FBI Ammunition Test Protocol Scores

[GIJEW]

BBI, regarding"common duty calibers" I suppose choosing between brands is splitting hairs, but what are your thoughts on bullet weights?

Am I correct in thinking that barrel length--ie duty pistol vs subcompact--is a relevant variable?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I take all of the tests with a grain of salt. I can remember way, way back when H.P White Laboratories recommended...

Which was why a standardized and repeatable testing protocol was such a benefit vs the "way back when" pigs, clay, steel, cadavers, and other non-repeatable media. Combined with a lack of understanding of wound mechanics (such as the idea of "remote wounding" in handgun bullets) and a criteria that was geared toward less penetration than would be considered acceptable today you'll fine lots of recommendations from many corners of things that weren't really a great idea. Some cling on to this day, like the fascination with bullets like those 110gr screamers because the ME numbers look impressive.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

BBI, regarding"common duty calibers" I suppose choosing between brands is splitting hairs, but what are your thoughts on bullet weights?

Am I correct in thinking that barrel length--ie duty pistol vs subcompact--is a relevant variable?

There's no set answer that will cover all the variables, and variables are likely to be small in 9mm and .40S&W. Short barrel .45 Auto may have trouble expanding at heavier weights and standard pressure as it just won't get the velocity it needs to open. .40 seems to be a very consistent performer across barrel lengths in the 165 or 180 gr range. I know it's fallen out of favor, and it's true the 9mm is samey-samey with quality ammo, but if quality ammo isn't available I'd probably favor the .40S&W.

If it shoots to point of aim, use that one. If you need a tie breaker, I tend to prefer heavier bullets but that is strictly personal bias. The 147gr and 124gr HSTs pass the entirety of the FBI protocol out of 3" and up barrels, IIRC.

And, of course right now, "what's available" is a big consideration.

 

[BE Mike]

BBI, regarding"common duty calibers" I suppose choosing between brands is splitting hairs, but what are your thoughts on bullet weights?

Am I correct in thinking that barrel length--ie duty pistol vs subcompact--is a relevant variable?

A good rule of thumb is that for every inch of barrel length lost, one might lose 40-50 fps velocity. Probably not a consideration in this day of new bullet designs.

 

[gregr]

I carry Federal 230 grain .45 acp in either the HydraShok, or now sometimes the HST. I`ve read that both performed well in the protocol testing, most especially the HST.

 

[DadSmith]

How about 180gr hard cast FN 10mm at 1120 fps? I bet that will go through everything and the target too.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

How about 180gr hard cast FN 10mm at 1120 fps? I bet that will go through everything and the target too.

Probably. If that's desirable or not is another question and is why there are also maximum penetration limits for the FBI protocols. It's no big feat to design a bullet that will penetrate barriers. I've mentioned the .357 magnum hard cast that went through an adult's chest, a security door, an exterior door, an inner wall, and was ultimate stopped by a fireplace. All you need is enough "gas pedal" and a bullet that will hold together. "Barrier blind" means it performs in the accepted range of penetration regardless of if it hits a barrier or not.

If I were more concerned with moose attacks than humans, though....

 

[shibumiseeker]

Probably. If that's desirable or not is another question and is why there are also maximum penetration limits for the FBI protocols. It's no big feat to design a bullet that will penetrate barriers. I've mentioned the .357 magnum hard cast that went through an adult's chest, a security door, an exterior door, an inner wall, and was ultimate stopped by a fireplace. All you need is enough "gas pedal" and a bullet that will hold together. "Barrier blind" means it performs in the accepted range of penetration regardless of if it hits a barrier or not.

If I were more concerned with moose attacks than humans, though....

It’s why my 10mm nuclear loads with hard cast bullets is what I carry for grizzly country but would never carry them on the streets. Bullet selection if I had the luxury of knowing what kind of situation I was going into in a fire fight, might change. So in the end, I carry some thing that has a good combination of penetration and expansion. The light weight, early fragmentation bullets, might be OK in a heavy caliber gun if I’m shooting straight on to a static human target, but are not generalized enough for me to feel comfortable with them in under a variety of circumstances. While certainly not as experienced with this as BBI, I have seen my fair share of shooting victims. In the end it almost invariably comes down to shot placement, and using a heavy enough caliber to do the job. So while I might make a good nod to my bullet selection, it’s why I choose to carry a weapon I am very comfortable with using, and I train to the point of being able to put my shots where I need to under differing and stressful circumstances.

 

[BE Mike]

Which was why a standardized and repeatable testing protocol was such a benefit vs the "way back when" pigs, clay, steel, cadavers, and other non-repeatable media. Combined with a lack of understanding of wound mechanics (such as the idea of "remote wounding" in handgun bullets) and a criteria that was geared toward less penetration than would be considered acceptable today you'll fine lots of recommendations from many corners of things that weren't really a great idea. Some cling on to this day, like the fascination with bullets like those 110gr screamers because the ME numbers look impressive.

