Curious how 9, 40, and 45 do in penetration with say a Flat nose FMJ, and does it add any meaningful effectiveness vs roundnose FMJ.

Thinking 147 in 9, 165 in 40.....

I have not been able to find any test or info.

Brass Fetcher might.

As a matter of fact I bought some 147 and 165s today. Not so much for me.

They sail through in a narrow path, causing little damage around the wound channel. You have to hope to hit solid bone, CNS, or a major artery.

Not really.

You do need to have enough frontal area driven at enough speed. The flat might not be earth shattering in gel versus the RN, but anyone who's ever killed anything generally skip the RN.

The good news is that as ranges get longer and speed goes down, their performance is also less effected.

They are handguns. Its not like the expanding bullets are bomblike in the difference...or compare to a 12 or 20 gauge Brenneke, which is nothing but a solid.

https://youtu.be/g_oqXbPjm18

Clay is meaningless since it only provides an image of the maximum, non-permanent, wound channel. That's why they use gel instead of clay. All that impressive clay expansion, were it flesh or ballistic gelatin, would just bounce back into shape.

Yeah I know, but it was about the only thing I could find with 3 different weights.

I dont find it useless it gives a reference. Some FMJ ammo expands readily such as tge Winchester white box 147 grain FMJ FP.The soft lead core and the soft plated jacket combine for an easily expandable bullet

Arteries in flesh/organs rupture and that force disruption isnt accounted for in gel.

Its akin to hitting the gel with a ball bat, sap or whatever force object. But that apparently plays no role, unless of course youve actually tested the concept on living animals.
The gel worship is a bit much.

I ain’t saying it’s right or wrong, just posted it. It is what it is.

Indeed

Temporary wound channel has an affect, for sure. It's a violent disruption of living tissue. But clay exaggerates this affect. Big impressive holes in clay aren't nearly as meaningful as they appear, is all I'm saying.

You clearly do not understand that clay gives an accurate reference, the hole from an expanding bullet will be larger and penetrate less the same as it does in ballistics gel. A little common sense and one should gain useful info from clay

All that is true. It is also true that gel is probably the best medium there is unless you've got a bunch of goats to shoot.

https://youtu.be/3G-txVKnVjY

Not 9 or 40.

To answer the OP's question, I have seen gel tests that report 26" to 28" penetration in bare gel for 9mm FMJ, vs. 12" to 18" for expanding bullets.

A slow load only 782 FPS that wouldn't impress in a JHP

Here's another reference point for you.

.357 Flat nose FMJ in gel.

It not much more then a hole straight through:



You are better off with good HP's.

Flat nosed 45s seem to "whomp" armadillos harder than round nosed. Not scientific I admit.

Depends on a lot of things.

A decent flatnosed solid from a 357 can go from the pooper out the brisket of about any whitetail deer or medium hog. Its a poor shot with about any "good" hollowpoint Ive come across, cause they wont make it.

If peaceful protesters are tossing molotovs at my windows, catching as many per round makes sense.

If everything consisted of a blob of lungs and livers and it
was all shot inside 35 yards, I'd give creedence to how "realistic" ballistic gel "tests" are.

It needs to be duplicated in a lab, preferably by a company that sells bullets in order to be quantified properly.

Ignore the facts that as far back as WWI, militaries banned the truncated cone and Colt New Police cartridges generally differed from S&W counterparts in one regard: bullet nose profile.

If they only had ballistics gel....

A real armadillo whomp difference effect can be seen with 45 Colt comparing old school round nose to the NEI 454-270-PBK which has the same meplat as an LBT WFN and the SWC shoulder to boot.

Yes, I've plunked a lot of dillos over the years.

I'd put more emphasis on gel tests if they illustrated what people like you who actually shoot things experience and have demonstrated for eons.

But they dont.

The best medium is Paul Harrell's meat target. Only problem is difficulty in perfect repeatability, since you can't have 100% identical meat targets, as it's basically impossible, so not 100% scientific.

This fellow has done that testing while testing other bullet styles. Bookmark this link as it has a lot of good info.

https://general-cartridge.com/

"At the suggestion from someone in another forum, I shot two rounds of some M882 9mm into some bare gel. This was the same blocks I used for the Underwood test. To my surprise, both rounds only penetrated about a block and a half, 24.5 and 24.75 inches. I was expecting much more."

From "UNDERWOOD 9MM & .40 S&W HARD CAST IN CLEAR BALLISTICS GEL"

Good stuff folks, it would be interested in Gel tests, to see the same profiles as in a WFN hardcast that hunters use in revolvers.......

Yet, perhaps not all handguns will reliably run them. I agree that as a PD round, a top JHP is usually the way to go. But it's of interest I am sure to many, how FMJ performs, no doubt they are less effective. I have heard exactly what JWP475 has said about some Flat FMJ rounds expanding.

It seems makers of the premium priced JHP would rather folks not know that some of those FMJ rounds might do more than just pencil thru. I am sure they are no where near as effective as an HST or Gold Dot.....but it would be interesting to see more tests done.

Thanks everyone for contributing.

Good link DLA.

I've used one or another version of the 45 ACP 230 cast flat point for ridding the place of the nuisance critters that invade here every year. That bullet at 825-950 fps anchors them PDQ with a good hit.

True, and you can’t have the exact same Communists. They come in all shapes and sizes😆

Read the link I gave you. He tests WFN profiles in 9mm, 40sw, 10mm, and 45acp. Maybe even 357mag.

Did you have problems getting them to feed?

No sir they fed slick in everything from a Cobra Patriot 45, I had around here for a S&G gun, to a 70's lightweight Commander. Walther PPQ, M&P45 Midsize, G30SF, Shield 45 etc no diff. I run them at 1.220” OAL

Edited to add: with a very firm taper crimp.

In fact the only guns that didn't like them much were a trio of XDS 45s that belonged to a couple of my sons and a son in law. After looking at the chambers on two of them, my opinion is those tend to either be short-chambered or have next to leade into the rifling. They'll feed hardball just fine along with most JHPs that follow the hardball profile (HST, Golden Saber WW-USA 230).

Some notes on the load using Missouri Bullet's 225 grain 'Flathead'. These days I am using Bear Creek's 230 grain version, one of the first coated bullets I've tried that shoots fully as well as the cast version.

http://www.thesixgunjournal.net/missouri-bullets-225-grain-flathead-for-the-45-auto/

MBC must've been going through some problems as they've really cut down on their product offerings. Nothing interesting for 45acp at all.

These are pretty interesting. Missouri Bullet's 215 grain '45 Express' coated 45 ACP/Colt bullet. It is essentially the old SAECO #58 with the lube groove removed to simplify application of the 'Hi-Tek 2' coating. The Express/SAECO 58 has a large .355" meplat and made its bones in bowling pin shoots popular a few years ago. At 20 BHN it isn't going to expand but it will hit hard and leave a big hole, coming and going.

[Linked Image]

I tried a box with a couple of proven accurate 45 ACP loads and could never get them to shoot really well. Summary here. https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/anybody-loading-missouri-bullets-215-grain-45-express.1754464/

Thanks DLA, yes I did, great info - appreciate that Sir.

Energy / penetration = "Smack Factor".
Light weight FMJ is your friend (military has other needs).