Pistol Bullets: How do you rate them in terms of accuracy?

Hornady XTP FP or JHP are the most accurate for me in .357, 9x18 Mak, and .430".

I have been shooting Bullseye Pistol and I am really not good enough to quantify accuracy There are guys who can hold hard enough to sort out bullet types, and bullet brands. I have asked for opinions on bullets, generally, once a shooter finds a combination that works, they stick with it. The JHP is generally considered the most accurate pistol bullet, depending on the JHP. Cast lead bullets in the 45 ACP have been developed to an accuracy level, that, it would take a ransom rest to sort groups. This may be partially due to the low pressures of the 45 ACP. Ball ammunition in the 45 ACP is with a 230 FMJ, no one has every said that round is inaccurate, only that it kicks. No one who uses a 9mm uses cast bullets, that cartridge is operating closer to 40 K psia. The most accurate bullets in my 9mm's are JHP and then FMJ, and the advice from the good shooters is to use JHP bullets. The 9mm has to be pushed hard and fast to retain accuracy at 50 yards.

I have shot plated bullets in the 45 ACP and 9mm. No one else is using plated bullets. I don't think they shoot well at 50 yards, my rapid fire and timed fire groups at 25 yards are not tight enough to really prove that one bullet type is better than another.

I have not seen anyone using coated lead bullets, if they prove very accurate, they will appear on the firing line.

It’s more about construction than it is about shape, but shape does play into accuracy in its own way.

So rather than start with your list of options I’m starting with construction.

Jacketed bullets are the best and worst at the same time. Jacketed bullets are essentially a 2 piece construction where a piece of copper is extruded and formed around a lead cup, or alternatively they are a copper cup which serves as a mould for the lead core. This is wonderful if things are done uniformly, but it’s hard to be uniform when working with small fragile pieces and tight tolerances. This is exceedingly bad when done in extreme volume for huge contracts because there is not enough time or profit margin to spare to be able to run high quality parts with good QC to ensure that machines aren’t vibrating out of tolerance. Jacketed base bullets are greatest in this respect as the bases are typically the most uniform and they seat the straightest in the cases usually. Business end jacketed bullets (fmj) have an open base usually with the jacket crimped around the base of the bullet. Sometimes it’s uniform, sometimes not, but this leaves a lot to be desired on base uniformity which generates a lot of variation. Extruding over a round nose isn’t exactly the easiest thing either.

Plated bullets are essentially a single piece construction with some material added on afterwards by a variety of processes. Again, if the process is uniform it works well, but plating is by its nature not the most uniform process in the world.

Cast bullets are one single piece of material. They are typically very uniform in density and being a one-piece design there is no error in adding any material to the bullet because nothing solid is added. The trick here is in what’s removed. Cast bullets have a sprue which must be removed to get a nicely balanced projectile. If done properly you have a one piece construction with essentially no variation in the lot. No manufacturing process errors in combining pieces. These are intrinsically top-of-the heap for accuracy.

Now, to move on to shape... when looking at pistol bullets BC is not a huge factor, but it’s a factor. The bigger issue at play when handloading ammunition is proper seating stems so that your “perfect” nose is not damaged, and a properly belled case so that your base is not shaved or deformed.

On the nose...My experience is that harder cast lead with a wide meplat is strongest and suffers the least damage during seating, but any properly supported nose will seat just fine. My experience here says JHP are tough, hard cast HP and next in line, and a hard cast Keith design is best.

On the base...you can’t really argue that anything is as good as a jacketed bullet. Lead deforms, copper slides with less deformation and less damage.


Soooo... my list goes something like this....

1. JHP with a thick, heavy duty nose.
2. Keith hard cast
3. Hard cast HP
4. Hard nosed jacketed
5. Hard nosed other lead
6. Plated/coated
7. Soft lead
8. JHP

But like Walkalong said, any of them with a well tuned process will far surpass the ability of the average shooter. My list is essentially the list of what is easiest to get a well tuned process with. I’m still trying to figure out where frangible bullets go too. My gut says that they belong in the #5 spot. What I find most interesting though is that when you look at my list, it follows my preference for hunting almost perfectly (flip the top two), but you absolutely are not paying premium prices for the best performing bullets. That #2 spot is sweet in the woods, sweet on paper, and sweetest on the wallet.

I think it really depends on what you are loading for. Hunting, targeting shooting ,etc. Maximum loads ,starting loads or below. I use all kinds of different bullets just depends on the what they are going to be used for.

Not all bullets are equal I have shot poor versions of all of them but yeah a decent FMJ will out shoot a great plated bullet IME.

That said I have won lots of matches shooting plated bullets.

Walkalong said:

I can say for sure the MBC coated 98 Gr WC is not as accurate in .32 Long as the Berrys 83 Gr HBWC that they haven't made in ten years. If they ever run another batch I am buying 5K.

Click to expand...

I wonder if we could put together a group buy and get them to make a run. I would also agree to buy 5k.

RugerOldArmy said:

This is probably an ill thought-out thread, on my part, but I find it an interesting discussion. Thanks for suffering an over-competitive mediocre pistol shooter, as he contemplates shooting Bullseye, and looks for an edge to make himself more competitive than skill alone would warrant.

I still think it is very interesting how readily we, myself included, have so often accepted 'good enough' and accuracy of the a cartridge of a few inches at 25 yards. Certainly we all do this because of our skills, the short sight plane, the basic difficulty in holding an extremely tight point of aim...or the purpose/shooting volume/cost. But it makes me wonder...

• Has anyone tried to test their handloads from a ransom rest in pursuit of rifle levels of accuracy? I mean benchrest rifle accuracy from a pistol cartridge may be crazy...but imagine if you could work up a bullseye handload that shot 1/2 MOA.
• If you developed a 1/2 MOA load, and even if you were a 3-4 MOA pistol shooter, how much would that cut your groups?
• I wonder what those companies selling 'Match' Handloads expect from their cartridges? Maybe there would be an interesting market niche for a company that could offer load capable of such accuracy in a test barrel. (Certainly that wouldn't transfer to such accuracy in all pistols, for all shooters...but it might be attractive for those wanting to ensure a load shoots better than they do.) Look at the test of the 'Match Ammo' in the link fxvr5 posted. The best accuracy was 1.74" @25 yards...that is 6.96 MOA. I suspect a handloader could develop a handload for an accurate gun that could do better than 6.96 MOA.

I think I'll keep my eye out for a used ransom rest. I'd like to try and make 1/2 MOA pistol cartridges, just for the challenge.

Click to expand...

I suspect that the guns are more of a limiting factor when talking about moa accuracy from pistols. Questions come to my mind such as; how well can a 5" barrel that is not attached to the frame (e.g. 1911) stabilize a bullet? Is a 5" barrel long enough to create the stability needed for such accuracy? And even if it is (which it may be), if the barrel is a some-what-free and moving part, how can it consistently move as intended for function of the firearms whilst still maintaining it's position relative the the slide of 1/60th of a degree?

Even if pistol loads were developed in highly accurate single shot falling block guns that removed these mechanical variables, I doubt the hard work of development would be very noticeable once the ammo was used in a conventional pistol. Obviously more likely noticeable to the very best of pistol shooter, but I still wonder how much.

One big question that occurs to me as I read this is:

To the extent that one bullet tests as more accurate (over a large enough sample to be meaningful) in a particular gun, how much of that is due to the bullet itself versus the idiosyncratic interaction of that bullet (and the rest of the load) with that particular gun?

For instance, in the article posted that tested a variety of factory ammo and found a particular Browning-branded round to be the most accurate, is that because of any greater level of consistency or aerodynamic properties or rifling-engaging properties of that particular projectile... or did everything about that load (including the projectile, but also the powder type and weight, primer, and brass) just happen to be "in tune" with what the particular test-gun "liked"?

The link I posted did not use a purpose-built bullseye gun. Thus it's not a great example of what a gun and ammo can do.

Most bullseye shooters agree that the best bullet is a JHP, and in the 45 it's usually the Nosler or Zero 185 JHP. In the 9mm/38 Super many shooters are using the Hornady HAP and XTPs, and Zero JHP-conical bullets as the select choice in the 115-125 weight range.

Powder, primer and brass selection also matters to many bullseye shooters. You can check out what they like by visiting the Bullseye forum: http://www.bullseyeforum.net/

The typical expected best performance from a 45 is often claimed to be a 10-shot group at 50 yards that is under 1.5 inches. The expected best performance of the 9mm and 38 Super are under 1.0 inch.

Keep in mind that the gun has to be up to the task.

You'll probably find the links below of special interest.
http://www.shootingtimes.com/reloading/loads-for-the-bullseye-shooter/

The info you are looking for has been done by several. The one that 1st comes to mind is http://www.schuemann.com/default.aspx
They have done work with twist rate and variable twist rates. I know of one gunsmith that has been doing work in this area too. The rifle smiths are a long ways a head of the pistol-smiths when it comes to building supper accurate guns. But I will say your not going to get a 1911 that accurate off the shelf. It's a reason some pay $5k+ for a BE gun. The good ones shoot the 1st round just like the others with no shift in POI.

RugerOldArmy said:

Maybe I'm too hopeful...one though that occurred to me is how a decent target handgun in .22 LR might perform using Eley TenX or some of the premium 22LR ammo out there. I have a feeling some of that might shoot 1/2 MOA.

Click to expand...

This is well outside my areas of semi-expertise, but my understanding is that serious rimfire bullseye/benchrest shooters often try a lot of different brands (and even lots) of ammo to see which one their particular gun likes best. No doubt many guns like TenX, but best accuracy is more than about the "inherent" accuracy of a particular piece of ammo or projectile... again, a lot of the accuracy (or loss of same) seems to include the esoteric interactions of the ammo and the gun (even leaving human-factor shooter out of it).

fxvr5 said:

The typical expected best performance from a 45 is often claimed to be a 10-shot group at 50 yards that is under 1.5 inches. The expected best performance of the 9mm and 38 Super are under 1.0 inch.

Click to expand...

And that is true, based on what the good shooters who ransom rest their Bullseye Pistols. And what is also true, I have never seen a 100-10X with a 45 ACP, seldom see 100's at 50 yards, in fact, I can't remember one right now. They are very rare, but I have heard they happen. And to shoot a 100 at 50 yards, in Bullseye Pistol, all you have to do is place all your shots in four inches at that distance. It ought to be a piece of cake with a M1911 that will shoot everything within 2 inches at 50 yards, right?

Nope, Bullseye pistol is down right impossible. It is hard. I had goals, made a few. One was to keep all shots in the black at 50 yards, not the ten ring, just the black. I have done that with a 22 lr, not with any centerfire I own. I have shot cleans at 25 yards with the 22 lr, have not done that with a centerfire. I have been banging away for maybe three years at this. I have come to the conclusion, I am the greatest source of inaccuracy in the system. Once a shooter realizes that he needs more improvement than his gear, I think that shooter is on the path to enlightenment.