As a rookie in the CCW world I have yet to decide on ammo for my Shield 9. I was sold a box of Hornady Critical Duty with my Shield purchase. Hornady makes Critical Defense Lite, a 100 grain bullet, designed for lightweight personal protection/compact guns.

What say you about Critical Defense Lite for the Shield 9?

On paper it makes sense.

Thanks.

__________________
Freedom is not free. Shield 9

I don't like any bullet lighter than 124gr. in the 9x19mm, and prefer the 147gr. I use the Winchester White Box 147gr. JHPs in my Glock 19. They're accurate, easy to control, and test well for both penetration and expansion. And at least they used to be very reasonably priced.

Light ain't right. Do you want to hit them with a ping-pong ball or a golf ball, both being the same relative caliber.

I think you'll find that most here are fans of 124 or 147 grain rounds for 9mm. I see no need for a "light" round for the Shield, or any similar sized 9mm. Personally, I carry Hornady Critical Duty (135gr) in my shield and am very happy with it.

My suggestion would be to run a magazine of what they sold you through your gun at the range, followed by a magazine of Hornady Critical Defense, and see which you shoot best.

Though my 1st choice is Critical Duty there are several other great premium rounds out there:
Federal HST 124gr., Speer Gold Dot 124gr, Winchester PDX1 147gr. I keep boxes of each stored away. Happy shooting, and remember...

__________________
Stay protected my friends.

I suspect who ever sold you the pistol either had a lot of the ammo they gave you or what they gave you was what they had (ammo scarcity and all).

Shoot it up.

Almost ant ammo is better for sd, if it's heavier than 115 gr.

Just my opinion, of course.

I'd be wary of any "light" loads in a small 9mm like that unless you're reducing the springs specifically for ease of use and shooting that specific ammo. Otherwise it will likely not be especially reliable as smaller pistols tend to be more sensitive to changes in ammo pressure/power with their smaller slide mass and critical spring balances.

Very well stated. Thank you.

__________________
Freedom is not free. Shield 9

The Critical Defense line has largely been a good performer in ballistic tests; Hornady seems to have done their homework with CD for its intended purpose -- civilian personal defense where barriers are less likely to be an issue.

There's usually a knee jerk reaction against light grain rounds and with some sound reasoning behind it, depending on the specific load, but if CD "lite" turns out to be the round you, your hand and your Shield "like" best (accuracy, reliability, recoil), don't be dissuaded from sticking with it -- that round can get the job done if you do your part.

All handgun rounds are compromises between competing factors; none is ideal, much less magic. A lighter round will sacrifice "punching power", but possibly in the service of easier, more accurate repeat shots.

Continue your research -- especially focused on ballistic tests, performance in actual shootings, and what law enforcement agencies are using, in combination with running different, quality defense loads through your Shield and determining between these factors what works best for you.

It's easy to fall down the rabbit hole of searching and worrying over the perfect round; don't. At the end of the day, any modern defense round from a reputable maker that's confirmed by you to be accurate and reliable in your pistol, and controllable by you, will be enough.

What's more important is your practice and your proficiency.

I use the CorBon 115 gr ammo. Good velocity from short barrels. I have killed varmints with this load and it works well. Check the videos on it.

Whatever you use, shoot at least 100 rounds through the pistol to be sure it will function 100%.

The smaller pistols have a bit more recoil so special light loads are made. If you cant handle the recoil of the heavier bullets, then what you can hit with is more important. Better a hit with a standard load than a miss with a +P+.

I've always figured having ammunition that shoots to point of aim in my guns to be more important than the weight of the bullet. That means you may have to try many different brands and weights until you find the most accurate and precise load for an individual gun. It also means you get to spend some much needed and enjoyable range time to do "research".

I carry Corbon 147 grain +P JHP in my Shield...sometimes older 147 grain Silver Tip just because I have some.

124 grain Remington Golder Sabre is also a favorite 9mm cartridge of mine.

__________________
C & L

the cor-bon in 115 +p is a fine choice. i love the old winchester silvertips in 115. i also love powerball in the 95 grain. its fast as heck and does the job just fine. heavy is better for carry but lighter is nicer for carry...

Lots of good advice above.
Here's a practical tip: Get your practice ammo and defense ammo in the same bullet weight so you will shoot it enough to get good.
I have met too many people with a defense gun and "the ultimate extreme zombie smasher whatzit ammo" and have yet to shoot their first 100 rounds. The only bullets that count are the ones that hit, and only the right kind of practice will get you there.
A quick test for "lite defense loads" is put one in the magazine, fire it weak-hand-only, and see if the slide locks back. If it does not, I would not consider carrying it.
The most important thing about the equipment is to work 100%; for the shooter it is to HIT the target, first time, every time.

__________________
Science plus Art

Thank you. Your feedback was very educational and professional.

__________________
Freedom is not free. Shield 9

Well said....thanks.

__________________
Freedom is not free. Shield 9

Unless your gun makes you look fat, you don't need lite ammo.

__________________
Thirty characters. Exactly...

I did not think that load was made for lightweight or compact guns, but for the recoil sensitive.

Were it me, I would just use a bullet in the range of the bullet weights that seem to function best in 9mm pistols, which are bullets in the 115 to 147 grain range.

I thought I learned from my last 9mm thread, which I just up and walked away from mid argument, not to make comments on another 9mm thread, but here I am again.

Yes, do your research. Take a look at HST and Gold Dot's info, look at every professional and amateur guy doing ballistics tests, and they will show that 115 grain bullets, even bonded, even with +p, even with +p+, are inferior to 124 up to 147 grains bullets. 115 grain hollow points were a favorite at one time, but all of this was based on bad science, like the old 20% gel tests, and those who believed in "standard" power handgun rounds producing hydrostatic shock. These ideas have been thrown to the curb a long time ago, with the modern 10% gel tests, and the accepted fact that 9mm, 40, and 45 just don't have the moxy to create shock damage, and the bullets will only create crush cavities from the physical crush of the bullet itself. The 115's waste their energy creating valueless shallow temporary cavities, and both penetrate and expand poorly. The same reason why they were thought to be magic back in the day is also the reason why they are actually very, very poor rounds.

People who support 115 grainers are still basing it on the old debunked tests, on anecdotal evidence ( I knew a guy who was killed with a brick once, so it must be a great self defense choice to carry) and Marshall and Sanow's complete load of worthless psuedo science. 115 grain bullets have a wonderful reputation; if you consider fragmentation and under penetration to be strong points. Many people who talk about the success the rounds had in law enforcement often don't talk about the fact that 115 silver tips and other law enforcement bullets also fragmented, a lot. One of the reasons why bonded ammunition has become the rage is because fast, light bullets like the old 115 HP's had a nasty reputation for disintegration, and bonding was needed just to ensure they would not fail on a very consistent basis.

Long story short, there is no reason to shoot anything lighter than a 124 grain. Simply none at all. The 115 is a poor performer, and uses, or shall I say wastes, its energy and potentiality in the wrong ways, and anything lighter is a gimmick. The truth is, .38 special and 9mm have had their share of failures in their long and venerable histories, and many of those failures were due to poor bullet selections. Choosing a 115 instead of a heavier bullet may not just decrease performance, it may very well lead to under penetrations and failures that may fail to stop a threat, which is the whole purpose of carrying a weapon.

Does the extra bullet weight actually cause THAT much recoil difference? Will you actually notice the 90-150 grains you will save on the weight of your carry system? Defending the 115 grain may have been somewhat credible, back in 1980, but it has no place in the modern age.

Sweet. I'm going to pack 4 boxes of Winchester 9mm 124 gr Nato in the bag tomorrow for my qualifying exam for my final test to get my CCP.

My SD load in the Shield 9 is Federal HS 124gr JHP, or Gold Dot in 124 or 147.

S&W CAS told me that the expected load for the Shield was 124 gr.

I have recently found some Remington UMC 115gr JHP that shoots hotter than the FMJ, but I have no measurements to support my opinion. As it is no more expensive than range ammo, I'm buying it as such while it is available.

I'm sorry, I should have said "excusable" not so much credible.

A 124 gr. 9mm bullet going between 1000 and 1100 fpm is about equal to a 125 gr. .38 caliber bullet going the same speed. A 147 gr. 9mm bullet at that velocity is between a 140 gr. and 158 gr. .38 cal bullet. The 9mm gets it's advantage over the .38 by utilizing higher available velocity. But, if you think a .38 special is adequate, a 'Lite' 9mm ought to be ok and has more rounds than a .38 special.

