Nyclad is back!!??!!??

[Bigtanker]

It's called Syntec Defense.

Not the original but they are trying. Segments into 3 petals. The jacket is polymer so I wonder how barrier performance would be?

https://www.federalpremium.com/products/handgun/federal-personal-defense/syntech-defense

 

[AngryRooster]

Yet they left out the best version, the butter soft lead .38 special. I'd rather the round stay together instead of fragment as well. I guess it's good to have options though.

 

[bdybdall]

Yah, when I saw the thread title, I was hoping to see the .38 Special Nyclad.

 

[AmmoManAaron]

Yet they left out the best version, the butter soft lead .38 special. I'd rather the round stay together instead of fragment as well.

^^^QFT^^^

 

[Disposable Heart]

It's called Syntec Defense.

Not the original but they are trying. Segments into 3 petals. The jacket is polymer so I wonder how barrier performance would be?

https://www.federalpremium.com/products/handgun/federal-personal-defense/syntech-defense

Barrier performance would be non-existent, as with any prefragmented round. Looks like a cross between the old Nyclad and the Lehigh Controlled Chaos. Fragmentation with rounds at pistol velocities often have little wounding potential and have poor penetration. They should have stuck with very very soft lead and the nylon jacketing to prevent leading due to the focus on shorter barreled guns instead of something that will look impressive in testing but have little penetration (read: The Taurus Judge Spatter Target Effect, looks shocking but in reality...)

On a secondary note, the performance of the soft lead hollow point in .38 Special is misrepresented. Even in it's softest form, the Remington 158gr SWCHP, has dismal performance in recent testing and had absolutely no barrier performance during the Miami Shootout. People will often disregard barrier performance, but forget that the rib cage is similar to the barriers they use in ballistics testing and acts as such.

Federal really missed out on a great opportunity with the HST in .38 Special: AMAZING performance but the profile just plain sucks for reloading quickly. After doing a TON of drills, I am now carrying my cylinder filled with HST, but have to use Ranger Bonded +P or Barnes as a reload due to bullet profile. Even with chamfering the charge holes in all my revolvers, the full wadcutter profile of the HST really is problematic for quick reloading. Sure, sure, they gave us the science behind why they did it but I am convinced that they could have had similar performance making a regular profile round and I honestly cannot tell a difference (nor can my timer splits) in recoil recovery between HST +P and any other well performing +P round.

 

[AmmoManAaron]

On a secondary note, the performance of the soft lead hollow point in .38 Special is misrepresented. Even in it's softest form, the Remington 158gr SWCHP, has dismal performance in recent testing and had absolutely no barrier performance during the Miami Shootout. People will often disregard barrier performance, but forget that the rib cage is similar to the barriers they use in ballistics testing and acts as such.

Federal really missed out on a great opportunity with the HST in .38 Special: AMAZING performance but the profile just plain sucks for reloading quickly. After doing a TON of drills, I am now carrying my cylinder filled with HST, but have to use Ranger Bonded +P or Barnes as a reload due to bullet profile. Even with chamfering the charge holes in all my revolvers, the full wadcutter profile of the HST really is problematic for quick reloading. Sure, sure, they gave us the science behind why they did it but I am convinced that they could have had similar performance making a regular profile round and I honestly cannot tell a difference (nor can my timer splits) in recoil recovery between HST +P and any other well performing +P round.

I presume you are talking about this testing:
https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/revolver-ballistics-test/

I don't think the 158gr LSWC-HP +P is that bad (Remington or Winchester, the Federal is too hard). They don't expand as much as some others, but in both 2" and 4" barrels, they consistently penetrate to the required depth range. There are worse options that are newer and cost more. Just due to mass, the 158gr loads generally penetrate ok regardless of bullet construction. If you want to talk about dismal performance: Hornady 90gr Crititical Defense Lite, Hornady 110gr FTX Critical Defense +P (non +P does ok), and Winchester Ranger 110gr +P+ are probably the three worst loads out there. Even the Hornady 125gr and 158gr XTP loads don't work as well as the old 158gr LSWC-HP +P; they penetrate ok, but don't expand as much as the simple lead bullet from Remington or Winchester. Add in hard barrier performance and maybe the XTPs are their equal, but no 38 Special load is going to be very good against barriers just due to the limitations of the cartridge.

The old Nyclad 158gr loads are supposed to behave similar to the Remington and Winchester LSWC-HP +P, but with less leading of your barrel and possibly slightly higher velocity. I would have liked to have seen four variations (125gr and 158gr, standard and +p versions) of the old Nyclad included in the LuckyGunner testing so we could make direct comparisons. The non +P versions were supposed to really shine (relatively speaking) in short barrel guns that can't handle +P loads and that is why people probably liked them.

As for picking out the 38 Special loads that expand the most and still meet the depth requirement, you have done that well. I view four (really two?) loads as best in that regard:
Federal 130gr HST Micro
Winchester 130gr Ranger Bonded +P
Winchester 130gr Train and Defend
Winchester 130gr PDX1 Defender +P

I suspect the three Winchester products all use the same basic bullet, but I still see an interesting phenomena - 130gr seems to be the perfect balance for achieving 38 Special terminal performance. The good 125gr and 135gr loads use older bullet designs, but are not far behind the latest and greatest 130gr stuff - I don't think that is a coincidence.

 

[jinks]

I checked the six boxes Nyclad (S&W) ammo I had set back. It is 158 gr semi-wadcutter, but not hollow point.

