Recent Topics
Fram SureGrip coating
by mobilaltima
06/21/18 08:24 PM
Manual transmissioned electric car
by mjoekingz28
06/21/18 06:45 PM
1991 Toyota Previa New JDM engine Redline
by Kurtatron
06/21/18 06:26 PM
8 yr old channeling John Bonham
by Toy4x4
06/21/18 06:02 PM
Traveller nlgi 2
by Spitter
06/21/18 05:33 PM
Upgrading the Kohler 7000 series air cleaner
by Patrick0525
06/21/18 05:08 PM
Any nano reefers here?
by RichardS
06/21/18 05:04 PM
ARC remanufactured Power Steering Pump
by Pajero
06/21/18 04:58 PM
John Deere "Easy Change" System gimmick
by SnowmanCO
06/21/18 04:55 PM
Oz Planstic Bag Bans - not so green.
by Shannow
06/21/18 04:31 PM
help me choose...
by chaindrive
06/21/18 04:07 PM
France F1 Grand Prix
by DeepFriar
06/21/18 03:16 PM
Valvoline High Mileage with maxlife tech semi-syn
by bradtech
06/21/18 03:16 PM
Best additive in oil to clean sludge?
by ffgb
06/21/18 02:19 PM
Who is a Dirt Track regular?
by thooks
06/21/18 01:39 PM
eco plug oil plug video is restricted
by edwardh1
06/21/18 01:27 PM
Political comments
by ridgerunner
06/21/18 01:23 PM
My Ford orange turned pink
by BeerCan
06/21/18 12:45 PM
Any plants/garden experts?
by maverickfhs
06/21/18 12:43 PM
Internet Sales Tax O.K.ed by Supreme Court
by doitmyself
06/21/18 12:23 PM
Newest Members
wil892, Spddm0n, ronw1309, Suth31, yamahaboy125
65286 Registered Users
Who's Online
98 registered (2015_PSD, andyd, AP9, 2strokeNorthstar, 2004tdigls, atikovi, 13 invisible), 1506 Guests and 42 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
65286 Members
67 Forums
285731 Topics
4768697 Posts

Max Online: 3590 @ 01/24/17 08:07 PM
Donate to BITOG
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#4690534 - 03/10/18 01:15 PM "Micro" rounds that are heavier?
JHZR2 Offline



Registered: 12/14/02
Posts: 41784
Loc: New Jersey
I saw the "micro" .38 spl rounds that are actually flat (bullet doesn't extend past the case) to minimize headspace in there and optimize powder burn. Unfortunately Cabela's was out, but I'm interested in trying them.

I was checking out the other defensive options, and noted the 150gr "micro" 9mm. Optimized for short barrels.

Then I saw this:



Seemed to not be that great from a Shield.

Lucky Gunner did better in an M&P9c



Only one of those seems to have a big channel. The rest may have expanded and stopped, but not necessarily did the same type of damage. Not sure if a gel block has some effect on that after the first firing.

It just seems to me to be counter intuitive to go heavier in a short barrel when the length of burn is minimized. Is the heavier bullet used for more length, so a trick like the micro .38 is applied in a bullet where length is necessary for feeding?

Seems to me that a 124gr would be minimum, with a 115 or even +P variants being better.

I know some on here have mentioned how modern ammo like HST and gold dots are so good that differences aren't really there. But I'd assume that's really for service size pistols (Interestingly, another test I saw showed that the 150gr micro bullets worked well in a full size).

So really, the interest to me is if anyone is aware of the real logic going heavy in a 9mm bullet optimized for micro bullets. I get 1/2 mv^2 and the fact that speed is essential for bullets to open up. So mass is not the major player here. Id have thought that a 115ish long, deep seated +p design would be best.

Top
#4690544 - 03/10/18 01:29 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
hatt Offline


Registered: 01/03/12
Posts: 4294
Loc: Florida
Heavier bullets lose less velocity as a percentage in shorter barrels vs lighter bullets. Heavier bullets also penetrate more to make sure you meet that spec. I'd run the same thing in my Shield that run in larger guns.
_________________________
2013 F150 5.0, PUP 10W-30, Wix 57502
2010 Camry 2.5, GTX 5W-20, Fram Ultra XG9972

Top
#4690562 - 03/10/18 01:46 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
ZeeOSix Offline


Registered: 07/22/10
Posts: 17775
Loc: PNW
I go for 124 gr for the higher velocity, which makes it shoot a bit flatter and gives better expansion.

