Glock Talk banner

+P+ HST...

4K views 56 replies 14 participants last post by  ranvette1 
#1 ·
I would love to see Federal introduce a 9mm +P or +P+ 115gr HST. Frankly, a standard pressure 115 @ ~1225fps and a +P+ @ ~1300fps might actually sell.

This is totally academic as the 9mm HST line is pretty well done already. But, for fun, your thoughts, please.
 
#2 ·
If some major agency were to approach Federal and ask for a 115gr +P+ HST load, and agree to buy enough to make it a worthwhile investment in designing a 115gr HST bullet, and/or the company had reason to believe the 115gr +P+ JHP was making a comeback, they'd probably agree to offer one.

Federal was in on the ground floor of the original 115gr +P+ load for a state agency, so it's not like they don't have some experience in this area of duty ammunition.

Since +P+ loads are typically something relegated to LE/Gov contract sales, though, and the duty ammunition market has moved on, why would they try to do something other than continue to meet the existing market demand?

If some agency wants a 9mm +P+ JHP, they can always order the affordable 115gr +P+ JHP Federal load.

This is kind of like asking why Winchester never developed a 115gr T-Series +P+ load. The market was (is) fully satisfied with the RA9TA 127gr +P+ or the old-style cup & core 115gr +P+ loads that Winchester could produce, and the trend seemed to amply demonstrate that the 124gr +P load was more "in demand" than either of the +P+ offerings.

If you really want to see a 115gr HST +P+ load, just tell Federal you'll guarantee that you'll buy 200 million rounds if they'll produce one ... ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kentguy
#5 ·
Really. How much more expansion would someone dare to expect at approx 1300fps in a lightweight JHP? The bullets almost turn themselves inside out in some situations as it is, and 1300fps from a 4" 9mm barrel is fairly screaming for a lightweight duty load, regardless of the JHP design.
 
#4 ·
At least in FBI protocol testing, [very broadly speaking] faster, lighter bullets can make a mediocre bullet design expand reliably at the lower end of penetration; even "good" bullet designs tend toward the lower end of penetration.

Heavier, slower bullets tend to penetrate, but may not expand. Even when they expand they tend to penetrate toward the higher end of the protocol. HST's in 124, 147 and 150 (standard and +P) tend to reliably expand and penetrate in the mid to upper end of the penetration protocol.

I can't see a good reason to use a loading that would likely increase muzzle flash and recoil, that would also tend to penetrate less - but wouldn't improve on [already very good] expansion reliability.

Your mileage may vary.....
 
#6 ·
A 115HST+P+ is a novel idea but would cost a lot in R&D $$$. Add to that the fact that the FBI thoroughly has damned any and all loads that don't pass their ballistic "protocols", I doubt any agency would use a 115gr loading.

The Federal 9BPLE has proven itself for decades now so why spend more $$$ developing something new? And if one doesn't like Federal, there's always Winchester, Remington and Speer to choose from.

P.S.: Hornady is the one who should look at developing a 115XTP+P+ loading as they are the one who would probably profit the most from a +P+ design for the LE market.
 
#8 ·
A 115HST+P+ is a novel idea but would cost a lot in R&D $$$. Add to that the fact that the FBI thoroughly has damned any and all loads that don't pass their ballistic "protocols", I doubt any agency would use a 115gr loading.

The Federal 9BPLE has proven itself for decades now so why spend more $$$ developing something new? And if one doesn't like Federal, there's always Winchester, Remington and Speer to choose from.
I think a standard pressure 115 HST would easily pass FBI standards. I imagine expansion would be around .58 to .62 and penetration somewhere around 14 inches. This is a guesstimate, but I think it would be in the ball park.
 
#7 ·
The 9BPLE is such a classic, I wonder if it'll ever "die".

Perhaps a +P+ 115 would have no practical application, but maybe a standard pressure 115 would. A standard pressure 115 HST would expand reliably at 1200fps, peneteate adequately and probably produce minimal recoil.

If Federal introduced either, I would be surprised. Most LEA have lost interest in 115gr 9mm in favor of 124 and 147. Ironically a 115 driven at 1180to 1220fps might actially provide good terminal ballistics with less recoil than the 124 and 147 standard pressure offerings. As it is, those aren't hard recoiling loads.

If CBP ever switches to 9mm maybe the 115 makes a come back. IIRC, they were the agency that requested some 135gr .40 about 6 to 8 years back.
 
#32 ·
The 9BPLE is such a classic, I wonder if it'll ever "die".

Perhaps a +P+ 115 would have no practical application, but maybe a standard pressure 115 would. A standard pressure 115 HST would expand reliably at 1200fps, peneteate adequately and probably produce minimal recoil.

If Federal introduced either, I would be surprised. Most LEA have lost interest in 115gr 9mm in favor of 124 and 147. Ironically a 115 driven at 1180to 1220fps might actially provide good terminal ballistics with less recoil than the 124 and 147 standard pressure offerings. As it is, those aren't hard recoiling loads.

If CBP ever switches to 9mm maybe the 115 makes a come back. IIRC, they were the agency that requested some 135gr .40 about 6 to 8 years back.
In my estimation the smaller the pistol the greater the chance that +P/+P+ rounds might compromise the gun's design at the moment when reliability is most critical.

