115 grain 9mm or 124?

I've always noticed more of a difference in powder loading than bullet weight in 9mmP when it's between 115gr and 124. Either should work fine in any modern pistol in reasonable condition.

That said, I do prefer the Euro ammo in 9mmP. It tends to be loaded hotter in both 115 & 124gr and some firearms I have prefer the hotter Euro loading rather than the anemic American loadings that are pretty common.

BSW

Either one works, I shoot 90% 124/5. Maybe slightly longer but that wont be an issue.

I would never buy norma if I intended to save brass to reload. The flashole on what I have seen is so small it's very difficult to decap.

thunderbyrd said:

I took a look at the ammo I have and it's all 115 and that's what I've been shooting. It has run flawlessly in my cz and Springfield. So should I expect any different performance from 124? Isn't the 124 longer?

Thanks for any advice!

Click to expand...

Every couple of months we get a post from somebody that has a brand new 9mm pistol, who is having cycling issues with the guns. Typically, they are shooting inexpensive 115gr ball ammo. Cheap, 115gr ammo is generally the weakest 9mm ammo available. A switch to 124gr, 147g, or hollow point ammo of any bullet weight normally corrects the problem. This is an issue with new/stiff recoil springs, and normally goes away within 100 - 200 rounds at which point they can use any ammo they want without problems.

If your guns work with 115gr ammo, it would just be a preference choice for you.

thunderbyrd said:

I was just at the Norma site and they've got some 9mm slightly cheaper than I find locally. I noticed the 115 and 124 were the same price. I took a look at the ammo I have and it's all 115 and that's what I've been shooting. It has run flawlessly in my cz and Springfield. So should I expect any different performance from 124? Isn't the 124 longer?

Thanks for any advice!

Click to expand...

If you're getting brass to the face, 124gr might help the ejection by working the slide harder/quicker. It also depends on how the ammo was loaded (pressure) so this is not a guarantee. I have a full size pistol that repeatedly placed the brass on my hat with 115gr ammo. Typical 124gr fixed the issue.

I have shot both 115 and 124 with the different 9mm pistols I have owned. Never had a problem with either. Today I only shoot 124 grain. I do not shoot cheap ammo.

I load both, but mostly 115. Have not found any good reason to shoot the heavier bullet over the 115. But they both shoot well.

My Stoeger STR-9 will fire anything, but it's a lot more accurate with the 124 grain than the 115

I pretty much only shoot 115 gr. I usually feel a little less recoil in 115gr ammo

I have shot Norma 115 almost exclusively since the panic started, being best prices and available. Over 2000 rounds of it, not one problem with my Beretta APX, Shield 2.0, Shield 9 Plus PC, or my Springfield Range Officer. I have about 1000 rounds on hand, but will be trying some 124 grain on my next purchase. So I'd say shoots well across a range of platforms and recoil spring strengths.

124gr. I'll shoot 115gr just to get the brass, which then gets reloaded with 124gr projectiles.

I’m surprised no one has mentioned that the 124 grain ammo will likely group differently than the 115.

Rudolph31 said:

I’m surprised no one has mentioned that the 124 grain ammo will likely group differently than the 115.

Click to expand...

There was no real difference out of my old G17. One at 10 yards and the other at 15y but the groups and location are pretty close.

But every gun is different so there could be a shift in the groups.

Rudolph31 said:

I’m surprised no one has mentioned that the 124 grain ammo will likely group differently than the 115.

Click to expand...

I find that 124gr seem to shoot closer POA/POI for iron sighted pistols, but the difference is negligible at common SD distances (7-10 yards)

In terms of feeding, firing, extracting the two should be similar.

There could be a difference in groups between the two.

For range ammo I buy the least expensive stuff I can find and that is usually 115 gr FMJ. But I've used 124 gr +P ammo for serious work for a while. If I find 124 gr FNJ for the same price as 115 gr I buy it, and sometimes that happens. At typical handgun ranges I've never noted enough difference for it to be a concern. Maybe at 50 yards or farther.

Is gone. 94gn is all that's left.

124 for me.

In the grand scheme of things it’s 9 grains of weight difference, not a huge amount. I haven’t seen much, if any, change of POI at pistol ranges if both 115 and 124 loads are loaded to decent specs.

I’ve shot tons of all three major weights; 115,124 and 147, all have worked well. The 147 gr bullets to shoot differently than the 115’s do, so I don’t shoot much 147 gr ammo anymore. My guns usually get 124 gr, but I won’t pass 115 gr loads if it’s a matter of price, though .

Stay safe.

Either or. I've shot a lot of 115 and 124. I keep my S&W mags loaded with Corbon 115gr +P, but I've shot some decent 124gr offerings. I gravitate towards +P in either weight, and my Smith functions fine with inexpensive 115gr FMJ for range time.

In the mid - late 90s my department Issued the original Win 147gr Black Talon. It shoots well enough once you get accustomed to it. I still have a few boxes of the old Black Talon and Federal 147gr Hydra-Shock. I haven't shot any of that stuff in years, but it would do in a pinch. It has souvenir status if nothing else.

You need to consider your barrel length. If you have a short barrel, such as the 3.1" barrel in my P365, you need to worry about the reduced muzzle velocity being insufficient for a hollow point bullet to expand properly under all conditions. If you are shooting an attacker at the nude beach, most bullets will expand properly even with a short barrel. But the situation changes completely when you are shooting through multiple layers of clothing, and at longer distances. For these reasons, with my P365, I would prefer to use 115 gr or lighter bullets with a +P load to obtain a muzzle velocity closer to that of a more normal barrel length.

I've seen ballistics testing that showed muzzle velocities much under 1,200 FPS can sometimes result in marginal bullet expansion when going through multiple layers of clothing. These tests were also performed at close range. Expansion at a longer distance would be even worse.

In Florida where it's mostly warm and people are not bundled up it, bullet velocity may not be so critical. But up North where people bundle in multiple layers, the bullet velocity is far more critical, especially with a short barrel.

I've used 115 gr JHP Sig Sauer, Speer LE, and Winchester, and 115 gr FMJ Browning, Magtech, Remington, and Winchester ammo and I have not yet had a malfunction. However, I've only put a total of 276 rounds through my P365, so it may be too soon to tell. The cartridges had rated muzzle velocities through a 4" barrel ranging from 1,135 to 1,225 FPS. None were rated as +P, but I think a couple were close to a +P load. FYI, I didn't set out to test different brands of ammo. I was just buying the ammo that was available at the time.

I shoot 124 gr better in almost all my 9mms. So that is what I stick with. The wrench in that statement is I shoot 147gr best in my pocket 9mm but I bet that will be changing soon for other reasons.

124 grain works for me.

Do you prefer German, or British?

When Germany adopted the Luger the cartridge, Pistolen Patrone 08, was a 8 gm round nosed bullet going 330 m/s (123.5 gr @ 1,080 fps) out of the 100 mm barrel.

When the British copied the 9mm Parabellum cartridge, they reduced the bullet weight to 115 grains, and 1200 fps out of an 8" sten barrel, later them bumped it up to 1,300 fps.

Generally, Commonwealth countries (Britain, Canada, etc) stuck with 115 gr, and continental Europe stuck with 124 grains.