G2 Research R.I.P. Ammunition Review and Testing

G2 Research R.I.P. Ammunition Review and Testing
G2 Research R.I.P. Ammunition Review and Testing

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)-A while ago I saw a video testing out the R.I.P. ammunition by G2 Research. The video seems to talk about how the ammo doesn’t penetrate as well as other ammunition. Although the creator is sure of his conclusions, I wasn’t so sure. It seemed like he forgot about the physics of energy transference.

The G2 Research R.I.P. ammunition is frangible round that is referred to as advanced energy transference (AET) ammunition. Frangible rounds have several advantages over a standard hollow point or full metal jacket round. Just how much of an advantage has been at the center of a lot of debates between gun guys.

When a frangible round leaves the barrel, it travels as a single solid piece until it hits the target. Once the bullet hits the mark, the bullet will break apart into multiple pieces causing multiple wound channels in the target. The G2 Research R.I.P. round in 9MM breaks into nine pieces for example. This feature is the first advantage of a frangible bullet.

The second advantage of a frangible bullet is that it doesn’t over penetrate a target as much as other types of ammunition. There is less of a chance of collateral damage in a shooting situation when the shooter uses a frangible bullet. All rounds still can over penetrate, but frangible rounds have less of a chance. G2 Research claims the R.I.P. 9MM penetrates 14 to 16 inches.

This lack of over penetration leads directly to the third advantage of a frangible round. Since it doesn’t over penetrate more energy is absorbed by the initial target. The first law of thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but that doesn’t mean the energy cannot be transferred from one medium to another. This reason is why people sometimes refer to the ammo as advanced energy transference ammunition.

G2 Research R.I.P. ammunition
G2 Research R.I.P. ammunition

I ran into the guys from G2 Research back in January at SHOT Show. I asked them about the physics of the R.I.P round and specifically about the YouTube video. They were aware of the video and strongly disagreed with the creator’s conclusions. We exchanged cards and I went on my way.

I went home from Vegas and didn’t think about it for a while, but in the back of my mind, I wanted to test out the G2 Research R.I.P. ammo. Then my phone rang a few months later. It was the guys from G2 Research. They wanted to know if I wanted to test the ammunition.

I wanted to test the ammunition, but I wanted to do it right. I explained to G2 Research that without ballistic gel blocks I wouldn’t be able to accurately test the ammo out to the point of being able to come up with a conclusion to see if it worked or if it was all hype. I would have to pass.

Then G2 Research offered to send me ballistic gel blocks to test out the ammo. I was finally going to get the answers about the R.I.P. ammo for myself. I agreed to do the testing and write an honest review of the ammunition.

The ammunition and ballistic gel blocks arrived on my doorstep a few days later. I couldn’t wait to test out the ammo, but first I had to decide the protocols for the testing of the ammunition. I decided to test out the G2 Research R.I.P. 9mm against Hornady’s Critical Defense 9mm ammunition.

Both the G2 Research R.I.P. and the Hornady Critical Defense ammunition are for self-defense, so I figured this would be the best option instead of testing the R.I.P. round against a full metal jacket round. Plus, Critical Defense is the ammunition I use in my carry gun and my bedroom sub gun.

Now that I had the rounds I was ready to put it to the test. The guys from Sterling Arsenal volunteered their range for the testing. I was still skeptical about the ammo, but I was willing to approach the experiment with an open mind.

One thing that surprised me after the first shot on each block was a little bigger than a quarter-sized cavity about three to four inches into the gel that I fired the R.I.P. ammunition into. It would have been devastating to be hit by that round. The Critical defense didn’t have a cavity anywhere near that size.

R.I.P. Ammo created a quarter-sized cavity about three to four inches into the gel.
R.I.P. Ammo created a quarter-sized cavity about three to four inches into the gel.

The fragments of the bullet ended up between four to seven inches into the gel bock. Each left a nasty trail. The spread was about four to five inches wide. Removing all the fragments would be hard for any doctor.

Around ten inches into the gel that I fired the R.I.P. round into there was another wound cavity about the size of a quarter. This cavity surprised me. I was not expecting another cavity that size that far deep. The final portion of the bullet came to rest at 14 inches into the gel. The Hornady Critical Defense round stopped 13 inches into the gel.

Around ten inches into the gel that I fired the R.I.P. round into there was another wound cavity about the size of a quarter.
Around ten inches into the gel that I fired the R.I.P. round into there was another wound cavity about the size of a quarter.
The final portion of the bullet came to rest at 14 inches into the gel. The Hornady Critical Defense round stopped 13 inches into the gel.
The final portion of the bullet came to rest at 14 inches into the gel. The Hornady Critical Defense round stopped 13 inches into the gel.

The G2 Research R.I.P. ammunition damage was devastating. I wouldn’t want to be shot with the either the Hornady Critical Defense or the R.I.P. ammo traveling at 1,250 fps, but the difference in damage was night and day. I was able to replicate the results multiple times. Both are great rounds, but the R.I.P. did do a lot more damage.

Another concern I had with the round is whether it would be reliable or not. I only had 100 rounds of the G2 Research R.I.P. to test out using my Glock 19, so I couldn’t do as much of reliability testing as I would have liked. At the range, the accuracy was just as good as with the Critical Defense. All 100 rounds of the R.I.P. ammo fired without a single failure.

The one advantage that the Hornady Critical Defense round has over the G2 Research R.I.P. is the price. You can pick up a box of Hornady Critical Defense rounds for around $20 for a box. The G2 Research R.I.P. rounds will run the shooter around $38 for a box.

The G2 Research R.I.P. round does what the company claims it does. In fact, it does it quite well. I was surprised by the performance of the ammo. I am still split on whether the R.I.P. round is worth the extra money.

The only thing else that I don’t like is the naming of the round. It gives the anti-gunners another talking point. In the end, I don’t care what the Bloomberg crowd thinks, but I also don’t like to provide them with anything that the can be used to misrepresent the gun community to the general public.

In addition to 9mm, the G2 Research R.I.P, ammunition comes in .380ACP, .357SIG, .40S&W, 10mm, and .45ACP. G2 research also offers a 12G R.I.P. shell for shotguns.

Readers can find out more about all the G2 Research products at http://g2rammo.com/

Sterling Arsenal testing range is not open to the public, but their shop can be found at https://www.sterlingarsenal.com/

About John CrumpJohn Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%’ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or at www.crumpy.com.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I have been an ‘Expert Witness’ at several jury trials regarding self defense/lethal force. Often the victims attorney will pose the question of ‘Killer bullets, hair triggers, pistol modifications, etc.’ In all cases the defense attorney quoted “relevancy’ and the jury was instructed to disregard.


Thank you for this review.

I TOTALLY agree with your point about the name! I will not buy this ammo for that very reason — I can’t imagine how enjoyable it would be to explain that to a jury…

Bernard E Barr

It has not fared well in actual shootings . Pre separation is what happened in military testing. On the civilian side this combined with the name are a law suit waiting to happen. I agree magsafe did perform much better in actual shootings.

John D

This is not a frangible round. Please reference the SAAMI or FLETC definition of frangible.


Underwood loads a brass fluted bullet called Xtreme defense in 9mm that penetrates barriers and continues to cause damage per FBI standards, even through windshields. Its mire expensive, but if needed, is cheaper than a funeral!

Bill Regina

Well..nice article.
Technically RIP ammo is a pre fragmented bullet..not a true frangible round.there is a difference. .
We have had numerous shooters in class test it from different guns and have had pre impact bullet separation, inconsistent accuracy at 25 and basic I wouldn’t use it as a carry or duty round considerations…
Not the first time this has been tried…

Daniel Gover

R.I.P. aka Restricted Initial Penetration. Works for me.


Everything about this bullets terminal performance is contrary to proven, accepted, FBI protocol performance. Energy transference is not part of the protocol and most everyone on the planet knows that “knockdown” power is a myth. Handguns do not generate that kind of energy. I’ve shot a lot of gelatin to the FBI standard and Vanns40, you are correct. Gelatin has to be mixed at a 10% ratio, and is shot at 39-40 degrees. Gelatin has to be calibrated before each test using an air rifle. A BB is shot over a chronograph and must be at 590 fps +/- 15… Read more »

Carlos Lopez

Thank you. The guy who wrote this article knows nothing of what’s important in a self defense round. Damage to 3 inches does nothing. That’s fat and muscle layers. This is the handgun equivalent of birdshot at 25 yards.

Rich in Mo

Another consideration is, frankly, the name. In court the attorneys opposing the shooter would have a field day in front of a jury with the name R.I.P.; “You clearly meant to kill” etc. That alone is why I would not use that ammunition.

Carlos Lopez

What you use makes no difference. If you shoot a man it can’t be argued that you DIDNT mean to kill him. The only question is wether or not deadly force was authorized. If it was, you could have shot him with a literal 1860s Cannon. If it was not it doesn’t matter what you shoot him with, you’re going to jail.

Rich in Mo

In a courtroom things are not always as clear-cut as you portray. Walking free or 20 years behind bars can hinge on something as simple as a name, ask any attorney. You certainly can argue you shot to STOP THE THREAT, never should you say you meant to kill.

Dr. Richard L. Wigginton, Sr.

Magsafe did this years ago and they did it better until Joe Zambone, a true rocket scientist lost his life in a traffic accident and the company was placed in other hands.

Roy D.

I had a conversation with Joe on the phone long ago as I had worked developing similar rounds at the same time he did. The difference was I used the pistol jacket cups that were available back then rather than melting the cores out of already formed bullets. If anyone wishes to do that type of bullet be aware good ventilation is mandatory as the fumes from the epoxy will mess with your nose membranes. I also used short and long roller bearing rods in some rounds with and without steel BBs and they were impressive. It was interesting work… Read more »

Scott Coughlin

I’m also curious about how it penetrated clothing prior to the ballistics gel? The FBI tests their ammo with several layers of denim in front of the gel.


Meh… I’ve seen the other videos that individual did different style tests showing the RIP round to be more gimmick than anything else. Certainly not worth the price.


Another important test involves barriers and penetration after the barrier. Any such test of walls, car doors, cloth, or windshields?


I would think it would be terrible against barriers. Would like to see it hit a few layers of denim as well. I currently use Hornady Critical Duty but am open to changing if need be.


My questions and comments, not in that order: 1. I understood that the only correct ballistic gel to use, to replicate FBI standards, has to be made within a certain frame, refrigerated and used within 30 minutes or so after being removed from refrigeration. There are, to my knowledge, three grades of gelatin. Only one is acceptable for firearms testing. 2. I also understand that in order to replicate accurate FBI results and adhere to their standards you have to use a certain size gel block. 3. Given the above, what gel did they send you, what size block, what… Read more »

D. Gold

Also 4 layers of denim have to be in front of the block.

This article smacks of advertising.


I don’t know if it’s advertising or ignorance, but there is a *lot* of very important information left out here. Plenty of rounds will look great when fired into clear ballistics gel, but when you actually out things through proper testing procedure with having to go through wholly reasonable barriers before proper gel, they fall apart. And this is the problem with RIP. Does great in bare gel, sure. But if you watch the actual temporary wound cavity and hydrostatic shock it produces in slow motion (which is actual energy transfer), it’s not that great. Put any sort of barrier… Read more »

Ton E