Who uses 147gr JHP 9mm as a self defense round?


PDA






rellascout
February 15, 2011, 03:24 PM
I have always been a 124gr +P guy. I have shot a lot of Gold Dots but I believe that mainly comes from the fact I bought a ton of it way back when and it works in all of my pistols.

You know THR loves a caliber war within a caliber, LOL... Just kidding, so tell me if you are shooting 147gr what kinds and why. Lets try to keep this one civil. I am not interested in bickering. Thanks in advance.

I am considering switching to 147gr Winchester Ranger RA9T 147 gr T-series.

If you enjoyed reading about "Who uses 147gr JHP 9mm as a self defense round?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
nigelcorn
February 15, 2011, 03:31 PM
I do. Mostly because I don't really think it makes any difference and the 147 grain was cheaper when I bought it.

How is that for a fantastic reason?

rellascout
February 15, 2011, 03:34 PM
I do. Mostly because I don't really think it makes any difference and the 147 grain was cheaper when I bought it.

How is that for a fantastic reason?

I like it! As I stated its the reason I am currently shooting gold dots. LOL :what:

mbruce
February 15, 2011, 03:43 PM
I have no stats to support this post and really don't know where to look... but i'll quote a very famous shooter from a famous family here in town.

She told me that a 9MM for SD purposes should be light and fast. It needs to create the maximum hydrostatic shock that it possibly can.

There are two schools of SD thought on caliber choices -- those that beleive in Hydrostatic Shock and those that believe in Wound Size...since each "school of thought" is widely accepted it would be futile to say the other is wrong -- i'm just stating what I was told by a shooting instructor who has instructed 1000s of LE and won numerous world championships -- so no real data to support this post -- but I didn't question her...just accepted it as fact.

If taking her advice go with the +p 115 gr.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock

Lazyshooter
February 15, 2011, 03:47 PM
When I carry a 9mm, I carry Gold Dot 147 gr JHP.

NG VI
February 15, 2011, 03:54 PM
It needs to create the maximum hydrostatic shock that it possibly can.

9mm won't get fast enough to cause meaningful hydrostatic shock. In service calibers it's pretty much nonexistant. Higher velocity is better than lower, but hydrostatic shock really doesn't come into play at the speeds a service pistol will ever be able to create.


Personally I liked the 147 HST or 147+P HST, those fourth generation Ranger-Ts look great as well. I also used to use the 9BPLE, 124+P Gold Dots, some Fiocchi-loaded 115 XTPs, but the one I had settled on for the long haul was the 147+P HST. Oh and I also used the 124+P HST a lot.

Orion8472
February 15, 2011, 04:36 PM
I have 500 Winchester SXT's in 147 gr. and I have no issues with using them. Traded a Countersniper scope for them.

rellascout
February 15, 2011, 04:45 PM
I have 500 Winchester SXT's in 147 gr. and I have no issues with using them. Traded a Countersniper scope for them.

What have you been shooting them out of? Have to tested expansion or just feeding. I am not a big fan of the backyard expansion test because any and every hollow point design, bullet & weight fails some amount of the time.

gofastman
February 15, 2011, 05:56 PM
147gr +P here!

ByAnyMeans
February 15, 2011, 05:56 PM
I have my G26 loaded with HST 147gr. They were a good deal when I bought them. Have a good supply of 124gr. (forget brand) as an emergency supply. When I'm done cycling through my 147gr. rounds I will get whatever is a good deal in 124+ or 147gr. from a major manufacturers defensive ammo line. As long as they cycle I fine with them.

Orion8472
February 15, 2011, 06:03 PM
What have you been shooting them out of? Have to tested expansion or just feeding. I am not a big fan of the backyard expansion test because any and every hollow point design, bullet & weight fails some amount of the time.

Just feed testing [CZ SP-01]. I don't have the equipment or place to test expansion.

martywj
February 15, 2011, 06:14 PM
Use 147 gr JHP of various manufacture, but mostly Winchester Ranger in all our 9mm handguns. We don't use +P at all. We have Kahr P9, S&W 908, S&W 3913, Kel-Tec PF9. All handle 147 gr just fine.

Geckgo
February 15, 2011, 06:24 PM
Well, I don't shoot a 9mm, but I thought my comment might be useful to you. I tend to go with the heavier bullets in any caliber. I prefer slower, heavier bullets. Guess that's why I got a .45. If you REALLY like small, fast bullets, why not stick with the smaller ones?

Also, have you lost faith in the GDHPs and want to switch brands for any specific reason? Or you just found a sweet deal on the Rangers? Both are great ammo, if there were a sale, I wouldn't mind switching brands/weights, they all do roughly the same damage, and handgun accuracy at 10yrds isn't too badly affected by swapping bullets, supposing that you notice a difference at all. I only shoot my little hand piece offhand, so I wouldn't notice any difference.

Just my two bits, nice discussion.

blackspyder
February 15, 2011, 06:34 PM
Hornaday XTP's in 147gr here. 147 strictly because that's what the lgs had in hornaday.

NG VI
February 15, 2011, 06:53 PM
Sometimes the caliber is just fine, sometimes it isn't about small and fast or big and heavy. The 9mm is really more like a middle of the road caliber, it's only light and fast compared to the .45.

mbruce
February 15, 2011, 07:15 PM
Sometimes the caliber is just fine, sometimes it isn't about small and fast or big and heavy.

