Bullet Photos

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Well....you can put me in that "Ted Nugent/eccentric" category.

I am a big 10mm fan.

My G20 with full power loads (like Buffalo Bore) is very controllable. I've shot .357 revolvers that are far worse, and a 4" .41 Magnum (my brother's model 57) is far worse. My brother's Dan Wesson 10mm is also very controllable. A bit more bark than a 1911 in .45 but nothing like that Model 57.

Now. the Glock is big, and it takes reasonably big hands to get a good grip and reasonably strong hands for managing the recoil, so, no, it's not a good choice for many shooters, and that probably excludes quite a bit of the population.

In my hands, however, follow up shots are quick, as quick as with a .40 compact, or a 9mm compact, though not as quick as a 9mm full size service pistol (like a Beretta 92). I bought the G20 just because I wanted a 10mm. 220g hard cast for bear country, 180g JHP for SD. A very effective pistol with great ballistic performance. 15+1 rounds of very effective performance. It's close to .41 Magnum performance but far, far easier to shoot and holds nearly 3 times the ammo.

It's a great gun.

But, I'll admit, not great for everyone...


Agree with everything you've said here.

If I could only keep 1 handgun, it would be my G20. Why? It's the most versatile handgun I own. I can run 135-grain hollowpoints for home defense, to prevent overpenetration, or 1300 FPS 180-grain loads, or heavy solid bullets for carrying in the mountains. Or I can run .40 S&W for cheap range practice (which I do often with zero issues).

It does have a large grip, and needs a firm hand and good technique to tame. For those who are willing to put in the time at the range, it's not a problem at all.

Heck, I even carry mine IWB from time to time. Not bad at all.

Here are some Underwood-loaded Gold Dots I shot into some heavy plastic agricultural water jugs (like what's used on farms).

Really fun handgun. I've owned mine since 2001. It was actually my first handgun.

 
^ Man those things are stretched to their limit.

I have these laying around, its a small percent of what I've tested but very representative. Theres 90% 9mm in this batch, with some .223/5.56 and .300blk pulled from hogs and such.

 
Originally Posted By: john_pifer
Here are some Underwood-loaded Gold Dots I shot into some heavy plastic agricultural water jugs (like what's used on farms). Really fun handgun. I've owned mine since 2001. It was actually my first handgun.


What was the weight retention on those?
 
I've been thinking hard about my next firearm being 10mm. Been debating between the G20 and G40 MOS. I have no immediate desire to put on optics, but you know, what if I do one day? I like the longer slide and barrel of the G40 as well. But, from what I've gathered, since the G20 has been out much longer, I can more easily get .40 and 357Sig barrels for the G20.


... Scrolling back up, I don't know how it became a 10mm discussion

It is interesting that the 357 Sig bullets differ so much from the 9mm. I've always been interested in some of the light weight higher velocity rounds. I don't reload yet, but I'd like to try a light bullet (maybe for a 380?) in a 9mm brass. Kind of a poor man's version of the 50gr Liberty Civil Defense 9mm that supposedly hits 2000fps.
 
Originally Posted By: AMC
The 5.7x28mm is an example; A very cool round that can be extremely capable or watered down and turned pretty useless. It could have some serious military and law enforcement potential but it is almost never loaded correctly to do so. It is in use by some government agencies but not very many. It does have a small cult type of following but is not the best choice for most individuals and agencies who operate in any type of a normal environment.


5.7x28 has been DROPPED by most agencies that adopted it. They found that it is not a very effective stopper. Most agencies have gone to AR-15's and short barrel AR-15's.
 
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: AMC
The 5.7x28mm is an example; A very cool round that can be extremely capable or watered down and turned pretty useless. It could have some serious military and law enforcement potential but it is almost never loaded correctly to do so. It is in use by some government agencies but not very many. It does have a small cult type of following but is not the best choice for most individuals and agencies who operate in any type of a normal environment.


5.7x28 has been DROPPED by most agencies that adopted it. They found that it is not a very effective stopper. Most agencies have gone to AR-15's and short barrel AR-15's.


Same can be said (dropped) for 10mm and to a lesser extent, the 40 S&W.

Like I said before, it has a ninch but not a big one, especially with any type of government agency anyways. The secret service still likes the p90 and 5.7x28. Again, most of the problems with that round came from the ammo loadings, a very similar problem to the 10mm. Both the 10MM and 5.7X28 can be loaded so that they are very effective but factory ammo offerings are usually watered down. When loaded to their potential, the 5.7x28 becomes very loud and has a big muzzle flash. The 10mm on the other hand has a lot of recoil and flash as well as increased wear on the gun. Elite ammunition is the only company loading the 5.7x28 to its potential but they are expensive and usually back ordered. Elite ammunition was actually raided by the ATF a several years ago but I believe they shook off whatever charges they were facing.

The factory FN ammo is powder puff compared to when it first came out. Those were some of the big reasons I sold my FN fiveseven years ago.
 
Perhaps. I don't think there is enough hard data on confirmed 5.7x28 shootings to say that for sure, but I do tend to agree.

It should also be noted that no matter how you look at it, 5.7x28 is far easier to shoot with far higher hit probability than the 10mm.
wink.gif
 
I thought that the 5.7x28 had the benefit of being able to penetrate soft body armor? I would think that's a significant bonus. A penetrating 5.7 has to stop better than a stopped 10mm.
 
Originally Posted By: EdwardC
I thought that the 5.7x28 had the benefit of being able to penetrate soft body armor? I would think that's a significant bonus. A penetrating 5.7 has to stop better than a stopped 10mm.


