Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Posted: 9/16/2009 5:33:53 AM EST
Has anyone seen any objective testing on this round? Particularly the 9mm 115 grain variety (called FTX on the box.)
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 6:02:06 AM EST
According to my Hornady LE catalog the 9mm 90 grain FTX load penetrates 11 inches into gelatin with a heavy clothing barrier, fired from a Kahr MK9 (3" barrel). It hit 1015 fps. They don't list any penetration data about the 115 grain load.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 6:17:03 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 6:24:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2009 6:39:47 AM EST by scotchymcdrinkerbean]
Originally Posted By Zhukov:
Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo, tacked at the top of the page:

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/DocGKRData/38spl_HorndayFTX_SpeerGDHP_CorbonDPX.htm


Oh, I got that, and agree, just was wondering if anyone around these parts had tested this "wonderful new ammo from Hornady that just has to be awesome," since I (probably should have mentioned this in the OP) may be issued the stuff and required to tote it rather soon.


eta: Unless someone has done some objective testing though, I will likely violate the regs and keep toting Gold Dots––––especially since I automatically distrust anyone who offers a 90 grain bullet as a defensive round in 9mm. (Barring the Barnes all-copper jobs I suppose, though the notion of a .380 sized round in a 9mm is still not something I can get over enough to carry the stuff.)
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 6:42:01 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 6:54:59 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/16/2009 6:59:59 AM EST by scotchymcdrinkerbean]
Derrrrrrrr..........gotta remember the search button.

Of course, that still fails to address the actual performance of the round, but good enough for me to advise others to just let it sit on the shelf and carry Gold Dots instead.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 7:16:19 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 7:26:14 AM EST
Somehow I missed Dr. Roberts' review of this stuff––––double derrrr for me for the day. Feel free to close this topic if desired––––and for anyone else questioning the stuff, not only does it seem to have reliability issues, but it seems to be another attempt at Cor-Bon Power-Ball lightweight underpenetrating ammo. Though in the test Dr. Roberts did, the stuff failed to expand after going through denim and *over* penetrated.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 7:47:34 AM EST
This months American Rifleman has an article on both the Hornady FTX and the new Winchester Bonded ammo.

Winchester designed their ammo to meet all of the FBI/IWBA criterion, including barrier penetration.
Hornady specifically designed the FTX with the idea that barrier penetration was not needed ???
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 6:13:17 PM EST
Originally Posted By CJFirefly:
According to my Hornady LE catalog the 9mm 90 grain FTX load penetrates 11 inches into gelatin with a heavy clothing barrier, fired from a Kahr MK9 (3" barrel). It hit 1015 fps. They don't list any penetration data about the 115 grain load.


I thought the 90 grs were the 380's and the 115 gr bullets are for the 9 mm? I have some for my 380 which are the 90 gr bullets, typical for 380's. I think I may have some for 9 mm somewhere in the basement. I'll try to remember to check and report back.

The Guns and Ammo television show tested them in a August episode and they opened up every time. They work so well you don't get the penetration of other bullets, but they do what they were designed for.
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 1:12:09 PM EST
Originally Posted By NVGdude:
This months American Rifleman has an article on both the Hornady FTX and the new Winchester Bonded ammo.

Winchester designed their ammo to meet all of the FBI/IWBA criterion, including barrier penetration.
Hornady specifically designed the FTX with the idea that barrier penetration was not needed ???


The review was less than professional imo. They used wax instead of ballistic gelatin.

Anyway, I thought the FTX did better even in that noob-ass review.
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 4:26:39 PM EST
Originally Posted By amd_dude:

The review was less than professional imo. They used wax instead of ballistic gelatin.

Anyway, I thought the FTX did better even in that noob-ass review.


Agreed. I was however talking about the companion article where they had interview data from folks at both Hornady and Win.

'"too much penetration for a sef-defense application" explaine Emary. As such Emary mandated that Critical Defense ammunition not exceed 12" of penetration." -Top of page 98
Emphasis added.

The guy who designed it specifically designed it to underpenetrate compared to the FBI/IBWA criterion.
Top Top