Top
#4690571 - 03/10/18 01:53 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
WyrTwister Offline


Registered: 01/13/13
Posts: 1523
Loc: Texas
I have loaded ~ 150 grain SWC's in 9 x 19mm ( originally cast for .38 Special / .357 Mag ) .
_________________________
Wyr
God bless

Top
#4690574 - 03/10/18 01:56 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
ZeeOSix Offline


Registered: 07/22/10
Posts: 17775
Loc: PNW
Another review of the Micro HST.


Top
#4690597 - 03/10/18 02:30 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
Linctex Offline


Registered: 12/31/16
Posts: 6148
Loc: Waco, TX
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
I was checking out the other defensive options, and noted the 150gr "micro" 9mm. Optimized for short barrels.


Interesting!!

I'm always looking for the "ultimate short-barrel 9mm round"
_________________________
"The evidence demands a verdict".
(Re:VOA)"it's nearly impossible to actually know the particular additives that are in there at what concentrations."

Top
#4690636 - 03/10/18 03:09 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: hatt]
JHZR2 Offline



Registered: 12/14/02
Posts: 41784
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: hatt
Heavier bullets lose less velocity as a percentage in shorter barrels vs lighter bullets. Heavier bullets also penetrate more to make sure you meet that spec. I'd run the same thing in my Shield that run in larger guns.


Understand both. But in the above video, they over penetrated from a shield, due to no expansion. So they didn't accelerate enough for loss to be an issue.

In here they didn't penetrate as far as the 147 and 147 +P, and all three of those rounds were claimed to be inconsistent from a Glock 43:

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Another review of the Micro HST.



The shield is 3.1", glock 43 3.4" and m&p 9c is 3.5" iirc. That's off the top of my head and potentially incorrect. But could it be that these "micro" rounds are optimized really for 3.5" pistols, not shorter variants? It just seems to me the performance isn't compelling. I'd think that a lighter bullet would accelerate more with less powder burn, and since engagement distance (arguably) isn't really a meaningful parameter for self defense with a micro pistol, speed would be optimized to ensure energy and ability to open.




Top
#4690647 - 03/10/18 03:30 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: Linctex]
KJSmith Offline


Registered: 08/31/15
Posts: 249
Loc: TX
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
I was checking out the other defensive options, and noted the 150gr "micro" 9mm. Optimized for short barrels.


Interesting!!

I'm always looking for the "ultimate short-barrel 9mm round"


http://shopwilsoncombat.com/9mm-95-gr-Ba...o/A9-95-TACXP/#

Top
#4690659 - 03/10/18 03:51 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: KJSmith]
JHZR2 Offline



Registered: 12/14/02
Posts: 41784
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: KJSmith
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
I was checking out the other defensive options, and noted the 150gr "micro" 9mm. Optimized for short barrels.


Interesting!!

I'm always looking for the "ultimate short-barrel 9mm round"


http://shopwilsoncombat.com/9mm-95-gr-Ba...o/A9-95-TACXP/#


The lucky gunner tests don't have this but do have 115gr, which does excellent from their M&P9c.

Top
#4690698 - 03/10/18 04:52 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
ZeeOSix Offline


Registered: 07/22/10
Posts: 17775
Loc: PNW
This is why I just go for either the 9mm HST 124 gr or Gold Dot 124 gr in standard load.


Top
#4690749 - 03/10/18 05:47 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
hatt Offline


Registered: 01/03/12
Posts: 4294
Loc: Florida
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: hatt
Heavier bullets lose less velocity as a percentage in shorter barrels vs lighter bullets. Heavier bullets also penetrate more to make sure you meet that spec. I'd run the same thing in my Shield that run in larger guns.


Understand both. But in the above video, they over penetrated from a shield, due to no expansion. So they didn't accelerate enough for loss to be an issue.

In here they didn't penetrate as far as the 147 and 147 +P, and all three of those rounds were claimed to be inconsistent from a Glock 43:

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Another review of the Micro HST.



The shield is 3.1", glock 43 3.4" and m&p 9c is 3.5" iirc. That's off the top of my head and potentially incorrect. But could it be that these "micro" rounds are optimized really for 3.5" pistols, not shorter variants? It just seems to me the performance isn't compelling. I'd think that a lighter bullet would accelerate more with less powder burn, and since engagement distance (arguably) isn't really a meaningful parameter for self defense with a micro pistol, speed would be optimized to ensure energy and ability to open.



