Huh

Super solid 9mm shaped like a ground down philips head that penetrates 40" of gel.



http://www.lehighdefense.com/pages/xtreme-penetrator

If I were carrying that for self defense I'd carry the Xtreme Defender Load. In my Glock 10mm that's a 115 grain bullet scooting along at about 1800 fps (6" barrel). It shows a penetration of 18". The Xtreme Penetrator with 40" of penetration isn't even going to slow down as is whistles through your target and kills one or two more people standing behind him.

If you're carrying for the woods, use the heaviest cast, or machined flat nose bullets they offer in 9mm.

80% of shot fired by police on average miss the intended target aren't the misses more dangerous to an unintended than the hits?

Is there such a thing as to good? That's a special application load in my opinion, big bears, boars, elephants...

Their 357 Sig 90 grain load is listed at 1600 FPS.

I would like to try those a Extreme penetrates, if the leave good wound channels they definitely have a place.

I might be old school, but a heavy bullet is what I want for penetration. Never have been a fan of tiny fly weight bullets for anything.

I sure wouldn't put them in anything you use for home defense.

They are interesting - but as you said over penetration is a big concern.

They look interesting and they sure are proud of them. My wife would have to get another job before I could afford them for day-to-day use.

30% more expensive than Gold Dots...Not interested.

Prolly 150% deeper penetration, I'm very interested

Why? Do you line your bad guys up and shoot three at a time?

Phil Shoemaker, used 147 grain deep penetrating hard cast to kill a 900 pound Alaskan grizzly that charged. Many like to use a familiar gun that they already own and shoot well.. mono metal bullet have tha ability to out penetrate heavier lead base bullets.

So, that's why Phil used a heavy lead bullet?

Phil had tested them and concluded that they would provid enough penetration.

I'd love to give these a try in a .40.




Travis

I'm using the Leghigh line of bullets in most of my daily carry guns.

Colt Commander .38 Super 90 grain Defender clocks 1530 fps.

Glock 40 with the Xtreme Penetrator are in the low-1600s

Kahr P380 with the 65 grain Defender supposed to be around 1300...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDvzul3rvTk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2LKZy5-y64

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PDQcE-1T40

I'm using the 90gr Defender bullet as well in a 9mm +P+ load @ 1525 fps from a G19. The Defender bullet works better than the Penetrator IMO; it still penetrates deep, but does more damage and is more accurate in my guns.

Travis - they have them for 40's.

I've been using hornady anodized 4 lead with thick double jackets rolled at the ends for years for bear... but never had to shoot one.

If I'm i bear country, I'd load extreme penetrators in a glock 19 with a +3 mag extension and have 19 rounds of deep penetrating ammo

For people though, the federal HST tests so damn good in every single test I've seen in 9mm, I just can tjustify these bullets for the 9mm or anything above it

In 380 they do intrigue me for my glock 42. THE extreme defenDer IL would be my choice there

They're in all my semi-autos (4 Glocks [17,19,20 & 40]). I use the Defenders because the penetration isn't too great. In my 10mm's it's 18" of ballistic gel. If the bullet has to penetrate heavy clothing and bones it may exit, then again it may stay in the bad guy's torso. I'm going to compare the penetration of Punch Bullets and Corbon FLN for my S&W 500.

Just use a 17 magazine instead of fooling with extensions, or even a 22 round Magpul or ETS mag. Those mag extensions can get bumped or knocked off at the worst times, turning your gun into a paperweight if you don't have time to reload. I didn't believe it until it happened to me, fortunately not in a dangerous situation.

Good point!

Bought several boxes of the 9mm Extreme Penetrators as truck backup for my G19 after reading Bob's reports here and checking out Youtube vids. They are loaded up in G17 mags and a 33 rounder.

Have a G30S inbound and will be picking up a few boxes of .45 ACP, too.

Current plan is to use them as truck backup only.

If they'll keep scooting through bulletproof glass and flack jackets, I doubt a car or truck door is going to defeat them.

