I ask because I'm getting 1275fps from my .357s. I'm going to test them in water next week.
I should get close to 1800fps from my 20" m92 which should be interesting
I ask because I'm getting 1275fps from my .357s. I'm going to test them in water next week.
I should get close to 1800fps from my 20" m92 which should be interesting
@the Schwartz
Can you run the numbers to compare to organic gel?
Of course.Originally Posted by 03RN
Assuming that weight retention is 100% (which is more the rule than the exception for the HST), here are the predictions made by all three bullet penetration models—
Federal 9mm 147-grain HST JHP
Diameter*: 0.69 inch
Mass: 147 grains
Velocity: 1,276 fps
Q-model:
Maximum Penetration: 10.80 inches
Total Wound Mass: 1.99 ounces
mTHOR:
Maximum Penetration: 11.16 inches
Total Wound Mass: 2.06 ounces
MacPherson WTI:
Maximum Penetration: 11.51 inches
Total Wound Mass: 1.75 ounces
*Since the gentleman conducting the water test maximum provided only the maximum expanded diameter of the test bullet, the predicted penetration depth is likely to be slightly shallower than it would be if he had provided the average expansion diameter. Using a reasonable estimate for that value of 0.66 inch, maximum terminal penetration would be approximately one inch deeper than the results computed above. I'd say that it is reasonable to expect about 12.25 ± 0.25 inches of penetration in 10% ordnance gelatin for this particular load.
I like his test set-up, too. It's convenient, inexpensive, disposable, and easily transported.
What's not to like?
''Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.'' ―Albert Einstein
Full disclosure per the Pistol-Forum CoC: I am the author of Quantitative Ammunition Selection.
Thank you. It was kind of a pain in the ass to set up. Trying to fill the bags in a stream was kinda tedious.Of course.
Assuming that weight retention is 100% (which is more the rule than the exception for the HST), here are the predictions made by all three bullet penetration models—
Federal 9mm 147-grain HST JHP
Diameter*: 0.69 inch
Mass: 147 grains
Velocity: 1,276 fps
Q-model:
Maximum Penetration: 10.80 inches
Total Wound Mass: 1.99 ounces
mTHOR:
Maximum Penetration: 11.16 inches
Total Wound Mass: 2.06 ounces
MacPherson WTI:
Maximum Penetration: 11.51 inches
Total Wound Mass: 1.75 ounces
*Since the gentleman conducting the water test maximum provided only the maximum expanded diameter of the test bullet, the predicted penetration depth is likely to be slightly shallower than it would be if he had provided the average expansion diameter. Using a reasonable estimate for that value of 0.66 inch, maximum terminal penetration would be approximately one inch deeper than the results computed above. I'd say that it is reasonable to expect about 12.25 ± 0.25 inches of penetration in 10% ordnance gelatin for this particular load.
I like his test set-up, too. It's convenient, inexpensive, disposable, and easily transported.
What's not to like?
What measurements would be needed for a more accuracy? I still have the bullet. And I can weigh it. I honestly didn't think about it. I'm not sure my kitchen scale will give me an accurate weight though.
DocGKR explains the difference between maximum and average expanded diameter in this sticky
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....istol-calibers
ShootingTheBull410 had average diameters of .600 for the 147 HST when the maximum diameters were over .70"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3Vf...zc27i&index=12
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM2A...zc27i&index=23
Thank you.
As for weighing the bullet, any reloading scale should suffice as they can measure recovered weight to the nearest tenth of a grain. If your kitchen scale can give a weight in increments as small as 1/10th of a gram, that should also suffice.
Using a caliper, the average of an equal number of minimum and maximum measurements across the bullet's expansion face is all that is needed. Provide the raw numbers and I will redo the computations if you'd like.
If you don't have calipers, I also have software that can be used to produce a reasonable evaluation of average expansion diameter. All I would need from you is a fairly high resolution picture of the bullet placed expansion face up pictured alongside a ruler in the same focal plane to provide scalar aspect.
Last edited by the Schwartz; 03-31-2022 at 09:29 PM.
''Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.'' ―Albert Einstein
Full disclosure per the Pistol-Forum CoC: I am the author of Quantitative Ammunition Selection.
I know you know this, but 9mm doesn’t have the case capacity to go that fast (with 147gr). Even in an SBR or PCC. They don’t pick up that much velocity with the barrel length. Typically ~200 fps max over a pistol.
What you want is 357 Sig as a fair comparison.
1233fps from a 7.7" barrel. No one loads the 9mm 147gr hst in a 357 Sig which is why I asked for PCC gel tests with the bullet I'm using.I know you know this, but 9mm doesn’t have the case capacity to go that fast (with 147gr). Even in an SBR or PCC. They don’t pick up that much velocity with the barrel length. Typically ~200 fps max over a pistol.
What you want is 357 Sig as a fair comparison.
Ah, you are right. I am dumb. Sorry.
That makes sense. Normal 147gr 9mm HST is about 1050 fps out of pistol so that makes sense that the added 200fps would put it there. Duh on me. I can’t add.
If you’d like, I can shoot it out of an 8” MPX.
I usually use clear gel out of convenience, but I have been considering trying to mix 10% and 20% clear gel to get the BB calibration depth more faithful.
EDIT: watched the video and 11xx for HST and 12xx for HST+P new style bullet.
I still have old lot of HST+P if that’s the bullet you’re looking for and I do have 16” barrels if you’re looking to see if it can bump up from the 1233 to get closer to the 1275 you’re looking for.
Last edited by JCN; 04-01-2022 at 05:34 AM.
Reply With Quote