115 vs. 124 grain for 9MM defensive ammo?

My answer is a bit lazy, but I'm sticking to it.

My wife was a new shooter, so I got her a used XD 9mm and a more recently a Ruger EC-9. She likes the slightly lower recoil of 115 gr. I switched out my .45s for 9mm because I decided capacity makes more sense than a bigger bullet. I reload a lot of target ammo, and 115 gr is the cheapest and most available bullet I can find. I want one bullet to load, train with, and carry, for all of our guns.

RMR 115 gr FMJ for practice, 115 gr HSTs for carry. All done.

Odd...I feel more of a recoil will 115s.

mljdeckard said:

My answer is a bit lazy, but I'm sticking to it.

My wife was a new shooter, so I got her a used XD 9mm and a more recently a Ruger EC-9. She likes the slightly lower recoil of 115 gr. I switched out my .45s for 9mm because I decided capacity makes more sense than a bigger bullet. I reload a lot of target ammo, and 115 gr is the cheapest and most available bullet I can find. I want one bullet to load, train with, and carry, for all of our guns.

RMR 115 gr FMJ for practice, 115 gr HSTs for carry. All done.

Click to expand...

I thought HST was 124 or 147 only?

I doubt there's much practical difference. My favorite 9mm carry load is 124 HST. But I think I've got Critical Defense in one of my carry guns right now, and I've been fine with 115 WWB HP's in the past too. I doubt ammo choice is typically the difference maker between a good vs bad outcome in a defensive shooting situation very often. Carry a decent quality HP and call it a day.

Its all theory. In reality, I carry hollow points from a legit American manufacturer that I know will function reliably in my pistol. To this, I add as much training as possible with ball ammo (assuming you can get it again one day) to insure I can hit my target. I also recognize that all handguns are not the greatest fight enders, and that shot placement is critical and it will likely require more than 1 shot to eliminate a threat.

I doubt there's a significant difference between 115 & 124 gr JHP's of reputable make, designed for defensive civilian CC use. 9mm ammunition has improved by leaps and bounds over, say, the last 10-15 years; both as to penetration with good expansion and reliable feeding through a plethora of handgun designs.

I do not think, however that 147 gr 9mm has the same characteristics...FBI studies seem to indicate it's good for CC use, but I personally doubt the amount of street use has resulted in adequate data to make a strong assertion for it's use. My study is somewhat limited and there are many here, and on other forums, with a lot of street smarts who may dispute my suspicions....

I'll still maintain, however, that the all-time gold standard for street credibility is the 125 gr, .357 JHP load; against which all current offerings should be judged. LEO's with long service records, please feel free to chime in!! Best regards, Rod

Speer Gold Dot 124gr +P for all my pistols rated for +P. They feed very well and have always gone... bang.

When I retired duty ammo was Hornady 135 gr Critical Duty +p. I stick with that in the rare event I carry a 9mm.

You know you are only talking 9grs more bullet weight. Less than 1/4 the weight of a common 22 lr bullet. I really doubt it matters. Just use what you can find and what functions reliably and gives the penetration and expansion you are looking for.

124gr +P Speer Gold Dot will turn a rabbit’s insides into outsides. 124gr Gold Dot standard pressure from a 3” barrel will completely blow out a car-crippled deer’s spine at the base of the skull and it will bleed out before a knife can touch its neck. A 147gr HST will do the same thing to your idiot friend’s poorly hit deer.

Quality hollow points will work, if you hit something important. Weight isn’t so important, IMHO.

YMMV.

I have stuck with 115 grain because that is the cheapest range ammo I have been able to consistently find and I want to practice with something similar to my carry ammo.
That said I did stumble onto a couple hundred rounds of low priced 124 grain last year and I ran a couple boxes through each of the 2- 9 mm's I carry and I didn't notice much of a difference to the 115 grain. If I came across a good deal on quality jhp's in 124 grain I would buy it and not worry at all about using it after checking function in my guns.

Gold Dot Short Barrel 124 grain. Works well in my G26.

