How Reliably do Modern JHP's Expand?

[HCM]

I feel like this marks a stark contrast with the FBI's mindset during the late 80s/early 90s, whereas in the FBI paper in the 80s, they said expansion shouldn't be counted on and factor into the decision for ammunition ("Bullet selection should be determined based on penetration first, and the unexpanded diameter of the bullet second") but now the extremely improved 9mm loadings seem to have changed that view.

There is a minimum penetration standard in the current FBI protocols. Expansion is also required to prevent over penetration.

One should not be counting on expansion for anything but preventing/minimizing over penetration.

There is no such thing as magic bullets. Shot placement and adequate penetration to reach vital structures are “it.”

Understandably, 1986 Miami shoot out in which a 9 mm Silvertip went through a suspect’s arm just short of the heart influenced their thinking.

The issues with older 9mm loads were most produced either inadequate or excessive penetration. Particularly when intermediate barriers were involved.

What changed with regard to modern 9 mm loads was bonded /barrier blind bullet designs which have adequate, but not excessive penetration and kept bullets in one piece when passing through intermediate barriers.

[Bruce Cartwright]

Folks:

I assume all of my defensive ammunition fired in a confrontation will fail and plan accordingly. If the ammo expands great, but I never count on it. Food for thought.

Bruce

[RevolverRob]

Modern JHP ammo that meets FBI/IWBA style barrier blind, robust expansion protocols tends to work well.

Just quoting this so folks read it again; it's about as close to a truism for handgun ammunition as exists.

Because handguns suck for shooting people - especially behind barriers or with heavy clothing. Don't compromise barrier performance if you don't have to.

Federal HST
Speer Gold Dot (including Short Barrel variants in 9mm and .38 Special)
Speer G2
Hornady Critical Duty
Winchester Ranger
Barnes Tac-XP

Any of them in 9mm, .40,.45.

[corneileous]

I’m curious; when you guys talk about barrier penetration for law-enforcement use, are you guys are talking about being able to shoot through a car door, a wall or something of that nature but still have the bullet not expand until it hits the person, or are you talking about being able to shoot through heavy layers of clothing?

I really don’t have any concerns at all for using the federal HST or the Speer gold dot as my defense ammo but when you look at the Hornady critical defense the Hornady critical duty, isn’t there a reason why at least according to Hornady that the defense is more or less made for people like myself and the critical duty it is made for law enforcement due to the fact that it will penetrate heavy barriers better being that that’s what law enforcement might be the most likely to be faced with?

This might be a dumb question but would the federal HST or the spear gold dot compare better to the Hornady critical duty or critical defense or is there even a comparison as far as hornady’s purpose for each round? I guess if I confused anybody with my question then what I’m trying to ask is if the federal HST was intended to be a lot more of a law enforcement round as opposed to a home defense round, if it even matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[4RNR]

I’m curious; when you guys talk about barrier penetration for law-enforcement use, are you guys are talking about being able to shoot through a car door, a wall or something of that nature but still have the bullet not expand until it hits the person, or are you talking about being able to shoot through heavy layers of clothing?

I really don’t have any concerns at all for using the federal HST or the Speer gold dot as my defense ammo but when you look at the Hornady critical defense the Hornady critical duty, isn’t there a reason why at least according to Hornady that the defense is more or less made for people like myself and the critical duty it is made for law enforcement due to the fact that it will penetrate heavy barriers better being that that’s what law enforcement might be the most likely to be faced with?

This might be a dumb question but would the federal HST or the spear gold dot compare better to the Hornady critical duty or critical defense or is there even a comparison as far as hornady’s purpose for each round? I guess if I confused anybody with my question then what I’m trying to ask is if the federal HST was intended to be a lot more of a law enforcement round as opposed to a home defense round, if it even matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hard objects

I don't think there's a way to make a bullet behave more or less for LE/Home Defense. It can't be more, or less, deadly. The only thing I can think of is maybe the company does further testing than just gel expansion.


Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[WobblyPossum]

I’m curious; when you guys talk about barrier penetration for law-enforcement use, are you guys are talking about being able to shoot through a car door, a wall or something of that nature but still have the bullet not expand until it hits the person, or are you talking about being able to shoot through heavy layers of clothing?

I really don’t have any concerns at all for using the federal HST or the Speer gold dot as my defense ammo but when you look at the Hornady critical defense the Hornady critical duty, isn’t there a reason why at least according to Hornady that the defense is more or less made for people like myself and the critical duty it is made for law enforcement due to the fact that it will penetrate heavy barriers better being that that’s what law enforcement might be the most likely to be faced with?

This might be a dumb question but would the federal HST or the spear gold dot compare better to the Hornady critical duty or critical defense or is there even a comparison as far as hornady’s purpose for each round? I guess if I confused anybody with my question then what I’m trying to ask is if the federal HST was intended to be a lot more of a law enforcement round as opposed to a home defense round, if it even matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The need for a round to penetrate intermediate barriers and still be terminally effective afterwards isn’t something that is specific to law enforcement. We aren’t even necessarily talking about having to shoot at someone who is behind hard cover when looking at the ballistic testing results. I pay particular attention to the heavy clothing and auto glass tests because of what those tests mean in the context of people shooting at other people in general.

