Who uses 147gr JHP 9mm as a self defense round?

[SIGLBER]

No handgun round has sufficient velocity to produce hydrostatic shock to the point that it would a significant factor in wounding capability. You have to get into centerfire rifle cartridges to get enough velocity for the pressure wave of the bullet to cause damage to the bodily structures that the bullet passes by and does not contact directly. Handgun rounds make holes. That's it. The temporary stretch cavity disappears a fraction of a second after the bullet enters the body.
The body closes around the wound and actually makes the hole smaller than the size of the bullet expanded or not. Surgeons and others clearly state they cannot which pistol bullet (speaking of the major service calibers) a person has been hit by until the bullet is removed. So if a handgun bullet expands to say .65 caliber and penetrates to 12" it doesn't matter if it starts off 147gr.'s at 1000 f.p.s. or 124gr.s at 1250f.p.s.. One is expanding to that caliber and depth by being designed to do so at a certain weight and velocity. Same with the other.
A well designed 147gr. round will do essentially the same damage a well well designed 124gr. bullet will do. Might be some difference in expansion/penetration. But a well designed JHP will meet the F.B.I. criteria regardless of the weight and velocity. Several 147gr. bullets do very good with todays designs. This was not always true. It was not always true of the light or mid-weight bullets either.
The old rule of a JHP must travel at least 1000f.p.s. to work was because of the poor design of earlier JHP's. They nedded velocity to work. Not anymore. The deciding factor should be does the round function reliably in your gun? Does it hit to point of aim? Is the recoil mild enough to allow fast follow up shots? Rounds like the Federal HST 147gr. bullet are coming on very strong because of good performace.

 

[areagan]

They were used in war and I don't recall hollow pointed rifle ammunition either. So what is your point. Mine is that there is not a handgun made capable of producing hydrostatic shock ( bleeding in the brain from body trauma ) . Pistols only poke holes.

Now at 3,500 feet a second from an AR 15 any bullet will cause shock regardless of bullet configuration.

 

[Geckgo]

Do you know any soldiers that currently carry sidearms at all??? Asside from a few special forces troops, it's my understanding that sidearms are issued to MPs and officers.

 

[rellascout]

Aregean... I want to personally thank you for turning a informative thread into a ego thread. Read the Op. What you are doing is exactly what I asked people not to do. Read the op and please do your THR best to not create a caliber war.

Ball ammo is not part of this discussion. If you use ball ammo for self defense that is up to you but this is not what this discussion about.

 

[areagan]

I read the original post and it does not rule out FMJ. It is just a rhetorical question about bullet weight. If you don't want any participation from other members then why put it on a public forum. Not every person thinks alike or shares the same values and ideals. From what I gathered from reading the forum policies personal one sided posting is not permitted. I don't think DISCUSSION CONTROL is permitted either looking at the guidelines.

I also know it is also typical for the resident clique to give a new member a hard time as that reputation about this web site is well know as well. I was really hoping it wasn't true.

 

[DasFriek]

The Ranger T-series is a great load, I use it in my .45acp 1911 in 230gr +P loads.
I use 147gr +P Federal HST in my MK9 and i do feel it does offer a small advantage in penetration over lighter loads.
In my MK9 the 147 HST +P shoots as soft as 127gr +P loads.

10 years ago i wouldn't have used a 147gr 9mm load as they didnt have the velocity to expand reliably, But todays bullets will expand great even at very slow speeds. Look at todays very slow .45acp standard loads coming out of short barrel 3" 1911 they are lucky to hit 800 fps and they still expand great.

 

[NG VI]

Thorgrim wrote

I've never seen anything convincing (and scientific) on hydrostatic shock. In the early days of the term (IIRC, it was P. O. Ackley who coined it), it generally involved bullets moving +4,000 fps, thus the invention of the .17 Remington. I don't doubt (if for no other reason than simple physics) that velocity matters, but I've never seen a convincing scientific argument that supports it in the velocity ranges of most handgun cartridges.

The Wikipedia article linked to earlier seems to have lumped hydrostatic effects with the "ballistic pressure wave" theory. Hydrostatic effects are very real, and are apparent when a fast object impacts a fluid object, but ballistic pressure wave is something I just don't think is real at all. Ballistic pressure wave is the theory that a projectile can cause remote wounding by the force of its impact, which is a nice idea but kind of absurd, while hydrostatic shock is just the term for the reaction of a highly fluid medium when hit by a fast object. We see hydrostatic shock effects when a container of liquids is hit by a bullet, like a 20oz bottle of water hit by a fast .357, or a groundhog hit by a .223, though the effects won't be nearly so dramatic in a larger 'container' such as a human.

Ballistic pressure wave would be cool if it were real, but it isn't.

 

[NG VI]

No handgun round has sufficient velocity to produce hydrostatic shock to the point that it would a significant factor in wounding capability. You have to get into centerfire rifle cartridges to get enough velocity for the pressure wave of the bullet to cause damage to the bodily structures that the bullet passes by and does not contact directly.

Or shoot objects much smaller than people. A smaller container will be less tolerant of the pressure spike from being hit with a projectile and will be more affected by the impact than a larger one.

 

[NG VI]

there is not a handgun made capable of producing hydrostatic shock ( bleeding in the brain from body trauma )

Hydrostatic shock is not bleeding in the brain, that's the bunk "ballistic pressure wave" theory, a bunch of mental masturbation.

Oh and

Who uses 147gr JHP 9mm as a self defense round?

Kind of does

" rule out FMJ."

.

Back to the scheduled thread.

 

[NG VI]

This group hasn't given anyone a hard time or supported anyone's bullhockey statements based on time on the forums once since I joined. Don't try to derail the thread and don't worry about people here holding a statement against you, if someone thinks you are wrong they will just say so in a civil manner and the explain why they think that is the case.

 

[rellascout]

I read the original post and it does not rule out FMJ. It is just a rhetorical question about bullet weight. If you don't want any participation from other members then why put it on a public forum. Not every person thinks alike or shares the same values and ideals. From what I gathered from reading the forum policies personal one sided posting is not permitted. I don't think DISCUSSION CONTROL is permitted either looking at the guidelines.

I also know it is also typical for the resident clique to give a new member a hard time as that reputation about this web site is well know as well. I was really hoping it wasn't true.

Thread title and OP both state that the proposed discussion is about JHPs. I want input from other members here but look at your posts. Instead of adding to the productive dicussion you drag out the dead horse off topic of "what will the lawyers say..."

It has nothing to do with you being a new member. It has everything to do with your attempt to derail my thread with off topic garbage.

Now back on topic:

I think I am going to get a couple of cases of Winchester Ranger RA9T 147 gr T-series and then some Winchester Ranger 9mm T-Series +P RA9124TP.

 

[joe_security]

rellascout: What is your opinion of the old Ranger 147gr. non T version ? There seems to be plenty of it to go around. Is the new PDX worth while in 147gr. 9mm ?

 

[rellascout]

rellascout: What is your opinion of the old Ranger 147gr. non T version ? There seems to be plenty of it to go around. Is the new PDX worth while in 147gr. 9mm ?

The stuff is cheap. $200 for 500 give or take a few $$$. I assume this is the stuff you are talking about: 9mm SXT Winchester Ranger 147 grain Ammo T-series ZRA9SXTC. That is about $35 to $40 cheaper than the current round. My understanding is that is a slightly different bullet design than the current offering but that it is still a solid bullet design. IIRC state of the art 2008. LOL

 

[Orion8472]

I just checked my Ranger ammo and it is the RA9T, so I guess that is concidered "the good stuff". If that's the case, I think it was a good trade [ammo for a Countersniper scope I had].

 

[Shaggz]

I carry COR-BON 115gr +p JHP in my 9MM.
From what I've heard/read & understand. It is a very effective round for stopping an assailant and I feel safe when carrying it.

 

[joe_security]

RA9T (147gr.) here as well. I thought this was pre "T" series ammo. I think I bought this stuff at least 3 years ago, maybe more.

 

[areagan]

Kinda makes you wonder if the ammo makers found a way for the paper shooters to be separated from their money faster. Next we will be asking the bad guys " Sir which bullet do you prefer to be shot with ". Cabin fever is really bad this winter it seems.:banghead:

 

[Owen]

Nobody is singling you out because you are new. They are arguing with you because:

1.) this is a discussion forum. arguing is what we do here.
2.) you're bringing up topics that have been settled here on THR dozens of times in the past.

The military uses FMJ in both rifles and pistols because that is what international law requires.

The bleeding brain thing has been proven false scientifically. The search function is broken at this time, but when its back up, do a search, there are dozens of threads about it.

Outside of NJ, no one has ever been convicted because of they chose to use hollowpoints. It was a concern Massad Ayoob brought up in a magazine article once. 20 years later, it still hasn't happened. If someone has been convicted or successfully sued, please bring it up in another thread.

Your last post in that thread is a non-sequiter, and has no connection at all to the rest of the thread. No one here is talking about shooting paper as far as I can tell.

 

[Water-Man]

I use Federal HST 147gr. in my carry pistol for the following reasons:
1. I believe HST is the best SD ammo on the market based on articles I've read and independent tests I've done.
2. I believe 147gr. penetrates deeper than 127, 124 and 115gr.
3. It feeds reliably in my pistol.

 

[rellascout]

I use Federal HST 147gr. in my carry pistol for the following reasons:
1. I believe HST is the best SD ammo on the market based on articles I've read and independent tests I've done.
2. I believe 147gr. penetrates deeper than 127, 124 and 115gr.
3. It feeds reliably in my pistol.

Nicely stated... I considered HSTs as well. I use them in my 45s.

 

[Wolfgang2000]

When my Dept went to 9MM they went to the 147 grn bullet, because the FBI said it was the way to go. I'm sorry it's actual street record was dismal.

In (mm I prefer the lighter but faster 115 or 124 +P or +P+. The 127+P+ is a great round also.

I hear the newer 147's are better, but I'll stick with the lighter and faster rounds. YMMV

 

[rellascout]

When my Dept went to 9MM they went to the 147 grn bullet, because the FBI said it was the way to go. I'm sorry it's actual street record was dismal.

In (mm I prefer the lighter but faster 115 or 124 +P or +P+. The 127+P+ is a great round also.

I hear the newer 147's are better, but I'll stick with the lighter and faster rounds. YMMV

What was the timeframe of these actual street record? When you say it was dismal in what way did it fail? Did it fail to expand? Did it not pentrate enough?

 

[mljdeckard]

And there are actually a lot of pistols in-theater right now. Carried by a lot more people than officers and MPs. (There's one on my hip right now.)

 

[481]

I have always been a 124gr +P guy. I have shot a lot of Gold Dots but I believe that mainly comes from the fact I bought a ton of it way back when and it works in all of my pistols.

You know THR loves a caliber war within a caliber, LOL... Just kidding, so tell me if you are shooting 147gr what kinds and why. Lets try to keep this one civil. I am not interested in bickering. Thanks in advance.

I am considering switching to 147gr Winchester Ranger RA9T 147 gr T-series.

r-

I have, on several occasions (on duty), carried the RA9T load. Definitely one of the better "heavy-for-caliber" 9x19 loads available and if it provides you adequate confidence, go for it. Winchester provides a "comparator" function on their 'site which includes the RA9T and might be of interest to you if you've not seen it already.

In "retirement", my current EDC (a G17) is loaded with the Hornady 9mm 147 gr. XTP JHP. Reputed for its excellent accuracy, it also provides moderate expansion (~1.5x caliber) and deep (14"-18") penetration.

 

[GRIZ22]

I do notice that the 124-127 +P loads recoil much more than 147. This is very noticeable too.

It may be the muzzle blast that bothers you. Muzzle blast bother s most people more than recoil.

I also know in New Jersey the use of any hollow point ammunition is a felony enhancement or a stand alone felony for just possession.

Outside of NJ, no one has ever been convicted because of they chose to use hollowpoints.

Contrary to gun forum beliefs hollowpoints are legal to have and use in NJ. See:

http://njsp.org/about/fire_hollow.html.

NJ restricts where you can possess them. If you possessing them legally (home, while hunting, at a range, etc) and you were to use them for a SD situation and it was a good shoot you will not be charged with possession or use of hollowpoints. If you commit a crime and you have hollowpoints you will be charged with them as a add on charge.

Now that that's out of the way, I use 147 gr 9mms in Beretta, Taurus, and S&W 9mms as I have found them to be more accurate.