Crusader Bullets... I like it.

150% deeper against what? Barriers? If so, what type? Tissue?

150% deeper than what load? JHP or FMJ? How does it compare to say a FMJ-FP in 124 or 147 grain. To my memory, the 40" of ballistic gelatin sounds like what you can get with a MUCH cheaper 9mm 147gr FMJ-TC/FP. ($1.50 per round for the Lehigh vs. $0.24 for Speer Lawman 147gr TMJ)

And the Lehigh is a non-expanding bullet. For self defense I prefer an expanding bullet. I find JHP's in the 124-147 grain weight range give me adequate penetration (for me), AND very good expansion.

Now I'm no expert on the Lehigh round, but it appears to be a very old idea making its rounds again... I think Charlie Kelsey, a brilliant gunsmith and the former mastermind behind Devel had a patent on that bullet design back in the '70's...and I think even then he wasn't the first to do it. Anyhow, the Lehigh round is non-expanding but does apparently produce larger than caliber wound channels, but still considerably smaller than that of most JHP's

If I were hunting with a 9mm then perhaps it would be interesting to me, but I don't hunt with a 9mm. For defense, I find my existing JHP's adequate for soft tissue and barrier penetration for most jobs.

So an extremely expensive 9mm FMJ isn't something that I find all that interesting.

What am I missing? Is there something amazing it's doing that I'm not catching?

Now that makes sense.

But aren't there already good 9mm loads that penetrate very well? The Speer Lawman 147gr TMJ is a jacketed truncated cone flat point that penetrates deep and straight in tissue, and does very well against intermediate barriers, and does that for literally 1/5 the cost of the Lehigh.

Buffalo Bore has a hard cast flat point with a wider meplat than the Speer Lawman, but it's a pretty expensive specialty round too; but still $5.00 per box cheaper than the Lehigh.


Maybe if I used a 9mm for defense against large bears, then perhaps I'd be a bit more excited about the Lehigh.

Already have the Buffalo Bore rounds.

What's not to like about having some of the Lehighs, too?

Exactly! Some seem to fear penetration, I on the other hand embrace it.

Well they might be expensive but I think we all overlooked something. That being they are not made of lead, meaning some states don't allow lead. Fedral lands might prohibit lead too. Just a thought.

You should probably take a look at the Defender round instead of the Penetrator. Unless you've just got your mind made up that an expanding bullet is the only thing that will make you happy?

That Defender bullet is similar to the Penetrator, but has deeper flutes for more radial damage. It really does work, and causes damage like a good expanding bullet, but is not affected by punching through bone, clothing, wood, etc. I even tested it through 1/4" 6061 aluminum plate into water jugs spaced a foot behind the plate; it still damaged the jugs just like a hollow point would have without the plate in the way. BTW 9mm FMJ didn't penetrate the plate at all.

It may not be for everyone, but it is an advancement over currently accepted defensive bullet designs. Part of the "magic" involves using a light bullet for high velocity to cause a lot of damage without excessive recoil or pressure, but making that bullet tough so that it penetrates deeply. The concept is effective, and does a lot more damage than a heavy slow hard cast bullet in my testing, but still penetrates as deep as you need it to (depending which bullet design you choose).

I will say though that the Polycase/Ruger rounds, which are marketed to perform similarly, do NOT measure up the same way. I tested 45 Auto and 9mm loads; they were OK but not as good as hot Gold Dot loads or the 90gr Defender.

If you can read it, each bullet hole is labeled with the round. The holes labeled "90gr ED" were the Lehigh Extreme Defense bullet. Please ask questions about these, there is more to point out that I won't go into detail about if you guys aren't interested.

Nice testing. I liked the metal penetration then it performed well in the water jugs behind the metal plate. If this is such as old idea why was it abandoned before?

I don't want super penetration in my SD carry gun ammo.

18" in ballistic gel isn't super penetration.

