Winchester PDX1 ammo

[cathellsk]

Is there any info on this new round from Winchester? I've read it was adopted by the FBI but couldn't find anything with a search. I used PDX and PDX1 and the search couldn't find anything. I picked up 4 boxes of the 147gr. 9mm the other day.

[tpd223]

Try this;


https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=26461

[blindluck]

I saw that ammunition2go had some earlier. I passed up on them until results came back in.

tpd223, my understanding is that they are not RA9T (or even RA9B) that you referred to but the new S9MMPDB1 as seen here:
http://www.winchester.com/PRODUCTS/newitems/whatsnewcontent.aspx?productid=70

[Jim from Houston]

tpd223, my understanding is that they are not RA9T (or even RA9B) that you referred to but the new S9MMPDB1 as seen here:
http://www.winchester.com/PRODUCTS/newitems/whatsnewcontent.aspx?productid=70

You're getting confused by the fact that Winchester uses different model numbers to refer to the same product depending on whether it's packaged for LE or civilian sale... "S9MMPDB1" is a Winchester commercial designation, "RA9B" is a law enforcement designation...the two are not mutually exclusive (i.e. both can refer to the same round) rather they refer to the difference in packaging (LE or commercial).

Don't know where you got this "reference to RA9T" that you talk about...tpd223 made no such reference...

[tpd223]

Having seen all of the above shot and recovered, the new commercial whateverit'snamed bonded round, the round tested by Doc Roberts, and the rounds I've seen tested here sure look like the same bullet to me.

These are not the same as the older version of the Winchester Bonded line, but are basically a bonded Ranger-T bullet.

[blindluck]

You're getting confused by the fact that Winchester uses different model numbers to refer to the same product depending on whether it's packaged for LE or civilian sale... "S9MMPDB1" is a Winchester commercial designation, "RA9B" is a law enforcement designation...the two are not mutually exclusive (i.e. both can refer to the same round) rather they refer to the difference in packaging (LE or commercial).

Don't know where you got this "reference to RA9T" that you talk about...tpd223 made no such reference...

The RA9T reference was my error but now I AM confused. Does stating that the two product codes are "not mutually exclusive" mean that they are verified to be identical or that they "can refer to the same round?"

If I'm wrong, I'm happy to admit it.

[Jim from Houston]

Go to the Winchester link that you provided in your post...let me quote the first line on that page: "The new Winchester Supreme Elite Bonded PDX1, which was chosen by the FBI as their primary service round, is now available in a full line of popular handgun calibers."

The exact round chosen by the FBI for their new .40S&W duty load is the "Q4355" version of the RA40B round, which is the exact round that is tested by DocGKR in the link that tpd223 provided in his first post...

The confusion arises from the fact that Winchester had two different versions of some of the "Ranger Bonded" rounds, most notably the .40, which was modified to make it perform better in the FBI competition...Winchester has said that the RA40B rounds have since all been changed over to this modified "FBI" version, which is also what they say is used for the PDX1.

And the kicker, of course, is that DocGKR has just recently shown us a very disturbing series of tests (which tpd223 linked to) that show this round giving poor performance in the 4-layer denim test...

[blindluck]

Jim and TPD223, you are both right. I am wrong. I trusted but verified (Ronnie Reagan would be proud) with Paul Nowak at Winchester who confirmed that they are identical except for packaging as you both already knew. Sorry that I created any additional confusion with my posts.

[tpd223]

"that show this round giving poor performance in the 4-layer denim test.."




In the .40 that is, the 9mm round looked fine to me.

[Jim from Houston]

Yeah, Doc's test with the 124gr RA9BA looked fine (somewhat disappointing RD on the 4 layer denim, however)...I'd still like to see the 147 tested, since that, like the .40 is one that Winchester has been reported to have "messed around with" for FBI testing purposes...I'm just sort of wary of this design until I see some consistent good results over a period of time.

I currently go with the old school RA9T, simply because I've seen it tested multiple times, over a course of years, and it's always seemed to do the exact same thing, namely 13-14 inches pen and rd of .60 to .62 regardless of denim or not...

I think I remember you saying that in Topeka you had been running both the 124+p Gold Dots and the RA9124TP...is that still the case...if so, how would you compare performance you've seen from the two?

[tpd223]

We have been running the 124gr +P Gold Dot ever since that round became available.

In 2006, due to a fiasco involving our attempted transition to Glock .40s that didn't work out too well, we ended up back with the 9mm for issue.
By that time of the year we couldn't get any +P Gold Dot as NYPD had put their order in for the year, and then Chicago had also adopted that round, so we were told a better than six months wait due to being in line behind like 60,000 cops for ammo (CCI has tremendous customer service in my experience though, just sayin).

Well, cops need ammo, and I was the primary firearms guy and rangemaster so it was my job to get them ammo, so we ended up with the 124gr +P Ranger-T as our duty load. I was worried about performance through glass as it was not a bonded load, but I thought "How often do we shoot people in cars?,,, almost never".
Our next three OISs were suspects in cars.

Anyway, the two loads are pretty much basically equivalent in my observation of testing and actual OISs.

I had a huge stash of the Winchester afterwards, so some of it was issued for BUGs and off-duty guns well into 2008.

Both brands have very good QC, but I have been particularly impressed with Winchester's QC over the past few years.
I noted that in 2007 when we shot up our old duty ammo in training (the Winchester stuff) to get new duty ammo for the year we had zero malfunctions at the range.
This is noted as we have a wide variety of shooter sizes and shapes, and we have a large number of G26s that are used for BUGs and off-duty by our folks.
320 shooters, firing around 400 Glock 9mms, with probably 20-30 3rd gen 9mm S&Ws thrown in for off-duty guns, not one single malfunction.

Personally, I prefer the Ranger-T line for carry due to the wadcutter-ish nose shape these rounds have (in the 9mm) and due to the action of the jacket being a plus, at least theoretically.
I'm a student of Jim Cirillo's work,,,, and I have seen head shots glance off just as he noted.
The Ranger-T 9mms have a very sharp edge for a JHP, the 124gr +P and 127gr +P+ tend to "dig" very well into bone and car sheet metal in my observation.

That being said, if ordered to do so I would carry any of the 124gr +P to 147gr Gold Dot or Ranger-T rounds without a complaint.

I'm liking this new 124gr +p as it appears to be nothing more than the 124gr +P Ranger-T bullet with the core now bonded to the jacket.