Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

9mm Defense rounds #2

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by 9mmforMe, Nov 19, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 9mmforMe

    9mmforMe Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    Messages:
    940
    Location:
    IN
    Ok guys, lets continue the conversation on 9mm defense rounds. This time let's not have the bickering and nonsense that dominated the other "Defence" thread or I will shut it down long before the mods do.

    With that said...what say you?:D

    I gravitate toward 147gr HPs and they dont need to be premium stuff.

    What are your thoughts and do you have any experiments with pictures to show us your research?

    115? 124? 147?
     
  2. gbeecher

    gbeecher Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2012
    Messages:
    197
    Location:
    minnesota
    Shot placement & penetration

    I personally feel that a heavier bullet weight is better, but I think that correct shot placement is #1 and penetration is vital. The 9mm Luger has had a long history of police, military and defensive use and is still regarded as more than adequate. Whatever works reliably in your firearm and is something you can shoot accurately will do! :)
     
  3. ku4hx

    ku4hx Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,794
    I like, well ... all the "major" brands: Remington, Speer, Winchester, Cor-Bon, Federal and etc. At one time or another, all have been adequately tested (the respective factory, FBI and etc.) and found to about as good as you can expect. None are perfect, there is no magic bullet, shot placement is indeed king and frankly ammunition choice is little more than an educated guess at best.

    I go with the heavier bullet choices for SD: 124 grain for 9mm, 180 grain for 40 cal/10mm and 230 grain for 45 ACP generally although I do sometimes consider season and expected clothing and go with 150/155 for 10mm.
     
  4. 481

    481 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,950
    If you like 9mm 147 gr. "not premium" JHPs, this might be of interest you-

    I tested this round in water (a valid tissue simulant) quite some time ago and the analysis below uses the recovery data to yield a prediction of the test bullet's performance in calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin.

    100_2247.jpg

    Here is the Schwartz bullet penetration model analysis for the test:

    WinchesterUSA 9mm 147 gr. JHP (USA9JHP2) v. four layers of 2 ounce cotton fabric

    Recovered Projectile Data:
    Average Recovered Diameter: 0.583 inch (1.645x caliber)
    Retained Mass: 147.6 grains
    Impact Velocity: 979.2 feet per second

    Predicted Performance:
    Penetration Depth (S) = 33.508 cm (13.192 inches)
    Permanent Wound Cavity Mass (MPC) = 49.163 grams (1.734 ounces)



    I think it did surprisingly well for "economy" ammo.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  5. Teachu2

    Teachu2 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    2,116
    Location:
    Keene, CA
    The "carry" 9s for me are a LC9 currently and a G26 on the way. I've boarded the SB bandwagon, and load with Speer GDSB. Accurate, controllable, reduced muzzle flash, engineered for short barrels. Factory version of what I would handload.

    There are many loads that will get the job done, but I have confidence in this one - and that's one less concern. Shot placement is key.
     
  6. 9mmforMe

    9mmforMe Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    Messages:
    940
    Location:
    IN
    481,

    Absolutely awesome! The 147gr WWB PP JHPs are my carry round (Ruger P95PR15). Good to know they perform well in your simulation. Thank you much, my friend.


    -Geoffry
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  7. C0untZer0

    C0untZer0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,007
    Location:
    Illinois
    I think we'll be OK on this thread because Defense was spelled correctly from the git go.
     
  8. hariph creek

    hariph creek Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    463
    Location:
    Vancouver, Wa.
    I think 'fences make good neighbors.
     
  9. C0untZer0

    C0untZer0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,007
    Location:
    Illinois
    Isn't it the earlier designs that had failures to expand or plugged up with demin?

    And aren't the non-premium rounds the older unimproved bullet designs?
     
  10. 481

    481 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,950
    Sure. You are welcome!

    I can post water test results of the 115 gr WWB PP JHPs, too....if you are interested in them.
     
  11. frank c

    frank c Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    278
    Location:
    Southern Michigan
    9mm federal 135 gr.tactical HP,winchester ranger 127 gr.+P.:fire:
     
  12. wally

    wally Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    12,566
    Location:
    Houston, Tx
    Where you place the bullet on the target is far more important than which particular bullet it happens to be -- as long as its capable of achieving adequate penetration.

    I'll always carry the heaviest bullet for the caliber, which means if I carried a 9mm I'd carry 147gr ammo.
     
  13. C0untZer0

    C0untZer0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,007
    Location:
    Illinois
    124gr is not a heavier bullet choice - except that it's heavier than 105 - 115gr And 124gr is the common bullet weight for NATO 9mm ammunition - so I woudn't consider it on the heaver side of the spectrum.

    135gr - 147gr would be the heavier standard loadings in 9mm.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  14. Steve C

    Steve C Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,691
    If a JHP fails to expand in water, it won't expand under any circumstances. Many of the standard JHP's will expand under ideal conditions, that being light clothing and a long enough barrel to achieve sufficient velocity.

    The a fore mentioned Winchester 147gr JHP USA ammo failed to expand after passing through the FBI protocol 4 layers of denim in this and an earlier test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptdL842BAqo&playnext=1&list=PLB56C838D41121C1A&feature=results_video

    There are many other 147 gr JHP's that will expand after passing through denim as well as other weights. Notably the more premium ammo like the Winchester Ranger, SXT's, PDX1, Federal HST, Remington Golden Sabers, and Speer Gold Dots perform better.

    Check out other 9mm tests by tnoudoors9 on You Tube at http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=winchester+9mm+tnoutdoors9&oq=winchester+9mm+tnoutdoors9&gs_l=youtube.3...26864.30760.0.32011.11.11.0.0.0.0.133.1094.7j4.11.0...0.0...1ac.1.8k1wd0WU0vE
     
  15. 2zulu1

    2zulu1 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2011
    Messages:
    1,089
    Location:
    Arizona
    124gr HST/XTP

    Thought I would share a few pictures, both the HST and TAP CQ share the same 1150fps MV, but they are designed for different expansion ratios and therefore theoretically penetrate to different depths.

    MacPherson's numbers were calculated by 481. Both bullets passed the 4LD test w/o any problems.

    HST retained its weight;

    9mm124FederalHST1150fps002.jpg
    9mm124FederalHST1150fps0566006.jpg

    Exp 0.566"
    Penetration 12.9"

    The XTP bullet design has a reputation for penetration, let's see;

    9mm124grHornadyTAPCQ1150fpsadvertised006.jpg

    9mm124grHornadyTAPCQ1150fpsadvertised007.jpg

    Less expansion than the HST, 0.516",
    Deeper penetration, 14.9"

    FWIW, the 147gr XTP at 995fps;
    Exp 0.575",
    Pen 15.7"
     
  16. 481

    481 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,950

    I am not so sure that I'd be so quick to condemn the performance of the WWB 147 gr. JHP in that case.

    One of the things that I noticed in this wetpack test

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptdL842BAqo&playnext=1&list=PLB56C838D41121C1A&feature=results_video

    was that the expansion cavity of the WWB was clogged with newsprint from the wetpack which means that the denim layers had to have been dislodged prior to the introduction of the the newsprint material into the cavity. An expansion cavity plugged with newsprint will also fail to upset and expand since the newsprint inhibits the hydraulic force that drives expansion and is one of the reasons that I test in water only.

    I couldn't help but notice that the round fired into water expanded almost as much as mine and wonder if tnoutdoors would've had the same results that I had, had he used a "water only" medium behind four layers of denim instead of the wetpack that was used in the test.
     
  17. Steve C

    Steve C Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,691
    Here is a test with the usa white box 147gr that showed better results after passing through denim and into ballistic gel. No actual bullet expansion measurement or chronograph results though.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhYDihaWkS0
     
  18. C0untZer0

    C0untZer0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,007
    Location:
    Illinois
    Just a blurb on the 4 denim "test" - a technicality, but it's not an FBI testing protocol. It is an engineering evaluation tool setup by Duncan MacPherson in an effort with the California Highway Patrol.

    http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/2006/04/02/0604-02a.htm

    It is different from the FBI heavy clothing test. The FBI Heavy Clothing Test Event is a gelatin block covered with four layers of clothing: one layer of cotton T-shirt material (48 threads per inch); one layer of cotton shirt material (80 threads per inch); a 10 ounce down comforter in a cambric shell cover (232 threads per inch); and one layer of 13 ounce cotton denim (50 threads per inch). The block is shot at ten feet, measured from the muzzle to the front of the block.

    But the 4-denim over a block, is a simple exercise that people can do - as oppossed to getting a T-shirt, 80-thread cotton shirt, peice of denim and a 10 ounce down comforter in a cambric shell cover (232 threads per inch). So it's developed into a standard that people like TNOUTDOORS9 use when they make their videos.
     
  19. otasan56

    otasan56 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Messages:
    292
    Location:
    Hartford, VT
    I carry WW115gr JHP +p+ in my G17. 1400 FPS is a hot load.
     
  20. kokapelli

    kokapelli Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Location:
    Arizona
    Because water cannot be compressed it can never be a legitimate medium for bullet testing, nor can it be compared to gelatin tests or to predict performance in living tissue.
     
  21. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    12,740
    Location:
    In a part of Utah that resembles Tattooine.
    Not really.

    The philosophy behind 147 grain is that a heavier bullet will penetrate further. But modern bonded 9mm bullets have leveled the playing field so much, that even in the last ten years, even 115 gr 9mm is much more effective than it used to be. In the real world, I doubt there is much perceptible difference at all in their performance.

    My wife is a new shooter, and I got her an XD-9. I handloaded some 147 grain ammo for her to try, and the recoil was a bit harsh. She switched back to a magazine of 115 gr, and liked it much better. I THINK, if she likes it more, and she will be willing to shoot it more, that is the correct round to use.
     
  22. 9mmforMe

    9mmforMe Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    Messages:
    940
    Location:
    IN
    481,

    Yess, I would like to see your results on the 115gr rounds.

    Thanks.
     
  23. 9mmforMe

    9mmforMe Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    Messages:
    940
    Location:
    IN
    Countzero,

    The WWB are supposedly updated from what I have read. Upon looking at the bullets over the last three years, the nose cavity has changed from a restricted opening to that of being more opened.

    Would you guys think this would be a good round to carry though it failed the expansion part of the FBI test?
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2012
  24. C0untZer0

    C0untZer0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,007
    Location:
    Illinois
    Only if I carried it for self-protection in a nudist colony.
     
  25. 9mmforMe

    9mmforMe Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    Messages:
    940
    Location:
    IN
    Hmmm...though it failed the FBI test I wonder if its good performance in the denim test is significant. Though water cannot be compressed in a closed system, it can be shifted if given the ability to do so and this would seemingly alter test results?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page