what are your thoughts for the best 9mm defensive ammo? - Page 4

what are your thoughts for the best 9mm defensive ammo?

This is a discussion on what are your thoughts for the best 9mm defensive ammo? within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Misconceptions and Limitations by Kyrie Ellis 4 May 1996 There has always been much debate, frequently acrimonious, concerning the ability of any specific pistol cartridge ...

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 90
Like Tree28Likes

Thread: what are your thoughts for the best 9mm defensive ammo?

  1. #46
    Member Array mrwonderful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    104
    Misconceptions and Limitations

    by Kyrie Ellis 4 May 1996
    There has always been much debate, frequently acrimonious, concerning the ability of any specific pistol cartridge to "stop" an attacker. People have tended to develop a fondness for a particular cartridge, and denigrate all others as being inferior in terms of "stopping power".
    At times this debate has almost assumed the character of a religious war, complete with slogans ("They all fall to ball!").
    Which is why I like Marshall's information.
    For the first time we have information about how pistol cartridges actually work in real life. No "simulated tissue", human cadavers, animals, or war stories. Just information about what has actually happened when people were forced to shoot other people.
    Which has left us with another, different, set of problems. How can we use Marshall's information? How do we avoid misusing his information? Which is why I've written this up, and submitted it to the "Stopping Power" page. My intent is to identify the misconceptions people (mostly gun magazine authors) seem to have formed about Marshall's information, and the limitations on the usefulness of that information. The format I've chosen (mostly because I couldn't think of a better one) is a statement commonly made about Marshall's information which is either mistaken or misleading, followed by an explanation of why that statement is mistaken or misleading.
    "Marshall's study is scientific."
    This statement is mistaken. In order for a study to be scientific, it must follow the scientific method. Which means formally stating a hypothesis, constructing an experiment to disprove that hypothesis, conducting that experiment, and presenting the results for review and replication by other researchers. Marshall did none of these things. He just collected information and published it. In the strict sense of the word, there is nothing "scientific" about Marshall's work. Nor could there be. Conducting an experiment where human test subjects are shot (frequently to death) is not something which can (or should!) be done. Nor would such an experiment have any real world value. Conditions in a laboratory can never duplicate conditions in the field.
    "Marshall's study is not scientific."
    This statement, while true, is misleading. The problem is that it assumes information must be obtained via experiment to be valid or useful. We don't need to conduct an experiment to determine that fire is hot, or that being shot is bad for our health. Nor is information gained from a scientific experiment necessarily valid or useful. Consider that scientific research once was used to prove that ionizing radiation was beneficial to our health and well being...
    "Marshall's statistics..."
    Any statement which refers to Marshall's information as "statistics" or "statistical" is mistaken. What people refer to as Marshall's "statistics" is really the proportion of people who stopped being aggressive after being shot once in the torso, expressed as a percentage. Unlike ball scores and batting averages, each case in Marshall's study had only two outcomes - a "stopped" or a "not stopped". Events which have only two outcomes are not suitable subjects for statistical study, since they cannot have any of the customary statistical measurements of central tendency (such as mean, median, or mode), or of variation (such as variance or standard deviation). The problem here is that we are so accustomed to seeing statistical data presented as percentages that we automatically assume all percentages are statistical.
    "Marshall's sample..."
    Any statement which refers to the shootings in Marshall's data base as a "sample" is misleading at best, and mistaken at worst. The word "sample" is generally used to describe a subset of events, taken from a larger set of events, because the whole set of events is too large to be manageable. Samples intentionally exclude qualifying events. Marshall pursued all of the shootings he could. He did not pick and choose from qualifying shootings. His data contains all of the events which met the criteria of one shot to the torso, and to which he had access. The reason that this is an important distinction is that the inclusion of all available information removes any objections to Marshall's information based on claims of "sampling error" - there is no sample. Which is not to say that Marshall's information truly represents the effectiveness of all cartridges. The subset of information available to Marshall may, or may not, be representative of all shootings.
    "Marshall's data indicates that the .357 Magnum (or whatever cartridge) will be a 90% (or whatever percentage) stopper."
    This statement is very much mistaken. Marshall's information is historical, not predictive. It indicates what has happened rather than what will happen. Which brings us to the what I believe is the single largest misconception.
    Are you one of the people who have used Marshall's data as a guide when shopping for a defensive pistol and/or ammunition?
    I am.
    And I've been wrong.
    Here is the problem - neither Marshall's data nor anyone else's can be used to predict a single future outcome. Even if we assume that Marshall's data has predictive value (a risky assumption since his information is descriptive in nature rather than predictive), it cannot predict individual outcomes. That's the nature of the world in which we live. Even if we know that a flipped coin will be "heads" 50% of the time, we can't know before hand if the *next* flip of the coin will result in a heads.
    And individual outcomes are what most of us are interested in. We may, if we are very unlucky, have to shoot someone in defense of our lives. It's very unlikely that we will ever find ourselves in this circumstance. [Well, that all depends on where you live! In South Africa, with crime, especially violent life-threatening crime, totally out of control, the likelihood of landing up in a situation where you are called upon to protect your life or property is actually very high. - Dale] It's even more unlikely that we will find ourselves in this circumstance more than once.
    So what we are preparing for is the once-in-a-lifetime situation where we must shoot to survive. And that is an individual outcome. Which cannot be predicted before it happens.
    Knowing this, do I still use Marshall's information when I buy ammunition for defensive use? Yes, I do. Even though I know it's silly. Why? Because I'm human, and completely capable of ignoring unpleasant facts...
    Oreste likes this.
    “Our lives come from God. So does our right to defend them”
    There is only one gun law in this country, the 2nd Amendment. All else is bureaucratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.


