Which non-LEO JHP is best buy for defense?????

AR-15 » Ammunition

AR Sponsor:

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Which non-LEO JHP is best buy for defense?????

Posted: 9/20/2005 5:16:18 PM EDT

I have seen a lot of posts on best choices from surplus FMJ, and a few regarding LEO only ammo.

My concern is self defense and SHTF with my 1/9 twist 6721 M4. I have seen a lot of concerns listed with military FMJ. I have read ammo oracle as well. I could not find recommedations on non-LEO only, including where to buy for a reasonable price. Federal match is obviuosly great with Sierra match HP, but if I want to have 1000 rounds on hand and some level of practice with it, I need to re-finance my house.

I see Federal American Eagle has a 55gr JHP, but that is much lighter than LEO and military choices for JHP.

I have 1k ronds of Federal 62 gr FMJ and 1k rounds of green tip military. If, heaven forbid, I ever need to prtect my family with this, I don't want to worry about performance.

If this is answered in another post, could you help me find it?

Thanks,
JB

Posted: 9/20/2005 5:21:50 PM EDT

[#1]

Why do you want a hollowpoint?
Are you confusing hollowpoints with open tip match rounds?

As far as training. Buy what self defense ammo you can afford, and then practice with mil-surp or Wolf.

Posted: 9/20/2005 5:54:20 PM EDT

[#2]

What about the Hornady TAP rounds?

Posted: 9/21/2005 3:44:58 AM EDT

[#3]

I understand the question about why HP's. My observation is that many of those groups (LE & military) that do not "have" to use FMJ, don't. It appears to me that the more weapons focussed the group, the higher the likelyhood that they use HP's.

Since I don't need to make concessions either, I would like to maximize the effectiveness of my choice, but hopefully be able to pay around $.50/bullet. Maybe this is not posssible.

For instance, Ammoman has a Federal 55gr soft tip at a good price. Are 55 gr SP's as effective as HP's? Or are they not much better than FMJ?

Is Hornady TAP a reliable round? I would guess yes, and also guess that 60 or 75 grain would be best choices. Please correct me if I'm wrong. But this is an example of one of the more premium rounds. Are there no less expensive HP's that would be acceptable?

As far as Wolff goes, I will say thanks but no thanks. I know there are many mixed views. I spent a lot of money to get a real Colt, and waited quite a while. I prefer to go with choices that no one really questions (at least as far as effect on the gun). Foolish as this might be.

Thanks for the replies.

Posted: 9/21/2005 6:10:08 AM EDT

[#4]

I have been having the same issues you are.

Remington now has a 62 gr HP match. You could get either loaded ammo or bullets and roll you own if you reload. I think I am going to pick up a couple boxes and give them a try. Might not be the cheapest in the world but I did notice you seem to like 62 gr rounds.

Posted: 9/21/2005 7:53:32 AM EDT

[#5]

Hornady 75gr TAP is very effective defensive ammo, one of the best. The overall pattern is that the best rounds in an AR tend to be heavy (69-77gr) OTM (or sometimes called "BTHP Match") rounds. Another one that also performs well and is in that same category is the 77gr Black Hills OTM. They are not "hollow points" like what you would think of from the handgun ammo world. They have a very tiny hollowpoint in the tip, almost like a little pinhole, and it's not there for expansion purposes. "OTM", "BTHP", or "Match HP" in 5.56 (and other) rifle calibers almost always means this kind of bullet design, NOT a big huge hollowpoint head designed to expand in flesh like JHP handgun rounds do.

Don't forget twist rate issues though. 1:7 will shoot anything, but some 1:9 AR barrels won't properly stabilize these heavier 75/77gr rounds, you have to test and see if they're wildly inaccurate and/or keyholing the targets.

