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.
