# Favorite 9MM Load



## Guest (Jan 1, 2008)

Which bullet weight do you prefer? Why? Which load is most accurate in your pistol? Most reliable.

I don't own a 9MM and would like specific feedback on the great old caliber.


----------



## 22945gt (Dec 15, 2007)

I don’t have a lot of experience reloading with many different powers and bullets. I have used Unique and HS-6 with 125gr LRN. Best load so far is 4gr. Unique at 1.165 OAL in an H & K USP 9mm. Good groups at 20 yards have not checked past that.


----------



## Liko81 (Nov 21, 2007)

How 'bout factory ammo? I personally plink with Remington UMC 115gr FMJs. I don't have huge amounts of experience with various loads, but UMC is relatively inexpensive and fires very cleanly (a thin film of soot, as opposed to a lot of rough grit). Winchester White Box is dirtier when fired, but other than that is comparable in most respects to the Remington. Blazer is dirtier still, but it's cheap stuff (aluminum casing is cheaper than brass). My defense loads are Federal 124gr HydraShoks. The kick from them is a little stronger and snappier than the plinking rounds but very manageable, and the report is deeper.

My Ruger P95 will feed just about anything; the only failure I've ever had was a failure to lock back, and that was my fault (my off-hand thumb was on the slide release). It's going on 1000 rounds, mostly of UMC with a couple hundred WWBs and a few dozen Federals, and it's never had a bullet-related problem, so I think I've found my loads.


----------



## HK9 (Dec 12, 2007)

My Favorite load is a 115 Gr. Plated Berry's Flat Point Bullet over 3.9 Grains of Clays Powder. It's accurate & the recoilt is mild, very pleasant to shoot.


----------



## Pointblank (Nov 26, 2007)

I think the most effective self defense load in 9mm is Corbon's DPX. Unfortunately it's pretty expensive. I think the Gold Dots are outstanding also. Gold Dot is the issued round of the NYPD.


----------



## camguy (Feb 8, 2008)

I was in Baghdad the end of '03 on some contract work, and our PSD's carried 9mm Federal HydraShoks. Now, these guys were all ex-Delta Force, and could have any sidearm their black little hearts desired, so I figure if it's good enough for them THERE it's good enough for me HERE.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

I like double tap ammo's 124gr +p Gold Dot load. It's a standard +p loading that offers the highest ballistic performance of any 9mm hollow point on the market in that weight. Using the Gold Dot bullet from speer too which is renound for being good. For standard practice ammo, anything will do that is cheap. my P30 shoots anything.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Dredd said:


> I like double tap ammo's 124gr +p Gold Dot load. It's a standard +p loading that offers the highest ballistic performance of any 9mm hollow point on the market in that weight. Using the Gold Dot bullet from speer too which is renound for being good. For standard practice ammo, anything will do that is cheap. my P30 shoots anything.


How is Double Tap's different than the factory Speer? Their website has a 50-round box at $25.95, which is cheaper than Speer (20-round box is $18.95).


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> How is Double Tap's different than the factory Speer?


Loaded hotter for higher velocity and energy. It's noticeable when you shoot them, but not uncontrollable. I like them because they use the same Gold Dot bullet, but with more power behind it.

Compare the numbers between them and you'll see the differences.

BTW: tactical Defense Solutions sells Speer Gold Dot 124gr +p for $23.00 per box of 50. They're sold out atm though.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Dredd said:


> Loaded hotter for higher velocity and energy. It's noticeable when you shoot them, but not uncontrollable. I like them because they use the same Gold Dot bullet, but with more power behind it.
> 
> Compare the numbers between them and you'll see the differences.
> 
> BTW: tactical Defense Solutions sells Speer Gold Dot 124gr +p for $23.00 per box of 50. They're sold out atm though.


So are Double Tap's ammunition just reloaded versions of other brand's of ammo?


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> So are Double Tap's ammunition just reloaded versions of other brand's of ammo?


well, they use their own nickle coated brass with their name and markings on the cartridge. They just buy speer's gold dot bullets when they load them. So yes you could call it a factory reload. However, it's the same bullet just their own casing with hotter loadings. I tried them, liked them, and kept using them. They feed reliably, shoot accurately, are controllable for me, and I have never found a dud. I could just as easily buy Winchester Ranger, Hornady, Federal hydrashock or Tactical ammo, Cor Bon (which is a factory reload too using Barnes' bullets), or Speer made PD ammo. I just have had good luck with Double Tap and they use a thoroughly tested bullet in the gold dot.

Interestingly enough Speer is owned by Federal which make two different products that almost compete against eachother.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Dredd said:


> well, they use their own nickle coated brass with their name and markings on the cartridge. They just buy speer's gold dot bullets when they load them. So yes you could call it a factory reload. However, it's the same bullet just their own casing with hotter loadings. I tried them, liked them, and kept using them. They feed reliably, shoot accurately, are controllable for me, and I have never found a dud. I could just as easily buy Winchester Ranger, Hornady, Federal hydrashock or Tactical ammo, Cor Bon (which is a factory reload too using Barnes' bullets), or Speer made PD ammo. I just have had good luck with Double Tap and they use a thoroughly tested bullet in the gold dot.
> 
> Interestingly enough Speer is owned by Federal which make two different products that almost compete against eachother.


Well I just ordered a box of 50...124gr +P Gold Dots. That's interesting that Speer is owned by Federal. A lot of times it's Federal versus Speer.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> Well I just ordered a box of 50...124gr +P Gold Dots. That's interesting that Speer is owned by Federal. A lot of times it's Federal versus Speer.


I suppose it was just a buyout or merger of some type between the two and they decided to keep the two product lines because they both do so well but then, I don't really know what the deal with it is.


----------



## K Bob (Sep 17, 2007)

3.5 Tight Group

Zero 125 JHP

Shot very well in my Glock 23 with the LW 9mm
convertion barrel


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

I guess they figured both lines have a ton of diehard users with brand loyalty. Like if GM bought Ford...they'd keep the Ford product lines open so they could still sell to the Ford fans. Also, if Federal or Speer have any usage contracts with any LE agencies or such, it would make things less complicated to keep both.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> I guess they figured both lines have a ton of diehard users with brand loyalty. Like if GM bought Ford...they'd keep the Ford product lines open so they could still sell to the Ford fans. Also, if Federal or Speer have any usage contracts with any LE agencies or such, it would make things less complicated to keep both.


The New York police department exclusively uses Speer Gold Dot 124gr +p ammo in their Glock 19s. that is AFAIK.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

If it's good enough for the NYPD, it's good enough for me.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> If it's good enough for the NYPD, it's good enough for me.


Don't be too sure! They carry a good load now, but until fairly recently, they issued solids like lead SWCs for .38, and round-nose ball (!!) for 9mm. Equipment selection at NYPD is heavily influenced by politics.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> Don't be too sure! They carry a good load now, but until fairly recently, they issued solids like lead SWCs for .38, and round-nose ball (!!) for 9mm. Equipment selection at NYPD is heavily influenced by politics.


That's dumb...ball ammo in 9mm? Wow. Well, I think we'll all agree that Gold Dots are one of the best out there.


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> fivehourfrenzy said:
> 
> 
> > If it's good enough for the NYPD, it's good enough for me.
> ...


I've read several articles by Ayoob suggesting modelling your SD weapon choices after LE is a good idea when you need to testify in a SD shooting.

Expanding bullets and large wound channels might not be considered humane by the politically correct. So I can understand why the politicos would limit LE and military to ball ammo.

On the other hand assholes who threaten my life and/or those of my family are not deserving of humane treatment.


----------



## Wyatt (Jan 29, 2008)

After reading good reports about the Speer Gold Dot 124gr +P around HGF I made the switch. Just received 4 boxes of the LE version, which is the same round but packed in 50 instead of 20.

For anyone that's interested I got them from Ammo-to-go for $24.95 a box(50). Shipping was reasonable, $9.50 from TX to CA. They currently have it in stock. Here's the link:

http://ammunitiontogo.com/catalog1/index.php?cPath=23_61_119&sort=2a&filter_id=24


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

submoa said:


> I've read several articles by Ayoob suggesting modelling your SD weapon choices after LE is a good idea when you need to testify in a SD shooting.
> 
> Expanding bullets and large wound channels might not be considered humane by the politically correct. So I can understand why the politicos would limit LE and military to ball ammo.
> 
> On the other hand assholes who threaten my life and/or those of my family are not deserving of humane treatment.


Most agencies around the country use Hollow Points for duty weapons. Two popular choices are Winchester ranger T 127gr +p+ and Speer Gold Dot 124gr +p. It's no secret that a JHP round will have a greater chance to put down a BG than FMJ.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> That's dumb...ball ammo in 9mm? Wow. Well, I think we'll all agree that Gold Dots are one of the best out there.


Ball ammo is what the military uses in their Beretta 92FS issue sidearms. They load up a 124gr FMJ to just below +p standards. NATO loadings are typically hotter than your standard practice FMJ, but not as hot as the +p JHP rounds.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

I guess a lot of the democrats who oppose the use of guns think that a bullet that is intended to incapacitate a BG as quickly as possible is designed to kill him.

I get a lot of flak for wanting a shotgun for HD. I assure people that a BG coming up the steps won't feel a thing.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> I guess a lot of the democrats who oppose the use of guns think that a bullet that is intended to incapacitate a BG as quickly as possible is designed to kill him.
> 
> I get a lot of flak for wanting a shotgun for HD. I assure people that a BG coming up the steps won't feel a thing.


Actually the Geneva Convention stated that a military force should not impose unnecessary pain and suffering on any enemy combatant. That includes using expending bullet technology. That way of thinking is starting to change a bit, but it's a long and hard process to get the word from the mid-east streets up to the guys who can make the change happen. Lots of guys are calling for a better loading than 9mm if they can't use JHP ammo. Maybe go back to the .45? I've heard some rumors of the SEAL teams trying to get the USP .40 into service with them. They used to issue the USP from HK, but it became expensive to keep in service compared to Sig and HK lost the contract. The SEALs currently use the Sig p226 as far as I know, which is 9mm.

I'm not sure if groups like Blackwater are under the same restraints. Since they are private contractors, I'd guess they could carry whatever they wanted.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

I'm aware of the Geneva Convention's constraints on military use of hollowpoint ammunition. I was referring to civilian use...IMO, if someone is deserving of a few bullets in SD, the person acting in SD should be able to use whatever kind of ammunition they want, whether it be non-expanding, expanding, fragmenting, etc. I remember reading somewhere that the Geneva Convention also prohibited military use of flechettes.


----------



## polyguy (May 4, 2007)

I don't have much experience with different types of ammo. To be honest, I've always had either Remington or Winchester FMJs loaded until a friend recently gave a box of Winchester 147gr JHPs. To me, a quality Full Metal Jacketed round has been good enough so far.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Dredd said:


> Actually the Geneva Convention stated that a military force should not impose unnecessary pain and suffering on any enemy combatant. That includes using expending bullet technology.


_Actually_, it was the Hague Accords, which the US never signed but abides by nonetheless. http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html



> They used to issue the USP from HK, but it became expensive to keep in service compared to Sig and HK lost the contract.


Do you have a reference for that? It's news to me. I believe SEALs used suppressed HK P9S pistols many years ago, in a limited capacity, and there is that silly HK Mk. 23 "SOCOM" pistol that seems to spend more time in the arms room than in the field. Anyway, the SEALs have been issuing the P226 since the 1980s, and the USP wasn't introduced until 1993, so the dates don't seem to add up.



> I'm not sure if groups like Blackwater are under the same restraints. Since they are private contractors, I'd guess they could carry whatever they wanted.


The contractors I've seen here almost all have M4s and either Beretta 92s or Glocks 9mms. One guy had a wide-body 1911 that looked like an STI at a glance. I don't know what they are carrying for ammo, though.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

polyguy said:


> To me, a quality Full Metal Jacketed round has been good enough so far.


Good enough until you shoot someone and it pokes a little pencil hole through him and exits to hit someone else. Modern JHPs are the way to go in 9mm. If you like ball, use a .45ACP.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> _Actually_, it was the Hague Accords, which the US never signed but abides by nonetheless. http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html
> 
> Do you have a reference for that? It's news to me. I believe SEALs used suppressed HK P9S pistols many years ago, in a limited capacity, and there is that silly HK Mk. 23 "SOCOM" pistol that seems to spend more time in the arms room than in the field. Anyway, the SEALs have been issuing the P226 since the 1980s, and the USP wasn't introduced until 1993, so the dates don't seem to add up.
> 
> The contractors I've seen here almost all have M4s and either Beretta 92s or Glocks 9mms. One guy had a wide-body 1911 that looked like an STI at a glance. I don't know what they are carrying for ammo, though.


Sorry to full quote cause I'm lazy.

I guess some info is more rumor than fact. Or, perhaps it was just that they did have access to HK pistols that may not have been used in active combat duty. Either way, thanks for correcting that.

I know that the contractors carry some form of automatic rifle. I was referring to their backup gun or sidearm. Didn't know if they were all using the same thing or what. It's hard to keep up with because you hear things that may come from people who don't know what they're talking about. Sig offers a Blackwater edition P226 but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the exact one they use in service but maybe they do. :mrgreen:


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> I'm aware of the Geneva Convention's constraints on military use of hollowpoint ammunition. I was referring to civilian use...IMO, if someone is deserving of a few bullets in SD, the person acting in SD should be able to use whatever kind of ammunition they want, whether it be non-expanding, expanding, fragmenting, etc. I remember reading somewhere that the Geneva Convention also prohibited military use of flechettes.


Laws outside the military are set from state to state. For example, in Texas or FL you don't have any restraints on the use of JHP ammo. In New York City you'd have a hard time buying it and many places do not sell it online to residents of NYC. I believe the state of New Jersey is similar, but don't quote me.


----------



## polyguy (May 4, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> Good enough until you shoot someone and it pokes a little pencil hole through him and exits to hit someone else. Modern JHPs are the way to go in 9mm. If you like ball, use a .45ACP.


Haha, not at all, my friend. I have JHPs loaded in my weapon, as I stated in the post you quoted. I'll stick to my 9mm FMJ, JHP, or whatever quality round is loaded and switch calibers when I feel the desire, thanks.


----------



## CMSpecs (Feb 25, 2008)

I guess he loads his M9 blindfolded each time. Cuz gov issue has never been nothing better than fmj. At least i've never ever seen anything more in all the m9s. You'd be blessed to get a clean box. 
And aint no fmj 9mm is gonna over penetrate nothing unless you dang near put the gun to somebodys head. At that point, ur a assainating some firggen body. Come on man


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

CMSpecs said:


> I guess he loads his M9 blindfolded each time. Cuz gov issue has never been nothing better than fmj. At least i've never ever seen anything more in all the m9s. You'd be blessed to get a clean box.
> And aint no fmj 9mm is gonna over penetrate nothing unless you dang near put the gun to somebodys head. At that point, ur a assainating some firggen body. Come on man


FMJ does overpenetrate. Do you understand what overpenetration means?

It means that the bullet penetrates a soft target too far. Doesn't have to go through someone. JHP was designed to expand and slow down inside a soft target such as a BG. It was also designed to create a larger wound channel and cause more trauma. Many modern bullets retain near 100% of their weight after expansion.


----------



## brokenviewfinder (Jan 16, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> I get a lot of flak for wanting a shotgun for HD. I assure people that a BG coming up the steps won't feel a thing.


I don't know how anyone would could argue with that. As a father of two kids under 6 in a small house, stopping a BG vs. unintentional lead flying through the kids rooms is a not a hard call.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

CMSpecs said:


> I guess he loads his M9 blindfolded each time. Cuz gov issue has never been nothing better than fmj. At least i've never ever seen anything more in all the m9s. You'd be blessed to get a clean box.


Uhhh, yeah, I'm well aware that my M9 is loaded with ball ammo. But thanks for the heads-up on that. 

But it's not what I'd _choose_ if I had a choice. You understand the difference, right?



> And aint no fmj 9mm is gonna over penetrate nothing unless you dang near put the gun to somebodys head. At that point, ur a assainating some firggen body. Come on man


You are _completely_ misinformed. NYPD, for example, got away from 9mm ball because they had so many cases of perforation on human targets. Those exiting FMJ bullets, which according to you "ain't gonna overpenetrate" hit a total of 5 uninvolved bystanders in that crowded city, as well as 17 police officers. 14 suspects were also killed by bullets that perforated other suspects. That's a total of *36* people. These were *all* FMJ 9mm bullets that *had already passed through other people* before they hit a second person.

(These stats came from an NYPD report quoted verbatim in _The New York Times_.)

In tests in ballistic gelatin, 9mm ball typically digs to 24+", with some examples going to 28". "Acceptable" penetration per the FBI protocols ends at 16", and most sources prefer 11-14" of depth. Most good modern JHPs fall somewhere in the 11-16" range.

If you prefer ball ammo in 9mm, that's okay with me. It's your life. I just hope I am not downrange if you have to fire in defense, like all those unlucky people in New York. I also hope, for their sake, none of your family members are anywhere behind the bad guy.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

brokenviewfinder said:


> I don't know how anyone would could argue with that. As a father of two kids under 6 in a small house, stopping a BG vs. unintentional lead flying through the kids rooms is a not a hard call.


Then you get fallout from some DA that thinks blowing a guy in half is inhumane and unnecessary. Gotta think all aspects.

There have been too many cases where the type of weapon used was used as evidence against someone in a PD situation and an uninformed jury hung them out to dry.

DA would likely say something like "This shotgun, is typically used for hunting purposes. In this case, it's clear that the defendant was in full awareness of his situation and used the said firearm with intent to kill <insert name here>. He was using a weapon which is more powerful than what was necessary."

It can go on and on. It's really tough...best idea is to avoid having to shoot at all cost.


----------



## Guest (Feb 28, 2008)

Sounds like the general consensus is a 124 gr JHP so later this year when I get my SR9 I'll start with a a factory loading and then load up some practice rounds with brass I scrounge at the range.

Thanks for the help.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Dredd said:


> There have been too many cases where the type of weapon used was used as evidence against someone in a PD situation and an uninformed jury hung them out to dry.


Perhaps you'd care to cite some of those "many" cases for us?

Even Mas Ayoob, who is the misunderstood source of most of these urban legends, recommends shotguns for home defense.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Those uninformed juries probably also follow the misconception that buckshot has less potential to perforate walls.

All I would tell them is I heard something downstairs, and instead of being a jackass and setting out to look for him, I did the smart thing and waited until he came to me, at which point he is the one initiating a confrontation. He's a home invader, and in *my* home. We have the Castle Doctrine, so any use of deadly physical force I choose to use to protect myself is justifiable.

And like I said, nobody feels a load of 00 buck hit them in the top of the head. I will get a positive ID on a target before I fire, but if the person sneaking up the steps is indeed in my home uninvited, they'll get plugged.

Now I need to go out and get a shotgun.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Shotguns are perfectly defensible in court. All else is blather designed to sell gun magazines.


----------



## CMSpecs (Feb 25, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> Uhhh, yeah, I'm well aware that my M9 is loaded with ball ammo. But thanks for the heads-up on that.
> 
> But it's not what I'd _choose_ if I had a choice. You understand the difference, right?
> 
> ...


I never said I preferred it. I've just witnessed a lot of fmj slugs being picked outta corpses & folks waiting to get stitched up. 
Ok you use the NYPD as an example here man? Do you know how many lawsuits that Dept has to date since 1987? Many of which false shootings of toddlers, homeless people,black people, you name it. not to mention the guy they shot 43 times a few years back. And the groom they recently slaughtered. what was it 50 rounds fired? I'll ay it again 50 ROUNDS fired Mikey. 21 hit the car, where did the other 29 go? Over the hudson river? Or into that guys face? That Dept is plauged with too many inexpirienced cops in too many areas to argue. And shooting skills is one of em. But thats not the point here, you used them but they are not what the topic is about man.
You see this puts me back in that post you just had goin and locked up about the scenario in the store & takin a shot at 35yds away and yadda yadda. Even if you got jhps,glaser rounds or whatever anti-penetratin magic in your bullet. Takin a shot with folks(let alone your friggen family) BEHIND the BG is just too much of a risk. And I'm tellin you, if you gotta draw your gun the situation is stressful anyway. The worse feeling you ever wanna deal with. Too much of a chance of a miss with or without JHPs. I mean think about that man. If you gotta shoot your gun at a living body, and then you mentioned family members BEHIND him/her? Heck no man.

