Optimum Weight or Best Compromise Weight for 9mm

[DMW1116]

I'm looking at different bullet weight/velocity combinations for 9mm to see which gives the best combination of trajectory and energy. Based on searching and looking at the different path and energy comparisons, the 124 grain seems to have the best combination inside standard handgun ranges in 9mm. I normally shoot 147 grain XTP bullets and they work well and the difference inside 50 yards is negligible for trajectory, with the edge in energy going to the 124 at the higher velocity. The difference is only about 10%, which isn't really enough to worry about for me.

There is the factor of accuracy between the two, but that will vary so much I feel I'll just have to shoot them to see. I tried some 115 grain XTP rounds but the accuracy was just out the window in my pistols. I haven't tried much 124 grain ammo, but my M&P 9 and Sheild seem to prefer heavier bullets, or at least slower bullets in terms of accuracy. Any thoughts?

 

[fxvr5]

It depends on the specific bullet and powder combo. No specific weight.

 

[cfullgraf]

At the ranges that you will be the most effective in hitting your target, it really does not matter. Get the combination of bullet and powder charge that gives the best groups over a variety of ranges. The variances will be relatively small.

We are not talking about "Bench Rest--kind of groups, ranges and accuracy here."

 

[Deus Machina]

Many variables, including the bullet design, powder, barrel length, etc.
Some powders are going to like longer barrels more. Some guns like different weights; 124gr seems to be a standard or at least a good compromise, since it's NATO standard weight.
For instance, my CZs have definitely like 124gr better, but have been acceptable with everything. 115gr is less accurate and 147 was okay but I had to be picky; the throat is shallow in those, so HST worked fine but the truncated-cone I tried lodged itself in every time without going into battery.

For defense? That matters as much on the bullet design as anything else. From the tests I've seen, XTP likes some velocity behind it. None of them seem to like to expand at .38 Special velocity, and heavier ones out of short 9mm barrels seem to have trouble. Light ones from longer 9mm and pretty much all of them from .357 seem to work fine. It would hardly be my first choice for SD thanks to those tests, but if you're looking to cut down on overpenetration or XTP is what feeds in your gun, or it's accurate for defense or target purposes, go for it.

 

[herrwalther]

All my guns tend to like 124gr +p better. I used to shoot nothing but 147gr but I didn't like shooting sub sonic hollow points. Especially out of a short barrel.

 

[Switup]

I prefer medium bullets (125-125)going a little slower for minor loads. 115 is the worst bullet for minor because of the snappiness. BUT I never could get used to slow 147’s. Too sluggish for me but they are indeed softer shooting. Love light bullets(115) for 9MAJOR at 1510 fps.

 

[Overkill870]

Trajectory and energy are not important to me for pistol cartridges.

I care about penetration and expansion.

I usually like heavy for caliber bullets. There's more mass and sectional density which aids in penetration. More material there to expand. And the recoil impulse is less abrupt.

 

[mavracer]

Best compromise is an oxymoron.
As with most things gun this too will depend on other factors.
I've been studying the ebb and flow of thoughts on terminal performance for a long time.
I remember when relative Incapacitation index was a thing before the Miami FBI fiasco and HWFE became a thing.
Feel free to do your own reading but IMHO the current thought that grew from HWFE that energy and temporary cavity should be ignored is wrong. Penetration should always be the first priority but once you reach a certain point you can have adequate penetration and start to have meaningful effect from energy.
Now that being said IMHO a 9mm lives in both worlds from a 3" barrel like many of the new Micro 9s popular now you can't get to the energy levels required to do both so I would say stick with a 147 for penetration once you get to 4+" barrels the 124+p get into the wildcard land.
As to long range 9mm some of what happens with long range rifles happens here the 147gr bullets have higher ballistic coefficient and retain velocity better so just how far are you shooting?

 

[JTQ]

I'd choose whatever your particular gun feeds and shoots better.

Outside of cheap/lightweight training ammo that is often so weak that it won't reliably drive the slide of some guns, most of the performance differences between quality defensive ammo is really just hair splitting.

 

[SDGlock23]

One of the more boring aspects of 9mm is bullet weight, but for me I tend to stick with 124gr.

 

[DMW1116]

Any thought on the light weight 65 and 90 grain bullets? The 65s sure seem to move, pushing 1650 or even 1700 fps. They seem to loose speed and energy quickly though.

 

[Mycin]

Any thought on the light weight 65 and 90 grain bullets? The 65s sure seem to move, pushing 1650 or even 1700 fps. They seem to loose speed and energy quickly though.

My thought is that bullets with these weights are probably designed for use in 380 ACP, and thus designed for those velocities. HPs may break up on impact and not penetrate well at 1500+fps. FMJ might be OK.

 

[DMW1116]

I was thinking more along the lines of the Lehigh solids actually. I’ve tried the 90s and want to try the 65/68 grain offerings.

 

[Speedo66]

I’d go with what works best for you and in your particular pistol.

Our mandated ammo was 147g JHP, and I fired thousands over the years in my Glock 26.

Now long retired I still carry those because I shot them well and know they work well in my gun.

 

[WYO]

I wouldn’t overthink it. Pick one of the popular LE loads such as HST, Gold Dots and Critical Duty and test them in your gun for functioning and recoil. Most of these are in the 124-147 range in standard pressure and +P configurations. They have been heavily vetted. If you have any doubts go out and shoot them against barriers and gallon water jugs.

Any thought on the light weight 65 and 90 grain bullets? The 65s sure seem to move, pushing 1650 or even 1700 fps. They seem to loose speed and energy quickly though.

I haven’t shot a superlight Lehigh in 9mm, but I did try a 65 grain Novx round here (P.S. that is 2 pieces of 22 gauge steel sheet metal taped together):



Note that a 124 standard pressure Gold Dot fired from the same gun through the same setup stopped sticking halfway out of the back of the second jug. When I fired the same type of Gold Dot out of the longer barrel of a P365 XL, the round kept going after exiting a 4th jug and was not recovered.

I still carry standard pressure 124 Gold Dots in all my 9mms, but that’s just me. YMMV.

 

[Rodfac]

Over the years and in maybe a dozen 9mm's that I've owned or had access to, heavier bullets shoot more accurately...I'm talking about 115 gr vs. 124/125 gr bullets. The difference is not substantial, however....forced to guess, I'd estimate an inch, or a bit more, in group size at 25 yds. For a defense gun, that's insignificant, IMHO.

Likewise, in my hands, the difference in recoil can barely be felt. Those that participate in the handgun games may see a difference in split times, as a result, but I doubt that it would affect a defensive shoot outcome.

Best Regards. Rod

 

[N555]

Sounds like 124 are the way to go for you.

 

[Cfish]

135’s are a good compromise

 

[DMW1116]

Generally speaking I'll take accuracy over energy but for service type pistols, once they can keep shots on an 8" target it might not be terribly useful except for inspiring confidence in one's tools. I haven't actually tried many 124 grain bullets, so maybe that's something to explore. I have some 135 grain cast and coated bullets but haven't shot any yet. These are for target loads and are heavy enough I think they'll work similar to the 147 grain bullets I've been using. I may pick up some 124s to try, just to cover my bases.

 

[jmr40]

The military chose a 124 gr FMJ at about 1250 fps. Most LE agencies choose the same bullet weight at about the same speed but choose a HP design instead. I figure they must know something if that is what they choose. For SD I choose something as close to that as I can get.

Initial 147 gr HP loads showed poor expansion and that bullet weight fell from favor, at least for a while. A few years ago, the FBI revisited newer 147 gr bullets at around 1000 fps and were impressed with the results. At one time that combo was issued to agents. I don't know if that is still true, nor do I know the exact bullet they chose.

I already had a good supply of 124 gr +P HP ammo so I never seriously looked at the 147 gr, but it may well prove to be the better option. But the 124 gr load has earned a solid reputation so for now I'll stick with it.

For shooting at the range, I can usually find 115 gr FMJ a lot cheaper and the accuracy and POI are close enough that I do shoot a lot of it practicing. But I'm not comfortable with bullets lighter than 124 gr for SD. But that is just me. Others see it differently.

 

[Charlie98]

I still carry standard pressure 124 Gold Dots in all my 9mms, but that’s just me. YMMV.

I used to carry 147's but realized out of the shorter barrels I have (3.6" and 3.1", respectively) that was probably not the best choice. I dropped down to the 135grn Critical Duty, and now I'm down to the 124grn Gold Dots. In a short-barreled pistol, getting the velocity up where the bullet has a chance of, first, good penetration, and second, the potential to expand seems paramount. I don't know if that was really a reality with the heavier bullets in a short pistol. A Browning HiPower? Sure... but I don't carry a BHP.

I know a lot of research goes into bullet expansion... but, honestly, I don't really look at that specifically. My primary goal is to get that bullet to the vitals, drive it in there... and then maybe it will expand, but even if it doesn't, I've still got that bullet in the vitals. Every situation for SD is so particular as to be a world unto itself... whether a bullet will expand or not, whether it penetrates or bounces off his cell phone, whatever... if it's the best I can do to deliver a bullet or two to where I want it, well... that's the best I can do.

