How Effective is Pistol Ammo at 100 Yards?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 лип 2024
- It's time for another edition of Stuff John and Chris Wanna Know! This time, we're looking at what pistol ammo does at 100 yards. Calibers tested were 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, and .357 Sig. We compared bullet velocity at the muzzle and 100 yards and also fired some rounds into ballistic gelatin. The results were a bit unexpected (especially for .357 Sig...).
Support our channel, buy ammo from Lucky Gunner! - Розваги
![Stuff You Should Know About Buckshot [Part 1]](/img/n.gif)
You need the new and improved fleece bullet stop.
Underrated comment hahaha
I feel honored to get this reference. You are a connoisseur of quality informed firearms content.
Bravo 👏
By Paul Harrell
@@ronivichman666 Who else?
While I agree with your analysis of the .357 SIG load you tested being at a velocity that is below its certain expansion threshold at 100 yards, this is by no means universal. The Speer Gold Dot .357 SIG load is designed to prioritize penetration for police patrol operations and control expansion. For example, the HST load of the same weight expands more and penetrates a bit less, even though both are launched from essentially the same velocity from my current SIG P226. It might be interesting for you to take a few shots with the HST before drawing a conclusion.
I was an early user of the .357 SIG when it was first introduced, because my local department selected it for duty, as did our State Police. The very selling point of the load for the Troopers was the flat-shooting nature of the cartridge since many worked in rural areas alone and at that time they did not have a patrol rifle, and it was thought this round would shoot flatter at long range. This was a SIG selling point for the cartridge in the mid-90's, when it began to compete with the .45 ACP, usually in a SIG P220.
To investigate the cartridge at long range, I shot an entire season (in the late 90's) of metallic silhouette matches at the club level using a SIG P229, originally purchased as a .357 SIG firearm, using 125 grain Speer Lawman ammunition. I found that on targets out to 100 yards, I really needed to use only a slight hold-over at 100 yards on the small Ram target, and if I forgot to hold over, I'd probably still get the hit, albeit on the belly of the Ram. I found it to be a very flat shooting cartridge. Even today, Speer notes that among Gold Dot loads of the same weight, (124) the .357 SIG drops 6.2 inches, while the 9mm +P load drops 8, and the standard pressure load drops 9 inches when all guns are zeroed at 25 yards. Not a huge difference to be sure, but this leads me to believe that you might have seen a different outcome as far as drop is concerned had you verified that your .357 SIG was sighted at 25 yards. I've seen this discrepancy occur when using a SIG pistol that is originally chambered in .40, using a drop-in .357 SIG barrel. Sight heights between the two calibers are different. So perhaps this accounts for what you experienced.
Having said all of that, there is certainly nothing wrong with a good, modern 9mm load, even at 100 yards. This was however not really true when the .357 SIG was invented, and why this odd cartridge came into being in the first place.
Agree Lucky Gunner could have used HST, BUT didn't.
Lesson here? Gold dot is trash smmo and they should have used HSTs
@@m0314700308891515 there are videos on here that test gold dots 9mm and 9mm+p and the non +p ammo is faster than the +p. speer needs to get it together lol
Are you suggesting there might be a reason for 357 Sig's flat shooting reputation? Through experience no less! The ammo in this test doesn't meet 357 Sig's original velocity for a 125gr bullet. Using something like a Buffalo Bore 147 would've yielded very different results as well. But hey, I carry those 124+P GDs. But not because I expect them to shoot better than 357 Sig. At any range.
Oh man, heavy for calibre bullets tend to perform better at longer ranges? If only literally hundreds of years of hunting would have told us this.
I was thinking the same thing. They could have just asked my great great grandfather and saved a lot of time.
But for real guys, this is helpful knowledge for a lot of people, who have little to no experience hunting, or don't know any well enough to ask questions as simple as this. Keep up the good work.
They lost less % but remained the slowest. I'm not aware of anything hunted with a 40 or 45.
@@RalphFiscus Really only hogs. And they still remained inside, or much closer to their optimal velocity range. A .300 Win Mag at 1400 FPS would be a lot less effective than a .45-70 at 1400. Because the bigger, heavier bullets are made to stay effective at that range of velocities. It's the same reason why so many 10mm handloads are awful. A lot of amateur handloaders will use .40 S&W bullets at much higher speeds than they were intended, leading to poor expansion. Same with .357 Sig. Same size pill, outside of it's optimal velocity range.
@@RalphFiscus FWIW, a former cop told me recently he hunts deer with a .40. For taking deer, I'd rather have something with a higher probability of kill to reduce the chance of just wounding the animal. Taking a deer is intended to be lethal for the deer as quickly and cleanly as possible, whereas the goal in selfdefense is to stop the threat, which might turn out to be lethal but is not intended to be, per se. Statistically, pistols, as a group, are generally significantly less lethal than rifles and shotguns. Your results may vary, of course, depending on such things as caliber, range, shot placement, marksmanship, etc.
