9mm 115 Gr. vs 124 Gr. vs 147 Gr.

It doesn't matter how fast it is, the design, the weight, the material, the jacket, the lube etc. It only matters what happens when it gets there. And this is the biggest secret of the ammo industry.

And the manufactureres and the firearms media are doing everything they can to keep that secret.
 
It doesn't matter how fast it is, the design, the weight, the material, the jacket, the lube etc. It only matters what happens when it gets there...
The latter is hugely affected by the former, no?
 
A few other reasons....

I prefer 124 grain and up. The 125 grain bullet is a good .38 bullet and I seen no reason to go lighter than that, while velocity is still higher than a similar barreled .38 +p load. It's good for penetration as well. I prefer the slower recoil over the snappy 115 grain loads. Some powders work better for a really gentle shooting session.
 
The latter is hugely affected by the former, no?

That's my point, we don't know. There is no Underwriter Laboratories for cartridge performance. No standards. Just opinions based on nothing. All we have are a bunch of YouTube "scientists" who brew up a batch of gel in their bathtub and put grandma's old denim underwear in front of it and shoot.
 
Twp examples......

My 2 cents.. I am still trying to figure out which is the best load to carry also. One thing I disagree with is the statement that size/weight of the bullet is king. A simple law of physics from high school says that Force F = M (mass) x V2 (velocity squared) Since velocity is squared the faster the projectile can travel the force goes up much faster than using a larger bullet.
I will explain the math using no units.
Force =a mass of 10 and a velocity off 10 = 10x(10x10) = 1000 units
If you double the mass to 20; Force = 20 x(10x10) = 2000 units
But if you double the velocity; Force = 10X (20x20)= 4000 units
So velocity is really king. I am not a ballistics expert or even a good journeyman. I am just looking at the math. SO I don't understand why a lighter bullet (say 115gr) going significantly faster than a subsonic 147gr bullet has less penetration. It should have more. Please help me with this. I must be missing something. Unless when we mean penetration we really mean the damage done by a larger object when it enters a cavity. That is a different science altogether. Somewhere in the past couple of month I read a really interesting paper on stopping power, hydro shock and penetration. I wish I could find it. Anyway.. I remain a learner on this subject and I just carry good factory fresh ammo that is recommended to do the job of ever needed.

Those are really good questions and a good example that we shouldn't just automatically accept what we hear, or even read.

I'm going to use a few things that I think are true. If you piece this together with a lot of other stuff, you might get an answer.

Gelatin block tests show the heavier slugs getting better penetration. This depends on both bullets expanding to about the same size.

The formula works in a medium of little resistance, like air, but traveling through a semi solid other factors come into play. Like pushing watery organs and flesh aside plus more friction and the effects of penetrating different materials, skin, organs, muscle as well as expanding the bullet and making a bigger hole.

Hunters of very large game use heavy, 'solid' bullets for the greater penetration. Not that they don't deform at all, they mostly blunt instead of 'mushroom'.

Bottom line. 12" is given as a the needed penetration to wound deeply in a human. It doesn't matter a whole lot what the weight/mass of the bullet is as long as it makes that requirement.

This is all opinion, not gospel and I'd welcome any additions but I prefer the 124 and 147 grain jhp type bullet going fast enough for them to perform properly. Better makes like the 'Gold Dot' are very predictable in terminal performance.
 
Last edited:
I'm partial to the heavier bullets. Most of my friends think I'm wrong. I will say this; when weight is an issue for carrying comfort, I will carry a 10 rd. magazine stoked with 115 grain projectiles as opposed to a 15 rounder loaded with 147s.
 
My 2 cents.. I am still trying to figure out which is the best load to carry also. One thing I disagree with is the statement that size/weight of the bullet is king. A simple law of physics from high school says that Force F = M (mass) x V2 (velocity squared) Since velocity is squared the faster the projectile can travel the force goes up much faster than using a larger bullet.
...
Sorry, but that's wrong.

