I have some doubters about the 1500 FPS 9mm +P+

[1911Tuner]

Prosser...Velocity is a good thing. Trying to push a gun beyond its design limits in pursuit of the nth degree of velocity is dangerous and destructive for relatively little gain. At the very least, it's hard on the gun. Carrying a cylinder or magazine full strictly for business is one thing. Every time the trigger is pulled is quite another matter.

The commercial manufacturers of uber-hot ammunition have the advantage of knowing exactly what pressures and pressure curves they're dealing with. They also blend powders to get the desired results within sane limits. Handloaders don't. If commercial loaders don't actually have the equipment on hand, they send it to a laboratory for testing. They're not going to package and sell a lawsuit in a box. Bet on it.

As the man said: "I only know what I can measure."

Back during my metallic silhouette addiction, I stretched the frames of two Super Blackhawks and a half-dozen Model 29s in my pursuit of ever-higher velocities...for the purposes of a clean knockdown on those pesky rams, and for a flatter trajectory...so I didn't have to move the rear sights so much when I changed stations. One of the Blackhawks was stretched so badly that Ruger couldn't repair it, and they cautioned me to "take it easy" on the other one. I stopped short of completely ruining the Smiths.

 

[MCgunner]

To each his own. That's way too hot for MY 9s and one of 'em is a Ruger P85. I'll stick with +P stuff max. It pushes a 115 JHP XTP at 1340 from the Ruger, 1263 from my Kel Tec. I don't know if I could cram any more Unique into the case, either, 6.4 grains and a compressed load. It's the max load in the Speer no. 11 manual. That load is laying down 410 ft lbs from the little Kel Tec, which to me is pretty impressive compared to a 125 grain .357 magnum load making no more from a 2" snubby and gettin' enough muzzle blast to get a sunburn off of.

Normally, I shoot a standard pressure load with Bullseye as a propellent. More pleasant, easier on the guns, and I can actually find my brass afterwards. The hot stuff gets shot very little and mostly in the Ruger to use it up as the KT is "limited use" +P. I've fired enough in the gun to test it, a few to kill hogs in the trap, that's it.

If I need more gun, I'll move up to my longer barreled .357s shooting heavies or my .45 Colt Ruger blackhawk, or one of my TC Contender barrels.

 

[orionengnr]

No one is putting a gun to their head to force them to buy Underwood Ammo. If it blows that's what lawyers and liability insurance is for.

The latter sentence is one that concerns me greatly. It speaks volumes about your mentality and value system, and (IMHO) casts the credibility of any of your future posts in a very dim light...

 

[Prosser]

"Prosser...Velocity is a good thing. Trying to push a gun beyond its design limits in pursuit of the nth degree of velocity is dangerous and destructive for relatively little gain. At the very least, it's hard on the gun. Carrying a cylinder or magazine full strictly for business is one thing. Every time the trigger is pulled is quite another matter. "

I guess that was the point of my post. There ARE guns that might be able to, or actually require, such hot ammo. I used my reloading issues with the old Sig 9mm in the 80's as an example. Machine guns are another example.

Loading hot stuff in a .45 Colt Ruger is considerably different if it's put in a .454 FA 83 or BFR?

I did ask if any modern guns are designed to function with such ammo?

 

[Prosser]

DTap

 

[MCgunner]

My main use for 9mm is pocket carry concealment. I down own a sub gun. Not too many pocket 9s are rated for more than +P, the Rohrbaugh not even THAT. That's okay, I have confidence in what I carry.

Now, if I need to carry a big gun to handle heavy handloads, I can get an X frame Smith and Wesson in .500 S&W Magnum. Why would I wanna blow up my Ruger 9mm trying to load it for bear?

Reminds me of an old saying, if you want a .357, buy one. Don't try to make one out of your .38.

 

[Hangingrock]

I really don’t see +P+ ammunition being problematic as long as end users are knowledgeable and willing to accept service life consequences to meet performance criteria.

 

[GRIZ22]

Zoogster, thanks for being the first to inject common sense in this thread.

My idea of a +P+ 9mm is called a 357 SIG.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I fail to see why anyone would need to use +P+ 9mm ammo. If normal 9mm ammo can't do the job you want done you can always buy and shoot a 40 S&W.

SAAMI sets limits for a good reason, to protect the shooter and their guns. Why shoot something that's beyond the SAAMI pressure limits when there are other safer options?

 

[YankeeFlyr]

Just saw this thread...

I'm with the attitude/tone of 1911Tuner all the way. 100%.

Look, if Certaindeaf wants to blow himself up, that's his choice. But he transferred the piece to someone else who may well know NOTHING about the progressive effects of stress concentrations resulting from small-radius tensile loadings, and so he put his philosophy onto someone else, it seems.

He's not gonna change his mind, so anything else is wasted breath. :banghead:

 

[1911Tuner]

transferred the piece to someone else who may well know NOTHING about the progressive effects of stress concentrations resulting from small-radius tensile loadings,

This. Whenever a slide stretches anywhere between the breechface and the first lug wall, it's the same thing as a stretched top strap on a revolver. It's a big red flag telling you to put on the brakes. If either one fractures, the game is over. Hang the revolver on the wall or replace the slide.


