Reality of Ammo

[miles71]

I have recently become the owner of a caseof Winchester SXT 147 gr 9mm ammo. (I have some great friends). I have never shot these rounds, but in the past have done some amatuer tests with Hydra shocks, Silver tips, and Golden Sabres. I have the Hydra shock 124 gr in my 9mm due to these tests shooting into buckets of wet sand and jugs of water.

Now I should state, these tests where done about 15 years ago and the Hydra shock was the big boy at that time. As I search the internet and talk to LEO's I get as many stories as I ask about the best ammo for self defense. SO my question for all of you, does it really matter what it is as long as it expands and does the job? Would anyone really want ANY of these Hollow points coming at them?

Just some thoughts TD

 

[Erich]

Well, sure, that's true. However, it's worth noting that there do seem to have been engineering improvements in the more recent bullets (the ones made from the mid-'90s on) as compared to the generation before that (which really got rolling in '88 or so). I see a the results of a lot of shooting cases at work, and "moderate deformation" is a common description of actual hollowpoint performance that I see written by OMI docs with the older hollowpoints (like the Hydra-Shoks and the much vaunted Black Talons).

To be honest, I think of bullet expansion as "gravy" in personal defense situations - while some people will stop if shot by a BB, no one seems to have to stop unless there's been a major loss in blood pressure (most easily and most usually caused by some perforation of the heart/aorta) or major disruption of the central nervous system. So, what you need a bullet to do is be accurate (for aimed placement into the vitals) and adequately penetrative (to reach those vitals). Hollowpoints don't have anything to do with this performance, really. While a slightly wider bullet may enable someone to miss by slightly more, and disrupt slightly more tissue, pathologists have told me that they cannot reliable differentiate between wound paths left by 9s or .45s, which sort of make me wonder how much that additional shot path volume really matters.

Anyhow, one thing that hollowpoints really can help with is preventing overpenetration in penetrative rounds. For example, the 9x19 is a penetrative SOB - I'd not feel responsible carrying 9mm ball for defensive purposes anywhere near civilization. That said, getting back to the first paragraph, the more modern hollowpoints have a much better rep for actually expanding in human targets. The earliest 147-grain Winchester Q-loads, for example, were designed for use in suppressed carbines, and did not expand worth a hoot when shot from pistols. (They were, however, wonderfully penetrative.)

So, for absolute cutting edge performance (in the semiautos - there are many proven older revolver hollowpoint designs), I'd feel better with a more modern bullet as opposed to an older one. FWIW, in my 9mms, I use either Winchester's 127-gr +P+ RA9TA or else - in the shorties - Speer's 124-gr short barrel +P Gold Dot. But I wouldn't feel inadequately armed using something older, like Federal's wonderfully accurate 9BP 115-gr JHP.

 

[cp1969]

I guess overpenetration is something to worry about, but if you can't place all your shots on the target, the misses count as the ultimate in overpenetration--and few people can place all their shots on target in an actual shooting.

 

[flop-shank]

One should always seek every possible advantage and the best modern ammo is an edge, but not a band-aid to fix poor marksmanship. Use the best modern ammo, but don't neglect regular practice.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

I keep hydra-shocks in my 1911 for defense and hunting. Love those old 200 grain Speer "flying ashtrays" too.
BTW.....a 230 gr hydra-shock will shoot clean through a deer at 30 paces.

 

[TNDave]

There is a lot of good ammo out there. The new generation hollow points seem to be the best ever. I have seen a lot of gunshot wounds over the years. I can say I have seen people hit with most common calibers. I have seen a lot of people shot with ball.

After my experiences this is my conclusion. It doesn't matter what gun or ammo you have. Like one of my old friends used to say "Any gun that works is a good gun and any round that will go through your skin is a good round.

That may be a little extreme but I am a firm believer that if you shoot someone three times in the area between their collar bone and the tip of the ribs, they will go down. That is with whatever gun you have with whatever ammo is in it as long as the gun is 38 Special/9mm or better.

Like Sykes and Fairbarin said "The more our pistols resemble machine guns the better we like it". So your ammo being modern HP's is just icing on the cake as long as you put your rounds on target.

 

[rev.]

over the years a trend has appeared that says that nothing "standard" can kill or incapacitate anything. First "magnum" appeared, then "+P", then "+P+", then "premium". On and on it goes.
We can "say" intellectually that putting a bullet where it belongs (in the CNS=nipple to nipple to throat) is the best we can do. The rest is up to the "target". But I doubt that we really mean it emotionally. We may deny it, but the search for the magic bullet is real and ongoing, along with the never/ever failing "platform" from which to launch it.
I'd say, shoot a lot, have fun, improve your aim, and remember, you have to hit them to hurt them, and hope you never have to.
rev.

 

[tpd223]

On my job we found both the 124gr and 147gr Hydrashocks to be rather poor duty ammo, these had a habit of either failing to expand after passing through heavy clothing, or over expanding and fragmenting, thus giving shallow penetration.

Between the two choices I'd go with your new 147gr ammo.


FWIW, we've been carrying the 124gr +P Gold Dot for duty ammo (except one year where we had to buy 124gr +P Ranger-T) and it has proven to be a superb choice for 9mm carry ammo.

 

[LoboGunLeather]

Performance in your weapon should be a big consideration. Does the ammunition feed, fire, extract, eject with absolute reliability? Does the ammunition shoot to point of aim (there are frequently big differences with different bullet weights)?

Reliability and accuracy are the primary considerations for me.

 

[photoman]

Lobo got it right. In a fixed sight, semi-automatic pistol, I'm way more concerned about reliability and point of impact than anything else.