Federal 9mm HST 147gr +P in Clear Ballistics gel. - Page 2

Handguns » Ammunition

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Federal 9mm HST 147gr +P in Clear Ballistics gel. (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 6/7/2017 3:20:50 PM EDT

[#1]

Quote History

Quoted:
I apologize. I wasn't aware that you were on the selection committee for those agencies and are privy to their selection criteria. By the way, how many OISs do those agencies have each year? Here is an interesting quote from someone more knowledgeable than me regarding 147 gr 9mm and agencies that actually get in gunfights.

View Quote

Those agencies adopt rounds based on what the chief likes without testing just like you do. The NYPD mandates 12 pound triggers on their Glocks. For years many departments refused to change from FMJ'S. The NYS Court system only authorizes only 147 grain ammo that their baliffs must buy on their own no matter what brand or if it even opens up if clogged.

Posted: 6/7/2017 3:25:07 PM EDT

[#2]

Quote History

Quoted:

But.. But.. the frying pans! What about the frying pans!??

Seriously, there have been multiple study's done about the 9mm round dating back to 80s. If this guy wants to ignore all of that in favor of what he saw on a YouTube channel I can't help him. There are other pieces to this puzzle that are not being discussed. Some bullets are chosen not just because of its ballistic performance but also because of how it functions in a chosen firearm. This is especially true when you attempt to bring .357 Sig and .40 S&W into the discussion. This guy is attempting to discuss this topic, making observations while looking through a drinking straw. This topic is not simple. It is complex and you can not determine a final selection based on the results of a YouTube video.

View Quote

The 9mm has evolved a lot since the 80's due to advances in powder and actual bullet construction.

Ballistic gel was created to have a medium that produces repeatable results that can be used by anyone. Ignore that and stay ignorant because the tests are on YouTube. Would it be better if posted on luckygunner?

And it isn't based on just one test. Numerous testers have come up with similar results.

Posted: 6/7/2017 4:23:38 PM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:

Those agencies adopt rounds based on what the chief likes without testing just like you do. The NYPD mandates 12 pound triggers on their Glocks. For years many departments refused to change from FMJ'S. The NYS Court system only authorizes only 147 grain ammo that their baliffs must buy on their own no matter what brand or if it even opens up if clogged.

View Quote

The FBI, US SOCOM, the NYPD, the LAPD, US Marshal service and so on choose their rounds based on test results. I'm not going to get into your attempted straw man over the Glock but bringing that into this discussion is like trying to compaire apples to carburetors.

The selection process for each are vastly different.

Posted: 6/7/2017 4:29:42 PM EDT

[#4]

Correct except for the NYPD and the LAPD.

Posted: 6/7/2017 4:32:46 PM EDT

[#5]

Here. Read this article. Barrel length also makes a difference.

9mm Ammo Quest: Speer Gold Dot G2 147 Grain JHP

Posted: 6/7/2017 4:43:38 PM EDT

[#6]

I finally had a chance to shoot two rounds into four layers of denim covered gel, shot from a Glock 17. The first round had an impact velocity of 1069fps penetrated to 16 inches and expanded to .64 inches. Shot number two hit at 1094fps expanded to .61 and penetrated to 20.5 inches.

I also shot two rounds through my S&W Shield into bare gel. Both rounds penetrated to 14.5 inches with the first round hitting at a velocity of 965fps and expanded to .666 inches. The second round impacted at 962fps and opened up to .65 inches.

Posted: 6/7/2017 5:03:31 PM EDT

[#7]

HST's are a thing of beauty. They always expand. There was a guy on the site you guys all hate "YouTube" that shot gel at 400 yards with a 9mm Keltec Sub 2000 and it still expanded.

Posted: 6/7/2017 5:13:47 PM EDT

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:
I finally had a chance to shoot two rounds into four layers of denim covered gel, shot from a Glock 17. The first round had an impact velocity of 1069fps penetrated to 16 inches and expanded to .64 inches. Shot number two hit at 1094fps expanded to .61 and penetrated to 20.5 inches.

http://i1044.photobucket.com/albums/b446/5pins/B238F94F-2E7E-44BC-979D-1C94ACF0F927_zpsptot8g6c.jpg

I also shot two rounds through my S&W Shield into bare gel. Both rounds penetrated to 14.5 inches with the first round hitting at a velocity of 965fps and expanded to .666 inches. The second round impacted at 962fps and opened up to .65 inches.

http://i1044.photobucket.com/albums/b446/5pins/D7086A4B-1AC0-428A-AFD5-64F685272635_zpsee6c2glc.jpg

View Quote

Still the +P, or are these the standard 147's?

Posted: 6/7/2017 5:34:57 PM EDT

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:

The 9mm has evolved a lot since the 80's due to advances in powder and actual bullet construction.

Ballistic gel was created to have a medium that produces repeatable results that can be used by anyone. Ignore that and stay ignorant because the tests are on YouTube. Would it be better if posted on luckygunner?

And it isn't based on just one test. Numerous testers have come up with similar results.

View Quote

You truly have no idea what you're talking about. Where do you think all the data that's been posted comes from? Water jugs? Wet pack newspaper? One of my favorite testers on Youtube is tnoutdoors9. His testing has contributed to many of my carry ammo decisions. And nobody is saying there is anything wrong with shootingthebull410's testing. I've watched many of his videos. In fact, his testing contributed to me carrying 147 gr HST in my Shield. The problem is that you're ignoring a whole universe of data and creating imaginary scenarios like shooting through dumpsters (yes, you did post that). You then select a round based on the fantasy world you live in and try to convince others it's the holy grail when, in fact, it's regarded as one of the poorer performers in the real world. If you're going to go 124 gr, +P is a better option.

Posted: 6/7/2017 5:56:56 PM EDT

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:
You truly have no idea what you're talking about. Where do you think all the data that's been posted comes from? Water jugs? Wet pack newspaper? One of my favorite testers on Youtube is tnoutdoors9. His testing has contributed to many of my carry ammo decisions. And nobody is saying there is anything wrong with shootingthebull410's testing. I've watched many of his videos. In fact, his testing contributed to me carrying 147 gr HST in my Shield. The problem is that you're ignoring a whole universe of data and creating imaginary scenarios like shooting through dumpsters (yes, you did post that). You then select a round based on the fantasy world you live in and try to convince others it's the holy grail when, in fact, it's regarded as one of the poorer performers in the real world. If you're going to go 124 gr, +P is a better option.

View Quote

What are you talking about? I make no reference to water jugs or wet pack. Glad you watch those 2 guys. The only beef I have with Tnoutdoors9 though is that he only fires one shot instead of 5 and almost always uses a 4 inch barrel.

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:02:06 PM EDT

[#11]

The myth debunked. Watch the steel testing at 15:20.

9mm Defensive Load Barrier Tests!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0piGeTVMZWs

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:12:52 PM EDT

[#12]

In case we missed it the first time.

Failed To Load Title

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zn5JQnjCW3I

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:16:19 PM EDT

[#13]

Quote History

Quoted:
The myth debunked. Watch the steel testing at 15:20.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0piGeTVMZWs

View Quote

You see? You don't even know what you are talking about. That plate was thin. They both go through. What I'm talking about is that a lighter grain having more speed will penetrate a barrier that a heavier grain with less speed will not. It's no myth. It's been proven. Look up armor plate tests and you'll see speed winning every time.

Why do you think a.55 gr .223 will penetrate a vest that a 124 gr +P+ cannot? Speed. That's no myth.

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:25:37 PM EDT

[#14]

Quote History

Quoted:

Still the +P, or are these the standard 147's?

View Quote

Still +P.

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:28:17 PM EDT

[#15]

And yes. Dumpsters, gas pumps, aluminum display cases in stores, shooting through 2 sides of a trunk, heavy steel doors on trains, heavy steel doors at business and commercial buildings are all laughable barriers that I deal with on a daily basis.

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:35:35 PM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:

Still +P.

