Ball Vs. Hollow Points

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fastbolt, thanks for the photos and info on the +P SXT ammo..
Good stuff. I also carry the Ranger brand when I can get.

De nada.

These photos are several years old, now, taken back when the change was occurring from the SXT (RA45SXTP, etc) to the T-Series (RA45TP).

The last bunch of .45 +P I received (they were out of stock of the standard pressure load) was the newest revision of the T-Series, but I don't have any images from the last test shots done at a gel event using either the.45 +P T-Series or the Bonded load. I have some data buried somewhere in my computer from that last session ... :scrutiny:

The Ranger line is just their LE/Gov product line, meaning the T-Series is just one product offered within that line. The other stuff might be similar to something offered in the Supreme or USA ("white box") line, at times. One of the Ranger Handgun 180gr JHP duty loads in .40 - the RA40180HP - is listed as producing 10fps more velocity than it's USA cousin - USA40JHP - at least in the specs, but I've seen the USA version delivered to replace a contract order for the RA40180HP, upon occasion ... and it's still listed under both the USA and the Subsonic Centerfire Duty Handgun product lines. :D

FWIW, the current RA40T 180gr T-Series is listed at producing 990fps, and the Ranger Bonded Handgun RA40B 180gr load shows 1025fps. It would seem each load has been optimized in the way of velocity for the design of the particular bullet being used.

I've been using a lot of Remington GS in the last several years, because it was available at the range for duty/qual/practice ammo, but if I was spending my own money for carry ammo I'd focus my efforts on either T-Series or Gold Dot. I can't offer any definitive data sets to support that personal preference, but that's how I'd spend my own money at the present time. I wouldn't jump through hoops to look for the T-Series, though, or pay through the nose for it, even though it seems to be pretty good stuff. I'd look for deals on the over-the-counter Speer GDHP and still sleep well at night (as long as it continued to feed well in my guns, when being fired in my hands, of course). I tend to look at the smaller custom ammo company offerings as being a bit prohibitive when it comes to the cost involved to periodically buy their products in quantities involving multiple boxes (or a case, or more).

I also sort of look at QC issues for the major companies as being something that seems to produce some "ebb & flow" over time.
 
Last edited:
Jacketed hollow points are the way to go 100% of the time in any caliber above .32 ACP.

Modern JHPs are meant to expand even after passing through heavy clothing. If they fail to expand, you're no worse off than if you had hardball, but hardball will never expand, so there's no benefit to using it over JHPs unless your gun doesn't function with JHPs, in which case you need new ammo or a new gun.

FMJ ammo has a tendency to make wounds smaller than the caliber that overpenetrate. There is less tissue damage and more likelihood of hitting bystanders.
 
Will this misconception ever die?

JHPs are absolutely the way to go for 9mm and above. They are not going to get stopped simply by a thick jacket or other clothing and due to advanced modern designs most likely won't clog either. Even if they do clog you have a hotly loaded FMJ. There really is no downside as long as your gun can feed them reliably.
 
I want some good opinions here. During winter months where people pile on clothes, would you rather cary ball or hollow point ammo. People pack on the clothes and with a big caliber, like a 45 acp is ball ammo the right choice? 9mm, 357 sig. Feedback on all calibers would be nice to have feedback.
Also, has anyone had any problems with there gun not feeding square end hollow points? I've even heard of people mix and matching in a hi capacity magazine (not really just thought about it).

You need to be more specific, and use a wound channel calculator. I don't like most HP ammo, since it's too light for caliber, but there are exceptions.

There are two ways to get wound channel: use a flat point, of LFN, and use the velocity of the pretty much non-expanding bullet to create wound channel. When you get over 1200 fps, that LFN might become an expanding bullet. That's pretty much revolvers but, it can be done with .45 Super, etc.
This gives you a cavity all the way through.

The other is to use a HP, but, they tend to expand quickly, do a lot of damage at the start, but fail to penetrate fully, and, in the end of their penetration, slow down so much the damage is not much.

It is possible to find heavy for caliber hollow points that penetrate and expand, along with creating a full length wound channel.
 
Last edited:
Todays hollowpoints and especially the bonded hollowpoints will easily penetrate heavy clothing. The real concern is with the bullet's performance/penetration capabilities after encountering heavy clothing. There are a few rare reports in the past of bullets stopping on heavy outer garments like those thick goose down jackets. The cause of these failures have been traced to defective ammo and not to the bullet itself being defective.

I don't consider those FBI tests to be the "be all end all". I do use them though as a tool to help me decide what hollowpoints perform best in the various self defense situations that i'm likely to encounter. I then choose those hollowpionts according to their reliability and shootability in my gun.

Up until yesterday i'd been carrying 147gr. PDX1's in my short barreled 9mm. Yesterday I switched back to the Corbon 115 gr. DPX, not because the PDX1 isn't a good SD round, but because the DPX shoots right at POA in my gun just like the 124 gr. FMJFP's that I usually train with. Both the PDX1 and DPX cycle reliably and penetrate deep enough and expand reliably according to the tests that i've seen. It's just that I have more confidence in my ability to hit exactly on target in a stressful situation with the DPX.
 
How much penetration do we need?

