PDA

View Full Version : FMJ vs Hard-Cast



dsapp
02-20-2004, 01:01 PM
which is harder, ie. less prone to deformation?

specifically talking about handgun rounds...

Anthony
02-20-2004, 01:26 PM
which is harder, ie. less prone to deformation?

specifically talking about handgun rounds...

IMHO,
Hard cast. FMJ bullets generally have a soft lead swagged core.
There are probably exceptions. Brass bullets do not count gents. I'm saying this before somebody 'delights' in 'shooting me down' !
A solid bullet is generally a better penetrator.
Hopefully David DiFabio will string along on this thread.

Regards,
Anthony.

John Silver
02-21-2004, 09:21 AM
Deformation on feeding off a magazine or hitting bone?

I guess I'd ask why?

For repeated loading/unloading, the FMJ will hold up better assuming equal crimps.

If you are looking for straight line penetration, the rounded profile of FMJ's can make them change course when hitting bone, while a hard cast lead SWC tends to give better straight line penetration. Many of the top handgun hunting loads in history have been lead SWC for this reason. Cooper liked the old truncated cone shape FMJ as a compromise fighting round.

Not sure if that helped, but there you go.

Jdam110
11-24-2015, 03:51 AM
if your ammo is Deformation from feeding off a magazine.. you got some problems!

Deformation on hitting bone, might work in your favor. once deformed the round might tear tissue, cause more bleeding than a smooth round nose bullet.

Danneskjold
11-24-2015, 04:09 AM
Bringing Anthony back to life...

choirboy
11-24-2015, 04:46 AM
Bringing Anthony back to life...

I saw the post and I though my senile brain was mistaken about Anthony's passing.

God Rest all of our departed,
Choirboy

reforger2002
11-24-2015, 07:53 AM
I suspect the difference is pretty much nill - big game hunters esp bear hunters like heavy, hard cast bullets out of monster bore revolvers in an attempt to break a bears shoulder while charging so maybe there is something to it