View Quote

Thank you for your efforts. Seriously. I apologize this thread got side tracked. However this being a technical discussion there is no room for misinformation and conjecture to be hailed as facts. This is why other data is being shared. I don't want someone a year from now to skip though this thread and only see nonsense about how the 124gr standard pressure is the best option when the data doesn't support that claim. I hope to read more of your tests in the future it is always interesting to decimate results and as Box of truth is fond of saying; "Shooting stuff is fun".

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:40:40 PM EDT

[#17]

More fun. I still want to see 124 gr penetrating a dumpster or even a heavy train car door. Video please.

9MM VS 45ACP

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzCiqZJsT6k

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:42:26 PM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:
And yes. Dumpsters, gas pumps, aluminum display cases in stores, shooting through 2 sides of a trunk, heavy steel doors on trains, heavy steel doors at business and commercial buildings are all laughable barriers that I deal with on a daily basis.

View Quote

Some of those Call of Duty maps are crazy with all the stuff they put in them.

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:44:13 PM EDT

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:
Where are you getting these numbers? No way in hell any 9mm HST expands to .88 or a .45 ACP penetrates steel the same as a 9mm. I can't embed YouTube but the links are below to gel tests. The numbers are way different.

124 gr HST

147 gr HST

View Quote

You do realize he's doing his testing with micro pistols, right? I carry a Glock 17.

Posted: 6/7/2017 6:47:31 PM EDT

[#20]

Quote History

Quoted:
More fun. I still want to see 124 gr penetrating a dumpster or even a heavy train car door. Video please.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzCiqZJsT6k

View Quote

Now you are just being stupid if you cannot admit that speed penetrates hard barriers better. Deflection?.. That's about all you can do. Your own video proves what I'm saying.

Posted: 6/7/2017 7:06:01 PM EDT

[#21]

Quote History

Quoted:

Now you are just being stupid if you cannot admit that speed penetrates hard barriers better. Deflection?.. That's about all you can do.

View Quote

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying your perspective is skewed and irrelevant. Most service caliber loads will penetrate the barriers an average person will encounter in a self defense scenario. Everything I've posted shows that and real street data shows that. The only thing you've contributed is defending yourself against an attacker wearing frying pans. I place more importance on other factors like penetration, accuracy, recoil, and weapon longevity. If you want to live life like you're playing CoD, that's your business. I plan to be a little more realistic. FWIW, my loads of choice in 9mm are 147 gr HST and 124 gr +P Gold Dot. Both have more street cred than you do.

Posted: 6/7/2017 7:07:41 PM EDT

[#22]

Quote History

Quoted:
You do realize he's doing his testing with micro pistols, right? I carry a Glock 17.

View Quote

The laws of physics still apply. Even in a carbine with a 16 inch barrel, the lighter grain will go faster and penetrate something that tbe heavier grain has trouble with.

Posted: 6/7/2017 7:22:42 PM EDT

[#23]

Quote History

Quoted:
The thing with these heavy for caliber 147grain 9mm's is that you lose speed for a very slight increase in expansion diameter. So what you end up doing is turning a high velocity round that works against hard barriers into a slow round that'll fail against hard barriers. That's the reason no Federal agency adopts the .45 ACP. It's great for soft tissue (people) but terrible against hard barriers that those people might be shooting from behind. (Cars, aluminum display stands in stores, dumpsters, heavy wooden furniture, ect.)

Look at the video below. The 2 rounds that penetrated that pan had one thing going for them. Velocity. The ones that didn't penetrate that pan had one thing in common. Their velocity was under 900 fps. Had they had the velocity that the other 2 had at about 1100 fps, they would have all gone through. Not every shot is center mass at a guys chest. Barriers are very common. Think being trapped at a diner or train car with hard seats.

Barrier Test

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i22-nMxnHrE

View Quote

As I posted earlier, 147 gr HST is within 150 FPS of 124 gr HST and would have penetrated the pan, too.

Posted: 6/7/2017 7:24:09 PM EDT

[#24]

What about layered frying pans, a la dragon skin? What can I use to defeat that armored threat? And how about a stainless steel pan and cast iron pan 'lamination'? How do we change our lives and loadout to stay safe from those trundling turtles of doom?

Do we even dare talk about these things on an open forum? What if the bad guys start buying all the frying pans at the thrift stores? Are there going to be calls from PatMac for frying pan waiting periods, or will we pass Frying Pan Felon Possession laws?

We get it. You like 124+P. Please stop. The rest of us want to read about what this thread is about: 147gr +P HST.

And thanks for the GD video. That answers that question.

Posted: 6/7/2017 7:40:09 PM EDT

[#25]

With what I've gathered with my own backwoods testing and youtubing is you get a little more penetration with one and a little more expansion with the other.

Not enough either way to claim a clear winner, imo.

I think you're good to go with any of the HST's. Find the one you shoot the best and stock up.

Posted: 6/7/2017 7:48:02 PM EDT

[#26]

Quote History

Quoted:
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying your perspective is skewed and irrelevant. Most service caliber loads will penetrate the barriers an average person will encounter in a self defense scenario. Everything I've posted shows that and real street data shows that. The only thing you've contributed is defending yourself against an attacker wearing frying pans. I place more importance on other factors like penetration, accuracy, recoil, and weapon longevity. If you want to live life like you're playing CoD, that's your business. I plan to be a little more realistic. FWIW, my loads of choice in 9mm are 147 gr HST and 124 gr +P Gold Dot. Both have more street cred than you do.

View Quote

Who said anything about street cred? I didn't state my qualifications. You are the one taking this personal. I'm just stating fact. The tests I posted showed the 147 gr penetrating less than the 124 in gel but you didn't like that and start bad-mouthing YouTube as if the website itself skewed the results.

And as far as the frying pan goes, anything normally around the 900 fps mark like the .380 or .45 ACP failed. That extra 200 fps made a difference in that particular case with that particular barrier thickness. That's the point I was making but lots of butt hurting starts happening as if a truck door or heavy steel door cannot be made of similar thickness.

It's something to consider and not get all bent out of shape over. Many here don't even know that and think heavier is always better in all cases when it's not in some cases.

This place is to learn is it not?

Posted: 6/7/2017 7:58:31 PM EDT

[#27]

Quote History

Quoted:

The tests I posted showed the 147 gr penetrating less than the 124 in gel but you didn't like that and start bad-mouthing YouTube as if the website itself skewed the results.

View Quote

Here is 147 penetrating more than 124. And please quote where I bad-mouthed Youtube. Every video I have posted has come from Youtube.

Attached File

Posted: 6/7/2017 8:12:16 PM EDT

[#28]

Quote History

Quoted:
Here is 147 penetrating more than 124. And please quote where I bad-mouthed Youtube. Every video I have posted has come from Youtube.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/2261/Untitled-224608.JPG

https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/2261/Untitled-225478.JPG

View Quote

First of all, that website is just plain wrong. .88 expansion shows that. It also shows the penetration numbers through a barrier into gel rather then showing penetration numbers of the actual barrier thickness. For example, this round penetrated 12 inches of wood while this one penetrated 16 inches of wood rather ?than going through a piece of plywood into gel and getting? those numbers.

And no offense to Tnoutdoors9, but he tests using one round. If you look at his most recent tests, he has gone to multiple rounds and averaging out the penetration numbers as you should.

In those tests he conducted in the past with one shot in gel, his 5 shot velocity tests varied. The same applies to penetration.

Posted: 6/7/2017 8:24:19 PM EDT

[#29]

You say you want to learn. I guess we can't trust the manufacturer either.

From Federal LE...

Attached File

Posted: 6/7/2017 8:38:24 PM EDT

[#30]

Quote History

Quoted:
You say you want to learn. I guess we can't trust the manufacturer either.