How many law enforcement and civilian self defense shootings each year result in body armor requiring to be penetrated?
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: EdwardC
I thought that the 5.7x28 had the benefit of being able to penetrate soft body armor? I would think that's a significant bonus. A penetrating 5.7 has to stop better than a stopped 10mm.


How many law enforcement and civilian self defense shootings each year result in body armor requiring to be penetrated?


I have no idea and I think it's a worthy question. Do you know those stats? I'm speaking purely from generalities and from what I've read on the internet. I actually really like the 10mm, especially for possibly large 4-legged animal protection (I'm deciding between the G20 and G40MOS).

On the other hand, knowing nothing else, if I was a cop with soft body armor, I'd prefer the thugs be shooting at me with 10mm than 5.7x28.
 
Originally Posted By: Itonlysmokesalit
Agreed, they are past there limit regarding velocity. I'd love to know how much weight they retained.


Didn't weigh them, but, as I said earlier, these were fired into heavy plastic agricultural water jugs. So, the expansion and effect on the bullets is much more aggressive than it would be if fired into gel.

A conclusion about the velocity limits of these bullets can't be drawn from this example.
 
Originally Posted By: john_pifer
Originally Posted By: Itonlysmokesalit
Agreed, they are past there limit regarding velocity. I'd love to know how much weight they retained.
Didn't weigh them, but, as I said earlier, these were fired into heavy plastic agricultural water jugs. So, the expansion and effect on the bullets is much more aggressive than it would be if fired into gel. A conclusion about the velocity limits of these bullets can't be drawn from this example.
Try this example (jacket separation = failure). TNOutdoors9 has tested many different brands and I consider him to be knowledgeable and trustworthy (YMMV):
 
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Try this example (jacket separation = failure).


You think 700 ft lbs of energy, 17.5 inches of penetration, and an expanded diameter of 0.7 inches is a failure? I'd rather have that than a perfectly symmetrical 9MM that penetrates 12.5 inches and expands to 0.75 inches with perfect expansion and no jacket separation.

Ammo is used for effect. Not to make pretty little star shaped bullets.
 
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Try this example (jacket separation = failure).
You think 700 ft lbs of energy, 17.5 inches of penetration, and an expanded diameter of 0.7 inches is a failure? I'd rather have that than a perfectly symmetrical 9MM that penetrates 12.5 inches and expands to 0.75 inches with perfect expansion and no jacket separation. Ammo is used for effect. Not to make pretty little star shaped bullets.
No, what I think is that according to ALL of the standards used to test bullets jacket separation is a failure of the bullet. Call it and paint it whatever way you wish, but without standardized testing, it is all just guessing. Do I think that a 10MM is a manstopper? Sure, if you can hold onto it and actually hit what you are aiming at.
 
I'm very fond of .357sig. It's my go to carry gun( G32 Gen4) especially in the colder months. I love shooting the round, and I believe it is one of the absolute best handgun loads available. Sure it's expensive, but it feeds reliably, and it packs a punch with relatively low recoil.

If I'm not carrying 357 Sig I carry 9mm in my single stack Walther PPS.

I see no point in .40 anymore for me. I sold my Walther ppq.40 when I bought the .357 sig. I did buy a Glock 23 barrel in case I ever need/want to shoot .40s&w again.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: EdwardC
I thought that the 5.7x28 had the benefit of being able to penetrate soft body armor? I would think that's a significant bonus. A penetrating 5.7 has to stop better than a stopped 10mm.


Yes it has that benefit when loaded with the right ammo. The factory FN ammo HAD the ability until the brady campaign made a youtube video showing standard FN ammo passing through level 2 body armor. The video went viral, everybody including the ATF and FN flipped out and whalla! The next batch of FN ammo was about 200 FPS lower velocity (in the fiveseven pistol) than before and it has stayed that way ever since. FN even went as far as to completely change their marketing strategy trying to market the round and it's weapons as good choices for women and recoil sensitive shooters.

The armor piercing benefit of 5.7x28 is also one of its biggest disadvantages. Many police officers around the world are killed with their own guns. Now imagine you are a cop carrying the fiveseven (5.7x28) pistol as your duty pistol. What good is that vest doing you if you are incompetent and let an attacker get your gun away from you? Most people forget that bullet proof vests for the police were originally designed to protect the officer from his own gun. To make matters worse, the 5.7x28 usually tumbles more violently after it upset by passing through armor and actually does more damage after passing through typical body armor....

Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Try this example (jacket separation = failure).



You think 700 ft lbs of energy, 17.5 inches of penetration, and an expanded diameter of 0.7 inches is a failure? I'd rather have that than a perfectly symmetrical 9MM that penetrates 12.5 inches and expands to 0.75 inches with perfect expansion and no jacket separation.

Ammo is used for effect. Not to make pretty little star shaped bullets.


Bubba, you are exactly right. Jacket separation may actually increase wound channel size because now the bullet and jacket make separate wounds and have the potential to damage more tissue as they penetrate.
 
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Try this example (jacket separation = failure).
You think 700 ft lbs of energy, 17.5 inches of penetration, and an expanded diameter of 0.7 inches is a failure? I'd rather have that than a perfectly symmetrical 9MM that penetrates 12.5 inches and expands to 0.75 inches with perfect expansion and no jacket separation. Ammo is used for effect. Not to make pretty little star shaped bullets.
No, what I think is that according to ALL of the standards used to test bullets jacket separation is a failure of the bullet. Call it and paint it whatever way you wish, but without standardized testing, it is all just guessing. Do I think that a 10MM is a manstopper? Sure, if you can hold onto it and actually hit what you are aiming at.
Retained weight was like 98%. I wouldn't call that a failure. The bullet was driven beyond it's design but it still performed well. The core looked perfect; the core is what does the work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top