tnoutdoors9 testing the .45ACP 230gr PDX1 [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : tnoutdoors9 testing the .45ACP 230gr PDX1


FLglockdude
08-05-2010, 23:10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwFKvfXnGHk&playnext=1&videos=Jfk6n82TLwU

This test had the same results as the 9mm 124gr+p, no expansion whatsoever when shot through denim. He tested again with no demin, and the expansion wasn't anything to write home about.

So far I have not been impressed by this ammunition.

cowboy1964
08-05-2010, 23:56
Yeah this is worrisome. I don't use PDX1 anyway because of the cost. Still Gold Dots for me!

I had hoped he would have done a second test with the 124+P without denim but he didn't.

DRT
08-06-2010, 10:40
My favorite line in the video was the last one.... "but think about it....in a self defense situation, your aggressor will more than likely be wearing clothing".

triggerjerk
08-06-2010, 11:18
I hope he tests some .45 HST and Ranger T.

Joshhtn
08-06-2010, 11:26
Another great video!... Thank you hickok45 for letting him borrow your 30.

Also, thanks to DRT for supplying ammo for some of his tests.

granitemonkey
08-07-2010, 16:02
Both of the .40 rounds he tested expanded beautifully.

ctfireman
08-07-2010, 17:16
I've been carrying pdx rounds in my .40's & .45's & am bothered by this. I certainly wouldn't wanna get hit with a 230 grain bullet expanded or not but it's not doing what it's supposed to do. I use gold dots in my .380 & corbon +p's in my 9mm. Looks like i'm switching out my .40 & .45 ammo. Oh yeah, forgot about the critical defense in my .38 (new .38 owner & forgot i had it).

KiloBravo
08-07-2010, 18:35
The weird thing is...my buddy tested a 180 gr. PDX1 in 40 and had excellent result through denim into water jugs. However, I tested a .38 spl +P out of my .357 snubbie and it failed to expand and passed through all 5 water jugs with denim as well.

I am very worried about carrying this ammo in anything now that I have seen the results duplicated over several different calibers.

IndyGunFreak
08-07-2010, 19:08
The weird thing is...my buddy tested a 180 gr. PDX1 in 40 and had excellent result through denim into water jugs. However, I tested a .38 spl +P out of my .357 snubbie and it failed to expand and passed through all 5 water jugs with denim as well.

I am very worried about carrying this ammo in anything now that I have seen the results duplicated over several different calibers.

Kinda my thinking... I'm thinking I'll probably switch back to Gold Dot... I'll probably just start looking online for 50rd boxes to save a few...

IGF

Glolt20-91
08-08-2010, 00:13
The 230gr PDX on the right flunked the sheetrock test, 230gr FMJ on left is a lot cheaper;

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o144/aztrekker/At%20the%20range/Sheetrock230grPDXcompare230grFMJ.jpg

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o144/aztrekker/At%20the%20range/Sheetrock230grPDX007.jpg

Other .45auto/230gr JHP sheetrock tested ammo, l-r;

Federal Hydrashok, Hornady TAP, Speer Gold Dot;

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o144/aztrekker/At%20the%20range/Furniture-sheetrockbags45acpHS-T-4.jpg

Bob :cowboy:

novaDAK
08-08-2010, 19:02
now we see why Ranger Bonded 124gr +P 9mm and Ranger Bonded 230gr .45 are not on this list:

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm#9mm

Note the 147gr Ranger Bonded 9mm IS there, which tnoutdoors9 tested as the PDX1 147gr JHP with successful results.

Not all PDX1 ammo is bad...the 180gr .40 and 147gr 9mm are particularly good loads.

granitemonkey
08-08-2010, 20:24
We cant let it leak out to the BG's that all they have to do to defeat modern hollowpoints is to wear four layer's of denim:rofl:

thegriz18
08-08-2010, 23:44
Yet another reason why I will stick with my 165 40 Ranger T/PDX1. Both of those rounds work very well. The 45 wasn't designed with expanding projectiles in mind. I think 874 fps is on the very low side to expect much expansion. Some rounds are better than others and you can cherry piclk tests to prove whatever point you want, but for me it will remain a 165 40 at 1100fps+.

Iceman cHucK
08-09-2010, 09:23
Penetration to me is #1 which is what this ammo should do well. Accuracy and expansion in a 45 is #2 and #3 for me assuming a good power factor. I carry the 45PDX1 and I also carry 45Ball. Not at all concerned with a lack of expansion.

cowboy1964
08-09-2010, 16:20
Penetration to me is #1 which is what this ammo should do well. Accuracy and expansion in a 45 is #2 and #3 for me assuming a good power factor. I carry the 45PDX1 and I also carry 45Ball. Not at all concerned with a lack of expansion.

Over penetration is not a good thing. I've never seen too many pro opinions that FMJs in large calibers is a good thing for defense shootings. Quite the opposite in fact.

DRT
08-10-2010, 19:31
.......Not all PDX1 ammo is bad...the 180gr .40 and 147gr 9mm are particularly good loads.

http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=26461&highlight=PDX1

5 of 10 of the 180gr .40 ranger bonded (same as PDX1) didn't expand after heavy clothing.

novaDAK
08-11-2010, 15:36
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=26461&highlight=PDX1

5 of 10 of the 180gr .40 ranger bonded (same as PDX1) didn't expand after heavy clothing.

bad lot of ammo...

If 180gr Bonded was that unreliable, FBI would not have adopted it.

dreis454
08-11-2010, 17:34
My favorite line in the video was the last one.... "but think about it....in a self defense situation, your aggressor will more than likely be wearing clothing".
but NOT 4 layers of denim....:whistling:

DRT
08-12-2010, 17:45
but NOT 4 layers of denim....:whistling:

This usually gets raised every week or so. I suggest you read the link below and get educated on the subject of 4 layer denim testing.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/2006/04/02/0604-02a.htm

dreis454
08-12-2010, 18:23
This usually gets raised every week or so. I suggest you read the link below and get educated on the subject of 4 layer denim testing.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/2006/04/02/0604-02a.htm

yup,read that before & see the posts on it all the time............I still think its BS:whistling:

DRT
08-12-2010, 19:18
bad lot of ammo...

If 180gr Bonded was that unreliable, FBI would not have adopted it.

Yeah, the FBI picked a real winner when they chose the 165gr HS at 980fps a few years ago too, didn't they?

Guess there's lots of bad lots these days.

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1248864


Whether it's the fundamental design and/or quality issues, if they dont expand reliably then no thanks.

novaDAK
08-12-2010, 23:40
Yeah, the FBI picked a real winner when they chose the 165gr HS at 980fps a few years ago too, didn't they?

Guess there's lots of bad lots these days.

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1248864


Whether it's the fundamental design and/or quality issues, if they dont expand reliably then no thanks.

Pointing to a test of a load that was tested and failed the FBI tests proves nothing especially when it's a different caliber and different weight.

So because Speer put out some gold dots loaded with hard primers once and actually RECALLED certain lots of ammo, we shouldn't trust gold dots at all either?

DRT
08-13-2010, 17:04
Pointing to a test of a load that was tested and failed the FBI tests proves nothing especially when it's a different caliber and different weight.

So because Speer put out some gold dots loaded with hard primers once and actually RECALLED certain lots of ammo, we shouldn't trust gold dots at all either?


Actually, the fact that there are separate references to recent tests where these bullets failed to expand after heaving clothing, involving 3 different lots/calibers/bullet weights. tends to point to a broader, more systemic problem, not a fluke. In my opinion, this should only lead to more concern on the part of the consumer. The other disturbing point is that many of these bullets that didn't perform well showed near-ZERO expansion; almost like the bullet could be reloaded. We're not talking about splitting hairs here but rather a significant lack of expansion. If you're still comfortable with it then carry it.

JBP55
08-13-2010, 17:14
Actually, the fact that there are separate references to recent tests where these bullets failed to expand after heaving clothing, involving 3 different lots/calibers/bullet weights. tends to point to a broader, more systemic problem, not a fluke. In my opinion, this should only lead to more concern on the part of the consumer. The other disturbing point is that many of these bullets that didn't perform well showed near-ZERO expansion; almost like the bullet could be reloaded. We're not talking about splitting hairs here but rather a significant lack of expansion. If you're still comfortable with it then carry it.


What he said.

cowboy1964
08-13-2010, 17:24
Yet another reason why I will stick with my 165 40 Ranger T/PDX1. Both of those rounds work very well. The 45 wasn't designed with expanding projectiles in mind. I think 874 fps is on the very low side to expect much expansion.

Velocity isn't the key, momentum is. A 45 will generally have more momentum.

http://terra.gg.utah.edu/guns/energy.pdf

novaDAK
08-14-2010, 05:54
Actually, the fact that there are separate references to recent tests where these bullets failed to expand after heaving clothing, involving 3 different lots/calibers/bullet weights. tends to point to a broader, more systemic problem, not a fluke. In my opinion, this should only lead to more concern on the part of the consumer. The other disturbing point is that many of these bullets that didn't perform well showed near-ZERO expansion; almost like the bullet could be reloaded. We're not talking about splitting hairs here but rather a significant lack of expansion. If you're still comfortable with it then carry it.

Denim plays hell on hollow points. Even bullets of the same caliber and make but slightly different designs will perform differently through denim and heavy clothing. Just look at the 165 Gold Dot vs. the 155 and 180, or the 165 Golden Saber vs. the 180. My point was that you can't predict how one bullet will perform based on one of different design (even though they're all the same make and line of ammo).

Ak.Hiker
08-14-2010, 23:33
Winchester may have designed a very good hunting bullet for the handloader. I wonder how it would preform at 950 to 1000?