Yondering
Thanks for your report! Who produces the defender,does it have the same kind of velocity that the Lehigh does? Thanks for your time.
Cheers NC

The Defender is made by Lehigh. Go to https://www.underwoodammo.com/ and you can get a full lineup of all of the available Lehigh ammunition.

Magnumdood
Thanks. I see both are price about the same. Cheers NC

If I carried a 380, the extreme penetrator would be my choice, I can also see it in the 45 acp in bear country.

I'm not so sure I'm sold on it in the 9mm vs crack heads as IMHO for rounds that can't break 1000 fps I want a non expanding bullet with a good meplat, but at 1100-1200 fps I'd prefer a bullet that expands some. But if I'm carrying a couple spare mags, one would be filled with the extreme penetrators.

Lehigh made the "Extreme Penetrator" bullet first, then refined the design further with the "Extreme Defense" bullet.

I think some of you guys are still misunderstanding these bullets. They don't expand, but they cause damage like an expanding bullet, without wasting any energy on deforming the bullet itself. This is not a bullet that zips through like an FMJ or slow hard cast flat nose.

I want the benefits of an expanding bullet too, but that doesn't mean I need the bullet to actually expand; the effect is what matters, right?

I'm not sure where 1100-1200 fps comes in, unless you're wanting weak loads. My 90gr ED 9mm loads are running 1525 fps from a G19, and Underwood sells them loaded to 1550 fps. The whole reason to use a lighter bullet is for high velocity, to cause more damage like an expanding bullet. If you're not going to push them fast, just use a hard cast flat nose and call it done; this one isn't your cup of tea.

As a side note, high velocity hard cast bullets can perform similarly to these Lehigh bullets, although not quite as impressive. I've been casting and loading the new Lee 95gr FN 9mm bullet (drops at 102gr for me) at 1500 fps; it doesn't do as much damage as the 90gr Lehigh but still a lot more than 147gr hard cast flat nose, or any FMJ, and still penetrates deeper than any of the popular 9mm expanding jacketed bullets. This one pictured was fired into water jugs at 1500 fps; it exploded the first few jugs and penetrated 5 IIRC, while my 124gr Gold Dot bullets are always stopped in the 3rd jug. You can see the nose bucked up just a bit, but it's undamaged otherwise. That's the 90gr Extreme Defender bullet in the background.

Yondering, you are correct many do not understand these bullets. There is definitely times when a deeper penetrating bullet would be desirable. The Extreme Defender is the best of both worlds wound channel like an expanding bullet with good penetration. The Extreme penetrator would be an excellent choice for protection against large predators for example.

These bullet are simply another option

What's the story on the 10mm and 357 sig. Thanks for your efforts.

I definitely see some 9mm testing in my future! I will want to see how they stack up against the Buffalo Bore 147 grain +P hard cast. This is the load Phil Shoemaker was using in his bear encounter.



With the Buffalo Bore load mentioned above, I got a pass through of 6 jugs using a Glock 43, with the round veering to right and missing the 7th jug. With the Glock 19, the round passed through the 8 jugs I had set up for the test.

I guess for me, im not sure the phillips head is doing more actual trauma in live tissue... Ballistic gel is a medium to compare bullets, it is not representative of how bullets perform in flesh of various sorts...skin, bone, cartilage, organs, etc... Lehigh touts their FTM design, fluid transfer monolithic and yeah it looks like it does something in gelatin but do yall trust that as the end all, be all marker for performance? Im genuinely curious....

I expect I'll drone on with heavy-for-caliber HP's, RNFP's and SWC's. I'm not saying the crusader bullet don't work as advertised. For me, it is simply that it doesn't accomplish anything significantly better than what I'm using now; and certainly not enough better to justify the price.

I hear you Sarge, but like I said before, if you live in a state that prohibits lead then it might be an alternative.

Yes indeed. And if the price could be gotten down to meet a gov't contract, it would be an improvement over FMJ pistol ammo.

How do you know? Have you tried them?

Try them in/on what is the question

If you don't know the answer, then they most likely aren't for you.

But, they're gauranteed to produce "deader" dead guys.