F=MA
Force = Mass x Acceleration

KE = 0.5MV^2
Kinetic Energy = One-Half x Mass x Velocity x Velocity

P = MV
Momentum = Mass x Velocity

SD = M/D^2/7000
Sectional Density = Mass (in grains) / Diameter (in inches) / Diameter (in inches) / 7000


DESIGN IS KING. The bullet design must be matched to the cartridge and target. Design cannot be captured by the basic physics equations and must be verified against a useful test protocol.
 
Last edited:
That's my point, we don't know. There is no Underwriter Laboratories for cartridge performance. No standards. Just opinions based on nothing. All we have are a bunch of YouTube "scientists" who brew up a batch of gel in their bathtub and put grandma's old denim underwear in front of it and shoot.
I agree there's less definitive information than desired, but what about FBI protocols as afar as standards, and dedicated groups or individuals like Brassfetcher and DocGKR for properly performed, dispassionate testing?
 
Wow, that stuff costs $77.40 a box?!?! My Academy just gave me four boxes of that same load, just to get rid of it! My goal (as soon as the weather becomes more reasonable) is to chronograph it, then pull some bullets and see what I can get by handloading it. I'll then compare it to the 147 gr. bullets in the 9mm. My only concern is that the Hydra-Shok would come apart at maximum velocity before it penetrates.

A quick glance at my Midway catalog tells me that the only two "factories" that are loading 147 gr. 9mm bullets with any good velocity are Buffalo Bore and Double Tap, with 1175 and 1135 FPS quoted. Both loads use the Gold Dot and I'd prefer either of these to any of the lighter bullet weight loads.

Dave Sinko

I believe underwood is pushing a gold dot at about 1100 fps. I believe buffalo bore changed to bullets that arent as good quality or so ive heard.
 
My 2 cents.. I am still trying to figure out which is the best load to carry also. One thing I disagree with is the statement that size/weight of the bullet is king. A simple law of physics from high school says that Force F = M (mass) x V2 (velocity squared) Since velocity is squared the faster the projectile can travel the force goes up much faster than using a larger bullet.
I will explain the math using no units.
Force =a mass of 10 and a velocity off 10 = 10x(10x10) = 1000 units
If you double the mass to 20; Force = 20 x(10x10) = 2000 units
But if you double the velocity; Force = 10X (20x20)= 4000 units
So velocity is really king. I am not a ballistics expert or even a good journeyman. I am just looking at the math. SO I don't understand why a lighter bullet (say 115gr) going significantly faster than a subsonic 147gr bullet has less penetration. It should have more. Please help me with this. I must be missing something. Unless when we mean penetration we really mean the damage done by a larger object when it enters a cavity. That is a different science altogether. Somewhere in the past couple of month I read a really interesting paper on stopping power, hydro shock and penetration. I wish I could find it. Anyway.. I remain a learner on this subject and I just carry good factory fresh ammo that is recommended to do the job of ever needed.

What comes to mind is an old video of a corvette in a high speed chase rear ending a semi and disintegrating. The semi was practically unharmed. Now imagine a semi going the same speed, im sure the results would be much differebt for the semi that was rear ended
 
We do know a lot about terminal performance from hunting, not just self defense. Heavier bullets for caliber and better sectional density lead to superior penetration, as far as weight is concerned with bullets, when isolated from other aspects, we more than understand the importance of this. When bullet design stays the same, heavier weight bullets are chosen for penetration, this is age old. Weight and sectional density matter a lot, and you can't simply sweep it under the carpet.