It's almost as if the Ballistic Coefficient in loading manuals is an actual meaningful number.
Also velocity. If you shoot two identical BC bullets of different weights but same energy, the slower will retain more energy.
@@davidh9659 The slower one will be the heavier one, but I guess you know that.
@@exothermal.sprocket
Cant wait for a space tourist to take his deer rifle to the moon.
@David H:
- Absolutely, because drag varies with the square of the speed.
- This video makes me wonder if smart, expert guys like Chris and John have ever seriously considered the physics/aerodynamics that apply to all the rounds they out down range?
The more important number for penetration at the target is sectional density, that is the cross sectional area (pi-r-squared) and bullet weight. The heavier bullet for a given bullet cross-section, assuming comparable bullet construction, will penetrate better on game or ballistic gel at similar impact velocity.
Being a bit of a physics nerd I really enjoyed this video. Thanks
Although making a shot with a handgun at 100+ yards in a self defense situation is highly unlikely, this was a very informative and interesting video. Thank you for posting!
Austin PD cop did it in real life back in 2014. Single shot. Hit the gunman in the heart and stopped an active shooter situation.
Not only unlikely but probably gonna goto jail if you're shooting at 100. There are exceptions to everything but in general you're probably going to jail
Indeed. Most courts would argue you could flee the situation. Unless they're shooting at you and there's no path of escape, you probs won't avoid punishment.
@@overlorddante if bad guy has you pinned down with a rifle or pistol you will walk in most jurisdictions.
@@ni9465 most likely, it can be argued it was necessary. I live in Massachusetts where they hate freedom so these are things I need to be concerned about. I often forget other states are cool with people defending themselves.
Here's my takeaway: the worst performer, my beloved 357 SIG, was basically a 327 ft-lb FMJ at 100 yards. That's 96% of the performance of Remington g&wbox 9mm 124gr FMJ at the muzzle. So while it might not be ideal at all, it's still plenty dangerous.
It wasn't really the worst performer - it was actually the best - they just misinterpreted the data. For flatness of trajectory, speed is all the matters, not percentage speed change
Will you do a follow up video using 9mm carbine and or other PCC’s
Yes, do this please.
This kind of isn't relevant, IMO.
If the longer barrel of PCCs gives a higher muzzle velocity, and longer ranges give more time for velocity to be lost(air resistance), basically a PCC is just a pistol with a longer range.
If we know the performance of a specific 9mm JHP at ~1050 FPS shot from a short barrel pistol at close range, and a PCC's longer barrel means the bullet is around 1050 FPS at 100yds, we already know exactly how that bullet will perform out of a PCC at 100yds.
@Smith Sonian I do know from running my own chronograph tests ( most unpublished ) that .357 Magnum had as much velocity left at 100 yards when fired from a PCC ( Henry Single Shot Rifle as the same round fired from a 4 inch revolver at the muzzle.
Yeah i was thinking the same thing (and commenting helps this move to the top of the stack for Chris or John to see). Especially short barreled PCC's like the AK-V, Scorpion and maybe the new LWRC .45 acp 'pistol'.
Ruger PC, Keltec S2K, Cmmg and the old Colt 6950. Please Please.
A bullet above the speed of sound is meeting much greater resistance than a subsonic one. The more above the speed of sound, the more you can expect to see a greater % of velocity loss. After they fall below the sound barrier the rate of velocity loss will be reduced...however as shown here, you might be below expansion threshold at that point..
Yeah, 357 sig has a couple things working against it when it comes to drag. The relevant equation would be Drag Force = 1/2(fluid density)v^2(drag coefficient)(cross sectional area). I didn't use symbols there for the most part to avoid confusion. Velocity of the object traveling is squared so that's already bad news for 357 sig, and it is also kind of a funky conical shape in the front so it is reasonable to assume it has a worse drag coefficient as well. The boys at SIG probably aren't so stupid to make that many mistakes and not notice, so it could probably be assumed they didn't intend for the round to be used at higher distances. This is why I love using sectional density though.
Edit: Notice that mass is absent from that equation for drag force as well by the way.
The work of a handgun round is done at or below 25 yards both in hunting and SD, making this video irrelevant from the start.
@@jamessmith-ow1bf well, considering pistol caliber carbines are quite popular these days, I don't believe it is. Sub machine guns are also still commonly found in use with military and law enforcement. Subsonic handgun rounds when paired with a silencer can make for low cost, low noise pest control. It is also not too uncommon for shots, particularly LE, to occur at ranges in excess of 25yds. If you have a round that performs well from 0-100+yds, why is that a bad thing?
