>38 Special self-defense bullet

KinleyWater":1fvdn1yl said:

I like the Sig V-Crown 125+P. I did some testing out of a Ruger LCR with the 1.87" barrel. From 7 yards, I saw good expansion with good penetration. Here is a complete write up:

Firearm –
Make: Ruger
Model: LCR
Caliber: .357 Rem. Magnum
Barrel Length: 1.87 inches

Ammunition –
Make: Sig
Model: Elite Performance
Caliber: .38 Special +P
Type: V-Crown ™ Jacketed HP
Mass: 125 Grains

Environment –
Temp: ~91 f
Humidity: 59%

Target –
The target was constructed using a seedless watermelon, approximately 20 pounds in weight, and 10 inches diameter, which was braced by pork ribs front and back. The front ribs were covered by a layer of boneless porkchops, measuring approximately .75 inches in thickness. For convenience, the ribs were contained within food-grade plastic grocery bags, while the chops were contained within a sealable 1-quart plastic storage bag. The ribs and chops were secured to the melon using duct tape. The target was then draped front and back in a t-shirt which had been folded in half to present 4 layers of cloth on both aspects. The entirety of the target was backed by four, 1 gallon plastic water jugs, which served as both backstop and to aid in determining if excessive penetration was present. All items rested on a flat board, raised to waist height by a pair of sawbucks.

Test –
The test was designed to determine the suitability of the ammunition selected in the firearm used, for the purposes of personal protection against an aggressive hominid. For the test, the shooter would assume a kneeling position, approximately 7 yards from the target, and fire four rounds. The target would then be analyzed to determine ammunition terminal performance in the following categories:
Penetration 1 – did the projectiles penetrate sufficiently to transect the target completely?
Penetration 2 – did the projectiles demonstrate excessive penetration?
Expansion – did the projectiles expand as designed?
Damage 1 – what degree of trauma was experience by the target?
Damage 2 – how well did the projectiles maintain integrity?
The go / no-go criteria were established as follows: The projectiles functioned as designed, penetrated sufficiently to transect the target, did not penetrate beyond the first water jug (assuming a full pass-through of the target), and maintained projectile integrity within an admittedly arbitrary margin of confidence. As this is a go / no-go test, projectile velocities were not measured.
Results –
Four rounds were fired through the test firearm at a distance of 6.8 meters (7.436 yards, 22.31 feet), as measured by a Bushnell ™ laser range finder. All four rounds struck the target, and three were deemed to have passed through the entirety of the target. The fourth appeared to strike high, and while it passed through the target, it did not appear to pass through the chops or ribs.

All four projectiles were stopped by the t-shirt at the back of the target. All four expanded, though one of the four suffered a loss of mass, likely due to striking a rib.

Analysis –
Projectile penetration through the pork chops was somewhat lackluster, but demonstrated a degree of projectile deformation even at a shallow depth in the target medium. Where a projectile did hit a rib, the rib broke and produced a small amount of small, mealy fragments. The watermelon ruptured along multiple fissure lines, with a few smaller pieces being thrown to the ground nearby. The melon flesh was heavily disturbed and showed evidence of projectile cavitation, producing a fairly evenly distributed pulp (see Fig. 7). The projectiles expanded as desired and maintained integrity with the exception of one projectile which appeared mangled, perhaps due to striking a rib.

Conclusions –
For penetration, this ammunition demonstrated the ability to penetrate through the target, yet did not penetrate through the first backstop jug. – go
For expansion, the projectiles all expanded very well, though the one suspected of striking a rib had a lesser degree of expansion. – go
The damage to the target was exceptional, especially to the melon. Ribs impacted by the projectiles broke and did not appear to interfere with the path of the projectiles. The projectiles maintained form and structure, with the aforementioned exception. – go
Based on the test as administered, I have a high degree of confidence in the efficacy of this firearm / ammunition combination.

Click to expand...

FOTIS":285etsm4 said:

KinleyWater":285etsm4 said:

I like the Sig V-Crown 125+P. I did some testing out of a Ruger LCR with the 1.87" barrel. From 7 yards, I saw good expansion with good penetration. Here is a complete write up:

Firearm –
Make: Ruger
Model: LCR
Caliber: .357 Rem. Magnum
Barrel Length: 1.87 inches

Ammunition –
Make: Sig
Model: Elite Performance
Caliber: .38 Special +P
Type: V-Crown [emoji769] Jacketed HP
Mass: 125 Grains

Environment –
Temp: ~91 f
Humidity: 59%

Target –
The target was constructed using a seedless watermelon, approximately 20 pounds in weight, and 10 inches diameter, which was braced by pork ribs front and back. The front ribs were covered by a layer of boneless porkchops, measuring approximately .75 inches in thickness. For convenience, the ribs were contained within food-grade plastic grocery bags, while the chops were contained within a sealable 1-quart plastic storage bag. The ribs and chops were secured to the melon using duct tape. The target was then draped front and back in a t-shirt which had been folded in half to present 4 layers of cloth on both aspects. The entirety of the target was backed by four, 1 gallon plastic water jugs, which served as both backstop and to aid in determining if excessive penetration was present. All items rested on a flat board, raised to waist height by a pair of sawbucks.

