I am considering loading some Lehigh Defense 9mm 115 grain Xtreme Penetrators to compare against the Buffalo Bore Outdoorsman round for woods carry. I searched Glock Talk and found a lot of info on the .380 ACP offerings, but not 9mm. Has anyone tried to load the 9mm version? Lehigh has some load data on its website, but I thought I would check here first. Thanks.
-
Glocktalk is a forum community dedicated to Glock enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about Glock pistols and rifles, optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, and more!
MedicineBow
Anybody Load Lehigh 115 Grain 9mm Xtreme Penetrators?
Fellow member and friend 21Glock sent me some 125 gr Xtreme Penetrators to test.
Maybe he got a bad batch.....
My impressions is total waste of money!
Over 75% of bullets were undersized , as small as .354 .
I disovered this after terrible accuracy and very inconsistent velocities.
The 125 gr is also very long (longer than 147 gr) limiting case capacity/performance and driving pressures up.
Is also my opinion , the all copper bullet does not give/move at all compared to a lead core jacketed bullet also drives pressure up compared to same weight jacketed or cast bullet.
I still have a few of these bullets that I plan to test for penetration and wounding capability compared to a good hard cast WFN.
I suspect less than stellar performance compared to a good hard cast bullet.
I have always been skeptical since seeing this bullet , after testing (small sample)
I will stick to good hard cast WFN bullets.
Maybe he got a bad batch.....
My impressions is total waste of money!
Over 75% of bullets were undersized , as small as .354 .
I disovered this after terrible accuracy and very inconsistent velocities.
The 125 gr is also very long (longer than 147 gr) limiting case capacity/performance and driving pressures up.
Is also my opinion , the all copper bullet does not give/move at all compared to a lead core jacketed bullet also drives pressure up compared to same weight jacketed or cast bullet.
I still have a few of these bullets that I plan to test for penetration and wounding capability compared to a good hard cast WFN.
I suspect less than stellar performance compared to a good hard cast bullet.
I have always been skeptical since seeing this bullet , after testing (small sample)
I will stick to good hard cast WFN bullets.
Thanks for your post, es 350. I ordered 100 of the 115 grain Xtreme Penetrator bullets earlier today. It sounds like you have the 125 grain projectiles that they call their “Xtreme Defense” bullets. I have worked a lot with Barnes TSX copper bullets in short action rifles, so I anticipated some seating, pressure and case capacity issues that are unique to all-copper bullets. It is possible that your seating depth issue will not be an issue with the 115 grain bullets. (At least I can hope.) However, your mention of the rounds being undersized is very disappointing.
It’s not like I need these bullets to work, because the 147 grain Buffalo Bore Outdoorsman +P hard cast rounds penetrate well. I was just figuring that, if they work out, I can load the Lehighs myself a lot cheaper than buying Buffalo Bore.
Because I already ordered the bullets, I will have to see what happens. I should know something about velocity and accuracy within a couple of weeks. Winter weather conditions will not allow me to go outside to shoot any water jugs for a while.
It’s not like I need these bullets to work, because the 147 grain Buffalo Bore Outdoorsman +P hard cast rounds penetrate well. I was just figuring that, if they work out, I can load the Lehighs myself a lot cheaper than buying Buffalo Bore.
Because I already ordered the bullets, I will have to see what happens. I should know something about velocity and accuracy within a couple of weeks. Winter weather conditions will not allow me to go outside to shoot any water jugs for a while.
If the bullet out-performs other established bullets then go for it. Hard to get real data on that bullet, from shootings where there was any real study.
It does not appear that there is much experimentation on Glock Talk involving the 115 grain 9mm Lehigh Xtreme Penetrator bullet, so I thought I would throw out my results to date in case anyone is interested.
I checked the batch I received with my calipers, and, like es 350, mostly got a reading of .354 inches. I suspect that this is intentional. I am including a poor picture (due to lighting conditions) of a Precision Delta 115 grain JRN next to an all-copper 115 grain Lehigh Xtreme Penetrator.
![Image]()
As you can see, there is going to be a lot more copper engaging the rifling with the Lehigh, which has got to affect pressure and velocity. (By way of example, Barnes rates its copper Tac-XPD 115 grain 9mm ammo as +P with a published velocity of only 1125 fps.)
Lehigh lists load data on its Website. It drops a footnote indicating that the “factory load” uses Accurate #7. The Lehigh data for Accurate #7 shows a range from 6.0 (velocity 1075 fps) to 7.3 (velocity 1150 fps) grains through a 5 inch barrel using CCI 500 primers, with an OAL of 1.1 inches. Lehigh did not indicate the “factory load” charge weight, although its loaded ammo claims a velocity of 1150 fps. (Lehigh’s Website does not indicate that the factory ammo is rated +P.) I had some Accurate #7 and some CCI 500 primers available, so I went with those. I used mixmaster brass that has been reloaded many times. I had to keep adjusting my seater die to get OAL right. As I got closer to max powder charge, the OALs seemed to vary more. The last batch (7.3 gr.) had OALs in three tranches and I loaded them in the magazine from shortest (bottom of mag) to tallest (top of mag). (My notes say 1.102 to 1.110, but I thought they went longer.) Every round in the entire test (including the control group test mentioned below) met a case gauge test and the plunk test in my Glock 19 Gen 4 barrel (including spinning the round in the chamber).
All results are from my Glock 19 Gen 4. The lower powder charges produced velocities that were substantially below Lehigh’s starting data. They started to catch up around 6.9 grains and followed a decent progression. At 7.3 grains, the Lehigh Xtreme Penetrators gave me a 10 shot average of 1144, high 1166, low 1124, ES 42, SD 12.3. The tallest rounds gave the highest velocity and the shortest rounds produced the lowest velocity.
All in all, I was pretty impressed that the velocity out of my 4.02 inch barrel matched Lehigh’s 5 inch barrel data. I still want to look at my brass, which got all jumbled up, but my cursory check did not reveal any concerns.
Because I had my powder drop set at 7.3 grains of Accurate #7, I went ahead and loaded some 115 grain Precision Delta JRN and also some unknown brand 115 grain JHP as control groups. I left the seater die in the same position as for the Lehigh, which resulted in the Precision Delta OAL of 1.155 inches and the JHP at 1.122 inches. I used the same Glock 19 Gen 4 for the tests.
I expected the control groups to post lower velocities at 7.3 grains. They did. The Precision Delta 115 grain JRN loads produced an 11 shot average of 1076, high 1110, low 1024, ES 86, SD 30. The 115 grain JHP loads produced a 10 shot average of 1077, high 1101, low 1047, ES 54, SD 21. (Pretty consistent for two completely different bullets and OAL!)
I did not get a chance to check accuracy with the Lehighs. I will do that soon. I also need to see how the load does against 8-1 gallon water jugs lined up in a row. I know that the Barnes 147 grain +P HCFP Outdoorsman will penetrate 8.
I will follow up after I shoot the Lehighs for groups and shoot the water jugs. Hope this helps.
I checked the batch I received with my calipers, and, like es 350, mostly got a reading of .354 inches. I suspect that this is intentional. I am including a poor picture (due to lighting conditions) of a Precision Delta 115 grain JRN next to an all-copper 115 grain Lehigh Xtreme Penetrator.
As you can see, there is going to be a lot more copper engaging the rifling with the Lehigh, which has got to affect pressure and velocity. (By way of example, Barnes rates its copper Tac-XPD 115 grain 9mm ammo as +P with a published velocity of only 1125 fps.)
Lehigh lists load data on its Website. It drops a footnote indicating that the “factory load” uses Accurate #7. The Lehigh data for Accurate #7 shows a range from 6.0 (velocity 1075 fps) to 7.3 (velocity 1150 fps) grains through a 5 inch barrel using CCI 500 primers, with an OAL of 1.1 inches. Lehigh did not indicate the “factory load” charge weight, although its loaded ammo claims a velocity of 1150 fps. (Lehigh’s Website does not indicate that the factory ammo is rated +P.) I had some Accurate #7 and some CCI 500 primers available, so I went with those. I used mixmaster brass that has been reloaded many times. I had to keep adjusting my seater die to get OAL right. As I got closer to max powder charge, the OALs seemed to vary more. The last batch (7.3 gr.) had OALs in three tranches and I loaded them in the magazine from shortest (bottom of mag) to tallest (top of mag). (My notes say 1.102 to 1.110, but I thought they went longer.) Every round in the entire test (including the control group test mentioned below) met a case gauge test and the plunk test in my Glock 19 Gen 4 barrel (including spinning the round in the chamber).
All results are from my Glock 19 Gen 4. The lower powder charges produced velocities that were substantially below Lehigh’s starting data. They started to catch up around 6.9 grains and followed a decent progression. At 7.3 grains, the Lehigh Xtreme Penetrators gave me a 10 shot average of 1144, high 1166, low 1124, ES 42, SD 12.3. The tallest rounds gave the highest velocity and the shortest rounds produced the lowest velocity.
All in all, I was pretty impressed that the velocity out of my 4.02 inch barrel matched Lehigh’s 5 inch barrel data. I still want to look at my brass, which got all jumbled up, but my cursory check did not reveal any concerns.
Because I had my powder drop set at 7.3 grains of Accurate #7, I went ahead and loaded some 115 grain Precision Delta JRN and also some unknown brand 115 grain JHP as control groups. I left the seater die in the same position as for the Lehigh, which resulted in the Precision Delta OAL of 1.155 inches and the JHP at 1.122 inches. I used the same Glock 19 Gen 4 for the tests.
I expected the control groups to post lower velocities at 7.3 grains. They did. The Precision Delta 115 grain JRN loads produced an 11 shot average of 1076, high 1110, low 1024, ES 86, SD 30. The 115 grain JHP loads produced a 10 shot average of 1077, high 1101, low 1047, ES 54, SD 21. (Pretty consistent for two completely different bullets and OAL!)
I did not get a chance to check accuracy with the Lehighs. I will do that soon. I also need to see how the load does against 8-1 gallon water jugs lined up in a row. I know that the Barnes 147 grain +P HCFP Outdoorsman will penetrate 8.
I will follow up after I shoot the Lehighs for groups and shoot the water jugs. Hope this helps.
I tested the 125 Lehigh's from a G26 as well.
Maybe I expect more then most from a bullet/load/firearm as far as accuracy is concerned.
The sample I had/have ranged from a hair under .354 TO .355. (Measured with high quality micrometer) Quite a difference IMO.
This would also explain the high extreme spread I saw on chrono.
The undersize bullets also would explain the accuracy that I saw.
This is also made worse by the fact that "most" 9mm barrels are actually larger than .355.
One of my 26's measures .357 the other is .3575.
My CZ TS 9mm barrel measures .358+.
So easy to see a .354 bullet in one of the above barrels is not going to seal the gasses behind bullet or barrel be able to get a "good" grip on bullet for acceptable accuracy.
Maybe I expect more then most from a bullet/load/firearm as far as accuracy is concerned.
The sample I had/have ranged from a hair under .354 TO .355. (Measured with high quality micrometer) Quite a difference IMO.
This would also explain the high extreme spread I saw on chrono.
The undersize bullets also would explain the accuracy that I saw.
This is also made worse by the fact that "most" 9mm barrels are actually larger than .355.
One of my 26's measures .357 the other is .3575.
My CZ TS 9mm barrel measures .358+.
So easy to see a .354 bullet in one of the above barrels is not going to seal the gasses behind bullet or barrel be able to get a "good" grip on bullet for acceptable accuracy.
Here's an update, using the handload referenced earlier in the thread.
In contrast, a test with a factory Buffalo Bore 147 grain +P Outdoorsman cartridge fired out of a Gen 3 19 can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ursfz1Wg8hA
Hope this helps.
In contrast, a test with a factory Buffalo Bore 147 grain +P Outdoorsman cartridge fired out of a Gen 3 19 can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ursfz1Wg8hA
Hope this helps.
thx for the test results. I tend to just go bigger gun instead of looking to make my little gun just adequate.
I killed a good-sized doe (120lbs, LW) on a late season hunt in Jan with an Underwood 9mm +p+ 90gr extreme defender round. This ammo uses Lehigh bullets and penetrates less than the extreme penetrator version but allegedly creates a wider wound channel and dumps more energy into the target. One shot behind the shoulder with an xdm 5.25 at approx 30 yards. She went down to her knees at the first shot. A second one probably wasn't necessary but why let her suffer. First slug took the top of the heart off, the second chewed up some lung. Both exited to parts unknown. She was dead within 15-20 seconds from the first shot. Destruction/wound channel was between a FMJ and HP, leaning toward the HP. Impressive for a 9mm.
I’m not an expert but it seems like lead core bullets suffer more from deformation and fragmentation at very high velocities, both of which can kill penetration, and therefore, the best penetrators are slow, heavy bullets. Copper bullets are much more immune to deformation and fragmentation. I’m not saying that makes a 90gr or 65gr bullet going very fast a better penetrator than a 147gr or 160gr bullet going very slow, but it at least seems possible in my mind. I suppose the side by side comparisons are out there...
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
