Fragmentation Rounds In 40 S&W [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Fragmentation Rounds In 40 S&W


professorj
12-26-2011, 09:16
Does anyone know a good brand? I'm looking for full fragmentation with no pass thru. And what is going rate?

I saw R. Lee Ermey talk about them on modern warfare a while back but never wrote down the name and wasn't sure if they offered it in my caliber. Thanks

Don't Tread On Me

Jim S.
12-26-2011, 10:47
The Glaser Safety Slugs are ones that I've had experience with and there are some other good ones out there.
Any good ammunition store on line can give you an idea what's out there.
However there is a definate trade off when you use these rounds as they are not known to penetrate very well before coming apart so reaching a vital organ or artery may be a problem.

professorj
12-26-2011, 11:27
I'm going on the assumption that not to many people will try b&e when its 30 or below. I'm really wanting to avoid pass through if I have to shoot in my home so it wouldn't accidentally get one of my kids or fiance in another room. But if it doesn't penatrate all the the way or not at all it should at least knock them back long enough for a head shot or for them to surrenders or flee. If you have any more advice or rebuttal please let me know, I am in no ways a know it all. Thanks

Don't Tread On Me

dpadams6
12-26-2011, 12:33
Corbon 135 grain noslers fragment pretty good. Some say similar to the vaunted 357 mag. 125 grainers which fragmenting violently.

tuica
12-26-2011, 12:50
A possible tactic would be to fire the first two/three rounds of frag., followed by more solid projectiles. Good Luck.

NG VI
12-27-2011, 13:18
I wouldn't count on any bullet knocking anybody back any appreciable distance.

Your best bet is to know the layout of your home, identify your target as a stranger (absolutely critical) before firing, practice enough so you have the skillset necessary to land a bullet on a person who most likely will not want you to, and will be taking measures to avoid your bullets, and buy a good load for your defensive use that takes advantage of the last thirty years of studies into the way handgun bullets work and how we can best assure that they will do what we need them to.

A good, large expanding conventional bullet is cheaper than the frangible stuff and it will be much more effective against human beings who want to hurt you as well. Personally I'd recommend the Federal HST in 180 grain or the Winchester Ranger-T, also in 180.

Both get enough penetration, are extremely consistent, are not known for excessively deep penetration, and expand to .75-.85" just about every time.

And HST is one of the cheapest top-shelf loads available. What more can you ask for from defensive pistol ammunition?

Brad55102
12-27-2011, 17:09
I'm going on the assumption that not to many people will try b&e when its 30 or below. I'm really wanting to avoid pass through if I have to shoot in my home so it wouldn't accidentally get one of my kids or fiance in another room. But if it doesn't penatrate all the the way or not at all it should at least knock them back long enough for a head shot or for them to surrenders or flee. If you have any more advice or rebuttal please let me know, I am in no ways a know it all. Thanks

Don't Tread On Me


My rebuttal is to stay away from Gimmick ammo.
Get proven ammo like
Speer Gold Dots
Federal HST's
both are street proven and offer very reliable expansion.
Expansion is the issue - when the round expands it will most likely not pass through the BG body.

professorj
12-28-2011, 05:39
Any thoughts on corbon??

Don't Tread On Me

DocKWL
12-28-2011, 07:51
There is little to any positive from a handgun bullet that fragments.

NG VI
12-28-2011, 10:42
Yes.

They are a very expensive brand that caters to the crowd who wants higher velocity and energy numbers no matter how well or poorly designed the projectile being launched is.

Except for the DPX loads they have, which are superb but extremely pricey. And not better than the much cheaper HST and Ranger-T loads anyway. Might be somewhat better than the Gold Dot/PDX-type bullets, those are kind of the gold standard for handgun ammunition and the DPX generally penetrates a little better and gets about the same expansion as they do.

Not a big enough difference between those five loads to show with any given defensive shooting, but if you like stacking your deck as high as it can go, pick one of 'em.

dpadams6
12-28-2011, 11:14
There is little to any positive from a handgun bullet that fragments.

Maybe in your studies, but in the real world street results, which Mas Ayoob refers to many times, the fragmenting rounds do the best. 357 mag 125, 9mm 115 +p+, I know its a rifle round and much faster, but .223.....

DocKWL
12-28-2011, 15:35
Maybe in your studies, but in the real world street results, which Mas Ayoob refers to many times, the fragmenting rounds do the best. 357 mag 125, 9mm 115 +p+, I know its a rifle round and much faster, but .223.....

I have stated before and for your benefit will say again:

You are welcome to test fire the bullets in question. Your results will be expected: On average, the bullets will not fragment with any regularity or explosiveness.

The current crop of robust expanding, non-fragmenting, barrier blind .223 bullets currently available, far exceed the early yaw and fragmenting bullets of lore.

While I respect Massad Ayoob's opinion on weapons and tactics, his opinions on terminal ballistics can be largely ignored.

Current real world street results depict heavy for caliber, modern self-defense bullets as more effective than the bullets you reference.

Tiro Fijo
12-28-2011, 15:45
...Current real world street results depict heavy for caliber, modern self-defense bullets as more effective than the bullets you reference.


I disagree 100%. You base your assumption on the fact that because many agencies have gone to 180 gr. .40 S&W. This was not entirely based on performance but rather on the quirky obsession that many have for 12" of penetration as well as many LEO's can't handle the snappier and more effective 155 gr. & 165 gr. loads in the .40 S&W. Also, the crappy Beretta Inox was cracking with the Rem. 155 gr. .40 S&W as used by the Border Patrol. Beretta has since altered the frame.

There is no hard data that the heavier loads used today are any more effective than say the old .357 Mag. 125 gr. HP or even the legendary Fed. BLE +p+.

DocKWL
12-28-2011, 15:54
I disagree 100%. You base your assumption on the fact that because many agencies have gone to 180 gr. .40 S&W. This was not entirely based on performance but rather on the quirky obsession that many have for 12" of penetration as well as many LEO's can't handle the snappier and more effective 155 gr. & 165 gr. loads in the .40 S&W. Also, the crappy Beretta Inox was cracking with the Rem. 155 gr. .40 S&W as used by the Border Patrol. Beretta has since altered the frame.

There is no hard data that the heavier loads used today are any more effective than say the old .357 Mag. 125 gr. HP or even the legendary Fed. BLE +p+.

Mine is not assumption. You are free to back yours with data.

dpadams6
12-28-2011, 16:34
I have stated before and for your benefit will say again:

You are welcome to test fire the bullets in question. Your results will be expected: On average, the bullets will not fragment with any regularity or explosiveness.

The current crop of robust expanding, non-fragmenting, barrier blind .223 bullets currently available, far exceed the early yaw and fragmenting bullets of lore.

While I respect Massad Ayoob's opinion on weapons and tactics, his opinions on terminal ballistics can be largely ignored.

Current real world street results depict heavy for caliber, modern self-defense bullets as more effective than the bullets you reference.

But with the 357 mag 125 and the 9mm 115+p+ scoring well into the 90+ % estimated one shot stops and the 357 more like 95-96%, how can we get much better than that.? I know those percentages are disputed by some, but the many police officers on the street that have in fact used both of those rounds in the past seem to agree that they worked very well and many mentioning of the incredible affect that the 357 mag had on bad guys. It seems like the heavier rounds you mention would probably be better if your going thru barriers, like many officers encounter. But, for straight on shots, not thru barriers, I would think it is hard to discredit the lighter/faster fragmenting rounds that create massive wound channels. Have you ever seen what a 10mm 135 grain nosler round at high velocities does to gel or wax? The wound it creates, I have never seen before in any other handgun round. It looks like it would be utter devastating to a human target.

Tiro Fijo
12-28-2011, 18:13
Mine is not assumption. You are free to back yours with data.


OK, show me your data.

professorj
12-29-2011, 04:01
Corbon 135 grain noslers fragment pretty good. Some say similar to the vaunted 357 mag. 125 grainers which fragmenting violently.

Sorry you already mentioned them ( corbon ).

Don't Tread On Me

NG VI
12-29-2011, 09:18
Marshall and Sanow's 'study' has been pretty heavily discredited, I believe there's even a sticky at the very top of the Caliber Corner about it. First of all, they did not take into consideration any incident in which the shootee was shot more than one time, which eliminates a huge number of shootings and makes it impossible to accurately determine which bullets really did work the best.

If you shoot someone just once, either he has extremely fast reflexes and quit his aggression remarkably fast, or you're doing it wrong and are risking your own life.

A study that totally discounts doctrine on use of handguns in a defensive situation can't really be used to determine how effective handguns are in defensive situations. And their subsequent books were pretty heavily funded by Cor-Bon weren't they?

Merkavaboy
12-29-2011, 15:38
Marshall and Sanow's 'study' has been pretty heavily discredited, I believe there's even a sticky at the very top of the Caliber Corner about it. First of all, they did not take into consideration any incident in which the shootee was shot more than one time, which eliminates a huge number of shootings and makes it impossible to accurately determine which bullets really did work the best.

Well DUH! If M&S are trying to put together a study of one-shot-stops, it doesn't make much sense to include shootings involving more than one shot, does it?

If you shoot someone just once, either he has extremely fast reflexes and quit his aggression remarkably fast, or you're doing it wrong and are risking your own life.

Now this is just a plain nonsensical statement. No, really, it is. Moving on...

A study that totally discounts doctrine on use of handguns in a defensive situation can't really be used to determine how effective handguns are in defensive situations.

Some more nonsense. Where do you come up with these ideas? You think M&S are writing about offensive handgun shootings as opposed to defensive handgun shootings?

And their subsequent books were pretty heavily funded by Cor-Bon weren't they?

Really? And you know this...how? Got proof? I think you're totally wrong about this. M&S probably really got funded by Triton, Joe Zambone of MagSafe, or Tom Burczynski (inventor of the Quik-Shok, PMC Starfire, Federal's Hydra-Shok and EFMJ bullets), Federal, Winchester or maybe even the Secret Service, RCMP or FBI. Corbon...really? :upeyes:

Yeah, I guess M&S have it all backwards. I guess shooting bullets into blocks of Gel while safely locked in a labratory is much more important and meaningful than collecting data on what bullets do to real people out on the streets.