After some ammunition research....

After some ammunition research....

This is a discussion on After some ammunition research.... within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I think I'm starting to agree with guys like Majorik and Glockman that for 9mm, the 147gr is a good choice. Question I have is, ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: After some ammunition research....

  1. #1
    Ex Member Array MP9NewMexico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    New Mexico/Colorado/Texas
    Posts
    318

    After some ammunition research....

    I think I'm starting to agree with guys like Majorik and Glockman that for 9mm, the 147gr is a good choice. Question I have is, it's already at a much lower velocity and energy than 124/124+p, so do you guys think it would be a wise choice for carry ammo in my LC9 (3.12" barrel). Would it have the velocity it needs to penetrate and expand reliably?


  2. #2
    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 MP9NewMexico View Post
    I think I'm starting to agree with guys like Majorik and Glockman that for 9mm, the 147gr is a good choice. Question I have is, it's already at a much lower velocity and energy than 124/124+p, so do you guys think it would be a wise choice for carry ammo in my LC9 (3.12" barrel). Would it have the velocity it needs to penetrate and expand reliably?
    Well, there's always the HST 147 gr. +P load, however, I can't imagine there would be much in the way of issues with a regular 147 gr. bullet. If it were me, however, I'd be loading CorBon DPX 115 gr. +P as it's my preferred 9mm load. (It's way freaking expensive, however).

    That being said, any of the loads from here Thoughts on Service Pistols, along with Duty and Self-Defense Ammo Recommendations - M4Carbine.net Forums would be fine.

    Here is the list of 9mm loads which passed FBI testing protocol from that page:

    9 mm:
    Barnes XPB 115 gr JHP (copper bullet) [CorBon DPX]
    Federal Tactical 124 gr JHP (LE9T1)
    Federal HST 124 gr +P JHP (P9HST3)
    Remington Golden Saber 124 gr +P JHP bonded (GSB9MMD)
    Speer Gold Dot 124 gr +P JHP
    Winchester Partition Gold 124 gr JHP (RA91P)
    Winchester Ranger-T 124 gr +P JHP (RA9124TP)
    Winchester Ranger-T 127 gr +P+ JHP (RA9TA)
    Federal Tactical 135 gr +P JHP (LE9T5)
    Federal HST 147 gr JHP (P9HST2)
    Remington Golden Saber 147 gr JHP (GS9MMC)
    Speer Gold Dot 147 gr JHP
    Winchester Ranger-T 147 gr JHP (RA9T)
    Winchester 147 gr bonded JHP (RA9B/Q4364)


    (I bolded my favorites).
    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

  3. #3
    Ex Member Array MP9NewMexico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    New Mexico/Colorado/Texas
    Posts
    318
    Well, I guess if they all passed FBI testing, then any would be sufficient. So I probably wouldn't see much benefit switching from the Gold Dot 124gr +P to the Gold Dot 147, Golden Saber 147, or HST 147.

  4. #4
    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 MP9NewMexico View Post
    Well, I guess if they all passed FBI testing, then any would be sufficient. So I probably wouldn't see much benefit switching from the Gold Dot 124gr +P to the Gold Dot 147, Golden Saber 147, or HST 147.
    Yep, the 124 gr. +P Gold Dot load will do exactly what you need it to do, and I wouldn't switch unless it was causing malfunctions.
    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

  5. #5
    Ex Member Array MP9NewMexico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    New Mexico/Colorado/Texas
    Posts
    318
    There was a gun show in town last weekend, where I was able to pick up 200 rounds of 124gr +P Gold Dot (prod 53617) for $99. 100 went through my LC9, perfectly, and the other 100 went through my M&P9, perfectly.

    Plus, I know they're a good round. My late father in-law was ex-LEO, had his CCW, and was a big hunter. When he passed me his XD40, he included a box of 50 .40 SW Gold Dots and said "If you have to shoot, I want to make sure you have the best ammo."

    Just thought I'd check into 147s.

  6. #6
    Distinguished Member Array ArkhmAsylm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    1,410
    Quote Originally Posted by MP9NewMexico View Post
    I think I'm starting to agree with guys like Majorik and Glockman that for 9mm, the 147gr is a good choice. Question I have is, it's already at a much lower velocity and energy than 124/124+p, so do you guys think it would be a wise choice for carry ammo in my LC9 (3.12" barrel). Would it have the velocity it needs to penetrate and expand reliably?
    It was suggested by one of the guys at my local Streicher's that the advantage of using a 147gr round out of the shorter 3" barrel (one that wasn't rated for +P ammo) was that the heavier load was slower, allowing more time to build pressure before exiting the firearm - thus adding a modicum of extra oomph to the bullet. It seemed a reasonable idea.

    After looking at the data on the Winchester T-series hollow points, I chose the RA9T for use with my PF-9 & the RA9TA for use in my Glock 17.
    "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)

  7. #7
    VIP Member
    Array nn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    7,123
    No...

