9mm Carry Ammo: Federal HST vs. Speer Gold-Dot vs. Underwood Gold-Dot

[Ron3]

I carry a G19 loaded with the Speer 124 gr +p Gold Dot.

It supposedly tests well and it's extremely popular. However it's bare gelatin performance is just at 12 inches. (the bare minimum recommended by the FBI)

Anyway I have that because I'm out of good 147 gr JHP's. 147 gr ammo doesn't "feel" like it's stressing anything. The gun just "rolls" a little more and the muzzle "flips" a little less. Muzzle blast is reduced and there is no sonic crack down range. Overall it's more pleasant to fire.

That being said 1300 fps 115 gr +p+ ammo (To include the gold dots) does feel "harsh" and recoil is stronger than you'd expect from your 9mm. I've never fired any hot 147 gr ammo but I'll bet it starts to recoil closer to a bigger caliber at that point.

I've only used Underwood Ammo in a glock 20 10mm and it was great ammo. Very accurate. However I did get two failures to feed in 100 rounds and I suspect the hot ammo (factory recoil spring) was the culprit.

I would not trust my life to ammo that runs a gun on the ragged edge of safety or reliability.

Moving up in caliber is the more reliable move if you want faster / bigger bullets.

[Badger89]

My first choices in order of preference: 147gr +P HST, 147gr Gold Dot +P+ as loaded by Underwood ammo.

Check out the ridiculously good Underwood stuff at the tnoutdoors9 channel on YouTube. Foocking amazing and no pressure signs.

Edit: I own both and they both run fine in my g26.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

I carry a G19 loaded with the Speer 124 gr +p Gold Dot.

It supposedly tests well and it's extremely popular. However it's bare gelatin performance is just at 12 inches. (the bare minimum recommended by the FBI)

Anyway I have that because I'm out of good 147 gr JHP's. 147 gr ammo doesn't "feel" like it's stressing anything. The gun just "rolls" a little more and the muzzle "flips" a little less. Muzzle blast is reduced and there is no sonic crack down range. Overall it's more pleasant to fire.

That being said 1300 fps 115 gr +p+ ammo (To include the gold dots) does feel "harsh" and recoil is stronger than you'd expect from your 9mm. I've never fired any hot 147 gr ammo but I'll bet it starts to recoil closer to a bigger caliber at that point.

I've only used Underwood Ammo in a glock 20 10mm and it was great ammo. Very accurate. However I did get two failures to feed in 100 rounds and I suspect the hot ammo (factory recoil spring) was the culprit.

I would not trust my life to ammo that runs a gun on the ragged edge of safety or reliability.

Moving up in caliber is the more reliable move if you want faster / bigger bullets.

Finally, a couple people who have actually used the stuff and aren't just armchair quarterbacking it. Thanks guys!

BufordTJustice - have you ever done any back to back recoil testing of the 147 grain +P HST and the 147 grain +P+ Underwood Gold Dots? I'm curious how they compare in terms of shootability.

Ron3 - For sure you should always verify functionality with your weapon before carrying the ammo. I prefer 9mm to larger calibers for the added magazine capacity. It seemed like according to Doc, for quality JHP ammo 9mm = .357 SIG = 40 S&W = .45 ACP in terms of performance. Given even remotely similar performance per round, I'll take the extra rounds please.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but at 1150-1175fps, won't the Underwood 147 grain +P+ be supersonic? I think even the Underwood 147 grain +P at ~1125fps would be supersonic or at least transonic. I wonder how much supersonic vs subsonic actually affects shootability... BufordTJustice, can you chime in?

One more thing no one has brought up yet is the different casings. Federal/Speer casings are nickle plated, while the Underwood casings are bare brass. Would this have any real world effect on reliability or corrosion resistance?

[bzdog]

However, the point of this thread was to compare the Underwood ammo specifically to two of what I believe to be the best options for 9mm defensive loads currently available.

OK, I see what you are after now.

As for whether the Underwood ammo may experience performance anomalies under certain conditions compared to the Gold Dots loaded by Speer, that is exactly what I would like to discuss. Can you think of a specific situation where the Underwood ammo may fail to perform as well as the Speer due to it's increased velocity,

The ammunition mfg will design the bullet to expand reliably at a certain velocity range. If you run that bullet at a different range it may or may not perform as intended.

or are you just not a fan of new ammo?

Actually, I was a previous boutique ammunition fanboy. It took me a long time to come to the conclusion to realize I was not only chasing benefits that not only may not be there, but to realize there was a risk that there may be negative performance potential.

I also came to see that small companies can produce good results one year and not so good results the next.

In the end, if you *know* the performance envelope the bullet was designed for and the loading is in that window, then there is no issue using a bullet like the Gold Dot loaded by someone else. But you'd be advised to find that out and, frankly, I no longer see the point.

The HST and Gold Dots all perform well. Getting it loaded by someone else isn't going to help in any significant way and may hurt. Why bother?

-john

[BufordTJustice]

Finally, a couple people who have actually used the stuff and aren't just armchair quarterbacking it. Thanks guys!

BufordTJustice - have you ever done any back to back recoil testing of the 147 grain +P HST and the 147 grain +P+ Underwood Gold Dots? I'm curious how they compare in terms of shootability.

Ron3 - For sure you should always verify functionality with your weapon before carrying the ammo. I prefer 9mm to larger calibers for the added magazine capacity. It seemed like according to Doc, for quality JHP ammo 9mm = .357 SIG = 40 S&W = .45 ACP in terms of performance. Given even remotely similar performance per round, I'll take the extra rounds please.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but at 1150-1175fps, won't the Underwood 147 grain +P+ be supersonic? I think even the Underwood 147 grain +P at ~1125fps would be supersonic or at least transonic. I wonder how much supersonic vs subsonic actually affects shootability... BufordTJustice, can you chime in?

One more thing no one has brought up yet is the different casings. Federal/Speer casings are nickle plated, while the Underwood casings are bare brass. Would this have any real world effect on reliability or corrosion resistance?

Badger, I have shot them back to back and the Underwood is hotter, but even with that ammo my g26 is still very easy to shoot very quickly. I do use a Wolff two piece guide rod and 22lb spring set....runs WWB and Tula with no issue and soaks up a good bit of recoil and net muzzle rise. Std pressure 9mm feels like .380.

Federal's +P isn't that much hotter than their std pressure 147 gr HST to my mk1mod0 hands. The Underwood feels very similar to Winny Ranger +P+ i used to have a couple years back.

The 124gr round is a littler over driven with the Underwood loadings. The petals begin to curl back on themselves a bit. The 147 gold dot doesn't do that. I don't think the subsonic/transsonic/supersonic issue matters much at handgun ranges.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

[Badger89]

The 124gr round is a littler over driven with the Underwood loadings. The petals begin to curl back on themselves a bit. The 147 gold dot doesn't do that.

Great info, thanks! I had wondered about that. The 124gr. +P Speer loading already seems to open up rather nicely compared to the rather disappointing expansion of the Speer 147gr. loads. The Underwood 124gr. +P+ has less lead and more energy than the 147gr. +P+, so it makes sense that somethings gotta give sooner or later.

I may be overgeneralizing here, but I think lighter loads are more sensitive to velocity changes than heavier loads. A little off topic but I think still related, tnoutdoors9 still has the videos up from when he tested the Federal Hi-Shock 115gr. standard pressure and the Hi-Shock 115gr. +P+. Same bullet, different velocities, VERY different results. The high pressure load had good penetration and left a very large cavity, but broke up inside the ballistics gel. (You could make the argument that it's being driven too fast.) The standard pressure load did not expand at all and penetrated 18" of ballistics gel plus around a foot of water jugs. (You could make the argument that it's being driven too slow to expand.) Yet the difference in muzzle velocity was only 100 fps between the two.

[ABNAK]

Great info, thanks! I had wondered about that. The 124gr. +P Speer loading already seems to open up rather nicely compared to the rather disappointing expansion of the Speer 147gr. loads. The Underwood 124gr. +P+ has less lead and more energy than the 147gr. +P+, so it makes sense that somethings gotta give sooner or later.

I may be overgeneralizing here, but I think lighter loads are more sensitive to velocity changes than heavier loads. A little off topic but I think still related, tnoutdoors9 still has the videos up from when he tested the Federal Hi-Shock 115gr. standard pressure and the Hi-Shock 115gr. +P+. Same bullet, different velocities, VERY different results. The high pressure load had good penetration and left a very large cavity, but broke up inside the ballistics gel. (You could make the argument that it's being driven too fast.) The standard pressure load did not expand at all and penetrated 18" of ballistics gel plus around a foot of water jugs. (You could make the argument that it's being driven too slow to expand.) Yet the difference in muzzle velocity was only 100 fps between the two.

That would be 9BPLE. It's been around for quite a few years (decades?) and has a pretty good street rep. Can't really argue with actual shooting results, especially when there have been many over the years from different agencies.

[whick1]

To me what little bit extra you get with the Underwood +p+ it is not worth the added pressure that it creates which will result in more wear on your gun and more recoil. I personally prefer the 124 gr Gold Dot in 9mm. The HSt is a good load as well but does not seem to have as much penetration as other quality loads.

[BufordTJustice]

To me what little bit extra you get with the Underwood +p+ it is not worth the added pressure that it creates which will result in more wear on your gun and more recoil. I personally prefer the 124 gr Gold Dot in 9mm. The HSt is a good load as well but does not seem to have as much penetration as other quality loads.

No.

The g27 or g23, for example use slides that are lighter than their 9mm counterparts....and they use the same recoil spring assemblies. Yet 40s&w is a much more violent cartridge than any +p+ loading from Underwood.

My agency issues +p duty ammo and trains with +p ammo as well (Speer lawman). After countless thousand of rounds, no additional "wear" has been seen. We have Glock 21's with more than 20k rounds that still will ring a gong at 100 yards while standing. Just more frequent RSA replacement....about every 3k to 4k rounds.

Underwood doesn't flatten the primer any more than the std gold dot loads...and not nearly as much as, say, buffalo bore ammo....which is super hot.

Also, HST meets FBI protocol for penetration depth and performs nearly as well as a bonded round through laminated auto glass.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

[whick1]

No.

The g27 or g23, for example use slides that are lighter than their 9mm counterparts....and they use the same recoil spring assemblies. Yet 40s&w is a much more violent cartridge than any +p+ loading from Underwood.

My agency issues +p duty ammo and trains with +p ammo as well (Speer lawman). After countless thousand of rounds, no additional "wear" has been seen. We have Glock 21's with more than 20k rounds that still will ring a gong at 100 yards while standing. Just more frequent RSA replacement....about every 3k to 4k rounds.

Underwood doesn't flatten the primer any more than the std gold dot loads...and not nearly as much as, say, buffalo bore ammo....which is super hot.

Also, HST meets FBI protocol for penetration depth and performs nearly as well as a bonded round through laminated auto glass.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

Yes.
Higher pressure rounds will cause accelerated parts wear quicker that lower pressure rounds. And while you are right the Glock 40s will wear out before a 9mm but that same 9mm will wear out quicker when shooting +p+ than shooting normal SAAMI pressure rounds or even +p. I am not sure the exact numbers of rounds quicker but it will wear out quicker.

As far as the HST is concerned it is a great rd and does meet FBI protocol but from my informal testing and some results I have seen from our dept as well as a couple other local depts it did not penetrate as well as Gold Dots or Bonded Ranger due to these tests our dept as well as a couple others went away from the HST. Would I feel outgunned or be concerned with HST NO I would most definitely not but given the choice our dept went with a different round.

[BufordTJustice]

Still no.

We have G22s with tens of thousands of rounds an NO "quicker wear" and .40 S&W is a much more violent round than ANY 9mm (+P+ or not, you're simply limited by bullet weight and case volume), especially the old 165gr and (current) 180gr Speer Gold Dots (and Lawman) that we currently use. They have less slide mass than a 9mm and the same RSA, yet you do not seem concerned about basically every .40 S&W handgun extant. To use Underwood +P+ is to apply less overall wear than one of the most common duty handguns (G22/G23) experiences EVERY TIME IT IS FIRED. There is no more primer flattening and nearly identical ejection distance and pattern for the Und 147gr +P+ as compared to a 124gr +P Gold dot from a gen3 G26, gen4 G26, gen3 G19, gen4 G19, gen3 G17, and gen4 G17.

Whick, if you're "worried" about wear, you've unknowingly indicted the longevity and reliability of nearly EVERY .40 S&W handgun in duty use today. I don't see any factual information that a) negates my personal experience or b) shows that the Underwood exposes a handgun to any "undue" wear.

You say that higher pressure rounds will cause more parts wear, so how long will a G22 last (since it is clearly worse off than any 9mm)? I've seen two G22s at my agency that have over 40k rounds and are only on their 5th RSA each. I think you're trying to gild the lily here. How many folks even put 10k rounds through their pistol? Not many. So I think the concern for additional wear is academic at this point.

If we were talking about Buffalo Bore or Double Tap (Which have both shown pressure signs in my guns), then it would be a different story. Also to mitigate wear and recoil, I use a Wolff 22lb recoil spring set with their blackened stainless in my G26. The 147gr Undywood feel softer than Speer 124gr +P with the stock RSA. Problem solved for under $40.

The HST, when shot into calibrated bal gel, has shown to be almost identical to Gold Dots in my agency's testing (using full FBI protocols and proper gel mixture). It penetrated slightly less in bare gel and Denim covered blocks because it expanded more, but the difference in pen depth was not stark. My agency wen with Gold Dots because we get them a lot cheaper for whatever reason and they are actually "bonded" (and this gave warm fuzzies to the CoC).

Folks, use the Underwood 147gr +P+ if you want. Excellent performance (and the best hog round in 9mm).

Yes.
Higher pressure rounds will cause accelerated parts wear quicker that lower pressure rounds. And while you are right the Glock 40s will wear out before a 9mm but that same 9mm will wear out quicker when shooting +p+ than shooting normal SAAMI pressure rounds or even +p. I am not sure the exact numbers of rounds quicker but it will wear out quicker.

As far as the HST is concerned it is a great rd and does meet FBI protocol but from my informal testing and some results I have seen from our dept as well as a couple other local depts it did not penetrate as well as Gold Dots or Bonded Ranger due to these tests our dept as well as a couple others went away from the HST. Would I feel outgunned or be concerned with HST NO I would most definitely not but given the choice our dept went with a different round.