Does anyone use frangible rounds?

[Beagle45ACP]

The reason I ask is that I see some HP rounds that boast 12-14" or more penetration (and that's when they expand, even more when they blow straight through). Now obviously, we should always be mindful of what lies beyond our target, but in the event of a SD shooting, there isn't exactly time to say, "Excuse me sir, but would you mind stepping to your left? I'm not exactly certain what you're standing in front of, and I have some concerns as to what I may hit."

I know a family friend who carries frangible rounds due to concerns of overpenetration, but so far he's the only one I've come across who uses this practice.

So to that end, does anyone here favor frangible rounds over HPs in their carry/nightstand guns?

[JD0x0]

12-14'' in gel does not = 12-14'' in body penetration.

Isn't the FBI standard at least 12'' yet, in police shooting videos you almost never see bullets exiting. You do however, see bullets missing, quite often, and striking pedestrians in police shootings.

I don't favor frangible rounds. A miss is far worse than an 'over penetration' of a standard HP. Do you have 100% accuracy in 100% of situations? I didn't think so...

I prefer to have adequate penetration into my target, and also light barrier penetration, if need be. You need to ALWAYS be aware what is beyond your target no matter what ammo you're using, IMO.

I see no advantage to frangible ammo in my home, and out on the street there's just too many variables. A miss with either could strike an unintended target, which goes back to my earlier point, that you need to have enough situational awareness to have a good idea what is beyond your target.

[chesterfield]

When I lived in an apartment I kept my S&W 66 loaded with Glaser Blue 38+P. They are 80gr. rated at 1250fps and 278ftlbs loaded with #12 shot. They are made in a variety of calibers. They also make Glaser Silver loaded with #6 shot for more penetration. The 32acp and 9mm I bought did feed well in my Tomcat and my S&W 5906. Now that I am in a house I still keep some in my house gun though they are staggered with HPs.

[Double Naught Spy]

The reason I ask is that I see some HP rounds that boast 12-14" or more penetration (and that's when they expand, even more when they blow straight through).

If 12-14" is when they are expanding in gel or people, then you need to be looking at some other ammo. In gel, most will be expanding in the 2-5" range.

Generally speaking, frangible ammo is not known for being a good stopper, mostly because it usually fails at being a good penetrator. You don't want to count on shallow tissue damage to protect you. You should buy some quality hollowpoint ammo for SD.

Note that overpenetration of the target is NOT what usually ends up harming other people down range. What normally ends up harming other people are outright misses.

[JD0x0]

If 12-14" is when they are expanding in gel or people, then you need to be looking at some other ammo.

I think what was meant was that 12-14'' total penetration is achieved when the bullets expand. If those same bullets were not to expand they would act as a FMJ or SWC and penetrate much further than the 12-14'' standard.

I believe it's impossible for pistol ammo to start expanding after 12-14''

[hoss1969]

I carry usm4 liberty civil defence) 50gr semi frag. My personal testing on a chronograph is high 2193fps @ 534 foot-lbs and low of 2039fps @ 462 foot- lbs out of a four inch barrel with 14" penetration and just shy of a 5 inch cavity.

Even gold dot Self defence is only rated @ Gold Dot HP 124gr 410foot-lbs 1220fps
And thst with a bullet just under 2 1/2 times the weight.

[Noreaster]

Frangible rounds, on flesh and bone, act like fmj. For that matter they also penetrate wood, doors, walls exactly like fmj. They do turn to powder on rocks and metal. I have done extensive testing on this for my Dept. I demonstrated shooting through wooden doors, pallets and other similar material.

[hoss1969]

The usm4 rounds are not pressed powder, they are copper that shreds and with the added foot lbs of engery it makes a big cavity. It is nothing like Glaser Safety Slug which could be defeated by a heavy leather jacket.

[colbad]

Used for shooting metal targets at close range to minimize ricochet. Never thought they would have any real purpose for SD compared to other real rounds. Limiting over penetration also limits penetration. High potential to splatter on impact. However, I think the 5.56 rounds seemed to be harder than the pistol calibers.

[Dragline45]

You need adequate penetration to reach vitals, frangible pistol rounds lack in this department, it's that simple.

[Snyper]

If frangibles were better, everyone would use them, but I don't know anyone who does

[hoss1969]

If frangibles were better, everyone would use them, but I don't know anyone who does

And not that long ago polymer guns were looked down on, few years ago fbi thought the .40 was the best, then they thought the 10mm was it now the sig .357 is the side arm but now the 9mm is getting a new look.

People are always trying to find what works for them. Right now thru personal testing the usm4 is proven to me that it hits like a mule, makes a big shredded hole which in my time in emergency medical service will fubar the target. Its my opinion from testing.

You appear to be making your opinion with out ever putting a round of it down range.

[hoss1969]

Used for shooting metal targets at close range to minimize ricochet

Just like while a BMW and a PT Cruiser are both automobiles, there are big differences between the two same goes for target and SD frangible bullets.

