[boomhower]

Link

[Tiro Fijo]

It's garbage. 80's designed heavy for caliber 9mm rd. that didn't work then & sure as Hell doesn't now.

[jr05]

Are you saying that heavy loaded (147gr) bullets did not, and do not work?

If it is just for this ammo, you are probably right, it is WWB. However, 147gr 9mm ammo is and excellent round for SD...Federal HST for example in 147gr is some of the best stuff out there for 9mm.

[Tiro Fijo]

Originally Posted by jr05

...If it is just for this ammo, you are probably right, it is WWB...

No it's not. it's FEDERAL.

The Federal 147 gr. Hi Shok JHP didn't work. The 115 gr. BPLE did & does work fantastically. As for the 147 gr. of today I don't know as I haven't seen anyone shot with it.

[9mm +p+]

Originally Posted by jr05

Are you saying that heavy loaded (147gr) bullets did not, and do not work?

If it is just for this ammo, you are probably right, it is WWB. However, 147gr 9mm ammo is and excellent round for SD...Federal HST for example in 147gr is some of the best stuff out there for 9mm.

147's are a joke, the WORST thing to ever happen to the 9mm. Don't belive me talk to some folks who have actually used them or seen them used, I have.

[9mmParabellum]

A Navy Seal original they more than likely used it for a supressed pistol long time ago for sentry stalking with head shoots a priority.

[cadillacguns]

Federal's 147 grn HST seem to be pretty good in todays FBI Protocol testing, I wouldnt hesitate to accept a mag full.

[KenB22]

Originally Posted by 9mm +p+

147's are a joke, the WORST thing to ever happen to the 9mm. Don't belive me talk to some folks who have actually used them or seen them used, I have.

Then either you or Mas are wrong. He told me in the GATE forum that 147 gr HST was performing well for San Diego and Indianapolis.

Care to tell us what agencies you talked to and when so I can check out your statement?

[M 7]

Originally Posted by KenB22

Then either you or Mas are wrong. He told me in the GATE forum that 147 gr HST was performing well for San Diego and Indianapolis.

Care to tell us what agencies you talked to and when so I can check out your statement?

I'm gonna go with Mas on this one.

He gets reports from those who bet their lives on it everyday and his information is the most accurate and up to date.

[ergon]

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_De..._FAQ/index.htm

This is a long list of info. If you can't find it here it doesn't exist. Check the bottom and you'll see it gets updated. Handgun ammo was 5/2012.

There is NO magic bullet. It's like real estate...........location, location, location.

[Tiro Fijo]

Originally Posted by KenB22

Then either you or Mas are wrong. He told me in the GATE forum that 147 gr HST was performing well for San Diego and Indianapolis.

Care to tell us what agencies you talked to and when so I can check out your statement?

That's because Mr. Ayoob can sometimes obtain info such as this from LE agencies as he is famous in his area and has some clout. The average Joe Schmoe can't get that info as agencies are reluctant to give it out as many wishing to obtain said info have a political agenda, i.e., Police brutality, racial, etc. Today's politically correct & racially charged climate has put a huge damper on 'street results' IMO, e.g., the Trayvon case. Just my 2 cents.

[Merkavaboy]

Originally Posted by ergon

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_De..._FAQ/index.htm

This is a long list of info. If you can't find it here it doesn't exist. Check the bottom and you'll see it gets updated. Handgun ammo was 5/2012.

There is NO magic bullet. It's like real estate...........location, location, location.

Well, Gee Wizz Batman! I don't see the 9mm 115JHP+P+ by either Federal, Winchester, Remington and Speer, nor Corbon's 115JHP+P on that list. Does that mean that these rounds don't exist?

[ergon]

The data contained exempted non relevant ammo. You can read can't you? You missed this so go back and try again pup. It's covered.

"You might notice that the list does NOT include any lightweight bullets with the exception of the Barnes 115gr version. The reason - especially if you've read the beginning of this article - should be clear already, but Doctor Roberts sums it up nicely as well: "With the exception of the Barnes 115 gr XPB all copper projectile, in general, most 9 mm 115 gr loads have demonstrated greater inconsistency, insufficient penetration, poor intermediate barrier capability, and failure to expand in denim testing than other 9mm bullets. For those individuals wanting to use lighter weight, supersonic 9 mm’s, I think a better alternative than the vast majority of 115 gr loads is to use the slightly heavier 124 to 127 gr bullets or the Barnes 115 gr all copper bullet"

[KenB22]

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo

That's because Mr. Ayoob can sometimes obtain info such as this from LE agencies as he is famous in his area and has some clout. The average Joe Schmoe can't get that info as agencies are reluctant to give it out as many wishing to obtain said info have a political agenda, i.e., Police brutality, racial, etc. Today's politically correct & racially charged climate has put a huge damper on 'street results' IMO, e.g., the Trayvon case. Just my 2 cents.

I agree. That's why I asked Mas so I could evaluate internet posters who say all 147g 9mm bullets are ineffective.

[Merkavaboy]

Originally Posted by ergon

The data contained exempted non relevant ammo. You can read can't you? You missed this so go back and try again pup. It's covered.

"You might notice that the list does NOT include any lightweight bullets with the exception of the Barnes 115gr version. The reason - especially if you've read the beginning of this article - should be clear already, but Doctor Roberts sums it up nicely as well: "With the exception of the Barnes 115 gr XPB all copper projectile, in general, most 9 mm 115 gr loads have demonstrated greater inconsistency, insufficient penetration, poor intermediate barrier capability, and failure to expand in denim testing than other 9mm bullets. For those individuals wanting to use lighter weight, supersonic 9 mm’s, I think a better alternative than the vast majority of 115 gr loads is to use the slightly heavier 124 to 127 gr bullets or the Barnes 115 gr all copper bullet"

Gee, I guess all those perps that have been given Dirt Naps by ISP, DeKleb Co. and other LEA's never got the memo from the FBI, Flackler, Dentist Roberts, et al, that "light" rounds, specifically the 115+P+ i mentioned, weren't effective in REAL WORLD SHOOTINGS by REAL WORLD COPS rather than killing blocks of inanimate jello shot by people wearing white labratory jackets!

[ergon]

Originally Posted by Merkavaboy

Gee, I guess all those perps that have been given Dirt Naps by ISP, DeKleb Co. and other LEA's never got the memo from the FBI, Flackler, Dentist Roberts, et al, that "light" rounds, specifically the 115+P+ i mentioned, weren't effective in REAL WORLD SHOOTINGS by REAL WORLD COPS rather than killing blocks of inanimate jello shot by people wearing white labratory jackets!

I'm a retired federal agent. If you don't like the facts ignore them. I shot 296/300 at Glynco. My last in service range score was 300/300. I was trained to fire two to the chest and one to the head. After that the SOB I shot didn't care what round he was hit with.

It's more than apparent that you didn't read what was written about 115 gr. loads even when I cut it out for you.
Believe what you want I just posted the info for the OP I didn't write it. Most cities, counties, and states buy what the bean counters can buy on the cheap NOT because they researched the subject.

[Tiro Fijo]

Dr. Roberts is a dentist. All those goombahs on M4carbine.net love to polish his pole by quoting that neat little chart like some sort of religous dogma. Anyone can shoot gel & I openly admit some bullets are impressive in this. However, nothing trumps reality & experience as denim/gel is merely a barometer of what might happen. My point being that for "Dr." Roberts to dismiss 115 gr. 9mm bullets as unacceptable off the cuff based purely on his tests is total BS when there are tons of historical shootings that state otherwise.

Besides, no one likes a dentist anyway. Not even their wives.

[ggarciatx]

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo

It's garbage. 80's designed heavy for caliber 9mm rd. that didn't work then & sure as Hell doesn't now.

So, are you saying these rounds would bounce off of you if they fired them at you?

Years ago, I saw these rounds choke quality pistols on the firing range. (Winchester 147 Subsonic) To be correct, 17-19 years ago. The rounds were subsonic and so labeled. The powder charge was upped a bit thru time and velocity went up a little. This solved the malfunctions. I participated in a group buy of Federal 124 gn Hydra-shok which were the cats meow back then. We didnt trust the 147. It is all a diferent story now. True that the Basic JHP has evolved to HST, Gold Dot, Golden Sabre, ect....., but the human body has not. Like another poster put it simply.... Location, Location, Location.

This round by the way is still used by departments in the US.

[KenB22]

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo

Dr. Roberts is a dentist. All those goombahs on M4carbine.net love to polish his pole by quoting that neat little chart like some sort of religous dogma. Anyone can shoot gel & I openly admit some bullets are impressive in this. However, nothing trumps reality & experience as denim/gel is merely a barometer of what might happen. My point being that for "Dr." Roberts to dismiss 115 gr. 9mm bullets as unacceptable off the cuff based purely on his tests is total BS when there are tons of historical shootings that state otherwise.

Besides, no one likes a dentist anyway. Not even their wives.

The light and fast 115gr may work great when there are no intermediate barriers. They may work great for civilians. Roberts isn't interested in finding loads that work well under 1 set of circumstances. As we all know, there is a whole series of IWBA tests that the bullet must pass before making Roberts' list. They must pass all of the tests, not just 1 or 2.


Roberts isn't just shooting jel. You should know better than that. He tests bullets according to IWBA protocol and tells people which ones pass and which ones don't. Why do you think he cares which ones pass his test? You can see there are both fast and light and slow and heavy bullets on his list. Tell me one bullet on his list that doeesn't have great success on the street. His advice has always been to find a bullet on his list and go with it.

[Merkavaboy]

Originally Posted by KenB22

The light and fast 115gr may work great when there are no intermediate barriers. They may work great for civilians.

Who do you think the Fed and Win 115JHP+P+ was first developed for and used by? ISP = ILLINOIS STATE POLICE. These guys have seen more gunfights and killed more people than the FBI since the early 80's with their "light" +P+ loads.

Roberts isn't interested in finding loads that work well under 1 set of circumstances. As we all know, there is a whole series of IWBA tests that the bullet must pass before making Roberts' list. They must pass all of the tests, not just 1 or 2.

Roberts isn't interested in what actually works well PERIOD! This is proven out by the fact that neither he nor the FBI even acknowledge the effectiveness of loads like the 115+P+ or even the .357Mag 125JHP, both PROVEN EFFECTIVE by COPS all across this country! They ignore these loads because they don't pass the FBI ballistic jello BS and yet continue to be PROVEN STOPPERS under all kinds of situations by salty Road Dogs and civilians alike. And since these loads have shown to work in the REAL WORLD but refuses to work in their laboratories, they convienently IGNORE such loads.

Roberts isn't just shooting jel. You should know better than that. He tests bullets according to IWBA protocol and tells people which ones pass and which ones don't. Why do you think he cares which ones pass his test? You can see there are both fast and light and slow and heavy bullets on his list. Tell me one bullet on his list that doeesn't have great success on the street. His advice has always been to find a bullet on his list and go with it.

So you're saying that Roberts is now shooting, what, jugs of water, wet newspaper and other "ballistic media"? We know that he's not shooting living human beings, that's for sure.

Roberts uses the same faulty tests that the FBI developed post-1986 Miami fiasco. The FBI can't/wouldn't find fault in their Agents, so they had to find a scapegoat in the pistol ammo they used. The FBI was the ultimate believer on the One Shot Stop theory. The FBI, through it's wound ballistics protocols promoted and foisted one of the worst 9mm JHP designs upon their agents and unsuspecting LEA's across this country: the subsonic 147JHP, especially that made by Winchester. The 147's were NEVER DESIGNED as a LEA service caliber load to be used in pistols. Period.

I personally trust the biased testing by the FBI and people like Roberts as far as I can throw them. When these people outright dismiss STREET PROVEN LOADS because they don't pass their circus routine of labratory "tests", this proves they've been snortin' too much powdered Kind & Knox.

[M 7]

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo

Dr. Roberts is a dentist. All those goombahs on M4carbine.net love to polish his pole by quoting that neat little chart like some sort of religous dogma. Anyone can shoot gel & I openly admit some bullets are impressive in this. However, nothing trumps reality & experience as denim/gel is merely a barometer of what might happen. My point being that for "Dr." Roberts to dismiss 115 gr. 9mm bullets as unacceptable off the cuff based purely on his tests is total BS when there are tons of historical shootings that state otherwise.

Besides, no one likes a dentist anyway. Not even their wives.

Name-calling and insults are a very poor argument.

As pointed out earlier, the FBI test protocols are a valid measure of their performance and bullets that pass the FBI test protocols do well on the street.

Roberts does not dismiss 115 gr. bullets at all. In fact, he includes the Barnes XPB 115 gr. JHP in his list of recommended 9mm loads.

[M 7]

Originally Posted by Merkavaboy

Roberts uses the same faulty tests that the FBI developed post-1986 Miami fiasco. The FBI can't/wouldn't find fault in their Agents, so they had to find a scapegoat in the pistol ammo they used. The FBI was the ultimate believer on the One Shot Stop theory.

Untrue. The FBI test protocols use 40 rounds to test one cartridge- Eight different tests with five rounds fired per test protocol. That's hardly a "one shot" philosophy.

[KenB22]

Originally Posted by Merkavaboy

Who do you think the Fed and Win 115JHP+P+ was first developed for and used by? ISP = ILLINOIS STATE POLICE. These guys have seen more gunfights and killed more people than the FBI since the early 80's with their "light" +P+ loads.

Read my earlier post, Mas has said that Indianapolis police are doing just fine with their 147 gr HST's.

The plural of anecdote is not "data" Fact is the bullet fails the IWBA tests. You want to use a bullet that fails the IWBA tests, no skin off my neck. You seem to think you are the smartest person on the planet so go for it...use what you want. I'm just glad police don't PM you to get your recommendation about what bullet to use.

[uz2bUSMC]

[QUOTE] . I'm just glad police don't PM you to get your recommendation about what bullet to use. /QUOTE]

They would get sound advice if they did.

[uz2bUSMC]

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo

Dr. Roberts is a dentist. All those goombahs on M4carbine.net love to polish his pole by quoting that neat little chart like some sort of religous dogma. Anyone can shoot gel & I openly admit some bullets are impressive in this. However, nothing trumps reality & experience as denim/gel is merely a barometer of what might happen. My point being that for "Dr." Roberts to dismiss 115 gr. 9mm bullets as unacceptable off the cuff based purely on his tests is total BS when there are tons of historical shootings that state otherwise.

Besides, no one likes a dentist anyway. Not even their wives.

I don't usually agree with what you post but in this case I couldn't agree more.