  2. #47
    SFC
    SFC is offline
    Member Array SFC's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona
    Posts
    24
    The 9 mm has been taking a bad rap for years and it still does take a back seat to the .40 S&W, 45 Auto, .357/38, etc., I felt the same way for years. After many self defense classes, training exercises and competitions I finally realized it is not so much the caliber as it is the shot placement. I also found that the firearm needs to feel comfortable it your hand and one you trust your life. I carry the 9 mm and use primarily 124 gr. although I have shot the 147 gr as well.

  3. #48
    Member Array bluemarlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    147g Federal HST without a doubt.
    +1.

  4. #49
    Member Array mrwonderful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by SFC View Post
    The 9 mm has been taking a bad rap for years and it still does take a back seat to the .40 S&W, 45 Auto, .357/38, etc., I felt the same way for years. After many self defense classes, training exercises and competitions I finally realized it is not so much the caliber as it is the shot placement. I also found that the firearm needs to feel comfortable it your hand and one you trust your life. I carry the 9 mm and use primarily 124 gr. although I have shot the 147 gr as well.
    Well said. I use to poo poo any thing smaller than 45. Then 40. My edc is glock 26 and home weapon 357 sig. Why, simply because I'm a better shot with those and nowadays I put more stock in accuracy, i.e. shop placement as you stated.
    “Our lives come from God. So does our right to defend them”
    There is only one gun law in this country, the 2nd Amendment. All else is bureaucratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.

  5. #50
    Member Array grimm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    19

    outdated info

    I believe that article was written a decade or so ago. Calling the Silvertip excellent and HydraShok excellent should clue you in. Those were state of the art bullet design of that era.

  6. #51
    Member Array mrwonderful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by grimm View Post
    I believe that article was written a decade or so ago. Calling the Silvertip excellent and HydraShok excellent should clue you in. Those were state of the art bullet design of that era.
    You missed the point of the article. It wasn't about which is the best stopper. It was about using real world street results to give a predictive view of how well ammunition works in shootings. People continue to attack Evan Marshall when all he was really saying was here is what happened with this round in this shooting. I put more stock in actual shooting results than in the opinion of the arm-chair jello junkies and self proclaimed experts. Ammunition that stopped bad guys years ago will still stop them today. When a particular round continues to pile up impressive street results, I put stock in that.
    Oreste likes this.

  7. #52
    Senior Member Array AZ Hawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    The Valley of the Sun, AZ
    Posts
    1,018
    Quote Originally Posted by mrwonderful View Post
    You missed the point of the article. It wasn't about which is the best stopper. It was about using real world street results to give a predictive view of how well ammunition works in shootings. People continue to attack Evan Marshall when all he was really saying was here is what happened with this round in this shooting. I put more stock in actual shooting results than in the opinion of the arm-chair jello junkies and self proclaimed experts. Ammunition that stopped bad guys years ago will still stop them today. When a particular round continues to pile up impressive street results, I put stock in that.
    No offense, but people continue to "attack" Evan Marshall because he has been thoroughly refuted...
    Move. Shoot. Survive. ― The "Unofficial" Suarez International Doctrine

    “The real man smiles in trouble, gathers strength from distress and grows brave by reflection.” ― Thomas Paine

  8. #53
    Senior Member Array AZ Hawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    The Valley of the Sun, AZ
    Posts
    1,018
    Quote Originally Posted by nick060200 View Post
    i read this article:
    Ammunition For The Self-Defense Firearm

    the part that talks about 9mm states this:
    "I don't care what you've heard: never use any 9mm hollowpoint heavier than 125 grains"

    what are your thoughts on this? i have never heard this until i read this article.
    Well, I carry Federal Tactical HST 147gr in my P30, so you can guess what I think of that!
    Move. Shoot. Survive. ― The "Unofficial" Suarez International Doctrine

    “The real man smiles in trouble, gathers strength from distress and grows brave by reflection.” ― Thomas Paine

  9. #54
    Member Array mrwonderful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by AZ Hawk View Post
    No offense, but people continue to "attack" Evan Marshall because he has been thoroughly refuted...
    Refuted by who? You facklerites?
    “Our lives come from God. So does our right to defend them”
    There is only one gun law in this country, the 2nd Amendment. All else is bureaucratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.

  10. #55
    Senior Member Array AZ Hawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    The Valley of the Sun, AZ
    Posts
    1,018
    Quote Originally Posted by mrwonderful View Post
    Refuted by who? You facklerites?
    Modern technology... Not to mention ballistic testing...
    Move. Shoot. Survive. ― The "Unofficial" Suarez International Doctrine

    “The real man smiles in trouble, gathers strength from distress and grows brave by reflection.” ― Thomas Paine

  11. #56
    Member Array mrwonderful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by AZ Hawk View Post
    Modern technology... Not to mention ballistic testing...

    Your phrase means nothing. Where is your argument? Ballistic testing? By whom? Arm chair jello junkies. Jello ain't people. I'll stick
    to actual results from real street shootings thank you. YMMV

    YouTube - ‪No Points‬‏
    Oreste likes this.
    “Our lives come from God. So does our right to defend them”
    There is only one gun law in this country, the 2nd Amendment. All else is bureaucratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.

  12. #57
    Distinguished Member Array ArkhmAsylm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    1,403
    Quote Originally Posted by sgb View Post
    The early 147gr JHP 9mm loads did suck, they had dismal performance on the street. The current generation of 147gr bullets preform very well and have become my preferred load when carrying a 9mm.

    Pistol w-Ranger 147 SXT.jpg
    I've still got several boxes of the Ranger 147 gr SXT as well, but I've also picked up a case of the newer T-series since seeing some ballistics testing on both. Gotta love that Ranger ammo!
    "Historical examination of the right to bear arms, from English antecedents to the drafting of the Second Amendment, bears proof that the right to bear arms has consistently been, and should still be, construed as an individual right." -- U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings, Re: U.S. vs Emerson (1999)

  13. #58
    Senior Member Array AZ Hawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    The Valley of the Sun, AZ
    Posts
    1,018
    Quote Originally Posted by mrwonderful View Post
    Your phrase means nothing. Where is your argument? Ballistic testing? By whom? Arm chair jello junkies. Jello ain't people. I'll stick
    to actual results from real street shootings thank you. YMMV

    YouTube - ‪No Points‬‏
    What "real" street shootings? You're using data which hasn't been independently tested (because they won't allow it and that's not suspicious...) and has been refuted since it was written. Hell, Federal and Winchester no longer make premium law enforcement rounds in 115gr +P+ because more often than not it fails, plain and simple... And, the vast majority of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies use 180gr .40 S&W because it works great!

    I still haven't seen you offer any real proof, either. And, if you did, it wouldn't meet sourcing standards, as it has only one source...
    Move. Shoot. Survive. ― The "Unofficial" Suarez International Doctrine

    “The real man smiles in trouble, gathers strength from distress and grows brave by reflection.” ― Thomas Paine

  14. #59
    VIP Member Array LongRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,621
    Quote Originally Posted by ArkhmAsylm View Post
    I've still got several boxes of the Ranger 147 gr SXT as well, but I've also picked up a case of the newer T-series since seeing some ballistics testing on both. Gotta love that Ranger ammo!
    I thought I would until I tested side by side with Federal HST. I posted the results in a thread awhile back. HST is the most reliable consistently expanding round of those I tested no matter what I shot it into or through. Rangers were so disappointing that I ended up using over $250 worth as range ammo. I could not in good conscious give it away to be used as carry by anyone I cared enough about to give ammo to. I posted my results on a couple of threads. I am aware that others may get different results but I can only trust what I actually saw out of my guns. Rangers often did not expand significantly, none had the "famed" talons and one out of five separated. The .45 HST consistently as in every singe time expanded to the diameter of a quarter no matter what I shot it into or through plywood sheet rock up to five layers of denim. Every one with six distinct wickedly ragged petals. The 9mm had identical results surprisingly the expanded diameter was not much less than the .45
    Abort the Obamanation not the Constitution

    Those who would, deny, require permit, license, certification, or authorization for me to bear arms are as vile, dangerous & evil as those who would molest, abuse, assault, rape or murder my family

  15. #60
    Member Array mrwonderful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by AZ Hawk View Post
    What "real" street shootings? You're using data which hasn't been independently tested (because they won't allow it and that's not suspicious...) and has been refuted since it was written. Hell, Federal and Winchester no longer make premium law enforcement rounds in 115gr +P+ because more often than not it fails, plain and simple... And, the vast majority of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies use 180gr .40 S&W because it works great!

    I still haven't seen you offer any real proof, either. And, if you did, it wouldn't meet sourcing standards, as it has only one source...

    Didn't know you were such a great mind reader. You know my sources? You should be on TV. Where is your independent data? You throw statements out as fact and were all just suppose to believe your claims. Where is your source, footnote data for this quote, "115gr +P+ because more often than not it fails". You have an opinion only, just like everybody else here. Please list your source and peer reviewed data as well as your own highly developed credentials. Geez....
    http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/u...ifs/hrzfab.gif
    “Our lives come from God. So does our right to defend them”
    There is only one gun law in this country, the 2nd Amendment. All else is bureaucratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

9mm defense ammo
,
best 9 mm ammo
,

best 9mm ammo

,
best 9mm ammo for defense
,
best 9mm ammo for self defense
,

best 9mm defense ammo

,
best 9mm defense round
,
best 9mm hollow point
,
best 9mm hollow point ammo
,
best 9mm round
,
best 9mm self defense ammo
,
best hollow point 9mm
Click on a term to search for related topics.