A few years ago, the FBI revisited newer 147 gr bullets at around 1000 fps and were impressed with the results.

Bullet tech has come a long way... but the same tech that was applied to making the 147grn bullets behave better, was very likely applied to all the weights of SD bullets... which would likely include propellant, too. The Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel SD ammo is a good example of that.

 

[Varminterror]

Any thoughts?

There are folks which walk into the grocer in the summer and roll in their hands every watermelon in the bin, then go home without picking one - acknowledging that they don’t know how to compare watermelons, and conceding to leave without a watermelon because they don’t… when almost any of the watermelons in the bin were ripe and not damaged, and would have tasted just fine. I like mine sliced and salted.

I feel like that’s what we’re doing here. The proposal sounds like we’re looking for Sasquatch, but what we’re really doing is holding up two watermelons, one a little more round, the other a little darker green - either of which is perfectly ripe and will taste the same as the other, but we’re putting them both back and going home empty handed because one HAS to be better, but we don’t know how to tell which…

We feel like we can stack cards to cripple any choice - and in some cases, maybe we can. Some bullets ARE designed to have higher impact velocity, so shooting them out of a 2” barrel instead of a 4” may undermine the bullet performance. Some bullets are just better performers than others. So maybe we can’t broadly generalize that 124’s are better than 147’s, because it’s also easy to show objective conflicts because we can fabricate a bullet, load, and pistol combination which creates better performance with either weight over the other. A smaller watermelon might be better if you’re taking it on a hiking picnic with a family of 3, but obviously that’s the wrong watermelon choice for a concession stand at a water park…

I also do think the “long range trajectory” aspect of this consideration is kinda silly. Scratch that - it’s silly. 0-50 yards, we’re talking about losing 50-75fps and the dropping ~1.2” vs. ~1.5” between 124’s and 147’s… you’re holding a pair of identical watermelons and pretending one is objectively and substantially better than the other. If we start talking 100-150, or 200 yard shooting where the low BC’s of these bullets actually starts to matter, sure, let’s talk about retained impact velocity and trajectory, but this ain’t that…

I do quite a bit of shooting with both 124’s and 147’s in my defensive pistols. One of my options is an integrally suppressed pistol in which 147’s are hearing safe, but supersonic 124’s are not, so I found a load with 147grn bullets which are proven to perform and which shoots well in my pistol. Alternatively, in my unsuppressed carry pistol, I simply chose a high performing bullet which shoots well, and didn’t have to concern myself with a maximum muzzle velocity, so I shoot 124’s in it. Not a shred of doubt in my mind that my ability to deliver in the moment will have far greater influence on the outcome than my bullet choices for either pistol.

 

[sanpitch]

I just read all the above posts and have many of the same thoughts and concerns. For me how well I shoot a pistol ammo combination is all most every thing. I have killed hundreds of animals, with service type handguns and loads. 38 spec, 357mag, 357 sig 9mm, 45acp. (sounds like BS dosen't ). 39 years as a rural cop, most of that as a trooper. The animals were injured along the highway, most just laid there, some would only allow me to approach to 20-50 yards,. (a little herd of 7 elk one night hit by a truck, one dead 6 broke down). Bottom line, even at point blank range bullet placement is almost every thing. Even head shots must be in the right place, between the eyes seldom works. For me the order of importance is placement, penetration, speed of delivery and bullet performance. I hunted with a handgun for ten years and killed every deer I shot at, all with a non expanding hard cast SWC.

 

[wanderinwalker]

DWM1116, don't overthink this. Any of the reputable modern hollow points, as loaded from a major manufacturer with a good reputation, will work just fine. As long as it's reliable in your pistols and hits to the sights, you've got what you need.

My recommendation is to search out something you can find in 50 round boxes. I personally dislike the little 20 and 25 round "civilian" boxes most manufacturers sell their defensive ammo in. Around here I have some Winchester Ranger SXT in 127 grain 9mm Luger +P+, Ranger SXT 147 grain 9mm,Luger Remington Golden Saber 124 grain 9mm Luger and Remington Golden Saber 230 grain .45 ACP, all in 50 round "law enforcement" packaging.

Or if you just want an easy button, track down 2 or 3 boxes of standard pressure Federal HST 9mm Luger in 124 grain, run a box through your pistols to confirm reliability, and call it a day.