[3000fps]

I've seen a few videos online, around 3-4 approximately of Winchester Ranger failing to expand, in ballistic media and jugs. Now I know it is not human flesh, but his gelatin tests are pretty close to FBI spec. The Winchester Ranger has such a shallow and tough hollow point compared to something like the Gold Dot.

I know a lot of guys carry the 127 +p+ and even this round failed to expand.

Here are the videos for refrence,

http://youtu.be/zSY018CXRi8

http://youtu.be/q2dJPeVo_7s

http://youtu.be/P1KRO4xf1r8

 

[midnitesi]

in my 40 i carry the 180 t series, have fired over 200 into jugs and gelitin and never had an issue, but the 9mm is a smaller opening which may get clogged by clothing but that can happen to any jhp, ill post a couple pics of a couple of rounds i salvaged from my tests both 40 and 9mm,

 

[midnitesi]

here is the 9mm sxt ranger, cant remember what grain

here is the 40 180s, hope this gives you an idea what to expect from the rounds

 

[3000fps]

They seem to have performed as advertised, do you remember what media they were fired into? If anyone has any hog hunting bullets saved post them please!

 

[midnitesi]

did some with jugs of water, some with jugs of wet newspaper, and some homemade ballistic gel,

 

[9mm +p+]

Honestly with the velocities we're talking about with handguns expansion is NO guarantee with any bullet, I've personally done some very unsicetific tests with Ranger T's and all have opened as they should. Wet newsprint was the media but all expanded, these were 9 127's and 45 230's. I carry both in my SD pistols and have no doubt that they will work.

 

[3000fps]

Just to chalk up, another failure to expand. This video was taken today with a .45ACP 230 grain +P

http://youtu.be/vDs5X_E-qjY

 

[9mm +p+]

OK please, oh please tell me who on earth wears 4 layers of denim?? Who? Just because some jughead in lab came up with this doesn't mean it's the gospel. A realistic test would make more sense but no everyone does this stupid denim test. Bottom line is this, you shoot the threat to the ground,period.

 

[cowboy1964]

To all those that have never had a failure to expand with their own testing, did you use ANY clothing over the test medium? I've almost never seen a JHP NOT expand when fired into bare gel or water.

To all those that don't understand why 4 layers of denim is used, do some research. It's a stress test. If a round does well there it's very likely to work well on actual clothing. If it does not, then it raises doubt. Do you not understand that people in cold climates will have multiple layers of clothing, some very tough (eg. leather)?

Bare gel is one extreme and 4-layer denim is the other. And theoretically, even 4-layers isn't an "extreme", unlike bare gel. You can't get less naked than no clothing but you CAN get more layers than what 4-layers of denim represents.

 

[cowboy1964]

Just to chalk up, another failure to expand. This video was taken today with a .45ACP 230 grain +P

http://youtu.be/vDs5X_E-qjY

I'm not using Ranger-Ts any more other than 127+P+ 9mm and then only in warm weather (if at all). Gold Dots and HSTs are more reliable, IMO, and are either bonded, or perform like bonded.

I really think the Ranger-Ts hollow point is just too small. Compare it against a Gold Dot or HST. It's only logical that a smaller cavity would clog easier IMO.

 

[9mm +p+]

To all those that have never had a failure to expand with their own testing, did you use ANY clothing over the test medium? I've almost never seen a JHP NOT expand when fired into bare gel or water.

To all those that don't understand why 4 layers of denim is used, do some research. It's a stress test. If a round does well there it's very likely to work well on actual clothing. If it does not, then it raises doubt. Do you not understand that people in cold climates will have multiple layers of clothing, some very tough (eg. leather)?

Bare gel is one extreme and 4-layer denim is the other. And theoretically, even 4-layers isn't an "extreme", unlike bare gel. You can't get less naked than no clothing but you CAN get more layers than what 4-layers of denim represents.

OK professor how is 4 layers realistic at all? I live in a damn cold state and I see NO ONE with 4 denim jackets on in the winter or 4 pairs of jeans:upeyes: I see hoodies and sweatshirts and over stuffed jackets not 4 layers of denim on anyone. I see no one testing loads against leather. I know my own tests were very unscientific no question, but using a combo of stuff that you WILL NOT run into on the street is just as bad. The only reason everyone uses it is because the almighty fbi or some other group suggested using it on their ammo. For everyones info the Secret service uses Ranger T's in their 357 SIG's, they must not be too bad ofa bullet if they use them to protect the pres...

 

[Merkavaboy]

The use of water jugs and other back yard "ballistics media" tests and even ballistics gel prove NOTHING as nothing can replicate the human body's various tissues.

IMO those "experts" (especially the FBI) are perpetuating a fraud upon everybody thru their tests and the use of homogenous "ballistic gel". And here's my reasoning:

Every single defensive handgun bullet/load (with the exception of maybe Hornady's XTP) has been tweeked and redesigned, some even multiple times, by the manufacturer. These redesigns are to make said bullet more "effective". If a 1st Gen bullet design is just as effective on the streets as it is/was while being tested in the labs using the FBI's Protocols and ballistic gel, there would be absolutely NO reason to redesign their bullet(s).

I've seen redesigns of the Silvertip, Golden Saber, Gold Dots, several changes for the SXT (since it's original Black Talon design), numerous changes for the Hydra-Shok, and even some of the HST bullets has undergone a redesign and now I'm hearing that the Ranger Bonded/PDX1 is undergoing a change.

All this proves to me that the use of ballistic gel for testing does not reflect what said bullets are doing in real world shootings in real living human flesh, blood and bones. If every modern designed defensive handgun bullet worked in real world shootings, every single time, as well as they worked, every single time, in controlled, repeatable labratory test settings using ballistic gel, there would never be a need to modify and redesign those bullets. They would work perfectly in every shooting, wouldn't they? Unfortunately testing bullets in labs under controlled conditions doesn't reflect what happens in real world shootings out on the streets every single day.

 

[Spiffums]

Just dump 4 or 5 rounds in them...... if one don't expand no biggie. There is no such thing as a "1 shot stop" round anyways.

 

[packinaglock]

I'm not using Ranger-Ts any more other than 127+P+ 9mm and then only in warm weather (if at all). Gold Dots and HSTs are more reliable, IMO, and are either bonded, or perform like bonded.

I really think the Ranger-Ts hollow point is just too small. Compare it against a Gold Dot or HST. It's only logical that a smaller cavity would clog easier IMO.

Yea I've givin up on the Ranger ammo too, what I have is now range ammo. To many Fail to expand vidio's for me.

 

[happyguy]

OK professor how is 4 layers realistic at all? I live in a damn cold state and I see NO ONE with 4 denim jackets on in the winter or 4 pairs of jeans:upeyes: I see hoodies and sweatshirts and over stuffed jackets not 4 layers of denim on anyone. I see no one testing loads against leather. I know my own tests were very unscientific no question, but using a combo of stuff that you WILL NOT run into on the street is just as bad. The only reason everyone uses it is because the almighty fbi or some other group suggested using it on their ammo. For everyones info the Secret service uses Ranger T's in their 357 SIG's, they must not be too bad ofa bullet if they use them to protect the pres...

Well, there is also the heavy clothing test.:whistling:

Regards,
Happyguy

 

[sandman77]

All this proves to me that the use of ballistic gel for testing does not reflect what said bullets are doing in real world shootings in real living human flesh, blood and bones. If every modern designed defensive handgun bullet worked in real world shootings, every single time, as well as they worked, every single time, in controlled, repeatable labratory test settings using ballistic gel, there would never be a need to modify and redesign those bullets. They would work perfectly in every shooting, wouldn't they? Unfortunately testing bullets in labs under controlled conditions doesn't reflect what happens in real world shootings out on the streets every single day.

