Best / Worst Mushrooming JHP

[Mikeyboy]

I'm looking for the best and worst overall brand in terms of JHP mushrooming on impact. Here is one good example.

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/HiPower127Winchester.htm

[Fremmer]

So he likes the +p+ 9mm ammo. I'm not so convinced.

He admits that he has to modify the gun (presumably to prevent excessive wear and tear and/or jamming):

It is my belief that if you plan to shoot +P+ ammunition in the Hi Power that you are best served by going to a Wolff conventional 18.5-lb recoil spring and I also use a buffer. At least use the 18.5-lb spring if you plan to shoot much of this ammunition.[QUOTE]

If I'm correct, an 18.5 pound spring is not standard in a BHP, and he is also adding a shock buffer. Both may affect reliabilty. IMHO, reliability is most important, and if the gun shoots reliably, you don't add different springs and buffers and other stuff that might cause problems.

I'll agree with his statement:

[QUOTE]While I believe that Winchester's LEO ammo to be at the top of the heap, I do not believe that it's "vastly superior" to other ammunition. I certainly don't think its fine expansion characteristics or "hooks" are enough to offset the need for placement. All is NOT lost if you're forced to load your defensive 9mm handgun with something other than this ammunition. With solid hits, I'm not convinced that we would actually see any difference in terminal effect.[QUOTE]

Well, I guess what he means is that for non-solid hits (whatever that means), he prefers ammo that requires special springs and buffers to prevent excessive wear and jamming.

I found this Guns Magazine article about using +p or +p+ in the BHP. (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_2_50/ai_112128013/pg_2) I'll quote the important part:

[QUOTE]From Venezuela to Great Britain, I've seen quantities of broken Brownings in government arsenals whose slides and frames were cracked by the brutal hammering of 9x19 NATO ammo. +P and +P+ loads also seem to be contraindicated. Listen to Bill Laughridge, who said to me, "Tell your readers in all caps, DON'T USE +P IN HI-POWERS! It's been my experience that even a few magazines of +P will upset the locking lugs."

I can't tell you what the best or the worst JHP is going to be. I'll guess that most of the standard JHP's produced by the major manufacturers these days will do quite well. If you're really worried about it, use a 'premium' brand of standard pressure Federal, Winchester, etc. ammo.

[Webleymkv]

Semi-Jacketed and all lead revolver rounds have reputations for very reliable expansion as do the newer expanding rounds like Federal EFMJ and CorBon Pow'RBall. Amongst those that don't are the various 145-147grn 9mm loads, 10mm (particularly the heavier loads) small calibers like .22lr, .25 auto, and some .32 auto, and some of your heavier loads for .41 and .44 Magnum (these loads are designed more for hunting and are therefore designed with penetration being more important than expansion).

[hksigwalther]

If I'm correct, an 18.5 pound spring is not standard in a BHP, and he is also adding a shock buffer. Both may affect reliabilty. IMHO, reliability is most important, and if the gun shoots reliably, you don't add different springs and buffers and other stuff that might cause problems.

:confused:

If he likes the higher performing HPs, fits his gun to accomodate the extra slide velocity, practices regularly with the combination to ensure competency on his part and reliability of the gun, why not go with the higher spring force? The site is Stephen Camp's. Check here and THR for his posts. That guy is one of the most competent and accurate shooters I've ever seen.

[Fremmer]

Thanks for the info on Mr. Camp. I didn't mean to insult him.

But I keep seeing these posts about using +p or +p+ ammo. I see it while hunting too; so many want to use a (whatever) magnum caliber, as though the increased power will somehow compensate for a poor hit. It won't. Too many shooters put the cart before the horse; they worry about round performance first, and about proper shot placement later. Frankly, if you can't properly place your shot, it doesn't matter much how well the round will perform. And if you have to add special springs and buffers (which may affect reliability) to use a more powerful round, it just is not worth it.

Mr. Camp admits that with proper shot placement (I'll presume that is what he means by "solid hits"), "[he is] not convinced that we would actually see any difference in terminal effect." So why not use a standard load and not have to worry about increased recoil/muzzle flash/retort, wear and tear on the gun, and messing with springs, buffers, etc.?

Once again, I'm don't intend to insult a fellow member. I'm no expert, but I don't understand why someone would use a round that requires modifications to the gun, and that could affect reliability (which is the paramount concern for any gun, especially a semi-auto), when they could just as well use a standard JHP.

[hksigwalther]

I doubt you insulted Mr. Camp. You're just expressing your opinion on the unnessary need to go higher pressures for, IYO, similar results from normal pressured ammo of the same configuration.