From Federal LE...

https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/2261/Untitled-225494.JPG

View Quote

Read my previous post. It's been edited with what I'm saying in regards to the particular barriers. Shooting through a piece of 1 inch plywood into gel and getting that number is not the same as shooting into a block of wood and getting total penetration on wood. Will a certain round penetrate what they are saying in gel if it failed to penetrate a particular barrier because it didn't have the required velocity to punch through and make it to the gel?

And as far as manufacturers go, how many times do they inflate results? How many times have you seen a manufacturer post a velocity that doesn't match actual testing? Nobody has been able to replicate that .88 expansion in bare gel that they seem to be pushing. Are they measuring one petal that flares out more than the other and calling it a day or are they getting the average diameter from multiple rounds at multiple parts of the bullet edges?

I'm Inclined to believe independent testers who use averages.

Posted: 6/8/2017 6:36:34 AM EDT

[#31]

Quote History

Quoted:
First of all, that website is just plain wrong. .88 expansion shows that. It also shows the penetration numbers through a barrier into gel rather then showing penetration numbers of the actual barrier thickness. For example, this round penetrated 12 inches of wood while this one penetrated 16 inches of wood rather ?than going through a piece of plywood into gel and getting? those numbers.

And no offense to Tnoutdoors9, but he tests using one round. If you look at his most recent tests, he has gone to multiple rounds and averaging out the penetration numbers as you should.

In those tests he conducted in the past with one shot in gel, his 5 shot velocity tests varied. The same applies to penetration.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Here is 147 penetrating more than 124. And please quote where I bad-mouthed Youtube. Every video I have posted has come from Youtube.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/2261/Untitled-224608.JPG

https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/2261/Untitled-225478.JPG

First of all, that website is just plain wrong. .88 expansion shows that. It also shows the penetration numbers through a barrier into gel rather then showing penetration numbers of the actual barrier thickness. For example, this round penetrated 12 inches of wood while this one penetrated 16 inches of wood rather ?than going through a piece of plywood into gel and getting? those numbers.

And no offense to Tnoutdoors9, but he tests using one round. If you look at his most recent tests, he has gone to multiple rounds and averaging out the penetration numbers as you should.

In those tests he conducted in the past with one shot in gel, his 5 shot velocity tests varied. The same applies to penetration.

No one tests into blocks of wood or steel. It's not part of the standardized FBI protocol.

Plywood, then gel is used to replicate standard building materials.

Testing to see which might shoot through a tree might be interesting but probably not repeatable.

Posted: 6/8/2017 9:29:50 AM EDT

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:

And as far as manufacturers go, how many times do they inflate results?

View Quote

They inflate the penetration difference between 124 gr and 147 gr 9mm? I'm going to need you to catch up. You're still on page one.

Posted: 6/8/2017 9:31:02 AM EDT

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:

Testing to see which might shoot through a tree might be interesting but probably not repeatable.

View Quote

Or relevant in the real world.

Posted: 6/8/2017 9:38:59 AM EDT

[#34]

Quote History

Quoted:

No one tests into blocks of wood or steel. It's not part of the standardized FBI protocol.

Plywood, then gel is used to replicate standard building materials.

Testing to see which might shoot through a tree might be interesting but probably not repeatable.

View Quote

I understand all that. But that wasn't my point in my original post. My original post stated that lowering the velocity of your caliber with weight affects what hard barrier your caliber can penetrate.

Then you guys want to say that it isn't the case and post data of thin pieces of plywood or sheet metal and say that heavier grain penetrates the same or more. It doesn't if the barrier is thick enough. As I've said before, all barriers aren't created equal.

Posted: 6/8/2017 9:45:55 AM EDT

[#35]

Quote History

Quoted:
They inflate the penetration difference between 124 gr and 147 gr 9mm? I'm going to need you to catch up. You're still on page one.

View Quote

Then read up and find out if I said that.

Posted: 6/8/2017 9:54:01 AM EDT

[#36]

Quote History

Quoted:
Or relevant in the real world.