If I remember correctly H.P White Laboratories' tests back then were run in cooperation with the FBI. Ballistic gelatin was the media used.

 

[DadSmith]

It’s why my 10mm nuclear loads with hard cast bullets is what I carry for grizzly country but would never carry them on the streets. Bullet selection if I had the luxury of knowing what kind of situation I was going into in a fire fight, might change. So in the end, I carry some thing that has a good combination of penetration and expansion. The light weight, early fragmentation bullets, might be OK in a heavy caliber gun if I’m shooting straight on to a static human target, but are not generalized enough for me to feel comfortable with them in under a variety of circumstances. While certainly not as experienced with this as BBI, I have seen my fair share of shooting victims. In the end it almost invariably comes down to shot placement, and using a heavy enough caliber to do the job. So while I might make a good nod to my bullet selection, it’s why I choose to carry a weapon I am very comfortable with using, and I train to the point of being able to put my shots where I need to under differing and stressful circumstances.

Definitely use a hollowpoint 10mm rd. They Definitely drop all their energy in the intended target if you are worried about over penetration. Like BBI said depending on the bullet and what it has to go through.
It could just as likely become a FMJ by filling up the hollowpoint cavity, or get shredded by the barriers it encounters. After thinking about this and reading the comments it takes a lot of engineering to develop a load to go through drywall and a 2x4 then clothing and expand and stop within 12-18" of penetration. Or a windshield, or car door, etc and do still penetrate 12-18".

 

[BehindBlueI's]

If I remember correctly H.P White Laboratories' tests back then were run in cooperation with the FBI. Ballistic gelatin was the media used.

They did use ballistic gel, but at a different concentration then is currently used in the FBI protocols, and of course they did not use the battery of tests now performed. While the gel existed, there was no "industry standard" to test to yet.

Then, to requote myself:

Combined with a lack of understanding of wound mechanics (such as the idea of "remote wounding" in handgun bullets) and a criteria that was geared toward less penetration than would be considered acceptable today you'll fine lots of recommendations from many corners of things that weren't really a great idea.

was the main issue with the treasury load. They were very impressed with temporary stretch cavity in gel, not accounting for the fact it lacked a correlation to wounding at pistol velocities, and they purposefully wanted penetration to stay in a range we would consider insufficient today with the assumption that a shot would be a straight on torso shot. For those, it worked pretty well. The lessons that shots may have to go through arms, ribs, etc. prior to getting to the parts that matter wouldn't be incorporated into the testing process until after Miami. The treasury load was almost certainly better than standard pressure .38 ball of the day, if for no other reason then it was less likely to deflect off round bone. It's pretty debatable if it was better than the FBI load of the day. It's beyond rational debate that modern barrier blind ammunition isn't a significant improvement on the bullet technology of when the Treasury load vs FBI load was a real question.

 

[BE Mike]

They did use ballistic gel, but at a different concentration then is currently used in the FBI protocols, and of course they did not use the battery of tests now performed. While the gel existed, there was no "industry standard" to test to yet.

Then, to requote myself:



was the main issue with the treasury load. They were very impressed with temporary stretch cavity in gel, not accounting for the fact it lacked a correlation to wounding at pistol velocities, and they purposefully wanted penetration to stay in a range we would consider insufficient today with the assumption that a shot would be a straight on torso shot. For those, it worked pretty well. The lessons that shots may have to go through arms, ribs, etc. prior to getting to the parts that matter wouldn't be incorporated into the testing process until after Miami. The treasury load was almost certainly better than standard pressure .38 ball of the day, if for no other reason then it was less likely to deflect off round bone. It's pretty debatable if it was better than the FBI load of the day. It's beyond rational debate that modern barrier blind ammunition isn't a significant improvement on the bullet technology of when the Treasury load vs FBI load was a real question.

The 110 gr. .38 SPL +P+ load was not a good replacement for my 158 gr. JSP .357 mag. load at the time. Luckily, we weren't stuck with it for long as it was replaced by the 125 gr. JHP .357 mag.

 

[DadSmith]

The 110 gr. .38 SPL +P+ load was not a good replacement for my 158 gr. JSP .357 mag. load at the time. Luckily, we weren't stuck with it for long as it was replaced by the 125 gr. JHP .357 mag.

For my mother's 38 snub I get her Federal Gold Metal Match 148gr wadcutter. It is very easy for her to shoot with low recoil. It should also have decent penetration.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

The 110 gr. .38 SPL +P+ load was not a good replacement for my 158 gr. JSP .357 mag. load at the time. Luckily, we weren't stuck with it for long as it was replaced by the 125 gr. JHP .357 mag.

