"Micro" rounds that are heavier?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: KJSmith
http://handgunplanet.com/review/ammo-review-wilson-comba


Seems to me that a lighter bullet like that would accelerate better in a short barrel gun to get the best performance. But I think the linked test used full size guns, FWIW. Lucky Gunner seemed tohave good results with 115gr copper type bullets from the M&P9c, which is a shorter barrel.

Noted in your link the mention of 147 still being the best. But Im still somewhat confused why not 124 especially for smaller...

Or the 95/115 rounds...

Still not fully understanding why Federal went to 150 for their Micro line of 9mm, which was the original premise. Id expect something like you linked to, to perform the best especially in short barrels!
 
I have never heard of, or seen those before, learn something new everyday!

I was referring to these pictured below, they are 38spl low velocity target practice rounds.


 
Originally Posted By: KneeGrinder
I have never heard of, or seen those before, learn something new everyday!

I was referring to these pictured below, they are 38spl low velocity target practice rounds.





Old school , but they work fine in a .38 Special for poking holes in paper . Probably work OK for poking holes in bad guys . The flat nose woyld produce good terminal effects , but penetration would be limited .
 
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: KneeGrinder
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.


Modern 147 Federal HST is hugely popular. Its one of the best performers on the market. Followed by 124+ p from many manufacturers. 115 grain JHP is almost universally shunned by any ballistics expert as it usually offers minimal penetration.


I had to change computers to access some of my links,

I have a lot of respect for the 147 grain projectile, they are very accurate, they have less felt recoil, and as I said, they penetrate deeper. For law enforcement, penetration is more important often to impact central nervous system. The Miami Dade FBI incident is the real demise of the 115 grain projectile, as they were most likely using standard "non" +P Federal ammunition, I belive that was their standard issue back then. The Federal Premium Hi-Shok, 115gr +p+, 9BPLE, although not the premium HST has a Velocity: 1,300ft/s, Muzzle Energy 431 ft·lb

The 147, Federal 9mm +P HST 147 Velocity 1050, 360 ft/lb

I will give you a link, not to try and change your opinion, just to give you the same opportunity to read from a Forensic coroners report. If the Federal 9BPLE is that deadly of a cartridge, the 9mm with almost any hollow point is a deadly weapon with good shot placement. Have a good read, Cheers


http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/defe...standpoint.html
 
Originally Posted By: KneeGrinder
I will give you a link, not to try and change your opinion, just to give you the same opportunity to read from a Forensic coroners report. If the Federal 9BPLE is that deadly of a cartridge, the 9mm with almost any hollow point is a deadly weapon with good shot placement. Have a good read, Cheers
http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/defe...standpoint.html


I have spent hundreds, maybe thousands of hours studying ballistics, to include my own testing. Hundreds of gel blocks, dozens of pigs both live and dead, hundreds of different ammo's evaluated. Attended about three dozen autopsies, and spent a dozen or so hours in a level 1 trauma center operating room while the surgeon patched up some bullet receivers. My goal in life was to become a court certified ballistics expert and witness. A job change completely gutted that idea. Its safe to say I know a bit more about ballistics than your average oil forum poster. Or even gun forum poster.

I could write a 50 page dissertation on this topic. Paired down to a very basic paragraph, its hard to beat 147 HST. Or 124+P Gold Dot or HST. Generally speaking the 115 grain and lower stuff doesn't work as well in barriers such as auto glass. So I generally recommend the mid to heavy loads that work good in all scenarios.

Yes I am FULLY aware that Federal 115+p+ 9BPLE has a good street record. I interviewed two officers that have used it, and read dozens of more reports. This ammo acts differently then modern ammo. It breaks up and shatters into 15 pieces, each causing different wound tracks. The original load was loaded to greater than 1300 FPS. The latest loads are watered down to 1225 FPS (or so). This load created a hydro-static shock which is not really understood and well studied even to this day. Some experts think its a wounding mechanism. Others think it is bunk. Me personally, I lean towards it being the main reason why this round is so successful. The old, faster stuff was much better than the newer, slower stuff, although you could reasonably expect the new stuff to work if you needed it. I am a big fan of the load, and I keep one to two cases on hand at all times for SHTF purposes. Because its affordable, and it works.
 
Originally Posted By: bubbatime


I could write a 50 page dissertation on this topic. Paired down to a very basic paragraph, its hard to beat 147 HST. Or 124+P Gold Dot or HST. Generally speaking the 115 grain and lower stuff doesn't work as well in barriers such as auto glass. So I generally recommend the mid to heavy loads that work good in all scenarios.



Im sure you could - sounds like youve developed an impressive set of experiences.

But recall that my query really goes back heavy 130gr HST bullets in .38spl loads optimized for snub nose revolvers, then extended to the 150gr 9mm bullets also supposedly optimized for short barrels. Notionally the snub .38, or a 3" shield/43 9mm would be used as a CCW civilian, who per my understanding, in most places has somewhat of a duty to retreat if a situation arose where auto glass and other barriers come into play. So Im not sure how much the barrier argument comes into play.

Inside a home, notionally someone would be as likely to be using a snub nose revolver or G43 for a bump in the night; Id argue that a service size pistol would be used to fight to a shotgun or rifle, if not solely used. Obviously thats not speaking for all people and circumstances.