The average chest diameter of a Large human male, 6ft and heavy build, is about 12 inches , according to the FBI stats. The FBI requires that their ammo meets that requirement of at least 12" penetration and .5" expansion in ballistic gel for 9mm after passing through 4 layers of heavy denim. There is hollowpoint ammo produced by the major American ammo companies that exceed that requirement. There are also requirements that the FBI has for other calibers as well. All of this was a result of the shootout in Miami, FL where a gunman killed FBI agents after being shot several times by less effective ammo, more than 20 years ago. Because of the FBI demands, the ammo companies have responded
 
That said, the only way to know how your ammo will ..

perform through a certain type of clothing, regarding penetration and expansion, would be for you to do your own tests using that clothing and ballistic gel.Heavy clothing such as goose down will obviously have a different outcome than the 4 layers of denim specified by the FBI etc, etc. There can not be 100% guarantee of how ammo will perform unless all of the variables used are the same. I too take the FBI stats as a starting point and guide for that reason.
 
Besides ensuring that the bullet reaches vital organs in a wide variety of scenarios and possible body types, greater JHP penetration depth also means that the expanded JHP is moving faster at every point of travel during penetration than an expanded JHP that reaches a shallower penetration depth.

I believe that such an attribute is a desirable thing to have and look for JHPs that expand and offer an average penetration depth of 15 inches.
 
Up until yesterday i'd been carrying 147gr. PDX1's in my short barreled 9mm. Yesterday I switched back to the Corbon 115 gr. DPX, not because the PDX1 isn't a good SD round, but because the DPX shoots right at POA in my gun just like the 124 gr. FMJFP's that I usually train with. Both the PDX1 and DPX cycle reliably and penetrate deep enough and expand reliably according to the tests that i've seen. It's just that I have more confidence in my ability to hit exactly on target in a stressful situation with the DPX.

Good on you. :) That's an important aspect of SD that many seem to take for granted.

Remember, it ain't the "arrows", it's the "indian".
 
Round balls worked well for Hickock with the "puney" (?) .36 Colt and he had to penetrate natural materials such as heavy wool and animal hides.
I'd say go with "Ball" ammo no matter what the gun is it'll get through materials.
ZVP
 
I'd say go with "Ball" ammo no matter what the gun is it'll get through materials.
Big difference between soft lead roundball and hardball. Lead roundball flattens out and creates nasty wounds. Last .54cal roundball I recovered from a whitetail was flattened out over 1" in diameter. Hardball, not so much. They tend to zip right through with very little tissue disruption.
 
For your question

There have always been questions about things like this. I actually wrote something on a blog that was very similar to the question and think it'll help you. As far as clothing goes I won't say it doesn't play a part but it won't play as big a role as I think you might be assuming it will.

Bottom line for Self-Defense I carry hollow points. Here's the link to the blog if you're interested.

http://www.thegunholsterstore.com/blog/?p=43
 
Last edited:
Yes, I have also hunted with pure lead round balls with my muzzleloaders..

and they do expand very well. I have killed a number of deer with 128gr lead round ball in 45cal percussion "poor boy" southern Mt rifle and the penetration is very adequate with 75gr of FFG black powder. That said, I see no reason why lead bullets could not be used with good effect in modern revolvers or pistols for self defense.
 
Buffalobore has a 158 grain soft lead HP Plus P .38 that goes 1040 fps out of my snub. It's currently loaded with that.

Couple ways to a wound channel: First meplat. Second velocity, third bullet expansion. Problem with most service calibers is they can't get the HP's to penetrate enough if said bad guy is very large, or has his arms pointed at you, to shoot you.

Also, at a certain velocity point, say 1350 fps, LFN bullets start turning into expanding bullets.

Ball can be designed to tumble as well, increasing wound channel.

For service calibers I've often wondered why they didn't go with a lighter, LFN
type bullet, going faster. More reliable, and you get penetration from bullet design and velocity, along with a large wound channel.

By the way, you don't need .75" of expansion to put a big hole in something. .475-.510" works FAR better then the numeric increase in size indicates.
 
I hunt with LFN bullets that I mold from my Lyman pot..

and in single shot rifles and single action revolvers have taken many wild boar on my farmland with them. And, as Craig mentioned, the diameter of the bullets sometimes doubles in size when removed from the animal. There is no doubt in my mind that if these bullets can perform that well in such large thick-hide animals with heavy coat of hair it could be equally deadly to humans with clothing. I still carry the old lead hollowpoint FBI load in my snubby revolvers and so do many LEO for backup. Buffalo Bore is about as good as it gets in this type of manufactured ammo.
 
IIRC, the original John Browning design was for a 200 grain LFN bullet, .45 ACP, at 950 fps or faster. The LFN design would give you a straight, penetrating round, and the velocity a pretty decent wound channel. If that's not correct, it might have been ball ammo. I wonder if a 200 grain .45 ACP ball bullet would tumble? Don't know.

That said, shooting .45 ACP ball mil surplus in the woods I was amazed by a couple things.
First, it was pretty much slow enough so you could see the glint on the bullet as it went through the forest, and two, that it penetrated like the energizer bunny, going through 12" trees, etc. and, it just kept on going.
 
There is no doubt in my mind that if these bullets can perform that well in such large thick-hide animals with heavy coat of hair it could be equally deadly to humans with clothing.

The less resistance you get from a human body may likely result in less expansion and more penetration.
 
Study FBI data, no opinions there. Also, boxotruth does a good job of showing real data to judge for yourself.
 
I think Madcap touched on a real issue. The marginals are where the discussion gets hypercritical, .32's and .380's.

The other area is I see for expanding the debate is shooting at/into automobiles.
 
It's interesting, DocGKR, has noted that a perfectly performing JHP at best, bumps terminal performance by about 5%. He has also noted that medical examiners, and trauma surgeons, have difficulty in distinguishing one wound from another delivered by typical service caliber's.

Shot placement is crucial, ball v JHP not so!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top