That would be a good thing, out of a carbine the 357 Sig would perform in the upper end of it's design envelope and offer even more superiority. The increased velocity from a carbine would then cause the 9mm to lose 20% of its power as it hit 357 Sig HANDGUN velocities.
james smith 147gr 9mm will barely break the speed of sound...if at all. Depends on the bbl length and loading. Not sure what your talking about.
45ACP is always relevant. From ball rounds to defense ammo. It will never die
Ramuel's Sampage totally agree, 9 or 45, those are some of the oldest and still used calibers for a reason.
Ramuel's Sampage Yep with modern double stack striker fired handguns such as the Glock 21 for example and with modern ammo, .45 is still a viable cartridge.
I wish they'd tested the 45ACP ball rounds. Unless you go +p, 45 hollowpoints don't always seem to go fast enough to expand. Fortunately 230 gr .451 FMJs do a surprisingly good job at relatively low speeds.
NoBrakes23. Try Federals 165 grain 45 acp. It's not +P and achieves north of 1000 fps. No problems with expansion.
@@jeffreymcdonald8267Thanks. I'll check that out.
I'm an old man now but do remember some things.....
The military knew this long ago ! 😊
Thanks for sharing and take care.
Knew it? I dont think theres a .45acp carbine or pistol in the US inventory.
@@maxout214226 thompson aka tommy gun was chambered in 45 acp
The M1911A1 was used (.45 acp) by the US military for decades
@@maxout214226 Navy SEALs, Special Operations Command, etc, still carry .45acp pistols if deemed needed for an op. Have specialized procurement. Modern models, although some possibly a modern variation of Colt 1911. Can't recall offhand.
Some of my absolute favorite type of videos you guys do: real-world, methodical, strip away all the BS claims and assumptions, and presenting the hard data no matter how they play out. Respect.
Excellent! My 1911 is still rockin’ it. Who woulda thought JMB knew what he was doing?
No 357 magnum?
We ran out of daylight.
My thoughts exactly could do 110 to 200 grain and or different ballistic coefficients in same weight/ muzzle velocity.
@@LuckyGunner I'd love to see more of this content! Very informative and reveals things a typical concealed carrier may not ever think of. Having a sheet of cardboard behind the ballistics gel would probably help ya make hits out at that distance, youd be able to see where your rounds are impacting. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing more types of ammo tested at distance like this. Would some expanding shotgun slugs have a similar negative effect at distance? Is the 10mm king at distance or worse than the competition? What about pocket pistols? Theres very little ballistics data on .380, .32, .25 and .22 and I think that's a large reason why they have tended to fall out of fashion, perhaps having informative data like that would convince more people to own such guns, and by effect encourage program compliance?
357 mag is likely very ammo dependent. A light 125gr would act a lot like the 357 sig, but there are some heavier bullets out there and even some rounds like semi-jacketed round nose lead or wad cutters that might perform okay going slower. It's pretty much a tinkerer's caliber.
*Lucky Gunner Ammo*
Well do it again with the *.357 Magnum* (the _real_ 357) and 10mm with heavy bullets. I need my biases confirmed.
Thank you for using the term "velocity window" when describing hollow-point performance.
I use that exact same terminology when I'm trying to explain it to people and generally get a confused look from them for a second or two.
the heavy for caliber idea worked very well in the metallic silhouette game.
they shoot clear out to 200 meters, so that really pushes the envelope for auto - revolvers do much better.
I’ve shot at a silhouette match with targets at 300 yds. Trying to hit those with a 45 colt was hilarious. We measured drop in yards instead of inches
Great video! I would have loved to see how 10mm performed at 100 yds.
I shoot and hunt at 100yds with a 5" 10mm 1911. There is no issue with bullets expanding at 100yds if they have a velocity of 1200FPS or more out of the muzzle. According to the ballistic calculator, FPE is greater at that distance than a +p .45.
I think I would go with more penetration and less expansion. The fastest bullet slowed down the most but still arrived faster than the others. Doesn't matter what velocity they leave barrel, what matters is what's the velocity on target, I dunno, .357Sig still looks like a good choice to me.
Awesome stuff. Vids are based on good data and always well produced....a joy to watch.
Thanks Chris! You always put a lot of very interesting info in your videos.
Another outstanding informative video from the best on UA-cam, you can’t put a price on the information you get from Lucky Gunner 👍
Another excellent video. I’m glad everything I’ve stocked up on has been heavy for caliber.
