close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

HST and PDX1 Test

Discussion in 'Caliber Corner' started by PghJim, Jan 22, 2010.


  1. DRT

    DRT
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 6, 2001
    864
    8
    Location:
    USA
    180gr .40 HST penetrated >= 12" in formal FBI testing. It also expands much larger with a sharper profile. Federal makes a full metal jacket if you really want some penetration.....
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. N/Apower

    N/Apower
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    585
    0
    If I had a .40 I would consider HST 180gr.
     

  3. PghJim

    PghJim
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    1,935
    49
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    I am not saying that GD is a bad bullet, I use them for reloading and did carry them for a while. It is an older design, but the thing I did not like was the velocity variation. The duty ammo is susposed to go 1,375 fps I think. However, out of my G32 the last time I checked 10 rounds the velocity ranged from 1,298 fps to 1,380 fps. 1,298 fps is getting pretty low for the 357 sig GD bullet and it will still penetrate. The more I play with the HST, the more I like it. Definately larger expansion and I have not noticed a siginficant difference in penetration. Every HST bullet I shoot through denim and water jugs looks exactly the same, not so with GD's. I just wish the HST would go over 1,400 fps out of a G32. Do not get me wrong, GD's are good bullets and I sometimes carried them from Buffalo Bore because they left my G32 at almost 1,450 fps. At that velocity it really expands to the point that you can see the gold dot in the middle of the mushroom.

    Can anyone tell me how you get the "Originially Posted by..." in your quote?
     
    #23 PghJim, Feb 14, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2010
  4. N/Apower

    N/Apower
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    585
    0
    I really REALLY doubt this is your problem, but it...could be.

    Speer makes 2 loads for the 357SIG.

    They look identical to the un-trained eye (You would never notice if I hadn't told you, or you weren't OCD).

    Yet they use different projectiles and a different powder charge. One has .2g (worth 25fps or so) less powder. It also uses a projectile designed for about 1.5" less penetration, so obviously they will look different when expanded.

    If you mixed ammo for your chronograph testing, or you shot these two different loads into milk jugs (there is a third load as well, that pre-dates there, circa '99), that could account for the "variability" you are seeing.

    All of the chronograph testing I have seen done for the 357SIG using Gold Dot ammunition shows SD's in/near the single-digits.

    * You have to use the quote button, or if you want to type in html, you have to use
     
    #24 N/Apower, Feb 14, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2010
  5. PghJim

    PghJim
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    1,935
    49
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    Thanks - I know about the two rounds. My testing was done with the Duty Ammo, which is the higher velocity one. I have found this wide variation before with a different lot. I do not think it is my Glock because other ammo, like the Corbon, is very consistent. However, two tests do not make enough evidence to condem the load. I think GD's are good bullets, but I generally went with manufacturers that load the bullet hotter like BB and DT. Unfortunatly now they are not using the 357 Sig GD bullet. It is a GD, but looks and weighs out like the 124 grain 9mm.

    I do not know when the 357 HST bullets was designed. I only found out about it two months ago.
     
    #25 PghJim, Feb 14, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2010
  6. den888

    den888
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    5,068
    0
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Good info in this post !!!