[AustinTX]

And not that long ago polymer guns were looked down on, few years ago fbi thought the .40 was the best, then they thought the 10mm was it now the sig .357 is the side arm but now the 9mm is getting a new look.

There's not really any effective analogy in there. Frangible ammo of different sorts has been around a long time. If some type were more effective than a bonded hollow-point, you would see wider adoption of the ammo (instead of virtually none at all), even if after some delay.

No one who has studied tens of thousands of real world shootings (for which ballistics gelatin is not always a perfect stand-in) and who has any reputation for being knowledgeable on self-defense matters -- Mas Ayoob, for instance -- recommends the use of frangible ammo. In all instances, underpenetration is a serious issue.

People are always trying to find what works for them. Right now thru personal testing the usm4 is proven to me that it hits like a mule, makes a big shredded hole which in my time in emergency medical service will fubar the target. Its my opinion from testing.

You appear to be making your opinion with out ever putting a round of it down range.

Whether he has or not is irrelevant. Simply "putting a round downrange," or through ballistics gelatin or some form of wet pack, doesn't by itself provide you with the information needed to draw a valid conclusion about its real-world efficacy.

[Double Naught Spy]

A buddy of mine is wanting to use Lehigh Controlled Chaos rounds for hunting. These are a defense round that have some impressive ballistic gel results with rifle rounds producing wound channels in excess of 5" over 10" or more in gel. The reviewers online talk about the amount of damage it will do with great penetration (major wound channel in excess of 13" and the base of the projectile continuing further).

Yet the few pics I can find of actual application of the rounds in hunting indicates short wound channels and NO over penetration of even gracile you deer. The amazing 'controlled chaos' destruction evidenced by the gel tests does not materialize (in the few examples I have seen) actual animals. Again, these aren't lowly pistol rounds, but are rifle rounds. Yes the animals were killed, but the same sort of results could have been produced by normal ammo with shots placed as well.

As noted, if frangible ammo really was such an amazing performer, people would be using it a lot more. They aren't. As noted, ballistics gel isn't real world.

[Snyper]

Right now thru personal testing the usm4 is proven to me that it hits like a mule, makes a big shredded hole which in my time in emergency medical service will fubar the target. Its my opinion from testing.

So show me your list of all the agencies that use frangible because it's "better".

Otherwise, you're just inserting a personal opinion that has absolutely nothing at all to do with what I said

Frangibles have been on the market since the mid 70's and are STILL not commonly used by anyone

[Theohazard]

Originally Posted by hoss1969

You appear to be making your opinion with out ever putting a round of it down range.

So do you; you appear to be making your opinion with very little evidence to back it up. Have you ever actually shot a person with frangible ammo? Have you ever studied hundreds (if not thousands) of real-world shootings and examined the results? I'm guessing you haven't done any of those things.

But the people who have done those things find frangible ammo to be inferior. Like others have pointed out, NOT ONE SINGLE major law enforcement agency in the US uses frangible ammo, as far as I know. Experts like Massad Ayoob and others who have studied real-world shootings advise against its use. And yet you think you have more knowledge and experience than all those people because you did a little backyard testing?

Originally Posted by hoss1969

And not that long ago polymer guns were looked down on, few years ago fbi thought the .40 was the best, then they thought the 10mm was it now the sig .357 is the side arm but now the 9mm is getting a new look.

Polymer framed pistols were picked up very quickly by both law enforcement and the general public once a good one came along (Glock 17). And the caliber wars that plague the FBI occur simply because the differences between those common defensive rounds is very hard to measure in real-world shootings. But the effectiveness of frangible ammo in real-world shootings isn't hard to measure: They have unreliable penetration and therefore no law major enforcement agency in the country uses them.

[skizzums]

"DRT" makes some awesome bullets with a stupid name. I guess they are "frangible", but they blow right through barriers so they don't help with the theoretical concern of over penetration of walls.. If I were concerned about walls and such, I think I would use an ar with the 30-40gr varmint grenades for housing barriers, like walls and floors. I would never personal/y be concerned about after the bullet exits the body, as long as its a good hollowpoint, the round has already lost so much energy, unless someone else is within a couple of feet of the perp, I don't feel the damage could be too costly. I would be Mich more concerned about the bullets that didnt hit the bad guy.

[JD0x0]

50 grain .355 cal bullet has the sectional density comparable to a single #4 buckshot pellet. I'm not impressed. The velocity and energy doesn't make up for the lack of penetration that is bound to happen with a bullet that light for caliber, meant to fragment (which will only hinder penetration more)

Energy isn't everything. A professional fighter can punch with more than 700ft-lbs of force, in some cases.

