What's wrong with 147 gr?

[Gun Slinger]

Doug,

Considering at what you posted with regard to Texasboy48's statements, I think the point is a good one regardless of caliber involved, one that I agree with in that today's ammo is much less "velocity dependent" for its expansion than that of days past. I realize that we do need velocity to develop the KE that will cause the expansion to occur when the bullet strikes the target (otherwise the bullet is not moving) however, I think that bullet design and construction has moved forward to the point that we no longer require strictly supersonic velocities (above 1100 f.p.s.) to initiate bullet expansion in our SD ammunition. It is a good day.

Regardless of the caliber being discussed, Texasboy48 makes valid arguments regarding several aspects of the topic at hand all of which square with my personal experience set, especially in terms of those using medium caliber, moderate recoiling pistols typically achieving better scores as well increasing operator comfort, accuracy and overall controlability, all of which are important factors in putting bullets where they need to be.

GS

 

[hotpig]

This thread reminds me just how little the general shooting population keeps up on bullet technology. It looks like many people get wrong or outdated information. My bet is they use gun shop commandos or gun rags as their sources.

Citing ancient information from the FBI shootout proves nothing. The FBI Agents were out gunned. It was a platform problem not a caliber or bullet problem. LA had the same problem in the initial response to the North Hollywood Bank robbery.

Taking on long guns especially full auto long guns with handguns is never a good idea.

 

[Gun Slinger]

hotpig,

Does seem like that, doesn't it?
Makes me wonder if the overwhelming selection of premium grade SD ammunition and the attendant marketing hyperpole that seems to accompany large selction has confused folks to the point of 'creating their own reality' in order to explain it all.

The 115 gr. Silvertip was not the culprit in the FBI Miami/Dade incident. Intervening cover and body parts and fate were. The Silvertip did its thing as it was designed to and was exploited as an "excuse" in the FBI's search for answers to some troubling questions. Pretty much all water under the bridge, anyway.

As much as I like the Hornady 147 TAP "CQ", I also like the Winchester RA9T load since it equals, if not outright exceeds, the other hotter loads in terms of penetration depth and final expanded diameter without the extra recoil and muzzle signature issues.

If forced to carry the 115 Silvertip or any other weight of currently manufactured SD ammunition than the 147 grain stuff currently in my G17, I would do so without reservation or concern and happily at that.

GS

 

[hotpig]

The FBI did not want to admit their guys did a dumb move and were lousy shots while doing it.It became a witch hunt against ammo that was not at fault.

Their is a silver lining when you look at the product development because of this incident.

 

[Soybomb]

The 115 gr. Silvertip was not the culprit in the FBI Miami/Dade incident. Intervening cover and body parts and fate were. The Silvertip did its thing as it was designed to and was exploited as an "excuse" in the FBI's search for answers to some troubling questions. Pretty much all water under the bridge, anyway.

Just because the ammo functioned as designed doesn't mean it was good. Specifying ammo that performed in that fashion was far from the only mistake of that day, but it doesn't mean ammo selection can't take some blame too. If the agents had ammo that meets today's selection criteria the situation might well have ended differently. It is of course not the only example of ammo that performed properly failing to penetrate deeply enough into bad guys. If you can place a shot in line with your attackers heart and it stops short of the heart because it passed through an arm on the way there, I just don't feel comfortable calling you a bad shot or that the ammo choice was good. There were plenty of mistakes made that day but I don't think its accurate to say that their choice of 9mm ammo wasn't one of them.

 

[hotpig]

Their choice of ammo was top of the line at that time. Because of the shooting have today's selection criteria for LE ammo.

Silvertip is still top of the line personal protection ammo. It does not meet the current FBI specs because it does not have to be tested to those specs.

 

[Gun Slinger]

Originally posted by Soybomb:

Just because the ammo functioned as designed doesn't mean it was good.

Huh?

GS

 

[BlindJustice]

I missed some of Texasboy48's point - need to stop posting
after a 6 pack, ahem.... just sometimes on threads somebody asks
about something say A vs B and the thread goes to C, D, etc.
example - somebody asks about which 1911, and invariably some
one will post get a Glock 19 ugh.

I'm going to use my tax return to get a 9MM probably a
CZ75 COmpact and I like the 147 gr. with a good JHP x 14 rds

 

[Gun Slinger]

Their choice of ammo was top of the line at that time. Because of the shooting have today's selection criteria for LE ammo.