In other words 9mm and .38 special carry the same weight bullets and at the same velocities should be app. equal. Personally I like 9mm a little hotter for SD, but they don't have to be max velocity. I'm working one a VERY 'Lite' 9mm for my wife to shoot until she gets used to the semi auto action.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

I'm surprised no one has asked this yet. But OP, what kind of environment are you going to be in most? Because that will dictate what ammo you should use. Like you wouldn't use the same gun to hunt deer as you would to hunt Cape buffalo, you shouldn't be married to just one "magic" bullet.

If you are going to be in crowded places a lot it would be better to use a lighter faster expanding bullet like a 115gr+p or 124gr+p to avoid over penetration, but if you are going to be traveling in a car for long periods of time a 124gr+p or a 147gr would be better.

Here's a good write up on the subject.

Massad Ayoob * Blog Archive * WHY WE USE EXPANDING BULLETS FOR SELF-DEFENSE PART II: THE OVER-PENETRATION FACTOR

I'd look at the Gold Dot Short Barrel 9mm load. Designed specifically for guns with short barrels.

For a lite load in the late 1970s we were issued the Federal 95 gr SP. It clocked at a steady 1400 fps out of my 39. If there were no barriers involved it had a great record in all our shootings. It would flatten like a quarter and we had very good results. However when going against barriers such as car doors and windows it wouldn't stay together.
As far as the 115 gr contrary to what some think about 'debunk tests' our street results proved a lot different than someone's opinion gotten from reading the internet and grocery story gun rags. The Federal 115 BPLE and the W-W 115 JHP+P+ was designed by our people and was issued for a good number of years. Each gave us great results even against vehicle barriers. I personally investigated and also supervised several shootings where the W-W 115 JHP+P+ was used, saw first hand how they performed numerous times, and it was a stopper. I know the gun rags and internet experts who have never seen a shooting let alone investigated any let alone quite a few disagree but the fact remains those 115 loads perform very well.
As far as 'fragmenting' I handled 1 investigation where 1 of our Troops shot a guy thru the back window of the pickup. The W-W 115 went thru the back window, thru the truck headrest, hit the guy in the back of the skull and came to rest just behind his eye. No fragmenting. But wait - the 'experts' say such can't happen with the 115 gr. And while it wasn't the picture perfect mushroom that internet experts expect it did have expansion. It worked as well as any round of any caliber would be needed.

__________________
183rd FBINA

I might get flamed for this, but....

Speaking for myself, as a civilian who travels in comparatively safe areas and does not seek out trouble, and who carries every day a handgun that I think is reliable for the job, especially because it is comfortable and I will carry it, I honestly think that:

In a self-defense situation, we as civilian shooters should be less concerned with ammo or pistols that shoot point-of-aim than we should be about being able to quickly put several rounds on a center-mass target, at ranges less than 20 feet, and especially less than 6 feet. These are, in my opinion, the ranges that we most likely will encounter if we have to draw our weapons and use deadly force in response to a threat.

That said, OP, I think whatever you can shoot with what you carry, comfortably and reliably, and several times quickly, is going to get you the most .... pardon the expression ... bang for your buck for self-defense.

There are excellent opinions here that have been expressed. Many will vary from what I am saying. But having come to realize that, as unlikely as a self-defense shooting in my case is, if the unthinkable ever happens, I will be firing multiple rounds and, likely, with very little conscious and concentrated aim involved. I base this on firsthand accounts from civilians and LEOs who have been involved in close-quarters shootings.

In other words, putting an amount of hollow-point rounds on a reasonable-sized target, and doing it quickly is, to my way of thinking, the best way to train for the situation for which we carry in the first place. If your 100 grain bullets are hollow point and reliably feed in your handgun, I would not hesitate to use them if they are what you shoot best. They will do the job; I am convinced of that, if you do your job of putting them in the right place to stop the attacker.

__________________
Ukraine -- now more than ever

Ammo selection can be tricky and since I carry a .38 I'm no expert by any stretch. I've read that selecting the round used by local LE can be a good idea if it works in your gun, and if you wind up in court having to defend your actions. This seems to make good sense.

__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)

Before we get too caught up on grainage, bear in mind that the most important factor in a bullet's terminal performance is the quality of the engineering and construction behind it, not its weight.

Fact is, 115 can be made to do the job exceptionally well, and better than many of its heavier siblings, when it's been smartly designed and quality built.

