Defensive Carry banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Does anybody have any data or first-hand knowledge regarding differences in performance between the two?

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
I cannot provide you with charts or IN DEPTH answers, others can. I will however say that the 147 performs better IMO. Due to the velocity by the way, a lighter bullet will travel faster, thus requiring more time to expand in an organic (human) target so the 147 is the better choice. This is only in my experiences however. As I said, one of our resident specialists will chime in and give you better info.
~Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,177 Posts
10 years back or so, the 147 was blasted constantly for over-penetration in soft tissue and under-penetration in hard targets. Lack of expansion was a primary cause that seems to have been alleviated with modern bullet designs although the under-penetration of harder objects (heavy bone, windshields, ect.) is still questionable because of the lack of energy. In 9mm, a good 115-124 JHP is the way to go IMO. A lot of velocity is lost to gain 23 grains of bullet weight that doesn't give you much, if anything in return.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,032 Posts
My old department had the 147 as issue ammo back in the early 1990s. The SWAT guys loved the performance out of their MP5s but expansion was inconsistant out of the Beretta 92s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
448 Posts
I thought I read somewhere that the 9mm was designed to be a 124 projectile. Therefore if I HAD to choose I would go with the native platform. But because I do not have to choose I have either one in my safe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,531 Posts
10 years back or so, the 147 was blasted constantly for over-penetration in soft tissue and under-penetration in hard targets. Lack of expansion was a primary cause that seems to have been alleviated with modern bullet designs although the under-penetration of harder objects (heavy bone, windshields, ect.) is still questionable because of the lack of energy. In 9mm, a good 115-124 JHP is the way to go IMO. A lot of velocity is lost to gain 23 grains of bullet weight that doesn't give you much, if anything in return.

10 years ago, bullet designs were 10 years older...:wink:

As far as the HydraShok goes, the 147 gr has a fairly decent track record, as does the 124gr...but I'd lean towards one of the newer designs, such as HST, Gold Dot, or Ranger-T...and then I'd go heavier.

Between the two? (shrug) whatever one shot better out of my pistol, I guess.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top