wheatsnackbread
Bearcat
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2018
- Messages
- 6
Hey all,
I've been trying to find some real life velocity data on the various heavy hitter 454 rounds without much luck. I just picked up my first revolver (super redhawk 454 7.5") so instead of begging for someone to go out and test all the ammo, I took a trip to the interweb store and picked up what looked to be the top contenders.
All data was acquired using a lab radar chronograph and my 7.5" super redhawk. Loads tested were:
Garrett H454 360 gr
Hornady 300 gr xtp
HSM 325 gr bear loads
HSM 45 Colt +P 325 gr bear loads
Buffalo Bore 360 gr
Double Tap 400 gr
I also have some grizzly 360s and some Underwood 360s that I was planning on testing, but unfortunately my chronograph chewed through its 6 AA batteries, and the range I was using was just too tacticool to carry batteries other than CR123s.
The main focus of my testing was to gather velocity data, and test for crimp jump. All velocity data was acquired over a 6 shot spread.
I did not do any significant accuracy testing, although at 25 yards, my grouping was pretty much the same as when I'm shooting my glock 21 or 19. I like to think I'm not a terrible shot, and I think I can confidently tell everyone that from the standing at 25 yards, all rounds tested were plenty accurate for defense use. Energy was calculated using the standard kinetic energy formula of bullet weight in grains multiplied by the square of the velocity in feet per second, and dividing that number by 450,435.
For the crimp testing, I took 4 rounds of each brand and subjected them to 20 recoil impulses, or until they failed. The only ones I documented the crimp testing on were the double tap 400 gr, because it did eventually give, and the hsm 454 since a lot of people seem to claim they jump crimp, which they didn't. All other brands held up.
One thing to keep in consideration about crimp jump, is just because "Brand X" didn't jump crimp in my pistol, does not mean that it wouldn't in a smaller variant like the toklat or the Alaskan. The super redhawk owners manual has a warning specific to the Alaskan about muzzle flip and recoil. That extra muzzle flip and recoil could certainly cause crimp jump in an Alaskan with a brand that did fine out of my 7.5", so if you own an Alaskan or Toklat and plan on using it for defense against something toothy and fussy, buy a couple boxes of ammo and some icy-hots and go do the crimp jump test in your gun before picking a fight with a polar bear, cape buffalo, triceratops, mammoth, or whatever other ill tempered beasts live in your lovely slice of heaven.
So without further rambling, here is all the data, and here's to my first post being something useful. Stay tuned for Underwood and grizzly data next week. Also for anyone interested, my new charity, the Fix My Bloody Broken Hand Foundation, is now accepting donations of ice bags and Motrin.
Garrett H454 365gr
Advertised velocity- 1500 FPS
Actual velocity- 1360 FPS
Advertised energy- 1798 ft lbs
Actual energy- 1478 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 33 FPS
Standard deviation- 13 FPS
Highest- 1377 FPS
Lowest- 1344 FPS
Notes
Hardest recoiling by far, but also the most consistent. I was disappointed that a company like Garrett that is held in very high regard was not closer to its advertised velocity. While I don't worship velocity, kinetic energy, or various other paper statistics, they do count for something, and coming in 140 FPS below the advertised velocity could be significant to a handgun hunter that has to shoot through brush or wishes to maintain a minimum impact velocity; lower starting velocity equals less effective range. The box did state that a freedom arms 7.5"barrel was used. I understand that freedom arms are some of the finest revolvers in the world, but a 140 FPS velocity difference between manufacturers seems a bit extreme. Extraction was smooth and stickieness free though.
I'm aware of the many things that Garrett has written about velocity in relation to penetration, and how you eventually get to a point of diminishing return after a certain speed, and also can cause catastrophic deceleration in cast lead bullets by pushing them too fast, but to many, having those extra few hundred FPS can be worth a bit more recoil.
Of the 20 rounds I fired, I did have one failure to fire, but it looked like a light primer hit, so I'm willing to give the ammo a pass on that one. I have about 30 more left to shoot, so I will update this if there are any more.
For what it's worth, I think the Garrett bullets also looked the best of all the ones I tested. One can easily tell that a lot of attention to detail goes into Garrett's casting process. And the packaging is good too; a nice reusable plastic box beats cheap cardboard any day.
Hornady 300gr
Advertised velocity 1650 FPS
Actual velocity 1548 FPS
Advertised energy 1813 ft lbs
Actual energy- 1596 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 47 FPS
Standard deviation- 25 FPS
Highest- 1566 FPS
Lowest- 1519 FPS
Notes
The hornadys probably had the sharpest recoil impulse, but not the most felt recoil. Kind of like shooting a 40 compared to a 45. It was definitely snappy and probably the least pleasant to shoot, but I'm sure those 300 gr hollow points moving as fast as they do would do a number on thin skinned game or 2 legged predators. I can only imagine the cleaning one would have to do if they used one of these to the T box to stop a home invasion. Hopefully the whole house would be tile and have no furniture or curtains.
I was not too surprised by the actual velocity and the difference in what was advertised; hornady is a big company and thus has to compete with other big companies, so their use of "marketing ballistics" was somewhat expected. Extraction was smooth and did not stick.
HSM Bear Load 325gr
Advertised velocity- 1330 FPS
Actual velocity- 1114 FPS
Advertised energy- 1277 ft lbs
Actual energy- 895 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 81 FPS
Standard deviation- 30 FPS
Highest- 1160 FPS
Lowest- 1079 FPS
Notes
The HSM Bear loads were very pleasant to shoot (as pleasant as a 454 can be), which is not surprising considering it was the lightest and slowest moving bullet of all that I tested. They also have the biggest deficit in advertised velocity vs actual velocity, at a whopping 216 FPS. While they didn't specify the barrel length used in testing, all other manufacturers specified a 7.5", so that seems pretty standard for a test barrel. I would be curious to hear from HSM why their numbers are so inflated for this round.
These rounds were a bit on the dirty side... a bit more smoke and slightly sticky extraction, but these were also the cheapest 454 rounds I've seen in a store, at about $40 per 50, so I suppose you get what you pay for. Good round to use as a stepping stone for new shooters building up their recoil tolerance.
I also did a crimp jump test with these because of what various other people had to say about them jumping crimp. I exposed 4 rounds to 20 recoil impulses, and they held in place. There was a growth of about .002 across the 4 I tested, but the crimps seemed to hold up. Not the most extensive test, but based on the results, I would be willing to bet they fixed their crimp jumping issues.
HSM Bear Load 325gr 45 colt +P
Advertised velocity- 1155 FPS
Actual velocity- 1126 FPS
Advertised energy- 963 ft lbs
Actual energy- 914 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 39 FPS
Standard deviation- 14 FPS
Highest- 1144 FPS
Lowest-1104 FPS
Notes
I found it funny that these rounds in 45 colt actually averaged a few FPS faster than their 454 counterparts. And at about $9 cheaper per box of 50, it seems like a no brainer. Recoil was easy on the hand, but like the hsm 454 it was slightly sticky and slightly more smoke than the other brands.
Buffalo bore 360 gr
Advertised velocity- 1425 FPS
Actual velocity- 1368 FPS
Advertised energy- 1622 ft lbs
Actual energy- 1495 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 91 FPS
Standard deviation- 29 FPS
Highest- 1410 FPS
Lowest- 1320 FPS
Notes
Felt recoil was about the same as the hornadys but not as sharp. For some reason, these also kicked noticeably less than the Garrett rounds. I guess that extra 8 FPS and 5 grains of bullet make quite a difference in the Garretts.
Extraction was a tiny bit sticky, but not overly sticky. I probably had to tap the rod an extra one or two times. To be fair, this was one of the last rounds I tested so it could have been a dirty cylinder.
Double tap 400 gr
Advertised velocity- 1400 FPS
Actual velocity- 1272 FPS
Advertised energy- 1740 ft lbs
Actual energy- 1436 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 91 FPS
Standard deviation- 25 FPS
Highest- 1322 FPS
Lowest- 1231 FPS
Notes
These ones I bought just to see if I could get them to jump crimp. There are enough reviews of this round to make me not want to trust my life to it if Im getting mugged in a dark alley by a costal brown bear, but I was glad they didn't jump crimp immediately like they apparently have for some.
