Is there an actual study about fmj/steel-core 9mm bullets?

[Ignition Override]

There actually was a fairly extensive test of Steel core vs. lead core .223 bullets tested in a few ARs:
"Lucky Gunner Epic Test...". Let's emphasize that the very accelerated barrel wear ("shot out by 6,000 rds.) was caused by coated steel Bullets....Not the cases. Most people seem unable to differentiate between bullets and cases. They hear or read the word steel, regurgitate....but never mention a verifiable source. "My buddy's cousin (who seldom cleans a gun) said...". .

Was there an actual extensive comparison done with ammo such as Wolf, Tula or Monarch 9mm vs. fmj lead bullets used in brass-cased ammo? If so, then there is a name for the study or the website.

We don't learn anything by repeating hearsay. With the lower energy of 9mm, possibly there is far less wear inside the bore compared to the much higher energy with .223, and other variables.
It would be nice to have some facts.

 

[C0untZer0]

Well, to start out with, I remember a member here sawed a Wolf bullet in half and it was copper-coated lead - not steel.

 

[1KPerDay]

IIRC the steel jacketed rifle study was flawed because they got the rifle so hot anything would have damaged the bore. I may be thinking of another test though.

 

[Ignition Override]

C0ountZer0: Interesting. Maybe the steel cores are not found in today's Wolf 9mm.

1KPerDay: They did heat the barrels a good bit and heat was a factor in the metal degradation.
They used a very similar rate of fire with both general types of .223 ammo in those ARs as a control, and the lead core bullets wore out a barrel at about 10,000 rds., the steel core by approx. 6,000 (?) rds.

The Jackets reportedly have soft steel in the "bimetal" coatings, but lead cores, because steel core handgun ammo is Illegal in the US.

**But does this soft steel coating on the 9mm bullet seriously increase wear in the bore, despite my Sigs, CZ and .380 Makarov being made of harder steel?
Having far less energy than a .223 or 7.62x39 bullet, maybe this is not a concern, at all?

 

[JohnKSa]

As noted, there is probably not much steel core pistol ammo on the U.S. market due to the restrictions on "armor piercing" handgun ammunition. Steel-jacketed ammo would be allowed as long as the jacket is not too heavy relative to the overall weight of the bullet.

Anyway, steel-core ammo shouldn't wear a bore any differently than lead-core ammo as long as the jacket is not steel. Steel-jacketed ammo might wear the bore a little bit faster, but it's not something I worry about in the handguns I am willing to use with steel-jacketed ammo. Besides, in most semi-autos, barrels are cheap and easily replaced.

A bigger problem with steel-jacketed ammo is that most indoor ranges won't let you use it.

 

[RecoilRob]

How did they make the call when the barrel was 'wore out'? If by accuracy....then the bimetal ammo might have just not been as accurate to begin with so naturally it would 'fail' sooner. Barrel steel is normally WAY harder than any jacket material and I'd think HOW you shoot it more important then WHAT you shoot through it when worrying about barrel life. Of course....if accuracy is your goal you likely won't be shooting steel jacketed ammo in the first place so there is that consideration. In a pistol it would be VERY hard to get the barrel hot enough to do serious damage to it....unless you're running a Glock 18.

 

[481]

C0ountZer0: Interesting. Maybe the steel cores are not found in today's Wolf 9mm.

My understanding is that Wolf makes ammunition with both copper-washed mild steel jackets as well as gilding metal (95Cu/05Zn) jackets.

 

[tipoc]

There actually was a fairly extensive test of Steel core vs. lead core .223 bullets tested in a few ARs:
"Lucky Gunner Epic Test...". Let's emphasize that the very accelerated barrel wear ("shot out by 6,000 rds.) was caused by coated steel Bullets....Not the cases. Most people seem unable to differentiate between bullets and cases. They hear or read the word steel, regurgitate....but never mention a verifiable source. "My buddy's cousin (who seldom cleans a gun) said...". .

Was there an actual extensive comparison done with ammo such as Wolf, Tula or Monarch 9mm vs. fmj lead bullets used in brass-cased ammo? If so, then there is a name for the study or the website.

We don't learn anything by repeating hearsay. With the lower energy of 9mm, possibly there is far less wear inside the bore compared to the much higher energy with .223, and other variables.
It would be nice to have some facts.

I'm not sure I understand the issue here. First Lucky Gunner is quoted as saying the test was about "coated steel Bullets... Not the cases." But then the op asks about..."Was there an actual extensive comparison done with ammo such as Wolf, Tula or Monarch 9mm vs. fmj lead bullets used in brass-cased ammo?" So is the question about the core of the bullet or brass cased ammo vs. steel cased?

First I'm not sure I've seen any steel core 9mm handgun ammo. I also don't think I've seen any steel coated ammo.

Second if the bullet weighs 124 gr.s with a steel core or a lead core both will be jacketed in copper so how will the core of the bullet make a difference to the life of the barrel? FMJ is FMJ.

So maybe it's just me that is confused.

 

[Ignition Override]

tipoc: sorry about a confused message.
I stand corrected. Immed. after posting this topic, I stumbled onto comments that steel core bullets in US handgun ammo is illegal.

My impression from the Lucky Gunner test is that the only solid factor in increased wear inside rifles is from certain bimetal coatings on bullets, not steel cases.

With the lower velocity of handgun rds., possibly there's much less difference in bore wear when comparing Russian bimetal coatings and traditional copper over lead?

 

[481]

There actually was a fairly extensive test of Steel core vs. lead core .223 bullets tested in a few ARs:
"Lucky Gunner Epic Test...". Let's emphasize that the very accelerated barrel wear ("shot out by 6,000 rds.) was caused by coated steel Bullets....Not the cases. Most people seem unable to differentiate between bullets and cases. They hear or read the word steel, regurgitate....but never mention a verifiable source. "My buddy's cousin (who seldom cleans a gun) said...". .

Was there an actual extensive comparison done with ammo such as Wolf, Tula or Monarch 9mm vs. fmj lead bullets used in brass-cased ammo? If so, then there is a name for the study or the website.

We don't learn anything by repeating hearsay. With the lower energy of 9mm, possibly there is far less wear inside the bore compared to the much higher energy with .223, and other variables.
It would be nice to have some facts.

I am somewhat suspicious of the potential for 'excess' bore wear that might come with the use of bi-metal jacketed bullets, too. For that reason, I just use ammunition that has jackets made of gilding metal (95Cu/05Zn). There is usually little to no difference in price and if there is, it is, to me at least, worth the 'peace of mind'.