That's what she said.....

sorry I couldn't pass that up.

DenaliPark
February 15, 2011, 07:35 PM
I am considering switching to 147gr Winchester Ranger RA9T 147 gr T-series.

Probablly the best 9mm hollowpoint load to be had, I've carried the RA9124TP, and the RA9TA, two superior loads to be sure, however they are not superior to the RA9T. They combine greater muzzle blast and a propensity to shed their jackets, two things that the RA9T does not....

Frozen North
February 15, 2011, 07:51 PM
When you get those, go shoot some water jugs. The expansion is incredibly reliable and very dramatic. These are the only bullets I have ever seen that always look like the picture in the advertisement.

I am a 147 HST convert, I now shoot 127 +P+ Ranger T in my G26. I may go with 147 Ranger T next time, they look like they deliver the goods without the extra pressure.

Good choice and good luck.

rellascout
February 15, 2011, 07:52 PM
Also, have you lost faith in the GDHPs and want to switch brands for any specific reason? Or you just found a sweet deal on the Rangers? Both are great ammo, if there were a sale, I wouldn't mind switching brands/weights, they all do roughly the same damage, and handgun accuracy at 10yrds isn't too badly affected by swapping bullets, supposing that you notice a difference at all. I only shoot my little hand piece offhand, so I wouldn't notice any difference.

No not at all. GDHPs have always done well for me but the stash is running low. I buy in Bulk to save $$$. I am down to a few boxes and what if the zombies come... LOL

Seriously just looking at options before I buy a couple thousand rounds.

BlindJustice
February 15, 2011, 07:55 PM
Yeah, in my CZ 75B

Doubl Tap +P 147 Gr. Cold Dot JHPs rated at !,125 FPS

accurate and easy to shoot recoil wise

However, Double Tap doesn't offer the Gold DOts currently
I think they're bonded JHPs now are Montana GOld.

R-

areagan
February 15, 2011, 07:58 PM
I have a pregnant question. Is it going to make any difference to a grand jury what you are shooting in the unlikely event you are forced to use your gun. My thinking is that if you are using the same ammunition as our military 124 NATO FMJ that kinds precludes the super killer bullet issues and subsequent civil suits from family survivors. Just throwing this out there.

Frozen North
February 15, 2011, 08:04 PM
Avoid Hyjack....

I do notice that the 124-127 +P loads recoil much more than 147. This is very noticeable too.

gofastman
February 15, 2011, 08:06 PM
Id rather be found guilty than dead...

anyway,
I too find 147gr loads to have the most comfortable recoil characteristics.

Geckgo
February 15, 2011, 08:07 PM
What about the civil suit: He's using military ammo!!! ? Personally I don't worry about such things, people can start a lawsuit for anything, but when you are in the right, you are in the right.

rellascout, have you shot the 147s in your gun?? A new hollowpoint can be devastating to the wallet if you buy 3000 and the first box won't cycle properly. Never really had that problem but I hear about it from time to time, might want to pick up a couple boxes before you take the plunge.

catnphx
February 15, 2011, 08:13 PM
Personally, I believe that the 9mm is better suited for the 124 than the 147. It was built for the 124 and the compact weapons don't behave very well with the 147 either. Again, from what I've learned and researched, that is my opinion.

I carry 124 in my 9mm.

areagan
February 15, 2011, 08:26 PM
Remember the Black Talon controversy. If you use your gun even, in your home, you are going before a grand jury and there is just no escaping that. I don't know about you but, I most certainly want a grand jury of my peers determining my fate and not just the local PD or a one man judge. I also know in New Jersey the use of any hollow point ammunition is a felony enhancement or a stand alone felony for just possession. Many states have ammunition laws on the books as well.

rellascout
February 15, 2011, 08:37 PM
Ball ammo is out of the question in my book.

I do not think in today's world JHP are seeing as a negative. A good lawyer will be able to argue you used them to prevent over penetration and that any bullet is lethal. Hypotheticals about what the outcome of a defensive shooting is not what this thread is about.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program.

gofastman
February 15, 2011, 08:44 PM
Personally, I believe that the 9mm is better suited for the 124 than the 147. It was built for the 124 and the compact weapons don't behave very well with the 147 either. Again, from what I've learned and researched, that is my opinion.

I carry 124 in my 9mm.
How do you figure? 147gr loads are very good for short barrel weapons :scrutiny:

redbullitt
February 15, 2011, 09:10 PM
I load them to use through my suppressor as a defensive load. If you are not shooting suppressed or a sub gun, then I would go for the 124s.

DenaliPark
February 15, 2011, 09:29 PM
It was built for the 124 and the compact weapons don't behave very well with the 147 either.

This is totally erroneous, in point of fact, 147 gr subsonic ammo burns its powder more efficiently than do 115 gr & 124 gr, standard, +P, or +P+ ammo does...What that means is that, the hotter ammo actually requires longer barrels to efficiently burn its charge of powder!

Deanimator
February 15, 2011, 09:31 PM
I don't have a velocity fetish.

I use the Winchester White Box 147gr. JHPs in all of my 9x19mm handguns. They're accurate and reliable. "Box 'O Truth" tested them and they did well for penetration AND expansion.

Deanimator
February 15, 2011, 09:35 PM
Remember the Black Talon controversy. If you use your gun even, in your home, you are going before a grand jury and there is just no escaping that.

What FACTUAL basis do you have for that?

Many states have ammunition laws on the books as well.
Really? Besides New Jersey, which ones? Ohio is NOT one of them.

Deanimator
February 15, 2011, 09:39 PM
I have a pregnant question. Is it going to make any difference to a grand jury what you are shooting in the unlikely event you are forced to use your gun. My thinking is that if you are using the same ammunition as our military 124 NATO FMJ that kinds precludes the super killer bullet issues and subsequent civil suits from family survivors. Just throwing this out there.
You're going to have a LOT more problems when your 124gr. goes through and through and kills a five year old on the other side of your assailant than you EVER will from shooting and neutralizing him with a 147gr. JHP.

And don't even THINK it can't happen. It happened to the NYPD a LOT before they switched to JHPs.

mbruce
February 15, 2011, 10:05 PM
Id rather be found guilty than dead...

anyway,
I too find 147gr loads to have the most comfortable recoil characteristics.
I dunno...after watching natgeo "hard times" I would rather go meet my maker then head to prison...the wife would be set up with life insurance money and we have no kids....she'll find a replacement for me! If the muslims are right then Ill have 72 of em waiting on me....ha

rbernie
February 15, 2011, 10:09 PM
I feel quite comfortable carrying the plain old pedestrian Gold Dot 147gr, based on the data that I've seen. It's my current EDC load, and I have a backup stash of Winchester 'Personal Protection' 147gr fodder just in case I ever run out of the GDs.

gofastman
February 15, 2011, 10:35 PM
And don't even THINK it can't happen. It happened to the NYPD a LOT before they switched to JHPs.
can you find some specific incidents? I just find that hard to believe, even though its not the first time i have heard it :confused:

joe_security
February 15, 2011, 10:41 PM
147 gr for me. I shot up some old 124 gr GDHP and followed it up with some Win. Supreme SXT 147 gr."personal protection. The 147 was much more pleasant in my P226. The accuracy really suprised me. I have some 147 gr Ranger on hand, its not the "T" version. I really like the civilian SXT version, has this been replaced by the new PDX1 ? I noticed the PDX comes in both weights.

Thorgrim
February 15, 2011, 10:41 PM
NG VI wrote:

9mm won't get fast enough to cause meaningful hydrostatic shock. In service calibers it's pretty much nonexistant. Higher velocity is better than lower, but hydrostatic shock really doesn't come into play at the speeds a service pistol will ever be able to create.

I've never seen anything convincing (and scientific) on hydrostatic shock. In the early days of the term (IIRC, it was P. O. Ackley who coined it), it generally involved bullets moving +4,000 fps, thus the invention of the .17 Remington. I don't doubt (if for no other reason than simple physics) that velocity matters, but I've never seen a convincing scientific argument that supports it in the velocity ranges of most handgun cartridges.

On the other hand, I'm not convinced that it does not matter at all. After a summer of hunting groundhogs with a buddy (he with a .25-06, me with a .257 Weatherby), I noticed that a lot of his hit whistlepigs crawled off, and almost all of mine were anchored on the spot - and that's only a 200-300 fps difference. Same bullet, same powder, same primers - I loaded rounds for both of us. But ... mine were approaching the 4,000 fps MV that Ackley thought was an important breakpoint.

Sorry, just ramblings on an old topic that's never been settled to my satisfaction.

clance
February 15, 2011, 10:45 PM
I carry a Kahr TP-9 and run Federal 147gr. +P Hydro-Shoks.

I like the heavier bullet and Kahr recommends using +P loads in their pistols, or at least they did according to my manual.

mljdeckard
February 15, 2011, 10:51 PM
I like heavy bullets. If I carried a 9mm I would use 147 gr.

wrs840
February 15, 2011, 11:00 PM
I like 124gr Golden Saber non-plus-P "low flash" because it's what I target and follow-up best with at 7 yds and 10 yds in my 3913/908/5904 SD 9mm CCWs, after testing fairly extensively with my particular combination of the all-important equation of man/method/machine. This kind of confidence is more important to me than what size of hole it makes or what manner of shockwave the stats prove it may create. Your mileage not only "may" vary, but indeed "will" and "should".

Make up your own mind about what works for YOU. It makes much more sense than using what works for me (or anyone else).

Les

Deanimator
February 15, 2011, 11:02 PM
can you find some specific incidents? I just find that hard to believe, even though its not the first time i have heard it
Massad Ayoob on non-expanding ammunition (http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=302002&page=3)
Ayoob's got a lot more to say in his various books.

JoeMal
February 15, 2011, 11:03 PM
147 GDHP for me

Jeff82
February 15, 2011, 11:21 PM
147 HST, nuthin' but net.

ironhead7544
February 15, 2011, 11:22 PM
I use the 115 gr CorBon in my G26. In one of those very small and light 9mm single stacks I would probably use the 147 gr HydraShok as the recoil would be a lot easier to control. I tested the 147 gr HS and found it expanded nicely. Just my .02.