IMO, there is an improvement in bullet performance with the higher velocities (for HP bullets) from the number of tests and results from various objective sources. To get to those velocities, preparations to the gun to balance the increased forces and pressures are required (unless you don't mind the excessive wear on the platform).

[Maddog_Enigma]

*** is the purpose of LEO .380 ammo? What Law Enforcement Agency uses .380 autos? What a joke.

[Majic]

*** is the purpose of LEO .380 ammo? What Law Enforcement Agency uses .380 autos? What a joke.
Ever heard of a BUG?

[Blackwater OPS]

I have been saying for some time that ranger is the best HG ammo, IMHO.

[stratus]

Ranger SXT for the win.

[Stephen A. Camp]

Hello. First, absolutely no offense has been taken on my part from anything anyone has said. "Different strokes for different folks," as the saying goes.

I, too, have seen the magazine article and think that there could be some truth to some of the older Hi Powers being beaten up by NATO or +P, +P+ loads, especially if well-used before. The ones that I have seen with rounded locking lugs also had well-used and weaker than standard recoil springs, sometimes in combination with a reduced mainspring. That is one reason I use the 18.5-lb recoil spring rather than the factory standard 17-lb in the Hi Power in conjunction with the factory standard 32-lb. mainspring. This combination works fine for me with either standard pressure or warmer loads. The Buffer Techology shock buffs have resulted in zero problems for me in the six Hi Power shooters I currently use.

There are +P loads and there are +P loads: Some kick a 115-gr. expanding bullet out at roughly 1250 ft/sec while another tosses one at over 1400 ft/sec from a couple of my Mk III pistols. I suspect that the 1250 ft/sec loads are considerably easier on the guns as this is roughly 70 - 80 ft/sec than the old stand-by 115-gr. Federal JHP.

FWIW, here are some observations on standard pressure loads that I put up quite a while back:

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Hi%20Power%20and%20Standard%20Pressure%20Ammunition.htm

I like the older forged frame pistols esthetically more than the current cast frames that came along when the forty caliber Hi Power hit the market. It seems that after as few as 2500 rounds, the frame rails would warp or break.
FN added a heavier recoil spring in addition to a heavier slide for the forty and the combination of these changes along with the extra barrel lug and cast frame seem to be holding up nicely from what I've observed from those using this caliber.

My guns are in 9mm and much shooting is done with standard pressure bulk ammunition or handloaded equivalents. At the same time, the MkIII's get a fairly generous dose of +P, +P+, and handloads throwing 115-gr and 124-gr. JHP's at about 1275 and 1244 ft/sec, respectively. I have no idea how many thousands have been run through primarily 3 Mk III pistols, all using the set-up mentioned above and in previous posts. No problems whatsoever, no excessive wear, and no parts breakage...either small or catastrophic.

For the longest it has been my position that "placement is power" combined with the actual willingness to shoot a human aggressor if no reasonable alternative exists. I personally believe that this is more important than what ammo is being used.

Today's expanding ammo in 9mm is much better than what I started out with well over 3 decades ago. Ammo that is sold in 9mm usually expands pretty reliably and it is my observation that very effective rounds can be had in either hot or standard pressure loads. My usual Hi Power "medicine" is Winchester's 127-gr. +P+ or the new Corbon 115-gr. DPX +P; I really have no real preference there, but it wouldn't bother me at all to have the gun loaded with the "old technology" Federal 115-gr. JHP or their now discontinued 124-gr. Nyclad hollow point loads.

Likewise, I have now seen that the 147-gr. loads from Remington (Golden Saber), Winchester Ranger T, and Speer (Gold Dots) work quite well and these are all standard velocity loads.

Ditto the Speer 124-gr. Gold Dots and Remington Golden Sabers. (I am quite fond of the XTP from Hornady as well though many don't care for it for defensive considerations.)

If a person has concerns about ruining their Hi Power through the use of +P ammunition, I'd suggest not using it. Though I personally believe that the "best" anti-personnel loads are probably in that catagory, I have never implied that the difference is vast. A well placed shot with either might very well "do the trick" ... and either might not. This is why I've harped on "being able to get the shots" to the point that some probably get a bit bored.

More than one bloody incident prodded me to focus more on accuracy in both slow or rapid-fire than figuring out exactly which load is the "best." Some claim this knowledge, but I do not. I think I'm pretty close on target, but it seems that each and every gunshot wound is somewhat unique and what decks one aggressor might not another.

