The US military is shooting +P+ now?

[Willie Lowman]

I just stumbled across a box of this M1152 ammo. It's a flat point 115 grain FMJ with an advertised muzzle velocity of 1320 fps.

I googled it and found an American Rifleman article about it. Seems it was developed for the new Sig M17 pistol to use. They list the chamber pressure as 39700 psi.

I haven't shot any yet but it must be a real firecracker!

[armoredman]

All that energy for a non JHP, interesting.

[Forte S+W]

9mm NATO has always been substantially hotter than Standard Pressure 9mm Luger, M1152 Ball in particular is comparable to +P+.

That's also why I've criticized folks who parrot the FBI's blanket statement that there's no substantial difference between 9mm Luger, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP while neglecting to mention that they're not using Standard Pressure 9mm Luger, but rather +P+ loads which are practically poor-man's .357 SIG in terms of ballistics performance.

Neither the Military nor Law Enforcement uses Standard Pressure 9mm ammo.

[TunnelRat]

I actually almost bought some from Brownells back before the ammunition panic really took off. Back then it was $0.22-$0.23 a round and that seemed high. If only I knew.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Forte S+W

9mm NATO has always been substantially hotter than Standard Pressure 9mm Luger, comparable to +P+.

That's also why I've criticized folks who parrot the FBI's blanket statement that there's no substantial difference between 9mm Luger, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP while neglecting to mention that they're not using Standard Pressure 9mm Luger, but rather +P+ loads which are practically poor-man's .357 SIG in terms of ballistics performance.

Neither the Military nor Law Enforcement uses Standard Pressure 9mm ammo.

9mm NATO is not +P+.

The SAAMI pressure limit for the 9×19mm Parabellum is set at 35,000 psi. NATO's specification is 36,500 psi. The SAAMI pressure limit for the 9×19mm Parabellum +P is set at 38,500 psi. 357 SIG is 40,000 psi.

Back before this panic I shot quite a bit of NATO spec 9mm. It was certainly noticeably warmer than your off the shelf 9mm range ammunition. 9mm +P is hotter still and the difference between it and NATO is still noticeable.

The M1152 is quite hot. Psi of 39,700. Now that is +P+. However if I remember correctly there were actually some articles of how that ammunition was causing more issues in the M17s than the JHP the military adopted. The pressure might be why.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Forte S+W]

On the bright side, unless you planned on shooting that M1152 through a full-size duty pistol, you're better off. The average 9mm pistol isn't rated for overpressure ammo like 9mm NATO and would have been worn out in shot order firing such hot loads.

That's why the Military and Law Enforcement carry such heavy duty pistols that folks ignorantly say are "too big, too bulky, and/or too heavy for 9mm" because they aren't shooting your average 115gr Standard Pressure 9mm ammo, they're shooting extremely hot loads which are approaching .357 SIG in terms of performance.

Shoot 9mm NATO out of one of those lightweight subcompact 9mm pistols everyone is so fond of these days and you're going to problems in a hurry.
Every now and again you'll see someone who bought one of those bags of loose NATO Spec Surplus 9mm ammo complaining about how harsh the recoil and concussion is out of some lightweight subcompact he carries, how the ammo isn't functioning properly, or in some cases that it damaged their firearm with prolonged use because apparently they didn't think that the unusually high velocity posted on the label was any cause for concern.

[TunnelRat]

Except 9mm NATO isn’t “over pressure”, in terms of being +p+. See above.

I get that you want to use this as another example of why 40SW is misunderstood/under-appreciated, but you’re using a weird example in focusing on 9mm NATO and your information on it is frankly incorrect. M1152 is not the standard 9mm NATO. It was submitted as part of the M17 trials. I don’t know if any NATO partners have adopted M1152.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Forte S+W]

Yes it is, anything over 35,000psi is overpressure, hence what designations such as "+P" indicate.

