Range Session

gerhard1

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
657
Reaction score
1,185
City & State/Province
Kansas
The other day my stepson and myself went to an indoor range in Wichita. I had originally intended to take my Pedersoli replica of the Remington rolling block but for various reasons, did not do so, instead, opting to shoot my S&W 986 with the Federal +P+ 9mm LE stuff. I also had some standard velocity Remington 115 FMJ range stuff, including some old rounds that needed to be shot up.

This is my first experience with the Federal ammo. The box lists it as 115gr JHP +P+ 9BPLE and I understand that it has a MV of around 1300fps. This is just shy of the 125gr 357 load at 1400 fps. I found it to be accurate in my hands and the first two moonclips, while they had very very noticeable recoil, were not all that unpleasant to shoot out of the 5" barrel of my 986. However, the pounding soon had its' effect on my hand and subsequent rounds did not feel nearly the same as the earlier ones. In all, I fired seven moonclips of the Federal 9mm and the remaining rounds were all the Remingtons that I mentioned earlier. Shooting the Remington ammo was a lot easier on my hand.

The gun, a S&W Model 986, is a seven-shot L-frame revolver with a 5" barrel and a titanium cylinder. It fits well in an N-frame IWB holster made for me by the late Jim Macklin and conceals quite well under a 'shoot-me-first' vest. Unlike many earlier sessions with this gun, there were no FTFs. This gun does not like Winchester or other harder primer ammunition, but does very well indeed with Federal or Remington. Shooting Winchester ammo, I would experience anywhere from 2% to 20% ignition failures and with the other brands, none. Sending the 986 back to Springfield was a waste of time as all that happened was that they (possibly) replaced the cylinder and pronounced to problem fixed.

The solution, then, appeared to be avoiding harder primers like Winchester, Fiocchi, and very likely S&B as well. This, while irritating, is a solution that I can live with.

All in all, I had fun with my stepson whom I have grown very close to since my move to Kansas, and had a productive range session as well.
 
All in all, I had fun with my stepson whom I have grown very close to since my move to Kansas, and had a productive range session as well.
I'm not my sons biological father. He was handed to me in the hospital when born. He has told me how much it hurt when I once referred to him as stepson. He is the one who will get all my gun stuff.
 
Could be a number of reasons for light strikes not igniting certain brands of primers. First, the strain screw may be backing out, it's a common occurrence. The strain screw could be a tiny bit too short. The main spring could be a light weight spring. The firing pin could be a little too short. Could be too much head space between the rear of the cylinder and the breech face. Excessive cylinder end shake can also cause ignition problems. None of these should happen with a new revolver, yet they do happen.
 
I asked because I was curious.

No SAAMI specs for +p+ ammo Federal says that ammo is 38,500psi.

SAAMI specs for .357 magnum is 35,000psi .44 magnum is 36,000psi

S&W doesn’t allow +p+ in your revolver, but they do (I believe) allow 9mm+p Which SAAMI list max pressure of 38,500psi. So is that ammo really +p? 🤷‍♂️ Why would they call it +p+?

At best you are right at the limit, causing excessive wear and tear on the revolver (and hand). I doubt you are gaining much performance.

Be careful.
 
Last edited:
It's an L-frame S&W, which is designed around the 357 Magnum. L-frame 357s will handle the 125gr 357 cartridge with ease, so my reasoning tells me that my 9mm L-frame should also handle the +P+ 9mm round.
The problem with high pressure rounds in L and N or any gun is forcing cone erosion. Bought a 629 once that suffered badly from it.
 
The problem with high pressure rounds in L and N or any gun is forcing cone erosion. Bought a 629 once that suffered badly from it.
Your point and that of member eveled are duly taken. Thank you, gentlemen.
 
I don’t recall that S&W ever prescribed +p+ ammunition in any of their handguns, revolver or semi auto. That didn’t stop law enforcement agencies, including the agencies under the US Treasury from issuing the legendary .38 Special +p+ “Treasury Load.” I’d heard it would loosen screws, stretch frames with continuous use, and generally accelerate wear.
 
Apparently in this case it was just marketing. Federal calls it +p+ but publish it’s pressure within the +p range.

So he was safe, just not sure it’s worth the punishment.

You have to go by what the manufacturer says the pressure is, because there is no SAAMI specs for any +p+ ammo. (Which is why no manufacturer allows it in their guns)

Another brand of 9mm +p+ could have twice that pressure.

It seems irresponsible to make it at all. I guess labeling it “LEO only” limits liability?

I asked not to be the safety nerd, but because I was curious about his research. 🧐

Usually guns are more accurate if you stay in the middle of the available loads.

It’s great that he is enjoying time with his step son. We are responsible to raise the next generation of Patriots. 🇺🇸
 
Last edited:
Wow!! I am always amazed and intrigued by the amount, depth, and technical level of knowledge you guys share.:love:

The good part is I can read for 15 minutes in a thread and learn an incredible amount.:)

The bad part is sometimes I feel like a firearm dummy.:unsure:
 
Last edited:
Wow!! I am always amazed and intrigued by the amount, depth, and technical level of knowledge you guys share.:love:

The good part is I can read for 15 minutes in a thread and learn an incredible amount.:)

The bad part is sometimes I feel like a firearm dummy.:unsure:
Indeed. I have been shooting revolvers for more than 60 years, and I learn quite a bit from folks such as those on this forum.
 
I have also learned a little more about +p+ from this thread. All I’d ever heard before was that +p+ rounds exceeded SAMMI without any explanation as to how much.

My first experience with +P+ was with the 110 grain Treasury Load thru a 686 for my official qualification before academy graduation. The TL was, at the time being replaced by the Federal 110 grain .357 Magnum SJHP. Recoil impulse seemed about the same. Later when I started carrying a Glock 17, the official duty load was the 9BPLE, it was followed by Winchester’s 115 grain +p+, then finally by the Federal 124 grain Hydra Shok +p+. I never saw any of the hot rounds causing any problems to the semis though the 9mm versions were snappier that standard pressure or +p. I even shot +p+ thru an early 940. A two inch Model 60 stoked with .357s was worse. I recently, inadvertently took a half box of mislabeled hot rod 124s i still had to the range and shot them thru my Sig P365. They were certainly snappier and a bit of a surprise but nothing uncontrollable. In regard to the OP’s 986, I’d say the hotter rounds would fine if not for the titanium cylinder, of which I have no experience.

I’ll add that my last official +p+ experience was with the 147 grain Hydra Shok that the FBI adopted to replace the old 158 grain LSWCHP. Out of .38 Special J-frames, there wasn’t much difference in recoil. I short a fair number of boxes they my old .38 Special 640 and occasionally thru a Mkdel 36. The 640 is starting to show it’s a little worse for wear.

I personally don’t see any reason for +p+ anymore, but it’s an interesting foot note. When those cartridges were issued, research into bullet terminal performance was in its infancy. Whether or not you believe the Marshall- Sanow one shot stop research was valid, it’s hard to argue that going into the 90s the +p+ JHPs marketed to law enforcement were only surpassed by the performance of the .357 Magnum and sharing equal percentages with .45ACP.
 
In case anyone is interested, here is my 986. It now has Pachmayr Compacs instead of the Hogue Bantams seen here.

57066137_877400385936751_7158338236085960704_o.jpg
 
Back
Top