That really is what it comes down to. People that put their lifes on the line every day are most likely spending more time focused on shot placement rather than being the test case finding out if the newest bullett design stops the bad guy faster. Until some do, the gel test is what we have to work with for data today.
Fortunately, it has technically not mattered what I carry so far because I have not had to real world test what’s in my firearm.
Gary, thanks for posting the link. I will read the whole document. 
All of you ballistic aficionado’s should take the time to read this, I did, all 51 pages. 
Much more then “Ballistic Jell” was used.
The Underwood XD uses the Lehigh Defense Xtreme Defense Technology
bullet. They are the same bullet and in some cases Underwood uses slightly
higher pressure which produces more velocity. The radial flutes increase tissue
pressure and direct the tissue outward to increase wound diameter. There is one
main characteristic to XD performance…. Velocity. The faster this round goes
the larger the wound diameter. We tested the 9mm XD, 9 +P, 9+P+ and the 357
SIG in multiple tests in gel and tissue. That’s 4 of the exact same projectiles with
the only difference being velocity. The wound channel size increased exactly in
proportion to increase in velocity. Unlike hollow points which are designed for a
certain impact velocity to best perform as designed, the XD always works better
when faster.
The data sheet shows results from Phase 2/3 with enormous wound diameters.
The radial flutes work perfectly in fluid/gel. Calculated PWCs are the largest
ever recorded in all calibers!
Many of our testers wondered if vectoring real compressed tissue sideways into
tissue would actually destroy that adjacent tissue that is not directly in the path
of the projectile. For those who think this will only work in a non-compressible
fluid like gel as we initially did, we can confirm that this technology works
extremely well in actual animal tissue with or without barriers. Remember that
hollow points expand because tissue which fills the hole in the hollow point is
compressed to such a point that the outward pressure inside the bullet pushes and
tears the metal and forces it outward where friction then takes over to complete
the expansion. If tissue can be compressed to the point of tearing metal (hollow
point) then tissue can certainly be compressed to the point of tearing tissue. The
Phase 4/5 tissue tests confirmed that in over 100 shots the measured wound
channel was not only larger than that of an FMJ but in most cases was the largest
wound channel produced in that caliber compared to all other rounds to include
fully functioning hollow points.
a. Penetration. All rounds in all calibers tested penetrated 15.2 – 20 inches
with and without barriers.
b. Reliability and Consistency. Every single shot did roughly the same thing.
There is a 0% chance of failure to function because there can be no failure
to tumble or expand (because they don’t) and no chance to fragment. This
was the most Reliable and Consistent round tested.
c. Barrier Performance. The XD round, the 5.7 mm rounds and FMJs were
the most barrier blind rounds tested. Not only did barriers not deflect the
round it didn’t change the wound diameter much and only slightly reduced
penetration depth. XD Barrier degradation was approximately 5%.
d. PWC. In the Phase 4/5 realistic tissue tests the XD produced the largest
wound areas and with the incredible penetration depth exhibited in the
Phase 2/3 gel tests the XD recorded the largest overall PWC in all calibers.
As noted the PWC numbers are inflated in the Phase 2/3 gel tests due to
non-compressible gel, but the penetration depths are more realistic to
compare.
Overall: This was by far the most impressive round tested. After over a year
of testing this round became the most requested round to test after some of the
agencies reviewed draft shot data. In continued testing this round became the
most measured and compared round in this test. We had more XD data points
than any other round. Because the XD relies so heavily on velocity the results
showed that the 357 SIG, 10mm and 9mm were the best calibers in this round
followed by the .45 and then the .40, the exact opposite of the hollow point
results.
The solid copper rounds available in 9mm present some of the best bullets available
in this caliber. The jump in performance and wounding capability between hollow
points and solid copper is the largest of any caliber. Deeper more consistent
penetration, great barrier performance and the largest PWC was recorded with a
solid copper round.
Forgive me if I missed it, but…is there any objective data comparing a good JHP with the XD?
Is there data for measured permanent crush cavity of any of the rounds they are discussing? Diameter of the projectile at the conclusion?
I mean, it’s a nice piece, but it’s clearly marketing speak picking and choosing what they choose to present to make their product look good.
Yes, read it.
I did read it, and apologize, but I don’t see that data.
Would you mind quoting and pasting the penetration depths, wound channel measurements, and expanded bullet diameters for the rounds in question? I’m not seeing that. The actual numbers, objective data, for the JHP’s in the same tests as the XD
I’m not playing your silly game, have a nice night. 
Just trying to find data or objective results
OK, to me ,and it’s just me opinion, fluted rounds are making more sense. The way I see it and to make a long story short, FMJ rounds traveling in a straight line will somewhat continue in a straight line, HP while traveling in this straight line will upon impact gather matter that will force the tip of the bullet open. A fluted round will travel in the same straight line until reaching matter and then just go off course and rip up anything in it’s path much like a meat grinder blade would rip up meat. I also read the same report or something very similar. Now I’m not trying to talk anyone other than myself into trying fluted rounds. No two people are the same, we all have our own preferences. I’m just thinking out loud. and it seems that there is less chance of a fluted round passing thru it’s target and injuring an innocent person.