View Quote

It absolutely is relevant. As I've said, "Not all barriers are created equal." If barrier penetration is not a concern to you, then carry what you want. Go .32ACP for all I care. If it is a concern to you, go with a caliber with acceptable speed and when you do so, don't handicap it by increasing the weight. That velocity loss of 200 fps could be the difference of whether your round punches through or not.

Posted: 6/8/2017 10:30:17 AM EDT

[#37]

Quote History

Quoted:

It absolutely is relevant. As I've said, "Not all barriers are created equal." If barrier penetration is not a concern to you, then carry what you want. Go .32ACP for all I care. If it is a concern to you, go with a caliber with acceptable speed and when you do so, don't handicap it by increasing the weight. That velocity loss of 200 fps could be the difference of whether your round punches through or not.

View Quote

If 200FPS is the difference maker how well do you think that bullet is going to perform when it hits clothing and flesh? Do you still expect to get significant penetration and expansion? Here is a clue, it won't. As I stated earlier in this thread; If your velocity is killed to the point that 200 FPS is your threashold for successful barrier penatration or failure to penetrate your round is ineffective either way. You are still grasping. As you are fond of saying not all barriers are created equal, well no shit. Barriers cause bullets to deflect, penetration is just one part of the equation. A lighter bullet is going to be impacted greater through deflection. In real life unlike video games bullets do not punch straight through objects. Glass is particularly bad at causing bullets to do all kinds of fuckery. A typical windshield is sloped and curved so in addition to having to penetrate a barrier the bullet has to deal with these other two angles applying force to it's flight path. If I am in the drivers seat shooting into the passenger side of the windshield I just added yet another angle of deflection to the bullet. A heavier bullet is slower, you are correct, but the greater mass helps to midigate deflection. As I said earlier in this thread, there are no simple answers and there is not a one size fits all bullet. If I left the house every day concerned about being attacked by frying pans, busses, dumpster or gas pumps I would probably choose a semi-auto shotgun with slugs. Since I live in the real world I have to consider addressing the threats I am most likely to encounter day to day, I chose a bullet that I feel best deals with those threats and environments as a whole. While I guess I can not kill a bad guy wearing frying pan body armor, hiding in a dumpster, while pumping gas, I can make accurate shots through my windshield and still have an effective bullet. Because of that I will stick with my choice of the 147gr +P HST.

Posted: 6/8/2017 11:43:36 AM EDT

[#38]

You can stick with what you want to. I'm not trying to stop you. I'm just pointing out fact which you incorrectly disputed and now are backpedaling with fudd-like phrases that resemble the "You don't really need that." like they like to say and you are implying in regards to trucks and buses.

Then you say that if an extra 200 fps is needed to "punch through" or penetrate since you don't like the phrase "punch through" it won't do anything because of clothes. That is incorrect. The bullet doesn't then slow down to below 200 fps after it goes through the barrier. So you now concede that speed can make a difference in punching through but if it does, it won't do anything. Really?

Below is an example of what an extra 200 fps can do. It's not a 9mm but the same principle applies. You stand behind that and tell me it won't do anything even if it penetrates your body 2, 3 to 4 inches.

.223 Armor Penetration

And for the record since you keep bringing up Call of Duty, I've got 2 deployments under my belt as a Fireteam Leader with the 1st Mar Div. Not that it matters anyway.

Just give it a rest already. If extra speed isn't for you, then carry your 147's. I could care less. Why do you care if someone else points out that you lose "SOME" barrier penetration with a slower bullet?

Posted: 6/8/2017 1:11:40 PM EDT

[#39]

Nevermind

Posted: 6/8/2017 3:50:52 PM EDT

[#40]

Let's boil this down to something very simple as the conversation has taken way too many tangents.

willjr75, what barriers will 124 gr 9mm penetrate that 147 gr 9mm will not?

Posted: 6/8/2017 6:28:09 PM EDT

[#41]

Quote History

Quoted:
You can stick with what you want to. I'm not trying to stop you. I'm just pointing out fact which you incorrectly disputed and now are backpedaling with fudd-like phrases that resemble the "You don't really need that." like they like to say and you are implying in regards to trucks and buses.