I have the lee 95 gr and am planning to remove the micro grooves as you did for pc use. What load are you using in the 9mm?

I'm using Ramshot Silhouette powder; started at 7.0 gr and worked up to 1500 fps in my guns. Mixed brass and CCI SP primers.

Win Autocomp would also be a great choice for this kind of load, and may give even higher velocity. I don't think my Silhouette load is maxed out either though.

That 95gr Lee is a neat little bullet, and is great for mild target loads too. I've been loading it at 1050 fps for GSSF indoor matches since beginning of the summer; it makes a very easy shooting load.

I don't think anyone's making miraculous claims on these. Don't believe me though, try them for yourself. I was very skeptical as well before I tried them.

FOr starters, I am not saying these bullets dont work, I am looking to see what evidence has been presented they work as well in living tissue as the gelatin
they do a helluva job on ballistic gelatin, next time I go hunting for steel plated ballistic gelatin, I will load these up...

I think the discussion is for self-defense and the typical response is "try them and see for yourself", so who is shooting people with them to compare terminal performance with a hollow point

also for bears, who has "tried" them on bears?

so the assumption based on youtube videos Ive seen is, the phillips head mono causes a good wound cavity in ballistic gel thus it will cause as large a wound cavity in living tissue...is there any other evidence to support it?

yes they go through more water jugs than a federal HST...i dont need to try that, i believe it. I believe they will out penetrate an HST, gold dot, etc...

not really. Speaking for myself, my testing has been in comparison to other known good performers (124gr Gold Dot +P in my case). Meaning, if my GD load does X, how does this new bullet compare? Try them in a bunch of different conditions, not just in gelatin or water. Go shoot through some drywall, sheet metal, glass, denim, deer, pigs, coyotes, etc as well. No one test covers all conditions, just as no bullet is perfect for all conditions; that's why you have to choose what to use for the worst case conditions you might encounter.

If you don't think you can believe results of any of that kind of testing, you better question the testing done on whatever bullets you're carrying as well, because that's how bullet performance testing is done. You know as well as the rest of us that nobody's testing different loads by shooting people; that's a straw man argument.

I'm just trying to present my observations on these, not convince anyone to start carrying them. My only argument with people on this stuff is when they make assumptions without having tried or researched it themselves. If someone has different observations than I do from shooting these, they should definitely post them, please!

Regarding expansion and water jug testing - my observations with the 90gr ED bullet at high (1500+) velocity is that it doesn't burst (a rough indication of temporary cavity) the first jug as hard as a Gold Dot or HST, but does tear up the 2nd and 3rd jugs a lot more. That indicates the hollow points are dumping a lot of energy right at the start, when they expand, while the ED bullet carries the damage farther into the target. Disclaimer for guys like Sako75 - don't try to read too much into that; it's just what these do in water jugs, it doesn't necessarily mean that's what they'll do in a bear or person.

The Penetrator bullet is less impressive in that regard; if we compare an HST at one extreme and a slow hard cast at the other, the Penetrator is closer to the hard cast end of the spectrum.

I didn't think much of Barnes bullets until I tried them.




Travis

No need.

1. I can make inferences from Lehigh's gelatin results.
2. I am not dissatisfied with the loads I mentioned above.
3. I can cast conventional bullets myself or purchase proven alternatives much cheaper.

I think I'm one that doesn't understand this bullet. From what I've seen the wound channel is only slightly larger than the starting diameter, but not anything comparable to an expanded JHP...So what am I missing? Help a brotha out.

Yondering,

I remain skeptical but I'm interested in learning more. What I haven't seen yet is how large the soft tissue wound channel is as measured. Everyone is saying "wound channel like a JHP" but when I look closely at ballistic gelatin that has been shot with these bullets, the wound track seems to be right at, or slightly above starting caliber. Is there anything that gives an actual diameter of the wound track, so that the round can be more accurately assessed against a JHP?

