200 grain gold dot in 44 special

[mickbr]

Anyone use this bullet and have any pet loads or experience? I know its a bit sacrilegous but I'm asking here as you guys have a good saturation of 44 guys, and am sure a lot of us have taken a walk on the dark side.This bullet gets good reports on youtube, (for what they are worth) Advertised expansion at 850fps but a lot of tests show it getting .65cal expansion down to the high 700's.

[DHDeal]

What type of revolver are you planning to use them out of? I've shot a few cylinders full out of a new BH Flattop Bisley using HS6. I did not chronograph them and they obviously didn't shoot to the same POI as my standard 250 grain cast bullets, but they were accurate.

[pettypace]

Anyone use this bullet and have any pet loads or experience? I know its a bit sacrilegous but I'm asking here as you guys have a good saturation of 44 guys, and am sure a lot of us have taken a walk on the dark side.This bullet gets good reports on youtube, (for what they are worth) Advertised expansion at 850fps but a lot of tests show it getting .65cal expansion down to the high 700's.

I have no personal experience with Gold Dots. But they seem to have a good reputation among those who use them.

That having been said, for a defense load I wouldn't be overly impressed with any 200 grain JHP that expands to 0.65" at, say, 775 ft/s. Predicted penetration for that combination would barely meet FBI minimum standards. On the other hand, a 200 grain .44 caliber wadcutter at the same velocity would have about 50% deeper penetration with only slightly less wound mass. And no walk on the dark side is required.

[Dale53]

I agree with pettypace. I have been shooting .44 Specials for a very long time. My 200 gr. group buy dbl ended w/c gets nearly 900 fps with 5.0 grs. of Red Dot and, on demand, shoots under an inch at 25 yards. Performance on "meat" should be about as good as it gets with very modest recoil.

FWIW
Dale53

[mickbr]

I have no personal experience with Gold Dots. But they seem to have a good reputation among those who use them.

That having been said, for a defense load I wouldn't be overly impressed with any 200 grain JHP that expands to 0.65" at, say, 775 ft/s. Predicted penetration for that combination would barely meet FBI minimum standards. On the other hand, a 200 grain .44 caliber wadcutter at the same velocity would have about 50% deeper penetration with only slightly less wound mass. And no walk on the dark side is required.

Well several 45 ACP bullets meet similar parametres with HP and no problem there pleasing the FBI or anyone else. But this wasnt intended to be a HP vs cast bullet thread. More after any experiences at the range , printed velocities vs chrony reports, and so forth.

[mickbr]

What type of revolver are you planning to use them out of? I've shot a few cylinders full out of a new BH Flattop Bisley using HS6. I did not chronograph them and they obviously didn't shoot to the same POI as my standard 250 grain cast bullets, but they were accurate.
In the field, a lever action funnily enough. But thought I would ask here being they are a pistol bullet, and the loads will be direct pistol loads.

[onelight]

Here is a good video of a gel test with the 200 grain Speer and even a comparison with some cast HP. The underwood 200 gold dot load runs 860 FPS from my 3" GP100
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=+44+special+gold+dot+testing&&view=detail&mid=CC0E9C14E3C55D015E34CC0E9C14E3C55D015E34&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3D%2B44%2Bspecial%2Bgold %2Bdot%2Btesting%26FORM%3DVDRESM

[mickbr]

Thanks, thats impressive!

[MOA]

I use to load up a counter 44 snub air weight hammerless Smith with those gold dots for the evening shift at Ruff's liquor and guns in Flagstaff for the evening shift. Never felt under gunned.

[jonp]

I use to load up a counter 44 snub air weight hammerless Smith with those gold dots for the evening shift at Ruff's liquor and guns in Flagstaff for the evening shift. Never felt under gunned.

Bought my first handgun there while in College. 6in 357 Mag and a bag of reloads

[MOA]

Bought my first handgun there while in College. 6in 357 Mag and a bag of reloads

Those gold dots are a good j word for up close work if needed. I increased my inventory of items quite a bit from the years I worked there, and the years I worked at Andy's. I started in cast in a serious way from all the toys I dealt with on a daily basis there.

[bobthenailer]

I loaded up the 200 gr GD for my S&W 69 to duplicate factory ammo velocity as i usually use the Saeco #420 200 gr tc for 99% of my 44 shooting , I have 3 other 44 moulds but rarely use them

[onelight]

I have no idea what barrel length or velocity you have in mind but for a rifle that 200 grain gold dot may not hold together to well it is designed for 44 special hand gun velocity.

[JerryCan]

I used that in a Rossi snub nose. It worked fine, I shot some water jugs, etc. Performed well as far as I could tell.

