Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: 9mm 147gr and Short Barrels

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    33
    Feedback Score
    0

    9mm 147gr and Short Barrels

    I am about to order a variety of 9mm ammo off of DocGKR's to see what our pistols like. I'm going to try to standardize to one round. Pistols to be used are a Glock 19, Kahr PM9, and HK P2000Sk.

    I have a suspicion that we'll end up using a standard pressure round since my wife will be more comfortable with it.

    How do the various 147gr loadings perform out of the PM9's short barrel?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,343
    Feedback Score
    0

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Outer Tumblungia
    Posts
    1,141
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by bratch View Post
    I am about to order a variety of 9mm ammo off of DocGKR's to see what our pistols like. I'm going to try to standardize to one round. Pistols to be used are a Glock 19, Kahr PM9, and HK P2000Sk.

    I have a suspicion that we'll end up using a standard pressure round since my wife will be more comfortable with it.

    How do the various 147gr loadings perform out of the PM9's short barrel?
    Out of a Sig P226 (4.4" bbl), muzzle velocities run anywhere between 900 - 1000 fps with averages around 940 - 950. Kahr's website shows an average velocity of 845 fps with a standard deviation of 43 fps at 5 yards using Federal Hydra-Shok 147 gr.

    Personally, I like the Winchester Ranger Bonded 147 gr. (Q4364)(http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/catalo...oducts_id/2847). However, I don't know what the velocity threshold floor is for reliable expansion. Most "short barrel" loads for the 9mm are 124 gr +P's (http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/catalo...roducts_id/655).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    12
    Feedback Score
    0
    In a response to a question about which grain 9mm Ranger ammo to use in a short barreled pistol including 3.5" and 3", I got the following response from Winchester LE Ammo:
    When we redesigned the Ranger T Series of ammunition we widened the velocity window under which the round would expand to allow for the slower velocities that shorter than standard barrels produce. What this means is that if you own a standard or sub compact pistol the round should have adequate expansion. In 9mm I would recommend the 147 grain bullet as it loses a lower velocity percentage than the faster lighter bullet in shorter than normal barrels. This is because the bullet has more dwell time in the bore and has a greater opportunity to burn the powder before the bullet exits the bore. Powder that is burned outside the bore does nothing for velocity. The lighter faster bullets generally have more powder to burn and since the lighter faster bullets have less time in the bore they are not efficient burners of powder in the shorter barrels.

    We increased the velocity window under which the round would expand by increasing the size of the hollowpoint, tweaking the jacket thickness and the depth of the cuts on the inside of the jacket petal segments.

    Sincerely,

    Paul Nowak
    Senior Technical Specialist
    Winchester Law Enforcement Ammunition
    I hope this helps.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Outer Tumblungia
    Posts
    1,141
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by blindluck View Post
    In a response to a question about which grain 9mm Ranger ammo to use in a short barreled pistol including 3.5" and 3", I got the following response from Winchester LE Ammo...
    Thanks for that info. Unfortunately, we still don't know what the lower end of that "velocity window" is. I have a message in to Paul Nowak on an unrelated matter and if I can gain his attention, I'll ask him if they have any published data about those velocity windows.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    118
    Feedback Score
    0
    In my highly scientific wetpack tests, Win. RA9T expanded and penetrated beautifully out of a PM9.
    Speer 124+P standard and short barrel loads did well also.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    253
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by blindluck View Post
    In a response to a question about which grain 9mm Ranger ammo to use in a short barreled pistol including 3.5" and 3", I got the following response from Winchester LE Ammo:


    I hope this helps.
    That's one of the better and truthful responses that I've seen provided by a manufacturer. For the same reasons, I tend to lean to 147 grainers out of short barrels, unless you are comfortable with the greater muzzle blast of fast, light bullets. Speer 124+P would be my choice, if that be the case.