 

[Disposable Heart]

I checked the six boxes Nyclad (S&W) ammo I had set back. It is 158 gr semi-wadcutter, but not hollow point.

There was a little bit floating around (SWCHP in 158gr) but most of what I've seen was 125gr hollow points for Nyclads.

 

[Disposable Heart]

I presume you are talking about this testing:
https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/revolver-ballistics-test/

I don't think the 158gr LSWC-HP +P is that bad (Remington or Winchester, the Federal is too hard). They don't expand as much as some others, but in both 2" and 4" barrels, they consistently penetrate to the required depth range. There are worse options that are newer and cost more. Just due to mass, the 158gr loads generally penetrate ok regardless of bullet construction. If you want to talk about dismal performance: Hornady 90gr Crititical Defense Lite, Hornady 110gr FTX Critical Defense +P (non +P does ok), and Winchester Ranger 110gr +P+ are probably the three worst loads out there. Even the Hornady 125gr and 158gr XTP loads don't work as well as the old 158gr LSWC-HP +P; they penetrate ok, but don't expand as much as the simple lead bullet from Remington or Winchester. Add in hard barrier performance and maybe the XTPs are their equal, but no 38 Special load is going to be very good against barriers just due to the limitations of the cartridge.

The old Nyclad 158gr loads are supposed to behave similar to the Remington and Winchester LSWC-HP +P, but with less leading of your barrel and possibly slightly higher velocity. I would have liked to have seen four variations (125gr and 158gr, standard and +p versions) of the old Nyclad included in the LuckyGunner testing so we could make direct comparisons. The non +P versions were supposed to really shine (relatively speaking) in short barrel guns that can't handle +P loads and that is why people probably liked them.

As for picking out the 38 Special loads that expand the most and still meet the depth requirement, you have done that well. I view four (really two?) loads as best in that regard:
Federal 130gr HST Micro
Winchester 130gr Ranger Bonded +P
Winchester 130gr Train and Defend
Winchester 130gr PDX1 Defender +P

I suspect the three Winchester products all use the same basic bullet, but I still see an interesting phenomena - 130gr seems to be the perfect balance for achieving 38 Special terminal performance. The good 125gr and 135gr loads use older bullet designs, but are not far behind the latest and greatest 130gr stuff - I don't think that is a coincidence.

Well, the Lucky Gunner tests as well as OIS events in history, plus shootings in the past involving revolvers. When departments were switching away from lead round nose in their service weapons, it was either try to upgrade the bullet (the famous "metro" or "FBI" load), go to .357 Mangle-um or try out one of those new autoloading 9mm'ers you've been hearing all about. Given as the tides of change happened, most departments went to 9mm rather than .357 (due to capacity being better and bullet performance JUST starting to become reasonable) or changed .38 components (due to political views in some states against the scary .357 or 'why do you need so many rounds that might hit bystanders' in 9mm). I have yet to hear of a department that ever used SWC in .38 (but I'm sure they are out there), most would just use hollow points or go to the magnums.

The performance of the metro/FBI load was overshadowed by the 9mms coming on the scene. You had some various FMJ, SOME 115gr JHPs around (Federal 9BPLE +P+ or Silvertips) and while they worked, they still didn't have what departments needed for penetration (as depicted later by the Platt and Mattix shooting). Departments did the "me too" with .40 and the FBI's choosing, so most departments dumped .38s and went to 9mms (with now newer ammo like Hydroshok and Golden Sabre) or .40.

The FBI shooting and the subsequent testing showed that we needed to "idiot proof" ammo when it came to penetration. In terms of the Silvertip of the time, one of the attackers was hit with what would have been a lethal shot and had it penetrated one more inch in, a incapacitating shot, and would have shortened the firefight to almost nil. The event also showed that the issued soft lead .38 Special HP was not adequate against autobodies, nor was most .38 at the time (thus why we wanted Magnums or 9mm). The FBI set up their minimums for testing protocol, BASED on the shooting an a analysis of various events in police history. Expansion to 1.5x caliber, penetration to 12" within calibrated ord gel, same parameters after encountering cold rolled thin gauge steel or autoglass front glass set at a specific angle, wallboard, plyboard, etc.... Rounds meeting these parameters, while not a guaranteed incapacitation (what is in life?) but DRASTICALLY reduced the issues of autobody and autoglass penetration, which .38 was not adequate.

That all being said, I've personally tested the Ranger +P round on thin steel, glass and etc... and found it just fine, on par with bonded 9mm of similar weight. I've also shot Remington 158gr SWCHP at autoglass and didn't even hit the target behind it (glanced either completely off in 2" barrels or VERY high deviation from point of aim in 4" barrels). Caliber isn't the issue, ammo was. I've shot quite a bit of the 125 gr Nyclad and even in some gel, was not a good performer.

That all being said: For the same price, round for round, I can buy HST or Ranger bonded as I can Remington. I firmly believe that the SWCHP and previous Nyclad performance is overstated compared to modern rounds and the mythos and nostalgia associated with the round hinders some folks' purchasing decisions. Would I want to be shot with a Remington or Nyclad? No. Would a SWC kill me instantly? Likely. But on the other hand, I won't carry those because I want a master of all trades, not a jack of all trades, round, which I get with more modern stuff.

 

[lawyers guns and money]

I agree. I have moved to Federal HST as the go to carry load. 124gr or 147gr as anything lighter does not perform as well. Plus this gives me an excuse to shoot up a lot of older ammo.