I have been loading my Shield with standard pressure 124-grain HST, and the second magazine is currently loaded with standard pressure 115-grain Gold Dot.

As tnoutdoors9 says in his test of the latter round, it "complicates" the search for effective self-defense rounds when compared to much more favored 9mm rounds. His test demonstrates great penetration as well as 50% expansion, along with great shooting characteristics.

I do have about 15 rounds of standard pressure 124-grain Federal Tactical Bonded I would probably load in the second magazine, but that's not enough to adequately test the round when there is none available since forever.

 
#9 ·
The 115 +P+ Gold Dot is a surprisingly good performer so yeah an HST like that would be interesting. It would probably outperform the 9BPLE simply because it wouldn't fragment. But I can see why Federal doesn't do that, the others are just so outstanding.
 
#10 ·
I agree. Why add a +P+ when the 124 and 147 SP and +P loads do just fine? I think a standard pressure 115 would make more sense.

Imagine a premium JHP that still makes the magical 12 inches, expands to over 1.5x caliber and recoils like a 115 American Eagle... That could be something. Maybe not. Who knows. I'm sure there would be enough people out there who would buy it.

Look at the micro 9mm 150gr HST. No real point in making that load when the standard pressure 147 does just fine out of a sub compact pistol. They still made it though... I think standard pressure 115 would have more appeal than a 150 @ 950fps.
 
#12 ·
But the 147 grainer sure did, and outscored the .40 S&W. Surpassed the .40 S&W, for FBI use. Gone. Bye.
 
#20 ·
Rarely does gel viscosity equal to "standard gel" viscosity. Still "acceptable" gel viscosity can result in variation of penetration of 2". Also, Speer, like Federal, uses maximum expansion, not average. The 115 gr. GD did not pass all protocol tests in whatever gel Speer used -- and would certainly not meet the 12" minimum penetration in soft tissue where penetration is, on average, less than in standard gel.
 
#23 · (Edited)
Gel tests don't really mean much when it comes to real world performance.

Sometimes bullets don't penetrate as well as they do in jello and sometimes they penetration more than they do in jello. Same goes for expansion.

Too many people take the FBI standards as gospel. Other agencies have different standards.

Penetration is the law of averages. For most people 8 to 10 inches of science experiment will yield satisfactory results. For some it might not be enough.

Look at how many people get killed by .380. Unless you're using an FMJ or XTP type bullet, .380 isn't passing FBI protocol. That doesn't mean it isn't effective.

This whole thing needs to be looked at in perspective. Gel tests are science experiments. The same load could perform slightly differently from test to test.

For civilian use, and 90% of LE use, a bullet that makes an average of 10 inches across all test parameters will probably perform just fine. We're talking handguns and handguns suck.

For Joe CCW a 115 that makes an average of 8 to 12 inches is just fine. I think a low recoiling 115 HST would fly off the shelves.
 
#24 · (Edited)
Don't expect anything special from one of the big ammo makers they're to busy counting the money made from their handgun ammo which has more than doubled in price in the last few years! And how many HOT loads do you see being offered by the big 4 ammo makers, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for something hot from the big boys it ant gonna happen! But if your serious about a hot 115gr round the Corbon JHP 115gr 357 Sig round has a velocity of 1500 fps or there's the Underwood 115gr 357 Sig round loaded with a Nosler bullet that has a velocity of 1550 fps with 615 ft/lbs of energy. If someone suggests these loads aren't as good as bonded bullets or that they don't meet FBI specks, ask them how much they would like being shot by one!
 
#25 ·
Gel tests don't really mean much when it comes to real world performance.

Sometimes bullets don't penetrate as well as they do in jello and sometimes they penetration more than they do in jello. Same goes for expansion.

Too many people take the FBI standards as gospel. Other agencies have different standards.

Penetration is the law of averages. For most people 8 to 10 inches of science experiment will yield satisfactory results. For some it might not be enough.

Look at how many people get killed by .380. Unless you're using an FMJ or XTP type bullet, .380 isn't passing FBI protocol. That doesn't mean it isn't effective.

This whole thing needs to be looked at in perspective. Gel tests are science experiments. The same load could perform slightly differently from test to test.

For civilian use, and 90% of LE use, a bullet that makes an average of 10 inches across all test parameters will probably perform just fine. We're talking handguns and handguns suck.

For Joe CCW a 115 that makes an average of 8 to 12 inches is just fine. I think a low recoiling 115 HST would fly off the shelves.
Properly calibrated and properly interpreted gel tests are meaningful. If you believe that a bullet will penetrate more in tissue than in gel, or that 10" penetration in gel is sufficient in "your" self-defense scenarios, that's your opinion. For me, since I probably won't be able to get the attacker to cooperate so I can get a direct, unobstructed frontal shot, I make an allowance for "lack of cooperation." And, of course, I don't feel that I could "get away with" emptying my whole mag at an attacker -- in which case 8" penetration would probably suffice. Even 9mm would suffice, in that case...
 