If you have a 1:9 barrel and 75/77 doesn't work for you (or you don't want to test, or just don't trust it under changing conditions), your next best bet for solid-performing defensive loads in an AR is going to be the M193-alikes (55gr FMJ, preferably NATO pressure). Federal XM193, or WInchester Q3131A are good bets there. Be wary of QC issues with XM193PD, but the non-PD XM193 is generally decent quality. M855 will perform well also, but not as consistently well in ballistic testing at short-medium ranges for human targets as M193s. It was meant to pierce very light armor at longer ranges.

Posted: 9/21/2005 9:45:41 AM EDT

[#6]

To try and see if I could find some tests describing what I was looking for, I found a report on the Federal Ammunition Website (LE Section) on 223 ballistic tests. On bare ballistic gel (no barrier) the one FMJ in the evaluation (55gr Red Box) penetrated almost half the total distance without much of a wound cavity. Even after that, it took much of the total of 14.5 inches of penetration before a significant would cavity was produced. Most of the other deigns (HP, SP, Ballistic Tip, etc.) created significant cavities almost immediately.

According to these comparisons the Federal 55gr SP may be a much better alternative to FMJ without the cost of TAP or Match ammo.

I'll have to get some and see how it runs in my gun.

JB

Posted: 9/21/2005 1:36:15 PM EDT

[#7]

i think the main reason people look at hollowpoints is the reduced riak of over penatration..

i know there are studys that show that this isnt as big an issue with fmj as once thought..

i belive leo use it for reduced liability reasons..

also i belive hps tend to be more accurate that fmj"no clue why that is"

Posted: 9/21/2005 1:37:58 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
To try and see if I could find some tests describing what I was looking for, I found a report on the Federal Ammunition Website (LE Section) on 223 ballistic tests. On bare ballistic gel (no barrier) the one FMJ in the evaluation (55gr Red Box) penetrated almost half the total distance without much of a wound cavity. Even after that, it took much of the total of 14.5 inches of penetration before a significant would cavity was produced. Most of the other deigns (HP, SP, Ballistic Tip, etc.) created significant cavities almost immediately.

According to these comparisons the Federal 55gr SP may be a much better alternative to FMJ without the cost of TAP or Match ammo.

I'll have to get some and see how it runs in my gun.

JB

i would look at hp over sp

Posted: 9/21/2005 1:41:40 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
i think the main reason people look at hollowpoints is the reduced riak of over penatration..

i know there are studys that show that this isnt as big an issue with fmj as once thought..

i belive leo use it for reduced liability reasons..

also i belive hps tend to be more accurate that fmj"no clue why that is"

I agree with all but the last statement.

I am not a big fan of JHP for 5.56 or .223. I would say get some xm193 or Q3131a (if you can find it).

Posted: 9/21/2005 5:05:27 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
To try and see if I could find some tests describing what I was looking for, I found a report on the Federal Ammunition Website (LE Section) on 223 ballistic tests. On bare ballistic gel (no barrier) the one FMJ in the evaluation (55gr Red Box) penetrated almost half the total distance without much of a wound cavity. Even after that, it took much of the total of 14.5 inches of penetration before a significant would cavity was produced. Most of the other deigns (HP, SP, Ballistic Tip, etc.) created significant cavities almost immediately.

According to these comparisons the Federal 55gr SP may be a much better alternative to FMJ without the cost of TAP or Match ammo.

I'll have to get some and see how it runs in my gun.

JB

You did say you read the ammo oracle, correct?
XM193 and Q3131A are both FMJ rounds that will fragment and leave a large and deep wound cavity.
They are probably the cheapest good performer's that you'll find.

Following that are the offerings from Black Hills with their heavy match loadings that use OTM bullets.
You want the 75gr load if your rifle will stabilize it, the 69gr otherwise.

Honestly, even at 50 cents a round, that's only 30 dollars for 60 rounds. Your life isn't worth 30 bux?
Even after you've spent around a grand on the rifle?

As far as practice ammo, if you disdain Wolf, the next best contender is probably American Eagle, or XM193 and Q3131A.

ETA, Looks like it'll cost a little more to fill two 30rd mags. BH Red Box at Cabela's
Maybe two 20's?

BH Blue Box at Cabela's

Posted: 9/21/2005 6:01:48 PM EDT

[#11]

Stryfe,

Point well taken.

I was hoping I could find for instance Federal Red Box AE 55 gr JHP to be superior.

Obviously, I am cheap but not destitute.

I guess I better get out my credit card. As the saying goes, it sounds like you get what you pay for.

JB

Posted: 9/21/2005 6:14:56 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
I was hoping I could find for instance Federal Red Box AE 55 gr JHP to be superior.
JB

I probably haven't been into ARs much longer than you.
But I get all misty eyed when I used to buy XM193 cheap, all the time.

Posted: 9/22/2005 12:59:58 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Hornady 75gr TAP is very effective defensive ammo, one of the best. The overall pattern is that the best rounds in an AR tend to be heavy (69-77gr) OTM (or sometimes called "BTHP Match") rounds. Another one that also performs well and is in that same category is the 77gr Black Hills OTM. They are not "hollow points" like what you would think of from the handgun ammo world. They have a very tiny hollowpoint in the tip, almost like a little pinhole, and it's not there for expansion purposes. "OTM", "BTHP", or "Match HP" in 5.56 (and other) rifle calibers almost always means this kind of bullet design, NOT a big huge hollowpoint head designed to expand in flesh like JHP handgun rounds do.

Don't forget twist rate issues though. 1:7 will shoot anything, but some 1:9 AR barrels won't properly stabilize these heavier 75/77gr rounds, you have to test and see if they're wildly inaccurate and/or keyholing the targets.

If you have a 1:9 barrel and 75/77 doesn't work for you (or you don't want to test, or just don't trust it under changing conditions), your next best bet for solid-performing defensive loads in an AR is going to be the M193-alikes (55gr FMJ, preferably NATO pressure). Federal XM193, or WInchester Q3131A are good bets there. Be wary of QC issues with XM193PD, but the non-PD XM193 is generally decent quality. M855 will perform well also, but not as consistently well in ballistic testing at short-medium ranges for human targets as M193s. It was meant to pierce very light armor at longer ranges.

What about the lighter Hornady TAP rounds?

Posted: 9/22/2005 1:01:53 AM EDT

[#14]

Black Hills 69gr BTHP.

Posted: 9/22/2005 4:04:30 PM EDT

[#15]

They underpenetrate in the lighter TAPs. You must not have looked very hard becasue I gave the best .223 performers in the last week. Then there is the better performing self defense loads thread tacked right at the begining of this forum.

Posted: 9/22/2005 7:43:12 PM EDT

[#16]

Properly constructed JHP's and softpoints outperform FMJ's at least in the stopping power area. Their fragmentation range is far longer. Their generally more accurate. I prefer heavy hollowpoints like the 69 grian Sierra Boattail match. (this is a holllowpoint despite what the military says to get around the Hague accords) It also works very well and fragments and penetrates about 12.5 inches in gelatin. Most of the lighter 223's and 5.56's under penetrate even the FMJ's. The heavier loads go a bit deeper which I belive is a good thing.
Pat

Posted: 9/22/2005 7:45:56 PM EDT

[#17]

also i belive hps tend to be more accurate that fmj"no clue why that is"
END QUOTE

its because with a JHP the lead is put in from the front of the bullet. With FMJ's the lead at the base is exposed and it often starts to spin out of the jacket. Go down range and look at some fired bullets sometime you will see what I mean. With the Hollow points the base is jacketed and does not deform.
Pat

Posted: 9/23/2005 6:21:26 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Properly constructed JHP's and softpoints outperform FMJ's at least in the stopping power area. Their fragmentation range is far longer. Their generally more accurate. I prefer heavy hollowpoints like the 69 grian Sierra Boattail match. (this is a holllowpoint despite what the military says to get around the Hague accords) It also works very well and fragments and penetrates about 12.5 inches in gelatin. Most of the lighter 223's and 5.56's under penetrate even the FMJ's. The heavier loads go a bit deeper which I belive is a good thing.
Pat

THe hollow point of a match bullet does not function at all. It does not open up at the nose and is a byproduct of bullet design. If the military could have the tip sealed and retain the match grade accuray they would and this would have zero effect on its terminal effectiveness.