I would never shoot with my family BEHIND my target. Thats just stupid anyway you look it at there Mikey. Supposed you miss and hit one of your family members, then what huh? Now you got a dead family member and a BG still left.


----------



## CMSpecs (Feb 25, 2008)

I'm not pickin on you Mike. I'm just talkin to you man. If it comes off like I'm bein rude, don't take offense man.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Even if you hit a family member, they probably have a better chance at living getting hit with a JHP...less penetration equals no exit wound for additional bleeding while you wait for the police and ambulance to show up, and might not penetrate deep enough to hit vitals, although that would be very iffy. A FMJ will most definitely penetrate far enough to hit vitals, and probably go right through them, hitting another family member standing behind them. A FMJ will also perforate the BG and hit a family member standing behind them, or perforate the BG, go through the wall, and hit a family member on the other side.

JHPs rarely go through a human...if they do, it's usually because the bullet didn't hit COM, and went through a leg or arm. Even if it does perforate a BG and hit someone on the other side, it's already expanded and lost most of its energy, whereas a FMJ will have plenty of energy behind it to take it deep into another human.

Even if the NYPD has bad shooters, a FMJ is still more dangerous to innocents standing around. If they miss with a JHP and hit someone they don't mean to shoot, odds are it will stop in that person. A FMJ will keep going, and possibly take out more innocents.

edit: When would a BG stand in front of family members he's holding hostage? That would be stupid on his part as he's turned his back to people that could easily knock him out or kill him with a blow to the back of the head from a hand or any blunt object that happens to be nearby. Not only that, they would put themselves in broad view. BGs will typically place a family member in front of him so to get to him, you gotta go through your family member.



Mike Barham said:


> Shotguns are perfectly defensible in court. All else is blather designed to sell gun magazines.


Well it makes sense in a lot of ways. They're cheaper than handguns and rifles, easier to become proficient with, and they spread the shot. It's not the spread that Hollywood portrays it to be, but even a 4-6" spread in HD distances gets a higher probability to score a hit. And even though buckshot has the potential to porforate a human, it doesn't have as much chance as a high powered hunting rifle with FMJ ammo.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> Even if you hit a family member, they probably have a better chance at living getting hit with a JHP...less penetration equals no exit wound for additional bleeding while you wait for the police and ambulance to show up, and might not penetrate deep enough to hit vitals, although that would be very iffy. A FMJ will most definitely penetrate far enough to hit vitals, and probably go right through them, hitting another family member standing behind them. A FMJ will also perforate the BG and hit a family member standing behind them, or perforate the BG, go through the wall, and hit a family member on the other side.
> 
> JHPs rarely go through a human...if they do, it's usually because the bullet didn't hit COM, and went through a leg or arm. Even if it does perforate a BG and hit someone on the other side, it's already expanded and lost most of its energy, whereas a FMJ will have plenty of energy behind it to take it deep into another human.
> 
> ...


Actually JHP rounds have MORE chance to kill someone than ball. a JHP 9mm round expsnds upwards of .65 caliber which creates a larger wound channel than just a 9mm ball zipping through. This creates more shock as well. Typically JHP loads are hotter than FMJ in order to have more energy on target.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> Perhaps you'd care to cite some of those "many" cases for us?
> 
> Even Mas Ayoob, who is the misunderstood source of most of these urban legends, recommends shotguns for home defense.


not just shotguns, but in general. Using a .357 Magnum got some lady out in Arizona in a heap of crap when she shot someone who broke down her door at night.

Most of the time it's not criminal charges, but the family of the moron who broke into your house who claim "they were laying in wait to kill him and he was such a nice boy."

Yeah sure, that's why the gangs around call him by some street name and he was arrested on drug charges a month ago.

I just really hope I never actually have to shoot at someone.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> Those uninformed juries probably also follow the misconception that buckshot has less potential to perforate walls.
> 
> All I would tell them is I heard something downstairs, and instead of being a jackass and setting out to look for him, I did the smart thing and waited until he came to me, at which point he is the one initiating a confrontation. He's a home invader, and in *my* home. We have the Castle Doctrine, so any use of deadly physical force I choose to use to protect myself is justifiable.
> 
> ...


Then you face civil courts for the suffering you caused that dude's family. Hopefully the Castle Doctrine protects you from that. I don't know the details of it, but there may be some crap to clean up before you can wipe your hands of responsibility for some druggy trying to steal your gold watch to pawn for crack.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

I don't know the exact outlines of the Castle Doctrine in and of itself, but the Kentucky Revised Statutes regarding self-protection while in an occupied dwelling pretty much cover the fact. Basically if someone unlawfully enters your dwelling (which is a felony), they are presumed to have intent to commit further unlawful acts with or without use of violent physical force. This can be met with physical force or deadly physical force. I have it right here in my CCDW handbook but I'm not about to spend 20 minutes typing it all out. If someone breaks in, I can shoot them. It's pretty clear cut.



Dredd said:


> Actually JHP rounds have MORE chance to kill someone than ball. a JHP 9mm round expsnds upwards of .65 caliber which creates a larger wound channel than just a 9mm ball zipping through. This creates more shock as well. Typically JHP loads are hotter than FMJ in order to have more energy on target.


I'm gonna have to disagree on this one. I addressed this issue in my "lethality of JHP versus ball ammo, etc." thread. I believe most of the time, ball ammo, although it doesn't expand and cause a larger cavity, does produce an exit wound, therefore meaning blood has two holes instead of one to bleed out. Also, it will almost always have enough penetration to hit vitals. JHPs rely on expansion to produce their maximum wound and trauma on a person...and I believe (I could be wrong) statistics show that JHPs only expand 60-70% of the time at best, meaning 30-40% of the time, they don't expand. Generally speaking when they don't expand, they do penetrate further, but not as far as ball ammo.

I'm not sure. This argument could go both ways. I do know that JHP, if properly expanded, will deliver all of its kinetic energy into the person, assuming it doesn't pass through and exit. This goes into "stopping" an attacker. The expansion also produces a larger cavity, like you mentioned, but I think a non-expanding FMJ that exits will still cause faster bleeding than an expanded bullet of the same weight/caliber that only creates a one-holed wound channel. There are beliefs that ball ammo (because of non-expanding properties) might slightly miss a vital or CNS component that an expanding JHP would hit. However, I think there would be more accounts of JHP not penetrating deep enough to hit a vital, whereas ball ammo would pass directly through.

Also keep in mind that lethality isn't the same as stopping power. I think someone who's bleeding more severely from an entrance *and* exit wound from ball ammo would be in more danger of bleeding to death unless they had *immediate* medical attention. I would say a lot of people that die from handgun wounds (barring those that take head shots) don't die because of destruction of a vital organ, but simply bleed to death before they can get help from paramedics. That could be completely false, but it's an estimate. One could survive from multiple shots in their torso, assuming they don't get their heart, liver, or lungs shredded and don't bleed to death. On the flip side, someone who takes a measly leg shot might bleed to death if their femoral artery is severed.