Nice premise! Thanks for an interesting and informative video! 👍
With PIstol Caliber Carbines getting to be so popular, have you considered testing popular 9mm loads out of 10.5" and/or 16" barrels to see what differences there may be on performance?
Great point. I'm personally lost on a conversation of hand guns at 100 yards..really over 45'.. the length of the longest open length in my house. But...aim small, miss small. Be well and safe
16" is too long for handgun calibers the powder will just burn out, 10"-12" max for pistol calibers.
Actually continuing on stating the obvious, years ago actually before the advent of the 357 SIG, I was using the heavy .357 magnums in revolver, and the 10mm auto for predator and big game hunting, and in the .357 the 158 and in the minimum a 140 grain bullet were really the effective bullet weights at 10o yds. In field situations even though they were slower, and much slower than the 100 and 125 grain rounds, people were advocating 90 gr. bullets were not effective at all. Understanding this was with either a Dan Wesson .357 with an 8” barrel or Thompson-Center Contender with 10” barrel.
What seemed to make the 9mm auto and the .357 mag revolver advocates was my favorite round, the 10mm in various pistols. In every situation, the 10mm performed the best. Before you jump on me for being a victim of “duh” thinking, what about all the advocates of the 9mm and the .357 SIG?
Remember this was back when bullets were not anywhere as capable as they are today, so especially then bullet performance showed it was dependent upon velocity and weight. But, and this is a huge but, when you take a bullet or any component of a system outside its design element, performance suffers.
Detractors of the hard-recoiling 10mm point, especially full-house rounds is out that it’s hard on guns, and hard recoiling. Well that’s absolutely true. However, some have pointed out that if you observe people shooting hard recoiling handguns, seldom do you see the use of the “new pistol” technique, but almost all use a variation of the old Weaver stance as it was designed to accommodate recoil.
Wow! Great test and video. Great job guys!
Great presentation. Thank you for doing this for all of us.
After that Indiana mall shooting over the weekend, I think it's safe to say that 9mm is fairly effective against an active shooter at 40 yards away
Very informative and interesting! I have done the same test with a Glock 21 and 230 gr XTP's, shooting from 100 meters into wet phonebooks. Got surprisingly good penetration, and also very good accuracy and expansion. Used 7.4 gr of Longshot. Did not chronograph the load, but the manual says around 900 fps. Used a Storm Lake 5.3" threaded barrel and a red dot on a rear sight mount of some sort (Strike Industries, I think).
It would be interesting to see the same tests at 50 yards or 50 meters, which some handgun accuracy tests are measured at. Also, as mentioned in several of the comments, it would be interesting to add some heavy for caliber .357 Sig and 40mm as well light for caliber 45 cal (185 grain). Great informative video gentlemen in the spirit of answering a question raises more and just as if not more interesting questions!
That bullet drop conjecture as a function of velocity loss is off the deep end guys. @100 yds the .357 SIG is still the fastest of the samples and bullet drop is purely a function of time to target, not negative delta V. The explanation for your perception of having to hold over has to be found somewhere else.
Like mentioned in a comment above it was probably the distance the handgun was sighted in. If the 357 sig was sighted in near the "peak" of the trajectory they would see more drop while the other handguns have their sightline cross the trajectory twice so there's less difference at 100.
Could be just the gun. Each gun is a different animal. You can't blame the round as to where you hold the point of aim compared to other guns. It's not a knock on a particular round because the gun has a higher hold at distance. It's a different gun, its gonna act differently...
I came to the comments to say the same thing. I'm a 9mm guy and don't even own a 357 Sig so I'm not just trying to justify my choice pistol ammo. Less time in the air means less drop.
Exactly!
A more thorough evaluation of the .357 can be found at the old tnnoutdoors9 channel. Most of the popular brands down load the caliber much like the 10mm is often downloaded. If you can take the snap, get the hot stuff or get the 9mm. I keep it around because when all the other stuff is sold out, .357 is still on the shelf.
great info
Indeed.
Fantastic video guys
Awesome episode an thanks for the knowledge guys.
I did some long range testing in the nevada desert while back with a couple 9mm loads and sig v crown .357sigs. I can confirm beyond doubt that i had a flatter trajectory with .357sig.
Lighter caliber may have lose a greater percentage of velocity at 100 yards, it was still had more velocity at 100 yards then the higher caliber (45 ACP) when it left the muzzle.
.357 Sig does drop less, so it is certainly the "easiest with which to hit." Plus, if you use Underwood or handload the cartridge to its original specs, it expands well at that range. I get consistent expansion on gel and deer out to 125 yards with my 125gr Gold Dots leaving the muzzle at 1450 to 1550 fps, and beyond that with the 147gr Gold Dots moving at 1375 fps from my Glock 31.
