The snow is close enough to gone that I will be able to shoot at the local range within a couple of weeks. I want to test ammunition for how well several different ammunitions' cartridges compare with what is accepted as acceptable for 357 Magnum self-defense bullet performance.

There are references on the web site regarding what is acceptable, plus testing that Forum members have done. Apparently, baseline is FBI testing that occurs using ballistic gelatin [and other materials.] But members substitute water and denim??? for more expensive and exotic materials, and that testing appears to obtain meaningful comparative results.

Please identify how I set up to test 357 Magnum ammunition for self-defense. If there are links to this procedure, that's easier for a reply.

If there are grades of results, such as "excellent performance" as well as "acceptable performance," please identify how my bullet test results are graded. While I know what I'm trying to ask for, I'm uncertain whether anyone else will understand and be able to respond. I've used perhaps too much explanation?

Naphtali;

Unless you want to duplicate the FBI standards, perhaps best COA is to look up the performance outcomes for the ammo you have/want from the manufacturers.

You can pretty much compare bbl length etc to what you carry and be confident that your rig and ammo will perform quite similarly to the test variables.

If you are handloading, well, that could be another story unless the maker also loads that bullet in tested ammo.

I confirm my ammo by simple chronographing from my handgun, and comparing to the test velocity. Less velocity usually will indicate lesser expansion and probably lessor penetration, higher velocity greater expansion ( and likely similar or lesser penetration)

Water jugs covered with expected clothing can give a comparison round to round IN THAT Media

I expect my 40 to penetrate at least three, or better yet four milk jugs, expand to a good mushroom and pretty much destroy jugs one and two....

Barriers? 1/2in plywood, an auto side glass, an old car door?

That's why I buy Federal HST or Hornady Critical Duty....

I don't carry handloads.

quote:

If there are grades of results, such as "excellent performance" as well as "acceptable performance," please identify how my bullet test results are graded. While I know what I'm trying to ask for, I'm uncertain whether anyone else will understand and be able to respond. I've used perhaps too much explanation?

No grades, there is the FBI testing prodigals that most use when testing bullets.

Water is a very good choice almost as good as ballistic gel and a lot cheaper.

What or how a bullet preforms has a lot to do with what one wants a bullet to do.

Most of the personal defensive ammo is made to meet or exceed the FBI standards. But they were set with the idea of use against human attackers.

Against animal attackers in the average humans size they most likely well work just fine.

Against bigger and heavier animals I would prefer a tougher bullet giving me more penetration.

If your set on preforming your own test so be it can be fun. I have shot thousands of rounds into various testing media.

If you just want to know how a bullet performs just do a you tube search and you well most likely find someone has tested them for you.

That said I use JHPs in my handgun for defense against humans in my handguns for hunting and bigger animal defense I use a heavy for caliber WFN hard cast.

But that said if I had JHPs in my handgun and I had to defend my self against a large dangerous animal I would use them for such.

Im satisfied that the 125 gr. Federal jacketed HP by Federal is the ultimate one shot stopper in the .357 magnum. Police files going back many years have apparently backed up this statement, it rated over the 40s and 44s as a matter of fact in actual shoot out records according to Handgun stopping Power, a definitive study by Evan P. Marshall and Edwin J.Sanow...A somewhat contested book, alas by critics of little or no actual experience, but IMO it was spot on according to what Ive seen in Mexico and on the Texas border over 40 years..Although I don't normally carry a .357 revolver as I prefer automatics, I do believe the .357 properly loaded to be the best caliber for one shot stops in existence, and its track record exceeds all others.

Sir, I agree that the 125/357 is a proven stopper- as is the 110/9mm, the 135/40 and the 230/45ACP etc. All post averages of 94%+.

The bigger question is no these numbers, but really how well the perform when the engagement is other than facing a threat wearing a T shirt?

"Barrier Blind" rounds these days are designed to be the best compromise against various barriers encountered in normal handgun combat and yet still be very effective in flesh.

Several makers like Hornady and Federal make such rounds, maybe others. And yes, even a "normal" duty/carry bullet will do justice after a windshield or a wall is covering the target. But I wouldn't bet on them.

It is too bad the tables you mention do not specify f any barriers were encountered in the incidents

http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm

Regards

As HP Master has pointed out, the barrier test, be it auto glass or metal car door, or dry wall, really complicates matters. Additionally, over penetration is another factor, not to mention bullet path after penetrating say, auto glass. Lighter bullets seem to fare worse in this last regard. I would go with the FBI test results!
Ultimately, the real test is whether you can hit the intended target in a show stopping manner.
Peter.

quote:

I would go with the FBI test results!

It is a decent standard when dealing with two legged varmints. But the average self-defense user do not face the same requirements that a working LEO does.

