Glock 23 , 165 or 180 fr. bullets ?

sgtb · Sep 17, 2004

Which generally shoots better in the 23, 165 or 180 gr. bullets?

failsafe · Sep 17, 2004

In my opinion,the 40 cal shoots best in 165 gr...What ever you choose, practice with the same as you intend to use for carry.....

RMTactical · Sep 17, 2004

I like the 165gr.

They tend to say you should shoot a lower grain bullet out of shorter barrels in the .40, I would stay away from the 180gr in a G23.

glockendoc · Sep 17, 2004

hey GoreLicks - what is the ballistics diff on smaller with shorter barrels like 27s and 23s - I thought it was minimal - at least at the short distances I am prepared to release them - I'm learning so throw me some data.
In the heat of the moment I suspect accuracy is lower so I want a higher foot-pounds to take bad guy down, but if I get same thing from 165 gr then I suspect I trade forbetter accuracy? Right?

Timjo1955 · Sep 18, 2004

The 165 grain premium ammos(Gold Dot, Golden Saber) have more velocity, muzzle energy, and recoil than either the 180 grain GD/GS or the less expensive target loads(exception may be Blazer aluminum). Whether you carry 155 grain, 165 grain, or 180 grain premium ammo is a personal preference. I generally carry 165 gr GD. For target practice, I use a variety of ammo from 165 gr(WWB) to 180 gr, depending on availability, cost, and my own preferences(I do not use Wolf or American Ammunition). Try some premium brands in 155 gr, 165 gr, and 180 gr to see what works best for you.

RMTactical · Sep 18, 2004

Originally posted by glockendoc
hey GoreLicks - what is the ballistics diff on smaller with shorter barrels like 27s and 23s - I thought it was minimal - at least at the short distances I am prepared to release them - I'm learning so throw me some data.
In the heat of the moment I suspect accuracy is lower so I want a higher foot-pounds to take bad guy down, but if I get same thing from 165 gr then I suspect I trade forbetter accuracy? Right?

It is minimal. I don't think the diference in bullet weight will make a HUGE difference either way... But I am looking for ANY advantage I can find.

The 180gr was a 10mm bullet. When they developed the .40, most people shot the 180gr stuff but later it was discovered that the lower grain bullets were more effective in .40, especially in shorter barrelled .40's.

http://www.greent.com/40Page/general/defammo.htm

"The 165gr loads tend to be the best performers in .40 S&W. The ProLoad 165gr has little recoil while maintaining the excellent expansion and penetration qualities of the Gold Dot bullet. The Remington 165gr Golden Saber is a hotter round for folks who want more energy downrange.

Moving a little lighter, the 155gr Remington JHP is an exception to our normal recommendation for premium JHPs this load has become famous for its effectiveness and is the round of choice of the U.S. Border Patrol.

For shooters using short-barreled guns such as the Glock 27, Kahr, etc., the lightweight ProLoad 135gr would be our recommendation for maximum performance without maximum recoil. [See Mark Passamanecks test of 135gr .40 S&W ammunition options here] Another low-recoil choice is the 165gr Hydra-Shok from Federal; however, this slow moving bullet is best used in full size guns which can get the most out of their velocity.

If you really want a heavy bullet in the more common 180gr weight, the Hydra-Shok from Federal has amassed a good reputation among law enforcement in the United States for its consistent performance."

Sektor · Sep 18, 2004

I only use 165

Bravo2 · Sep 18, 2004

I been using the 165gr since it first came out and had a sw 4006 when it first came out and then it was 180gr only. I been saying it fars i can remember that the 165gr shoots most accurate in all .40 guns and less felt recoil. I like rem golden saber 165gr. After reading police articles on this round since 96 I can still say nothing out performs it. It don't plug up and penetrate more in winter heavy clothing like gold dots and ect.

fastbolt · Sep 18, 2004

It will probably depend more on the person doing the shooting ...

The ever-continuing debate regarding the "best" caliber, bullet design & bullet weight notwithstanding ... I've never been able to notice any significant difference regarding potential accuracy when I use either 155gr, 165gr or 180gr ammunition in my issued & personally owned .40 S&W pistols. Well, come to think of it, my short term use of some even lighter bullet weight ammunition didn't reveal any significant potential accuracy differences, either.

I prefer either 180gr or 165gr ammunition.

You may discover that your particular pistol, and you, "prefer" one or the other ... or, you may not notice much potential difference in practical accuracy between either bullet weight, and decide that other factors may influence your choice of ammunition.

MARTIN FISHER · Sep 18, 2004

165 GD for my G23.

lastevolution · Sep 18, 2004

165 gr generally does better.