I did the same test with these that I did with the other rounds, but these did eventually fail. I had two jump to the point of cylinder lockup after being exposed to 12 recoil impulses, and the other two gave out after 16. Still, that's better than failing after two or 3 rounds, but I still wouldn't carry these as bear defense rounds.
Recoil wasn't noticeably different than the buffalo bores. Big and heavy but not snappy and violent like the hornady 454s were. One thing I will say is that these rounds were dirtier than the most filthy of skid row homeless folk. There was noticeably more smoke, and quite a bit of carbon fouling... I was half expecting my gun to smell like urine, b.o. and crushed dreams when I popped the cylinder open. Very rough and sticky extraction too.
I may be overly critical about this, but the bullets were also just ugly. Lots of casting marks... like to the point of them looking like they were tumbled using lawn mower blades as media. These are definitely the rounds you take home because the bar is about to close and they're just all that's left... and sure, they'll probably get the job done, but you don't tell your pals you used them, you would rather not look at them and you best better clean up real good afterwards and set your standards higher next time.
Muzzle flash
https://i.imgur.com/5fLAYSl.png
Jump in cylinder
https://i.imgur.com/mj0TG2f.jpg
Crimp jump line up. Numbers on brass are how many shots to failure
https://i.imgur.com/ZcPus6M.jpg
Before firing
https://i.imgur.com/tpu4h90.jpg
After firing
https://i.imgur.com/wfL3UIS.jpg
Left: Garrett right: double tap
https://i.imgur.com/xyYS50J.jpg
Buffalo Bore's comically big boxes
https://i.imgur.com/uBx6cD0.jpg
Double tap 400s looking fugly
https://i.imgur.com/IBvWV2F.jpg
What shooting that much 454 in one session did to my hands
https://i.imgur.com/ajHcFCv.jpg
I've been trying to find some real life velocity data on the various heavy hitter 454 rounds without much luck. I just picked up my first revolver (super redhawk 454 7.5") so instead of begging for someone to go out and test all the ammo, I took a trip to the interweb store and picked up what looked to be the top contenders.
All data was acquired using a lab radar chronograph and my 7.5" super redhawk. Loads tested were:
Garrett H454 360 gr
Hornady 300 gr xtp
HSM 325 gr bear loads
HSM 45 Colt +P 325 gr bear loads
Buffalo Bore 360 gr
Double Tap 400 gr
I also have some grizzly 360s and some Underwood 360s that I was planning on testing, but unfortunately my chronograph chewed through its 6 AA batteries, and the range I was using was just too tacticool to carry batteries other than CR123s.
The main focus of my testing was to gather velocity data, and test for crimp jump. All velocity data was acquired over a 6 shot spread.
I did not do any significant accuracy testing, although at 25 yards, my grouping was pretty much the same as when I'm shooting my glock 21 or 19. I like to think I'm not a terrible shot, and I think I can confidently tell everyone that from the standing at 25 yards, all rounds tested were plenty accurate for defense use. Energy was calculated using the standard kinetic energy formula of bullet weight in grains multiplied by the square of the velocity in feet per second, and dividing that number by 450,435.
For the crimp testing, I took 4 rounds of each brand and subjected them to 20 recoil impulses, or until they failed. The only ones I documented the crimp testing on were the double tap 400 gr, because it did eventually give, and the hsm 454 since a lot of people seem to claim they jump crimp, which they didn't. All other brands held up.
One thing to keep in consideration about crimp jump, is just because "Brand X" didn't jump crimp in my pistol, does not mean that it wouldn't in a smaller variant like the toklat or the Alaskan. The super redhawk owners manual has a warning specific to the Alaskan about muzzle flip and recoil. That extra muzzle flip and recoil could certainly cause crimp jump in an Alaskan with a brand that did fine out of my 7.5", so if you own an Alaskan or Toklat and plan on using it for defense against something toothy and fussy, buy a couple boxes of ammo and some icy-hots and go do the crimp jump test in your gun before picking a fight with a polar bear, cape buffalo, triceratops, mammoth, or whatever other ill tempered beasts live in your lovely slice of heaven.
So without further rambling, here is all the data, and here's to my first post being something useful. Stay tuned for Underwood and grizzly data next week. Also for anyone interested, my new charity, the Fix My Bloody Broken Hand Foundation, is now accepting donations of ice bags and Motrin.
Garrett H454 365gr
Advertised velocity- 1500 FPS
Actual velocity- 1360 FPS
Advertised energy- 1798 ft lbs
Actual energy- 1478 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 33 FPS
Standard deviation- 13 FPS
Highest- 1377 FPS
Lowest- 1344 FPS
Notes
Hardest recoiling by far, but also the most consistent. I was disappointed that a company like Garrett that is held in very high regard was not closer to its advertised velocity. While I don't worship velocity, kinetic energy, or various other paper statistics, they do count for something, and coming in 140 FPS below the advertised velocity could be significant to a handgun hunter that has to shoot through brush or wishes to maintain a minimum impact velocity; lower starting velocity equals less effective range. The box did state that a freedom arms 7.5"barrel was used. I understand that freedom arms are some of the finest revolvers in the world, but a 140 FPS velocity difference between manufacturers seems a bit extreme. Extraction was smooth and stickieness free though.
I'm aware of the many things that Garrett has written about velocity in relation to penetration, and how you eventually get to a point of diminishing return after a certain speed, and also can cause catastrophic deceleration in cast lead bullets by pushing them too fast, but to many, having those extra few hundred FPS can be worth a bit more recoil.
Of the 20 rounds I fired, I did have one failure to fire, but it looked like a light primer hit, so I'm willing to give the ammo a pass on that one. I have about 30 more left to shoot, so I will update this if there are any more.
For what it's worth, I think the Garrett bullets also looked the best of all the ones I tested. One can easily tell that a lot of attention to detail goes into Garrett's casting process. And the packaging is good too; a nice reusable plastic box beats cheap cardboard any day.
Hornady 300gr
Advertised velocity 1650 FPS
Actual velocity 1548 FPS
Advertised energy 1813 ft lbs
Actual energy- 1596 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 47 FPS
Standard deviation- 25 FPS
Highest- 1566 FPS
Lowest- 1519 FPS
Notes
The hornadys probably had the sharpest recoil impulse, but not the most felt recoil. Kind of like shooting a 40 compared to a 45. It was definitely snappy and probably the least pleasant to shoot, but I'm sure those 300 gr hollow points moving as fast as they do would do a number on thin skinned game or 2 legged predators. I can only imagine the cleaning one would have to do if they used one of these to the T box to stop a home invasion. Hopefully the whole house would be tile and have no furniture or curtains.
I was not too surprised by the actual velocity and the difference in what was advertised; hornady is a big company and thus has to compete with other big companies, so their use of "marketing ballistics" was somewhat expected. Extraction was smooth and did not stick.
HSM Bear Load 325gr
Advertised velocity- 1330 FPS
Actual velocity- 1114 FPS
Advertised energy- 1277 ft lbs
Actual energy- 895 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 81 FPS
Standard deviation- 30 FPS
Highest- 1160 FPS
Lowest- 1079 FPS
Notes
The HSM Bear loads were very pleasant to shoot (as pleasant as a 454 can be), which is not surprising considering it was the lightest and slowest moving bullet of all that I tested. They also have the biggest deficit in advertised velocity vs actual velocity, at a whopping 216 FPS. While they didn't specify the barrel length used in testing, all other manufacturers specified a 7.5", so that seems pretty standard for a test barrel. I would be curious to hear from HSM why their numbers are so inflated for this round.
These rounds were a bit on the dirty side... a bit more smoke and slightly sticky extraction, but these were also the cheapest 454 rounds I've seen in a store, at about $40 per 50, so I suppose you get what you pay for. Good round to use as a stepping stone for new shooters building up their recoil tolerance.
