115 gr. vs. 124 gr. +P 9mm Ammo

[Old SF MJT]

For years now, I have loaded my full-size 9mm pistols (4.5” or longer bbl.) with 124 gr. +P rounds, but loaded their shorter-barreled counterparts with 115 gr. +P ammo. My thought is that the heavier round in the longer bbl. will provide the velocity to give good efficiency from the heavier slug, while the lighter slug from the shorter bbl. will still be afforded the velocity to ensure proper projectile performance.

Question 1: Is my rationale flawed?

Question 2: In this day and age of limited ammunition supply coupled with soaring prices, will there be any significant loss of performance by standardizing on the 124 +P? The 115 +P?

Many thanks in advance.
Old SF

 

[briansmithwins]

It really depends much more on the powder characteristics than the weight of the bullet. A faster burning powder is going to be more optimized for shorter barrels but might overdrive JHPs out of a longer barrel hurting weight retention and penetration.

I use Federal 9BPLE, a +P+ 115gr load in everything 9mm. If I was really concerned I'd use one of the short barrel loads in the subcompact pistols and the 9BPLE in the full size pistols.

BSW

 

[jmr40]

You're overthinking the barrel length thing. Most 124 gr +P will be getting 1250-1300 fps from a 4.5" to 5" barrel. Maybe 50 fps slower from a 3" to 3.5" barrel. There isn't that much difference. There is plenty of speed to expand even from the shorter barrel. I think the biggest advantage to using special powders in shorter barrels is to reduce muzzle flash. Even if they get 40-50 fps more speed I don't think that is a game changer.

The 115 gr HP loads have traditionally had issues with over expansion and not giving enough penetration. Newer bullets have been designed to help with that, but 115 gr 9mm loads would not be my 1st choice. I still don't trust them to give adequate penetration, especially if barriers or heavy clothing comes into play

Conversely early 147 gr loads had issues with poor expansion and excessive penetration. Once again newer bullets have been designed that seem to have solved this issue. At one time a 147 gr HP at about 1000 fps is what the FBI considered the best round. I'm not sure if that is still what they recommend or not.

I have always felt any decent 124 gr bullet at 1200-1300 fps from a 9mm was the best compromise regardless of barrel length. You might get 1200 fps from a shorter barrel, 1300 from a full size with a longer barrel I'm not brand loyal. I don't think a $2/round is that much better than one that costs 50 cents/round as long as it meets the other criteria.

To me the jury is still out on 147 gr loads, but they would be my 2nd choice with 115's the 3rd option and FMJ of any weight as a last resort. But to be fair, I still don't think the difference between any of the the HP ammo is huge.

 

[film495]

I wondered similarly when I got a 9mm PCC. After digging around and collecting some info, word on the street was the lighter 115 grain bullets, and just factory loads, but I have done some handloading, the cartridges are the same for pistol and carbine, one can squeeze a bit of performance out of the longer barrel in the Carbine with some nuanced hand loading, but IMHO not enough for my purposes to do anything but have a standard load. The 115 grain for whatever reason, has more of an uptick in velocity with the longer barrel. .

Interesting question, my guess would be standardizing will save time, and then you can't mix up which box is which, and all the cartridges will be more consistent. I just use Win 231 for regular pistol loads. Again this is an assumption, so do some research, but I think either weight projectile will work fine, if you are loading a +P load, but - my question is why? I think it will work with a regular pressure load, and aren't you just making your pistol a bit harder to control with the extra +P load, how much are you really gaining and does it make a real difference? Generally, I steer away from max loads or +P loads. 9mm gets moving pretty fast and I haven't seen or heard of much failure to expand like with slower .38 Spcl ...

 

[Riomouse911]

IMHO, a Performance difference is mainly between bullet styles and brands and the guns they’re fired in. A 9-grain difference in weight between 115 and 124 isn’t a huge amount, I doubt there would be much, if any, measured difference at SD ranges between the two with identical bullet brand/styles through the same gun.

Our office followed the County Sheriff and some other local agencies and went from 127 gr +P+ to 124 gr +P Win Ranger SXT ammo about two years ago, primarily because gun manufacturers warranty issues were cropping up with +P+ use. From what the OIS reports sent in since the switch have shown me, since the switch from +P+ there hasn’t been a noticeable effectiveness difference even with the tiny decrease in bullet weight and a bit less initial velocity with the 9mm service guns.

As for part two: Years ago a couple of Winchester LE ammo folks recommended to me the 147 gr bullet for micro pistols. Their stance was since bullets don’t generate the velocity they do in the longer barrels, the 32-odd grain weight increase the 147 has over the 115 gr. bullets gives them a vital-organ penetration advantage when expanding. It is this advice that led me to try out and now carry the Federal 150 gr. HST Micro loads for my small 9mm pistols.

My opinion is just that, it is worth no more or less than any other you may receive. YMMV.

Stay safe.

 

[1942bull]

I use 124 gr 9mm JHP out if a 3.4 inch barrel. I get good expansion through water jugs with standard pressure. I expect +P would provide more.