[mickbr]

I have no idea what barrel length or velocity you have in mind but for a rifle that 200 grain gold dot may not hold together to well it is designed for 44 special hand gun velocity.

44 special velocities or maybe just into +P territory. Have been watching youtube vids on ballistics gel and seems it expands from 800fps impact( or a bit below) to about .60-.65cal. Through 850-900fps it gets full expansion of about .65 to .70cal and 12-14" penetration. After that expansion remains the same but penetration increases a few inches as the velocity is pushed higher all the way to 1050-1100fps. At 1150-1200fps the jacket separates and fragments but the core is still driving to 14-16".

[onelight]

44 special velocities or maybe just into +P territory. Have been watching youtube vids on ballistics gel and seems it expands from 800fps impact( or a bit below) to about .60-.65cal. Through 850-900fps it gets full expansion of about .65 to .70cal and 12-14" penetration. After that expansion remains the same but penetration increases a few inches as the velocity is pushed higher all the way to 1050-1100fps. At 1150-1200fps the jacket separates and fragments but the core is still driving to 14-16".

Well you have done your research . Good for you.
I carry the 200 grain gold dot in my GP100 for certain locations but for all around use I am another that thinks a Keith bullet , mine is the Lyman 429421 is a great all round bullet in 44 special but I also shoot a lot of commercial cast 240 swc Hi-tek coated. I like them all.

[mickbr]

Yes just watching others hard work on youtube really. What I was after moreso was anyone wanting to share load data. There is data out there in various manuals for 200 grain jacketed bullets. However it varies, oviously depending on whether its a revolver barrel or test barrel etc. Hence was interested in any real world testimonials. This is probably the wrong forum for it- I am more a fan of cast bullets in the calibre myself for the record. This was more a random foray into other areas.

[onelight]

Nice article on 44 special gel test with several bullets .
https://rangehot.com/44-smith-wesson-special-ballistic-test/

[pettypace]

Nice article on 44 special gel test with several bullets .
https://rangehot.com/44-smith-wesson-special-ballistic-test/

Note that the author, Hunter Elliott, never specified just what he used for "ballistic gel." But comparing his penetration data with predicted penetration from the models of Charles Schwartz (Quantitative Ammunition Selection) and/or Duncan MacPherson (Bullet Penetration), it's clear that Elliott was not using the validated 10% ordnance gelatin on which the FBI 12" to 18" penetration standard is based. More likely, Elliott was using Clear Ballistic gel and may have fallen for the same "No Calibration Needed" claim that fooled me not so long ago.

Roughly speaking, the problem with Clear Ballistic gel is that it's "softer" than 10% ordnance gel. So, bullets penetrate significantly deeper in C-B gel than in 10% ordnance gel (or in the soft tissue that it's supposed to simulate). In my own testing, I found hard-cast, solid bullets consistently penetrated about 25% deeper in C-B gel than the models predicted for 10% ordnance gelatin.

The problem is even worse for expanding hollow point bullets than for solids. Not only is the C-B gel "soft" on penetration, but it's also "soft" on bullet expansion. And because the bullet does not expand as much in C-B gel, the smaller bullet diameter gives even more penetration in the C-B gel than it would have had in 10% ordnance gelatin. Put another way, what appears to be ideal expansion (whatever that is) in C-B gel, might actually be over-expansion and resulting under-penetration in 10% ordnance gel.

Given that, I question the author's conclusion that "the Hornady Critical Defense and Glaser Safety Slug performed very well as a defensive round..." Neither comes very close to meeting the FBI minimum penetration standard.

[onelight]

Well the clear gel may not meet professional testing standards but it is probably more representative than water , dirt , wet magazines or any of the other test mediums people use , lots of information can be found on the popular duty ammunition but not much on 44 special.
And as far as I am concerned any gel is a poor substitute for flesh bone and blood but it is probably the best practical substitute. It at least gives you a way to compare bullet performance in gel. If I have to shoot through 12 to 18" of muscle to get to the good parts I need a much bigger gun :bigsmyl2:
I do like penetration more than expansion but I feel some situations require a compromise , well I guess most situations for CC guns do.

[Savvy Jack]

July 14th, 2014

In my experience, water expands the bullet more than synthetic gel.


265247
44-40, Uberti SAA revolver
16+" penetration clear ballistics gel

265252
Speer GDHP top left compared to the Speer GDHC 44 Mag bullet, both 44 Mag and used in the 44-40 as well as some 45 Colt tests.


265250 265248265251265249


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDqADMv51qg

[onelight]

Probably, huh? :shock: That's quite a claim. :wink:

Terminal ballistic performance in 10% ordnance gelatin and water have been strongly correlated to and have been shown over decades to represent terminal ballistic performance in human, porcine, feline, canine, and sheep soft muscle tissue, yet I am not aware that any such supporting research exists for the Clear Ballistics gel product. None of the other materials (dirt—assuming here that you meant soil, wet magazines and soaked newprint, etc.) that you mention have been correlated to terminal ballistic performance in soft tissues to the extent that BB-validated 10% ordnance gelatin has.