Then you say that if an extra 200 fps is needed to "punch through" or penetrate since you don't like the phrase "punch through" it won't do anything because of clothes. That is incorrect. The bullet doesn't then slow down to below 200 fps after it goes through the barrier. So you now concede that speed can make a difference in punching through but if it does, it won't do anything. Really?

Below is an example of what an extra 200 fps can do. It's not a 9mm but the same principle applies. You stand behind that and tell me it won't do anything even if it penetrates your body 2, 3 to 4 inches.

.223 Armor Penetration

And for the record since you keep bringing up Call of Duty, I've got 2 deployments under my belt as a Fireteam Leader with the 1st Mar Div. Not that it matters anyway.

Just give it a rest already. If extra speed isn't for you, then carry your 147's. I could care less. Why do you care if someone else points out that you lose "SOME" barrier penetration with a slower bullet?

View Quote

What have you shot with a 147 grain bullet that stopped it, but a 124 grain bullet going 200fps faster penatrated?

Posted: 6/8/2017 6:29:26 PM EDT

[#42]

Quote History

Quoted:
Or relevant in the real world.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Testing to see which might shoot through a tree might be interesting but probably not repeatable.

Or relevant in the real world.

I actually think a tree penatration test is relevant. Just kinda hard to keep consistent.

Posted: 6/8/2017 9:56:39 PM EDT

[#43]

Quote History

Quoted:
Let's boil this down to something very simple as the conversation has taken way too many tangents.

willjr75, what barriers will 124 gr 9mm penetrate that 147 gr 9mm will not?

View Quote

I guess you don't want to give it a rest. Are you telling me that both rounds penetrate the exact same no matter what the velocity?

Come on dude. Then you you ask me which barrier the 147 won't penetrate that the 124 will. It goes like this.

If the 124 penetrates X amount of inches or centimeters of hard barrier, the 147 will penetrate slightly less in inches or centimeters depending on the barrier.

Here. Knock yourself out with this video. It too shows that speed penetrates hard barriers better. The 95 gr killed the 115, 124, and the 147.

9mm Cinderblock Test

Posted: 6/8/2017 10:11:24 PM EDT

[#44]

Quote History

Quoted:

I guess you don't want to give it a rest. Are you telling me that both rounds penetrate the exact same no matter what the velocity?

Come on dude. Then you you ask me which barrier the 147 won't penetrate that the 124 will. It goes like this.

If the 124 penetrates X amount of inches or centimeters of hard barrier, the 147 will penetrate slightly less in inches or centimeters depending on the barrier.

Here. Knock yourself out with this video. It too shows that speed penetrates hard barriers better. The 95 gr killed the 115, 124, and the 147.

9mm Cinderblock Test

View Quote

Why didn't 115 gr WWB FMJ penetrate the block? No 124 gr was tested. I thought you weren't a fan of 1 bullet tests.

I'm guessing that you'd carry an FN Five-Seven if you lived in a free state.

Posted: 6/8/2017 10:22:10 PM EDT

[#45]

Quote History

Quoted:

I actually think a tree penatration test is relevant. Just kinda hard to keep consistent.

View Quote

It is but these clowns will say it isn't so as not to lose an argument. Nobody takes cover behind trees or 2x4's.

Posted: 6/8/2017 10:24:29 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Why didn't 115 gr WWB FMJ penetrate the block? No 124 gr was tested. I thought you weren't a fan of 1 bullet tests.

I'm guessing that you'd carry an FN Five-Seven if you lived in a free state.

View Quote

It displays what I'm saying in regards to velocity. And why wouldn't I be able to carry a 5.7? Is that what you have resorted to now? Insults that aren't even accurate?

Posted: 6/8/2017 10:31:56 PM EDT

[#47]

Quote History

Quoted:

It displays what I'm saying in regards to velocity. And why wouldn't I be able to carry a 5.7? Is that what you have resorted to now? Insults that aren't even accurate?

View Quote

I wasn't aware that they made 10 round mags for the Five-Seven. My apologies. Why don't you carry one?