Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    South East US
    Posts
    1,437
    These are the old 74 grain 9 mm load.
    https://youtu.be/cSTxnhUF2zY


    https://youtu.be/arqYKyeFczM

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    748
    Just as a point of reference, I shot a
    box of the ARX's in my hunt for an
    accurate self defense round for my
    RMR'd 17.4. I was impressed with
    the accuracy, but decided to go with
    the Critical Duty for my carry load.
    I wanted the heavier bullet weight
    for street carry for my 17.

    Both of these groups were shot
    off a bench rest with the factory
    barrel, an RM08G, & SI 417 slide
    at 30 yards.



    "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes" Alan Temby
    "Give a man a mask and he will tell you the truth"- Oscar Wilde.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Third Coast
    Posts
    4,031
    several years ago I tested the old federal ballisticlean 100gr BC9NT2 ammo . it was designed for shooting steel up close. Composed of basically a clipped section of multistrand zinc cable that was then semi jacketed by copper. We found that when shot into gel the jacket separated and the strands unwound in about 1/2 to 3/4 inch lengths and took separate paths through the gel. continuing to "cut" during their path. After testing I kept at least one mag of it for soft targets. Wouldnt work well on hard targets but I always wondered why they didnt market it as a defensive round.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    NEVER CONFUSE GETTING LUCKY WITH GOOD TACTICS (unless you are at the bar)

    I'm not in the business of Losing

    A stab to the taint beats most of the mystical bullshit, most of the time

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Prescott
    Posts
    558
    So I've actually shot the Ruger Arx and the company that makes them for them to test performance side by side. Both rounds were tumbling at 10yds with a dead wind (indoor range). They groups well regardless of their sideways holes on paper, but I would not expect these to act any differently

    Do NOT call me an armorer
    Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
    Now I am become Death, the destroyer of all worlds
    People have asked me if I consider myself a good or bad person. The truth of it is, I don't know or care. I have been called both. I like to think I have saved more lives than I have ended. Either way, I can still sleep at night.
    SEMPER FI

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    NW Washington
    Posts
    2,999
    Odd. I've never had one tumble. Different results from different barrels i guess.

    Sasquatch, interesting info. I have to wonder though, was that shot you describe through bone? I ask because I saw similar damage on a deer with FMJ pistol bullets that were definitely bone shots; the secondary projectiles can do a lot of damage. It's always useful to see more results though, thanks for sharing yours.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Western WA
    Posts
    5,248
    Quote Originally Posted by ShopMonkey View Post
    So I've actually shot the Ruger Arx and the company that makes them for them to test performance side by side. Both rounds were tumbling at 10yds with a dead wind (indoor range). They groups well regardless of their sideways holes on paper, but I would not expect these to act any differently
    I have the same experience. As I recall I fired it from both a G 19 and a G 43. Maybe from a shield as well but I do not remember.

    Unfortunately I do not remember which barrels are used, whether they were stock or SI barrels.
    In any event I did not find the ammunition accurate enough. I thought with the light weight bullets there might be a noticeable difference in recoil but if so it was lost on me.
    Brent Yamamoto
    Suarez International Tier 1 Staff Instructor

    Ready, willing, able. Bring it.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    South East US
    Posts
    1,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Yondering View Post
    Odd. I've never had one tumble. Different results from different barrels i guess.

    Sasquatch, interesting info. I have to wonder though, was that shot you describe through bone? I ask because I saw similar damage on a deer with FMJ pistol bullets that were definitely bone shots; the secondary projectiles can do a lot of damage. It's always useful to see more results though, thanks for sharing yours.
    Yondering, No sir....zero bone struck. Went between ribs on both sides to include both lungs and out thru the leg again w/ no bone contacted in any way. The armadillo on the other hand was shell, bone & heavy muscle...resulting in an explosion of sorts. Watch the video links (and many others on youtube) for the high speed camera footage....the old 74 gr loads would reliably yaw very quickly. The newer faster 65's will generate more energy and likely yaw quicker.

    Personally I think the concept is working.....as for the hydraulic forces being forced out of the flutes....I'm not sure as it doesn't seem to travel in a straight nose forward attitude much.....yawing and resulting energy transfer and a larger frontal area because of yawing....yes definitely.

    Regarding bullet stabilization. I've shot it in a 43, two LCPs, a relative shot it in a G-26, a G-21 and a Keltec P3AT w/ no key holing or stabilization issues. I didn't see any youtube tests speak of this issue and I've watched a bunch of them. Hit youtube and query "ARX tests" and you'll see consistently good accuracy, reliability, penetration and yawing/energy transfer.

    Candidly, if you're dealing with a pistol that is finicky w/ JHPs, then this may be a good solution. But, I'm still toting 124 +P HSTs in my G-19s. Again only time will tell....but it appears to be promising technology.

    Tks, S.
    Last edited by Sasquatch; 04-30-2018 at 04:45 PM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    NW Washington
    Posts
    2,999
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch View Post
    ..the old 74 gr loads would reliably yaw very quickly.
    OK, that's different than what I tested, all of the fluted rounds I tried were the newer lighter version. I did not see any evidence of yaw with them in several types of wet and dry media, just straight penetration without much radial effect. Interesting to compare your results with what I saw, but knowing that it was a slightly different bullet makes sense.

    I was also disappointed with their penetration (or lack of) in various thicknesses of aluminum and steel sheet, with auto body panels in mind. Even though I was testing hot (+P and +P+) loads with these, they wouldn't shoot through a 1/4" aluminum plate, just left a divot and fell to the ground. The 90gr Lehigh I tested at the same time not only punched through, but was still effective on the far side. Several other more common defense rounds, like the 124gr Gold Dot, also punched through easily.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    South East US
    Posts
    1,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Yondering View Post
    OK, that's different than what I tested, all of the fluted rounds I tried were the newer lighter version. I did not see any evidence of yaw with them in several types of wet and dry media, just straight penetration without much radial effect. Interesting to compare your results with what I saw, but knowing that it was a slightly different bullet makes sense.

    I was also disappointed with their penetration (or lack of) in various thicknesses of aluminum and steel sheet, with auto body panels in mind. Even though I was testing hot (+P and +P+) loads with these, they wouldn't shoot through a 1/4" aluminum plate, just left a divot and fell to the ground. The 90gr Lehigh I tested at the same time not only punched through, but was still effective on the far side. Several other more common defense rounds, like the 124gr Gold Dot, also punched through easily.
    The weak point of these ARXs is windshield glass and metal etc. They seem to penetrate wood, wall board etc. well. What are you looking for it to do?? If I wanted a round to penetrate deep and do damage (i.e. large animals), the Lehigh sounds promising. In my case, I'm not sure I trust the frontal profile of the Lehigh in my already finicky G43....that's the main reason I'm even toying w/ the ARXs.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    NW Washington
    Posts
    2,999
    I'm surprised to hear your 43 is so finicky; mine feeds pretty much everything, including SWC profile which many 9mm pistols won't. Are you using an aftermarket barrel or mags? I did notice the ETS mags were more finicky about what would feed well in the 43.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •