Favorite SD ammo?

Whatever brand name LE ammo I find for a good price.
I've used Speer, Winchester, Remington and Federal.

I started with Hydrashok circa 2000. Switched to Gold Dots around 2008. That’s it for me. It works. It’s reasonably priced (online).

I would be just as happy with HST.

That holds true for 9x19, 45ACP, 38 Special that I use. I don’t think I’ve ever had a failure with those ammos. Certainly not in revolvers.

I don’t worry about minor differences in performance, usually, but I like the 124 +P or standard pressure 9mm Gold Dots over the 115 or 147.

Lucky Gunner did a test on the most popular S/D ammo. Go to the web site and find lab tests. It includes penetration, expanded diam. with photo's and video.

+P doesn't matter for revolvers. +P just means it's higher pressure, doesn't mean it has higher velocity. Higher pressure could be a good thing in a semi-auto to ensure proper cycling, it doesn't matter for a revolver.

I carry Hornady Critical Duty in autos.

In my case:
When I can find it, HST. Pick your flavor.
A close second is Gold Dot, of the middle or lighter weights when there are choices; heavy ones like longer barrels. The 'short barrel' designs may differ in this particular case.
In a revolver, my third choice is soft lead semi-wadcutter hollowpoint. It may not expand as large as modern designs, but at worse it's still a .35" hole and it has a decent reputation.

I've grown to accept that there are rounds I prefer, not so much demand, and rounds I haven't seen benefit to. For example, I'm fine with my semi-jacketed HP in my revolver. Easy to control, they won't jump crimp in my lightweight revolver, and the soft lead may still expand a bit. It's not going to get smaller. On the other hand, many of the budget JHP just don't seem to expand in tests; might as well get semi-wadcutters or truncated cone if you don't have other options.

Rumor is that some manufacturers make their 'short barrel' options worth it. A different powder or load to get what velocity they can, a different bullet construction so it will still expand without as much velocity (at least in gelatin; IIRC, the short-barrel Gold Dots have a larger cavity), or a different formulation for the powder just to prevent excess flash. You'll have to do your research on a particular one if it catches your eye.

CZ p10c 9mm-Gold Dot 124gr +p
CZ 75b 9mm-Buffalo Bore 115gr XTP +p+
Glock 43 9mm-Federal HST 150gr micro
Glock 20 10mm-Underwood Gold Dot 180gr
Glock 20 9x25 Dillon-Underwood Xtreme Defender 90gr
Glock 29 10mm-Gold Dot 200gr
Rock Island .45acp1911-Federal HST Tactical 230gr
Rock Island 9mm1911-Buffalo Bore 115gr XTP +p+
S&W 681 357 mag-Hornady Critical Duty 125gr
Diamondback DB9 9mm-Federal HST 150gr micro
NAA Pug 22WMR-Hornady Critical Defense 40gr (I think)

Speer Gold Dot +P for my 9MM, any variety of LSWHP for my .38 Spcl.

There are several 9MM SD cartridges I'd be happy with, once function tested. I like Gold Dots from back yard testing several brands.

Stubert said:

Lucky Gunner did a test on the most popular S/D ammo. Go to the web site and find lab tests. It includes penetration, expanded diam. with photo's and video.

Click to expand...

One cavet about Lucky Gunner they shoot 5 rounds into each block which unfortunately can greatly skew the average penatration.

My SD ammo is hydra-shok, now I have moved to HST.

My 357sig SD ammo is Ranger T. I can never seem to find HST in 357sig.

FEG HiPower, Astra A70, Ruger LCRX 9mm - Federal classic 9bp

Ruger Speed Six, Service Six - Winchester Silvertips (158)

NAA Black Widow, High Standard Mark IV - Hornady Critical Defense .22 Mag


Yeah, nothing really gourmet here.

Speer Gold Dot is what I use in my 9mm. I use the 115gr version which seems to be not quite as popular as the 124gr, but I got a smokin' deal on it and the performance tests I've seen on it are not that different from the 124gr and 115gr is what I shoot for range ammo as well.

If/when I run out of the Gold Dot I purchased, I'll get the cheapest I can find out of Speer Gold Dot, Federal HST, and Hornady Critical Defense (I use Critical Defense in my .357 Mag).

For those looking for the LuckyGunner tests:

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

Sig VCrown in 115 is what I use for SD in 9mm.

mavracer said:

One cavet about Lucky Gunner they shoot 5 rounds into each block which unfortunately can greatly skew the average penatration.

Click to expand...

That's not complete information. Lucky Gunner shows the median penetration for the five rounds in the chart, but you can click on the table and see the depth for each of the five rounds.

My answers are based on several different published tests and my own testing:

For .38 Special, 125 gr. Remington Golden Sabers or possibly 100 gr. Xtreme Defender (I've shot and tested GS, but not the Xtreme D's, but: penetration.)
For 9mm, 135 gr. HST.
For 357 Barnes 140 gr. XPB.
For .45 ACP, 230 gr HST

Critical Defense for my 38
And the same in my 40 Cal

Good Ol' Boy said:

Sig VCrown in 115 is what I use for SD in 9mm.

Click to expand...

Seriously considering switch to the Sig ammo 'cause of price. Wanna see how it performs in my guns, of course.

TarDevil said:

Seriously considering switch to the Sig ammo 'cause of price. Wanna see how it performs in my guns, of course.

Click to expand...

Price is certainly a plus, it's why I initially started using their ammo. But it really is decent stuff.

I recommend it every time I get the chance.

In the 90s I used fed 147 jhp and win black talons 147 gr iny 9mm. The. 45 auto 230 he black talons. The 357 mag got either win silver tip or hornandy xtp 158 jhp.

I'm still deciding what to run for current SD ammunition.

I am somewhat intrigued by what someone says is the best, better, or "has worked well for me" when it comes to SD rounds. Especially when it is a new or newer product. While its a simple proposition to determine what will reliably function in a given firearm, or the accuracy level it may achieve, isn't quantifiable information on what will function best in an antipersonnel scenario a bit hard to come by? For a new product, it should be non-existent. Those of us who are experienced hunters, for example, and have used the same rifle round for several seasons and effectively harvested a couple dozen deer with it have more REAL terminal performance data than any new SD handgun round will achieve for probably a long time. And even then, results tend to vary: X number of animals DRT, distances covered by other animals before they drop, damage level to specific organs, blood loss/trail, etc. I successfully harvested a deer this season with a new Hornady product (300 B-O sub-x) and it performed as advertised. Prior to me shooting that deer, I had very little info (all anecdotal) on what to expect. I still consider the product "good enough to continue using", but 1 deer kill isn't much data either. Personally, I don't consider performance data on SD bullets that have been fired into anything but humans more than theory. This is why I always consider shot placement to be "king", assuming the round in question functions reliably in the given handgun in the first place. This is my thought process, Does anyone think that this reasoning is "off"?

I tried the Inceptor ARX ammo just recently and there are some things I like about it. In a lightweight revolver, the lower recoil is always a plus for me. In semiautos, the shape of the bullet is like FMJ so it feeds well.