Very interesting as always
Great video, and again grandpa .45 keeps up with juvenile delinquents ; )
Was the p226 357 sig barrel the original barrel for that slide or was it on a 40S&w slide. The sites are different on a sig p226 chambered originally from the factory for a 40 s&w.
So at 100 yards the 357 Sig still had a greater overall velocity. Yes it had the greatest percentage drop from muzzle to the 100 yard mark, but it was still traveling faster - which is flatter.
It was also one of the only ones starting out supersonic and dropping down through transonic on the way. Not great for accuracy.
Impossible for it to be fastest and have the greatest "drop." The gun simply wasn't sighted in and was hitting high.
@@exothermal.sprocket That's just not true. The 45 is not a "more efficient shape," it's just heavier. The 357 sig was faster at 100 yards than the 45ACP was at the muzzle. It will always arrive at the target first, no matter how much energy it lost in transit, it will drop the least (though it may do something funny as it drops from being super sonic).
The 45 ACP will have greater energy at 100 yards, but it will arrive there way after the 357 sig. Drop and energy retention are related in that they both involve velocity, but not 1:1. Drop is a matter of the time it takes to cover the distance, energy is related to the the square of the speed of the bullet when it gets there (namely 1/2*mv^2).
Go plug their chart into a ballistic calculator (there are a few online).
@@exothermal.sprocket Your comment implies that a bullet that loses less energy is "more efficient", and therefore has less total elapsed travel time. The 45acp, from the video we all watched and are commenting on, lost the least energy "to the wind" by only losing 8% of it's velocity. Your comment would suggest that because it lost the least velocity, it is the most "efficient" shape. But more incorrectly, your comment then implies that it's elapsed travel time would be less because it lost the least energy to drag.
Maybe you phrased it poorly, but all I'm saying is the total elapsed time to target is more about velocity overall than it is about the loss of energy. The 357sig lost the most velocity and energy, and arrived at the target with less total energy than the 45, but it certainly arrived there faster and dropped less for it.
@@exothermal.sprocket Awesome, your mechanical engineering background means that we can talk way easier.
This whole thread is about how one of the dudes in the video claimed that 357 Sig dropped more than even the 45, claiming that it wasn't such a flat shooter as he thought. When you wrote, "Bullet shape is the whole point being made. More efficient shapes don't waste energy on wind, therefore total elapsed travel time is less (less drop), greater energy at arrival," it appeared that you were defending the erroneous statement that the 357 Sig dropped more vertically than the 45, because it lost more velocity over the course of travel. I was trying to refute this by saying, the 357 Sig started and finished much faster, therefore dropped less than the 45, regardless of energy and velocity loss.
If we hold initial velocity constant, the ballistic coefficient is truly all that matters in terms of drop. The bullet with the better ballistic coefficient will be more efficient and retain more velocity over travel. In the comparison of two bullets with the same initial velocity and mass, the one with a higher ballistic coefficient should always arrive on target first, be traveling faster, and have more energy and momentum. By this, everything you have said is correct so long as you are only comparing two bullets of the same initial velocity. In the video, the 357 Sig has much higher initial velocity, so the comparison of ballistic coefficients and percentages of lost velocity doesn't really matter relative to drop.
If you think the 357 sig dropped more than the 45, you're wrong. Otherwise, I think we're just talking past each other.
I'm thinking a lot didn't make it to the end.
Yes, the heavier bullets "performed better" WHEN they hit, but if you watch, the 124+p was easier to hit with.
ALL of these perform well at "standard" distance, and I would take the one I can hit with at longer distance, instead of dumping 2 mags to get 3 hits.
Nice video Guys! Carry on
i'm wondering how different those expansion results would've been with th .357 sig if they had used the hst version...the gold dot has the shallowist of all the sig loadings...
Please test some Underwood 90gr and 65gr. Part 2 please
This is why Lucky Gunner is one of the absolute best channels. Science!
How about part 2 for revolver ammo (including Chris' baby .327 Magnum :) )?
Awesome info, thanks 👍
Very interesting, great stuff!
Excellent analysis
Interesting investigation, especially since, as you point out, lower velocity can result from a shorter barrel as well. It might be informative to see percent velocity loss plotted versus cross-sectional density and versus ballistic coefficient.
Good video guys!
When younger, I was able to hit a human size target 7 out of 8 shots with an open sighted Remington 45acp slide on a no name receiver. It did not have stock military sights. Good to know it would still be effective at that range.
I think what's really interesting is showing the power of storytelling. How as humans, it's inherent to our being an unavoidable. How easily it is to invest into the different narratives of calibers as they're all characters at the end of the day. But really respect the effort to test and look for real data. John feeling like a ".357 sig guy" is such a great example of this. I'd always attached myself to .40 cal, as one of my best friends growing up was LEO, and .40 cal is what they used for good reason where it really matters on the daily. But times change and the advancement of 9mm has been impressive. Much to the guy's point - you have to hit what you're shooting at first for ballistics to matter.
Really good video.
Thank you for the video.
It would be great if you guys could test the drop of those loads at 100 yards. Maybe with a scoped short barrel PCC to reduce shooter error?
Very interesting study!
Predictable results for hollow points. Higher velocity bullets are going to be affected more by the drag caused by the hollow point. Would be nice to see this same experiment ran with ball ammo.
What if you wanted to carry a pistol caliber carbine and a handgun that were chambered the same and had magazine interchangeability. I know the Kriss Vectors and Ruger PC carbine will or can be outfitted to accept Glock magazines. The Beretta CX-4 Storm and 92FS both accept the same magazines as well. So does the extra barrel length of the Carbine bring the round back into the velocity range at 100-200 yards.
I'd love to see this test done with various loadings of 10mm, .44 Mag., and .38 Special.
Good video, as always!
Thank you. You are a gentleman and a scholar 😎👍
Would have loved to see you test the 300 grain flat point .50 G.I round at 100 yards, but I do realize you don't sell this ammo. ✌
At what range does transonic instability affect most handgun bullets substantially enough that subsonic rounds have a major accuracy advantage? I would guess it becomes a major accuracy issue at several hundred yards. Shooting at such ranges 147gr 9mm ought to be generally more accurate than lighter bullets because it never transitions from supersonic to subsonic during flight. This may be a relevant factor in ammunition selection for a pistol caliber carbine (although of course if you actually anticipate shooting at targets hundreds of yards away, handgun ammunition is a poor choice).
Yes! Stuff John and Chris want to know! This series is MY SHIIIIIT!
Now the question is how far distance wise can the good performers be pushed before they stop reliably expanding. Great video!
I think in terms of 25 yards max for self defense with a rare need to go fifty yards. If we're a hundred yards away, most should be able to get away without firing.
Dale come on, we are old farts. say you are in an open parking lot behind a car with your handgun and someone wants to kill you with an AR. where are you going to go?
@@Davidautofull Behind the motor.
I think the law is you have to prove a clear and PRESENT danger to your safety. If you shoot someone 100 yards away better have a good lawyer.
james smith putside of a mass shooting, you’re going to have a hard time proving that. Though, here in Texas, I’m all but positive that if someone 100 yards away was trying to kill someone else, I can act to defend that person, despite not being in direct danger myself.
Some good examples here, but the whole time I'm like,
"right, when am I ever going to be in a situation where there is a known, clearly identified, deadly enemy fully three hundred feet away, and my next best possible option is to open fire with a handgun? What?"
I guess, if North Korean paratroopers decend on Mt.Brighton, we will all be yelling 'WOLVERINES' and mag dumping our Glocks at any given distance.
But barring that, just use a rifle. Or move to cover and call in an air strike, lol.
Pistols are poor performers at any range. They work, but almost any other type of firearm is more appropriately effective given the option.
_______
Unless you run 5.7x28mm or 7.62x25mm, then you're good.
Not perfect, but significantly better than 9mm at 100yds.
And far more accurate.
Can you guys please do a video comparing some carry methods for running and working out? I keep buying holsters for my 442 but I haven’t found anything quite comfortable and I often leave it at home.
Something a notice at 2:55 is all of those bullets are basically trending trending towards the same FPS. So bullets close to that fps dropped less. Those speeds are also the same speeds commercial airliner fly at because it offers the best bang for speed to energy when in dense air. That's probably why the bullets are slowing down to that speed.
The air is much less dense at altitudes that commercial jets are flying. They're not flying in dense air.
@@gb93669 I meant they where not like in space or anything. I was trying to avoid space/near space comments. I should have said more relative measurements. They are both going under mach 1 to about the same %. About 80-70%. I wanted to point out that super sonic travel takes a lot more than sub sonic. That's it's not a linear scales and the chart shows that.
I use 147gr hst in my g19 and my suppressed 9mm AR. Thanks for the awesome video!
Not arguing with physics, or trying to dismiss your 357 SIG results, but....I like to shoot 9x25 Dillon in my Glock 20 with long slide, and find it shoots VERY flat out to 100 yards. I sight-in at 100 yards, and at 50 yards it's no more than 3" high -- flat enough to suit me, for sure. For those unaware, 357SIG :: 40 S&W as 9x25 Dillon :: 10mm (not counting differences in primer use).