It makes sense that JHPs would be more lethal as they have more "stopping" power than ball ammo, but there are certain instances where ball ammo would kill, and JHP would not. I'm waiting for Mike and some of the others to chime in on this one.


----------



## CMSpecs (Feb 25, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy,
I didnt know which of your posts to quote man lol. I don't even know where to begin here. But, I'm not gonna go on & on about this. Not even worth the typing anymore now. I tell ya what, you go ahead and shoot your family with JHPs,FMJs,Glasers,buckshot, and live by whatever rules you feel okaying the nill THOUGHT of even shooting in their direction let alone at their bodies. I've threw in my hand on this here.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

CMSpecs said:


> I'm not pickin on you Mike. I'm just talkin to you man. If it comes off like I'm bein rude, don't take offense man.


No offense taken, though I prefer you address me as "Mike," not "Mikey." Treating me like a child doesn't help your argument.

Anyway, I posted about NYPD not to argue the merits or demerits of that department, or the shooting ability of the NYPD. I was refuting your obviously erroneous statement that 9mm FMJ does not perforate human targets. Quite clearly, it does, and often.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Dredd said:


> Using a .357 Magnum got some lady out in Arizona in a heap of crap when she shot someone who broke down her door at night.


Okay, please *cite the case*. You know, a case name (State of Arizona v. Jane Doe, Estate of Joe Scumbag v. Jane Doe, etc.), or even a link to a newspaper article? I live in Arizona and work in the gun industry, and never heard about this. I find it very difficult to believe that a lone woman would get in trouble for shooting an intruder, no matter what gun she used, in a solidly pro-gun state like Arizona.



> Most of the time it's not criminal charges, but the family of the moron who broke into your house who claim "they were laying in wait to kill him and he was such a nice boy."


Lawsuits abound in litigious America, and you're very likely to be sued _no matter_ what weapon you use to shoot someone. But you're certainly no more likely to be sued if you use a shotgun or a .357 than if you use a 9mm or a .40.

I'm a graduate of Mas Ayoob's LFI school. A lot of the stuff you hear bandied about regarding guns and criminal charges and lawsuits is stuff that people heard fourth-hand and claim that "Well, Mas Ayoob said..." Mainly it's exaggerated crap, and no better than any other gun store gossip or misinformed stuff you see on the Errornet. I blame _Combat Handguns_ magazine, and its sensationalist covers, for a lot of this.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

CMSpecs said:


> fivehourfrenzy,
> I didnt know which of your posts to quote man lol. I don't even know where to begin here. But, I'm not gonna go on & on about this. Not even worth the typing anymore now. I tell ya what, you go ahead and shoot your family with JHPs,FMJs,Glasers,buckshot, and live by whatever rules you feel okaying the nill THOUGHT of even shooting in their direction let alone at their bodies. I've threw in my hand on this here.


I don't see where *fhf* is advocating firing at his family or anything remotely like that. Let's stick to the technical issues here instead of personal attacks.

A bullet that exits creates two holes instead of one. This theoretically increases the chance of pneumothorax/hemothorax, which may be more likely to cause death than the slightly greater permanent wound cavity created by an expanded JHP, depending on the location of the wound.


----------



## Don357 (Dec 4, 2007)

submoa said:


> I've read several articles by Ayoob suggesting modelling your SD weapon choices after LE is a good idea when you need to testify in a SD shooting.
> 
> Expanding bullets and large wound channels might not be considered humane by the politically correct. So I can understand why the politicos would limit LE and military to ball ammo.
> 
> On the other hand assholes who threaten my life and/or those of my family are not deserving of humane treatment.


Would'nt an instant death be more humane than hours or days of suffering pain and or bleeding to death???
I use several different loads for my 9mm's. For plinking I use Monarch (Barnaul) or Winchester, or Blazer 115gr FMJ, but for defence my wife carrys Federal Premium 124gr "Hydra-Shoks" in her Kel-Tec P-11 and I carry Winchester Personal Defence 147gr JHP in my TZ99. Both guns will eat anything you care to feed them, but the heavier bullet seems to be a bit more accurate in my TZ, not to mention penetration and knockdown power. BTW, I also carry my TZ as a back-up when I go hunting. Wild hogs don't go down easy!


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

CMSpecs said:


> fivehourfrenzy,
> I didnt know which of your posts to quote man lol. I don't even know where to begin here. But, I'm not gonna go on & on about this. Not even worth the typing anymore now. I tell ya what, you go ahead and shoot your family with JHPs,FMJs,Glasers,buckshot, and live by whatever rules you feel okaying the nill THOUGHT of even shooting in their direction let alone at their bodies. I've threw in my hand on this here.


Shoot my family? Dude man bro buddy you need to grow up. Just because I can justify my reasonings while you can't doesn't make room for irresponsible, immature posts like that.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> Okay, please *cite the case*. You know, a case name (State of Arizona v. Jane Doe, Estate of Joe Scumbag v. Jane Doe, etc.), or even a link to a newspaper article? I live in Arizona and work in the gun industry, and never heard about this. I find it very difficult to believe that a lone woman would get in trouble for shooting an intruder, no matter what gun she used, in a solidly pro-gun state like Arizona.
> 
> Lawsuits abound in litigious America, and you're very likely to be sued _no matter_ what weapon you use to shoot someone. But you're certainly no more likely to be sued if you use a shotgun or a .357 than if you use a 9mm or a .40.
> 
> I'm a graduate of Mas Ayoob's LFI school. A lot of the stuff you hear bandied about regarding guns and criminal charges and lawsuits is stuff that people heard fourth-hand and claim that "Well, Mas Ayoob said..." Mainly it's exaggerated crap, and no better than any other gun store gossip or misinformed stuff you see on the Errornet. I blame _Combat Handguns_ magazine, and its sensationalist covers, for a lot of this.


I remember what i read, but never can remember names or specifics. The point is, it happens. Some DA gets on the case and is a hard ass. Plain and simple. It's the risk you take with you. I know there's more problems with shooting someone than there should be. Especially when it's on your property and the person is unwanted and uninvited.

I don't claim to be some sort of expert, but I have read things that make me think seriously about the topic.

I guess my whole point is you can't just go and shoot someone who you suspect an intruder and everyone says "ok sir, no problem". That's all I really mean to say. There is more that goes along with it after the incident.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Dredd said:


> The point is, it happens.


And my point is, it _doesn't_ happen with anywhere near the frequency people on the internet claim it does. How can you expect us to believe "it happens" if no one can produce any actual evidence that it happens? You can tell us to believe in UFOs, too, but unless you can produce some evidence, you're not going to get very far.

The only person who can ever seem to actually cite real-life instances of this is Mas Ayoob, and most commonly even in the cases he cites, the particular gun used only has a peripheral involvement to the charges being brought, or the lawsuit being filed.

I'm not saying to use a Browning 1919 for HD, but something like a shotgun or .357 revolver is perfectly fine and totally defensible.