Posted: 9/23/2005 7:58:27 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
What about the lighter Hornady TAP rounds?

They lack sufficient penetration to ensure they will get the job done - no matter the situation.

Dr Roberts has posted his lists of recommended rounds before. A copy of that list can be found at www.MD-AR15.com in the FAQ section.

Best of the 'heavy OTMs' that are readily available to civilians and are cost effective:
Black Hills 75gr OTM (same bullet as the 75gr TAP)

If your 1:9 won't shoot the 75gr to your liking then:
Black Hills 68gr OTM or the Black Hills 69gr SMK

the 68gr has a better wound profile and is less expensive, but most rifles seem to shoot the 69gr more accurately. Another advantage of the 68gr is it's cannalured while the 69gr is not (the cannalure helps prevent bullet setback - a very nice feature for ammo used in semi-auto rifles).

Posted: 9/23/2005 8:00:14 AM EDT

[#20]

The 69 grain Sierra jhp is a match bullet and it expands and totally fragments and penetrates 12.5 inches. The 168 grian .308 match load also fragments. These may be labled match bullets but they do expand and fragment and perform like hollowpoints because they are.
Pat

Posted: 9/23/2005 3:53:13 PM EDT

[#21]

.

Posted: 9/23/2005 5:03:00 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
The 69 grain Sierra jhp is a match bullet and it expands and totally fragments and penetrates 12.5 inches. The 168 grian .308 match load also fragments. These may be labled match bullets but they do expand and fragment and perform like hollowpoints because they are.
Pat

Please stop. You have been corrected and you STILL spread misinformation. These are LAND WAREFARE LEGAL because they are NON FUNCTIONING hollow points. Close the tip and they function EXACTLY the same. They yaw and fragment just like FMJ they do NOT expand from the tip EVER.

Posted: 9/23/2005 9:17:59 PM EDT

[#23]

I have tested these loads myself and there is plenty of gelatin test data on the net for you to see. These loads expand and fragment like most conventional 223 hollowpoints. They don't act one bit like ball. Before trying to tell me to stop make sure you know what your talking about. The 69 grain Sierra boattail match penetrates 12.5 inches of gelatin on average and totally fragments. It does not fragment like ball ammo which usually breaks in half at the cannular then splits into two main pieces and several smaller frags. It expands andfrags like a hollow point. Nearly all 223's yaw as the penetrate the body this is not related to bullet construction as much as the caliber itself. I am not spreading misinformation about this or lying. Its true that these bullets were not designed with expansion and fragmentation in mind, but that is what they do rather by design or not. There hollow point is why the 77 grain version of the Sierra Boattail is doing so well compared to regular SS109 loaded ammo in the field right now. The rules of war have little to do with bullet design and more to do with politics. If you could close the tip on these bullets they would act far different.

By the way what is your background in this area. Are you in the ammunition industry, have you tested any ammo for selection purposes for an LEO agency. Do you run a ballistics lab. I am a cop and a firearms instructor who has personaly been involved in selecting ammo for the department I work for. I do not run a lab but I have done some informal tests with various mediums. I am just curious as to your background.
Pat

Posted: 9/24/2005 6:18:26 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The 69 grain Sierra jhp is a match bullet and it expands and totally fragments and penetrates 12.5 inches. The 168 grian .308 match load also fragments. These may be labled match bullets but they do expand and fragment and perform like hollowpoints because they are.
Pat

Please stop. You have been corrected and you STILL spread misinformation. These are LAND WAREFARE LEGAL because they are NON FUNCTIONING hollow points. Close the tip and they function EXACTLY the same. They yaw and fragment just like FMJ they do NOT expand from the tip EVER.