Reading the three sources (if you have bothered to, yes, they're lengthy) linked earlier in this thread demonstrates definitively that the Clear Ballistics gel product results in large variances (independent of caliber being tested) that understate expansion and overstate penetration depth making the results comparable only to what happens in the Clear Ballistics gel product itself, not human soft tissues. In other words, testing in Clear Ballistics gel tells us nothing other than how a projectile behaves in Clear Ballistics gel but not in human tissues.

There are many reasons that law-enforcement agencies both Federal and State/Local use either or both BB-validated 10% ordnance gelatin or water to evaluate the terminal ballistic performance of their ammunition. Among them are that both 10% ordnance gelatin and water produce scientifically-valid, repeatable tests results that correlate to those seen in actual human bodies shot under combat conditions. The same cannot be said of dirt/mud/soil, water-saturated newsprint/magazines or of the Clear Ballistics gel product.

I agree that is what I said gel is the closest thing they have found to test in I am not sure what the winking and "probably" is all about .
Savvy Jacks test is a good test , is it perfect or does it meet scientific standard probably not . I don't think he is selling any thing or cares if you can repeat it But it is still better a than lot of things people tested in before the gel was available but it has no bones no lungs no hide .
I have seen bullets flatten out on bone in an animal that have no expansion in gel.
If you want to believe gel is the same as a living animal that is your choice I would like to see where you hunt that animals are only meat no bones blood or organs .For me it is a tool to compare bullets in gel cause we don't have anything better to test in.
Don't get me wrong I am glad we have it I read the tests with interest .
But they are only a small part of the story I don't care where you buy you gel Do it the way you want accept the formal procedure as gospel . Me if I test I use water jugs but they are not an animal either.

[onelight]

Thanks for the post Jack
I know that when I was looking to find a bullet for my 3" GP100 to CC in certain places I had a hard time finding any kind of testing at velocities for 44 special most expanding bullets for .44 are designed for the magnum and not going to expand at lower velocities and the OPs post was looking for similar info for 44 special . Just what you posted.

[Savvy Jack]

Thanks for the post Jack
I know that when I was looking to find a bullet for my 3" GP100 to CC in certain places I had a hard time finding any kind of testing at velocities for 44 special most expanding bullets for .44 are designed for the magnum and not going to expand at lower velocities and the OPs post was looking for similar info for 44 special . Just what you posted.

Correct,

to add...hollow point bullets now days are designed to expand (perform) at certain velocities. Honestly they are not much more than a brand name tennis shoe...."the new" sells vs "old news"...been around for generations of which my first was Niki when they first started and the Panama Jack T-shirt a few years later. The 44 Special GDHP will over expand at 44 Magnum velocities thus the 44 Magnum has the GDHC that needs more velocity to expand. Nearly all typical handgun caliber HPs expand to around a 1/2", the main difference being energy and penetration ability or in the case of humans, the lack of too much penetration. We all know a hollow point is nothing more than a "parachute" on a dragster. A 44-40 hard lead RNFP will penetrate the broadside of a horse at only 700fps from a revolver. On my last hunting trip for white tail a few years ago, I used a 1,300fps load @ 65 yards using a 240gr Hornady lead SWC HP. It entered broadside at the shoulder, hit the blade, turned 90 degrees and traveled down the spinal cord obliterating everything lodging in the hind quarter. Deer never took a step, a bit too much over kill!

265272 265273


Another hunter used a 200gr XTP 44-40 load, here is the result
265274

Here is my gel test results using the 200gr XTP. Also remember, it is velocity at penetration, not the muzzle (this load not for typical use in revolvers, exceeds SAAMI Max pressures). Basically looks just like the one used on a deer above.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMD6Z2DUqvw 265275


Lets compare all of this with regular ole soft lead bullets from the old west days!!!
265276

265277


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTuFgGBWNFU
Let me know if you spot a phonominon in this test at :25 time frame. 44-40 about 75 yards I think it was...using good ole black powder loads and a soft lead bullet.

[onelight]

Is there fire in the gel at 25 .
Boy that load hit that block hard :bigsmyl2:

[Savvy Jack]

I am not surprised by your experience in the least.

The dynamic pressure that drives a bullet's expansion is the product of the mass-density of the medium being struck by the bullet times the square of the bullet's velocity according to Bernoulli's Law where PDYN = ½ρV2.

