Water Jug Test 115 JHP UMC. Rem. L9MM1B

[TRGTman]

   After testing the 115gr. JHP Rem . UMC L9MM1B from 100rd. packs from  Wally, in the Glock 26, I thought I'd try the test on my Glock 17L longslide . I wanted to see if it would work at the higher velocity from the longer barrel, and if so what would be the difference in expansion and penetration. Using my same 3 -1gallon water jugs filled to the top , I put three of them in a row in my wooden test box. At 10 ft. distance this is my result. The first jug was violently blown apart and fell to the ground with the splits shown in the photo.  The second jug was penetrated with a small entrance hole and the back side was dented firmly ,but not penetrated on it's backside at all , and the expanded bullet was inside.  This is very unlike the results from the short Glock 26 in my earlier test . Seems the higher velocity in the longslide caused the bullet to expend it's energy quicker, and run out of steam and only make it through the first jug and not have enough speed to make it through the second. The pictures show the difference in the recovered rounds and one shows the extra mushrooming caused by the higher velocity. The two bullets shown are fired from the short barrel 26 on the right side photo , and the one fired with the 17L on the left side and compared to a dime.

[Bobo]

TRGTman,

Thanks for the great test!

There is such a thing as "over-velocity” in expanding bullets

Normally, one might think that the faster a bullet travels (velocity) the better it will perform. It will travel in a flatter trajectory, penetrate deeper, and expand more, than the same bullet that travels more slowly from the same firearm.
After all, “A Super-Duper Titanium Nasty Point +P at 1000 fps will naturally out perform the same Super-Duper Titanium Nasty Point non +P at 850 fps!” Who could doubt that?

Yes, it will travel in a flatter trajectory. Sorry, no, it may not necessarily penetrate deeper and expand more.

Each individual bullet type seems to run on a rough bell curve as far as performance goes. As the velocity increases the bullet performs better and better until it reaches its "optimum" velocity. Once this occurs the bullet then begins to loose performance  --  i.e., over-velocity.



Here is another test, not quite as “apples/apples” as your test, but possibly makes the point as well or even better. This test media was ballistic gelatin.
http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/9mm/gel9.htm

In this case a much slower and much heavier Remington 9mm 124gr. Golden Saber at 1009 fps had greater penetration and expansion than a much faster and lighter Cor-Bon +P 9mm 90gr. at 1394 fps. How could this be? Could it possibly be over-velocity in action? BTW, the fastest bullet in this test (the Cor-Bon mentioned) was beaten in penetration by ALL the other rounds, and was also beaten by all but three in expansion.

Bottom line - Your test and this one are only two of many examples. When over-velocity is a factor, faster (higher velocity) doesn’t always equal better performance. In fact, it could mean just the opposite - poorer performance.

Bobo

[TRGTman]

Bobo, This is kind of like the old warnings to never use 9mm.  147Gr. JHPs for defense.  But the logic has sort of changed in this argument too. Now some of the better loads are the 147 JHPs. The advances in bullet design has improved the performance of these  bullets in actual test. But , I was sort of surprised at the lack of penetration in the longer barrel as shown with the UMC 115 JHP ; This means we need to  test every load we might carry to make sure it performs the way we want . Thanks for your comment !

[whkento]

Interesting results.  Thanks, TRGTman.