That being said, I shouldn't have lumped Military and Law Enforcement together so much in my statements, so allow me to clarify. 9mm NATO is hotter than Standard Pressure (35,000psi) 9mm Luger, but not as hot as +P, and certainly not +P+ which many Law Enforcement agencies tend to use these days.
M1152 Ball, which I should have specified by name, but lazily generalized as "NATO" or "NATO Spec" ammo, even though it's actually special purpose ammo that far exceeds standard issue NATO Spec 9mm handgun ammo.

I'll go back and correct my statements for the sake of clarity, but you were right to call out the erroneous information that my poor wording and generalized statements directed towards the Military and Law Enforcement ammunition as a whole.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Forte S+W

Yes it is, anything over 35,000psi is overpressure, hence what designations such as "+P" indicate.

That being said, I shouldn't have lumped Military and Law Enforcement together so much in my statements, so allow me to clarify. 9mm NATO is hotter than Standard Pressure (35,000psi) 9mm Luger, but not as hot as P+, and certainly not +P+ which many Law Enforcement agencies tend to use these days.
M1152 Ball, which I should have specified by name, but lazily generalized as "NATO" or "NATO Spec" ammo, even though it's actually special purpose ammo that far exceeds standard issue NATO Spec 9mm handgun ammo.

I'll go back and correct my statements for the sake of clarity, but you were right to call out the erroneous information that my poor wording and generalized statements directed towards the Military and Law Enforcement ammunition as a whole.

No 9mm NATO I have ever purchased was specifically marked +P, however. This is true of both the cartridge itself and the box (edit: Winchester doesn’t have the +P marking on their 9mm NATO, but they do have fine print on the box that says, “These cartridges are loaded to military velocity and pressure; average pressure is 10% to 15% higher than industry standard pressure for 9mm Luger.”) As I pointed out the correct pressures myself, I fully acknowledge it is higher than standard pressure even if it doesn’t bear those markings. Then we have the fact that +P+ doesn’t actually have specific load data from SAAMI and that is up to the manufacturer. When I think of overpressure ammunition, I think of ammunition outside of SAAMI’s specifications (so +P+). But in fairness that’s my convention.

I did go back and edit the post to more accurately reflect I meant in terms of +P+.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Forte S+W]

9mm NATO wouldn't be labeled as "+P" because such is a SAAMI Specification that didn't come about until the 1990s when dedicated efforts to improve the ballistics performance of the 9mm Luger cartridge with hotter loads like those of previously boutique ammo manufacturers like SuperVel came into being and were quickly became so common place that they required a specific designation for the same of public safety, whereas 9mm NATO predates SAAMI's "+P" designation and doesn't have the same specifications anyway, ergo even under SAMMI Specs, 9mm NATO loads wouldn't be designed as +P.

As you yourself stated, and accurately so I might add, 9mm NATO has a peak pressure rating of 36,500psi whereas +P ammo has a peak pressure rating of 38,500psi, ergo 9mm NATO isn't hot enough to be designed as +P.
That being said, technically any ammo which exceeds Standard Pressure ratings is Overpressure by definition because it no longer adheres to SAAMI Specifications of what qualifies as Standard Pressure.
In other words, if Standard Pressure 9mm Luger is 35,000psi and 9mm +P is 38,500psi, but 9mm NATO is somewhere in between at 36,500psi, then how would you describe its pressure curve?

With that said, just in case there is any further confusion, when I was referring to ammo that is nearly as powerful as .357 SIG, I was referring to 9mm +P+ loads, which as per SAMMI Specifications is a designation which exceeds the pressure threshold of 9mm +P, which is 38,500psi. M1152 Ball is an example of such a load which fortunately has a specific name, thus making it an ideal example because otherwise I'd have to cite some random load by Buffalo Bore or something which just so happens to be designated as +P+ as per SAAMI Specs because it exceeds 38,500psi in terms of pressure, even if its marginally so and not quite as much as M1152 Ball.

[TunnelRat]

Right I get that. I think it’s important though for people reading to know that ammunition might be overpressure even if it’s not marked +P, such as 9mm NATO. That’s what I was trying to get across.

As you mentioned there are a number of loads marketed to law enforcement that are very warm. Some of those are also beyond +P.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[44 AMP]

if Standard Pressure 9mm Luger is 35,000psi and 9mm +P is 38,500psi, but 9mm NATO is somewhere in between at 36,500psi, then how would you describe its pressure curve?

First point:
The pressure specs being thrown around here are just that. pressure specs. Peak pressure limits. This is an different thing from "pressure curve".

Second point;

I think you're looking at the limits a little wrong.

SAAMI spec for the standard load is 35k psi. Anything (and everything) above that is +p. Until you get to 38,500psi. Above 38,500psi, SAAMI calls it +P+. And, there is no upper limit specified for +P+. 39,700psi is +P+ so is 60,000psi also +P+ though its too hot to shoot in current pistol designs.

SO, if its above standard pressure, a little or a lot SAAMI says its +p. If its above SAAMI's upper limit for +p then its +p+. no matter if a just a few thousand psi or a hugely dangerous amount its still +P+.

[wild cat mccane]

So some flaws here.

M1152 is 115gr is trainer.

BUT...it's trainer that isn't actually used. We know this because it's a Winchester/Olin round.

Winchester no longer is the private partner of the EVERY DEPLOYED round DOD produced Lake City plant.

The US military isn't using this round. Because Winchester/Olin was the previous operator, they get away with marketing a bunch-o crap as Military. It isn't.


Military uses NATO. NATO is 124/125gr.

[rock185]

FWIW, I have chronographed M1152 in several different firearms. It does approximate or exceed the advertised 1320 FPS in 4.7"- 5" pistols. Velocity in my 16" carbine does not equal commercial +P+ velocities. So it would appear to me the M1152 is optimized for pistol length barrels. I did notice that the earlier (headstamped '19) M1152 I bought several months ago had crimped primers, but unlike 9MM NATO, had unsealed primers and case mouths. The latest purchase ('20 headstamped) retains the crimped primers, but now also has sealed case mouths and primers.


I am kind of surprised that our military went to the trouble and expense of having Winchester develop this newer load, since 9MM NATO is the standard and has been in use by the US military and NATO partners for so many years. Listed as training ammo on the civilian market, an NRA article indicates, "The Ball cartridge is intended for use against enemy personnel".... Would the higher velocity and flat point make it a more effective anti-personnel round? I admit I don't know, but perhaps the military thinks so? I'm even more surprised that this higher pressure load has been released for sale on the commercial market. In any case, I like it and recently acquired another case of the stuff. Whether the military is actually using it or not, I've not seen anything to indicate to me that the M1152 round is a "bunch-o crap".

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by wild cat mccane

So some flaws here.

M1152 is 115gr is trainer.

BUT...it's trainer that isn't actually used. We know this because it's a Winchester/Olin round.

Winchester no longer is the private partner of the EVERY DEPLOYED round DOD produced Lake City plant.

The US military isn't using this round. Because Winchester/Olin was the previous operator, they get away with marketing a bunch-o crap as Military. It isn't.


Military uses NATO. NATO is 124/125gr.

Is there an element of marketing to this? Of course. That said the round in question was adopted as part of the M17 trials. SIG partnered with Winchester (Olin Corp.) for the ammunition part of the competition. There are multiple articles detailing that the ammunition was being used (I’m not sure about current usage).

https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...m-luger-loads/

The ammunition is listed in this article as being produced at Oxford, Miss, not Lake City.

I’ll add that depending on the terms of the contract, it may not even require or mean that Winchester maintains the sole rights to produce the ammunition for military usage. I don’t know the details of the contract and I haven’t seen them posted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Forte S+W]

@44 AMP
I'm not in the mood to argue semantics, so I'm going to be brief.

I merely stated that 9mm NATO predates the +P designation, hence why it isn't labeled as +P on MilSurp ammo packaging. Also, I was merely acknowledging TunnelRat's statement that generally speaking 9mm +P is loaded hotter than 9mm NATO because most ammo manufacturers who specialize in the production of overpressure ammo tend to aim for the highest numbers they can get away with without risking exceeding official limitations, ergo "+P" ammo tends to be loaded hotter than 36,500psi and closer to 38,500psi.