EDIT: I should add, I'm doing this with the underwood/lehigh defense light, solid copper bullets (xtreme defense). Amazingly (and surprisingly) I find that ammo VERY accurate -- shooting easily repeatable 4" groups at 100 yards, with the 7" Lone Wolf barrels.
That analogy at the end was hilarious
Props to John for losing all that weight! Way to go man!
Guys, the .357 Sig ammo to test is the Hornady 147g; SD .167; BC .212. MV=1225; at 100yds V=1072 (-13.5). Looks like the same bullet they load in their 9mm with MV=975. Will this bullet open up at 935 and yet not fly apart at 1200?? Would really like to know before I put them in my Glock 33? Or do I just put in another barrel and convert to 9mm? (No the 125g and 140g ammo I fire from the Glock is not to snappy....However the muzzle blast will clear your sinuses!!)
Good info!
Is there a chance of a follow up video actually measuring bullet drop at 100 yds. Bullet drop is a function of velocity, gravity (which accelerates objects down at a constant rate regardless of weight) and distance. Based on the math the higher average velocity of the .357 sig means it's flight time is shorter and gravity has less time to act on the bullet meaning it drops less than the others.
There may be something to do with the sights on the various pistols used in the test might make your experience seem like the math doesn't work but every test I've seen done on bullet drop show it does
Right, the .357 sig has the flattest trajectory based on the velocities they give. It starts faster and is also faster at 100yds than anything else. I made some quick calculations with their numbers and I came up with the .357 sig having ~7" of drop at 100 yds, the 9mm 124gr dropping ~9" the .40 having ~10.5", and the .45 having about 15" of drop. They had a small sample size, but .357 sig dropping the most would be violating physics.
The Sig is probably spending more time transonic so no laws of physics need be violated with the odd results. Lots of instability during that case.
Based on the information in the video I think the increased perceived bullet drop had more to do with the difference between point of aim, point of impact sights and six o'clock sights. In the video they focused more on a larger than expected drop with the .357 not a larger group size that would be caused by the sound barrier. I also dug up the manuals for my sig 229 in 40/.357 sig (I have both barrels), xdm in 10mm and Springfield 1911 in 45. The sig and xdm both are set up for point of aim point of impact at 25 yds and the 1911 is set up for 6 o'clock at 25 yds. If the guns used in the video had a mixture of point of aim and 6 o'clock sights it would explain the video's results.
@@chaddoan4659 👍
That's part of the reason why I would like to see a follow up video. I've seen video's from vicker's tactical where they came up with a surprisingly accurate estimate for the distance where a long range rifle bullet passed through the sound barrier based on a major change in accuracy at that distance. That may be what's happening here but the video doesn't provide any insight into why they got the results they did. It could be the sound barrier, it could be the sights or it could be something else we're all missing.
I’m a .357 sig fan boy too. Could you try my favorite load and the best performer in the 5 yard test, the .357 sig Winchester PDX1?
Your point, Chris and John, was demonstrated successfully for JHPs (and, by inference, this would likely also include ballistic-tipped JHPs). I wonder, however, if JSP designs would be less sensitive to projectile velocity loss at greater rangers and, therefore, might be a better alternative in some situations. My thought - and I’ve done no experimentation - is that the soft-point’s lead alloy core might expand across a broader velocity spectrum, than do top-tier JHPs (because, and I’m speculating here, they are mechanically simpler with no cavity that needs to be dynamically forced open after bullet impact). Of course, for most circumstances where the target is relatively proximate, the well-designed JHPs would certainly be superior. But I’m thinking of a .357 Sig, a 10mm or a magnum revolver shot at (perhaps) 100m (or more).
At 100 yards my favorite handgun cartridge of all time is a Thompson Center Contender in .25-35 WCF. There's only one factory weight and that's a 117 grain round nose, but it is a joy to shoot and the bullet arrives on target pretty quick. The .35 Remington with a 200 grain bullet just recoils too much to be a lot of fun. Except for the shock on other people's faces when I touch off a round. In standard handguns I like a .41 Mag with a 210 grain bullet out of a 6 inch S&W 57 or a 10 mm with a 180 grain bullet from a Colt Delta Elite. I sold the Delta Elite some years back because I decided the round was just too much pressure for the frame, but the .41 and the Thompson Center handle the rounds very well. And if I have to get into a hand gun fight at 100 yards or better, the Thompson Center will do very well. Closer than that and the problems with double taps and reloading become serious ;-)
So if generally speaking the heavier bullets are performing better why not use 180 grain 40SW loads?
A friend of mine who is a police firearms instructor changed my view with a simple statement. Pistols are reactive weapons. They are useful for two purposes, to defend yourself when you did not expect to need a weapon or to fight your way to a rifle.He said a pistol should never be your primary means of defense. As I have started training with rifles, the difference in sight picture, power and accuracy is so fundamental, it is just amazing.
I wish there was more ammo tested I love the info in this video you guys should remake this and add calibers maybe 10mm also maybe look at standard ball ammo
Thanks for another entertaining vid. As others suggested, how about seeing what most of us .357 revolvers use-.38’s and at a variety of closer ranges. Hitting the gel at those distances was impressive and humbling. SF
Makes me even more confident in the 9mm HST 147gr
Yup! HSTs are simply fantastic.
Except for barrier performance, which all hollow points suffer to overcome.
Not sure of to many people who would attempt to shoot someone at 100 yards with a 9mm let alone it being justified.... The only exception really would be an active shooter.
When it comes to auto handgun cartridges at 100 yards, it has been 10mm that have been said to excel. Still, as your take away suggest, a 147gr .357 SIG may perform pretty well and there's a segment of SIG fans that prefer that weight to the typical 125gr.
If you do a part 2, perhaps you could include the 147gr .357 SIG and 10mm then add .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum. An interesting addition would be the .460 S&W Magnum, though that cartridge is sort of approaching rifle territory, lol
What matters most for how flat the trajectory is is just average speed (time it takes to reach the target), not percentage speed lost. .357 Sig may have slowed down the most percentage-wise but it still had the highest velocity overall and the highest velocity at the target, so it would in fact have the flattest trajectory of the rounds you studied.
I'd like to see a few 180gr. 40 S&W rounds tested.
I've read for a while now that most 10mm ammo from the mainstream ammo manufacturers is downloaded more for the JHP bullets all being based around .40 S&W velocities, so for the handloaders out there, if you're looking at longer distances for shooting 10mm, you can use the JHP's and load the 10mm really warm as out to 75+ yards it will be in the velocity window of the bullet.
Same with .327 Magnum, the Hornady XTP bullets are all based around .32 Mag velocities.
Would like to see some PCC gel tests as well, not just at 100 yards, but standard home defense distances too.
Very interesting results! 🤔
The faster bullets create more drag at higher air speeds then the slower bullets do. Then combine that with their lesser mass and that’s why they are losing a greater percentage of their velocity at distance.
Good thing I pack the HSt's for SD, Great vid, thx.
It would be interesting to see different revolver calibers like 357, 41 mag and 44 Mag.
They all perform well at that range. They are regularly used in steel silhouette competitions at 100yd. The .357 is light enough that it can strike a target without knocking it over, so most competitors favor .44 Mag once they get to where they can reliably hit at 100yd.
Because of the increased love of the pistol calibre carbines, it would be great to see this again with the 45 and 9mm in lets say 10 inch barrels.
Is there any chance you could try pistol round through a longer barrel like 10" to 16" barrels
Im so interesting about this cuz Im a serious PCC guy. can you review some more test like this but in a longer barrel or maybe Long barrel PCC vs very short barrel rifle. and maybe cover more bullet like 357magnum 44magnum. the chart was very useful.
Very good video. The comments brought up .357 mag saying it would fall in the same category as Sig. Not so the case. The most popular .357 Mag defensive round is the 125 sjhp. The same bullet that it used in the .38 Spec +p. It expands at the 900 or so fps of the .38 so I think it would do fair at 1100+ fps. Also the Gold Dot is also not the only option for Sig.
Great video as usual with interesting results. While this has been done several times over many years, it's always good to revisit the same experiment to see what the results are with varied materials and conditions. An idea to consider in the future would be using the same bullet design for each loading to get a more consistent comparison. As stated by others, bullet design varies, not just in the shape or size of cavities but also in the metallurgy. Some use a softer lead that is bonded or not bonded, a harder or softer jacket, pre-scored or even split and swaged closed, etc. They are designed to do different tasks. The heavier .45 and 147gn 9mm may have had similar performance due to sharing the same bullet design. I do regular pistol shooting at 100 yards but not for this. I'm usually shooting at paper or steel. In my experience with 45acp and 9mm is that I'm actually having to hold under the target by about 12 inches or more. Most people miss because they believe they have to arc the round. I'd suggest doing some shooting on paper with each load to determine it's actual hold at that range. The back of a larger target, using a 1-foot diameter circle with a 4-inch broad "dot" in the center. Start your aiming at the 6-o'clock of the large circle. It seems counter-intuitive, but try it. None of us are infallible in our assumptions.
make these a thing. test more of these. make it a series. thanks
Very, shot a coyote at 93 yards stepped off with my sig 220 hydroshock, made it about 20 yards before it died. What amazed me is the lack of drop.
I would like to see you do this kind of test for .357 mag and 10mm. Also with Soviet calibers, specifically 9 Mak and 7.62 Tok