Why do law enforcement and civillians carry 147gr 9mm?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I also carry a 147 load (REM Golden Saber, and Speer GD)in my Walther PPS and PPQs.

To me the 147s are more of a “push” than a “snap” in the recoil department, and I’m back on target faster. Also, in the short barreled PPS the 147s don’t lose as large of a percentage of velocity when compared with the 124s or 115s. I also worked up a 147grn cast bullet load for IDPA that mirrors my carry ammo in MV. IMHO, the 147s are "softer" shooting.

Chuck
 
then while does .357 mag [125 grain] beat .45acp in the manstopping department? [a.k.a. "one shot stops"]
Click to expand...

My theory is it takes *much* longer to get back on target for the second shot with a .357, but then you don't need the 2nd shot after all. You *might* not have needed the 2nd shot of a .45 double-tap either.
 
A .357 may, under some conditions, according to one method of testing, be somewhat more likely to get a one-shot stop than a .45. Real world statistics are much more murky.

It's not that I don't love good heavy revolvers, I do, and a 4" or 6" Python is definitely on the "Someday" list, but I can deliver better shots faster with my 1911. I can also reload it a lot faster. Either one is very likely, with most loads, under most conditions, to completely traverse a human target, and my .45s make bigger holes. (Particularly with 230 gr HSTs, which routinely expand to about the diameter of a quarter.)
 
The bullet weight/terminal effects/velocity/penetration argument aside (who REALLY knows which is best, or which you need at the moment), I am quite pleased with the accuracy of both Federal and Speer 147gr ammo, and the fact that they function well and can be used in any of my 9mm handguns.
 
I tend to carry 147 gr. bullets in my Walther PPS and Glock 19 as I think that the heavier bullet seems to cycle the action better, I seem to find that I have fewer failure to feed events with the 147 gr. bullets versus the 115 gr. bullets. Not to say that I have a lot of failure to feed incidents but the heavier bullet seems to work a tad better. I also tend to use 230 gr. bullets in 45 acp for the same reason. However, your results may vary and I may be guilty of conformational bias.
 
I chose the 147 Ranger T's for use in my G26. The +P versions don't really provide any benefit in a shorter barrel.
 
I assume it's legit, but I have a letter someone posted asking Winchester what they recommended for their short barreled 9mm. The ballistics engineer at Winchester seemed to defy "conventional logic" and recommended the 147gr. (NON +P) for short barreled guns, due to more dwell time in the barrel, thus a more complete powder burn, and less velocity loss.

A lot of folks always want the fastest thing they can get, but I've never bought into that argument.

I've always thought (as the Winchester letter appears to verify?) that you can't just make a blanket statement 'bout what works best - it all depends on a lot of variables (burn rate of the powder, bullet design, etc.).
 
I've only seen the 147 grain loads for LEOs used in carbines or subguns like the MP5. As others remarked on here, the prevalent loads were the Ranger SXT 127 +p+ loads and the HST.
 
Why do law enforcement and civillians carry 147gr 9mm?
Click to expand...

I agree with what others have said...by and large they don't. Meaning that law enforcement that use 9mm tend to go with the 115 and/or 124-127 gr, weights in a JHP. A few posters have explained some of the reasons behind the temporary favor the heavier bullets had in law enforcement. That lasted a few years but as better bullet designs appeared the trend receded. This was back in the 90s by the way.

The bulk of defensive ammo sold today is in the 115 and 124 gr. weights. There are more loads offered in these weights than in 147. That is because the more traditional weights sell more, including to regular shooters.

Mostly it's a matter of choice. Personal preference and reasoning.

then while does .357 mag beat .45acp in the manstopping department?
Click to expand...

There is no real evidence that it does. Back in the day when some theorized this to be true there were many more good jhp bullets for the .357 Mag than for the 45acp. So the .357 developed quite a rep. It was also the case that more leos shot revolvers than semis, again this favored the .357.

The only "evidence" for the superiority of the .357 Mag comes from the "One Shot Stop" statistics of the writers Marshall and Sanow. Their evidence has been very controversial. But even they call them both about even with good bullets, if a fella bothers to read their books.

tipoc
 
I'm posting here a few links to some resources where folks can see the results of various tests of different weight and types of 9mm ammo shot into and through a variety of things. Often when you take the time to study these you revise your opinions on what you thought you knew and took for granted.

Here is Brass Fetcher. A very useful sight both for their published data and for their slo-mo videos.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/9x19mm Luger/9x19mm Luger Summary Table.pdf

http://www.brassfetcher.com/index_files/9x19mmSlowMotion.htm

Ballistics by the Inch is also a useful site. Here they take barrels and cut them down and test for the velocity and energy. They also shoot from real world guns with different barrel lengths and provide info on that.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9luger.html

Maybe my favorite...The Box O Truth where they shoot a number of things with a wide variety of guns and ammo and show you the results.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/theboxotruth.htm

tipoc
 
Some folks (seriously) believe that velocity is irrelevant when discussing pistol rounds.

They favor the 147 gr in 9mm.

That is as simple as I can state it.
 
I don't think anybody believes that velocity is irrelevant. It is more likely accurate to say, "many people understand that velocity is just one of multiple relevant considerations".
 
Perhaps not on this board, but there are people that literally believe (and demand) that velocity is irrelevant in pistol rounds, trust me.

This is a direct quote from another board:

"Velocity in a handgun is irrelevant as a wounding factor. All velocity does (when a proper bullet is assumed) is create a larger Temporary Wound Cavity."

I agree with you that it is one of many factors.

Not everyone agrees though.
 
theblaze said:
Perhaps not on this board, but there are people that literally believe (and demand) that velocity is irrelevant in pistol rounds, trust me.

This is a direct quote from another board:

"Velocity in a handgun is irrelevant as a wounding factor. All velocity does (when a proper bullet is assumed) is create a larger Temporary Wound Cavity."

I agree with you that it is one of many factors.

Not everyone agrees though.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that the 5.56 proves that velocity is relevant. If it wasn't going 3000 fps it would just be a souped up 22LR. I'm sure that it's not as much of a factor in handguns, but the real question is how much of a difference does 1000 fps vs 1500 fps make. Personally I think not much. The only exception that I can think of is the 357 Magnum, but the .45 is usually subsonic and it's been a proven man stopper for over 100 years. I'm sure the bad guy wouldn't know the difference between getting shot with a 124gr vs a 147 grain. I'd say get whatever is cheapest/ in stock and not worry about it.
 
theblaze said:
"Velocity in a handgun is irrelevant as a wounding factor. All velocity does (when a proper bullet is assumed) is create a larger Temporary Wound Cavity."

I agree with you that it is one of many factors.

Not everyone agrees though.
Click to expand...
The British certainly believed it after WW I were they replaced the .455 with the .38/200, which threw a 200gr soft lead bullet at 625 FPS...it is better known in this country as the .38 S&W (although with a lighter bullet). It was adopted for much the same reason as the 147gr 9mm slug...penetration.

It actually remained in UK service until it was replaced by the 9x19mm...loaded with the 124gr slug
 
9mmepiphany said:
The British certainly believed it after WW I were they replaced the .455 with the .38/200, which threw a 200gr soft lead bullet at 625 FPS...it is better known in this country as the .38 S&W (although with a lighter bullet). It was adopted for much the same reason as the 147gr 9mm slug...penetration.

It actually remained in UK service until it was replaced by the 9x19mm...loaded with the 124gr slug
Click to expand...

They Webley in a defensive discussion?Come On....
 
theblaze said:
Perhaps not on this board, but there are people that literally believe (and demand) that velocity is irrelevant in pistol rounds, trust me.

This is a direct quote from another board:

"Velocity in a handgun is irrelevant as a wounding factor. All velocity does (when a proper bullet is assumed) is create a larger Temporary Wound Cavity."

I agree with you that it is one of many factors.

Not everyone agrees though.
Click to expand...

I agree. Amazing what people believe/claim these days. Without velocity, the bullet is at rest.
 
Deanimator said:
Unlike a lot of people, I don't have a velocity fetish.

I use the Winchester White Box 147gr. JHP in all of my 9x19mm guns. Box 'O Truth tested them and they rated highly for BOTH penetration and expansion. They're very accurate and 100% reliable in my Browning Hi Power and Glock.
Click to expand...

D-

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. I thought that it might be of interest to you.

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 in 10% Ordnance Gelatin:
Penetration Depth (S) = 33.508 cm (13.192 inches)
Permanent Wound Cavity Mass (MPC) = 49.163 grams (1.734 ounces)


Although a lot of people dismiss it for being "old" and "cheap", I think it did surprisingly well for "economy" ammo.

:)
 
Last edited:
9mmepiphany said:
The history of the 147gr 9mm slug is pretty interesting. It was originally produced for use against sentries/guard dogs through a suppressed pistol and was loaded to sub-sonic velocities for that use.

The FBI Miami shootout aftermath committee studied different bullets to try to find a bullet that offered better stopping power. The 147gr loading was thrown in almost as an afterthought and surprised the testers with it's penetration. This lead to the FBI selecting this load as the stop gap to it's problems, while it conducted testing for a better caliber than the 9mm...which resulted in them adopting the 10mm S&W 1076 as an issue gun.

Unfortunately their adopting the 147gr sub-sonic JHP lead a lot of LE departments to adopt it as an issued loading for their 9mm pistols. The major attribute of the sub-sonic 147gr slug in LE work is accuracy.

The 9x19mm was designed with a 124gr slug and this is still an optimal bullet weight. Ammunition manufacturers have developed JHP technology of their premium defensive ammo to all meet the requirements set forth by federal research to the point that it doesn't really make a difference which JHP you pick.

What does matter much more is which loading you can make accurate and repeated hits on target with the most quickly.
Click to expand...
Always pleased with your well thought out responses, thanks...this is how I recall it as well...I also recall early 147 Gr 9mm (Winchester subsonic) to fail to expand...but then that wasn't really its purpose at that time...

Bill
 
"Velocity in a handgun is irrelevant as a wounding factor. All velocity does (when a proper bullet is assumed) is create a larger Temporary Wound Cavity."
Click to expand...
I agree. Amazing what people believe/claim these days. Without velocity, the bullet is at rest.
Click to expand...
It would be asinine to assume that this anonomous poster was talking about zero velocity vs some arbitrary velocity. Maybe he should have included the word "added" to eliminate the possibility but I'm sure someone will come along prove that assumption wrong.
 
silversport said:
I also recall early 147 Gr 9mm (Winchester subsonic) to fail to expand...but then that wasn't really its purpose at that time...
Click to expand...

You are correct, it was one of the reasons I started carrying my own ammo on duty.

We even got the word, through the departmental armorer, to be careful using it in H&K P7 M8/13 or MP-5 as it might cause malfunctions
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Topic Dead
2 3 4 5
Replies
118
Views
2K
Spats McGee
Spats McGee
K
  • Locked
Realities of Self Defense and the Law
2 3
Replies
70
Views
2K
Kleanbore
K
N
  • Locked
PDWs: What do you think?
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
RyanM
R
Back
Top