Given an identical impact velocity against both test mediums, it doesn't take a tremendous leap of logic to see that the higher density of water (whose mass-density is 0.999972 ± 0.004 g∙cm-3) should result in greater pressure being exerted upon a bullet striking the much less dense Clear Ballistics gel product (whose mass-density is 0.824 g∙cm-3) which stands in complete agreement with your observations of seeing greater bullet expansion in water than in the Clear Ballistics gel product.

You are correct, I was replying to, but did not quote.....


Well the clear gel may not meet professional testing standards but it is probably more representative than water , dirt , wet magazines or any of the other test mediums people use

[Savvy Jack]

Is there fire in the gel at 25 .
Boy that load hit that block hard :bigsmyl2:

Yeap!! Sonoluminescence, here is another one in a 44 Mag load


265278


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-85yeS9SeO8
look at 0:10

[onelight]

Yeap!! Sonoluminescence, here is another one in a 44 Mag load


265278
I don't know what that is and I couldn't spell it if I did , but I have seen that Flash in gel test videos before :cool:

[Savvy Jack]

Understood, thanks for clarifying.

The combustion that you are observing in the Clear Ballistic gel product during the penetration event is produced by the compression of the vaporized (in the vacuum of the temporary cavity) paraffinic processing oil (Paralux 701) used to plasticize the tri-block copolymer used in its manufacture. This is the same process that occurs in diesel engines when the fuel is compressed to the point of spontaneous auto-ignition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonoluminescence

[Savvy Jack]

Yes, I know what sonoluminescence is, but the phenomena occurring in the Clear Ballistics gel product is not what is occurring during the collapse of the temporary cavity in these events.

What is happening is the combustion of the processing oil vapor that is liberated under the transient vacuum that auto-ignite during the collapse of the temporary cavity.

Sonoluminescence does not produce combustion products because it is a plasma and consumes nothing chemically as it is merely the conversion of energy from one form to another (in this case, acoustic to light).

In the linked video, at 4 seconds you can see the formation of the combustion end-products (as a cloud of opaque black soot) in the collapsing temporary cavity after the light produced by the combustion of the oil vapor.

Combustion flash at 4 seconds:
265299

Combustion end-products (opaque, black, carbon-rich soot) formed immediately after the flash of combustible processing oil vapor at 4 seconds:
265300

As can be seen at 10-15 seconds into the attached video, the resulting combustion products (opaque carbon-rich soot which is indicative of incomplete combustion of the hydrocarbon processing oil vapor) are then ejected forcefully from the projectile's initial point of entry into the block of the Clear Ballistics gel product.

Combustion end-products (sooty smoke) ejected from the projectile's entry point:
265301

Detail of the smoky soot cloud (combustion end-products) being ejected from the block of Clear Ballistics gel product:
265302


Entire unedited video from which the above images are taken can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=3N9SBADBtYc&feature=emb_logo

This should settle the confusion as to what is actually occurring in the Clear Ballistics gel product.

I apologize, yes I have seen that video too, enjoy!

Fire Piston Effect - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_piston#:~:text=A%20fire%20piston%20consists%2 0of,and%20open%20at%20the%20other.&text=The%20compression%20of%20the%20air,the%20auto ignition%20temperature%20of%20tinder.

Sonoluminescence - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonoluminescence

[Savvy Jack]

Please don't apologize for good discourse and questions. ;-) I figured that you'd understand once the video displaying the entirety of the phenomena could be considered. I have enjoyed this exchange.

ETA: One of the other major technical issues that comes with using the Clear Ballistics gel product is that testing with that particular medium tends to produce an excessive amount of projectile ''rebound'' wherein test projectiles rebound several inches rearward and come to rest at a depth that is far shallower than their actual maximum penetration depth.

One such example can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czsd-v5sm3s

In the specific case cited, the test projectile reaches its maximum penetration depth of 18 inches in the Clear Ballistics polymer product at 8 seconds into the video—

265311

—and then rebounds inside the temporary cavity to a depth of 13.5 inches where it then remains permanently at rest from 12 seconds to the end of the video—

265312

—having rebounded 4.5 inches(!) which is a reduction of 25% of its maximum penetration depth seen at the 8-second mark in the above-referenced video.

My first tests shots using clear ballistics gel was July 3rd, 2014. Watching those videos is what finally got me to try it. I watched nearly every video available at the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7amWWr2oVjg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC2SUehnJ5A

[cwlongshot]

I have a dandy custom 429421 mold thats been HP'd. Cast in 20:1 and shot about 1050- 1100 It doubles its dia. Have t tried 30:1 or 40:1 with this one but might be needed for reliable expansion at the lower Spl velocities.

But its a great HP bullet for me!!

CW

https://youtu.be/_F8_xKrwqdo

https://youtu.be/SRTjfEu4Zlc