I think we discussed this before. We carried the 155 HST's @ 1200 fps and they worked very well. Prior to that we had the 155's @ 1250 fps that were blamed for tearing up guns.Another resurrected zombie thread on this short-lived LE/Gov .40 load?
I remember when rumors of its potential development were first circulating many years ago. They were thinking about replacing the stout 155gr .40 load being used by some fed agencies - which was hard on weapons and shooters - with a lighter recoiling, lighter bullet weight load.
If I remember right, the bullet weight first being discussed was 125-135gr, but specifically with a lower velocity compared to the hot-rod 135gr commercial .40 loads of the time.
After testing they apparently finally settled on the 135gr bullet weight, and the specified velocity was set at 1200fps, with an allowable +/- of 50fps.
It wasn't very long before the "what was old is new again" demonstrated itself, and the real world practical successes brought attention back around to the original 180gr bullet weight for the .40 S&W.
While the 135-155gr .40 loads were the darlings of the shooting world for some years, the real "sweet spot" for LE, overall, seemed to be with the 165gr-180gr loads. I remember being told by one of the LE/Gov ammo reps, at the height of the .40's popularity, that their contract sales for state & local LE was about an even split between 165gr & 180gr orders.
Now, going on 15 years later, while the 9mm has been enjoying a resurgence of attention in LE circles (especially among trainers of large groups of cops), the 180gr bullet weight in .40 is still arguably the "big dog" when you hear cops talking about duty ammunition. It's been "working" since it was first released for duty back in '90.
I've carried issued .40 loads in both 165gr and 180gr, myself, with more 180gr loads being issued. I do have one compact .40, though, that has exhibited a particular "liking" to the venerable W-W 155gr STHP, so I try to keep a couple of boxes on hand for that gun (4040PD). I still have some remaining 165gr loads from earlier days, but the bulk of my own .40 is comprised of good quality 180gr loads from various major American makers.
I never got around to trying (for carry) any of the short-lived reduced velocity 135gr fed load, myself ... and when I tried an early hot commercial 135gr load on the range I noticed cratered primers in the recovered cases I inspected, and decided to stick with less wild loads.
I remember. Your branch/field office never got around to receiving the short-lived, milder 135gr JHP's, if I recall.I think we discussed this before. We carried the 155 HST's @ 1200 fps and they worked very well. Prior to that we had the 155's @ 1250 fps that were blamed for tearing up guns.
Most of the frames on the Beretta's broke before we had extractor issues. The problem with the recoils springs was two fold, they used the same spring for the 9mm and the national firearms unit stored them all with the slides locked back.I remember. Your branch/field office never got around to receiving the short-lived, milder 135gr JHP's, if I recall.
One of our guys, who had a connection to ICE for some task force, brought some of the Rem 155gr duty loads he'd been given by his connection to our range. He wanted to use it for his scheduled qual with a G27 he used as an off-duty weapon, instead of the issued 180gr JHP's. Since it was a personally-owned off-duty weapon, and the ammo was made for LE use, that was within policy and not a problem.
Afterward he said he'd never fired anything that rocked his G27 that hard, or had that much of a muzzle blast, and said he was going to go back to using the available 180gr duty ammo. No biggie.
Many years ago I was talking with a friend of mine (in the firearms industry), who had recently acted as a proctor for some fed testing of the original 155's in some Beretta's. He told me that the trigger springs and the extractors just didn't like that hot load's recoil force. The trigger spring was an easy fix (Wolff spring), but he never told me what had eventually been decided about the potential for the increased wear on the extractors. (Using a milder load was apparently a decision made down the road.) Sound familiar? Sometimes what may happen in proctored testing may not be the same thing seen when the rubber eventually meets the road later on in actual service use.
I’m pretty sure that old hot 155 grain Remington messed up the slide lock on my G27. The slide started detaching every time I dry fired it. I couldn’t figure it out at the time. I took it to an Armorer. He couldn’t figure it out either, but replaced the slide lock and that did the trick. That stuff was wicked in that little gun.I think we discussed this before. We carried the 155 HST's @ 1200 fps and they worked very well. Prior to that we had the 155's @ 1250 fps that were blamed for tearing up guns.
I think that term is over used. I don't care what you call it, lite fast bullets destroy a lot of tissue, provided there is enough penetration. Again, match the bullet to the task.FWIW, there is no such thing as an energy dump in soft tissue, laws of thermodynamics apply for wounding incapacitation.