Thats what I got out of it also. I learned a lot. Also interesting is the lighter 9mm fluted did more tissue damage because of the higher velocity. 
I see the opposite. That fluff piece by the manufacturer went to great lengths to explain that even through a barrier (like, your house walls) it still penetrates to or beyond the FBI window (window of 12-18"…and it’s 16-20" even after a barrier). 20" is a lot. Seems to me it’s more likely to over penetrate…barriers or the threat…and hit an innocent
And this takes me back to my original quest. Lighter rounds with less recoil. I’m getting older and my sidearm seems to be getting heavier.
Did it do more tissue damage? There’s no data telling us how much permanent crush cavity it had vs JHP, let alone from a disinterested third party
There were no manufactures involved in any if the tests.
You’re making me question my thinking. More research is definatly needed. Although I do trust Scott Wagner’s view. from USCCA. I read his article last night.
I thought this was an interesting paragraph.
The Over-Penetration Myth:
Fear that a bullet will pass through a target body and damage a bystander are
unfounded. First, approximately 40% of all shots fired in the day do not hit any
target at all and even less bullets hit the target at night. That’s cause for real concern.
Secondly, shots passing through the target torso do not have sufficient remaining
penetration capabilities. Lastly, there haven’t been any cases where this has actually
happened. No recorded medical reports or lawsuits come from a bystander wounding
resulting from over-penetrating handgun bullets through the torso of a target. For
the purposes of this test we used International Wound Ballistics Association (IWBA)
18x6x6 inch calibrated gel blocks with a sideways block backstop providing an
overall maximum measured depth of 24 inches. Only Full Metal Jacket rounds and
rounds that failed exceeded penetrating that depth.
Except now they will have to add the Baldwin shooting. 
Now you’re just making yourself appear foolish. Here are your “disinterested third party”.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
There are so many agencies and people to credit with the amazing amount of data
that was measured and calculated in this report. So many new things were
accomplished and considered like Ballistic Ratio, consulting of medical
professionals to create the first large scale test using realistic animal tissue as a
primary media and the testing of all four types of ammunition instead of just hollow
points.
People involved in this 2016-17 Joint Agency Ballistics Test For Defensive
Handgun Ammunition came from the Department of Defense, Department of
Justice, Marshalls, two Texas State departments, 4 police and Sherriff departments,
2 security firms, 3 local gun stores and 2 training schools. We had 2 companies that
sponsored some of the tests by providing supplies and food. One local grocery store
chain gave great discount on brisket used in Phase 4/5. The tests were accomplished
at 4 outdoor ranges starting in March of 2016 and finishing in October of 2017.
Ammunition was provided by multiple sources ranging from the manufacturers to
gun stores and finally most provided by the agencies involved. No ammunition
manufacturers were allowed to sponsor or attend any test. They were only allowed
to provide ammunition and nothing else.
The people involved were active, retired and by the end some of the active retired!
Many wished to remain anonymous and it was agreed that two final reports would
be made. One only for the agencies involved and one for general use that would
have all specific agencies, individuals and companies information removed, with the
exception of the company compiling and disseminating the final report. No agency,
company or individual received any financial or gift compensation of any kind for
testing or the report. A very special thanks to all the volunteers who helped set up,
tear down, film, photograph, measure, re-measure, document, calculate and check
all the data. Only through their diligent thorough work could this much accurate
data be generated.
That’s what this paper says. But I could write a paper that says a whole bunch of government agencies tested nerf gun bullets and they found they outperformed traditional bullets. Doesn’t make it true. Without the actual citations of who did the testing and confirmations that they actually did the tests this could just be a made up document by some teenage kid in their parents basement. Or more likely an Underwood employee with some spare time on their hands.
Maybe this is a real document based on real government data and maybe fluted ammo is a significant advancement over hollow points. But the fact that this paper shows non expanding bullets to have massively expanded and the lack of any citations and links to the actual data make me very suspicious. And the fact that we haven’t heard of any agencies reacting to these astounding advancements by changing their ammo choice adds to my suspicion. I’m all for being proven wrong. I’d be happy to switch to ammo that is twice as effective as what I am currently using. But I’m not going to make that switch based on one anonymous document on the internet.
I don’t care what you use or don’t use. Maybe you could call them, the number is on the document. Have a good night. 
From the 2022 version. [email protected]
I believe in the saying “you do you, I’ll do me”. I really appreciate all the info that you shared, It will help in my quest for information. There is really alot of views pro and con for fluted rounds I think pros will help my personal decision. Thank you for your time and effort friend.