MikePaiN
February 15, 2011, 11:35 PM
I carried 147g JHP rounds in my PT709 because I found the pistol shot well with them....Now that the 709 is gone and I have a K9 it does well on 115g PBX +P rounds, so that is now what I carry.

Matt-J2
February 15, 2011, 11:45 PM
I have the 124gr TAP in my new(to me) CZ 75. Shot well today, has a good rep so far as I know, and best of all, it was available to purchase when I went shopping for JHP ammo.
I'd like to try some 147gr ammo though, see how it shoots for me.

wally
February 16, 2011, 12:28 AM
I don't carry a 9mm, but if I did it'd be with 147gr ammo!

areagan
February 16, 2011, 12:41 AM
I would be willing to bet that any shooting situation under any circumstances regarding injury or death is going to require a legal determination in every state of this union. This also regardless of the principles involved being either civilian or professional. It is a legal requirement.

I don't know if I would make such a wild blanket statement about the NYPD and ball type ammunition either. The fact of the matter is that, all police departments used ball ammunition for many many years in revolvers and auto loaders.

Our own military uses 9 mm 124 grn NATO FMJ ammo right now and we have won a few wars in the last 100 years with ball ammo. I just can't right off 124 grn ball ammo as not being an effective round.

Making such hard assertions is just unsettling to me.

mljdeckard
February 16, 2011, 12:48 AM
No war has ever been determined by sidearms.

SIGLBER
February 16, 2011, 12:56 AM
No handgun round has sufficient velocity to produce hydrostatic shock to the point that it would a significant factor in wounding capability. You have to get into centerfire rifle cartridges to get enough velocity for the pressure wave of the bullet to cause damage to the bodily structures that the bullet passes by and does not contact directly. Handgun rounds make holes. That's it. The temporary stretch cavity disappears a fraction of a second after the bullet enters the body.
The body closes around the wound and actually makes the hole smaller than the size of the bullet expanded or not. Surgeons and others clearly state they cannot which pistol bullet (speaking of the major service calibers) a person has been hit by until the bullet is removed. So if a handgun bullet expands to say .65 caliber and penetrates to 12" it doesn't matter if it starts off 147gr.'s at 1000 f.p.s. or 124gr.s at 1250f.p.s.. One is expanding to that caliber and depth by being designed to do so at a certain weight and velocity. Same with the other.
A well designed 147gr. round will do essentially the same damage a well well designed 124gr. bullet will do. Might be some difference in expansion/penetration. But a well designed JHP will meet the F.B.I. criteria regardless of the weight and velocity. Several 147gr. bullets do very good with todays designs. This was not always true. It was not always true of the light or mid-weight bullets either.
The old rule of a JHP must travel at least 1000f.p.s. to work was because of the poor design of earlier JHP's. They nedded velocity to work. Not anymore. The deciding factor should be does the round function reliably in your gun? Does it hit to point of aim? Is the recoil mild enough to allow fast follow up shots? Rounds like the Federal HST 147gr. bullet are coming on very strong because of good performace.

areagan
February 16, 2011, 12:57 AM
They were used in war and I don't recall hollow pointed rifle ammunition either. So what is your point. Mine is that there is not a handgun made capable of producing hydrostatic shock ( bleeding in the brain from body trauma ) . Pistols only poke holes.

Now at 3,500 feet a second from an AR 15 any bullet will cause shock regardless of bullet configuration.

Geckgo
February 16, 2011, 01:14 AM
Do you know any soldiers that currently carry sidearms at all??? Asside from a few special forces troops, it's my understanding that sidearms are issued to MPs and officers.

rellascout
February 16, 2011, 01:15 AM
Aregean... I want to personally thank you for turning a informative thread into a ego thread. Read the Op. What you are doing is exactly what I asked people not to do. Read the op and please do your THR best to not create a caliber war.

Ball ammo is not part of this discussion. If you use ball ammo for self defense that is up to you but this is not what this discussion about.

areagan
February 16, 2011, 02:03 AM
I read the original post and it does not rule out FMJ. It is just a rhetorical question about bullet weight. If you don't want any participation from other members then why put it on a public forum. Not every person thinks alike or shares the same values and ideals. From what I gathered from reading the forum policies personal one sided posting is not permitted. I don't think DISCUSSION CONTROL is permitted either looking at the guidelines.

I also know it is also typical for the resident clique to give a new member a hard time as that reputation about this web site is well know as well. I was really hoping it wasn't true.

DasFriek
February 16, 2011, 02:15 AM
The Ranger T-series is a great load, I use it in my .45acp 1911 in 230gr +P loads.
I use 147gr +P Federal HST in my MK9 and i do feel it does offer a small advantage in penetration over lighter loads.
In my MK9 the 147 HST +P shoots as soft as 127gr +P loads.

10 years ago i wouldn't have used a 147gr 9mm load as they didnt have the velocity to expand reliably, But todays bullets will expand great even at very slow speeds. Look at todays very slow .45acp standard loads coming out of short barrel 3" 1911 they are lucky to hit 800 fps and they still expand great.

NG VI
February 16, 2011, 04:05 AM
Thorgrim wrote
I've never seen anything convincing (and scientific) on hydrostatic shock. In the early days of the term (IIRC, it was P. O. Ackley who coined it), it generally involved bullets moving +4,000 fps, thus the invention of the .17 Remington. I don't doubt (if for no other reason than simple physics) that velocity matters, but I've never seen a convincing scientific argument that supports it in the velocity ranges of most handgun cartridges.



The Wikipedia article linked to earlier seems to have lumped hydrostatic effects with the "ballistic pressure wave" theory. Hydrostatic effects are very real, and are apparent when a fast object impacts a fluid object, but ballistic pressure wave is something I just don't think is real at all. Ballistic pressure wave is the theory that a projectile can cause remote wounding by the force of its impact, which is a nice idea but kind of absurd, while hydrostatic shock is just the term for the reaction of a highly fluid medium when hit by a fast object. We see hydrostatic shock effects when a container of liquids is hit by a bullet, like a 20oz bottle of water hit by a fast .357, or a groundhog hit by a .223, though the effects won't be nearly so dramatic in a larger 'container' such as a human.

Ballistic pressure wave would be cool if it were real, but it isn't.

NG VI
February 16, 2011, 04:06 AM
No handgun round has sufficient velocity to produce hydrostatic shock to the point that it would a significant factor in wounding capability. You have to get into centerfire rifle cartridges to get enough velocity for the pressure wave of the bullet to cause damage to the bodily structures that the bullet passes by and does not contact directly.

Or shoot objects much smaller than people. A smaller container will be less tolerant of the pressure spike from being hit with a projectile and will be more affected by the impact than a larger one.

NG VI
February 16, 2011, 04:11 AM
there is not a handgun made capable of producing hydrostatic shock ( bleeding in the brain from body trauma )

Hydrostatic shock is not bleeding in the brain, that's the bunk "ballistic pressure wave" theory, a bunch of mental masturbation.

Oh and Who uses 147gr JHP 9mm as a self defense round? Kind of does " rule out FMJ.".

Back to the scheduled thread.

NG VI
February 16, 2011, 04:14 AM
This group hasn't given anyone a hard time or supported anyone's bullhockey statements based on time on the forums once since I joined. Don't try to derail the thread and don't worry about people here holding a statement against you, if someone thinks you are wrong they will just say so in a civil manner and the explain why they think that is the case.

rellascout
February 16, 2011, 09:56 AM
I read the original post and it does not rule out FMJ. It is just a rhetorical question about bullet weight. If you don't want any participation from other members then why put it on a public forum. Not every person thinks alike or shares the same values and ideals. From what I gathered from reading the forum policies personal one sided posting is not permitted. I don't think DISCUSSION CONTROL is permitted either looking at the guidelines.

I also know it is also typical for the resident clique to give a new member a hard time as that reputation about this web site is well know as well. I was really hoping it wasn't true.

Thread title and OP both state that the proposed discussion is about JHPs. I want input from other members here but look at your posts. Instead of adding to the productive dicussion you drag out the dead horse off topic of "what will the lawyers say..."

It has nothing to do with you being a new member. It has everything to do with your attempt to derail my thread with off topic garbage.

Now back on topic:

I think I am going to get a couple of cases of Winchester Ranger RA9T 147 gr T-series and then some Winchester Ranger 9mm T-Series +P RA9124TP.

joe_security
February 16, 2011, 10:47 AM
rellascout: What is your opinion of the old Ranger 147gr. non T version ? There seems to be plenty of it to go around. Is the new PDX worth while in 147gr. 9mm ?

rellascout
February 16, 2011, 10:57 AM
rellascout: What is your opinion of the old Ranger 147gr. non T version ? There seems to be plenty of it to go around. Is the new PDX worth while in 147gr. 9mm ?

The stuff is cheap. $200 for 500 give or take a few $$$. I assume this is the stuff you are talking about: 9mm SXT Winchester Ranger 147 grain Ammo T-series ZRA9SXTC. That is about $35 to $40 cheaper than the current round. My understanding is that is a slightly different bullet design than the current offering but that it is still a solid bullet design. IIRC state of the art 2008. LOL

Orion8472
February 16, 2011, 11:32 AM
I just checked my Ranger ammo and it is the RA9T, so I guess that is concidered "the good stuff". If that's the case, I think it was a good trade [ammo for a Countersniper scope I had].

Shaggz
February 16, 2011, 11:59 AM
I carry COR-BON 115gr +p JHP in my 9MM.
From what I've heard/read & understand. It is a very effective round for stopping an assailant and I feel safe when carrying it.

joe_security
February 16, 2011, 12:19 PM
RA9T (147gr.) here as well. I thought this was pre "T" series ammo. I think I bought this stuff at least 3 years ago, maybe more.

areagan
February 16, 2011, 12:42 PM
Kinda makes you wonder if the ammo makers found a way for the paper shooters to be separated from their money faster. Next we will be asking the bad guys " Sir which bullet do you prefer to be shot with ". Cabin fever is really bad this winter it seems.:banghead:

Owen
February 16, 2011, 01:27 PM
Nobody is singling you out because you are new. They are arguing with you because:

1.) this is a discussion forum. arguing is what we do here.
2.) you're bringing up topics that have been settled here on THR dozens of times in the past.

The military uses FMJ in both rifles and pistols because that is what international law requires.

The bleeding brain thing has been proven false scientifically. The search function is broken at this time, but when its back up, do a search, there are dozens of threads about it.

Outside of NJ, no one has ever been convicted because of they chose to use hollowpoints. It was a concern Massad Ayoob brought up in a magazine article once. 20 years later, it still hasn't happened. If someone has been convicted or successfully sued, please bring it up in another thread.

Your last post in that thread is a non-sequiter, and has no connection at all to the rest of the thread. No one here is talking about shooting paper as far as I can tell.

Water-Man
February 16, 2011, 01:58 PM
I use Federal HST 147gr. in my carry pistol for the following reasons:
1. I believe HST is the best SD ammo on the market based on articles I've read and independent tests I've done.
2. I believe 147gr. penetrates deeper than 127, 124 and 115gr.
3. It feeds reliably in my pistol.

rellascout
February 16, 2011, 02:08 PM
I use Federal HST 147gr. in my carry pistol for the following reasons:
1. I believe HST is the best SD ammo on the market based on articles I've read and independent tests I've done.
2. I believe 147gr. penetrates deeper than 127, 124 and 115gr.
3. It feeds reliably in my pistol.


Nicely stated... I considered HSTs as well. I use them in my 45s.

Wolfgang2000
February 16, 2011, 03:13 PM
When my Dept went to 9MM they went to the 147 grn bullet, because the FBI said it was the way to go. I'm sorry it's actual street record was dismal.

In (mm I prefer the lighter but faster 115 or 124 +P or +P+. The 127+P+ is a great round also.

I hear the newer 147's are better, but I'll stick with the lighter and faster rounds. YMMV

rellascout
February 16, 2011, 03:22 PM
When my Dept went to 9MM they went to the 147 grn bullet, because the FBI said it was the way to go. I'm sorry it's actual street record was dismal.

In (mm I prefer the lighter but faster 115 or 124 +P or +P+. The 127+P+ is a great round also.

I hear the newer 147's are better, but I'll stick with the lighter and faster rounds. YMMV


What was the timeframe of these actual street record? When you say it was dismal in what way did it fail? Did it fail to expand? Did it not pentrate enough?

mljdeckard
February 16, 2011, 05:35 PM
And there are actually a lot of pistols in-theater right now. Carried by a lot more people than officers and MPs. (There's one on my hip right now.)

481
February 16, 2011, 05:54 PM
I have always been a 124gr +P guy. I have shot a lot of Gold Dots but I believe that mainly comes from the fact I bought a ton of it way back when and it works in all of my pistols.

You know THR loves a caliber war within a caliber, LOL... Just kidding, so tell me if you are shooting 147gr what kinds and why. Lets try to keep this one civil. I am not interested in bickering. Thanks in advance.

I am considering switching to 147gr Winchester Ranger RA9T 147 gr T-series.

r-

I have, on several occasions (on duty), carried the RA9T load. Definitely one of the better "heavy-for-caliber" 9x19 loads available and if it provides you adequate confidence, go for it. Winchester provides a "comparator" function on their 'site which includes the RA9T and might be of interest to you if you've not seen it already.

In "retirement", my current EDC (a G17) is loaded with the Hornady 9mm 147 gr. XTP JHP. Reputed for its excellent accuracy, it also provides moderate expansion (~1.5x caliber) and deep (14"-18") penetration.

GRIZ22
February 16, 2011, 08:22 PM
I do notice that the 124-127 +P loads recoil much more than 147. This is very noticeable too.

It may be the muzzle blast that bothers you. Muzzle blast bother s most people more than recoil.

I also know in New Jersey the use of any hollow point ammunition is a felony enhancement or a stand alone felony for just possession.

Outside of NJ, no one has ever been convicted because of they chose to use hollowpoints.

Contrary to gun forum beliefs hollowpoints are legal to have and use in NJ. See:

http://njsp.org/about/fire_hollow.html.

NJ restricts where you can possess them. If you possessing them legally (home, while hunting, at a range, etc) and you were to use them for a SD situation and it was a good shoot you will not be charged with possession or use of hollowpoints. If you commit a crime and you have hollowpoints you will be charged with them as a add on charge.

Now that that's out of the way, I use 147 gr 9mms in Beretta, Taurus, and S&W 9mms as I have found them to be more accurate.

Nushif
February 16, 2011, 08:28 PM
I just usually go to the LGS and buy whatever 9mm Golden Sabre they have.
My current crop is 147 grain, I think.

I'm of the opinion that any premium round will do the trick, so I'm not super choosy.

Don357
February 16, 2011, 09:35 PM
With me it really depends on which one of my 9mm's I'm carrying at the time. For my short barreled Kel-Tec P-11 I use 124gr Federal Hydra-Shoks and for my full size TZ-99 I use Winchester White Box 147gr JHP's. However I would not hesitate to use either cartridge in either gun. All this ...weight+velocity+bullet design= A HEADACHE!!!! Just practice, practice, practice, and learn to put your bullet where YOU want/need it, and it dosen't matter what caliber, weight, velocity, or design you have. Just my $.02.

