Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 72

Thread: 3" Inch 9mm Carry Loads?

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,688
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Eda View Post
    federal recently changed the design of the 147gr HST, and the new lots are seeming to have expansion issues in real life shootings

    the 124 and 124gr +p HST are the new gold standard
    Do you have a source for this? Or info on what lots have been affected?
    It's f*****g great, putting holes in people, all the time, and it just puts 'em down mate, they drop like sacks of s**t when they go down with this.
    --British veteran of the Ukraine War, discussing the FN SCAR H.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,032
    Feedback Score
    0
    I'm going with the Underwood 68 gr. They shoot fine from my P30SK and I dig the velocity.

    When I prove them out in my CX4 9mm its getting them, too.

    They are a low-flash, quality load, offer good penetration without the over penetration risk / waste like fmj, can't be clogged by clothing, cut tissue better than a round bullet, shoot a typical POI from my pistol, are lighter to carry, might hurt a BG more should he have armor, and are less deadly far down range.

    For carried spare magazine (s) I lean toward standard weight projectiles for better performance through barriers / cover.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    11,718
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpha-17 View Post
    Do you have a source for this? Or info on what lots have been affected?
    Yes, very interested to read the source. The newest HST's I have are at least a year+ old, and that's the 147gr standard pressure ones. All the other ones are even older.
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry
    F**k China!

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,688
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ABNAK View Post
    Yes, very interested to read the source. The newest HST's I have are at least a year+ old, and that's the 147gr standard pressure ones. All the other ones are even older.
    I got curious and did a quick google search on the subject. Found a few discussions on the topic, but little actual info. Several people repeat the same claims of failures in real-world shootings, but offer no details or info. Closest to anything useful I found was a test of "new" 147gr HST by TNoutdoors9, which showed slightly reduced expansion. According to him, the change was several years ago.

    It's f*****g great, putting holes in people, all the time, and it just puts 'em down mate, they drop like sacks of s**t when they go down with this.
    --British veteran of the Ukraine War, discussing the FN SCAR H.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,032
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron3 View Post
    I'm going with the Underwood 68 gr.

    For carried spare magazine (s) I lean toward standard weight projectiles for better performance through barriers / cover.
    Actually, it depends on the cover. All my ready-mags getting the Lehigh bullets.

    Really lightens up a 20-rd mag, too.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    northern CA
    Posts
    962
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ABNAK View Post
    Yes, very interested to read the source. The newest HST's I have are at least a year+ old, and that's the 147gr standard pressure ones. All the other ones are even older.
    The design definitely changed and you can find pictures showing the difference. It's been a while since I have read anything about it, but IIRC anything in the new box shown in the video is the new bullet. You can verify new or old load by pulling a bullet. New bullet 2 cannelure, and the old bullet has 1.

    I have no info on real world shootings, but the design has definitely changed. Increased barrier penetration at the cost of a little expansion. Pistol forums has a short thread about it. You can also find info scattered among the interwebs.
    Last edited by jstone; 04-22-22 at 01:18.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    11,718
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpha-17 View Post
    I got curious and did a quick google search on the subject. Found a few discussions on the topic, but little actual info. Several people repeat the same claims of failures in real-world shootings, but offer no details or info. Closest to anything useful I found was a test of "new" 147gr HST by TNoutdoors9, which showed slightly reduced expansion. According to him, the change was several years ago.
    Why does the desire to "fix it if it ain't broke" seem to permeate society in general? SMH
    11C2P '83-'87
    Airborne Infantry
    F**k China!

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    341
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jstone View Post
    The design definitely changed and you can find pictures showing the difference. It's been a while since I have read anything about it, but IIRC anything in the new box shown in the video is the new bullet. You can verify new or old load by pulling a bullet. New bullet 2 cannelure, and the old bullet has 1.

    I have no info on real world shootings, but the design has definitely changed. Increased barrier penetration at the cost of a little expansion. Pistol forums has a short thread about it. You can also find info scattered among the interwebs.
    Happen to have a link to the pistol forums thread?

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    119
    Feedback Score
    0
    Does anyone know why this ammo was discontinued, or where to get any? It's 150 gr HST "micro" 9mm, it's designed for short barrels. Also I'm interested in the 38 spc HST micro, it's discontinued also. I have some Buffalo Bore 158 gr 38 spc +p LSWCHP 1000 fps, but I think the recoil would be a bit much for an airweight J frame.




  10. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    3,476
    Feedback Score
    58 (100%)
    I run garden variety 124 HST +P in couple 3” P365s and couple Staccato carry guns.
    “Heavy Clothing” gel test with the 3” barrels was 14”+ penetration, 1140 FPS Velocity and around .6” expansion.
    As you’d expect, the 4” barrels yielded higher velocity/better expansion, but around 3/4” less penetration.

    Accuracy was 1 3/4” @ 25 yds (benched) with P365s (relatively shit triggers) and closer to 1 1/4” with Staccato’s.
    5 rd. groups.
    I can live with that.
    A true "Gun Guy" (or gal) should have familiarity and a modicum of proficiency with most all firearms platforms.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 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
  •