+1 hotpig.

They could only use what was the best at the time and you are correct, the Winchester Silvertip in either weight (115 or 147) is a fine SD round.

GS

 

[Gun Slinger]

BlindJustice,

I missed some of Texasboy48's point - need to stop posting
after a 6 pack, ahem.... just sometimes on threads somebody asks
about something say A vs B and the thread goes to C, D, etc.
example - somebody asks about which 1911, and invariably some
one will post get a Glock 19 ugh.

It's OK man, we forgive you.

GS

 

[DougDubya]

Regardless of the caliber being discussed, Texasboy48 makes valid arguments regarding several aspects of the topic at hand all of which square with my personal experience set, especially in terms of those using medium caliber, moderate recoiling pistols typically achieving better scores as well increasing operator comfort, accuracy and overall controlability, all of which are important factors in putting bullets where they need to be.

+1 Gun Slinger. The physics student in me, though, is constantly spouting off E=mc squared. More mass AND more velocity makes a happy combination of more smackdown, as demonstrated by the success of the 155-grain .40 Smith Silvertips and the 165-grain Gold Dots, I believe.

 

[Gun Slinger]

Doug,

Well, when you find some SD ammo that E=mc^2 applies to, let me know. I am in for a case or two.

If thermonuclear, make it three cases.

GS

 

[DougDubya]

I'll keep you in mind.

Seriously, mass and velocity in good, healthy helpings do better than light and slow.

Remember - the British developed a .38 S&W round that was a 200 grain lead slug to make up for the lack of .455 ammo. They couldn't get more powder into a Webley, but they sure could add some lead up front.

 

[Gun Slinger]

Originally posted by DougDubya:

Seriously, mass and velocity in good, healthy helpings do better than light and slow.

Agreed. Momentum is a good thing.

Guess that is why I prefer the 147 gr. TAP "CQ" buzzing along at 1000 f.p.s. outta my G17.

GS

 

[Shadow1198]

All I will say is feeding reliability and shot placement.

 

[Soybomb]

Huh?

The ammo might have performed 100% as it should have, but if the selection criteria were wrong and didn't require ammo with sufficient penetration, the FBI still made an ammo mistake. If I sent you out on duty with glaser safety rounds and they worked as designed and failed to stop you wouldn't say "the ammo was fine, it performed as designed", you would say that there was an ammo problem, the selection process was wrong. A yugo might function as designed in a race, it doesn't mean its good.

 

[HadEmAll]

bdg146, reagarding your post
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"MTS840 or anyone else:

This is a bit off topic, but quite often when someone posts a list of ammunition that is deemed "acceptable", Hornady doesn't make the list. Why is that? They seem to be unmentioned a lot of times, with the focus going to Federal, Winchester, etc. I guess you could say I'm a bit of a Hornady fanboy... their ammunition has always been extremely accurate and has always done its job when I use it for hunting purposes. If I had to use ammo from only one manufacturer, I'd pick Hornady. Just wondering why it doesn't always make the grade..."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll take a stab at this. Hornady handgun loads feature the XTP bullet, which is constructed more heavily than the feature bullets of competitors, such as Speer's Gold Dot, Remington's Golden Saber, etc.

Hornady promotes the XTP to have "controlled expansion" and "deep, terminal performance".

In plain English, XTPs penetrate deeper, and expand less that most. I think hunters like XTPs.

Not to say they are not great loads. I've read good things about Hornady's ammunition as to feeding and accuracy. I've read opinions that the XTP may not expand the most, but will always expand, etc. I saw a picture of two 124 grain +P 9mm bullets, one removed from a javelina, and the other fired into water, and they had expanded almost exactly the same. These picture were posted by Stephen H. Camp on an Interntet article.

These are things I picked up while researching the XTP bullet after ordering some Black Hills ammo, thinking it had Gold Dot bullets, and finding it had XTPs instead.

I think you could do a lot worse.

 

[bdg146]

Thanks for the info. I've just always found Hornady to be EXTREMELY accurate. I understand the penetration/controlled expansion concerns. However, if a caliber that penetrates less (45 acp for example), couldn't the XTP be considered optimal?

And I don't currently own one, but I've read about penetration concerns with the .380 caliber. So wouldn't an XTP do better out of that caliber, because it combines expansion and penetration? Ahh, I'm just thinking out loud. Anyway, thanks for the info. If it goes where I want it to, I consider it a great load, whether it expands a little less or not.