The whole FBI protocol was base on the flawed assumptions that it was bullet failure, not poor tactics horrible shooting and many mistakes made by the agents in the 1986 shoot out.

For larger four legged predators a tougher deeper penetrating bullet is nicer to have.

Can't disagree, but I did say this:

quote:

Ultimately, the real test is whether you can hit the intended target in a show stopping manner.

Peter

quote:

Originally posted by Peter:
Can't disagree, but I did say this:

quote:

Ultimately, the real test is whether you can hit the intended target in a show stopping manner.

Peter

Bullet placement is king for sure

I don't recall al the details but iirc one bad guy took a 9mm silvertip to the side, the bullet expanded perfectly and stopped just shy of the aorta, allowing the perp to wield the min14 with deadly results..... IIRC.

After shot placement, penetration is key. I'd prefer a bullet that will over penetrate compared to one that barely penetrates.

quote:

penetration is key

I think that is the issue being discussed isn't it? The old bullet construction meant that bullets built for expansion did not do well penetrating hard barriers like glass windshields, metal car doors etc., while the bullets constructed for penetration did not do well after they penetrated the hard object. The newer wave of bullets seem to do both, at least better than the "old" bullets. I would be concerned about over penetration if, for example at close range, a 9mm fuly penetrated the bad guy and then went through the dry wall into the next room. I am not an expert!
Peter

quote:

one bad guy took a 9mm silvertip to the side, the bullet expanded perfectly and stopped just shy of the aorta, IIRC.

Out of 115 or so rounds fired by the agents the bullet went through the arm into the chest cavity stopping in the out side lining of the heart. It was determined that it was a fatal hit.

The bullet did what it was designed to do. Even if it would have entered the heart there is no guarantee that would have stopped the fight right then and there.

The FBI tried to blame a single bullet when they missed the bad guys with well over 100 rounds. The tactics they used to stop the vehicle were horse crap.

I was very involved in tactical Law enforcement back then. The agents screwed big time then management tried to blame it on one single bullet.

I shot to many things to know that even taking out the heart and lungs one does not get instant stops.

It would have been much better if they would have hit their targets with a lot more of the hundred plus rounds they missed with, been wearing their body armor, had their long guns M-16 and MP-5s available instead of locked up because of political correctness

But on the bright side it was the spur that drove huge developments in defensive handgun ammo.

Well, 1986 was kinda early in the modern handgun combat era, so no surprise that the hit ratio sucked. Still does. While I love the old 3rd gen SWs, carrying a (3900 series iirc) mini-gun for tough duty and as you say, chasing bank robbers known to be rifle equipped with handguns is rather silly. Maybe they had not time to gear up, I don't know.

Cops carry handguns because they need a convenient weapon that allows them to function with both hands, they go for the long guns ( rifle/carbine scattergun) when they know they are going to a fight.

While the 9mm ST may not have been the ideal, it was cutting edge- and as you say, they missed a whole bunch. suppressive fire is not a very good solution, even in armed forces conflict, but then it can be used with impunity, more or less, not so with LE ops.

quote:

Maybe they had not time to gear up, I don't know

They had this planned for some time. The BGs had set a pattern for their robberies. They knew the vehicle they would be using.

They knew the BGs had a very violent history.

After studying this for years. I came to the conclusion that the Agents involved didn't believe the BGs would take them on and that they would give up because they were the FBI.

I am and was a firm believer in over whelming the BGs with superior fire power and tactics.

The FBI did or had neither of those going for them.

That idea served me well in over 33 years of chasing and arresting BGs.

quote:

After studying this for years. I came to the conclusion that the Agents involved didn't believe the BGs would take them on and that they would give up because they were the FBI.

Agreed. Their mystique was not the same after that. I know 4 FBI agents, all retired now. I don't believe any of them ever had to use their sidearm! Still, as was said earlier, that Miami shootout was a long time ago and our knowledge has improved a lot since then. I believe that the agents had long guns in the trunk of their car, but I am not sure where I heard that. The fact that we keep harking back to that event shows it's significance! That and the bank robbery in California, where the bad guys had body armor of some kind.
Not sure we need the other extreme either where someone farts in public and we call out the SWAT team and the negotiator.
I might add that I still have my S&W 659 but don't carry it any more. Too big!

Peter

quote:

I might add that I still have my S&W 659 but don't carry it any more. Too big!

In Free states where one does not have to worry about hiding ones guns I find full size pistols a joy to carry. Plus they are easier to shoot and hold more ammo.

While I understand the performance limitations of the 22 mag. as it relates to hard barriers, I am somewhat intrigued by the round's performance in soft targets.
Peter.