Trying to turn a 9x19 into a rifle by using an extremely light for caliber bullet is a pipe dream, and a gimmick, at best. More people would be using similar ammo if it was effective and efficient. As far as I'm concerned, that ammo is using velocity and energy to market it's ammo, and I don't believe their claims for a second. I've seen ballistic tests of that ammo on youtube, and I'm not impressed at all. Permanent cavity and penetration was no where near what you or the manufacture claim...

Opens and fragments about 1'' in. Permanent cavity only reaches about 3'' deep, and isn't large in diameter at all. The core piece didn't even penetrate 12'' and it's a little piece of the bullet that's supposed to penetrate, it acts like a FMJ and the damage isn't all that impressive or deep for that matter.

No thanks. You're free to use it, but you should really know what you're using. I wouldn't trust that projectile with my life. I consider this type of ammo to be suitable for squirrels, not humans.

Also, just to reiterate again. Performance in gel does not EQUAL performance in tissue. The gel tests that we go by are only meant to give an 'even playing field' to test different projectiles in the same medium.
The example I will throw out again is. The FBI standard is 12-14'' of penetration. Front to back most humans rarely have a chest cavity that deep. Yet, even with their ammo that penetrates 12-14'' in gel, it rarely exits perps with COM mass hits. I don't think I ever recall a police shooting video where I notice the LEO's bullets consistently exiting the target. But wait, they penetrated 14'' of ballistic gel, why are they not exiting? Because a human is not ballistics gel. I always viewed ballistics gel as sort of being comparable to gut shooting someone/something, where there's no/minimal bones. Completely different from a shot to the chest.

[Carne Frio]

I use two Glaser Silvers in 44 spl when walking in a residential
area for protection from aggressive dogs. The rest are hollow
point ammo. The reason is that I do not want a ricochet or a
miss fly into someone's home. When I'm walking out of town,
it's 44 jacketed soft point.

I do think they have use, but it is specialized.

[orionengnr]

Back in 1987, G&A magazine ran an article which convinced me that Glaser, MagSafe, et al were just the thing.

I spent an awful lot of money buying a bunch of those 6-round packs (these days I think they are 8 rounds, woo hoo). Shot them off and had some failures to cycle my SD pistols (S&W 469 and HK P7, two of the more reliable 9mms of that era).

The more I read, the less convinced I was that these were a wise choice.

Back then, they were $3 plus per round. Naturally, back then, I was thinking "you get what you pay for".

Hmmm...not always, and really, almost never. Don't know what they cost today, and really don't care.

These days...yeah, I'll go out on a limb and say that they are a gimmick, made for PT Barnum's favorite kind of people.

You do however, see bullets missing, quite often, and striking pedestrians in police shootings.

Really? Do you? I don't.

[hoss1969]

Theohazard.

You miss the op. He asked if anyone carryed them. i responded that I do, what kind and why I choose to. I tried to inform of what my personal results were, and the numbers I was able to personally get recorded by chronograph and standard shooting penetration tests.


Never said they were the end all in ammo. But I'd respect your stand against if you had took the time to try and test instead of just repeat out dated data on a older ammo that is of a completly different material and design.

[Theohazard]

Originally Posted by hoss1969

But I'd respect your stand against if you had took the time to try and test instead of just repeat out dated data on a older ammo that is of a completly different material and design.

I think you're missing my point. If I took the time to test them like you did, those tests would be just as useless as the ones you did. Those tests aren't good at predicting real-world results in real shootings.

And no, modern frangible ammo isn't all that different than the older designs; it still hasn't been proven to perform as well as JHPs. Period.

Every few years someone comes out with some new, supposedly awesome design that's supposed to be the new end-all and be-all of handgun bullet designs. It's almost always some new type of frangible load that looks nasty in ballistics gel tests, but never seems to actually out-perform traditional JHPs in real-world applications, which is why every single major law enforcement agency in the country uses JHPs.

If you're worried about over-penetration with your handgun, use frangible ammo. If you want your handgun to be as effective as possible at stopping two-legged threats, use JHPs. There is no "magic bullet" when it comes to handguns, no matter how much the makers of rounds like the DRT tell you otherwise.

[JD0x0]

Every few years someone comes out with some new, supposedly awesome design that's supposed to be the new end-all and be-all of handgun bullet designs. It's almost always some new type of frangible load that looks nasty in ballistics gel tests, but never seems to actually out-perform traditional JHPs in real-world applications, which is why every single major law enforcement agency in the country uses JHPs.

Oh you mean like this?

http://g2rip.com/
Yep, like most ammo like this, independent tests didn't come close to the manufacture's claims, even in the coveted 'ballistics gel'

[willr]

A number of years ago the police dept in Yuma, AZ built a new facility which includded an indoor range. The range was to be used for practice and qualiying for local police. The range required use of frangible bullets. State law required use of issue service ammo or the equivalent for qualifying. Since all service ammo was 230 gr 45acp, the range was totally useless because the heaviest frangible ammo had 185 gr bullets. I guess the conclusion is that frangible bullets are not all they are supposed to be.

willr