As for +P and +P+...I'm not adverse to it in limited quantities. The guns are proofed at 25% above SAAMI standard pressures and the stresses that it generates. They'll stand up to it, but understand that any time those stresses are ramped up, the effects on the gun are detrimental and cumulative over the long run, and its service life is shortened. There's no way around that. Fire 100,000 rounds of .38 target wadcutter through a Model 19 and it'll be almost as good as new. Start using 15 grains of 2400 behind a 160-grain cast SWC...nearly the equivalent to the original .357 loading...and it'll loosen up pretty quickly. Use the same load in a Model 27 or 28...the size revolver that the cartridge was developed for...and it'll do much better.

There were some very good reasons that Smith & Wesson advised: ".38s for practice and .357s for business" in their K-frames. Many shooters ignored it, and they shot their Model 19s apart in short order. Smith threw in the towel and introduced the L-frames for the high velocity crowd, and...you guessed it...the handloaders started jacking up the pressures, and the L-frames started getting battered. I have a 681 here that had been fired almost exclusively for years with my home cast 160-grain SWCs and 14.5 grains of 2400...long accepted as a fine .357 load...and it is. It's also pretty rambunctious. Not at the level of the original ZOMG! .357 offering, but still plenty thumpy.

The gun also developed a little endshake about 5,000 rounds into it. Not excessive, but enough to let me know that I needed to step back...so I cut the charge a full grain, and the endshake hasn't progressed. Velocities are still a bit higher (at around 1300 fps) than today's average commercial ammo produces...and the damage stopped. Even so, the revolver is semi-retired, and I rarely shoot it any more.

 

[Jim Watson]

Tuner (anybody) do you have the American Rifleman of the 1960s when the feds commissioned H.P. White Laboratories to "test" handguns for "safety?"

As I recall, they got two samples of each major make and model and shot them for durability, one with standard loads and a proof round every thousand, the other with a steady diet of proof loads. None of the ones shot with all proof loads lasted very long and a lot of the others showed wear and tear in advance of what you might expect.


Of course the real purpose was looking for a route to repressive gun control under the guise of "safety." It didn't work because the results were inconsistent, some of the name brands folded up, some of the cheap guns lasted.

 

[1911Tuner]

Jim, I (vaguely) remember the article, but I don't know of anybody who would have a copy.

I also seem to remember a destruction test in which...somebody...established a maximum charge of 2400 with 240-grain jacketed bullets in a Model 29, then bumped up the powder charge by one grain...and proceeded to rattle the gun apart within a couple thousand rounds. Headspace went from .005 inch to .010 inch. In another Model 29, they stuck with the established maximum for that gun, and it took 5,000 rounds to get there. In a third...firing only commercially loaded ammunition...it still had good headspace after 10,000 rounds. IIRC, the commercial ammunition was Remington 240 JSP. The real surprise was there was relatively little difference in chronographed velocities between the 1-grain overload and the safe maximum. Seems like it was about 50-60 fps.

If I concentrate, more of the details will come to me.

 

[Hangingrock]

When one alludes to the S&W K frame revolver demise the 125gr 357Mag loading was the beginning of the end. As law enforcement standardized on that particular loading durability issues became apparent. Training practices changed also from 38Spl usage to training with the service carry load.

The general issues of +P and +P+ in my opinion is driven by law enforcement agency requirements.

Now you do have the steel pig, goat and chicken society and the power factor sports shooters that value performance over weapon service life in order to be competitive in their game of choice.

In the end a weapon is nothing more than a tool. How the tool is used translates into service life and maintenance issues.

 

[Prosser]

Just occured to me my old Mac 11 ate ANYTHING. My hottest loads? no problem. That very heavy bolt couldn't really tell what the minimal differences in recoil in 9mm were doing to it.

 

[1911Tuner]

Straight blowback is a little different, Prosser. The breech opening is delayed by bolt mass. It's a solid bolt...not a slide.

Barrel and breech aren't mechanically locked. There's nothing to stretch. The chamber walls are heavy in the M-10/M-11 pistols, so they can handle a lot of chamber pressure...more than is generated by any pistol cartridge that they're chambered for.

Those tensile stresses are high, and they're very real. That's the one aspect that so many have a problem understanding, but it's the big reason that slides aren't made of aluminum and the reason that the early Smith "Airweight" models would stretch with as few as 50-60 rounds of the old 110-grain +P+ "Treasury" loads.

I keep getting the feeling that a few people have the idea that the limits set by the SAAMI are merely suggestions, and that the people who set them are a pack of scared, hand-wringing wimps who don't understand anything about ballistics or yield properties of ordnance steels...but they do.

The caveats are posted. Do as you think best.

 

[Prosser]

I'm with you 100% on your position of reloading to sane levels.