Several years ago, two officers under my command were forced to shoot a stone sober burglar who attacked them. He took a hit through the neck with a full-house .357 magnum 125-gr. JHP that hit nothing vital just about the time his sternum was blown open with a blast of 12-ga No. 4 buck from a distance of about 18". He remarked something to the effect that he didn't think that the officer would really shoot him. He then looked over his shoulder, backed up against a wall and sat down using the wall as support. He lowered his head and died. In another instance, a young woman ran over 2 city blocks to where me and my partner were. She was running from her ex-boyfriend who'd just popped her twice through the chest (off center) with his .45 using 230-gr. FMJ. She lived and he wound up going to the pen, but not after he shot her grandmother the next day. (She survived too.)

It sort of dawned on me that maybe the main determinant in "stopping power" was what actually got damaged by the bullet more so than other factors.

So what in the world has all of this got to do with standard vs +P ammo in the Hi Power? I suggest that if we cannot count on a 12-ga. at near point-blank range, even when shredding the heart, to instantly "stop" an aggressor, the difference between a standard and +P 9mm round probably won't make a big difference. The primary advantage I've seen with the +P stuff is that it does pretty well in the expansion tests after passing through barriers and penetrates some "hard" targets better than their standard pressure counterparts.

I think maybe the fact that there are so many variables in a life-or-death situation that we cannot control, that we jump on the things that we can and focus on the "best" gun and ammunition, perhaps to the point of thinking that these choices might in themselves save us. I sort of believe that a skilled shot with a 9mm using standard pressure ammo will walk away from an encounter more times than the poor shot using "nuclear loads".

In the end, go with what you prefer or trust in the Hi Power. If that's +P, fine. If it's a fairly stiff diet of it, I'd suggest upping the spring a bit and I like the buffer. Understand that it can be used for range work and removed when cleaning, before the gun goes on defense duty. If you fear malfunctions, don't use one. If you prefer standard pressure ammo from 115-147 grains, use it, but whichever load you opt to go with, get good with the pistol.

Best.

[Mark54g]

Shot Placement with anything larger than a .2 and smaller than a .6 :)

[Mikeyboy]

Ironically I started the thread and pulled the link more for the pic of the bullet then the use of +p+ rounds. I agree that regular use of high pressure round may be hazardous to your handguns health, but like someone have already said, Different strokes for different folks.

I'm more interested in figuring out which manufacture has the best "Blossom", Which ammo manufacture makes the best jhp that consistantly expands. I have been using Golden Sabers, Gold Dots, and even WWB in JHP, however I don't know which round will work the best, regardless of weight or pressure. I'm going by word of mouth, but I haven't seen any proof of which JHP expands the best.

Semi-Jacketed and all lead revolver rounds have reputations for very reliable expansion as do the newer expanding rounds like Federal EFMJ and CorBon Pow'RBall.

If you had a choice in revolver round would you go with lead ball, semi jacketed, JHP or EFMJ

[Stephen A. Camp]

Hello. On the revolver thing it depends on the caliber, size of the revolver, and its intended purpose.

In .38 Special, my choice in expanding bullets remains Remington 158-gr. LSWCHP +P but I'm taking a long hard look at Speer's 135-gr. Gold Dot load.

In my .357 Ruger SP101, I am currently using a mid-range load, also from Remington. It's their .357 125-gr. Golden Saber, but may switch to the new Corbon 125-gr. DPX after I shoot/test some of it.

In larger framed .357 revolvers I normally use Winchester 145-gr. STHP's or handloaded 158-gr. SWC's.

In .41 Magnum, either handloaded 210-gr. SWC's or Winchester 170-gr. STHP.

In .45 Auto Rim, I shoot 250-gr. CSWC handloads.

In .44 Special, 200-gr. Hornady XTP's, also handloaded.

In .45 Colt, 250-gr. CSWC or XTP's loaded to about 950 ft/sec.

Best.

PS: On the 9mm thing, probable contenders for largest diameter expanding bullets would be between Gold Dots, Golden Sabers, and the Winchester Rangers. Corbon's PowRball seems to make a wide "pancake" as well in both 9mm and .45 ACP.

[CarbineCaleb]

It sort of dawned on me that maybe the main determinant in "stopping power" was what actually got damaged by the bullet more so than other factors.
That's an excellent insight, but if past experience is any guide, it won't even slow down the caliber/cartridge arguements here. People obsess ad nasueum on the equipment and on terminal ballistics - it's what they do.

[Webleymkv]

*** is the purpose of LEO .380 ammo? What Law Enforcement Agency uses .380 autos? What a joke.

Many Europen Police Agencies used .380 and .32 automatics for the better part of the 20th century and some probably still do (I believe that the Russian Police still use Makarovs which aren't all that much more powerful than .380's). These police have finally grasped the concept that a handgun makes a very poor primary weapon and is more suited as a secondary weapon. These policemen make more use of submachineguns and carbines. Perhaps this ammunition is marketed towards this market.