I tend to sway toward heavier bullet weights for any handgun chambering. That said, I like 124gr for defensive use in general, but I don’t shy away from the lighter 115gr loading if it’s all I can get my hands on. It’s shot placement that matters.

I prefer 124grn bullets. But in this market? Take what you can get.

WB

Use whatever you can get as a hollow-point bullet at the best price that goes bang 100% of the time in whichever gun you're carrying.

That being said, Hornady "Critical Defense" would be my first choice, though not the best price.

Out of really short barrels, 115 is great and probably has the best chance of expansion due to increased velocity. 124 grains isnt much slower, but it is measurable. They still expand every time as well, for me out of short barrels.
Full size guns, 124grains is just fine. I find recoil to be slightly snappier/sharper with 115 grain ammo or handloads that are loaded to full power.
In general, 115 and 124 are in the same "class" in my opinion and I wouldnt hesitate to use either one.
147 grains are a different animal, and unless loaded to full potential and/or fired from at least a 4" barrel often 147 grain bullets can have trouble expanding due to low velocity. 895-945fps out of short barrels, not too ideal.
I use 147 grainers out of my 17L and 34 with great results. Slower recoil, and pushier recoil, more like a mild .40 S&W

I think the 124gr round is a good compromise between the high velocity of a 115gr and the retained momentum of the heavier 147gr projectile. How well the bullet impact lines up with your sight picture can be a concern too. My Shield shoots low with 115gr, better with 124gr and best with 147gr, while my SR9c seems to do best with 124gr

In any given offering, if there were multiple offerings, I would consider other factors other than if they are 124 or 115 grains. For example:
I prefer 115 gr Gold Dots over 124 Grain Golden Sabers. But i Prefer 124 Winchester Ranger T-s over 115 Grain Federal 9BPLE hi-Shoks. Oh boy.

147gr loses the least velocity in short barrels. 147gr also has a deeper hollowpoint cavity, which provides more expansion reliability because it is less likely to plug with cloth.

However instead of choosing ammo based on bullet weight you should choose based on reliable terminal performance (adequate penetration depth and reliable expansion).

Mass is what will kill in a handgun. This is why I prefer the .45 auto.

if I had no other choice than to carry a 9 Luger, I would carry it with the hottest 147 grain loads I could find.

Wildbillz said:

I prefer 124grn bullets. But in this market? Take what you can get.

WB

Click to expand...

Agree..in my morning ammo search engine wanderings, I found some Magtech, 147g, subsonic ammo for $.10 less than 115g..bought it, plinked with it(Glock 48)..worked fine, hit the target....

481 said:

Confirming the reliability of a given load in your particular pistol is probably the greater concern if you are already relying on a premium JHP design.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Confirming the reliability of a pistol being used for self-defense is more critical than most any other bullet configuration factors, including penetration, expansion, recoil, poi,etc., as important as they otherwise might be.

Shawn Dodson said:

147gr loses the least velocity in short barrels. 147gr also has a deeper hollowpoint cavity, which provides more expansion reliability because it is less likely to plug with cloth.

However instead of choosing ammo based on bullet weight you should choose based on reliable terminal performance (adequate penetration depth and reliable expansion).

Click to expand...

Good idea, but not easy to find "volunteers" for an actual testing process for the intent of why we carry, and with what round is being used. The substitute media by which ammunition manufacturers test their product is most often a poor replacement and not very consistent with how a possible adversary is put together. Their process does make for a good advertisement picture of an expanded bullet though, but is there a "money-back" guarantee?
I've tried ballistic gelatin, and that's about the most time consuming messy crap I've ever dealt with. Can't find any good kits that come with bones and internal organs, or that provide clothing that a "nasty" would be wearing. Never met anyone whose "center-of-mass" was the consistency of a stack of wet newspapers either.
I can't speak for anyone else, and I hope I NEVER need to find out, but I carry for one purpose only, and that's to STOP the threat, completely, against myself and whom ever I'm with at that time, and if that takes multiple rounds from what I'm carrying to end any serious aggression, so be it.

The brand of ammunition is going to make a bigger difference than the weight. I'd take a good 115 like a HST over a cheap 124 hollowpoint like Winchester White Box