Case in point: CorBon DPX 115 grain 9mm. Put it up against any 9mm defense load out there and the Barnes bullet can match or best it.

Grain doesn't matter nearly as much as design and construction, and in those regards we are lucky to be living in a relative golden age of modern defense ammo.

In 1980 we were issuing the 115 gr Silvertip. Back then HP ammo in 9mm was being developed. We had carried the Silvertip just a few months when 2 of our Troops got in a shootout with a outlaw motorcycle member. A rather fair size guy wearing a heavy leather vest over a leather jacket. He was hit 13 times COM. Most of the rds failed to penetrate deep enough after going thru all the leather to hit vitals. The guy fired 5 rds from his snubby, not hitting anyone, climbed on his motorcycle to escape, and fell over dead. A lifestyle of fatty foods and no exercise killed him. The docs said his arteries around the heart were all nearly plugged. The stress from be shot at along with the plugged arteries caused him to have a massive heart attack and die. As soon as our people saw how the Silvertip performed every sworn in the dept was contacted, even if off duty, and told to unload the Silvertip and load something different until a new duty ammo could be issued. If you didn't have any of the old issued ammo then go buy something or your command would bring you some to your house but don't carry the Silvertip. A few weeks later we issued the Federal 115 BP and later the BPLE.
When the FBI went to the 9mm they had what they called the Computer Man. The FBI basically used the RII computer formula to conclude the best ammo was rapid expansion, limited penetration. It was based on computer projection. Their computer told them the 115 Silvertip was the best 9mm. Our range people took the investigation of the outlaw biker to Quanitico and showed them how the Silvertip performed in a rather unusual circumstance. We had a lot more shootings that the FBI had and a whole lot more using the 9mm. The FBI didn't care about our results. Their Computer Man model told them the Silvertip was the best round. We learned in 1980 what the FBI learned in Miami a few years later. The Silvertip didn't fail. It performed as designed. Rapid expansion, limited penetration.
After Miami the FBI pendulum swung clear the other way and the FBI began touting deep penetration, limited expansion - the exact opposite of what they preached with their Computer Man. That's when the FBI started claiming the W-W 147 JHP Subsonic was the best 9mm going.
The local PD (about 300 sworn) jumped on the W-W Subsonic bandwagon because that what the FBI said was best. We were doing their officer involved shooting investigations. I investigated and supervised the 7 shootings they had with the Subsonic. In every shooting, if we could recover the round, none expanded. The rds performed like FMJ. A lot of the cases the rd punched small hole in, small hole out, very little damage inside. After their 4 or 5 shooting I worked with their range officer as they could see that Subsonic wasn't doing it. Their 7th shooting involved a running gun battle thru a residential neighborhood. Dozens of rds were fired. It finally ended when the BG ran out of ammo and quit. He had been hit 11 time including thru both lungs and a few more times thru the torso. None of the rds expanded. Just small hole in, small hole out. Even with the exertion of running and rapid heart beat there was very little blood loss. He spent 2 weeks in the hospital and then was well enough to be released and taken to jail. That was enough for them with the Subsonic. They were going to switch to our 115 +P+ when SIG made them an offer they couldn't refuse. SIG had just come out with the 357 SIG rd. It was a sleeper. No agency had picked it up. SIG's offer was swap the PD all their 6904/6906 for new SIG 357, new leather for all sworn, transition training ammo, 2 yrs of duty/qualification ammo, and the promise that if the 357 rd didn't pick up in 2 yrs SIG would swap out all the guns for .40. No cost. No agency could pass up an offer like that. I never investigated any of their shootings with the 357 however I did talk to their COP and other command, range officer, and our people who did the investigations. Night and day difference between the Subsonic and the 357 SIG. They are still very happy with the 357 performance.

__________________
183rd FBINA

Your own statement shows why the 115's were, and are, a poor choice. Certainly, they may work well in the shallowest of angles and depths, but it is the fact the round would pancake out to the size of a quarter, and stop short, that made it a failure. Your second post confirmed everything I said. The 115's tendency to stop short IS its failure. That is not internet reading, that is not gun rag nonsense, that's absolute fact, something you yourself acknowledge. The fact that those bullets were engineered to fail doesn't change the fact that they were failures. Again, the theory behind the 115 ST and the 110 .38 Treasure Load were, as you put it, was chosen by the "Computer Man", again, by flawed tests and theories. So, I don't understand the statement to defend these rounds, then turn 180 degrees and admit they were failures in your second post.

The main point goes to the fact that 115's have been booted from law enforcement for the most part, if not the entire 9mm cartridge for the failures you mentioned in the 80's. The fact that people were stopped by the 115 grain bullets, in situations you have witnessed and investigated, does nothing to prove that the weight of bullet in general has any advantages, or has any purpose vs. improvements in 124 grain and heavier bullets for terminal performance. Do 115 grain bullets offer any advantage, at all, considering the lessons learned from men in the field like you, and from decades of improvement have given us many forms of data? Knowing what we know now, and looking at the current lines of bullets and full rounds produced, can you say that there is a solid reason to choose the lighter rounds anymore?

We have stacks of field reports and laboratory analysis, and decades of improvements of bullets and processes. With all things considered, in a world where 147's are no longer subsonic, and hollow points are no longer the "new thing" on the block, what kind of conclusions should we draw?

You either didn't read what I wrote, didn't understand what I wrote, or you're trying to turn something I didn't say to support your beliefs.
I never said any such thing.
The 115 BPLE and the W-W 115 +P+ worked very well for us and a lot of other agencies for a lot of years.

You didn't read what I wrote. I was describing the Federal 95 gr SP from the late 1970s. An entirely different bullet design than either the Federal or W-W 115 JHP. And I never said the 95 gr stopped short. If you read what I wrote about it the 95 gr was a great stopper as long as it didn't have to go thru car doors and windows.

I only mentioned the Silvertip from 1980 which was designed as a rapid expansion, limited penetration rd. No where did I say such about either the Federal or W-W round. In fact I gave an example of a 115 gr W-W penetrating the back window of a pickup, thru a headrest, thru the back of the guy's skull, and coming to rest behind the guy's eye.

Read my post again. I am not a fan of the 1980s Silvertip. But the BPLE and the W-W JHP +P+ are not anything like the Silvertip. Completely different bullet designs.

The BPLE and the W-W +P+ worked well for many years. They don't stop working because a company tweaks it's design and something which performs differently comes a long.

You think all 115 are the same. They're not. The design spec for a Silvertip is nothing like that of the BPLE or the W-W JHP.
I have personally seen and investigated numerous shooting with the Fed and W-W 115. They work and they worked thru various barriers.
Now don't try twisting what I've said into something I didn't. Since you didn't understand my last posts - the Federal 115 and the W-W JHP+P+ works very well and does everything any SD rd would need. They didn't have shallow penetration. They didn't fragment.
So where do you get all your 'knowledge'? Explain all the shooting investigations you handled. Tell us about the autopsies you attended and recovered the bullets. I'd like to hear what you have to say. Forget about repeating all those internet stories and gun rag articles you've read. Tell us about your extensive 1st hand experience you've had.
The conclusion I draw is some people when they have no real world experience cherry pick their data by reading too many internet stories and believing grocery store gun rags.

__________________
183rd FBINA

This is the reason I chose Hornady, whether I'm carrying 9mm or .40 S&W. When hollow points fail to expand the reason is always because the cavity got plugged by the clothing it passed through. The plastic tip in the cavity of Hornady ammo has never failed to prevented clogging in every demo I've seen, and caused uniform expansion of the round. It is THE most consistent in that regard.

With the hardened core of the Critical Duty round I feel confident of good penetration AND expansion in the unlikely event I must resort to lethal force.

__________________
Stay protected my friends.

Here is my take on 9mm and the short barrel:


9mm and the Short Barrel | The Desert's Edge

Corbon DPX +P 115s for me, thank you.

Excellent on all points ispcapt with the above being my favorite quote of the year!

Personally, all I shoot is 115s. In my bedside I keep the Corbon DPX which I believe has plenty of street cred. and in my other 9s that my wife may possibly have to use, Hornady Critical Defense.

Both I believe will suffice.

PS- if I every have to fire, I'll just "pancake um to death"....

How do you feel about the recoil on the Critical Duty? I'm a big bore kinda guy, but I've been sprayed by a can of rotten pumkin thanks to Critical Duty 9mm at about 15 yards out of a 4 inch barrel.

__________________
Just the opinion of a kid

Hornady 9mm 90 gr critical defense = app. 1100 fps.

.380 acp 90 grain bullet = app. 1000 fps

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"