> There is more that goes along with it after the incident.


I agree that we have to think about Problem Two in advance, but we shouldn't unnecessarily handicap ourselves when it solving to Problem One, by ignoring easily-defensible weapons because of some unfounded rumors circulating on the internet and in gun shops. If we don't survive the lethal encounter, then what happens in court is a rather moot point.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> And my point is, it _doesn't_ happen with anywhere near the frequency people on the internet claim it does. How can you expect us to believe "it happens" if no one can produce any actual evidence that it happens? You can tell us to believe in UFOs, too, but unless you can produce some evidence, you're not going to get very far.
> 
> The only person who can ever seem to actually cite real-life instances of this is Mas Ayoob, and most commonly even in the cases he cites, the particular gun used only has a peripheral involvement to the charges being brought, or the lawsuit being filed.
> 
> ...


I'm confident that I can pop 2-3shots in COM with my pistol calibers much more than I am to hit on target with my 12 guage. Simply because I rarely shoot the shotgun and have alot of practice time in on the pistol. That's important too, confidence in your ability.


----------



## DevilsJohnson (Oct 21, 2007)

For a 9mm It will depend on what pistol I've got out of the safe. My Sig 226 seems to like the 147 jhp (speer) a little more than my Springfield 1911 that shoots a 115 a lot better. IU usually use a Federal Hydro Shok in it. 

I reload a lot but find it a lot less troublesome for me to not reload my carry ammo. I shoot with some local and state LEO and they get a little bent about reloaded carry ammo. The judges will too stating that reloading a hp for carry you are thinking ahead about killing someone. I really do not understand the mind set but I don't use near as much carry ammo so it's not a big deal.

fivehourfrenzy: I'm not too far away from you (Rockcastle Co). That castle doct. really don't mean much of anything new to Ky residents. On paper it does saying things like the person no longer needs to be inside the house but there have been several people hung in court trying to practice it. If it were me I'd just stick to old school thought and wait them out till they are a good way in the door.

My reloads are HP as well being I want to be able to know exactly what the slug is going to do and switching back and forth to me just don't make as much sense. FMJ ammo can indeed pass through a human target. That is one of the reasons I don't carry a 9mm much anymore. I learned from personal experience. I most the time have a 45 ACP with me but have been known to carry a 40 S&W or a 9mm at times. Sure the 45 makes a big mess but it usually wont pass through being a slower slug to begin with and with a HP slows down a lot faster.

I do have a 12 ga that I use for home defense. I prefer a pistol mainly because I am more comfortable with it but I still keep one next to the bed.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Dredd said:


> I'm confident that I can pop 2-3shots in COM with my pistol calibers much more than I am to hit on target with my 12 guage. Simply because I rarely shoot the shotgun and have alot of practice time in on the pistol. That's important too, confidence in your ability.


I have no problem with that at all. A shooter should definitely use what (s)he's comfortable with. But don't discourage the use of better, more potent weapons - that many people find easier to use - by saying those users will go to jail or lose their assets for using something as prosaic as a shotgun or a revolver. Especially when those statements can't be back up with facts.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

DevilsJohnson said:


> fivehourfrenzy: I'm not too far away from you (Rockcastle Co). That castle doct. really don't mean much of anything new to Ky residents. On paper it does saying things like the person no longer needs to be inside the house but there have been several people hung in court trying to practice it. If it were me I'd just stick to old school thought and wait them out till they are a good way in the door.


Nice to meet someone else from KY. Yeah the Castle Doctrine says you can use deadly physical force if they're clearly attempting to break and enter. I still wouldn't try to blast them through the door...that's foolish in my opinion, especially if you can't 100% positively identify the person on the other side. I sat crouch behind a couch or table, set the sights on the door, and wait. That gives you a bit of time to identify the person entering so you don't go blowing your friend's head off, and if it takes a moment to get an ID, you're somewhat hidden as opposed to standing in broad view.

When it applies to me, there aren't any "circles" or dead-ends in my apartment. Nothing branches off. You walk in and you have the kitchen on one side, the living room, then the steps going up behind you. Up the steps are two bedrooms. Pretty simple. I'll let them have whatever they want from downstairs. Once they come up those steps, lives are in danger, and after having 100% confidence that it's a home invader, they'll take 9mm JHPs in the forehead, or 00 buckshot in the forehead. My so-called "sniper's perch" is right outside my bedroom, and looks straight down to almost the first step, and a few feet beyond the steps are visible. Nobody would see me unless they looked straight up upon entering the stairway, and it would be pretty dark up there. We keep a light on right next to the stairway but it doesn't come up into where I'd be waiting. You can see a person in total light when they get near the steps or come onto them, but someone looking over the wall-rail thingy from just outside my room is damn near invisible.

Oh yeah and I played football for Boyle County. BOTH years when we laid the smack down on Rockcastle at state. :mrgreen:


----------



## Arcus (Feb 13, 2008)

*Bullet expansion most important...*



Mike Barham said:


> A bullet that exits creates two holes instead of one. This theoretically increases the chance of pneumothorax/hemothorax, which may be more likely to cause death than the slightly greater permanent wound cavity created by an expanded JHP, depending on the location of the wound.


In reference to this and other previous posts re. degree of penetration, my personal experience in the operating room is that for a given energy, a bullet which expands and stops, expending all of its energy inside a body, will do more internal damage. Those which do not and continue out of the body in a through-and-through fashion without expansion and a sizeable exit wound do not cause meaningful additional bleeding with the exit wound. In the absence of a large exit wound, the most important and lethal sources of flood loss occur internally as caused by damage to arteries and well perfused organs, e.g. heart, kidney, spleen, liver, lungs. I've excluded the brain from that list for an obvious reason. It is entirely possible to hemorrhage most of ones total blood volume (~ 5L ) into the abdomen alone.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Arcus said:


> In reference to this and other previous posts re. degree of penetration, my personal experience in the operating room is that for a given energy, a bullet which expands and stops, expending all of its energy inside a body, will do more internal damage. Those which do not and continue out of the body in a through-and-through fashion without expansion and a sizeable exit wound do not cause meaningful additional bleeding with the exit wound. In the absence of a large exit wound, the most important and lethal sources of flood loss occur internally as caused by damage to arteries and well perfused organs, e.g. heart, kidney, spleen, liver, lungs. I've excluded the brain from that list for an obvious reason. It is entirely possible to hemorrhage most of ones total blood volume (~ 5L ) into the abdomen alone.


Very good point. And, internal bleeding is *much* more difficult to stop than a surface wound, and many times impossible.

I think it would be safe to say that a FMJ that *does* damage or rupture arteries or other vital organs necessary to maintain life in a human being, and that *does* exit would be a more lethal bullet.

On the flip side, I think it would also be safe to say that a JHP, in the grand scheme of things, is more lethal in that its expansion and total energy transfer inside the human body gives it a MUCH higher chance of causing damage to arteries or other vital organs (i.e. it expands and takes out the aortal wall when the FMJ does not).