Also, for secondary wounding from stretch cavity, the velocity number that has always been accepted is 2,000fps. This was the number given all the way back near the turn of the 20th century, and in several articles written by Dr. Fackler, he pretty much confirmed that 2kfps seems to be about the right velocity. Anything below that and it has to be a shot that comes extremely close to a non-elastic piece of body tissue.

So again I remain dubious about its effects from high velocity...and the fact that over the decades I've seen a LOT of extremely high velocity handgun rounds come and go. They all make nearly identical claims, but as time goes on we find out that the claims just aren't so.

I won't go so far as to say "my mind is made up" in regards to carry ammo, and I like to say I'm open minded...and hope that is true.

I really want to see solid numbers rather than photos of things shot because photos of things shot often doesn't tell the whole story...and often can be created by first ensuring precisely perfect conditions.

That's why most ammunition evaluations scientifically list a numerical value for each category such as; Velocity, starting bullet weight, ending bullet weight, starting bullet diameter, ending bullet diameter, penetration on bare gelatin, penetration on (and then list each test medium), etc.


For my primary carry ammo, I'm pretty happy with the overall performance, but there's always room for a "specialty round" in one of my spare magazines. But I need to see the stats/numbers etc before I'm really going to be convinced.

Seems like high speed photography shows a stretch channel forming at well under 2000 fps impact velocity.

There is 2 versions of the Lehigh bullet the Extreme Defender has deeper flutes and impacts a wound channel in ballistic gelatin simlar to a jhp and penetrates a bit more. The ED penetrates hard barriers better than jhp.

The Extreme Penetrator would be used against larger predators because of the increased penetration. The EP does not produce as large of a wound channel as does the ED but penetrates much deeper.

Therein lies my reasoning for my choice to use 9mm and .45 ACP Penetrators as truck backup and possibly 3rd mag backup for barrier penetration (car doors, fenders, sheet metal, etc) and defense against large predators... The 2-legged kind, that is.

difference with barnes is the tsx and ttsx are hollow points...monolithic hollow point
Hollow point is a proven design

Lehigh is Phillips head point

Thanks for the response! I agree with what you said and think I'd like to see/hear some stories/pictures of what kind of terminal ballistics ED bullets have on goats, pigs, yotes, deer, etc...love to see what a double lunged wouND channel looks like from one of these.... that could give some perspective

Just a thought - for barrier penetration like car doors, etc, the lighter/faster ED bullet is what you want. Velocity is king for penetrating steel, not bullet weight.

A couple things:

First, look at the Defense bullet, not the Penetrator. The ED is the one that performs like a hollow point.

Second, it sounds like you're assuming that permanent wound cavity is only as large as the expanded diameter of the bullet; that is not necessarily correct. In low velocity solid lead bullets, maybe, but definitely not with modern hollow points or designs like this ED bullet. Tissue ejected laterally away from the nose of the bullet is responsible for a lot of the permanent wound channel, and that is highly dependent on design/shape of the front of the bullet. Gelatin does not simulate this very well, so don't rely on gel testing for that information.

Your 2,000 fps number is not accurate; I believe that could be true for non-expanding spitzer rifle bullets, but not for everything across the board. Velocity of the tissue ejected away from the nose is what matters, and that is a function of a lot more than just bullet velocity.

I think you're making some assumptions based on very old testing, and not realizing that a design like this Lehigh stuff does not work the same way. You have more questions than I can answer; all I can suggest is to go do some testing for yourself.

Yondering - Thanks for the reply, and I'm very interested in your thoughts on this new round, as well as thoughts from JWP475.

The problem I'm having is I can't find anything quantifiable on the wound cavity, just anecdotal; and I don't accept anecdotal as scientific; especially when the anecdotal comes from the people trying to sell a product. Let's be real here, bullet salesmen have a history of being very much like snake oil salesmen.

I do understand how permanent cavities are made and how it's not all frontal diameter or expanded diameter; I get that, and totally understand how, depending on bullet shape and construction you can get larger than caliber wound cavities from a non-expanding solid...I'm no stranger to that concept. Heck I've seen it first hand in the field on several occasions. And I agree there's a good deal more at play...so I think I'm on the same page as you there; but I still appreciate you bringing the subject up...never assume

My issue is I can't find anything objectively MEASURABLE beyond bullet weight, velocity, and penetration...and I'm a big believer in the old axiom of "you cannot improve what you cannot measure". I'm also a believer in President Reagan's "Trust, but verify".

I also understand that ballistic gelatin is limited, but I have yet to find a better testing medium; so good has to do when perfect just isn't available. And honestly, Lehigh is using ballistic gelatin, so they seem to believe it has value, and their use of, and claims made, while using ballistic gelatin makes it reasonable to ask for objective measurement in ballistic gelatin, wouldn't you agree?

Historically speaking whenever a new bullet comes out that's significantly different from conventional design, there are always a lot of anecdotal claims made, and simulations setup to support these claims. Only to find out later that in the real world, they just don't hold up. And I'll also admit, in my youth I was taken in by a couple. I remember when myself and many others thought the Glaser Safety Slug was the end all, only to later find out, not only was it not the end all, but it was a very marginal defense load altogether.

What's more, this isn't a completely new bullet design. This approach has been tried at least twice. But I'm not so closed minded that I can't consider that someone finally got it right. But neither am I gullible.

Regarding the 2k velocity thing, I don't understand your statement (below) in the context of my comments about stretch cavity.

I think that was supposed to be a statement to refute the 2k velocity thing...Like, the velocity of the projectile isn't as important as the velocity of the tissue ejected away from the nose...is that what you're getting at?

The problem is, the velocity of the tissue being ejected away from the nose can't be any higher than the velocity of the projectile; so I'm not getting your statement. Maybe you can clarify...because I think you may be understanding something I'm not and I'm hoping you can educate me. I also know myself, and I know that while I have a decent grasp on terminal ballistics, I'm far from an expert, and there are those on these forums that understand it much better than I do (such as yourself and JWP475, as well as a few others). So I'm hoping for a learning opportunity here.

What I keep coming back to is, how can one take their claims as gospel when the only objectively measurable pieces of data they have are: bullet weight, velocity, and penetration? Unless I have missed it, no other element of this bullet's performance has been accounted for in any objectively measurable way. And if I did miss that, please show me where the data is; I'm very interested.

I'm interested because if this bullet REALLY WORKS as they say it does, it could be a real game changer for the military.

And like JWP475, I think there's always room for specialty rounds in one's arsenal. It's just foolish to think one round does it all. Actually it was JWP who got me to re-consider what I carry in my spare magazines, and now they will sometimes carry specialty rounds like a hard cast flat point.

Again, thanks for yours and JWP's responses.

On the lehigh video, they do shoot watermelons with a penetrator and defender....the penetrator zips through with little damage, the defender blows the melon up pretty good while zipping through

http://www.lehighdefense.com/pages/resouces#video

penetrator vs defender video

Splitting the quote for clarity



Fair enough, and that's why I say don't believe Lehigh or anyone else (including me), try it for yourself. That's the only way to get real quantifiable data that you can really trust, IMO. I was very skeptical of Lehigh's claims (partly because of the "Extreme" naming), and did not believe it until I tried them myself. I have seen impressive permanent wound cavities from these in wet paper, melons/pumpkins/etc, and small game, but did not record the measurements you're asking for, or take pictures.

For example, the boys wanted to shoot a pumpkin last night, so we tried one of the 90gr ED bullets to compare to a good expanding cast hollow point. The hollow point left an entry hole about the diameter of my pinky and an exit like a silver dollar, but I could wiggle my thumb around in the entry and exit holes of the ED bullet (exit hole was the same size, one of the interesting features of this design). I didn't measure them, and it doesn't necessarily correlate to meat; I just point it out as an example.

Maybe, but it can be a whole lot lower, depending on the bullet shape. Don't assume it is always equal to bullet velocity.



