Why Hollow Points Suck

[Marine Cpl]

You're missing my point. The video is comparing two bullets. You can't compare two things in an uncontrolled environment. You can't compare two weightlifters when one of them is lifting a bucket of feathers on Earth and another is lifting a bucket of lead on the moon. You can't say broadhead X is better than broadhead Y on an arrow when one hits the shoulder blade and another is shot through the ribs not contacting any bone.

Yes, the HST didn't perform all that well, probably because it broke up. Was this a one off thing or is it common? Hard to tell when only one round is shot. Do you really want the bullet to go through bone, and then another 16" of penetration? Remember, more energy is dumped into the person being shot when bullets don't come screaming out the other side. What was the actual dimensions of the wound channel? The hollow point probably expanded significantly more than the other bullet in this test.

A better test would have been to shoot multiple bullets into a controlled target. Shoot 5 bullets through drywall into gel. Then shoot 5 rounds through a 1/4" piece of plywood sandwiched between two flank steaks and see how far that goes into ballistics gel. Shoot 5 rounds where they deflect off a 2" diameter pipe and see how they go through gel. Shoot 5 rounds through the same spot on a deer and see what happens.

Shooting one bullet into an uncontrolled target and then using that result to say hollow points suck is ridiculous. Frankly, if the HST bullet went through muscle (possibly frozen?) an inch of deer bone (which is tougher/denser than human), through more muscle, and then still penetrated four inches... The bullet didn't perform that poorly.

I agree. 5 times should have been done. But than again if it failed once out of 5, that's a failure in my book.

As far as penetration goes, yes. I want maximum penetration. I've already explained in another the thread about the myths of overpenetration and the lack of previous problems when solid bullets were used for everything 30 years ago.

It was hard for me to let go too but I eventually did.

Xtreme Defenders penetrate 18 inches no matter what's in front of them if overpenetration is a concern.

 

[@thewheels]

9mm penetrates just fine when a solid is used. You'll get the same under-penetration with hollow points of larger calibers if something gets in the way and fragments the bullet.

Maybe. Isn't under-penetration relative though? Under-penetration for a 357Mag does not equal .380 under-penetration.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Maybe. Isn't under-penetration relative though? Under-penetration for a 357Mag does not equal .380 under-penetration.

I don't understand your question. On a human, a .380 will go through both sides if a solid is used just like a .357 Magnum will. If a hollow point is used, under-penetration is underpenetration no matter what caliber is used.

 

[Phauxtoe]

#1 what a stupid gun!
#2 i want the round to stay inside

 

[NirvanaFan]

#1 what a stupid gun!
#2 i want the round to stay inside

I'd rather have the round just exit out the far side. Two holes to bleed from is better than one.

 

[Phauxtoe]

i like all the energy going into the target, if no bones are hit its a big waste!

I like Hornady critical defense!

 

[NirvanaFan]

I agree. 5 times should have been done. But than again if it failed once out of 5, that's a failure in my book.

As far as penetration goes, yes. I want maximum penetration. I've already explained in another the thread about the myths of overpenetration and the lack of previous problems when solid bullets were used for everything 30 years ago.

It was hard for me to let go too but I eventually did.

Xtreme Defenders penetrate 18 inches no matter what's in front of them if overpenetration is a concern.

Who is to say that the solid doesn't fail in some way in 1 in 5?

I'm not super concerned about overpenetration. I'm more concerned with dumping as much energy into the bad guy as possible. More energy = more damage. Hollow points do a better job of this.

When you have a few minutes, could you find that post/thread? I'd be interested to read your thoughts.

 

[Marine Cpl]

i like all the energy going into the target, if no bones are hit its a big waste!

I like Hornady critical defense!

It's been proven that slow moving handgun energy is a non factor in regards to immediate incapacitation. If it were a factor, one shot to a non vital would drop you.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Who is to say that the solid doesn't fail in some way in 1 in 5?

I'm not super concerned about overpenetration. I'm more concerned with dumping as much energy into the bad guy as possible. More energy = more damage. Hollow points do a better job of this.

When you have a few minutes, could you find that post/thread? I'd be interested to read your thoughts.

It's a solid copper bullet. They can't fragment like lead does.

That thread was a long time ago. It may take me a while to find it. If I remember correctly, it turned into insults after the person I was debating couldn't dispute the facts.

 

[NirvanaFan]

If I remember correctly, it turned into insults after the person I was debating couldn't dispute the facts.

People resorting to insults? On this forum? I can't believe it!

No worries if you can't or don't want to find it. I was just curious.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I'm looking. Hold your horses!

 

[whauburger]

I didnt read any comment bc i dont care, but his modified glocks got a 4.6" barrero.

 

[Marine Cpl]

People resorting to insults? On this forum? I can't believe it!

No worries if you can't or don't want to find it. I was just curious.