It's a compromise. If the FMJ hits the right spots and exits, it's deadlier. If it misses where an expanded JHP would hit or doesn't expend enough of its energy to cause significant damage where an expanded JHP would, it's not deadlier. However, the chance of a JHP causing fatal damage and/or blood loss is more likely than a FMJ. In actuality they are two different arguments.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Maybe I am misunderstanding the physical mechanisms involved, but how does "expending its energy in the target" do anything? Energy is just the ability to do work - in this case, making a hole and expanding the bullet. A bullet that penetrates to the same depth and expands to the same diameter will do the same damage to the body, regardless of how much energy it uses to do so.

I agree with the point about internal bleeding, hence my comment about it depending on the location of the wound.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> Maybe I am misunderstanding the physical mechanisms involved, but how does "expending its energy in the target" do anything? Energy is just the ability to do work - in this case, making a hole and expanding the bullet. A bullet that penetrates to the same depth and expands to the same diameter will do the same damage to the body, regardless of how much energy it uses to do so.
> 
> I agree with the point about internal bleeding, hence my comment about it depending on the location of the wound.


I think the energy transfer is a valid point. If a non-expanding FMJ perforates a target, it has kinetic energy carrying it through, and then further once it exits. While an expanding JHP offers a larger, wider wound channel, the expansion acts as a brake to stop it from exiting.

Think of it this way. Say you have two 124gr bullets, one FMJ, one JHP. Say both have equal terminal velocity, energy, sectional density, and momentum. The only difference is that one expands, and one does not. Say the FMJ perforates the person and exits with exactly half of its original terminal V, E, SD, and M. Because it did not expand, it didn't have the increased SA (surface area) to expend all of its energy. Say the JHP expands and stops in the person. Because of expansion, the SA is increased, so being that it's wider, it can cover a larger area of body tissue and expend its energy. Similarly with snowshoes. If you jump on two feet of snow in boots, you'll punch through. With snowshoes, the weight (like the energey of the bullet) is spread over a wider area, and you stay on top. Higher sectional density means it has less SA to actually hit resistance (body tissue).

So in essence, you could have a non-expanding 9mm (.36) FMJ that expends 300ft/lbs and exits with 150ft/lbs of energy (450ft/lbs total). Or, an expanding 9mm (.36) JHP that mushrooms to .55-60 and expends all 450ft/lbs into the body. The high sectional density of the FMJ doesn't give it enough SA to stop in the body...there isn't enough resistance on its frontside to bring it to a halt in a person. The JHP that mushrooms increases its SA, meaning it has more tissue to punch through with the same V, E, and bullet weight, so the extra tissue it crushes causes it to lose all of its energy.

I think the whole thing about energy transfer is that full energy transfer means it has contributed all of its kinetic energy into crushing bodily tissue and/or organs, meaning maximum internal damage.


----------



## Arcus (Feb 13, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> Maybe I am misunderstanding the physical mechanisms involved, but how does "expending its energy in the target" do anything? Energy is just the ability to do work - in this case, making a hole and expanding the bullet. A bullet that penetrates to the same depth and expands to the same diameter will do the same damage to the body, regardless of how much energy it uses to do so.
> 
> I agree with the point about internal bleeding, hence my comment about it depending on the location of the wound.


Ok, just to make sure I'm communicating precisely and also not misunderstanding Mike or anyone else... the energy I'm referring to is the same as muzzle energy except inside the body of the target BG. It's the energy the bullet retains upon arriving at the target. Kinetic energy I believe is = one half times the product of mass times velocity squared. (sorry there doesn't seem to be an equation editor on this forum ) That's why the .45ACP is a better SD round than a .22LR - more energy to be expended in and do damage to a BG's arteries and internal organs.

As for ball vs. JHP, expansion inside the body, yadda yadda yadda... Mike makes the point that energy can be converted to work, or in geekspeak, force over a distance. In a gunfight, a bullet's energy is best spent forcing its way through vital structures. A larger bullet, or one which has deformed to become larger, will strike more structures on its way into a body if it has enough energy to continue its forward progress.

Hmph, as is my habit I went and made that more complicated than it needed to be. Rephrasing, if a bullet exits a BG that means it still had kinetic energy which could have been converted to internal damage had it deformed to a greater degree and come to a stop inside the BG. That sounds clearer.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Arcus said:


> Hmph, as is my habit I went and made that more complicated than it needed to be. Rephrasing, if a bullet exits a BG that means it still had kinetic energy which could have been converted to internal damage had it deformed to a greater degree and come to a stop inside the BG. That sounds clearer.


The way I see it, "energy transfer" itself does not cause more internal damage. The fact that it is able to transfer 100% of its kinetic energy is *because it made contact with enough tissue and/or organs to completely stop the bullet*, which means it induced maximum internal damage to the body.

In other words, complete energy transfer does not mean the bullet caused maximum damage. It's the other way around...the bullet causing maximum damage means the bullet transferred all of its kinetic energy. The only way a bullet can transfer 100% of its energy to a person is when the bullet has enough resistance to come to a complete stop. And the only way it can have enough resistance is if it engages enough tissue to bring it to a stop.

Say a 9mm bullet expanded to 300% diameter upon impact. It would demolish a huge portion of tissue, but wouldn't penetrate very far. All of its energy would be contained within a few inches, creating a very wide, disgusting wound, but not a deep one. The same 9mm that does not expand and exits the person would cause a straight-through wound, but would still have energy left over that could've damaged more tissue had it expanded. The trick to JHPs is finding one that expands to a maximum to damage the most tissue, but is still able to penetrate far enough to hit vital organs and/or the CNS.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> Maybe I am misunderstanding the physical mechanisms involved, but how does "expending its energy in the target" do anything? Energy is just the ability to do work - in this case, making a hole and expanding the bullet. A bullet that penetrates to the same depth and expands to the same diameter will do the same damage to the body, regardless of how much energy it uses to do so.
> 
> I agree with the point about internal bleeding, hence my comment about it depending on the location of the wound.


Perhaps it's enough energy deposit to cause an involuntary muscle reaction and in a best case circumstance cause the bad guy to collapse? I'm no doctor or physicist so I don't know. It probably has more to do with the mythological 1 shot and he's down idea.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

fivehourfrenzy said:


> The way I see it, "energy transfer" itself does not cause more internal damage. The fact that it is able to transfer 100% of its kinetic energy is *because it made contact with enough tissue and/or organs to completely stop the bullet*, which means it induced maximum internal damage to the body.
> 
> In other words, complete energy transfer does not mean the bullet caused maximum damage. It's the other way around...the bullet causing maximum damage means the bullet transferred all of its kinetic energy. The only way a bullet can transfer 100% of its energy to a person is when the bullet has enough resistance to come to a complete stop. And the only way it can have enough resistance is if it engages enough tissue to bring it to a stop.
> 
> Say a 9mm bullet expanded to 300% diameter upon impact. It would demolish a huge portion of tissue, but wouldn't penetrate very far. All of its energy would be contained within a few inches, creating a very wide, disgusting wound, but not a deep one. The same 9mm that does not expand and exits the person would cause a straight-through wound, but would still have energy left over that could've damaged more tissue had it expanded. The trick to JHPs is finding one that expands to a maximum to damage the most tissue, but is still able to penetrate far enough to hit vital organs and/or the CNS.


Your last sentence is exactly what the FBI tests. They test various pistol calibers and check the results they obtain in both expansion and penetration. They also examine the possible wound channel created. They then recommend certain bullets be used by field agents. I believe (please don't quote me) that the FBI seeks a bullet that can expand reliably and retain a majority of it's weight after expansion while penetrating 12"-14" and not much further (due to risk of exiting).

They recommend Speer Gold dot 124gr +p, Winchester Ranger T 127gr +p+ among others.

Here's a link to some of their test data. I don't know how complete this test is and I understand the information obtained is a few years old, but here it is. Click on the Tactcal Brief Links for some personal defense ammo ballistic results with pictures of the expanded bullet. http://www.firearmstactical.com/tactical.htm


----------



## Arcus (Feb 13, 2008)

*Excellent clarification!*



fivehourfrenzy said:


> ...The fact that it is able to transfer 100% of its kinetic energy is *because it made contact with enough tissue and/or organs to completely stop the bullet*, which means it induced maximum internal damage to the body...
> 
> ...Say a 9mm bullet expanded to 300% diameter upon impact. It would demolish a huge portion of tissue, but wouldn't penetrate very far. All of its energy would be contained within a few inches, creating a very wide, disgusting wound, but not a deep one. The same 9mm that does not expand and exits the person would cause a straight-through wound, but would still have energy left over that could've damaged more tissue had it expanded. The trick to JHPs is finding one that expands to a maximum to damage the most tissue, but is still able to penetrate far enough to hit vital organs and/or the CNS.


Bingo! :smt023 One of my biggest faults in this type of conversation is being too technical and unclear. You've captured it well here. The greater the muzzle energy of the round the more it needs to deform to keep the energy inside the BG and not something or someone behind him.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Arcus said:


> The greater the muzzle energy of the round the more it needs to deform to keep the energy inside the BG and not something or someone behind him.


And when a bullet transfers all of its energy to the BG, that means it's damaged the maximum amount of tissue possible with the given bullet. Once that's accomplished, a big determinant of how effective the bullet is is to look at penetration versus expansion. More expansion = less penetration, and less expansion = more penetration. Once you have enough penetration to make the bullet stop in the BG, then you work with expansion properties. If it's not penetrating far enough, decrease expansion. If it's penetrating more than necessary, increase expansion.

I believe the FBI standards are as follows:

6" or less = insufficient
7-12" = sufficient
13-16" = optimal
16"+ = sufficient, but not if it overpenetrates

I think I'm a bit off on my numbers, but it's pretty close.

Gold Dots pwn.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Okay, I agree with the energy transfer statement the way it's been rephrased. Again, it's just the ability to do the work of expanding the bullet and burrowing through the body. If we mean that "maximum energy transfer" means expanding the bullet as much as possible while still stopping in the body at a depth that damages the maximum number of vital organs, then yes, it is a good thing.

I just don't think there's anything magical about "energy transfer," which was one of the silly "stopping power" buzzwords (buzz phrases?) of the 1980s. It's more about the size of the wound cavity, which is directly related to the size of the expanded bullet and the depth of penetration.

I carry JHPs and encourage everyone to do the same.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> I carry JHPs and encourage everyone to do the same.


How are Hydra-shoks different than standard JHPs? I know Gold Dots use uni-core technology to keep the jacket from separating from the core, which is the most common cause of a JHP failing to expand.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Hydra-Shoks use a central post in the hollow cavity that supposedly channels pressure better for expansion. However, they don't seem to do any better or worse than other modern JHPs. For a while, they were the hot thing, but now they're just another bullet.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> Hydra-Shoks use a central post in the hollow cavity that supposedly channels pressure better for expansion. However, they don't seem to do any better or worse than other modern JHPs. For a while, they were the hot thing, but now they're just another bullet.


Then you have the famous "Black talon" from Winchester that was taken off the market and had the black coating removed. Current Winchester Ranger T rounds are this same bullet. Some claim it's better than before. It was labeled as a "cop killer" bullet for a while I believe.

There is also the Barnes X Bullet used by Corbon in their DPX line which some people claim to have success with in testing.

Yet, there is no actual evidence that any of these are better at stopping a person than the others. I say, find a load you can group well, fired reliably in your gun, feeds reliable, doesn't have failures, and you can get easily. Then you use that one. I don't have enough time to test every single thing out there :mrgreen:

Personally I like Gold Dot, some people only use Corbon, some people only use Federal or Hornady or Winchester Ranger. Then you have different weights. Some people like a light and fast bullet, some people like a heavier and slower bullet. You have +p and +p+ etc as well. It's enough to make you go crazy trying to decide what to use. So my solution was to get a few of each and shoot a grouping of about 5 rounds at a target. Which one felt best to me, was there any issues? Did I hit my intended target?

The answer was yes to each question with every load I tried. I don't have means to test ballistics and expansion etc. However, I could use some online resources to get an idea of what worked well. Based on that information I made a decision based on what I could easily obtain, what the price was, how well I shot it, and if it worked reliably in my gun.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

*Dredd* is on the money. People spend way too much time poring over the minutiae of one premium bullet versus the next. They all work well if they are shot well.

There are more important things to think about when it comes to self-defense. I suggest everyone just pick the premium round that works in their gun and move on.


----------



## Dredd (Feb 22, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> *Dredd* is on the money. People spend way too much time poring over the minutiae of one premium bullet versus the next. They all work well if they are shot well.
> 
> There are more important things to think about when it comes to self-defense. I suggest everyone just pick the premium round that works in their gun and move on.


I should mention that I tested Double Tap Gold Dot 124gr +p, Speer Gold Dot 124gr +p, some Hornady Tap, Winchester Ranger T 127gr +p+, Corbon DPX and standard 115gr +p, Hydrashok 135gr and 115gr +p+.

Tested in a Glock 17, Smith & Wesson M&P9, Springfield XD9, HK P30, HK USPc 9mm, and a Beretta 92FS. Every round fired reliably, fed fine, and generally had no issues. So I would wager that any quality gun would handle any quality ammo with ease. I have only had any issues with certain brands of practice ammo in any of the listed guns(low power cheap ammo and reloads). I would have to say that most ammo marketed for personal defense is manufacturerd and loaded to tighter tolerances and QA'd a bit more thoroughly. Still, I would test a magazine to be sure.

I only own the HK P30, but had access to the others through a couple friends who went in on the ammo purchases with me to split the cost and some of the testing.


----------



## fivehourfrenzy (Aug 12, 2007)

My Doubletaps came in the mail yesterday. They're pretty.


----------