The 115 grain hollow point bullet was based on an extremely flawed theory in the 1970's and early 80's based on the theory that temporary cavities from bullet shock caused damage, and lead to stoppages in attacks. This lead to the flawed idea that maximizing temporary cavity and shock was the means to increasing effectiveness of handgun rounds, and an entire science was formed around this, using 20% ballistics gel and measurements of temporary cavities in these gels. Since fast, light bullets for caliber caused the greatest amount of shock in these tests, all of the experts at the time said that light and fast bullets were now super duper awesome cutting edge super one hit stopping ultra mega bullets. The experts took the flawed conclusions of the metrics and immediately went to the pulpit in front of LEO's and preached from the mighty gospel of fast handgun bullets. With great firebrand preachers for the new cult, they converted many a heretic to the One Truth of handgun terminal performance, that speed and shock are everything. Did you know that the Glaser Safety Slug is the best bullet ever designed?

Low and behold, true believers, it turns out the theory and conclusions they drew were absolutely wrong. The great new cult was built around misunderstandings and bad scientific conclusions, a deeply flawed theory. It turns out that almost no handgun can produce hydrostatic shock, and that temporary cavities are of little to no importance in stopping attacks. The 20% gel tests also purposely exaggerated these effects, making the illusion worse. It turned out the primary, and perhaps only, mechanism of stoppage was the actual crush cavity from the bullet itself. The super duper ultra mega super one hit man stoppers turned out to not be what they were said to be by the preachers of the new terminal ballistics cult, but the myth lives on today through those who still believe.

No matter how well you design a bullet, weight and sectional density will limit its potential. That's a dead on fact. Handgun bullets are already light for caliber to begin with, and sectional density is always an issue. All standard handguns area also low velocity and low energy. 1150 fps, or 1350 fps may be relatively fast for a handgun, but its still very slow. You don't really hit high velocity till you break the 2000 fps mark, and no "high velocity" handgun does that, much less a 115 grain 9mm Luger. No, the velocity is not high enough to create effective shock in tissue, no, the energy isn't high enough either. Its a medium power handgun, a low power cartridge, and a low velocity projectile.

So, when we talk about handgun bullets, and expanding bullets, what is best? Handgun bullets don't penetrate very well to begin with, weight, velocity, energy, and sectional density all considered, they aren't spectacular to begin with. The supposedly dangerous FMJ over penetrating tissues has been greatly over exaggerated, and non expanding bullets often times don't go through targets. If a non expanding bullet can fail to punch through a man, what does that say about expanding bullets? The answer is that we should be careful that the bullets don't fail to punch deep enough because of the increased surface area and resultant drag reducing penetration, not to mention bullets absorb their own energy in expanding. They can easily fail to get deep enough in angle shots.

So, if we need to make sure we can punch deep enough with our expanded bullet, what's the best way to go about it? One way is to build a better bullet that won't fragment or over expand. This is key to success, and preventing failure. The other is giving it the advantage of weight and sectional density, increasing its ability to penetrate deep even with the increased drag of crushing a bigger cavity with its bigger expanded face. It would appear for the handgun, with its limitations, would be best suited to use the heaviest bullets for caliber available when using expanding bullets. Using a higher velocity, lighter bullet simply doesn't seem to make sense, and in fact, fliess in the face of what we know about terminal ballistics.

Yes, you can attempt to design a bullet that will expand less and mitigate the problems of the light bullet, but that won't change the end limitations. Sure, they can and have designed 115's that won't fragment or they control expansion to prevent it from under penetration, but in truth, these bullets still under perform against heavier rivals. In the end, design can't make up for real physics and real physical limitations.

The people who believe in the Cult of the light bullet will often times pull out the old flawed science or Marshall and Sannow's work to prove they are right. Prove to them the old tests were flawed and the books they read are poor statistical hack work, they tend to degrade into "terminal ballistics don't matter, shot placement is everything" and generally try to change the subject to something other than the subject at hand. The same people who bash modern ballistics gel testing are sometimes the same people who preached to you about the old gelatin tests being final proof of smaller calibers and lighter bullets being superior. They ignore the science when its convenient.

