Speer Gold Dot G2 - What Happened ?

Well, it's still being offered in the LE line in 9 (147gr), .40 (180gr) and .45 (230gr +P).

I've only heard of one agency I knew who decided to adopt it, but then ammo selection isn't something brought up and discussed among LE instructors nearly as much as it is among gun enthusiasts.

I only learned of more local agencies deciding to change to HST after cost & availability issues came up in a conversation one day (at a LE range), and it was casually mentioned that the really low cost of the HST made it less expensive than any of the other premium lines being offered by Remington, Winchester or Speer, so a lot of smaller agencies had started ordering it to save money. It apparently helped that a major West Coast distributor had a warehouse full of it ready and available for immediate delivery, too.

Pricing and timely availability are often prime considerations when it comes to duty ammo, especially since all of the big name American ammo makers are providing duty ammo that tests similarly nowadays.

 

Good luck finding anything of merit. Lots of folks know that the G2 has had problems, Speer is very tight lipped about addressing the problem.
The 124 +P Gold Dot has been a hallmark for a reason. It seemed to need the little extra the +P gave the round to work best across the board. 147 grain is a new commodity to me. Until 2 years ago I didn't know this weight was even offered in 9MM. Now I'm not a 9 guy, but have a couple of them around. On the rare occasion I load out 9MM. Golden Saber 124+P or standard pressure HST get the nod. HST because of the testing I've seen and officers I know. GS because I've seen enough holes that it made, I'm convinced.
Hard to say, but good luck on the quest.

 

I’m also a fan of Golden Saber and regularly carry the 124-gr+P load in my Glock 19.

Was unaware of the G2 issues so this thread has been interesting to me.

 

The Speer 147gr G2 has a velocity of 950 fps not much faster than a 230gr .45 but not with the same size and weight of a .45. The girls at Speer just don't know when to quit.


This sums it up very well.

https://handgunplanet.com/review/speer-gold-dot-g2-ballistic-test/

 

I bought a couple boxes of this junk. Will be using it up as range ammo.

 

The G2 that the FBI most recently adopted and now seems to have moved on from is the G2 that comes in the white box marked Law Enforcement Only. The G2s packaged in the blue & gold boxes are old stuff and reportedly had some performance issues. I’ve got my carry guns loaded up with the current G2 right now. It is an accurate round, and no one has reported any issues with it. I haven’t seen any gel testing and know of no real world track record that has been established. It allegedly performs well going through all sorts of mediums, including auto bodies and windshields. If I had my choice, I’d prefer the Gold Dot 124 +P or the 9BPLE, (as I don’t see many opportunities to be shooting into cars in my future and never cared for any 147s in a 9mm); but I use what is provided to me at present. I don’t know what the white boxed stuff chrono’s at, but the 950 thing sounds about right. I have some coworkers swearing that the white box ammo is actually +P cause they think the felt recoil seems heavier, but I don’t think so. Nevertheless, the official line I’ve heard is that the white box G2 performs as designed from pistol length barrels, including shorties, and I have no information or evidence contrary to that claim.

 

I'll try to remember to keep an ear to the ground to hear of anything from the large SO who recently started transitioning to it, when they decided to transition from their longtime SIG .357's to new SIG 9's. One of their guys who came to one of our schools told me they'd selected the G2 as their new duty round.

 

WOW talk about a drop! Going from the most powerful service caliber to the weakest round that can be fired out of a 9mm handgun. Curious what their priorities are.

 

I have been on the Speer bandwagon for longer than I care to admit, so take this as you wish.
One of many articles and web gel tests that I've seen. Some claim less than adequate penetration, some don't.
https://handgunplanet.com/review/speer-gold-dot-g2-ballistic-test/
All claim the round shoots, is reliably coming out of the barrel, and hits where aimed with good groups. I believe a lot of folks think this means "good", and it's a start. Hopefully it's the only thing we as civilians will ever have to gauge it on, so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
One of the better reviewers.

Another respectable reviewer

 

Relatively speaking the 147gr 9mm sits at the bottom of the service caliber heavy loads.

147gr 357 Sig 490 ft/lbs of energy

230gr .45 ACP 415 ft/lbs of energy

180gr .40 S&W 400 ft/lbs of energy

147gr 9mm 325 ft/lbs of energy


125gr 357 Sig 506 ft/lbs of energy


This is why I referred to the change as a large drop and was curious as to the reasoning.

 

We didn't talk about it in-depth, but they apparently wanted to go to a caliber that was easier on their staff, training, etc. They've been using the Classic SIG's in .357 for something like 12-15 years. I was told they've not been dissatisfied with it (they've used it in shooting incidents), but now that the guns were getting old they wanted to look around and re-evaluate the current state-of-the-art regarding replacement guns, caliber and ammo. They reportedly carefully considered current training needs, ammo costs and general support/maintenance issues, etc. They decided to stay with the Classic SIG's, but adopt 9mm.

Personally, I'd have gone with something other than the G2, but that's me. Perhaps that will change with the new state contract offering both HST and GDHP (although the GDHP is a significantly more costly, even at contract pricing).

Don't be too sad about them going from the "most powerful service caliber to the weakest", because when you talk with lots of LE instructors and armorers the .357 has a lot more enthusiasts and followers outside LE than inside it.

Something I found interesting, when talking to the guy about their present transitioning from .357 to 9, was that when they were talking to other people (agencies and industry sources) about service calibers, they were reportedly told that at least one of the fed agencies who has long used .357 was apparently planning to transition to 9 as soon as their existing massive stockpiles of .357 ammo was exhausted.

You can only maintain and rebuild guns for so long, too. I remember talking to a FBI agent about when the agent's SIG 9 had had to be replaced with a Glock .40. The agent had really liked that SIG 9, and done a lot of shooting with it over the years, but one day the armory said the SIG had just become too worn and could no longer be kept within spec with parts replacement. According to the SIG armorer instructor in my earlier armorer class (Classic line), the current .357's were expected to have the same service life as the .40's, with periodic inspections and maintenance, but we were told some parts of the .357 guns would be expected to show signs of wear (stress, deformation, etc) sooner than in the .40 guns.

The continued diminishing use of the .357 in LE isn't exactly unexpected, nor is it the end of the world.

 

Shame... the original Gold Dot was fantastic.

 

The "original" GDHP bullet has benefited from revisions, too, giving us the present versions.

 

Fastbolt’s intel on a department switching from 357 SIG to 9mm (G2) was similar to a department I worked with for a good 15 years. They had carried P226s in that chambering for probably 16+ years and I normally didn’t hear any complaints. Their firearms instructors all had high round counts through their pistols. I never found the 357 SIG a handful, but there were a lot of weak shooters I encountered who did. That department switched to Glocks and initially said they were going with the G2, but ended up issuing out Ranger 147 bonded. One of their cops I talked with said that they’d seen over penetration from the 357 SIG Gold Dots. Then again, most of their clientele seeking LE deadly force responses were tweekers. I don’t know the over penetration story to be a fact, but suspect the real reason was because the 357 SIG is too stout for poor shooters to master and maintain proficiency when training time, range time, and money are factors. While bad shooters can fail to qualify with a Glock 17 or M&P 9 duty pistol, It takes a bit less effort to at least keep them at minimum standards. Furthermore, the P226 is a solidly built pistol, but in 357 SIG, but a Glock is just easier to maintain, easier and less expensive to maintain, and cheaper to field.

 

Not a problem for me if you want to raise that question.

Assigning value to the idea of the calculated ME "energy in foot pounds" is something best left to the advertising folks, or the gun store counters.

Sure, there's occasionally been someone willing to speculate upon a "if this, then that" relationship between calculated ME and "effectiveness" observed outside the lab.

On the other hand, it doesn't take much "speculation" to consider the size and characteristics of a GSW and the observable wounding effect/trauma after a bullet cuts, tears, crushes and smashes critical bony structures, tissues and organs. Such wounding effect can be observed and quantified by surgeons, even if they may not be able to tell you what sort of bullet may have been involved.

Once you get up into higher velocities (often described as meaning 2000-3000+fps, but sometimes down as low as 1400fps), some additional potential effects have been theorized based upon observable effect of the victim, when wounded (or animals).

After my fair share of years being trained and exposed to info from all manner of other agencies, industry folks and professionals in the medical field, as a firearms instructor I've long since set aside interest in ME, per se.