9mm defense loads.

[tirod]

I'ts a carry pistol, the reality is shot placement will be a lot more important than the load. Since the likelihood of needing it means you are under 21 feet, then +P loads, the expense, and practicing with them aren't really going to deliver much in the way of a significant difference on the target. It will mean a difference in how you shoot it - and knowing you have harder recoiling ammo in a small gun isn't going to inspire confidence right off.

LEO's are going to soft recoil ammo to get better shot placement and quicker sight acquisition for the second shot. +P doesn't offer that.

What you will probably find is that a hollow point that is reliable in feeding will be much more important that one that happens to have another 50fps on impact. The bullet has to be chambered first, not stuck against the feed ramp because the nose shape doesn't work well.

That is why it's recommended to first get the weapon broken in. Lube it and shoot 500 rounds thru it to knock down the sharp edges and rough surfaces, like the feed ramp and the underside of the magazine lips. Then start buying different types of ammo and try them out. Unfortunately, a box of 50 isn't a reliable test - it takes quite a bit more shooting to finally decide if one round or another does the job. That is why some older cartridges have a better reputation than the new loads - they've been around longer and the shooting public has proven them out.

How an older design works in a newer gun still needs to be proven, tho. No guarantees in life.

Nothing wrong with asking ahead of time, but there's always the chance that the most recommended ammo isn't your favorite. It's the overall experience of shooting it that matters, from the time the slide starts moving it to chamber, to after the slide has completely retracted again. The dynamics are more important than an incremental difference in grain weight or powder charge. Especially under 21 feet.

[Tactical Jackalope]

I beg to differ. Not being a "macho man" or anything. Cause I despise the .40S&W for that sole purpose. But the +p+ that I carry I handle just as well as any other 9mm round. Don't know if it's the gun or what it is. But I manhandle the 9mm in standard pressure and do the same with +p+ for some reason.

To each his own with that.

[NJgunowner]

Well just to shoot down all the BS caliber war crap, I'll link this. Long story short take whatever you feel comfortable with, IT DOESN'T MATTER.

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/17wLmA...org/node/7866/

[Tactical Jackalope]

^ I'm going to read the heck out of that link in a moment. Just wanted to say I'm sorry. You're in New Jersey. no hollowpoints.

[NJgunowner]

Hehe, we can have them as long as we keep them at home or the range, and sometimes hunting. Since we can't conceal carry here anyway, it's a moot point.

[biohazard313]

i prefer winchester ranger.

Barnes XPB 115gr HP (35515) such as loaded by Cor-Bon (DPX09115)
Winchester Partition Gold 124gr JHP (RA91P)
Winchester Ranger-T 124 gr +P JHP (RA9124TP)
Winchester Ranger Bonded 124 gr +P JHP (RA9BA)
Winchester Ranger-T 127gr JHP +P+ (RA9TA)
Winchester Ranger-T 147gr JHP (RA9T)
Winchester Bonded 147gr JHP (RA9B/Q4364)
Speer Gold Dor 124gr JHP
Speer Gold Dot 124gr JHP +P (53617)
Speer Gold Dot 147gr JHP (53619)
Remington Golden Saber 124 gr +P JHP bonded (GSB9MMD)
Remington Golden Saber 147gr JHP (GS9MMC)
Federal Tactical 124gr JHP (LE9T1)
Federal Tactical 135gr JHP +P (LE9T5)
Federal HST 147gr JHP (P9HST2)
Federal HST 124gr JHP +P (P9HST3)

all of the above are good choices. i prefer the RA9T or RA9B

[Derbel McDillet]

Avoid Hornady Critical Defense and Critical Duty - it's crap. Its expansion performace is worse than premium JHP ammo - yet Hornady has been successful in marketing this ammo to the gullible and uninformed. It's overpriced, over-hyped junk. See - http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.p...-Handgun-Tests

I suggest you consider Speer 124gr +P Gold Dot JHP or Federal HST, either 124gr +P or 147gr for your Shield. HST is one of the best, if not the best of modern premium bullet designs.

[Tactical Jackalope]

I agree with the above. I don't think I've ever recommended Hornady bullets. After I had a box with mainly hates primers that failed to go off in 3 other 9mm's I dropped them like a fly.

[lantern2814]

I have 2 I prefer. Federal HST and Winchester Ranger T...both in 124 gr.

[stormyone]

<<<http://le.atk.com/wound_ballistics/l...omparison.aspx

Great site for gel tests and various barriers. 9mm loads include all variants of Speer Gold dot and Federal HST.>>>

Good link.

Me? I like Speer, Federal HST, and my favorite Winchester Ranger T. Preferably in 147gr.

[Tomac]

Avoid Hornady Critical Defense and Critical Duty - it's crap. Its expansion performace is worse than premium JHP ammo - yet Hornady has been successful in marketing this ammo to the gullible and uninformed. It's overpriced, over-hyped junk. See - http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.p...-Handgun-Tests

I suggest you consider Speer 124gr +P Gold Dot JHP or Federal HST, either 124gr +P or 147gr for your Shield. HST is one of the best, if not the best of modern premium bullet designs.

While I agree that Critical Defense is a stellar underperformer (except in .380 where it's one of the few JHP's that both expands and reaches 12" in gel), I must disagree that Critical Duty is "crap" or "overpriced".
Critical Duty consistently reaches 15" (right in the middle of the FBI's suggested 12"-18" of penetration, even with the std pressure load) and the 50rd boxes cost no more than other premium loads (like HST, for example).
However, you can't get something for nothing. To get this penetration and barrier-blind performance, you have to sacrifice expansion.
HST is an excellent design, no argument from me, and should be a prime consideration if you worship at the alter of expansion at the cost of penetration.
If you believe sufficient penetration trumps expansion, then Critical Duty is a better performer.
All handguns are relatively poor "stoppers", regardless of caliber or bullet used. Shot placement and sufficient penetration are paramount, all else is secondary.
In smaller/lighter pistols I prefer std pressure loads for better controllability and faster followup shots but YMMV.
Tomac

[kcub]

HST is an excellent design, no argument from me, and should be a prime consideration if you worship at the alter of expansion at the cost of penetration.

If you review the data at the link I posted you will know this is false. HST is very good at both. In all calibers.

[Derbel McDillet]

However, you can't get something for nothing. To get this penetration and barrier-blind performance, you have to sacrifice expansion.

Critical Duty is constructed with a hardened lead core which inhibits reliable expansion performance. (The photos show this in the link I previously posted.)

Modern premium JHP ammunition achieves greater expansion reliability and greater expanded diameter (than Critical Duty) while simultaneously achieving adequate and reliable penetration. There is NO trade-off between expansion and penetration performance.

Critical Duty and Critical Defense are inferior to modern premium JHP ammunition.

[jmr40]

I'm not picky about brand. Any 124 gr HP at around 1200fps. Could probably be happy with some of the better 147 gr loads. While I don't feel quite as good about lighter loads it is still about hitting your target. I concentrate on that and worry less about the exact bullet in the gun.

[Tomac]

Gentlemen, I'm not interested in a testosterone contest about which bullet design is the best.
However, the laws of physics cannot be circumvented.
FMJ penetrates further than a quality JHP. Why? Because expansion increases drag and drag reduces penetration. At the opposite end of the spectrum you have exotics like MagSafe or Glaser which have explosive expansion but very little penetration.
For a given bullet weight, diameter and muzzle velocity, the greater the expansion the less the penetration. This is Physics 101 and cannot be argued.
If you feel 12" of penetration is sufficient for whatever bullet you choose then, again, I have no argument with your choice because (again) all handguns are relatively poor stoppers *regardless of caliber or bullet used*.

Can you honestly state that an aggressive and determined BG could tell the difference between being hit with HST or Critical Duty? Can you honestly state that barring a hit to the CNS that the bleedout rate between HST and Critical Duty would be sufficient to alter the outcome of the encounter (ie: ensure incapacitation from bleedout within a few seconds)?

I would gladly use either but prefer Critical Duty for my particular needs (YMMV).
Tomac

[zeke4351]

Hornady by design is a lower powered soft shooting ammo with what they call controlled (restricted) expansion. It is between FMJ and JHP in the expansion department. The only reason a .380 Hornady will pass a FBI gel test is because of very little expansion by design.
I will only use street proven LE ammo in my carry gun no matter the caliber. I have never known of any LE agencies using Hornady even though it does work as it is designed it does not compare to LE ammo. I have read that a short barrel gun (less than 3.5") will benefit from +P ammo. I have also read that a Winchester rep said that a heavier 147 grain bullet works best in short barrel guns because of more dwell time in the barrel giving the powder more time to burn. I carry Speer Gold Dot 124 grain +P in my Sig P938. I wish there was a lot more ammo testing done using the smaller carry guns because I think there would be a lot of good proven ammo that won't perform in these small guns. I am giving my small 9mm second thoughts as being a good carry choice.

[keithdog]

Ok, I have a dumb question of which I think I know the answer, but want to be sure. Is the Federal HST and Hydra Shock bullets one and the same?

[keithdog]

Also, I'm starting to think it may be a good idea to carry a heavy 147 grain bullet during winter when heavy clothing is worn, and lighter 124 grain bullets for summer months when clothing is light. Does this sound like a reasonable idea?

[pturner67]

"Ok, I have a dumb question of which I think I know the answer, but want to be sure. Is the Federal HST and Hydra Shock bullets one and the same?"

Nope. Same manufacturer but HST is far superior.

[RBid]

Originally Posted by angel71rs

You are going to get a lot of opinions anywhere you ask. I chose Speer Gold Dot because it is bonded and has a good track record with law enforcement.

This. Big fan of Gold Dots.

Federal HST and some of the Winchester bonded JHP are also great.

[Tomac]

"Ok, I have a dumb question of which I think I know the answer, but want to be sure. Is the Federal HST and Hydra Shock bullets one and the same?"

Nope. Same manufacturer but HST is far superior.

Agreed. IIRC, HST = Hydra Shock Two.
Tomac

[kcub]

Hornady bullets sometimes are out of spec in terms of overall length. This is a known problem with HK 45 pistols and some Hornady .357 bullets. I don't know about 9mm.

[dayman]

lol.
I use Hornady critical defense.
It's generally available, it's accurate, and I've never had any feeding issues with it. So, I'm reasonably certain my gun's going to go bang, and then properly prepare it's self to go bang again.
This is the first I've heard of any serious issues with it. So, I'll probably look into it, but most of the differences people get hung up on wind up being pretty marginal.

I've never shot anything living with it, but I've shot a lot of living thing with Hornady's rifle offerings, and they seem to do the job.

My advise would be to buy whatever reputable JHP offering is easily available to you, and not worry about it.

[Dc777]

Lets put it this way. As long as you place a shot where it needs to be, you will achieve your goal. I like the golden sabers and that's what stays in my ccw. Making a good shot is key.

[Tactical Jackalope]

Lets put it this way. As long as you place a shot where it needs to be, you will achieve your goal.

Yup, shot placement is king. That goes without saying. However, it's optimal to have a prodigious round in case you don't hit vitals. It'll give the physical and psychological affect needed to stop the threat.