Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Opinions on Winchester Ranger-T ammo?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    6,142
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Dude.
    RLTW

    Former Action Guy
    Disclosure: I am affiliated PRN with a tactical training center, but I speak only for myself. I have no idea what we sell, other than CLP and training. I receive no income from sale of hard goods.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,520
    Feedback Score
    0

    Opinions on Winchester Ranger-T ammo?

    Apples and oranges but I’ve had good luck with the ranger t in 230gr 45acp. Killed a couple cows with them, they did the job and expanded well. They even had the talons like the black talons of old. These are the tan boxes though. I’ve had some of the newer bonded Winchester sd ammo and wasn’t as impressed. I started loading my own with gold dots.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by ubet; 03-15-21 at 23:18.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Phoenix, Az
    Posts
    4,370
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    My department recently switched our 9mm duty ammo to the Ranger One. The One is basically the 147 grain bonded ammo that has a blue polymer insert in the cavity that's supposed to prevent plugging. Similar to the concept of the Hornady Critical Duty.

    I dont believe we have had any shootings with it yet but I guess it performed pretty well in the testing.

    When I asked about it on some LE type pages I was told that it's too new to have any real street data yet, but that the 147 Ranger T that it is based on has a proven track record.
    C co 1/30th Infantry Regiment
    3rd Brigade 3rd Infantry Division
    2002-2006
    OIF 1 and 3

    IraqGunz:
    No dude is going to get shot in the chest at 300 yards and look down and say "What is that, a 3 MOA group?"

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    488
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    The talons introduced "cutting" as a mechanism into the wounding process instead of just crushing.

    I'm a fan of HST but would carry Ranger T with no issues. +p+ and 127 aren't my thing

    147 standard HST is easier to shoot, easier on gun, better through intermediates

    just find a load you can always get more of and is 200 rds+ reliable in your specific gun

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Patron State of Shooting
    Posts
    4,396
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Thought Id throw some chrono info up for yall, in case anyone cares. Winchester Ranger 127 +P+.
    G17..10 round average:1268fps with 18fps SD.
    G19...10 round average 1236 with 18fps SD.
    Accuracy was excellent out to 25 yards I tested. Recoil was not at all much more noticeable.
    Last edited by Straight Shooter; 05-14-21 at 20:15.
    The obedient always think of themselves as virtuous rather than the cowards they really are.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    11,718
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Straight Shooter View Post
    Thought Id throw some chrono info up for yall, in case anyone cares.
    G17..10 round average:1268fps with 18fps SD.
    G19...10 round average 1236 with 18fps SD.
    Accuracy was excellent out to 25 yards I tested. Recoil was not at all much more noticeable.
    You're talking about the 127gr +P+ right? Those can't be 147gr numbers.

    I've watched a few videos testing the 147gr Ranger T's out of different barrel lengths. I personally didn't have much luck with the 127gr +P+ when I tested it, but apparently others have had issues with that load also as far as reliable expansion is concerned. Most 147gr loads, no matter what manufacturer, seem to have more leeway for barrel length changes than lighter 9mm loads; this carries across calibers (heavy-for-caliber rounds have less velocity loss when going to shorter barrels) as a general rule. However, from the couple of videos I saw it appears that the Ranger T 147gr also suffers from that performance deficit when fired from shorter barrels. Keep in mind that the velocity loss in a subsonic is not much when shot from a 4" or a 3" barrel. It appears that the Ranger T's are susceptible to even a little loss of speed. Just throwing these numbers out there from memory, but a 4" will yield ~ 950fps while a 3" (or 3.1", I don't remember exactly) was running at about 920fps or thereabouts. The expansion difference in the same test with different barrel lengths in gel was considerable, given the minor reduction in velocity. Therefore I will keep the 147gr Ranger T's for guns with 4" tubes (or the Scorpion with a 7.75" barrel) and HST 147gr for the more compact CCW pistols. HST 147's have consistently performed well in my own test as well as other videos I've seen no matter the barrel length.

    Bottom line? I think the Ranger T's are designed to perform in a very tight window of velocity; HST seems to be more flexible.
    Last edited by ABNAK; 05-14-21 at 19:49.
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry
    F**k China!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Patron State of Shooting
    Posts
    4,396
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ABNAK View Post
    You're talking about the 127gr +P+ right? Those can't be 147gr numbers.

    I've watched a few videos testing the 147gr Ranger T's out of different barrel lengths. I personally didn't have much luck with the 127gr +P+ when I tested it, but apparently others have had issues with that load also as far as reliable expansion is concerned. Most 147gr loads, no matter what manufacturer, seem to have more leeway for barrel length changes than lighter 9mm loads; this carries across calibers (heavy-for-caliber rounds have less velocity loss when going to shorter barrels) as a general rule. However, from the couple of videos I saw it appears that the Ranger T 147gr also suffers from that performance deficit when fired from shorter barrels. Keep in mind that the velocity loss in a subsonic is not much when shot from a 4" or a 3" barrel. It appears that the Ranger T's are susceptible to even a little loss of speed. Just throwing these numbers out there from memory, but a 4" will yield ~ 950fps while a 3" (or 3.1", I don't remember exactly) was running at about 920fps or thereabouts. The expansion difference in the same test with different barrel lengths in gel was considerable, given the minor reduction in velocity. Therefore I will keep the 147gr Ranger T's for guns with 4" tubes (or the Scorpion with a 7.75" barrel) and HST 147gr for the more compact CCW pistols. HST 147's have consistently performed well in my own test as well as other videos I've seen no matter the barrel length.

    Bottom line? I think the Ranger T's are designed to perform in a very tight window of velocity; HST seems to be more flexible.
    Yes, dang it...shoulda put that info up..Ill edit.
    The obedient always think of themselves as virtuous rather than the cowards they really are.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,747
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    As stated in another thread leave the 127gr +P+ to the subguns. The rest of the Ranger-T bullets are good performers. Unfortunately Id put Winchester QC behind Federal/ATK/Speer, I have a Ranger-T with a backwards primer in a drawer somewhere to prove it...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •