal to change what many had regarded as one of the best 9mm rounds out there.

I remember a comment a Glock rep told me once regarding changes to Glock magazines - when I asked why the change in magazines, his reply was "Engineers change things because they can - it gives them something to do".

I hope Federal had a better reason than that.

If you have ever been on the inside of a business with engineers and sales people then you will realize there are excellent reasons why sales people don't work in Engineering. If you have a serious question, don't believe sales person, ask a sales engineer or better yet the product or engineering manager that understands the challenges and WHY expensive changes are made.

[olstyn]

better yet the product or engineering manager that understands the challenges and WHY expensive changes are made.

My understanding from conversations with a mechanical engineer is that sales engineers often make promises to customers that are very hard for the teams that are actually developing the products to keep. The Mech-E in question was working in a significantly different field than firearms or ammunition, but I imagine that similar circumstances exist across the spectrum, and that it's only the scale and severity of the challenges created by the sales teams that vary. I, too, would take anything that sales people or sales engineers say about "real" engineers and why and how they do things with a large grain of salt.

[QED]

My understanding from conversations with a mechanical engineer is that sales engineers often make promises to customers that are very hard for the teams that are actually developing the products to keep. The Mech-E in question was working in a significantly different field than firearms or ammunition, but I imagine that similar circumstances exist across the spectrum, and that it's only the scale and severity of the challenges created by the sales teams that vary. I, too, would take anything that sales people or sales engineers say about "real" engineers and why and how they do things with a large grain of salt.

Salesmen don't need to abide by the laws of physics; engineers are not so "lucky."

[Moonshot]

The HST version on the right {new} is preferable; the one on the left would probably barely reach 12" penetration (in 10% "real" gel).

I can't comment on whether or not the new version is better - that's the point of my question, but everything I have read (from ballistics experts), seen (from reputable on-line sources and first hand), and been told (by people who use it) contradicts the second half of your statement.

Again, I don't know if the new version is "better" than the old (whatever that means), but I am pretty sure the old version met the FBI penetration standards.

Please provide supporting data.

[QED]

I can't comment on whether or not the new version is better - that's the point of my question, but everything I have read (from ballistics experts), seen (from reputable on-line sources and first hand), and been told (by people who use it) contradicts the second half of your statement.

Again, I don't know if the new version is "better" than the old (whatever that means), but I am pretty sure the old version met the FBI penetration standards.

Please provide supporting data.

What contradicts the statement that a more expanded JHP (greater recovered frontal area) typically has reduced penetration? It's obvious that the "old" version has a significantly greater average recovered diameter than the "new" version of "same" HST. Have you not seen some tests in 10% "real" gel where some HSTs that were tested expanded too much and penetrated only about 10 inches? That's hardly up to FBI penetration standards which are -- 12" MINIMUM IN SOFT TISSUE!

[QED]

From Federal's own data (probably several years old) in bare 10% gel:

9mm 124 gr. P9HST1 ---- 11.0" penetration
9mm 124 gr. +P P9HST3 ---- 10.0" penetration
9mm 147 gr. P9HST2 ---- 12.0" penetration

Thus my previous statement that the "older" and -- more expanded -- version of HST probably barely meets 12" penetration in gel is supported by Federal's own data.

Other "older" HSTs in other calibers also just barely made the 12.0" minimum penetration -- in gel. Good thing that Federal has evidently reduced expansion and thus increased penetration in "newer" versions of their HST JHP!

[Moonshot]

From Federal's own data (probably several years old) in bare 10% gel:

9mm 124 gr. P9HST1 ---- 11.0" penetration
9mm 124 gr. +P P9HST3 ---- 10.0" penetration
9mm 147 gr. P9HST2 ---- 12.0" penetration

Your penetration numbers seem low. I'm not saying they're wrong, but data from Doc and others have placed the 147gr and the 124gr +P well on the list of acceptable rounds, from 3" to 6" barrels (or so I have taken their data). The 124gr standard pressure has never made "the list" - the doctor has reported it is OK, but there are better options.

I would expect deeper penetration after passing through 4LD if only for the same reasons you mention - less expansion, but I am truely surprised at the bare gel numbers you have posted. I hope you're wrong, as I carry both the 124gr standard pressure and the 147gr standard pressure in my G26.