Sgt_Steiner · Sep 18, 2004

165 grain tends to be the most acccurate with the best ballistics. Speer Gold Dot is #1 on the FBI list if I remember right. I have not noticed an appreciable difference in recoil between the two. 180gr are often downloaded by the manufacturer because there is more bullet setback so the bullet takes up more room increasing the likelihood of a KB. So they download the round.

cole · Sep 19, 2004

Originally posted by failsafe
In my opinion,the 40 cal shoots best in 165 gr...What ever you choose, practice with the same as you intend to use for carry.....

Ditto. Our HKUSP40c and former Glocks (G23 and two G27s) were more accurate with 165gr.

As for CCW ammo being the same weight as range ammo, for defensive shooting, IMHO it's more mastering a solid grip with a controlled trigger pull, than the slight recoil and accuracy differces between 165 and 180. In a stress situation, if you don't just "spray-and-pray" your practice has been worth it's salt. Besides, in my experience, most (if not all?) .40 range ammo I've shot is loaded lighter than the same weight defensive round.

Sgt_Steiner · Sep 19, 2004

Yep. I would say thats true for 9mm and .45 as well. Thats why I shoot JHP every now and then at the range.

Originally posted by cole
Besides, in my experience, most (if not all?) .40 range ammo I've shot is loaded lighter than the same weight defensive round.

cognitivefun · Sep 20, 2004

what about 135gr? I wonder how these work?

Sgt_Steiner · Sep 20, 2004

The general consensus, to which I subscribe, is that smaller faster movng bullets are not as effective as medium sized bullets. Not everyone believes that of course. Some Law Enforcement agencies use 115 gr +P+ 9mm for example. The bigger the bullet the bigger the wound channel, the faster bullets tend to leave smaller wound channels or big temporary channels. Of course there all sorts of different opinions and theories about this sort of thing so the 165 gr as a good proven middle ground seems to be the safest bet.

atmarcella · Sep 22, 2004

I USE COR-BON 135GR, MARSHALL AND SANOW SAID THEY'RE THE BEST ON THE STREETS, ANY COMMENT?

V Creed · Sep 22, 2004

The 180gr shoots considerably higher than the 155gr. Decide what weight you want, adjust your sights accordingly, then stick with that weight.

I usually carry Remington Express 155gr JHP's (inexpensive, well proven, Border Patrol load), but just got some 180gr Rem Express 180's by mistake. 155gr = 1140fps in G22. 180gr = 1060fps in G22. When you figure it out, the muzzle energies are almost identical = +/- 455 ft-lbs energy. My sights are adjusted right on for 155gr, but the pistol shoots about 4" high with 180's at 15Y.

docglock · Sep 24, 2004

The followed is borrowed from one of the experts at www.tacticalforums.com: Bottomline - It's probably a toss-up between the 165 and 185 grain bullets. The load tested here was Ranger RAT and RATA. I personally use the 180 gr Ranger T in my G22 and G23:

.40 S&W Rem 165 gr JHP GS4SWWA, lot #N28PA0016, S&W 4006, gel calib = 9.5 cm @ 589 f/s

Bare Gelatin: vel=1086 f/s, pen=12.9", RD=0.65", RL=0.35", RW=165 gr
4 layers of Denim: vel=1080 f/s, pen=18.4", RD=0.49, RL=0.48, RW=163.2

.40 S&W Win 165 gr JHP RA40TA (lot# 29TD22), S&W 4006, gel calib=9.0 cm @ 571 f/s

Bare Gelatin: vel=1173, pen=13.3, RD=0.64, RL=0.37, RW=149.3
4 layers of Denim: vel=1166, pen=13.5, RD=0.66, RL=039, RW=163.9

.40 S&W Win 180 gr JHP RA40T (lot# 15RG70), S&W 4006, gel calib= 9.5 cm @ 589 f/s

Bare Gelatin: vel=913, pen=12.6, RD=0.71, RL=0.40, RW=180.8
4 layers of Denim: vel=910, pen=14.2, RD=0.65, RL=0.45, RW=180.3

Personally, I choose the Win 180 gr RA40T when carrying a .40 S&W. You should choose an effective load, which in your pistol is reliable, accurate, has minimal flash, and is reasonable enough in cost to purchase 1000 rounds or so (500 to assess function and reliability, with 500 stored for future needs).

These .40 S&W loads have all demonstrated outstanding performance in our testing:

Win 165 gr JHP (RA401P)
Win 165 gr JHP (RA40TA)
Fed 165 gr JHP (LE40T3)
Fed 180 gr JHP (LE40T1)
Rem 180 gr JHP (GS40SWB)
Speer 180 gr JHP (53966)
Win 180 gr JHP (RA40T)

Glock 23 , 165 or 180 fr. bullets ?

sgtb

failsafe

RMTactical

glockendoc

Timjo1955

RMTactical

Sektor

Bravo2

fastbolt

MARTIN FISHER

lastevolution

Sgt_Steiner

cole

Sgt_Steiner

cognitivefun

Sgt_Steiner

atmarcella

V Creed

docglock

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities