Best 9mm Carry Round

[T. Defense]

I've been carrying the .45 and .40 for the last 6 years and haven't been following the 9mm ammo much. When I was carrying the 9mm the Corbon 115+P was the choice. Are there better choices out there today.

Thanks,
T. Defense

[sig228ns]

I prefer Winchester Ranger T 127gr +p+

[Nowhere Man]

Corbon DPX.

Dave

[Lugi]

Gold dot 124 gr.+p :thumbsup:

[Merkavaboy]

In reality, there really is no "best" load in 9mm, or any handgun caliber for that matter.

There are some of us who like the light/fast loads (I personally choose to use the Federal 115JHP+P+ 9BPLE load because if its excellent street record), others like the heavy/slower loads like the 147JHP's in various makes/bullet styles, and yet others split the difference and go with the mid-weight 124/127 JHP designs in +P and +P+ velocities.

My suggestion is to do some deep thinking and try and figure out what may be best for your specific needs under the specific circumstances in which you may have to deploy your defensive handgun. Do you need a load for up close bad breath distances, or do you expect that you'll have to worry about barrier penetrations. Do you live in an area where T-shirts and shorts are the norm, or do you live in an area where heavy clothing is more often encountered or maybe you live in an area where heavy clothing AND heavy winter or leather jackets are common? Will you be using your defensive firearm inside a residence in which overpenetration of apartment walls are a concern or maybe you live in a rural area where a bullet passing thru a outer wall, door or window is not a concern. Will you be carrying your pistol in public where the potential of overpenetration of a BG may put others at serious risk (like in a fairly populated urban town or city) or do you live in a rural area where you may encounter just a handful of people on your daily rounds in town?

Each type of bullet style/weight have their advantages and disadvantages. Such things need to be taken into all-around consideration when you choose what type of ammo is best for you.

[T. Defense]

Originally posted by Merkavaboy
In reality, there really is no "best" load in 9mm, or any handgun caliber for that matter.

There are some of us who like the light/fast loads (I personally choose to use the Federal 115JHP+P+ 9BPLE load because if its excellent street record), others like the heavy/slower loads like the 147JHP's in various makes/bullet styles, and yet others split the difference and go with the mid-weight 124/127 JHP designs in +P and +P+ velocities.

My suggestion is to do some deep thinking and try and figure out what may be best for your specific needs under the specific circumstances in which you may have to deploy your defensive handgun. Do you need a load for up close bad breath distances, or do you expect that you'll have to worry about barrier penetrations. Do you live in an area where T-shirts and shorts are the norm, or do you live in an area where heavy clothing is more often encountered or maybe you live in an area where heavy clothing AND heavy winter or leather jackets are common? Will you be using your defensive firearm inside a residence in which overpenetration of apartment walls are a concern or maybe you live in a rural area where a bullet passing thru a outer wall, door or window is not a concern. Will you be carrying your pistol in public where the potential of overpenetration of a BG may put others at serious risk (like in a fairly populated urban town or city) or do you live in a rural area where you may encounter just a handful of people on your daily rounds in town?

Each type of bullet style/weight have their advantages and disadvantages. Such things need to be taken into all-around consideration when you choose what type of ammo is best for you.

Excellent info and advice. We are in a rural setting and from what I've found out so far, for my application the Corbon 115+P or the Federal 115JHP+P+ 9BPLE would be my better choice. I just talked with a friend of mine who is a combat instructor in our area and Those two cartridges were his choice for where we live and what we would most likely encounter. Along with the Evan Marshall's findings and the famous Goat testing.

Thanks again,
T. Defense

[sneakyracer]

Most 9mm JHPs are pretty decent. I preffer 124gr +p's but the 115+p Corbon is still a very potent choice.

[Powder]

:)

[rsilvers]

Originally posted by T. Defense
Excellent info and advice. We are in a rural setting and from what I've found out so far, for my application the Corbon 115+P or the Federal 115JHP+P+ 9BPLE would be my better choice. I just talked with a friend of mine who is a combat instructor in our area and Those two cartridges were his choice for where we live and what we would most likely encounter. Along with the Evan Marshall's findings and the famous Goat testing.

Thanks again,
T. Defense

Um... Are you joking or do you believe the goat testing was real?

Corbon 115+P was interesting 10+ years ago. Now there is 124 Gold Dot, 127+P+, and all sorts of superior ammo. Many at lower prices.

[Photocop]

As a 10mm enthusiast I became hooked on Double Tap Ammo. Most non-10mm guys haven't even heard of Double Tap but it is one of the only companies that loads the almighty 10mm to its full potential of 750+ ft./lbs. of muzzle energy. Now that DT makes all different calibers of ammunition, I'd say its 9mm is pretty hard to beat. It out performs most if not all of the other manufacturers in terms of velocity and muzzle energy and uses Speer Gold Dot bullets for lead.
I like the 124 gr. +P variety.

DT stats:
124gr @ 1310fps / 473ft. lbs. from a G17
115gr @ 1415fps / 511ft. lbs. from a G17
147gr @ 1135fps / 421ft. lbs. from a G17

www.doubletapammo.com

[ColoradoPacker]

lots of good 9mm loads

http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000964

[Alaskapopo]

I like HST the best. Take your pick on rather you want the 147 grain or 124 grain version both do well.
2nd Best is the Winchester Ranger series in either +p+ 127 grain or the 147 grain version.
3rd. would be the Remington Golden Saber 124 grain +p or 147 grain version.
Pat

[Dandapani]

Originally posted by Alaskapopo
I like HST the best. Take your pick on rather you want the 147 grain or 124 grain version both do well.
2nd Best is the Winchester Ranger series in either +p+ 127 grain or the 147 grain version.
3rd. would be the Remington Golden Saber 124 grain +p or 147 grain version.
Pat

what he said! :wavey:

[J.P.]

I am very impressed with Double Tap's 147gr +p load.
I'd like to see what they could do with the 9mm Golden Saber......

[Rugby]

Originally posted by Photocop
As a 10mm enthusiast I became hooked on Double Tap Ammo. Most non-10mm guys haven't even heard of Double Tap but it is one of the only companies that loads the almighty 10mm to its full potential of 750+ ft./lbs. of muzzle energy. Now that DT makes all different calibers of ammunition, I'd say its 9mm is pretty hard to beat. It out performs most if not all of the other manufacturers in terms of velocity and muzzle energy and uses Speer Gold Dot bullets for lead.
I like the 124 gr. +P variety.

DT stats:
124gr @ 1310fps / 473ft. lbs. from a G17
115gr @ 1415fps / 511ft. lbs. from a G17
147gr @ 1135fps / 421ft. lbs. from a G17

www.doubletapammo.com

SSHHHHH! Don't be tellin' everyone!

[Rugby]

The 9mm bashers will never admit it, but there is some wicked nasty 9mm on the market that penetrate and expand every bit as well as the other calibers. There's a picture floating around of a 9mm HST that expanded to about .78":shocked:

I fell in love with the Ranger 127 +P+. That HST stuff has promise too. The DT stuff, at least on paper, seems like another outstanding load.

[T. Defense]

Originally posted by rsilvers
Um... Are you joking or do you believe the goat testing was real?

Corbon 115+P was interesting 10+ years ago. Now there is 124 Gold Dot, 127+P+, and all sorts of superior ammo. Many at lower prices.

Robert:
Good seeing you on this forum, didn't know you cruzed Glock Talk.
I really thought the goat test was real. They even had pictures!
Like I said its been a while since I've carried a 9mm, its probably been close to 10 years, now that I think about it. Now if you were to ask me what the quietest subsonic load for a 9mm was, I would know a little more about that ;)
good info as always.

Thanks,
T. Defense

[ColoradoPacker]

Originally posted by T. Defense
Robert:
Good seeing you on this forum, didn't know you cruzed Glock Talk.
I really thought the goat test was real. They even had pictures!
Like I said its been a while since I've carried a 9mm, its probably been close to 10 years, now that I think about it. Now if you were to ask me what the quietest subsonic load for a 9mm was, I would know a little more about that ;)
good info as always.

Thanks,
T. Defense

Wolf Gold 147gr JHP was quieter than American Eagle, and the same as Special K at the CO silencer meet :wavey:

[T. Defense]

Originally posted by ColoradoPacker
Wolf Gold 147gr JHP was quieter than American Eagle, and the same as Special K at the CO silencer meet :wavey:

Wolf Gold 147gr JHP Was the quietest that we tested and believe me we tested a slew of them. 9MM 147 grain Tactical Subsonic HP-XTP from TTI Armory and TTI's 9MM 158 grain Tactical Subsonic FMJ was also ultra quiet.

[T. Defense]

I had no idea there was this much info and differing opinions on 9mm carry ammo until I put some key time in on the computer and did some google searches. Glock talk and the members on this forum have been the most informative. Great site!!! From what I gather here are some of the most effective loads.

Federal 9BPLE +P+ 115 gr. HSJHP
Federal 9HST1 124 gr. HST HP
Federal 9HST2 147 gr. HST HP
Double Tap +P 115 gr. Speer Gold Dot JHP
Double Tap +P 124 gr. Speer Gold Dot JHP
Double Tap +P 147 gr. Speer Gold Dot JHP
Winchester's Ranger series T, Bonded, Frangible

Have I missed any??

