LC9 Chronograph Data
 

LC9 Chrono Data

I spent about an hour or so clocking various rounds through my LC9 today. It was brutally sunny and 90 something today. I don’t know the barometric pressure and my altimeter was on the fritz. I forgot to bring my directional gyro. I did make a half-hearted effort to keep the ammo in the shade. I was looking to see what the defensive ammo I had on hand would do velocity wise. I also clocked some handloads. All of the factory ammo was antique. The Ranger SXT’s were the original ones with the Black Talon bullet in the plain brass case. The 147 Ranger JHP were in the original box marked subsonic or deep penetrating. The Federal 115 JHP 9BP were the standard pressure and were in a faded red box. No doubt this stuff is older than some forum members. The 115 grain Winchester Silvertip HP were older than the Ranger ammo. The Speer Gold Dot 124’s were much younger, probably 10 years old or so, whenever the NJSP switched to Sigs :whistling:
The Chrony brand chrono was set on a tripod about 4 feet in front of a target. I used a stereovision binocular organic range finder to determine the chrono was about 15 feet from the muzzle. I forgot to take a pic of the chrono set up.

Here is the data:

115 Grain STHP 10 shots
Low: 1011
Hi:1059
Average:1034
Extreme Spread:48.2
Standard Deviation:15.3

Federal 9BP 115 JHP 10 shots
L:990
H:1055
A:1023
ES:64.7
SD:23.2


124 GDHP 10 shots
L:998.4
H:1040
A:1020
ES:45.3
SD:17.1


Ranger 147 SXT 10 shots
L:936
H:967
A:946
ES:30.3
SD:8.5


Ranger 147 JHP 10 shots
L:910
H:956
A:928
ES:45.6
SD:14.0

All handloads were assembled on a Lee Pro1000 using a Lee three die set. All charges were thrown after determining the initial powder measure settings with a scale. WSP prmers and only the finest mixed range brass were utilized.

The loads listed, and the volume of the cavities used, are shown to be appropriate and safe in my guns. They are for informational purposes only, and are not meant to take the place of load data from a reliable published source that has been worked up in a laboratory. Do not use my load data or Lee disc cavity information to load your own ammo.



115 FMJRN 5.8 Unique (0.71cc) 10 shots
L:1002
H:1066
A:1048
ES:64.5
SD:19.7


125 Cast Truncated Cone 4.0 Unique 5 shots
A:888

125 Cast TC 4.9 Power Pistol (0.46) 10 shots
L:950
H:1000
A:978
ES:49.5
SD:15.6

147 Hornady XTP 4.9 Power Pistol (0.46cc) 10 shots
L:865
H:934
A:892
ES:69.2
SD:18.6

147 FMJTC 4.3 Bullseye (0.46) 10 shots
L:880
H:935
A:915
ES:55.0
SD:16.1

160 Cast RN 4.0 Unique 5 shots
A:882

You could have been sitting in the sun drinking a cold one and letting the newbs do all this stuff that you already did 30 years ago.

I'll just never understand flatlanders.


Jack

Sitting in the sun drinking a cold one? Us crazy flatlanders sit in the shade. I didn't have a LC9 30 years ago either.

Jack is ticked because the only form of entertainment available to him is watching mountain goats mate.

those factory rounds seem to be going slow. I shoot faster stuff than that for IDPA.

Really. My last chrongraphed WSTHP went 1260fps in my BHP, of course, that is quite a bit more bbl. How short is that LC9 bbl?

The LC9 has a 3.1" barrel. The numbers are correct. The same box of 124 GD's did 1160 out of my 4.5" G17, yet they only go 1020 out of the LC9. The same box of Federal 9BP did 1150 out of the G17 and 1023 out of the LC9.

Winchester's LE guy, says to use 147's in short barrels because they loose the least velocity. My results back that up. The Same box of Ranger 147 SXT did 1028 out of the G17 and 946 out of the LC9. So, 147's are designed to run at about 980 or so and are within their design window at the 946 of the LC9. But the lighter bullets are designed to operate at 1100-1200 and are not much over 1000. The fastest 115's I tested are only going about 100 faster than the 147's.

My gun is loaded with the Ranger 147's since the FBI tests show they expand and still penetrate at 946. I could load it with +P or +P+ 115's and 124's to get the speed back up, but Ruger says not to use +P+ and that +P is safe but will wear the gun. Blast, flash and recoil are higher with a short barrel and light +P loads.

The LC9 is a light little gun and I see no reason to beat it up.

5.8gr of Unique in 9mm. That must be a pretty full shell. Is this load compressed?

I just bought an LC9 today. Really lookin forward to shootin it and loadin up some ammo for it. :cool: -Wade-

That is why I load my Kahr MK9 with 147 HSTs. Good chrono data thanks.

I don't know if it is compressed. Maybe we could put C4W in one when I seat a bullet and he can tell us what is going on in there:wavey:

Seriously, he is very small. Jack says he gets his clothes at Kids R Us.

I don't know if it is compressed, there is a good chance it is. I didn't have to do any fancy tricks to seat the bullets, but the case is pretty full.

Great minds think alike.

I suppose it depends on your seating depth.
I have a Nosler manual which lists loads for a 115 grain JHP. It also lists the load density volume. No c.o.l. is listed for the round (except for maximum of 1.169).
Nosler Reloading Guide 6
115 grain JHP
5.1 grains Unique 1000 fps - 84% load density
5.6 grains Unique 1060 fps - 92% load density
max = 6.1 grains Unique 1120 fps - 100% load density
none of these loads are designated as compressed.

Good info Wisky. I did some testing on my Kahr PM9 with 3" barrel about a month ago, only it was about 40 degrees cooler. I had a lot of similar results as you with factory and reloads.

124gr. GDHP 5 shts. avg.= 1045

147gr. GDHP 5 shts. avg.= 910

124gr. Berry's HP 5 shts. avg=1016
5.8gr Unique

124gr. Berry's HP 5 shts. avg=1021
5gr. WST

147gr. GDHP 5 shts. avg= 830
3.7gr. WST

147gr. GDHP 5 shts. avg.=806
4.3gr. Unique

I need to get some Power Pistol and try that, how do you like it. Also how is you accuracy with you LC9, looks like a real nice gun. I love my PM9 shoots as good or better than my G26.

Just for giggles, I looked up the energy of a few of the loads above.

115 FMJRN 5.8 Unique (0.71cc) 10 shots
Average:1048
Energy ft. lbs. 281 (source: Hornady Handbook)

124 GDHP 10 shots
Average:1020
275 (source: Hornady Handbook)

147 FMJTC 4.3 Bullseye (0.46) 10 shots
Average:915
Energy ft. lbs. 264 (source: Hornady Handbook)

Actual penetration may show counter intuitive results, but ..... I would think all of these rounds would perform similarly. Assuming adequate shot placement, the difference would probably prove to be whether the bullet being fired expanded properly.

Accuracy is good with jacketed loads. It hits to point of aim with a 6 o'clock hold. This is more than I can say for any of the three 5 shot revolvers I have. I can get them all on a paper plate at 25 yards off-hand if I don't pull a shot.

I can't give an opinion on PP yet. It's made for "power", but all the data I can find online for it is meowed down. The "max" load for it with a 147 is 5.0, but Alliant used to have it at 5.7. Well, 5.0 doesn't do anything I probably couldn't do with Unique. See the problem? They make a good powder and then tell you to basically figurre it out for yourself, which is a bit risky. I can get more "power" with Unique and a 20 year old manual. PP isn't in any 20 year old manuals.

The only PP loads I shot were the ones over the chrono. I'll shoot them for accuracy tonight. I did find unburnt flakes on my notebook when I fire the PP loads which means they could be stepped up a bit. That will be a project for my G17, not this little thing. I don't think it's the pressure itelf that beats a gun up, I think it's the recoil. If I can get "more power" with PP and still be in a safe pressure range, I think it will still beat the gun up. The G17 can take the higher recoil forces IMO.

I don't put any weight in energy. It's a made up concept. A foot-pound is the ability to move a pound of something one foot. I don't think a one pound steel block would be moved 264 feet if it was hit by the 147/BE load.

Bullet construction has more to do with penetration than anything else IMO. A 115JHP that doesn't expand will penetrate more than a 147 that expands rapidly. My thing is, the bullets are made to work at certain velocities. The 115 and 124 bullets are made to work at velocities that I can't obtain in the LC9 unless I use +P or +P+ ammo. The 147 Rangers work at a velocity that I CAN get with the LC9. Also, all weights are so close to each other in terms of velocity, I might as well just use the heavier one since it's going almost as fast as the light ones.

Thanks Wisky, after I made my post I took a closer look at PP and saw what you are saying. It doesn't seem to do much better than Unique.

What I'm trying to do is get a little more velocity with the 147gr. GD's, which may be hard in a 3"barrel. I did notice that Longshot did list some of the highest vel., but have not tried that yet. Whether it can accomplish this in the short barrel is yet to be determined. I just may have to give it a try.:supergrin:

Thanks. Good logic.
IMHO, I won't use 147 grain XTP's in my G26 and MK9 because they seem to require higher velocities.
But, can I buy reloading components for the 147 grain Rangers?
If not, I'm left wondering what 147 grain JHP I can load myself?
Silvertips and Golden Sabers come to mind.
Any suggestions?

Yes, I can buy a box of the ammo I choose to carry, but I'd like to put a lot of my own reloads through the gun to make sure my gun feeds that bullet perfectly.

You can purchase 147gr. Speer Gold Dot's

You can get the standard Win 147JHP which is either identicle, or nearly identicle, depending on who you ask, to the 147STHP. The GD that Colo mentioned, Golden Sabres, probably Remington standard 147's, and a few I've overlooked. I got the XTP's because I had a BassPro gift card and they had them on the shelf.

I like the XTPs. They are affordible and they feed well. If you shoot them into anything to test expansion with a short barrel load, I'd be interested.
So, you think any of the bulk Remington or Winchester hollow points are good quality. Based on appearance, they are light years ahead of the stuff I was loading 15 years ago.

GREAT THREAD! THANKS!

http://www.firearmstactical.com/ammo_data/9mm.htm

This is old test data. Some of the bullets have been changed a bit like the Ranger SXT's. But, I don't think they have changed the standard bullets like the Win JHP.

Nice data. Are you relying on an optimal penetration number? I'm under the impression that most law enforcement agencies use some ideal penetration number as their selection criteria (like 13 inches or something).

I'm not sure what to conclude since some of the lighter bullets penetrate nearly the same as the 147 grain.

The Gold Dots do seem to consistantly have the best expansion numbers.

Yeah, for all the "scientific" testing, they sure get results that don't have any real conclusion. I think a bullet has to penetrate. In this case, the 147's and 115's are almost going the same speed, so I might just as well use the 147's and get deeper penetration.