Looks like a poorly designed round. Another reason I don't do the bleeding edge latest and greatest.
_________________________
2013 F150 5.0, PUP 10W-30, Wix 57502
2010 Camry 2.5, GTX 5W-20, Fram Ultra XG9972

Top
#4690820 - 03/10/18 07:25 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: hatt]
JHZR2 Offline



Registered: 12/14/02
Posts: 41784
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: hatt
Heavier bullets lose less velocity as a percentage in shorter barrels vs lighter bullets. Heavier bullets also penetrate more to make sure you meet that spec. I'd run the same thing in my Shield that run in larger guns.


Understand both. But in the above video, they over penetrated from a shield, due to no expansion. So they didn't accelerate enough for loss to be an issue.

In here they didn't penetrate as far as the 147 and 147 +P, and all three of those rounds were claimed to be inconsistent from a Glock 43:

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Another review of the Micro HST.



The shield is 3.1", glock 43 3.4" and m&p 9c is 3.5" iirc. That's off the top of my head and potentially incorrect. But could it be that these "micro" rounds are optimized really for 3.5" pistols, not shorter variants? It just seems to me the performance isn't compelling. I'd think that a lighter bullet would accelerate more with less powder burn, and since engagement distance (arguably) isn't really a meaningful parameter for self defense with a micro pistol, speed would be optimized to ensure energy and ability to open.



Looks like a poorly designed round. Another reason I don't do the bleeding edge latest and greatest.


I think you said you have a shield - what do you run? I was under the impression that some of the last-gen rounds were poorer performing. At least with respect to short barrel guns that can't make full design velocity.

Just generally curious. Primarily my interest is in service size pistols - I do live in NJ after all. I just happened upon this round looking for those "sunk" .38spl rounds. But may be useful to others. I found the mass to be curious so it's a matter of curiosity to me.



Top
#4690871 - 03/10/18 08:16 PM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
hatt Offline


Registered: 01/03/12
Posts: 4294
Loc: Florida
I'm using old Winchester 147 HPs that I had a supply of. I don't carry it much. When I get around to placing an ammo order I'm going to buy 124 +p Gold Dots.
_________________________
2013 F150 5.0, PUP 10W-30, Wix 57502
2010 Camry 2.5, GTX 5W-20, Fram Ultra XG9972

Top
#4691045 - 03/11/18 12:30 AM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
KneeGrinder Offline


Registered: 11/28/17
Posts: 221
Loc: North of you Idaho
[quote=JHZR2]I saw the "micro" .38 spl rounds that are actually flat (bullet doesn't extend past the case) to minimize headspace in there and optimize powder burn. Unfortunately Cabela's was out, but I'm interested in trying them.

Seems to me that a 124gr would be minimum, with a 115 or even +P variants being better.[quote]

==========================================

For 9mm, by far the lighter projectiles 124's are the preferred followed by 115's for velocity and foot pounds of energy. The heavier 147's are noticeably lower on foot pounds of energy due to the loss in velocity, but do penetrate a little deeper. 124's +p, Federal HST, Speer Gold Dot, Winchester Ranger.


As for the 38 Special, the projectiles you reference are called "Wad Cutters" and "Hollow Base Wad Cutters"

They are used for target shooting purpose only. The reason they are seated flush with the end of the case is to burn fast burning powder more efficiently. They are only used at lower velocities, and the hollow base has a very narrow range because the base is hollow and expands, if you put too much powder behind it the base will melt and lead your barrel in a few shots. Lead will splatter! The "Non" hollow base wad cutter will be a double ended bullet, you can load it either end facing out, thats why they call them double end wad cutters. I use them a lot! They punch perfect round holes.
_________________________
08 Tribeca 82k PUP 5w30 wix
06 Accord Hybrid 131k PUP 5w20 wix
02 Chevy k3500 97k Delvac 1 esp 5w40 wix
00 F350 133k Delvac 1300 15w40 wix

Top
#4691195 - 03/11/18 08:44 AM Re: "Micro" rounds that are heavier? [Re: JHZR2]
JHZR2 Offline



Registered: 12/14/02
Posts: 41784
Loc: New Jersey
Ive seen the deep-seated wadcutters. What I was looking at for .38spl was these:



JHPs in a deep seated configuration to optimize powder burn. I did not that there are other non defense variants of this configuration.

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >