This thread, from 12-30-2013, discussed this same topic in detail, and included, in the first post, the rounds selected as well as the catalog numbers. See Post 1. The contract award was made in the late fall of 2013, so this is not particularly new news.
http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/351485-fbis-new-9mm-ammo.html
As to the fact that the military switching away from the 9mm because the 9mm does not work, remember the military uses ball ammo. The only thing that makes the 9mm a workable round for LE and self-defense use is the premium hollow points available to LE and ordinary citizens. So, let us remember, when discussing this, that the FBI is not limited to ball ammo, and to argue that the military reached a different conclusion is like comparing "apples to oranges."
Another item to remember. Expanding bullet technology has come light years since what was available when the Bureau originally adopted the Winchester OSM (Olin Super Match 147 grain JHP round) following the 1986 Miami shootout. Penetration to vital organs and creation of a big permanent wound cavity remains the same science and conclusion reached in the ammo study the Bureau did post-1986. There are now JHP premium bullets that will do things at pistol velocities unheard of in 1986.
For all of the fans of other calibers, please take pride in the fact that the .45 never has to try to be "as good as the 9mm." Rather, it is that the 9mm and the .40 S&W try to be as good as the .45.
The point is that the improvement in projectiles that now makes the 9mm a more viable choice for LE and self-defense do NOT cause the .45 ACP to be worse, it just makes the lesser calibers better than they were, which, when combined with cost, magazine capacity, less recoil, faster follow-up shots, and less wear and tear on the weapons, makes the 9mm a more attractive option these days.
Two of my college friends are now in the FBI (close to retirement), and I have always admired the way the Bureau puts thought and study into a problem to come up with a repeatable, verifiable reason for their choices. My interest in this topic is that I respect their science, and as I do not have the ability or budget to do my own experiments, I enjoy the opportunity to use, IF I WANT TO, something that has proven itself in scientific testing.
I share Jeff Cooper's feelings about the .45 ACP. One friend who went to Viet Nam found himself in a firefight, and he ran out of ammo. The only reason he is alive today is because he crawled over to a dead officer, removed the officer's 1911 from its flap holster and engaged. A series of one-shot stops with that big, fat 230 grain ball round, caused him to recently tell me that he will never switch to the 9mm. And that is fine with me. I imagine Jeff Cooper would feel the same way, were he still alive to see the performance of projectiles developed after his death. That is ok, too, as his conclusions were made at a time when expansion was just not reliable with the hollow points of his day, and as we have all noticed, 9mm ball just will not get the job done.
I had little use for the 9mm prior to the recently developed 9mm premium loads, but I have given it a second look. And, it looks good. Is it a guarantee? No, but nothing is.
Remember the Texas Ranger's words to the woman who, after noticing that he was wearing his pistol at a dinner party, asked if the Ranger was "expecting trouble." The Ranger said, "no, ma'am - if I were expecting trouble, I would have brought a rifle." A pistol, of any caliber, is by definition, not really the best choice for a gun fight, but it is certainly more convenient than a rifle.
) Therefore I listen to anything they have to say and feel that it would be stupid not to. However, I'm not obligated to follow their lead to the letter and automatically adopt for myself any weapon and cartridge these guys use. I'm not a small person so I don't have to shy away from the heavier recoilers. But I also know what I can shoot best in a pinch.
.