I'm inclined to agree with DevL on this one.

Posted: 9/24/2005 7:15:50 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The 69 grain Sierra jhp is a match bullet and it expands and totally fragments and penetrates 12.5 inches. The 168 grian .308 match load also fragments. These may be labled match bullets but they do expand and fragment and perform like hollowpoints because they are.
Pat

Please stop. You have been corrected and you STILL spread misinformation. These are LAND WAREFARE LEGAL because they are NON FUNCTIONING hollow points. Close the tip and they function EXACTLY the same. They yaw and fragment just like FMJ they do NOT expand from the tip EVER.

I'm inclined to agree with DevL on this one.

Yep, DevL is right on as always.

Posted: 9/24/2005 11:23:11 AM EDT

[#26]

If i am wrong I will admit it But I challenge you to test this load yourself in gelatin. It typically totally fragments and penetrrates approximately 12.5 inches. The ball ammo we have tested usually breaks in half at the cannular and views off in two directions with less frags but their larger. How do you explain the total fragmentation if the hollowpoint is not aiding in expansion.
Pat

Posted: 9/24/2005 1:52:46 PM EDT

[#27]

Because it breaks in half due to jacket thickness not the tip which does not expand. A read of any text or study will explain this. When they do not break after yawing (due to inadequate velocity) the tip also is not found to have expanded.

Posted: 9/24/2005 2:15:51 PM EDT

[#28]

Could you cite some sources such as the IWBA or Dr. Fackler or the like so I can look at what your talking about. In my tests the bullet totally frags and seems to behave differntly than standard 55 grain FMJ loads. Forgive me if I don't just take your word for it. As you know there is a lot of mis information on the net.
Pat

Posted: 9/24/2005 4:43:06 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
If i am wrong I will admit it But I challenge you to test this load yourself in gelatin. It typically totally fragments and penetrrates approximately 12.5 inches.
Pat

According to you, the 69gr Sierra JHP also expands and that is where you are wrong.

Furthermore,--and DevL, please feel free to correct me if I am wrong--veloctiy, not so much bullet construction, is what contributes to the fragmentation effects. Don't belive me? Just look at the construction of the M193 round, it is not a JHP bullet and yet it fragments dramatically at adequate velocities.

Still don't belive me? Fire a 69gr Sierra JHP into 10% ballistics gelatin at sub 2400 FPS velocities and witness the minimal (if any) fragmentation effetcs.

The Ammo Oracle is your friend.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Justin

Posted: 9/24/2005 5:38:34 PM EDT

[#30]

The match bullets fragment at LOWER velocities because they are longer which imparts greater stress as they yaw but PRIMARILY it is due to a weaker/thinner jacket. Of course velocity is the key but they must be weal enough to break apart fromt he stress. You will notice Wolf does not fragment because of its stronger steel jacket.

Glockfan,

If you want a detailed explanation go to tacticalforums.com and pose a question to the Doc in the terminal ballistics forum. I discussed this issue of the reasons the bullet is legal for land warfare due to its fragmentation mechanism during a phone call from Dr Roberts to me a year or two ago. It sounds like you will only believe him so I suggest you ask him yourself.

Posted: 9/24/2005 6:14:16 PM EDT

[#31]

Thanks for the info. I am not too proud to admit I may be wrong on this issue.
Pat

Posted: 9/24/2005 6:41:06 PM EDT

[#32]

Bullet construction is a HUGE factor in whether a yawing rifle bullet will fragment in flesh (or a medium of similar density). The bullet's construction is the primary determining factor for the impact velocity that will be required to create fragmentation. Make a bullet's jacket thicker, or change to a stronger material, and the required minimum impact velocity for fragmentation will increase. Make the jacket thinner, or use weaker material, and the required velocity will decrease.

Other things, such as bullet length-to-caliber ratio, are also a factor, but in relative terms, not as significant as bullet construction, where a seemingly insignificant variation can create VERY different results in fragmentation.

-Troy

P.S., DevL is, of course, exactly right in that OTM bullets such as the Sierra MatchKing do not expand from the bullet tip, but fragment in mid-yaw, exactly like an M193 or M855 bullet will do, given sufficient impact velocity.

Posted: 9/24/2005 6:47:05 PM EDT

[#33]

55gr nosler ballistic tip, works on prairy dogs, works on deer, works on people....feed your varmint rifle varmint ammo...

Posted: 9/24/2005 7:20:38 PM EDT

[#34]

DevL and Troy:

I stand corrected. Live and learn. Thanks for teaching me something new today.

Regards,

Justin

Posted: 9/24/2005 7:54:07 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
55gr nosler ballistic tip, works on prairy dogs, works on deer, works on people....feed your varmint rifle varmint ammo...

Ballistic tip rounds in .223 are not for people. They just don't work good. The best rounds in .223 (from deadly, to most deadly are,) M855, M193, 69grOTM, 68grOTM, Sierra77grOTM, Hornady75grOTM, Nosler77grOTM.

If I got it wrong please tell me.

Posted: 9/25/2005 5:37:59 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Why do you want a hollowpoint?
Are you confusing hollowpoints with open tip match rounds?

If anyone's confused (or trying to intentionally confuse others) it's the govt renaming HPs as OTMs. Hornady, Sierra, Nosler, none of them refer to their bullets as OTMs, they're all match HPs. I guess by renaming the HP portion as "open tip", that doesn't have the same evil connotation (since evryone out there already knows that HPs are verbotten). And the reason they're desirable is because they frag at lower velocities, but we all know that already.

Now to answer the question, std pressure Hornady TAP would be a good choice. The main thing you are giving up is fragmentation range, but IIRC they are still good out to at least 100 yds when launched from a 16" carbine. If you have a slower twist barrel that won't stabilize 75 grain bullets, the next best bet would be 68 OTM/BTHP. Try Black Hills for those.

Posted: 9/25/2005 6:52:14 AM EDT

[#37]

I was under the impression Hornady has always called their bullets OTM and Sierra SMK. Did not know this was a military designation. Thanks for the clarification.

Posted: 9/25/2005 7:32:16 AM EDT

[#38]

The "OTM" or "Open-Tip Match" came from the terminal ballistics research community, who is acutely aware of the political incorrectness of the term "hollow point" and so came up with a term to describe match bullets that happen to have an open tip (due to the common method of constructing a match bullet), but are not designed to expand from the nose like a conventional hollowpoint. Had such a term not been invented, there would have been an unnecessary uphill battle over the "hollowpoint" issue when trying to get these new loads approved for military use.

-Troy

Posted: 9/25/2005 7:35:49 AM EDT

[#39]

Hornady has a match bullet product line, featuring either A-Max (polymer tipped BT bullets) or conventional BTHPs. (If this link doesn't work, you may have to drill down into the .224 rifle bullet line to see how they designate their match, varmint and std bullets)

Sierra has a Match King product line, and all of their offerrings are either HP or BTHP designs.

Nosler has a Custom Competition product line, and all of their offerings are BTHP designs.

I don't believe you'll find any "OTM" designation anywhere within their respective lines, that's a designation created by the govt. For govt orders/contracts, the boxes may be labeled OTM, but they are loaded with BTHPs.

Posted: 9/25/2005 7:53:27 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
The "OTM" or "Open-Tip Match" came from the terminal ballistics research community, who is acutely aware of the political incorrectness of the term "hollow point" and so came up with a term to describe match bullets that happen to have an open tip (due to the common method of constructing a match bullet), but are not designed to expand from the nose like a conventional hollowpoint. Had such a term not been invented, there would have been an unnecessary uphill battle over the "hollowpoint" issue when trying to get these new loads approved for military use.

