Thank you for very good demonstration, data and description. Surprised that the Duty failed. The Defense seems like a 380 +p more than a standard 9mm. It isn't a failure. If one is looking for light recoil and less penetration with some expansion then it is a good option. Appreciate the good content.
I too was surprised with Duty. Not very much of a barrier but it sure did effect it. You are correct, Defense certainly did not fail. It did better than Duty but still not as good as some other bullets we tested like the Federal HST. Thank for watching and posting!
Great video as always. Imo the Critical Duty is one of the worst hollow points where terminal performance is concerned. Barrier blind usually means terminal performance suffers.
Like some of your other viewers here, I'm a bit surprised at the Duty version performance. I know the PAC-T protocol doesn't necessarily allow for multiple shots, but maybe someday you could try shooting a few more of those into the gel, getting a sample size of three or five. The Hornady Critical line is carried by so many, myself included, that these results are concerning.
Hello Aaron. Thanks for watching and posting your ideas. I have already been thinking about a "second chance" test to increase the sample size. At the same time I worry that if I needed to use that one particular bullet, I might really regret it. How many would fail to expand? I have not had a failure from HST or the Corbon (in fact, I just bought more Corbon). What do you think?
Thanks for the question. The highest scoring 9mm bullets were the 115 gr. Corbon DPX with 437.5 pts. in bare gel and the same score in our soft barrier test, and the 124 gr. HST (also 437 pts.) The HST I use is +P but I also have some standard HST. Thanks for watching
I have not tested these same rounds in .45 ACP and I would not extrapolate 9mm results to .45 results. Very different rounds as you know. We do have some otherr .45 ACP soft barrier tests coming out later this summer. Thanks for watching and posting!
Yes, that is correct. What if that one fluke bullet was the one you needed? There are several bullets that are better than the Critical Duty. I have not seen a fluke from the Federal HST or Corbon DPX.
Me too. Quite surprised. I actually thought the performance between the two would be quite similar. The soft barrier I used was quite realistic, but should not have been difficult to defeat.
@@mrpibb7781 Yes, Critical Duty is designed as "barrier blind". By definition that means the bullet will perform well (normal) even after passing through a barrier. That should include soft barriers which are the norm. In this case, Duty clogged and failed to expand. That does not mean it would not be lethal however.
Thank you for very good demonstration, data and description. Surprised that the Duty failed. The Defense seems like a 380 +p more than a standard 9mm. It isn't a failure. If one is looking for light recoil and less penetration with some expansion then it is a good option. Appreciate the good content.
I too was surprised with Duty. Not very much of a barrier but it sure did effect it.
You are correct, Defense certainly did not fail. It did better than Duty but still not as good as some other bullets we tested like the Federal HST.
Thank for watching and posting!
Great video as always. Imo the Critical Duty is one of the worst hollow points where terminal performance is concerned. Barrier blind usually means terminal performance suffers.
Thanks. Your opinion of the Critical Duty bullet was spot on. It did not perform well in this scenario.
@@sdkweber So when will your next PAC-T test come out?
@@funwithballistics1016 Our next PAC-T comes out in 2 weeks. Next Thursday we got a pretty neat scope video coming out.
@@sdkweber can't wait!
@@funwithballistics1016 I think it is going to be some nice videos. Have a good weekend.
What's the best 9mm defensive round???
Like some of your other viewers here, I'm a bit surprised at the Duty version performance. I know the PAC-T protocol doesn't necessarily allow for multiple shots, but maybe someday you could try shooting a few more of those into the gel, getting a sample size of three or five. The Hornady Critical line is carried by so many, myself included, that these results are concerning.
Hello Aaron. Thanks for watching and posting your ideas. I have already been thinking about a "second chance" test to increase the sample size. At the same time I worry that if I needed to use that one particular bullet, I might really regret it. How many would fail to expand? I have not had a failure from HST or the Corbon (in fact, I just bought more Corbon). What do you think?
What 9mm defensive load scored the best on the PAC-T? Was it the Federal HST 124 grain? Have you tested the +p in the HST?
Thanks for the question. The highest scoring 9mm bullets were the 115 gr. Corbon DPX with 437.5 pts. in bare gel and the same score in our soft barrier test, and the 124 gr. HST (also 437 pts.) The HST I use is +P but I also have some standard HST.
Thanks for watching
Please add Defiant Munitions 9mm 115 grain + TCX to your PAC-T testing plans.
What I want to know is where in the world were you where it's 52 degrees in July???????????
That's funny. We recorded this video in late April but it aired today in July.
Did you conduct this test on the defense and duty .45?
Can we extrapolate the 9mm results to the .45 or would they perform better?
I have not tested these same rounds in .45 ACP and I would not extrapolate 9mm results to .45 results. Very different rounds as you know. We do have some otherr .45 ACP soft barrier tests coming out later this summer. Thanks for watching and posting!
You shooting innocent people with critical duty. I need new ammo 😮
U just did on round w ballistics? The duty could have been a fluke
Yes, that is correct. What if that one fluke bullet was the one you needed?
There are several bullets that are better than the Critical Duty. I have not seen a fluke from the Federal HST or Corbon DPX.
Humm,, the critical duty ammo surprised me that it didn’t even try to expand,,
From what I heard. Critical Duty is made to be "barrier blind" so it resists mushrooming. Not sure if that's internet mumbo jumbo or not.
Me too. Quite surprised. I actually thought the performance between the two would be quite similar. The soft barrier I used was quite realistic, but should not have been difficult to defeat.
@@mrpibb7781 Yes, Critical Duty is designed as "barrier blind". By definition that means the bullet will perform well (normal) even after passing through a barrier. That should include soft barriers which are the norm. In this case, Duty clogged and failed to expand. That does not mean it would not be lethal however.