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,497
    Or, you can look at it this way...that short barrel is going to blow some unburned powder out of the barrel. So you will loose the main advantage of your +p loading. And in turn degrade the velocity perimeters the lighter weight depends on to expand. So, maybe with a perfect shot that doesn't encounter any resistance or deflection , you will be ok, and it will penetrate to the needed vital organs.

    Or you can just load it with something that is heavy enough to get there without depending on variables you cannot control.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  9. #9
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,497
    I'm not down on the 124 grn +p. It should be fine for a carry load. But the shorter barrel will rob of it's main strength.
    Just be aware of the pros and cons of each and choose one based on your margin of acceptance within those perimeters.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Array IAm_Not_Lost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northern AZ
    Posts
    1,008
    Quote Originally Posted by ArkhmAsylm View Post
    After looking at the data on the Winchester T-series hollow points, I chose the RA9T for use with my PF-9 & the RA9TA for use in my Glock 17.
    That's the exact ammo I just got delivered, I went out yesterday and shot 50 through my CM9 without a hitch.
    It's my opinion that a 147gr out of a shorter barrel would be more efficient than a 124gr+P loading out of a shorter barrel. Both rounds will suffer from unburnt powder (124+P more so), both rounds will suffer some velocity loss, but it's the 147gr bullet that relies less on velocity and energy to do it's job.
    "Brilliant. So now we got a huge guy theory, and a serial crusher theory. Top notch. What's your name?" - Paul Smecker

  11. #11
    Member Array Gunsmoke16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    315
    Had a friend that had some jamming issues & FTF with a compact 9mm gun. Turned out to be the ammo. Yes the 147grn does travel slower, and in this case it didn't have the sufficient ump to cycle the slide properly... I would not recommend using it in a compact barrel gun from this observance. The 115 to 124grn is probably best choice. I think the lighter, faster moving round that will expand controllably will be the better knockdown situation. Check out the Hornady Critical Defense ammo. Also note that the Federal ammo has the hardest primers and smaller guns like Rugers, Kel-Tec and such had had striker issues with hard primer ammo. Glock and some others don't have problems because they have good STIFF springs for the firing pin.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Array IAm_Not_Lost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northern AZ
    Posts
    1,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunsmoke16 View Post
    Had a friend that had some jamming issues & FTF with a compact 9mm gun. Turned out to be the ammo. Yes the 147grn does travel slower, and in this case it didn't have the sufficient ump to cycle the slide properly... I would not recommend using it in a compact barrel gun from this observance.
    Umm...I'm not sure I would make such a broad conclusion based off of one friend having trouble with 147gr ammo, too many variables IMO. Secondly I am trying to think of a reason why 147gr would lack less "oomph" than a 115 gr load and I can't think of any, I don't mean that in a sarcastic way either, I truly mean I can't think of a reason why that would be the case.
    "Brilliant. So now we got a huge guy theory, and a serial crusher theory. Top notch. What's your name?" - Paul Smecker

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    2,364
    Quote Originally Posted by IAm_Not_Lost View Post
    Umm...I'm not sure I would make such a broad conclusion based off of one friend having trouble with 147gr ammo, too many variables IMO. Secondly I am trying to think of a reason why 147gr would lack less "oomph" than a 115 gr load and I can't think of any, I don't mean that in a sarcastic way either, I truly mean I can't think of a reason why that would be the case.
    That's because it doesn't lack oomph at all...in fact, unless you're talking about a warp-speed 115gr+P(+), the 147 is likely doing better in the "oomph" category.

    And I've never met a compact 9mm that disliked 147's; Glock 26, EMP, XD, M&P--either I or friends have owned/carried 'em all, and all have digested it just fine...seems that subbies don't like 'em is an interwebz myth.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

  14. #14
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,497
    My g26 eats 147 grns like a pregnant woman in a pickle jar.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array 10thmtn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,352
    Here is some testing out of a short (KT P11 - 3.1 inch) barrel:

    GoldenLoki.com

    Seems most of the ammo tested did pretty well. That said, I just got some 147 gr Speer Gold Dots. Need to test them through my Glocks (not expecting any feed issues there) and my PM9.
    The more good folks carry guns, the fewer shots the crazies can get off.
    www.armedcitizensnetwork.org - member
    Glock 30, 19, 26; Ruger SP101, LCR, Mini 14; Marlin 336 .30-30; Mossberg 500
    CT Lasers

Page 1 of 2 12 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

pm9 federal hst 147
,
q4364 velocity
,

q4364 vs ra9b

,
q4364 vs ra9t
,
ra9b
,

ra9b vs q4364

,

ra9b vs ra9t

,
ra9t vs q4364
,

ra9t vs ra9b

,

winchester q4364

,
winchester ra9b
,
winchester ra9b vs q4364
Click on a term to search for related topics.