SO it fundamentally comes back to the use of a 150gr JHP in a .38spl at low velocity, or similarly, the concept of a 147gr JHP in a 3" 9mm. Do the results still come out in favor of the heavy bullet? Its not necessarily always the case it seems... looking at the 2" results for heavier bullets in the LG test for .38spl, or the original linked to test for the Federal 150gr bullet, its not clear that its always the case.

I guess gel and denim isnt everything; but its a good attempt to create an objective, repeatable test....

Thoughts?
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
I guess gel and denim isnt everything; but its a good attempt to create an objective, repeatable test.

A standardized gel test is the only way to compare performance between ammo under controlled conditions. Way too many variables otherwise. IMO, pick ammo that does very well in the gel test (expansion and penetration consistancy) and it's going to work as well as possible on a bad guy with good shot placement.
 
I would agree with everything you stated. I personally would not even use 115 grain +P+ in a 9mm on a hot day at the beach! The muzzle blast/flash is harsh! Add some winter clothes, and a jacket, NO 115's! I don't have much faith with any round in the 9mm shooting thru barriers, that's why I don't carry one. I did notice when I was looking for velocity data that many web sites listed velocity at 1180 fps I think, I was thinking they had that data mixed up with the standard 9BP, since the velocity of Speer Gold dot 124 +P is 1220 fps. I am a strong believer in hydrostatic shock, and that's why I advocate the 124 grain +P for the 9mm.

You obviously understand a lot more about ballistics than most any other Bitog viewer, I will have to give you a lot of respect for that. Not many people really understand anything other than a mushroomed projectile, "Boolit" let alone hydrostatic shock, and temporary wound channel, and my favorite that people misunderstand and confuse, energy in foot pounds, as knock down power!

As you can see by my pictures posted above, I have an alternate solution to this age old dilemma, a 165 grain at 1140 fps, 476 fpe, works better for my piece of mind. Cheers
 
Quote:
It just seems to me to be counter intuitive to go heavier in a short barrel when the length of burn is minimized.


I suspect a Faster burning powder is used?
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
SO it fundamentally comes back to the use of a 150gr JHP in a .38spl at low velocity, or similarly, the concept of a 147gr JHP in a 3" 9mm. Do the results still come out in favor of the heavy bullet? Its not necessarily always the case it seems... looking at the 2" results for heavier bullets in the LG test for .38spl, or the original linked to test for the Federal 150gr bullet, its not clear that its always the case.

I guess gel and denim isn't everything; but its a good attempt to create an objective, repeatable test....

Thoughts?


Lucky gunner is one set of data. Had they used any of the other commercially available gel blocks, the results on their website could look drastically different. Also, one snub nose revolver could offer 30-50 FPS slower velocities than an identical revolver, due to cylinder gap, or forcing cone erosion, etc. A conventionally rifled 3 inch barrel handgun might be 30 FPS slower than a polygonal rifled 3 inch barrel from another manufacturer. There are just WAY too many variables to get excited about one set of test, done by one ammo retailer, shooting one brand of compact 9MM pistol.

.38 special is an entirely different discussion than 9MM. I do mostly agree with the LG ammo test, so pick one on there that looks good and you should be good to go.

After analyzing data points for years, my honest advice? Pick a name brand modern ammo that gets good reviews. Verify that it functions in your gun. Try to buy it in bulk from online bulk dealers to save money.

You are NOT likely to get in a shootout this year. Or next. Or even in your lifetime. In which case, the ammo in your gun doesn't matter.

If you do get in a shootout, 95% of the time, the perp decides he has better things to do, and moves on. In which case, ammo doesn't matter.

The 1% of the time you are in a shootout with a religious fanatic, ISIS terrorist, that knows he is going to die, and take as many people as he can with him, and continues attacking you even after he himself is shot, then your shot placement is what will matter. Its not likely to make a hill of beans difference if your 9MM gun has 124 +P HST, or cheap Winchester White Box JHP. Honestly.

We way over think this stuff.

Federal HST 124 or 147 - good stuff
Speer Gold Dot 124 - good stuff
Winchester bonded - good stuff
Many others - good stuff

We often read what the "ballistics experts" have to say about certain loads. We should value their opinion, but not take it as gospel. I've seen many stuck in their ways, and not accept new data points. And like I said earlier, we way over think this stuff.

And yes I'll agree with your point earlier, that compact guns should not be used for home defense unless that's all you have. I like full size duty pistols, which get me to my rifle or shotgun.
 
Thank you.

Yes we way over think this stuff... heck I live in NJ - CCW is currently out of the question. So micro rounds in short guns don't make a bit of difference to me.

It's primarily academic to me, and very interesting all the same.

Thanks again!
 
I haven't shot those .38spl deep seated hollow points, but I did fire some of the 150gr micro rounds through a 9mm shield this weekend, along with some 124gr hst and some 115gr Barnes TAC-XPD +P 115 gr ammo.

All fired flawlessly through the shield, as well as duty size 9mm pistols.

In the shield, there was a notable reduction in recoil with the 150gr HST micro rounds, AND the Barnes 115 gr rounds, even though they are higher pressure. Not sure it's important enough to justify buying multiple rounds between different defensive pistols, as the 124 HST just doesn't recoil that badly in and of itself, but for some, it could be a major improvement to go with the other rounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top