I'm being very specific in saying that CERTAIN firearms can handle very high pressure 9mm rounds. Most of those are machine guns, or semi-auto versions of machine guns.

That said, I would be VERY careful in putting such high pressure loads in any gun not designed, or design capable of taking such loads.

Given a choice I would rather have a heavier for caliber bullet then a light for caliber 9mm. My choice is the 147 grain HST, mainly because I got a great deal on them. Second is 147 grain flat points.

My 9mm is rated for plus P 9mm, but, it's barrel is so short, I think I'm better off with heavier for caliber bullets, creating more pressure, and better velocity out of the short barrel.

IF I wanted a 115 grain bullet in 9mm, at that velocity, it would be a flat point. I would allow the velocity to create the wound channel, and the flat point to penetrate straight and deep. A 115 grain HP is a penetration failure waiting to happen.

 

[nelson133]

Having gotten older, I no longer have the need to prove my manhood with the power of my reloads. Lighter loads are just fine for practice.
My social use 9mms are loaded with Federal 9BPLE, I have shot just enough in each gun to make sure it functions and no more. As far as the concern about the non-performance of a 115 grain hollow point, I have seen the ballistic gelatin tests and the street reports on this bullet and have no fears.
I have also seen many reports on the lack of performance of any non-expanding 9mm bullet. The reason the Illinois State Police went to the federal load was the failures to stop with the solids. I you chose to carry solids, I hope I'm not standing behind whatever you are shooting at.

 

[Armed012002]

I sure don't want to be standing next to someone when their gun blows up.

I know, because I still have the memories of a fellow blowing up his Smith & Wesson 629. A small piece of his revolver actually hit my glasses. If I didn't have glasses on, there's a good chance I would have damage to my right eye. The owner of the 629 had minor cuts and burns on one of his hands.

Do think of those around you when you reload. Especially when you're pushing the limits.

 

[1911Tuner]

Do think of those around you when you reload. Especially when you're pushing the limits.

That's the catch. Handloaders don't have more than a general idea that they're approaching or exceeding the limits, and sometimes that line is crossed with maximum published data. Guns vary. What is completely safe in one may be pushing your luck in another, outwardly identical gun, or a different gun in the same caliber. I had a 4-inch Python years ago that would stick cases hard with certain listed safe loads, and the chambers were fine. When the same load was fired in a 4-inch Model 27 and a 4.625-inch Blackhawk, the cases fell out of the chambers.


Ballisticians have progressed in the last 25 years. Not only is the equimpent used to measure pressures much better, but in their discovery that peak pressure isn't the only concern. How long that peak pressure is maintained, and the area under the curve is as critical as the peak...and maybe even moreso.

 

[Prosser]

There is NO reason to push a 9mm that hot, in a standard gun. It's just stupid.
If you want more, get a bigger caliber, bigger case, and less pressure.

 

[Deaf Smith]

British L7A1 9mm 'Hirtenberger' ammo gets almost 1400 fps (124 gr slug) from my Glock 17 with Bar-Sto conventionally rifled barrel. Chronoed it myself.

So I guess it can be done.

Deaf

 

[ljnowell]

British L7A1 9mm 'Hirtenberger' ammo gets almost 1400 fps (124 gr slug) from my Glock 17 with Bar-Sto conventionally rifled barrel. Chronoed it myself.

So I guess it can be done.

A quick search of that ammo description brings this up at the top of the first page:

"L7A1- This ammunition was produced between 1990 and 1992. Many samples exceed the NATO maximum chamber pressure specification for small arms, which is 50,000 PSI (345 MPa). For this reason, the British MOD ceased to use it

Interesting.

 

[1911Tuner]

Interesting.

Indeed. I remember the Israeli black tipped 9mm "Uzi" ammunition that included the caution:

"For Submachine Gun use only. Do not fire this ammunition in a pistol" printed clearly on the box...and it didn't approach the pressures of the Hirtenberger lots. The people who ignored that advice busted Beretta 92 slides like popcorn.

So it can be done.

Lots of things can be done that probably shouldn't be done.

 

[JohnBT]

Department of the Treasury
ATF Office of Public Information

For Immediate Release FY-97-6
Contact: Vickie Saunders
Date: November 7, 1996

HAZARDOUS AMMUNITION

Washington--The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) has been advised by Hirtenberger AG, Hirtenberg, Austria, that certain 9Xl9 mm
caliber ammunition produced by Hirtenberger is unsafe for use in any handgun.

The ammunition, designated L7A1 and produced ln the years 1990 through 1992, was produced for the British Ministry of Defense specifically for use in submachineguns under adverse conditions. The ammunition was loaded to produce pressures far in excess of that intended for use in handguns.

The manufacturer advises that up to 12 million rounds of this ammunition has recently been sold on the world surplus market. The ammunition can be identified by the following head stamp located on the bottom of the cartridge case

12 O'clock position: HP
3 O'clock position: 90, 91, or 92
6 O'clock position: L7Al
9 O'clock position: the marking of a cross within a circle

This ammunition should not be fired.