The need for good performance in the heavy clothing test should be pretty obvious for most people. The person you might be forced to shoot could be wearing multiple layers of warm clothing depending on your location and the time of year. It’s not unusual for someone in New England in the winter to be wearing a thermal base layer, a flannel shirt, a hoody, and a Carhartt coat. That’s totally normal for the context of many people’s lives. The auto glass test gives you a good idea what the round will do when it hits a hard object at an angle. Do you know what the most common “intermediate barrier” is that someone might have to shoot through in a deadly force situation? It’s bones. In order to get your bullet into the organs you’re trying to hit inside the upper torso, like the heart and lungs, it’ll have to pass through ribs, vertebrae or the sternum. The bullet might also have to pass through your adversary’s arm to get to their torso to begin with. You might have seen anecdotal information about how it’s common for people to get shot in the hand or arm during a shooting. That’s because people’s hands and arms are likely to be up around their torso during a use of force, whether they’re holding a gun to shoot at you, or swinging a tire iron to bludgeon you, or just punching you to death. A round that can penetrate auto glass and still perform within the penetration/expansion/weight retention standards in gel afterwards should also be able to pass through someone’s arm bones and ribs and perform adequately in their torso afterwards.

[BehindBlueI's]

I’m curious; when you guys talk about barrier penetration for law-enforcement use, are you guys are talking about being able to shoot through a car door, a wall or something of that nature but still have the bullet not expand until it hits the person, or are you talking about being able to shoot through heavy layers of clothing?

I really don’t have any concerns at all for using the federal HST or the Speer gold dot as my defense ammo but when you look at the Hornady critical defense the Hornady critical duty, isn’t there a reason why at least according to Hornady that the defense is more or less made for people like myself and the critical duty it is made for law enforcement due to the fact that it will penetrate heavy barriers better being that that’s what law enforcement might be the most likely to be faced with?

This might be a dumb question but would the federal HST or the spear gold dot compare better to the Hornady critical duty or critical defense or is there even a comparison as far as hornady’s purpose for each round? I guess if I confused anybody with my question then what I’m trying to ask is if the federal HST was intended to be a lot more of a law enforcement round as opposed to a home defense round, if it even matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Some of both. Remember intermediate barriers can be anything from a car door to a forearm.

The more product lines you have, the more marketing driven you can be. Civilian market ammo is largely marketing and price driven. Duty (and HST and Gold Dot) in most calibers meets the full FBI protocol testing. Defense does not, but likely comes at a slightly reduced recoil and maybe cost (at least to the manufacturer)

[corneileous]

The need for a round to penetrate intermediate barriers and still be terminally effective afterwards isn’t something that is specific to law enforcement. We aren’t even necessarily talking about having to shoot at someone who is behind hard cover when looking at the ballistic testing results. I pay particular attention to the heavy clothing and auto glass tests because of what those tests mean in the context of people shooting at other people in general.

The need for good performance in the heavy clothing test should be pretty obvious for most people. The person you might be forced to shoot could be wearing multiple layers of warm clothing depending on your location and the time of year. It’s not unusual for someone in New England in the winter to be wearing a thermal base layer, a flannel shirt, a hoody, and a Carhartt coat. That’s totally normal for the context of many people’s lives. The auto glass test gives you a good idea what the round will do when it hits a hard object at an angle. Do you know what the most common “intermediate barrier” is that someone might have to shoot through in a deadly force situation? It’s bones. In order to get your bullet into the organs you’re trying to hit inside the upper torso, like the heart and lungs, it’ll have to pass through ribs, vertebrae or the sternum. The bullet might also have to pass through your adversary’s arm to get to their torso to begin with. You might have seen anecdotal information about how it’s common for people to get shot in the hand or arm during a shooting. That’s because people’s hands and arms are likely to be up around their torso during a use of force, whether they’re holding a gun to shoot at you, or swinging a tire iron to bludgeon you, or just punching you to death. A round that can penetrate auto glass and still perform within the penetration/expansion/weight retention standards in gel afterwards should also be able to pass through someone’s arm bones and ribs and perform adequately in their torso afterwards.

Interesting explanation. So it kind of sounds to me that both speer and federal got ya covered on both ends with the gold dot and the HST whether your law enforcement or home defense which brings me wonder even more why Hornady basically has around that’s intended for law-enforcement with their critical duty and a round that’s it intended for home defense in the critical defense.
Edited to add:
I guess @BehindBlueI’s already pretty much answered the question regarding Hornady critical defense and critical duty.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RevolverRob]

It's 2022 and as Dave Spaulding notes below our ammunition today is the best that we've ever had. This is HST in a block of ordnance gel and that's a round that consistently meets the FBI/IWBA protocol.

This round did not go through a barrier, and gets full expansion and ~19" of penetration. Imagine going through bone, autoglass, sheet rock, sheet metal lamp post, etc. There are plenty of things you might shoot through that represent barriers to bullets that might not seem like barriers to humans. But just take a general thought and apply it - If it can obscure your vision in anyway, it is a (potential) barrier to bullets.

http://instagram.com/p/CdVt86RLN9U/

[Hambo]

Modern JHP ammo that meets FBI/IWBA style barrier blind, robust expansion protocols tends to work well.

It's 2022 and as Dave Spaulding notes below our ammunition today is the best that we've ever had.

Grab some of the good stuff and make sure it functions in your pistol, then quit worrying about it.