[sthomp]

Hello, folks. To begin, I've been reading in this forum for several months and it has been very refreshing to see the knowledgeable professionalism displayed without the usual rudeness as seen on most shooting forums. I recognize many of the familiar screen names and respect their position in the industry. It's good to see you guys are here. Kudos to the administrators, moderators and members for running such a valuable forum. Having said all that, I also have some questions.

I have long been a fan of the Hornady XTP bullet and reload it for Whitetail hunting in .41 magnum, .44 magnum and use the .45 250gr saboted for muzzleloading. The performance has been as advertised(excellent) with consistent, moderate expansion and penetration to the off-side skin, regardless of depth or impact velocity. I originally bought into the thinking that the XTP "penetrated too deeply" for personal defense CCW use, but revised my opinion and have been carrying it in my Wilson Protector Compact and Sig245 for a couple of years in the 200+P loading.

I have searched previous posts and see very little info on the XTP in the .40s&w loading.
I am interested in possibly using either the Hornady factory [email protected] or the [email protected], as chronographed, in my Glock27. I've tested 500 rounds in the G27 and am utterly satisfied with the accuracy and reliability. Is there any penetration/expansion testing on those .40s&w XTP loads as fired from the various compact/sub-compact pistols...or in any .40s&w pistol, for that matter?

Thanks...Sonny Thompson

 

[Jim Higginbotham]

Thanks for Posting Sonny, and welcome to the club!

I don't think you can really go very wrong with an XTP bullet. For the most part they perform as advertised, limiting expansion so that those occasional failures to penetrate - which is the #2 cause of failures to stop (poor marksmanship being #1) - are minimized.

I have not shot anything with the XTP in either .40 or 10mm but when I use the .40 for a backup it most often has the Triton 155 Hi-Vel in it (that is an XTP custom made for Triton).

While I use 230s in the .45 I doubt that you will find a 200 XTP inadequate either.

Best regards,
Jim Higginbotham

 

[CaesarI]

I tend to think the 180 is better... but the you can find 155 XTP data on most .357 SIG websites.
14.5" Bare Gel and 18.1" Clothed Gel in the FBI tests.

 

[Stephen A. Camp]

Hello Sthomp and welcome. I, too, favor XTP bullets and have found them to perform very well in the field on small to medium critters. Normally, I use 9mm 124gr XTPs, but have had good luck with the 200 gr XTP in .45ACP.

When trying to find an accuracy load at the hotter end of the envelope for that caliber, in most cases, the handload with an XTP bullet wins.

Best.

Best.

 

[sthomp]

Those folks who have worked with this bullet design seem to have the same results as I do. In critters such as deer, coyote, javelina and such, the XTP has performed better than anything else I've seen. As I handgun hunt a lot, I'm able to see the effects that living tissue (animal, anyway) has on these bullets, and visa versa. I was flat out amazed at the dismal performance of the Golden Saber on a deer chest cavity. At any rate, what I'm trying to say is the XTP is the best bullet, IMO, for hunting, due to its terminal performance. What I can't figure out is why it is rarely even tested or regarded for personal defense. What I'd really like to see is a side by side comparison with the GS, GD and HS. I'm hoping David and Evan will comment on this one.

Regards...Sonny Thompson

 

[Guest]

Sonny,
I have been really pressed for time right now, but I did want to respond.

I have posted some .40S&W results here

http://www.pistolsmith.com/viewtopic.ph ... orum=24&15

but I really do not spend a lot of time with the .40 as I am not a fan and cannot find a legitimate reason to own one.

Beyond that the XTP is rarely commented on as it is that good.
What I mean is that the good products rarely need to be heavily advertised and the manufacturers find little incentive to pay a gun magazine through advertising dollars to pimp their products.
*(Gunsmiths have a sperate angle and are not required to spend as heavily thus the reviews on custom gun work are usuaally very credible, the smith usually gives the work away for the article and the writer gets a very good custom gun for his/her time. My comments should not be meant to include gunsmiths or holstermakers).

Generally the more heavily advertised or written about a product is,
the more you need to avoid buying it as it is usually "crap" in technical terms.

I do have several local PDs that are forced to use the .40 and have spent some time testing from the G27 backup pistols.

You asked of the XTP, I only have 180gr test results as the 155 is also a product that I belive has little reason for existing beyond increasing the sales potential for the product lines...

Test results for the Hornandy 180gr XTP jhp:
Test Gun:
Glock G27
Temp- 85* F
Velocity- 905fps
Penetration into bare 10% .177 calibrated gelatin- 13.5"
Expanded diameter- .64"
Penetration into three layers of denim then 10% .177 calibrated gelatin- 15.2"
Expanded diameter- .60"
18 guage auto sheet metal results:
expanded diameter .51" *note flat profile
pentration depth after passing through the sheet metal- 11.7".
Accuracy Test from the bench Rest @ 25 yards best group
5 rds- 2.9".

 

[CaesarI]

Hey now that we're on the topic of XTP's... how well do the 9mm's handle clothing? I saw some good data from the CHP on the 9mm, but they guy didn't post anything about penetration through denim covered gel. The FirearmsTactical data from 1991 has the 147XTP going 22.1" bare and 20.5" clothed. Both of which are beyond what I consider safe depth.

What I consider the hallmark of a good design, is something that penetrates to approximately the same depth through cloth and bare gel. The 147 Gold Dot data on FTI, is GREAT, but the gel is uncalibrated... and the 1995 data on the 147 GD, says it gets 16.5, and 18.2

Remington's own data on their 147 GS looks great also, 12.8 and 13.2, though an inch or two more penetration in both would make me feel all warm and fuzzy.

Apparently the army liked the Fed 147, and while it's bare gel 13.15 is good, it's clothed gel of 19 is not, but this was a test done in 95 maybe it's gotten better since then?

The 1995 124gr HS, data looks great too 13.35, and 13.1 don't get much more consistent than that. But all the stuff i've read about the HS lately is that they aren't performing as well as they used to. The post is clogging expansion. Seems they wanted more feed reliability and sacrafice performance.

Ahhh the difficult of being a P7 Cultist... if only that gun weren't so good, I could shoot 10mm and be happy... but nooooo

-Morgan

edit: in bold. Sometimes I type faster than i think.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: CaesarI on 2001-10-26 18:40 ]</font>

 

[Guest]

I do have a full 9mm article in the works.
I plan to shoot some more gelatin this weekend if my schedule holds true.

In the article I have tested the 9mm 147 XTP, 124, 147 GD, 147 SXT, Ranger 127gr +P+ , Hydrashock +P+ 124, 147, the Glaser silver, 124+P Golden Saber, silvertip, Federal classic, Triton Q shock and Hi Vel, and the Winchester white box jhp.

All tested in bare, clothed, and sheet metal to calibrated gelatin.

Test guns are the Glock 17 and the Glock 26.

Be prepared as some of the rounds really suck so far and you should know that I am perfectly willing to print the truth and endure even more hate mail from the advertisers.... anyway I should be done soon and will post the results here.

 

[buzz_knox]

David, have you thought about adding Speer Gold Dots to the test? I've been using 124 gr. +Ps lately in my P7. I would be interested in what you thought of them, as well as how they turned out in your tests.

 

[Guest]

Buzz,
The GD above is short for Gold Dot.

 

[buzz_knox]

Doh!

 

[CaesarI]

What sort of clothing are you using exactly?

Buzz, Re: 124gr +P Gold Dot: http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs31.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs9.htm
http://www.rothenbuhler.com/gun/ammo.htm

N.B. Velocity in brief 9, and rothenbuhler.com

-Morgan

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: CaesarI on 2001-10-19 18:09 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: CaesarI on 2001-10-19 18:16 ]</font>

 

[MichaelOrick]

155/180 XTP both about 14/.64 bare gel, 18/.55 heavy cloth most of the tests I've seen.

Later stuff has less flash.

Pen in FBI series for 155gr Hornady XTP .40 S&W

bare 14.5
cloth 18.1
steel 23.0
wboard 14.0
pwood 18.3
glass 10ft 10.7
cloth 20 yds 15.9
glass 20 yds 12.1

 

[Guest]

Caeseril,
You know you could pickup a P7M10 and convert it into it's true 10mm form in lieu of the .40 Short and weak.
Check the HK section archives for info if you are interested.

 

[CaesarI]

Yes I'm aware, but thanks for mentioning it anyway. It was all the rage on the P7BB a while ago. I decided I wasn't THAT fond of messing with guns. I'll probably eventually get an EAA Witness 10mm, or a 1911 variant.

While an HK USP 10mm is a remote possibility, the P7 is already too much of a specialist gun for HK to further throw it into the realm of small markets and make a 10mm version. Even though they'd prolly be able to sell at least a thousand.

-Morgan