Test –
The test was designed to determine the suitability of the ammunition selected in the firearm used, for the purposes of personal protection against an aggressive hominid. For the test, the shooter would assume a kneeling position, approximately 7 yards from the target, and fire four rounds. The target would then be analyzed to determine ammunition terminal performance in the following categories:
Penetration 1 – did the projectiles penetrate sufficiently to transect the target completely?
Penetration 2 – did the projectiles demonstrate excessive penetration?
Expansion – did the projectiles expand as designed?
Damage 1 – what degree of trauma was experience by the target?
Damage 2 – how well did the projectiles maintain integrity?
The go / no-go criteria were established as follows: The projectiles functioned as designed, penetrated sufficiently to transect the target, did not penetrate beyond the first water jug (assuming a full pass-through of the target), and maintained projectile integrity within an admittedly arbitrary margin of confidence. As this is a go / no-go test, projectile velocities were not measured.
Results –
Four rounds were fired through the test firearm at a distance of 6.8 meters (7.436 yards, 22.31 feet), as measured by a Bushnell [emoji769] laser range finder. All four rounds struck the target, and three were deemed to have passed through the entirety of the target. The fourth appeared to strike high, and while it passed through the target, it did not appear to pass through the chops or ribs.

All four projectiles were stopped by the t-shirt at the back of the target. All four expanded, though one of the four suffered a loss of mass, likely due to striking a rib.

Analysis –
Projectile penetration through the pork chops was somewhat lackluster, but demonstrated a degree of projectile deformation even at a shallow depth in the target medium. Where a projectile did hit a rib, the rib broke and produced a small amount of small, mealy fragments. The watermelon ruptured along multiple fissure lines, with a few smaller pieces being thrown to the ground nearby. The melon flesh was heavily disturbed and showed evidence of projectile cavitation, producing a fairly evenly distributed pulp (see Fig. 7). The projectiles expanded as desired and maintained integrity with the exception of one projectile which appeared mangled, perhaps due to striking a rib.

Conclusions –
For penetration, this ammunition demonstrated the ability to penetrate through the target, yet did not penetrate through the first backstop jug. – go
For expansion, the projectiles all expanded very well, though the one suspected of striking a rib had a lesser degree of expansion. – go
The damage to the target was exceptional, especially to the melon. Ribs impacted by the projectiles broke and did not appear to interfere with the path of the projectiles. The projectiles maintained form and structure, with the aforementioned exception. – go
Based on the test as administered, I have a high degree of confidence in the efficacy of this firearm / ammunition combination.

Click to expand...

Paul Harrell?

LOL

Click to expand...

HAWKEYESATX":tj8dp6d3 said:

Here is a link to a YouTube video that shows the Buffalo Bore 158 gr FBI load. Watch until the end where you see the expanded bullets.


Hawk

https://youtu.be/gPtV1HStybk

Sent from my REVVLRY+ using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Guy Miner said:

Investigated some shootings in my law enforcement career. Not nearly as many as say a cop in Chicago might investigate, but dealt with a number of shooting victims live and dead and came away with some thoughts that seem pretty solid to me:

1. As in hunting, shot placement is key. Get a round into the brain cavity, sever the spine, take out the heart... Those tend to be effective quickly. Spine shot may only disable, not kill. Heart shot can take a surprising amount of time to be effective. Brain usually works real quickly, even with poor bullet performance.

Recovered one of the old 38 "Nyclad" bullets from a skull - it had only penetrated a couple of inches and failed to expand. It looked almost brand new. But the person was very dead.

Even a 22 will work just dandy if it gets into the brain.

2. More "power" be that velocity, bigger cartridge, heavier bullet... Usually leads to more damage, much nastier wounds. Two cases involved use of the 30-06 and soft point ammo at modest range. Both were fatal, one instantly, the other victim didn't last long. At the other end of the spectrum, people can soak up modestly powerful handgun hits and keep right on going. That includes from 22 up through the 40's and 45's. I couldn't see any real difference between the hits of a 9mm and a 40 or 45. Fortunately a lot of bad guys don't seem to want to pay extra for premium ammo, and just use good ol' FMJ rounds. Many folks hit with that stuff suffer only minor injuries. Unless it's a brain, spine or heart shot.

3. From a handgun - even super-duper "defensive" expensive, expanding ammo doesn't necessarily produce that desired "one shot stop." One bad guy took six 9mm hits up close and personal. Broke his arm, tore up his chest cavity - but failed to get the heart. He died, but not until after managing to stab is victim! Fortunately the stabbing victim, a good guy, recovered just fine. Bad guy was still crawling towards his victim when the first cop arrived on scene...

So - I do think that the load matters - some are obviously more effective than others. But... Shot placement is key, whatever your choice of revolver or semi-auto pistol may be. Practice, practice, practice. Get some coaching from someone who's actually a good shot and a good instructor. These days with ammo shortages, dry-fire practice can help a lot, and it's free.

Practice getting that gun into action quickly. Firing accurately. Repeating with as many shots as necessary. Practice making mag changes, or reloading your revolver with a speed strip or speed loader. Practice using cover! If you don't get hit, that's a great thing!

So ya - I like all these ammo comparisons - but mostly - be sure to make good hits, quickly.

I've carried different types of ammo in my 38/357 revolvers over the years. Used to believe in that "one shot stop" stuff - now I only believe in that if the brain, spine or heart are hit - and even then the effects may be delayed.

Guy

Click to expand...