#26 · (Edited)
9mm just doesn't have the energy to enable a 115 grain bullet to meet FBI protocols -- unless the expanded diameter is under half-inch or so.
This just isn't true. 0.5" is about 41% expansion [ ((0.5"/0.355")-1)*100 ]

At least eight (8) of the ten (10) 115 grain loads in the Lucky Gunner testing met the FBI protocol and expanded greater than 41%. The Barnes TAC-XPD 115 Gr +P penetrated an average of 13.4" (FBI Min=12") and expanded 99% (~0.7").

========

Now whether FBI protocol testing has relevance to "real world" is another debate. Until statistically significant "real world" data is available, laboratory is the best there is. If "we" stuck with only field proven loadings there would be no development of bullet designs.

I've been told that there are loads that do not do well in laboratory testing but are "field proven"; but are there loads that perform well in testing but don't perform well in the field? I don't know, but it would make for some interesting research I suppose.
 
#27 ·
This just isn't true. 0.5" is about 41% expansion [ ((0.5"/0.355")-1)*100 ]

At least eight (8) of the ten (10) 115 grain loads in the Lucky Gunner testing met the FBI protocol and expanded greater than 41%. The Barnes TAC-XPD 115 Gr +P penetrated an average of 13.4" (FBI Min=12") and expanded 99% (~0.7").
Since when does the FBI protocol specify or allow the use of Clear Ballistics gel?
 
#33 ·
I suspect a 115 HST would do the same.

I don't know where the idea that +P and +P+ ammo can compromise performance. Most modern 9mm handguns are designed for 9mm NATO which is loaded hotter than SAAMI standard pressure 9mm. SAAMI is 35k psi and NATO is somewhere around 36.5k or so. I might be a little off. +P SAAMI isn't much different from NATO spec. I can understand concerns with +P+ because it isn't regulated by anyone, but +P is good to go in any modern pistol. I'm sure someone will post up an exception to this, but you all get my point.
 
#34 ·
Well I hope you're right about today's small pistols made by reputable arms manufacturers. My opinion may be clouded by having had a couple of dismal experiences from purchasing less-than-top-tier makers' products.

That said, I also view the small pistols as up-close-and-personal self-defense weapons, and would expect premium JHP standard pressure ammos perfectly adequate to accomplish the task at relatively close range.
 
#36 ·
Well I hope you're right about today's small pistols made by reputable arms manufacturers. My opinion may be clouded by having had a couple of dismal experiences from purchasing less-than-top-tier makers' products.

That said, I also view the small pistols as up-close-and-personal self-defense weapons, and would expect premium JHP standard pressure ammos perfectly adequate to accomplish the task at relatively close range.
The small pistols may be a different situation than larger pistols. IMO, if the manual says rated for +P, it's good to go. With all the boutique ammo makers popping up its easy to understand why someone may have a bad experience. If one sticks to a major ammo maker like Federal, Speer, or Winchester, the ammo will likely be just fine. IMO, the major ammo makers water down even the +P stuff a bit for liability reasons. That's impossible to know without actually measuring the pressure.

Even using +P ammo, 9mm still has advantages over .40. The main advantage being an extra round or two in the magazine, and still less recoil. I used to be a tried and true .40 guy. Then I was jumping on the .45 bandwagon and now I'm in the handguns generally suck group.
 
#37 ·
In my view 124 grain or 147 grain standard pressure work just fine.

If you want +P or +P+ just step up to .40 instead.
There's no doubt that +P+ 9mm load will wear out a 9mm pistol faster than a .40 cal load (within SAAMI) would wear out a pistol designed for .40 cal. It's interesting that 9mm fans claim that 9mm is just fine for self-defense -- except many 9mm fans feel they need +P+ loads in 9mm....
 
#38 ·
There's no doubt that +P+ 9mm load will wear out a 9mm pistol faster than a .40 cal load (within SAAMI) would wear out a pistol designed for .40 cal. It's interesting that 9mm fans claim that 9mm is just fine for self-defense -- except many 9mm fans feel they need +P+ loads in 9mm....
The advent of +P and +P+ ammunition is driven by technological advancement. The 9mm was designed in 1901 by Georg Luger. It was put into production in 1902. Metallurgy and manufacturing capabilities were not what they are now. With modern technology firearms are able to safely operate at higher pressures.

SAAMI pressures are conservative for a reason. Pistols built 100 years or so ago can't handle the increased pressure produced by +P and +P+. Modern service size pistols made by modern manufacturers are very capable of handling the increased pressure from +P and +P+ ammunition. Even 9mm NATO is technically over pressure by about 5%.

9mm fans that want to use +P+ are really no different than those who wish to use .40 or .357 Sig. They want a more effective powerful cartridge for their needs.
 
#39 ·
9mm fans that want to use +P+ are really no different than those who wish to use .40 or .357 Sig. They want a more effective powerful cartridge for their needs.
I can certainly understand why some 9mm shooters want to "maximize" 9mm by using +P+ loads -- to give 9mm better terminal performance. However, I don't accept that using such loads does not wear out a 9mm pistol faster than a pistol designed to shoot .40 cal or .357 Sig @ SAAMI pressures.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top