 

[Old SF MJT]

To all the folks here that have weighed in: Many Thanks! Some different points of view expressed, but all of them very much worth careful consideration. So now I get to scratch my head some more and try to formulate my own (much more educated) opinion.

Again: Many thanks. And I hope that all of you have a warm, joyous Christmas Season.
Old SF

 

[481]

This.

I use 124 gr 9mm JHP out if a 3.4 inch barrel. I get good expansion through water jugs with standard pressure. I expect +P would provide more.

If you have the access/availability to a range that will permit you to test out each round in its respective pistol, this is the best option.

If you want to go beyond that, there are quite a few mathematical models that will allow you to predict terminal penetration.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Here's what you really need to know about hollowpoint ammunition.

HP ammo is designed for optimal performance at whatever their advertised muzzle velocity is. If your velocity varies too far outside that velocity, either too slow OR too fast, then you won't have optional performance characteristics.

What is the velocity range for optimal performance?

Well, that's not something really put out there by manufacturers, so it's not really known unless someone does a bunch of testing on their own.

Suffice it to say that if you're "reasonably" close to the advertised velocity with your firearm, you should get good performance.

I hesitate to put a number to this range for a couple reasons. One is that I don't know and haven't done any testing myself. The other is it would be a sure way to start up a lot of bickering over the topic.

A simple way to test your theory is to do your own ballistics gel testing and see. Throw in some chronograph results as well.

If it's not in your budget for gel or chronograph, shoot some water jugs and see what happens.

 

[JTQ]

I think it is mostly hair splitting. The difference between a 125gr +P hollow point and a 115gr +P hollow point from the same manufacturer with same style of bullet, from the same gun, is probably smaller than the the difference between that companies 9mm round, and their .40 S&W, .45 Auto, and 10mm rounds, using the same bullet design. We know folks choose 9mm because it is just as good as those other rounds.

I'm taking a lot of this bullet performance on faith. Pros have studied this stuff and manufacturers followed their recommendations to produce rounds that should be as effective as possible, within the capabilities of the round, that I'm not going to sweat it out between respected rounds from respected manufacturers in any of the common defensive rounds.

Another point - I believe all bullet/gel penetration testing is done at 10' and most from 4" barreled guns. If all your shooting is done at 10' and all your guns have 4" barrels, and everything you shoot has the same muscular/skeletal density as gel, and they all wear the same layers of denim, and ...

You should be fine.

 

[briansmithwins]

This is a really good resource for comparing bullet performance: https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/#9mm
In the individual descriptions they will tell you what pistol was used for that test. For example they used a S&W M&P9C for this test: https://www.luckygunner.com/9mm-p-124-grain-jhp-speer-gold-dot-short-barrel-20-rounds#geltest

Gel testing isn't the end all of bullet performance but it is a good starting place. My own opinion is gel is a best case performance test. If a JHP bullet won't expand in gel it's more likely to not expand in the real world.

BSW

 

[golden]

OLD SF

I would not worry about the 115 versus the 124 grain weight. Much more important, in my opinion is the bullet you select. My carry ammunition in all but my smallest 9m.m. is the FEDERAL 124 grain HST jhp. My agency selected the HST rounds when we still issued .40 caliber pistols. I was very impressed with it and how it performed. My agency had no complaints about the HST in the field. This is reflected in the gel tests which show it to consistently expand and still penetrate adequately.

I have several different standard pressure, +P and +p+ rounds to choose from at home. When I first started carrying a 9m.m. on duty, my carry load was 9m.m. +P+ 115 grain ammo, I think from WINCHESTR. We used whatever ammo won the agency contract and the +P+ always performed well out in the field.
Now, I just use standard pressure HST 124 grain from FEDERAL. I have about 500 rounds of the +P HST, but find that the tradeoff in increased velocity is offset by the greater recoil, noise and flash. It is not worth it too me.

You may be different and find that +P is fine and worth the extra effort.
However, my point is that you go with the most effective load that you can shoot quickly and most accurately and not worry about whether your ammo is +P or non +P.
It will not be the bullet weight or velocity that decides this, but the bullet design.

I also carry the 180 grain .40 caliber HST in my .40 caliber BERETTA 96 and Stoeger 8040 pistols.

If you choose a different load, say Gold Dot, Golden Sabre, Critical Defense or one of the other high performance rounds, then the bullet weight difference in performance will be minor.
However, I avoid the 147 grain 9m.m. loads. They have never impressed me and seem to offer no advantage of the 115 and 124 grain which can always claim higher velocity to insure expansion. I think their biggest claims to fame is the mild recoil.

Just my experience,

Jim

 

[JTQ]

However, I avoid the 147 grain 9m.m. loads. They have never impressed me and seem to offer no advantage of the 115 and 124 grain which can always claim higher velocity to insure expansion. I think their biggest claims to fame is the mild recoil.

The 147gr advantage is usually deeper penetration. It will have more mass and greater sectional density than the 115gr and 124gr projectiles.

It is usually chosen by folks who would ordinarily choose .40 S&W or .45 Auto, but pick a 9mm gun for ammo capacity, cost of ammo, or ease of shooting the smaller caliber gun. However, nearly all defensive ammo is designed to perform very similarly, so there really isn't much difference. Pick the round that shoots the best (cycles reliably and is most accurate) in your gun, and don't worry about it.

 

[roque5]

I carry 147 gr in my CCW but prefer 124 gr for practice and competition, I chrono all of my reloads and was surprised and enlightened as to the results. Getting a chronograph will help you decide also.

 

[jeff-10]

Everyone's favorite, Hickock45, did a great video on barrel length. He uses Glock models 17, 19 and 26 to demonstrate. For most 9mm's you don't seem to lose much until you get to or under 3".

 

[golden]

JTQ,

Not quite true.

The 147 grain bullet was designed to penetrate, but that is not really a good thing.

The 9m.m. 147 grain jhp started out as a mistake! It was specified as a round for use by NAVY SEALS in their MP-5 submachine guns which were silenced. The round had to be a 9m.m. and they wanted a hollow point to aid in accuracy as the round was intended to be used for headshots at short range with silenced sub machine guns. It ran up a great score and was reported as working 10 out of 10 times in a row. Except that they were head shots! So you would expect them to work perfectly. This round was developed along the line of match bullets and did not expand at all.

This was not important to the military, as it worked for them the way they wanted. Now along comes the FBI which had just had a group of agents shot and killed or wounded in MIAMI. So the bureau decided it was all the fault of one bullet not penetrating enough. At this time, the non expanding 147 grain OTM (OPEN TIP MATCH) round was getting that wonderful reputation. So the FBI start pushing for deeper penetration and what we get are rounds that barely expand if at all and risk overpenetration.
Some of the .45ACP supporters claimed that physics was with the 147 grain jhp, but it did not tally with the experience of most Law Enforcement agencies. Those first generation of heavy hollowpoint 9 m.m. round acted more like .38 Special lead round nose, with the same poor results.
The newer premium bullets have overcome some of the problems, but I still do not see any advantage in 147 grain bullets. They will not expand as well as a rule and are more likely to overpenetrate.

Jim

 

[herrwalther]

You are overthinking just a tad. My 9mms shoot different ammos, differently. And I carry the ammo that is most accurate and reliable in both. My 3 inch barrel 9mm doesn't like the 124 +p ammo I carry in my full size. So I carry regular pressure 147 gr instead.

 

[barnetmill]

I like the +P+ federal 115 gr ammo and I am looking for some more of it.

 

[dawei]

You are overthinking just a tad. My 9mms shoot different ammo, differently. And I carry the ammo that is most accurate and reliable in both. My 3-inch barrel 9mm doesn't like the 124 +p ammo I carry in my full size. So I carry regular pressure 147 gr instead.

You hit the nail on the head, I too shoot what is most accurate in my in my two 9mm's one a Ruger® and the other a Taurus® G3C. The Ruger® is a first-generation, circa, 2011, LC9 with a 3.12" barrel. It doesn't shoot 115gr or 124gr ammo worth spit. Conversely, POA/POI are identical with all 147gr ammo I have tried. My carry load is Winchester® DEFENDER® 147gr BJHP #S9MMPDB1. My Taurus® G3C with a 3.26" barrel OTOH has shown a marked preference for Federal® PERSONAL DEFENSE® 124gr PUNCH™ JHP #PD9P1.

Both loads are standard pressure.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

147gr loses the least velocity when fired from shorter barrels, which means its velocity is the closest to the manufacturer's design velocity compared to 115gr and 124gr, regardless if 115gr/124gr is +P or not.

147gr has a deeper hollowpoint cavity, which allows cloth plugs to be pushed to the bottom of the cavity, clearing the cavity mouth to allow fluid to enter to expand the bullet more reliably than lighter weight bullets.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

Here is a comparison of different calibers that you might find interesting. 115 gr 9mm ammo penetrates further than 40 SW or 45 ACP.

40 SW vs. 357 Sig vs. 9MM vs. 45 ACP (Part 2) (FMJ Aluminum Test)
- by The Penetration Channel - Dec 11, 2016

 

[barnetmill]

Here is a comparison of different calibers that you might find interesting. 115 gr 9mm ammo penetrates further than 40 SW or 45 ACP.

40 SW vs. 357 Sig vs. 9MM vs. 45 ACP (Part 2) (FMJ Aluminum Test)
- by The Penetration Channel - Dec 11, 2016

A good beginning. Velocity is one part of the equation. Also bullet construction is also important.
I have in the past found that winchester white box fmj bullets deformed when fired into typical pine 2x8s and 9 mm nato or older military loads did not. Also the 9mm Nato ammo is loaded a little hotter.

 

[C0untZer0]

The 147gr offering have better terminal ballistics