-Troy

I'm not aware of any rifle HPs that are designed for expansion as their primary wounding mechanism. I believe all are designed for maximum fragmentation upon impact. This may be preceded by some degree of expansion, but varmint bullets certainly don't hold together, they begin fragmentation almost at impact.

I know of no medium/large game HP bullets, all are either conventional SP or controlled expansion designs.

Pistol HPs are designed for expansion, as well as holding together to allow sufficient penetration.

When considering Hague convention rules on not using bullets designed for "causing suffering" (can't remember exact language), you really need to put yourself back in the era when these rules were laid out. At the time soldiers were modifiying long, heavy RN bullet tips to aid expansion. Velocities were slow back then (2,000 - 2,200 fps), you didn't have 3,000 fps loads. Bullets back then hung together as they penetrated. In essence they were trying to modify their rifle bullets then to behave like pistol bullets do today. I don't know when it came to be accepted ( 5.56, XM-193 perhaps), but somewhere along the way fragmentation as a wounding mechanism came to be accepted as not violating the "causing suffering" prohibition of the Hague Convention. High velocity BTHP/OTMs are just an extension/evolution of this accepted method.

Posted: 9/25/2005 8:21:38 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
I'm not aware of any rifle HPs that are designed for expansion as their primary wounding mechanism. I believe all are designed for maximum fragmentation upon impact. This may be preceded by some degree of expansion, but varmint bullets certainly don't hold together, they begin fragmentation almost at impact.

Many varmint bullets are designed to expand from the nose, and in fact, the primary purpose of the "ballistic tip" design is to initiate bullet nose expansion immediately upon impact. Yes, these bullets ALSO fragment at higher speeds as intended, but if you look at terminal ballistic testing of these rounds at lower impact speeds, you will see nose expansion but no fragmentation.

The same testing with BTHP/OTM bullets will show intact bullets yawing, but no nose expansion.

-Troy

Posted: 9/25/2005 9:14:13 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm not aware of any rifle HPs that are designed for expansion as their primary wounding mechanism. I believe all are designed for maximum fragmentation upon impact. This may be preceded by some degree of expansion, but varmint bullets certainly don't hold together, they begin fragmentation almost at impact.

Many varmint bullets are designed to expand from the nose, and in fact, the primary purpose of the "ballistic tip" design is to initiate bullet nose expansion immediately upon impact. Yes, these bullets ALSO fragment at higher speeds as intended, but if you look at terminal ballistic testing of these rounds at lower impact speeds, you will see nose expansion but no fragmentation.

The same testing with BTHP/OTM bullets will show intact bullets yawing, but no nose expansion.

-Troy

I was referring to HP varmint bullets, not SP, BT, V-Max or the like.

Posted: 9/25/2005 11:48:45 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Why do you want a hollowpoint?
Are you confusing hollowpoints with open tip match rounds?

If anyone's confused (or trying to intentionally confuse others) it's the govt renaming HPs as OTMs. Hornady, Sierra, Nosler, none of them refer to their bullets as OTMs, they're all match HPs. I guess by renaming the HP portion as "open tip", that doesn't have the same evil connotation (since evryone out there already knows that HPs are verbotten). And the reason they're desirable is because they frag at lower velocities, but we all know that already.

I was simply looking for clarification to make sure that he wasn't thinking in terms of hollowpoints designed for expansion and bullets with hollow point jackets intended for improved accuracy that happen to have a very useful side effect of fragmenting really well and causing a lot of damage to two legged varmints.
Basically, I was hoping we could clear the air before the big flame war started.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Which non-LEO JHP is best buy for defense?????

AR-15 » Ammunition

AR Sponsor:

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us