    Tim

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    651
    Feedback Score
    0
    I had a very similar question recently between the Federal 124gr HST and the 147gr HST out of a Glock 26 and a PM9. I wanted a round that was a soft shooter so anyone in my family could control it, and the newer generation of bullets seem to need the velocity boost of +P less now. Anyway, went with standard pressure for my tests. No chrono data, just subjective "feel" and observation.

    I had a friend load a random mix of 124gr and 147gr on my mags, and I could not tell any difference in recoil, blast, barrel rise, or shot-to-shot split times. My friend was watching, and he could not see any difference either. Again - no measurements were taken, just seat-of-the-pants observation.

    I did notice the 147gr had a slightly longer OAL, and I wondered if this might potentially cause feeding issues, perhaps if gun got dirty. Didn't experience any feeding issues, and probably fired 200 rounds without cleaning in this little test.

    The following link is to ATK's test data for the HST (early data - no +P rounds available).

    http://le.atk.com/pdf/PierceCountyWorkshop.pdf

    You'll notice penetration depth was uniformly good through all barriers, with the 147gr going a little deeper, but not by much. In most cases, both weights went around 12" to 13".

    Expansion was equally pretty good, with the 124gr edging out the 147gr, but again not by much.

    I ended up going with the 124gr, figuring if the rounds performed as advertised, either would be good, while if the rounds failed to perform, expansion would suffer, while penetration would increase. As they all penetrate adequately now, extra penetration wasn't a goal, but loosing expansion might be an issue, and I figured the faster 124gr might hold expansion a little better than the 147gr.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    406
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I have 9mm down to two rounds. For my G26 I carry Corbon 115 grain +P. For my service barrel sized 9mm I run Corbon 124 grain +P. I was told by reliable sources that in 9mm you really need no less then 1,000 fps for reliable expansion. In a short barreled weapon a lighter bullet will preform better since it will have a higher velocity. In a service length barrel the lighter bullet tends to go so fast that it can shead it's jacket when impacting hard objects, this is why I go with the 124 grain in full size handguns.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    406
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by moonshot View Post
    I had a very similar question recently between the Federal 124gr HST and the 147gr HST out of a Glock 26 and a PM9. I wanted a round that was a soft shooter so anyone in my family could control it, and the newer generation of bullets seem to need the velocity boost of +P less now. Anyway, went with standard pressure for my tests. No chrono data, just subjective "feel" and observation.

    I had a friend load a random mix of 124gr and 147gr on my mags, and I could not tell any difference in recoil, blast, barrel rise, or shot-to-shot split times. My friend was watching, and he could not see any difference either. Again - no measurements were taken, just seat-of-the-pants observation.

    I did notice the 147gr had a slightly longer OAL, and I wondered if this might potentially cause feeding issues, perhaps if gun got dirty. Didn't experience any feeding issues, and probably fired 200 rounds without cleaning in this little test.

    The following link is to ATK's test data for the HST (early data - no +P rounds available).

    http://le.atk.com/pdf/PierceCountyWorkshop.pdf

    You'll notice penetration depth was uniformly good through all barriers, with the 147gr going a little deeper, but not by much. In most cases, both weights went around 12" to 13".

    Expansion was equally pretty good, with the 124gr edging out the 147gr, but again not by much.

    I ended up going with the 124gr, figuring if the rounds performed as advertised, either would be good, while if the rounds failed to perform, expansion would suffer, while penetration would increase. As they all penetrate adequately now, extra penetration wasn't a goal, but loosing expansion might be an issue, and I figured the faster 124gr might hold expansion a little better than the 147gr.

    Just on a side note, non of the test results done by Pierce County where with compact and sub compact guns. These where all guns with 4-5" barrels. Bullet performance can and typically does drop off quiet a bit out of 3" or shorter barrels. This is why you need to go to a lighter bullet to make up for the velocity, the opposite is in play with a longer barrel. With a longer barrel you need a heavier bullet to slow it down a bit to insure it does not strip it's jacket when impacting hard objects; the heavier bullet will also aid in deeper penetration.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

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
  •