Pick two and post!!!!!!

Thanks,
T. Defense

[rsilvers]

http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm
"In mid-1993, the results of an authorless "study" done purportedly by shooting more than 600 goats in Strasbourg, France, were circulated, anonymously, throughout the handgun community. A copy of these "Strasbourg Tests" was sent to the Firearms Training Unit of the FBI just before a scheduled meeting of the Wound Ballistics Committee. The committee members, all respected pathologist or trauma surgeons, were unanimous in their opinion that these "tests" were, in fact, a hoax -- and had been fabricated, most likely by somebody without a medical background. A detailed analysis of these tests was published in the Wound Ballistics Review.5"


http://www.tacticalforums.com/
"How interesting, by using such discredited refrences, Triton's press release tarnishes Mr. Burczynski's reputation and casts doubt on the crediblity of their company as a whole.

On 28-30 June 1993, the FBI Wound Ballistics Committee investigated “The Strasbourg Tests” and declared the purported experiments a hoax. Multiple absurd incongruities from an anatomic, experimental protocol, data reporting, and statistical standpoint, aptly illustrated that “The Strasbourg Tests” violated scientific principles and were without question hyperbole. From a legal perspective, the experimental shooting of live, unanaesthetized animals is prohibited not only in the United States, but also France. Investigations by French law enforcement and military wound ballistic researchers failed to find any evidence that the tests were actually conducted and reached similar conclusions to U.S. researchers--that the tests were fraudulent.

Several years ago, I was tasked with reviewing the Marshall and Sanow book. That review was published in the Association of Firearms and Toolmark Examiners forensic journal, AFTE Journal, 24(4); 10/1992. Although I have not specifically placed it on the web, I have discovered the review available several places, including: http://www.povn.com/~4n6/Trnsmgfd.htm and http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm

The July 1992 “Law and Order” has several letters to the editor, as well as a statement by the magazines’ editor, further illustrating the lack of truth and serious errors in the Marshall and Sanow “data”. Several papers have been published in the peer reviewed IWBA “Wound Ballistics Review” which have discussed the lack of credibility of Marshall and Sanow. It was clear in our review and in from the investigations by others that Marshall & Sanow had lied, fabricated data, and did not follow scientific protocols. Their information is fraudulent and meaningless. Please do not stake your life on this garbage.

Only ignorant armchair commandos who believe what they read in trashy consumer oriented gun magazines cling to crackpot fantasies like “The Strasbourg Tests” or Marshall and Sanow’s “data”."



Depends which side you believe. I used to believe the Evan Marshall side but now I am firmly on the other side.

[T. Defense]

Originally posted by rsilvers
http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm
"In mid-1993, the results of an authorless "study" done purportedly by shooting more than 600 goats in Strasbourg, France, were circulated, anonymously, throughout the handgun community. A copy of these "Strasbourg Tests" was sent to the Firearms Training Unit of the FBI just before a scheduled meeting of the Wound Ballistics Committee. The committee members, all respected pathologist or trauma surgeons, were unanimous in their opinion that these "tests" were, in fact, a hoax -- and had been fabricated, most likely by somebody without a medical background. A detailed analysis of these tests was published in the Wound Ballistics Review.5"


http://www.tacticalforums.com/
"How interesting, by using such discredited refrences, Triton's press release tarnishes Mr. Burczynski's reputation and casts doubt on the crediblity of their company as a whole.

On 28-30 June 1993, the FBI Wound Ballistics Committee investigated “The Strasbourg Tests” and declared the purported experiments a hoax. Multiple absurd incongruities from an anatomic, experimental protocol, data reporting, and statistical standpoint, aptly illustrated that “The Strasbourg Tests” violated scientific principles and were without question hyperbole. From a legal perspective, the experimental shooting of live, unanaesthetized animals is prohibited not only in the United States, but also France. Investigations by French law enforcement and military wound ballistic researchers failed to find any evidence that the tests were actually conducted and reached similar conclusions to U.S. researchers--that the tests were fraudulent.

Several years ago, I was tasked with reviewing the Marshall and Sanow book. That review was published in the Association of Firearms and Toolmark Examiners forensic journal, AFTE Journal, 24(4); 10/1992. Although I have not specifically placed it on the web, I have discovered the review available several places, including: http://www.povn.com/~4n6/Trnsmgfd.htm and http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm

The July 1992 “Law and Order” has several letters to the editor, as well as a statement by the magazines’ editor, further illustrating the lack of truth and serious errors in the Marshall and Sanow “data”. Several papers have been published in the peer reviewed IWBA “Wound Ballistics Review” which have discussed the lack of credibility of Marshall and Sanow. It was clear in our review and in from the investigations by others that Marshall & Sanow had lied, fabricated data, and did not follow scientific protocols. Their information is fraudulent and meaningless. Please do not stake your life on this garbage.

Only ignorant armchair commandos who believe what they read in trashy consumer oriented gun magazines cling to crackpot fantasies like “The Strasbourg Tests” or Marshall and Sanow’s “data”."



Depends which side you believe. I used to believe the Evan Marshall side but now I am firmly on the other side.

You haven't steered me wrong yet, and I know you have answered a ton of my questions on www.silencertests.com, all of which have turned out to be 100% on. great info.

Do you concur with my quick list of quality 9mm ammo?

Thanks again,
T. Defense

[rsilvers]

I don't know much about the current Federal ammo. I trust to pick from this list:

http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000964

Barnes XPB 105 & 115 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal Tactical 124 gr JHP (LE9T1)
Speer Gold Dot 124 gr +P JHP (53617)
Winchester Ranger-T 124 gr +P JHP (RA9124TP)
Winchester Partition Gold 124 gr JHP (RA91P)
Winchester Ranger-T 127 gr +P+ JHP (RA9TA)
Federal Tactical 135 gr +P JHP (LE9T5)
Federal HST 147 gr JHP (P9HST2)
Remington Golden Saber 147 gr JHP (GS9MMC)
Speer Gold Dot 147 gr JHP (53619)
Winchester Ranger-T 147 gr JHP (RA9T)

My HK P7, that I am carrying today, is loaded with Winchester 127 +P+. Last week I was carrying a Glock 20 with an extended barrel and Double Tap 180 Gold Dot.

While I like Double Tap a lot for 10mm, for 9mm I would pick a police load so if I was in court I can say have the same ammo the police use rather than I sought out a special load. Minor point, and I would disregard it if I thought Double Tap 9mm was better than Winchester.

[Tommy Vercetti]

Although it has fallen out of vogue,(meaning you won't find it on too many of the current gun board lists of recommended defense ammo)I've always found Federal's 9BPLE to shoot like match ammo in my 9mm's. Popularity is subjective, performance isn't.:beer:

[390ish]

I agree with Tommy. The Federal 9PBLE seem like they were made for my 226. My pistol also really likes the Hornady 115 factory loadings. My good 38 super hates factory ammuntion and does not really shape up until you load hot 124 grain+ ammo pushed by a bit of AA #9 or Blue Dot.

[ColoradoPacker]

Originally posted by rsilvers
I don't know much about the current Federal ammo. I trust to pick from this list:

http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000964

Barnes XPB 105 & 115 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal Tactical 124 gr JHP (LE9T1)
Speer Gold Dot 124 gr +P JHP (53617)
Winchester Ranger-T 124 gr +P JHP (RA9124TP)
Winchester Partition Gold 124 gr JHP (RA91P)
Winchester Ranger-T 127 gr +P+ JHP (RA9TA)
Federal Tactical 135 gr +P JHP (LE9T5)
Federal HST 147 gr JHP (P9HST2)
Remington Golden Saber 147 gr JHP (GS9MMC)
Speer Gold Dot 147 gr JHP (53619)
Winchester Ranger-T 147 gr JHP (RA9T)

My HK P7, that I am carrying today, is loaded with Winchester 127 +P+. Last week I was carrying a Glock 20 with an extended barrel and Double Tap 180 Gold Dot.

While I like Double Tap a lot for 10mm, for 9mm I would pick a police load so if I was in court I can say have the same ammo the police use rather than I sought out a special load. Minor point, and I would disregard it if I thought Double Tap 9mm was better than Winchester.

Heh, that's the same web-link that I posted farther up the page, silly.

I have Ranger 147gr in my Suppressed Glock and PM9. Then Ranger 127+p+ in the other Glock 19, SIG239 and MK9. I do have a few 147gr Golden Saber and 147gr Gold Dot laying around, and I'd feel comfortable using them if I was out of Ranger. I used those before I found Ranger at a better price ($88/200 at MAHSupplies.com) Good stuff.

[rsilvers]

Analysis of some of the Evan Marshall data.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0701/0701268.pdf

Shows how you cannot consider the goat tests useful.

[Warp]

Originally posted by Lugi
Gold dot 124 gr.+p :thumbsup:

That's what I have in mine. :thumbsup:


There are several newer, bonded bullets that perform well.

I also like some of hte Winchester Rangers and Federal's bonded offerings.