This. The Ranger T's have been performing great on the street for more than a decade. The 127 gr +p+ 9mm and 165 gr 40 cal loads are widely regarded as the best street performers in their respective calibers. They work great on bad guys. They do seem to plug a little more frequently in 4 layer denim tests though. Ranger T's, Gold Dots, HST, and DPX are all pretty damn good and will get the job done if you put them on target.

 

[dpadams6]

OK professor how is 4 layers realistic at all? I live in a damn cold state and I see NO ONE with 4 denim jackets on in the winter or 4 pairs of jeans:upeyes: I see hoodies and sweatshirts and over stuffed jackets not 4 layers of denim on anyone. I see no one testing loads against leather. I know my own tests were very unscientific no question, but using a combo of stuff that you WILL NOT run into on the street is just as bad. The only reason everyone uses it is because the almighty fbi or some other group suggested using it on their ammo. For everyones info the Secret service uses Ranger T's in their 357 SIG's, they must not be too bad ofa bullet if they use them to protect the pres...

I question the fbi research that talks about penetration, penetration, and penetration. Actually, when you look at old "street proven" bullet designs (357 mag 125 and 9mm 115+p+) they both penetrate less, and fragment violently.

 

[hotpig]

Keep things in the right context. Ranger T ammo has a good street record in real shootings. That trumps back yard pistol play for me.

I see threads like this and read guys saying they are switching to rounds that do not have a track record. The plus side would be more people carry it the faster we will see if the ammo lives up to its hype.

I have a customer that keeps reading this stuff. Every week or two he calls me wanting to order the ammo of the week. It has taken me a long time to convince him that ammo that was good last week is still good this week. Just because some one is harping about another brand this week is not a reason to change his ammo.

 

[Merkavaboy]

I question the fbi research that talks about penetration, penetration, and penetration. Actually, when you look at old "street proven" bullet designs (357 mag 125 and 9mm 115+p+) they both penetrate less, and fragment violently.

As should everyone. I always had some doubt ever sense I got a copy of their ballistics protocol from a now retired Sgt I worked with when he returned from the FBI Academy back in the late '80s. The proverbial "straw" for me was when I got a copy of Eugene Wolberg's article regarding San Diego PD's use of the Win 147JHP subsonic and his gel testing of said load. I knew right off the bat that he had fudged his findings, and I was proven right when a well known ballistics gel "expert" admitted that Wolberg had the San Diego coroner cherry-pick the bullets from actual shootings to be used in his study. By eliminating any and all bullets that failed to meet his criteria, he skewed his findings in order to meet his own personal goal of proving that the use of ballistic gel was equal to actual bullet performance in real human flesh.

 

[3000fps]

Yet even ANOTHER!!!!!!!

http://youtu.be/4fH775n3V0s

Winchester Ranger-T 9mm +P+ fails to expand out of a 4.5 inch Glock 17 at nearly point blank range!

OK professor how is 4 layers realistic at all? I live in a damn cold state and I see NO ONE with 4 denim jackets on in the winter or 4 pairs of jeans:upeyes: I see hoodies and sweatshirts and over stuffed jackets not 4 layers of denim on anyone. I see no one testing loads against leather. I know my own tests were very unscientific no question, but using a combo of stuff that you WILL NOT run into on the street is just as bad. The only reason everyone uses it is because the almighty fbi or some other group suggested using it on their ammo. For everyones info the Secret service uses Ranger T's in their 357 SIG's, they must not be too bad ofa bullet if they use them to protect the pres...

The layers of denim are based on an average thread count of clothing that they're likely to encounter. There is an FBI standard and then an IWBA standard. Clothing IS a determining factor in a JHP's performance since people are rarely encountered not wearing clothing.

Secondly, the Secret Service does not use Winchester Ranger's, they use Speer Gold Dot.