I also did a crimp jump test with these because of what various other people had to say about them jumping crimp. I exposed 4 rounds to 20 recoil impulses, and they held in place. There was a growth of about .002 across the 4 I tested, but the crimps seemed to hold up. Not the most extensive test, but based on the results, I would be willing to bet they fixed their crimp jumping issues.
HSM Bear Load 325gr 45 colt +P
Advertised velocity- 1155 FPS
Actual velocity- 1126 FPS
Advertised energy- 963 ft lbs
Actual energy- 914 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 39 FPS
Standard deviation- 14 FPS
Highest- 1144 FPS
Lowest-1104 FPS
Notes
I found it funny that these rounds in 45 colt actually averaged a few FPS faster than their 454 counterparts. And at about $9 cheaper per box of 50, it seems like a no brainer. Recoil was easy on the hand, but like the hsm 454 it was slightly sticky and slightly more smoke than the other brands.
Buffalo bore 360 gr
Advertised velocity- 1425 FPS
Actual velocity- 1368 FPS
Advertised energy- 1622 ft lbs
Actual energy- 1495 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 91 FPS
Standard deviation- 29 FPS
Highest- 1410 FPS
Lowest- 1320 FPS
Notes
Felt recoil was about the same as the hornadys but not as sharp. For some reason, these also kicked noticeably less than the Garrett rounds. I guess that extra 8 FPS and 5 grains of bullet make quite a difference in the Garretts.
Extraction was a tiny bit sticky, but not overly sticky. I probably had to tap the rod an extra one or two times. To be fair, this was one of the last rounds I tested so it could have been a dirty cylinder.
Double tap 400 gr
Advertised velocity- 1400 FPS
Actual velocity- 1272 FPS
Advertised energy- 1740 ft lbs
Actual energy- 1436 ft lbs
Extreme spread- 91 FPS
Standard deviation- 25 FPS
Highest- 1322 FPS
Lowest- 1231 FPS
Notes
These ones I bought just to see if I could get them to jump crimp. There are enough reviews of this round to make me not want to trust my life to it if Im getting mugged in a dark alley by a costal brown bear, but I was glad they didn't jump crimp immediately like they apparently have for some.
I did the same test with these that I did with the other rounds, but these did eventually fail. I had two jump to the point of cylinder lockup after being exposed to 12 recoil impulses, and the other two gave out after 16. Still, that's better than failing after two or 3 rounds, but I still wouldn't carry these as bear defense rounds.
Recoil wasn't noticeably different than the buffalo bores. Big and heavy but not snappy and violent like the hornady 454s were. One thing I will say is that these rounds were dirtier than the most filthy of skid row homeless folk. There was noticeably more smoke, and quite a bit of carbon fouling... I was half expecting my gun to smell like urine, b.o. and crushed dreams when I popped the cylinder open. Very rough and sticky extraction too.
I may be overly critical about this, but the bullets were also just ugly. Lots of casting marks... like to the point of them looking like they were tumbled using lawn mower blades as media. These are definitely the rounds you take home because the bar is about to close and they're just all that's left... and sure, they'll probably get the job done, but you don't tell your pals you used them, you would rather not look at them and you best better clean up real good afterwards and set your standards higher next time.
Muzzle flash
https://i.imgur.com/5fLAYSl.png
Jump in cylinder
https://i.imgur.com/mj0TG2f.jpg
Crimp jump line up. Numbers on brass are how many shots to failure
https://i.imgur.com/ZcPus6M.jpg
Before firing
https://i.imgur.com/tpu4h90.jpg
After firing
https://i.imgur.com/wfL3UIS.jpg
Left: Garrett right: double tap
https://i.imgur.com/xyYS50J.jpg
Buffalo Bore's comically big boxes
https://i.imgur.com/uBx6cD0.jpg
Double tap 400s looking fugly
https://i.imgur.com/IBvWV2F.jpg
What shooting that much 454 in one session did to my hands
https://i.imgur.com/ajHcFCv.jpg