Found it.

Underwood Ammo

It wasn't as bad as I remembered about the insults but it focuses mostly on overpenetration.

 

[@thewheels]

I don't understand your question. On a human, a .380 will go through both sides if a solid is used just like a .357 Magnum will. If a hollow point is used, under-penetration is underpenetration no matter what caliber is used.

My point is that when both under-penetrate, the 357 Mag should still penetrate further.

 

[Marine Cpl]

My point is that when both under-penetrate, the 357 Mag should still penetrate further.

Than it's not underpenetrating. It either reaches vitals or it doesn't and underpenetrates. At least that's what I mean in regards to if a round underpenetrates.

 

[libertysnake]

Dead horse for those without an open mind. The revered Federal HST didn't quite HST did it?

Oh. I thought it was just @Darth alluding to liking to get his ass whipped. (IE, see the police academy chick who didn't graduate for being a dominatrix.)

 

[Podmonkey]

I'd rather have the round just exit out the far side. Two holes to bleed from is better than one.

Who is to say that the solid doesn't fail in some way in 1 in 5?

I'm not super concerned about overpenetration. I'm more concerned with dumping as much energy into the bad guy as possible. More energy = more damage. Hollow points do a better job of this.

When you have a few minutes, could you find that post/thread? I'd be interested to read your thoughts.

These to statements contradict each other somewhat. If you have a pass through then the bullet couln't have dumped everythung it had in the target, else it wouldn't have left the target.

@Willjr75, chin up, you are slowly convincing me. Not that hollowpoints suck, I don't think they do, but maybe the newer copper solids are better. They seem to have an advantage in consistency and less sensitivity to velocity and barriers. Given the push against traditional lead bullets I'd really like to see the price of the copper prijectile come down to make the transition a painless one. I'd really like to see Ruger's process on the polymer blended bullets get perfected to make for really cheap practice ammo.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Energy dump with slow moving pistol rounds have no immediate effect on a target. Even FBI experts say so in their ballistics manual. If it did like I said earlier, a shot to the gut would knock you out.

 

[NirvanaFan]

Energy dump with slow moving pistol rounds have no immediate effect on a target. Even FBI experts say so in their ballistics manual. If it did like I said earlier, a shot to the gut would knock you out.

So, the FBI is right in their ballistic manual but wrong in their choice of hollow points?

 

[NirvanaFan]

These to statements contradict each other somewhat. If you have a pass through then the bullet couln't have dumped everythung it had in the target, else it wouldn't have left the target.

Kind of, I guess. Optimally, the bullet would enter, do it's thing, then have just enough energy to break the skin on the back side of the wound and just dribble out of the hole. I guess it wouldn't be expelling all of it's energy in the target, but 99.9999% or whatever.

 

[Marine Cpl]

So, the FBI is right in their ballistic manual but wrong in their choice of hollow points?

They are right that energy dump is a myth. Correct. I'm not saying that hollow points are bad. They just don't work all the time. They however have to use them and are still trying to find one that works better to this day. 9mm to 10mm to .40 and back to 9mm. Their original 9mm penetrated 10 inches. After doing the caliber dance they settled on one that did 13 inches. Now they are looking at one that does 17 inches.

 

[NirvanaFan]

It's an interesting discussion. I'm going to a class next week that deals with active shooting scenarios. If I have the opportunity, I'll ask the trainer about his thoughts. I did go to a ballistics class last year with Dr. Paul Maurer. He's given lectures to police agencies and talks to private contractors. I think he is now head of neurosurgery at one of the local hospitals. He was the one that operated on the cop (Anthony DiPonzio) shot in the head in 2009. I'm pretty sure he mentioned using hollow points. If a leading expert in ballistics recommends it, I don't think it would be a bad choice.

Are you familiar with the Strasbourg test? I don't think that energy dump is a myth. It would be an interesting experiment done with modern ammunition.

 

[Podmonkey]

If by energy dump one means hydrostatic shock then yes, it does exist. It is an observable phenomenon. Its just that in the typical defensive pistol calibers there just isn't enough of it to have a significant effect. But in rifle calibers, even the heavy magnum pistol calibers the hydrostatic shock effect can add substantially to the wounding effect.

 

[@thewheels]

If by energy dump one means hydrostatic shock then yes, it does exist. It is an observable phenomenon. Its just that in the typical defensive pistol calibers there just isn't enough of it to have a significant effect. But in rifle calibers, even the heavy magnum pistol calibers the hydrostatic shock effect can add substantially to the wounding effect.

Isn't this why hunting deer with a 308 fmj is unacceptable but hunting with 30-30 Hornady lever-revolutions is completely acceptable?
Something is lost or nothing is gained by using the fmj - I'm not sure how to describe it but identical shot placement with the 2 different rounds should produce different results? No?

 

[Marine Cpl]

It's an interesting discussion. I'm going to a class next week that deals with active shooting scenarios. If I have the opportunity, I'll ask the trainer about his thoughts. I did go to a ballistics class last year with Dr. Paul Maurer. He's given lectures to police agencies and talks to private contractors. I think he is now head of neurosurgery at one of the local hospitals. He was the one that operated on the cop (Anthony DiPonzio) shot in the head in 2009. I'm pretty sure he mentioned using hollow points. If a leading expert in ballistics recommends it, I don't think it would be a bad choice.

Are you familiar with the Strasbourg test? I don't think that energy dump is a myth. It would be an interesting experiment done with modern ammunition.

Take what the trainer says with a grain of salt. Many of them just parrot each other and have no ballistics knowledge whatsoever.

 

[Podmonkey]

Isn't this why hunting deer with a 308 fmj is unacceptable but hunting with 30-30 Hornady lever-revolutions is completely acceptable?
Something is lost or nothing is gained by using the fmj - I'm not sure how to describe it but identical shot placement with the 2 different rounds should produce different results? No?

What people never want to consider is there is no single parameter at play when it comes to terminal ballistics. Projectile energy must also be harnessed by the proper bullet design/construction to achieve the desired effect. The .308 FMJ enters the target with a fair bit more energy than the 30-30 but if all the bullet does is sail through soft tissue and make two .30 caliber holes its not gonna do all that much to the target is it? The 30-30 ballistic tip however will deform and expand making much more efficient use of the energy it does have, it will create a larger wound cavity, causing more blood loss and the 30-30 will have enough hydrostatic shock going on to possibly add to the tissue damage, the exapnding design will enhance this effect compared to a FMJ. However if that .308 FMJ should strike bone it will likely shatter that bone and the resulting bone shards could cause extensive damage. Its all very chancey really. Soft points, hollowpoints, ballistsic tips, fluted tips are all meant to increase the odds of producing an effective wound. With an FMJ you are dependant on hitting somthing critical or on fragmentation. Fragmentation when it occurs can also cause extensive damage, perhaps the most of any bullet mechanic but it is a bit chancey itself as to whether it occurs or not.

 

[Podmonkey]

Take what the trainer says with a grain of salt. Many of them just parrot each other and have no ballistics knowledge whatsoever.

That's kind of a big assumption on your part isn't it? We should all take the information we receive with a grain of salt but we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water either.

 

[Marine Cpl]

That's kind of a big assumption on your part isn't it? We should all take the information we receive with a grain of salt but we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water either.

It's the truth though. I take anything anyone says with a grain of salt and then research what they say as best as I can.

When I took my mandatory NRA course for my license, my instructor was telling everyone to get laser sights for their carry pieces because it was superior to using iron sights. He also taught 6 o'clock hold when aiming.

 

[@thewheels]

Soft points, hollowpoints, ballistsic tips, fluted tips are all meant to increase the odds of producing an effective wound. With an FMJ you are dependant on hitting somthing critical or on fragmentation. Fragmentation when it occurs can also cause extensive damage, perhaps the most of any bullet mechanic but it is a bit chancy itself as to whether it occurs or not.

You state it better than I could.
Hollowpoints may/may not suck but some are constructed better than others.
And, IMO it seems possible that which bullet construction works well for one caliber may not translate to another. Or there's better design/construction based on velocity and maybe even bc?

 

[Marine Cpl]

What people never want to consider is there is no single parameter at play when it comes to terminal ballistics. Projectile energy must also be harnessed by the proper bullet design/construction to achieve the desired effect. The .308 FMJ enters the target with a fair bit more energy than the 30-30 but if all the bullet does is sail through soft tissue and make two .30 caliber holes its not gonna do all that much to the target is it? The 30-30 ballistic tip however will deform and expand making much more efficient use of the energy it does have, it will create a larger wound cavity, causing more blood loss and the 30-30 will have enough hydrostatic shock going on to possibly add to the tissue damage, the exapnding design will enhance this effect compared to a FMJ. However if that .308 FMJ should strike bone it will likely shatter that bone and the resulting bone shards could cause extensive damage. Its all very chancey really. Soft points, hollowpoints, ballistsic tips, fluted tips are all meant to increase the odds of producing an effective wound. With an FMJ you are dependant on hitting somthing critical or on fragmentation. Fragmentation when it occurs can also cause extensive damage, perhaps the most of any bullet mechanic but it is a bit chancey itself as to whether it occurs or not.

But in the end no matter what bullet you use, shot placement and penetration to vitals are what immediately kills. You can shoot a deer with a fancy hollow point in the stomach and it'll run away from you further compared to a solid bullet through the heart. The same applies to a human.

How many times have humans been shot by fragmenting .223 rounds in non vital areas in these wars we've been in and lived or continued fighting until dying later?