Yeah, other than as a flashbang I would not expect it to be. 158gr JSP is still a pretty good go-to for most uses by most users in a duty sized revolver. IIRC, the Treasury load had a 2" barrel in mind, where nothing already available was reliably expanding. Of course, they cheated (hence the +P+ labeling, which isn't really a SAAMI thing) to get even the 110 gr up to speed from the snubby. So, better than standard pressure LRN for the uses and guns envisioned, but not a replacement for .357 magnum loads of the day out of 4"/6" guns.

 

[BE Mike]

For my mother's 38 snub I get her Federal Gold Metal Match 148gr wadcutter. It is very easy for her to shoot with low recoil. It should also have decent penetration.

It's accurate for sure. One thing it points out is one size doesn't fit all.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

For my mother's 38 snub I get her Federal Gold Metal Match 148gr wadcutter. It is very easy for her to shoot with low recoil. It should also have decent penetration.

Wadcutters are a pretty good answer to standard pressure .38s in shorter barrels. You aren't going to get sufficient penetration AND expansion until +P loads, and penetration is more important. They've also done better than I would have expected in auto glass testing and the shape makes them less likely to skip off round bone than standard ball. In the context of self-defense against random violence I think the wadcutter is an excellent choice.

 

[dudley0]

Wadcutters are a pretty good answer to standard pressure .38s in shorter barrels. You aren't going to get sufficient penetration AND expansion until +P loads, and penetration is more important. They've also done better than I would have expected in auto glass testing and the shape makes them less likely to skip off round bone than standard ball. In the context of self-defense against random violence I think the wadcutter is an excellent choice.

They are very controllable too but a pain to try and load from strips. When I was carrying a snubby as a BUG I had a strip of 135 grain gold dots as a reload. More pep, but I could load them easier while not in a bad situation. Figured if I got to the reload on a BUG I was in it and probably lost my fine motor skills anyhow.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

They are very controllable too but a pain to try and load from strips. When I was carrying a snubby as a BUG I had a strip of 135 grain gold dots as a reload. More pep, but I could load them easier while not in a bad situation. Figured if I got to the reload on a BUG I was in it and probably lost my fine motor skills anyhow.

Reloading speed is so far down on the list as to what really matters in these contexts as to be irrelevant. If it concerns a given carrier, though, SWCs on the speed strip will load easier and are mostly samey-samey.

 

[BE Mike]

Yeah, other than as a flashbang I would not expect it to be. 158gr JSP is still a pretty good go-to for most uses by most users in a duty sized revolver. IIRC, the Treasury load had a 2" barrel in mind, where nothing already available was reliably expanding. Of course, they cheated (hence the +P+ labeling, which isn't really a SAAMI thing) to get even the 110 gr up to speed from the snubby. So, better than standard pressure LRN for the uses and guns envisioned, but not a replacement for .357 magnum loads of the day out of 4"/6" guns.

As it turned out the round was used in actual duty circumstances in the field, not long after it was issued and failed miserably. An "insider" told me that the "controlled expansion" 110 gr. .38 SPL load was just to get our "foot in the door" convincing ignorant administrators that it wasn't a "dum dum" and hoping to move forward with more effective ammo. At the time (the 1980's) there was some resistance, in some circles, regarding the use of hollow point ammo by law enforcement. Unfortunately some of those resistant people were in positions to make important decisions about agency equipment. Ignorant politicos can get a LEO killed by stupid decisions, as effectively as a bad guy with a deadly weapon. During the "controlled expansion" period, I made a comment about having a 3 shot revolver. When questioned about my comment, I stated that the course of fire for qualification now required two shots on each engagement of the target, which to me meant that there was no faith in the current issued ammo. My comment was made to someone "in the know". When I returned to my desk, there was a new box of factory 125 gr. JHP, .357 mag. ammo on my desk!

 

[DadSmith]

Wadcutters are a pretty good answer to standard pressure .38s in shorter barrels. You aren't going to get sufficient penetration AND expansion until +P loads, and penetration is more important. They've also done better than I would have expected in auto glass testing and the shape makes them less likely to skip off round bone than standard ball. In the context of self-defense against random violence I think the wadcutter is an excellent choice.

She is in bad shape health wise but she has always been pro gun and self-defense. She use to shoot +p 158gr but that was years ago. She has lost a lot of strength so the main thing I considered was her being able to hit with a low recoil round. She does great with them. She still hits a 8x10 target at 7 yards with it which is accurate enough for home defense situations. Dad is headed that way also. He has his 1911 loaded but he can no longer operate the slide. So he has it ready to go if needed but he carries a Ruger LCR 38 for self-defense now. He still shoots +p rounds though.