McCall911
February 18, 2011, 05:17 AM
I've used 147 grain JHP's as a SD round. In fact I still have some in one of my 9mm's (either the one in the drawer underneath my elbow right now or the one beside my bed. Forget which.)
Some of the first 147 grain JHP's weren't much to write home about IIRC. I'm pretty confident that has changed by now.

benEzra
February 18, 2011, 01:01 PM
I think 147gr got a bad reputation because the original 147's were loaded very light so as to be subsonic. I suppose the assumption was that because the "cool operators" were using 147 subsonics in suppressed guns, that must make them awesome for general use. 9mm is not a high-energy round to start with, so downloading the round to lower velocities and energies puts it in rather feeble territory.

I believe that fad went away quickly---failure to expand was endemic and the resulting overpenetration and lack of incapacitation was problematic---but the reputation stuck.

Personally, I like +P 115gr and 124gr loads, but I'd be OK with a +P 147gr as well if that were the only choice. I don't personally see the point, though, as 124gr can offer as much penetration as you want, with somewhat less recoil than hot-loaded 147's and higher velocity/energy.

gofastman
February 18, 2011, 06:25 PM
I just ordered 200rds of 147gr+P HST ammo.

I see no reason to not use +P ammo. In my completely uninformed opinion, I would venture to say most large ammo mfg's probably load their +P stuff to the very top of SAAMI max pressure for standard pressure rounds to avoid a lawsuit from some stupid (or ignorant) person blowing their gun up.

Atticus the Finch
February 23, 2011, 10:03 PM
I didn't read every single post so I'm sorry if someone already said this.

The 9mm was developed and optimized to be fired as 115g-124g. Once you start getting heavier and slower, you're losing the velocity needed in order to get that standard 12 inches of penetration. The same goes for lighter .45's. I use 124g +p personally.

gofastman
February 23, 2011, 10:27 PM
Once you start getting heavier and slower, you're losing the velocity needed in order to get that standard 12 inches of penetration

ummm, no :banghead:

straight from the horse's mouth:
http://www.winchester.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/flash-SWFs/law_bullit.swf

heck, if we are strictly talking about penetration, look at the 147gr 9mm vs the 357 SIG (super fast 9mm 125gr bullet)

Jeff82
February 24, 2011, 01:03 AM
The 9mm was developed and optimized to be fired as 115g-124g. Once you start getting heavier and slower, you're losing the velocity needed in order to get that standard 12 inches of penetration. The same goes for lighter .45's.

Wrong in just about everything you said.

kopcicle
February 24, 2011, 04:53 AM
I know I'm not going to surprise many with this post .

If lighter a longer barell helps
If heaver the recoil impluse is spread over a longer period of time .
Heavier slower projectiiles will stay in the tube longer and be subjected to muzzle flip a bit more than lighter rounds . The lghter faster rounds print low , the heavier slower rounds high .
opinion:
115 is nearly silly light
124(5) is still a bit on the light side but Mas Ayoob went to a lot of trouble to document it's effect .
147 is nearly too heavy but recent (to me anyway) advances in bullet construction make it a fair choice .
How come no one has attempted to popularise a 135 ?
It's just words folks , and I do not cary a 9mm for defense (and never will) .
I do not use 185's or 200's in my .45. I don't like the recoil . I don't like where they print . I don't like the muzzle blast and my weapon somtimes refuses to feed , eject and occasionally locks up in recoil .
Summary:
Every bore and barell length has a sweet spot for velocity and bullet weight .
Again I wonder if someone went to the dtrouble of developing a 135gr would anyone buy it ?

Ok I'm sick of me too :D have a good thread

~kop

rellascout
February 24, 2011, 09:41 AM
Winchester had a very popular 127 +p+ round.

mbruce
February 24, 2011, 10:49 AM
I bought a few boxes of Winchester Ranger SXT 147gr after getting input from NG...

I know a member post a comparable reloading recipe for 9mm +p+ in the reloading forum....just a FYI in case your wondering how to still get that +p+ load.

HoosierQ
February 24, 2011, 02:18 PM
Got 18 of 'em loaded into my Glock 17 at bedside. They feed just fine for me.

NG VI
February 24, 2011, 03:53 PM
The 9mm was developed and optimized to be fired as 115g-124g. Once you start getting heavier and slower, you're losing the velocity needed in order to get that standard 12 inches of penetration.

Yeah, you lose velocity, which is helpful in penetration. However, you are gaining in mass, which matters most in generating inertia, one of the biggest factors in gaining penetration.

blue_ridge
February 24, 2011, 04:02 PM
There is a lot of expertise out there supporting high velocity 9mm as the most effective version. I'd go 115gr. +P so long as it shot accurately and reliably in my specific weapon. If 147's shoot noticeably better, then they would be the easy choice.

NG VI
February 24, 2011, 04:05 PM
Yeah a lot of old expertise.

The 9mm loads of 2011 are not the same as the 9mm loads of 1991. It's almost a new game as far as performance of the heavyweights goes, and the lighter bullets just haven't gained as much out of the advances as the heavies.

blue_ridge
February 24, 2011, 04:14 PM
Yeah a lot of old expertise.

The 9mm loads of 2011 are not the same as the 9mm loads of 1991. It's almost a new game as far as performance of the heavyweights goes, and the lighter bullets just haven't gained as much out of the advances as the heavies.

Care to support this with facts? I mean, what you say sounds interesting, but it would be nice to see some numbers or an article that explains your line of thinking. The 115 +P has been well documented, like you say, for a long time. So what gains in 147 gr loads have erased the higher velocity advantage, as you contend? I have no problem changing my hand loads if there is a better alternative.

TheOhioan
February 24, 2011, 04:58 PM
I carry 147 grain HST everyday, I think it is a great round and the stats I have seen make me very happy with that load.

Lonestar49
February 24, 2011, 05:19 PM
I have 500 Winchester SXT's in 147 gr. and I have no issues with using them. Traded a Countersniper scope for them.


...

Same here, horde the stuff, as it, and some of the FMJ Ranger I use in my Sig P229n/r 40's is the most consistent, accurate, cleanest burning, ammo I have ever used or seen, picking up the brass and it looks brand new, rdy to re-load in both 9mm and 40 S&W

I like it because I believe in weight/inertia and it shoots, recoil wise, no different, maybe a tad less than any of the 115gr or 124gr FMJ so the feel is the same.

I use it in both my Sig P229R CT 9mm and P228n/r 9mm - SXT 147gr JHP's

When I bought it, IIRC, it was around 36 bucks per 50 in 180gr 40cal and 31 bucks per 50 9mm, both JHP

Not the best price, but "it was there, available".. a long while back

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc306/Lonestar49/winchesterranger-t-new-1.gif


Ls

NG VI
February 24, 2011, 05:52 PM
Blue Ridge, back when ammunition companies started to put some real thought into JHP design, higher velocity was the only game in town to ensure that a bullet would expand. Back then, a +P or +P+ 115 or 124 grain was really the only way to get the performance out of the bullet people wanted. The only way to get some expansion, you know. Well the 147s of today, namely the Ranger-T and HST (pretty sure others like Winchester's PDX stuff does this as well) is designed in such a way that after a realistic point velocity isn't what's driving bullet expansion.

The newer 147s have the advantage over the newer 115 and 124 grain bullets because they are just as good at expanding, but they have more material to work with in the process. They produce more momentum, so they can be designed to expand to a wider degree than a comparable lightweight bullet without worrying about a lack of penetration through resistance. Resistance is what makes a JHP penetrate less than a comparable load in the same caliber with an FMJ bullet. Momentum can help overcome it and assist in getting an acceptable amount of penetration.

The 115s and especially 124s being made now are no slouches, far from it, but the upper hand they used to have with their higher velocity just doesn't matter like it used to. The advantages of more bullet mass is now, thanks to the wonders of modern design and industry, more useful.

CZ57
February 24, 2011, 09:06 PM
Low tech, but one of the best penetrating bullets around is the standard Remington 124 gr. JHP. I load them to +P to get the expansion I want and really couldn't be persuaded to change.;)

Myles
February 24, 2011, 09:41 PM
I like Remington 124gr. +P JHP, and Federal HydraShok 147gr. +P+. I keep a few magazines of each loaded. I actually prefer the Remington for consistent accuracy. The Federal is no slouch, just more expensive to find any more to practice with, so I horde what I have. Both are very tough to come by in the original loadings. (Late 80's, early 90's)

blue_ridge
February 24, 2011, 11:14 PM
NG_VI, thanks. however, I was looking for some numbers, gelatin results, police shooting records etc. Interstingly enough, Wikipedia actually shows some info, including two terms I had never heard of. Marshall and Sanow's One Shot Stop rating (OSS) and Average Incapacitation Time (AIT), FWIW.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9x19mm_Parabellum

NG VI
February 24, 2011, 11:26 PM
Yeah I tend to go with hard things like penetration and expansion, the Marshall and Sanow books were interesting reads but realistically they are kind of meaningless, since they only compare gunshot wounds in very specific cases. I mean, they don't compare results in incidents where the person was shot more than once. Shooting someone twice or more is kind of to be expected if someone is doing something so bad you have to shoot them to get them to stop.

Dean1818
February 25, 2011, 07:01 AM
Here In Texas.... the grand jury would be asking why you didn't shoot the BG with a bigger caliber

Brasso
March 12, 2011, 11:13 PM
I carry the 147gr HST. I would be happy with a 124+p loading as far as terminal performance is concerned, but the 147's have a milder recoil impulse to me, and I prefer them for that.

psyshack
March 13, 2011, 12:54 AM
I load up all of my HD/SD ammo. And live in a free state.

PF-9
I use 147gn XTP's during fall and winter. And 124gn XTP's spring and summer.

Sigma9VE
Gets the same load rotation. But the loads are unpublished very hot rounds. Call them +P+ if you must. :) And if the Sigma draws night stand duty it gets the 147's.

hirundo82
March 13, 2011, 12:00 PM
I only use 147gr as my SD 9mm ammo. I prefer Federal HST, but I've also used Winchester Ranger SXT when the HST was impossible to find. I use 147gr because I care about penetration more than expansion (that's what she said), but the 147gr HST gives excellent expansion too.

stevereno1
March 13, 2011, 12:38 PM
147gr. Rangers in my G-17.

If you enjoyed reading about "Who uses 147gr JHP 9mm as a self defense round?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!