bear defense: hard cast versus xtreme-penetrator. Which would you take and why?

Since there was a post and link earlier this week, to a man that killed a pretty big bear with a .38 spc, I'm not sure it matters, lol. Shot placement as we always say.

 

Usually hard casts can be had in heavier bullet weights which adds to momentum and shouldn't be deflected as easily. Penetration is (for any animal) the most important factor, not energy figures. I'd go with hard cast.

 

I went with hard cast. Heavier and should penetrate deeper. Hardest part would be keeping my feet from doing a 180 even though that's supposed to be the worst thing to do.

 

Wasn't it a boar?

 

For handguns used to kill large animals I prefer a WFN hard cast bullet or a Keith Style SWC. I want a big meplate as I feel its works and punches a better wound channel and has a better chance of destroying a wider cross section of tissue than pointed bullets.

I've killed a handful of deer with 255 grain Keith style bullets and they perform superbly as long as you hit the thing where it matter. Normally get complete penetration. So I have a lot of confidence in this type of bullet as I've seen it work on living breathing animals.

Don't know enough about the Lehigh bullet to have an opinion but don't think its legal on game for hunting (has to be all lead or soft point in KY). I'm not inclined to rely on unproven theories when my butt is on the line. It might be the best thing since sliced bread...but for now I'll stick with what I have used and have confidence in.

 

Now that you mention it, yes it was. A big one he had hanging up in a photo. I stand corrected. Thanks. First shot.

 

I would go with the hard cast from Underwood. Given equal energy a bullet that creates a wide wound path is not going to penetrate as deeply and against a bear I would want all the penetration I could get. You don't see many gel tests of hard cast bullets since they are not an exciting new product and it is hard to catch them since they penetrate so deeply. But they have been proven to work well over time.

I would go with the hard case even if the cost was the same but the Extreme Penetrator is more expensive at $31/box of 20 vs. $19 for the hard cast ammo, both from Underwood. Not enough to worry about if you are only buying one box. But I have read enough reports of people having to use stronger recoil and magazine springs before their guns are completely reliable with the extra strong 10mm loads that I would need to run at least 100 rounds through the gun before I trusted it with either load. And I would like to practice with them occasionally too to verify nothing changed. When you run the power level up so high your gun can just barely reliably handle it it does not take much to go from completely reliable to pretty reliable. For self defense I want completely reliable.

 

close...."wild/feral" hog. I guess depending on what part of the country it was (can't remember), it may have had some European boar in it.

apologies...not trying to be persnickity.

 

Papa bear is a boar too. Couldn't help myself here so sorry.

 

What kind of bear are we talking about here? From my limited understanding, a wild hog might actually be "tougher" than a black bear when thinking about calibers. Brown and grizzlies are tougher than a hog or black bear.

 

Boar, bear or hog, I'd be scared and running.

 

Hard cast. Why? Because of bullet weight. What has been proven to work are hardcast bullets that are heavy for caliber. They not only have more mass, they have greater sectional density. And on head shots, the flat nose bullets penetrate the skull at any angle.

And on body hits, what has been shown to work on African game, is that long-for caliber bullets penetrate in a straight line and go deep into the vitals instead of angling off and exiting the body

The Phillips-head bullets trade mass for velocity. On paper, they produce a lot of kinetic energy. But on paper, a 22-250 produces more KE than a 45-70.

But up against an angry bear, I'd rather be armed with a 45-70 than EITHER a 22-250 or a 10mm loaded with lightweight "Magic" bullets that make impressive "wound channels in blocks of jello.

And once again, I'd rather go with what works rather than the latest fad. I feel the same way about the ARX ammo in 9mm. We already know what works in the 9mm. We know that 124 grain and 147 grain bullets work better than lighter faster 115 grain ammo and we know that the HST and the Gold dot bullet designs work very well in actual street shootings and not just in Jello testing and in people's immaginations.

 

Underwood Penetrator = 700 ft-lbs
Underwood Hard Cast = 694 ft-lbs

So an increase of 6 ft-lbs (1%) requires changing springs and reduces reliability?

 

No, both those loads could require different springs and reduce reliability. It is the increase from the 450 to 600 ft-lbs most 10mm loads outside of Buffalo Bore and Underwood generate that causes the need for different springs. Guns designed for conventional ammo can have problems with the really hot stuff.

While most people think BB and UW are just loading to the SAAMI spec while everyone else is under loading I suspect everyone else is loading to the spec and UW/BB are going over. The 10mm is supposed to be loaded to no more than 7% higher pressure than a 40 S&W (35000 to 37500 psi) and the case is .15 inch longer. But the hot 10mm loads generate up to 60% more power than a 40 S&W from the same company and using the same bullet. I do not see how that is possible with such a small increase in the pressure limit and case length. Gun makers are going to design their guns to function well with SAAMI spec ammo. If you buy ammo that goes a little further you may have to change your gun to accommodate it.

I do not think the UW and BB loads are blow your gun up hot but I would not just assume a stock gun will be reliable with them. Look at threads like https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/who-is-shooting-hot-10mm-in-their-g20.1636323/ and similar threads in the 10 ring subforum here on Glocktalk. Quite a few stock Glocks handle the hot ammo fine, others choke on it. If I was carrying a 10mm for bear defense it would be loaded with UW hard cast ammo. But only after I ran enough through the gun to make sure it was reliable in my particular gun.

 

Do you think Sig Sauer loads to SAAMI? Their 10 mm ammo comes in at 624 ft-lbs. I do think most producers underload it. Not sure why someone can't specify a range of energy levels that meet SAAMI. Shouldn't be that difficult to figure it out.[/QUOTE]

 

I just looked up load data for the 10mm in my 1989 3rd edition Nosler reloading manual. The intro for the 10mm was written by Jeff Cooper who described the development of the 10mm and said they were getting an "astonishing" 1200 ft/s with a 180 grain bullet and 5 inch barrel. If anyone knew what a full power 10mm was supposed to be it was Jeff Cooper. BTW, the best Nosler could do with a 6 inch test barrel was 1200 ft/s with a 170 grain bullet. I am guessing Nosler was measuring pressure and trying to stay within the SAAMI limits while the guys developing the cartridge we going by how the cases looked.

My gut feel is anything over 600 ft-lbs is going over the limit. But I am just guessing based on what other cartridges deliver. Every ammo reviewer in print, on the web or on YouTube has a chronograph. None of them have the equipment needed to measure pressure and neither do I. SAAMI just sets pressure limits, cartridge dimensions, etc. They do not test ammo.

Why would most manufacturers seriously under load only their 10mm loads? I have shot some fairly weak Winchester white box 9mms but the difference between WWB 9mm and the hottest +P 9mm is a lot less significant than the difference between weak and hot 10mm.

BB and UW have pretty strong motivation to load the ammo as hot as they can. People buy a 10mm because it is the most powerful round they can get with a standard Glock or 1911 style gun. And lots of them search the internet for the most powerful ammo they see tested on YouTube. "Wow, look at that! Above the advertised 1250 ft/s!" sells a lot more ammo than "not the strongest ammo but accurate, reliable and no smilies on the cases". And if they do go over the limit who is going to know? The only people that measure pressure are the ones making the ammo.

I have shot +P+ ammo through my Glock 19 despite there being no pressure limit for +P+. If I had a Glock 29 I would have to at least try some Underwood ammo. But I would not take for granted the gun would run well with it.

 

10MM ammo was traditionally produced as a "hot" round. It was designed that way as requested by the FBI after the Miami shootout In the 1980's. The "REAL" 10MM Ammo is or was an amazing round, but as FBI agents continued to fail qualifications with such a powerful gun, picture nerdy accountant type agents who have to qualify, and smaller framed females, that's what caused the FBI, to go back to Smith & Wesson, who cut down the case and powder charge and TADA!! THE .40 CALIBER.
but before the .40 was made, the FBI tried to find a way to reduce power loads to have their people pass qualifications, so they "pud" loaded their rounds. It became so common, almost every ammo manufacturer did the same over the years.
Long story short, Underwood and Lehigh and a few others are the ones who ACTUALLY are still loading a 10MM the way it was made to to be loaded! It's everyone else who changed.

 

Hard cast 200 grain. I fire them in my gen 3 without issue, clean after every use. Anything heavier needs a barrel change. 220 grain tend to tumble from the factory barrel. I also alternate 200 grain XTP and hard cast in the magazine without any problems..Brown bear, nothing smaller than the .44 magnum. Shot placement is everything when facing large predators that think your food or just pissed off.

 

Huh? Consider the extreme Penetrator:
UW = 700 ft-lbs
LH = 450 ft-lbs

That 300 ft/s is a pretty significant difference.