Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Glocking' started by mikeashurst, Dec 7, 2019.
+1 on that.
On second thought, I better make sure that the Federal 147 grain HST ammo is equally accurate in my Sig P226, Beretta 92FS and Glock 26 before making the switch. I like to rotate my 9mm's.
I rotate my .45's also. I especially like my Glock 41! I use Speer Gold Dot 230 grain in .45. Hands down most accurate round for me and my gun combinations!
I agree. I would say that my shots were at least 50% tighter on target using the 147 grain HST.
The 7 yard thing was a figure developed by the FBI. (Back in the 90s, IIRC).
It was the distance that over 90 percent of law enforcement shootouts took place at. It had nothing to do with legality.
Good to know info. Just remember that after a fatal SD shooting you'll be required to prove jeopardy, ability, and opportunity. That's something that a person who carries a gun needs to think long and hard about before carrying.
And I hope you never have to use it, but if you do you want all the EDGE you can get, I like the 147 gr too.
And that's why I carry 9BPLE. Federal 115 grain +P+.
Great "street cred" with LE.
Good choice in the 90s but modern 147gr performs markedly better, especially against barriers.
As a CCW citizen, do you really envision a situation where you will need to defeat barriers?
I think he's talking about heavy denim type clothing.
With many departments using many top of the line SD ammo, some for years, there is plenty available info on their performance. Heavy for calibers have always been good, consistent performers, the 147HST is one of them.
That in itself is why it is important to live in a place where local prosecutors are more likely to be on your side in a self defense shooting. I know that circumstances for many preclude that.
While there may be “better”, I haven’t seen much better bang for buck. 9BPLE is still a very relevant round, solidly in the acceptable category.
9BPLE, in law enforcement testing, has a tendency to fragment and break apart at relatively shallow depths, leading to inadequate penetration. Saving a few bucks per box doesn't outweigh the disadvantages of inadequate penetration, even through 4 layers of denim tests. It typically gets 11" or less, much like the old Winchester Silvertip used on that tragic day in 1986.
9BPLE was well regarded back when we knew very little of wound ballistics science, back when "fragmentation is king" and higher velocity was considered to always be a good thing even when it hinders penetration. Shallow, large wound cavities were considered optimal, and we didn't know that you need a projectile able to penetrate at least 12" to be able to hit a vital organ at any angle.
The 147 grain loads (such as Winchester Bonded RA9B and Speer Gold Dot) perform much better through all batteries of FBI-spec testing, and this performance has been correlated in ballistic gel tests. Likewise, Hornady Critical Duty 135gr +P is extremely consistent through all barriers, even auto glass.
I do think barriers are important to consider when looking at carry for self defense. When I look around, I see lots of barriers that may have to be shot through in a legitimate self defense shooting, particularly wood and sheet metal. Also, it has been proven that loads which perform well against auto glass also perform well when encountering bone.
The amount of energy pistol rounds produce, even the really hot ones, isn't nearly enough with their projectile construction to cause the type of ripping and tearing seen in rifle rounds. Energy does not directly correlate with effectiveness. It only measures a round's ability to do work and does not tell what a projectile does in tissue.
While the 115gr +P+ loads may not have done as well in the FBI conceived gel/barrier testing regarding "minimum" average penetration, they did, however, manage to earn a respectable track record in actual shooting situations. You might either Search for posts by isp2605, or PM him and discuss the matter with him directly. His agency helped W-W & Fed create and refine the 115gr +P+ JHP loads, which served his large agency well for a long time, and that includes against some normal barriers sometimes encountered in LE work.
Now, I tend to like to see at least 10-11" penetration in the FBI Heavy Clothing and IWBA's 4LD testing for lighter weight bullets, and stopped being dogmatic about a 12" minimum, myself (even though major ammo contract and agency testing often uses it as a benchmark).
The older 115gr +P+ and .357 125gr seemed to produce "satisfactory" results in actual OIS situations, more often than not. The hot-rodded .38SPL Treasury Load, the 110gr +P+, seems to have produced some satisfied users, even though the .357 version of the 110gr JHP didn't seem to do quite as well, at least anecdotally (even though the 70's LEAA Computor Man simulation predicted good results).
The CHP here in CA used the 110gr +P+ load as an issued round for some time, as not all CHP Field Offices inventoried the 125gr JHP Magnum load, nor did all traffic officers wish to qualify to carry the Magnum load. (S&W even made a K-frame .38SPL model for the CHP.) A longtime friend of mine was a CHP officer for the years covering both the revolver and the semiauto pistol eras, and served as a weapons (training) officer in different field offices where he served.
He preferred the Magnum, but he ended up having to carry the +P+ if the commander of the field office where he worked wouldn't approve and stock .357MAG for duty/qual ammo. (As maybe an interesting bit of trivia, he said that in one of the field offices where he worked, they stocked and approved 10mm for off-duty carry, and stocked W-W 175gr STHP for quals and required that load be carried for off-duty by the officers who owned 10mm off-duty weapons. That was in the days of the S&W 3rd gen 1006/66 pistols being popular.)
Let me see: Choice between gel tests and actual results from OIS that show the round works. Guess which one I'll go with. Remember, gel tests are only a test medium that can be standardized to show how a round works in a specific medium. Useful information but not the be all-end all source of information. Too many factors at play.
Here is one guys gel tests with 9BPLE. Obviously, one test does not make or break a round, but it did very well.
Speer's factory comparison (I checked the 115gr +P+ and the 147gr GDHP loads, but others can be selected, of course).
Winchester still lists their RA9115HP+ 115gr +P+ in their 2019 LE catalog under the Ranger line, but it's not listed in the gel testing (even though the .380 and .38SPL is listed). Probably because it's kinda fallen off the scope for major LE sales.
Now, even if a particular gun maker approves the use of the +P+ load in their models, a steady diet of it may still likely accelerate normal wear & tear of some components.
“Note that the Federal 115 gr 9BP and 9BPLE were very inconsistent in testing, with insufficient penetration in bare gelatin, bullet fragmentation leading to poor expanded diameter, and a high failure to expand in denim testing.
9mm Fed +P+ 115 gr JHP 9BPLE fired from S&W 5906 (lot # 24C-0684) 5 shot ave:
BG: vel = 1342 fps, pen depth = 11.7", RD = 0.47", RL = 0.21", RW = 67.2 gr
9 mm Federal 115 gr JHP 9BP, Glock 17, gel calib= 9.0 cm @ 596 f/s
Bare Gelatin--vel=1136, pen=9.4, RD=0.62, RL=0.28, RW=109.1
Things got strange with the Denim testing of the 9BP. In every 5 round test, there was at least one bullet which plugged up and failed to expand. The bullets which failed to expand had pen=20+ inches, RD=0.35”, RL=0.52”, RW=115.3.
Glock 17, gel calib= 9.5 cm @ 605 f/s.
Results below do NOT include the bullets which failed to expand!
4 layers of Denim--vel=1139, pen=12.8, RD=0.53, RL=0.41, RW=114.5
Sig P226, gel calib= 9.5 cm @ 605 f/s.
Results below do NOT include the bullets which failed to expand!
4 layers of Denim--vel=1111, pen=11.1, RD=0.55, RL=0.38, RW=114.7
The Federal 115 gr 9BP and 9BPLEhas insufficient penetration in bare gelatin, has 20 to 40% failure to expand in denim testing, and is less than ideal against intermediate barriers like auto windshields. I personally would not choose to use it given all the better options currently available.
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.”
Yep...accuracy is everything...I think it was Col Cooper who once opined " Only accurate rifles are interesting"