Velocity of tissue ejected to the side is dependent on shape of the bullet and bullet velocity (among other things); trying to put a bullet velocity number like your 2000 fps on this across the board assumes that shape of the bullet doesn't matter, which is not correct. That 2000 fps number may be correct for round nose or spitzer designs that don't push material away to the side as fast.

Think about a round nose or FMJ pistol bullet (non-tumbling for sake of argument), where material pretty much flows around the nose with relatively little lateral force. Now compare that to an expanded hollow point, with essentially a very large flat in the front, that pushes material to the side much faster even if the bullets are going the same speed. The ED design acts more like the hollow point, but it's the flutes in the sides, rather than the nose, that scoop material out to the side at high velocity.

Or, think about what happens when you pee on a flat rock. That splash effect is what I'm referring to.

Ahaaa…There’s the disconnect. You’re talking about permanent/crush cavity and I’m talking about temporary/stretch cavity.

The 2,000fps number was in relation to wounds secondary to stretch cavity. Under 2,000fps (as a general rule) the stretch cavity produced by most bullets is insufficient to overcome the elasticity of most soft tissues. Now that’s a big generalization but it’s pretty accurate. Obviously some variables such as bullet construction and shape, as well as all the variables of what constitutes “soft tissue” in a human can have an effect on that rule, so it’s not a hard and fast rule; just a generalization. But in my observation it’s pretty accurate and relevant generalization.

Even very high velocity handgun bullets like 110-125 grain .357’s typically don’t create stretch cavity wounds (where tissue is stretched beyond its elastic limits, usually looks like tearing), or wounds to non or less elastic tissue that’s disconnected from the permanent/crush cavity. But beyond 2000fps impact velocity, that’s when you see such wounds. Stretch cavity wounds can play a significant role in wounds inflicted by a rifle, but generally they don't play much of a role in handgun wounds unless the wound comes at or VERY close to a very inelastic organ or tissue. Examples would be the liver or vascular areas where vessels branch off...there with a close hit even a handgun can cause the vessels to rupture even though there was no direct contact by the bullets.

I had a patient who was shot mid-abdomen about 3" to the right of his belly button. He was shot from about 10 yards away with a .30-30 soft point and the stretch cavity tore his liver almost in half; he died pretty quick. That's an example of a shot well away from the liver where the stretch cavity was the make or break element. As a general rule, you don't typically get that from a handgun.

Anyhow, you are speaking of the role of velocity in the contribution/enhancement of the permanent/crush cavity, and yeah, that can and does happen at much lower velocities; and bullet construction/design can play a meaningful role.

I kinda suspected we were talking about two different things. Thanks for clarifying.

Gotta throw something in here... much of the permanent wound cavity of 2000+ fps rifle rounds comes from fragments rotating into the wound/lacerating it as the stretch occurs. The same effect can be seen from yawing rifle bullets and particularly those which eject fragments from an open base or break apart at the cannelure. I discussed this with Fackler at some length years ago when we used him as an expert witness on multiple shooting/homicide involving a rifle. It is also evident in radiology of those wound types as well as Fackler's own diagrams of rifle wounds.



Like many tissues in in living organisms, it is is the nature of gelatin to stretch significantly and close up behind the wounds. The stretch you're observing from these Phillips bullets and the permanent cavity left in its wake, bears no resemblance to those caused by rifle service rounds, much less expanding rifle rounds.

Nobody said it does. Why would you think anyone here thinks that?

The mention of Lehigh's sub 2000 fps stretch cavity was raised...



This is not to imply Lott doesn't know the difference. But people do google their way into these discussions and l felt compelled to underscore the distinction.

They do cause a stretch cavity to some degree; so does any other bullet, of any design. That doesn't mean anyone thinks handgun bullets perform like rifle bullets, or that the stretch cavity is severe enough to cause permanent damage. I think you may be seeing what you want to see in this conversation, not what is actually being said, because you've already made up your mind on the topic.