Peak Pressures were used mostly as a frame of reference to clearly define the differences between 9mm NATO, 9mm Luger +P, and 9mm Luger +P+.

However, I was arguing with TunnelRat that 9mm NATO and +P were both overpressure ammo, just as +P+ and M1152 Ball are also overpressure ammo to begin with. So we're both saying the exact same thing here anyway.

[wild cat mccane]

Yep.

If it isn't produced at Lake City, it's not being deployed in real life.

It's a trainer only and despite the two gun magazine articles about it, DOD rounds are made at Lake City which is Northrup Grumman. Even the Winchester marked "Lake City" is made through partnership to Northrup for Winchester.

Olin has no presence in Lake City. DOD requires all rounds are through Lake City.

Additionally, we know this because NATO is 124gr or 125gr.

[TunnelRat]

This isn’t 9mm NATO. It’s a different round. When you say, “deployed”, what specifically do you mean? This cartridge has been in use by the US military.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wild cat mccane]

It absolutely is not being used in combat.

[TunnelRat]

I have no idea if it is being used in combat. I’m not sure anyone has said that specifically. That doesn’t mean it isn’t being used in other capacities.

I’ll add that just because Olin Corp. isn’t running Lake City doesn’t mean they aren’t getting military contracts for ammunition and that those aren’t being produced at Oxford.

https://www.guns.com/news/2019/01/28...-ammo-contract

https://www.guns.com/news/2020/01/29...-ammo-contract


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wild cat mccane]

I did. I said it is only being used as a trainer and VERY limited.

Winchester isn't the sole producer of training 9mm. It is a limited agreement.

Lake City is the producer trainer and combat NATO ammo.

I've only purchased 5.56 Federal overrun contract DOD ammo with the DOD sku. I've never seen US military SKU 9mm.

This is not the SKU.

This is marketing.

[TunnelRat]

It’s the designation that was assigned as part of the M17 competition. I’m not sure what more to tell you. If you’re annoyed that Winchester is then using that designation to try and get civilian sales, okay, though that seems a pretty common strategy in this industry.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wild cat mccane]

The key here is "developed" for the contract. If you investigate that SKU for the ammo you are talking about, you will not find it in the DOD registry.

It can be the exact same ammo, but the SKU will be different. I'll post up a picture of my 62gr DOD 5.56 from Federal. It is totally boring without marking but what it is.

Additionally, this isn't the sole training ammo as the articles leads you to believe. The DOD training round is out of Lake City. Winchester/Olin has absolutely no role in Lake City.

I'm just saying don't think this is the average training round. It also is NOT the deployed round. (your training round during on deployment is your active duty round)

Meh. Winchester is doing a LOT of 100% false marketing on their ammo right now with their duty/forged/Lake City usages.

This is also no faster than Fiocchi CMJ 115gr.


Truly, a "meh" distinction.

[TunnelRat]

I don’t believe I personally have said it is the average training round, though I get your point.

To me all of them do marketing. I’m not sure Olin Corp. is any more egregious than anyone else, but if you see it differently fair enough.

As I pointed out in the contracts above, Olin not having a role in Lake City doesn’t mean it isn’t producing ammunition under contract for the Army. In reading the American Rifleman article I don’t see where it claims this is the sole training round (I wasn’t under that impression).

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[74A95]

Just a comment on the pressure values:

SAAMI, CIP and NATO EPVAT testing methods differ slightly, so comparing pressure values is not entirely fair because the methods could result in different values for the same ammo tested. I don't know how much different. It's just something to keep in mind.

According to the Wikipedia page, "Due to NATO EPVAT using technically differing proof test standards than SAAMI and C.I.P., EVPAT pressures cannot be directly compared with SAAMI and C.I.P. pressures."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_E...sting#Proofing