Lastly, the 125 grain .357 Magnum rounds did well. But, what about the 158 grain hollow points? Just because .357 magnum had the power to make the 125 work well, is there the possibility that there is better? Could it be a hotload 158 grain hollow point of the same build might actually out perform the all sacred 125? Could it be, that even though the 125 grains were incredibly effective, that perhaps there was something even better? The 125 grain bullet argument always seems to state that 125 worked in 357, but I've never heard of any of these people ever mention if it was better or stacked up against other .357 Magnum rounds. They state the 125's grand superiority as if it were the best, without ever once stacking it up against alternatives.
 
I have a Beretta PX4 Sub Compact I carry when I'm not carrying my 40c and was concerned with 147 grain JHP bullets expanding properly under the lower velocity from a 3 inch barrel verses a full size weapon with a 4-5 inch barrel producing a much higher barrel velocity ..

Testing with what was available - water filled gallon milk jugs with 4 layers of denim from a pair of jeans !! All of the different brands of JHP in 147 grain I tested expanded shooting through this configuration .. some did expand slightly more then others but all the modern rounds expanded in the 3 inch barrel..

The one that I thought expanded the best was Western Defend and that is the one I carry after my experiment and watching video of test of the round being shot into gelatin that is on YouTube ..

A series of video's called Ammo Quest on YouTube tests many of the most popular bullet sizes and weights in a controlled environment that comes close to simulating FBI Testing Controls ..
 
I see we've managed to resurrect a six-year-old thread to have another discussion about bullet weight, complete with math formulas about E=MC2.

My two cents? Experiment and shoot all of them. 115, 124, 125, 147, whatever else you can find.

Whichever brand and bullet weight is the one you are most accurate with, use that one.
 
Last edited:
a 380 is not a pop gun and this is an old post

For a bit of fun, you can go here;

http://www.winchester.com/Products/le/Pages/ammunition-testing.aspx

Hit the "Launch Testing Comparison Tool" and you can compare the various Ranger-T loads, note that the 124gr +P, 127gr +P+, and 147gr 9mms, and the .357Sig all give about the same performance in gelatin (in fact the 9mm is often better), also note how close all of the service calibers come in actual performance.




PS; pop gun carriers should note that the .380 is NOT "almost the same as a 9mm", I'm not saying don't carry one, I'm saying don't fool yourself into thinking it's a real gun.
my loads for my 380 which i had before the micro 9 craze i got because it was a hi cap lil pistol now even higher with new mags from bersa i get and xtra 2 rounds over the stock mag by using modded thunder mags
but i havent put it on the crony but its a steel frame double stack not the new alloy frame thunders and my 115 hp loads jack your hand around pretty well so im guessing im approaching 9mm performance if not equaling it i cant fing the ammo can with my bullets in it since the move but i know its pretty well the book max with the sierra hps i wanter to do 124gr but couldnt find any data so the 115 was the best i could do for now im sure these loads would rip apart an alloy or poly gun ut i know i did use bulleye so i could get the most efficient use of the short bbl but i know its pretty snappy and has as much recoil as my sig 928 and havent loaded any for the 9 as of yet but was using win 115's and they were flatting the primers so they are rocking out of that but like i said the recoil is about the same so all you people saying this is better than that load your own i trust me anymore than i do any bullet company there was a post on here that said do you like a supersonic bb or bowling ball ?ill take the supersonic bowling ball its only simple high school physics and a final thought on the 380 there are some excellent sd rounds out there now g2 reaserch rip and lehigh in my 380 and 9 i use the rip because the 380 gives 7 fragments and the 9 gives 9 watch them kill a pig with a 380 with 1 shot and the 14 layer denim into the gel penetration so just amp that up a lil in the 9mm a 380 is no longer a "POPGUN" i trusted my *** to it back then with ball ammo and trust it now with R.I.P ammo god bless the righteous
and punish the wicked
 
Get several different ammos, at least a half-dozen, and do a lot of shooting. Regardless of bullet weight, stay with what functions reliably, is accurate, and you can shoot well. No 9mm ammo produces hand-wrenching recoil. No need to concern yourself with Internet gunfighting theory.
 
Back
Top