GunGeek, I thought you were talking about permanent crush cavity, since you said you wanted an expanded bullet for a larger wound channel; that is what I was addressing. If you were talking about stretch cavity - water jugs and gelatin do a great job of simulating that IMO. My testing has been in water jugs and wet paper, not gelatin, but there's plenty of gelatin testing videos online. I'm also testing these at high velocity, not watered down 1100-1200 fps loads.

Testing the ED bullet in either one shows performance comparable to good hollow points, but different shaped cavities (both stretch and permanent).

Expanding hollow points, as you know, tend to have a small entry, then a large ballooned area with lots of damage, then a relatively small wound channel after that, like the picture above. The Lehigh ED in comparison tends to create a more linear cavity, that tapers off gradually as bullet velocity drops. The maximum cavity diameter is not quite as big as that caused by a Gold Dot or HST in my experience, but runs a lot deeper/farther into the target. Does that make sense? Maybe the best comparison is to say it's like a fast WFN bullet that trades off some penetration for a larger wound channel. (a significantly larger wound channel, in my experience).

I quoted what was 'actually being said' and explained my reason for posting. I have no problem with anyone else's opinion of Lehigh's ammunition or bullets. And no, I haven't decided quite what to think of them yet. Like some others here I'd like to shoot some critters, or see some shot with them, before I decide. I'll close my commentary on this topic with the following video link. Haven't quite figured out how to imbed these here yet.

https://youtu.be/betFqFCwcYo

i will be probably be buying the 65 grain extreme defender +P to run in my glock 42....

https://youtu.be/6F5rPTHcrmg got 12" in this test wit ha shorter barrel 380

Now I see why Bob runs those in his .380.

I think the Lehigh ammo makes the .380 a worthy carry weapon. If I had a choice of not carrying a firearm or carry a .380 I would, of course, choose the .380. That turd only sees "GUN" when you present your .380 and point it at his forehead. He's not thinking, "well, that's only a .380, I should be able to rush him and soak up a couple of rounds and shove that pea shooter up his azz before I kill him". No, I'm certain they see a firearm and immediately do whatever they can to avoid being shot. But, with the Lehigh ammo if you have to shoot a bad guy it's got a much better chance of incapacitating him than the traditional .380 ammo would.

10mm 140gr penetrator fired through two approximately 3/16" steel plates at 10 yds.

Timber master that's some serious penetration...but I wouldn't want that for humans....bears..yes

The problem with shooting a human with that round is it will go through three people without much trouble. We, as gun carriers, are expected to know that. Even if we don't when you're in court you'll learn you should have. We are responsible for any and everything a bullet that we fired hits, damages or kills. I have a couple of boxes of the Penetrators for carrying my Glock in the woods. I've also got a S&W X-frame 500 Magnum. Uumph! Talk about BIG and HEAVY. But, I'm thankful for the heft of the revolver as well as the recoil absorbing rubber grips. When I load it up hot it's like shooting a hot .44 Magnum from a S&W Model 29 w/a 4" barrel.

I've been trying to find the write up where a guy, using a Glock 20 shooting a Lehigh Penetrator, performed a penetration test. He had a pane of bullet resistant glass about 3/4" thick, 4 gallon jugs of water and a cinder block wall. He shot the glass...the bullet penetrated the glass, all 4 gallon water jugs and knocked a chunk out of the cinder block wall.

I should get some before they are labeled as AP.

You should see how the 9mm penetrator penetrates...again overkill pardon the pun for humans and not worth the risk
9mm extreme penetrator test

I have always been taught that overpenetration for Self-defense was a Bad Thing. That was only for fairly light-weight, boned and average light-dressed human predators. When it comes to large shagnasty predators with a leg at each corner, I think that more penetration= More Better!

I carry a 357 magnum, and despite the cost, would gladly pay a premium for deep penetrators, providing I could shoot them, and they wouldn't burn and blind me in the bargoon! Probably could use heavy factory loads or handloads to practice with.

If I lived near Yellowstone (My favorite place on earth!)I think I'd rather face a hostile critter with a can of Bear Spray in one hand, and a good weapon in the other! A shotgun comes to mind.