"Modern 9mm Loads" not on "The List"

[KCabbage]

Simmer down. It wasn't on the list when you asked. It looks as if he added loads since then. I say what I mean but, if you feel disrespected when I say, "With all due respect", then you twist it up however you like.

I see people ask him these types of questions over and over. You said yourself that at the time that particular load wasn't on the recommended load list but you went ahead and asked if it was a recommended load. It didn't make sense. I assume Mr. Roberts is a busy man so I figured I would save him the time and effort.

[tnedator]

Simmer down. It wasn't on the list when you asked. It looks as if he added loads since then. I say what I mean but, if you feel disrespected when I say, "With all due respect", then you twist it up however you like.

I see people ask him these types of questions over and over. You said yourself that at the time that particular load wasn't on the recommended load list but you went ahead and asked if it was a recommended load. It didn't make sense. I assume Mr. Roberts is a busy man so I figured I would save him the time and effort.

I had a reply typed, but just don't feel right doing it in Doc's threads/forum. Needless to say, I'm glad I asked the question as it was missing from the list and was clearly a round Doc tested and previously posted results on and intended to have in his list.

Let's leave it at that.

[number9xd]

Probably plenty in stock because no one wants it. What is your reasoning in not just using the venerable +P???

OP from 2010 if Doc has PDX1 147 same as RA9B then I think the 124 +P may be equivalent to the RA9BA that he did test. I have plenty plenty of PDX1 but no ballistic gel so my testing would be quite useless.

Just not interested in +P loads. I found some P9HST2 a couple days after my post, so I'm good now.

I still look forward to Doc's findings on the 125gr when / if he is able to test it though.

..