I'm not in any way an ammunition expert, so please bear with me and feel free to correct (or better explain) anything I say here. I just received a 500-round case of Winchester 9mm M1153 from SGAmmo that is apparently overrun (or rejects) from a government contract. You can find it listed here:

500 Round Case - 9mm Luger 147 Grain Jacketed Hollow Point T-Series Government Contract Special Purpose M1153 Winchester High Pressure Ammo - ZQ4429 - $289.50 now $389.50 as of 11/4/23 and… back to $289.50 as of 12/12/23

This is the new JHP ammo that's been adopted by the U.S. military, so I was curious to try some out and add a small amount to my defensive ammo stash. Buffman posted a short test of this ammo two years ago, but he was only able to get two rounds at the time:



SGAmmo is very up front about the fact that this ammo appears to have been released to the commercial market because Winchester somehow mixed in some Ranger T-Series RA9T projectiles in the lot, so there are M1153 cartridges loaded with RA9T mixed in with the standard MHS projectiles. They also mention that some rounds are missing the primer sealant that's required by the military contract. So... one might interpret these as being rejects from the government contract, not really an overrun. Here's the disclaimer from the SGAmmo product listing:


The ammo comes in plain white Winchester boxes with no markings or description on them, other than the lot number stamped on one of the flaps.

Attached File


I opened up and sorted the ammo and thought you all might be interested in the numbers I came up with. Of the 500 rounds I received, I would say that 370 of them have properly sealed primers, although that might be a little generous, because some have very thin coatings, and a couple don't have a complete circle of sealant around the primer. I sorted the rounds into two 50-round boxes of unsealed primers plus another half of a box. I have never reloaded ammo, but I'm going to pick up a bottle of sealant and apply it to those rounds. I may just shoot the unsealed ones, since I want to try out this ammo anyway, but I figured it would be a learning experience. Here's how the half-and-half box looks:

Attached File


As far as the projectiles go, I ended up with 21 rounds that have the Ranger RA9T projectiles, which wasn't as bad as I was expecting. An interesting thing I noticed is that all of those rounds had unsealed primers - I didn't find any Ranger rounds that were properly sealed. Maybe just coincidence, but that made them easy to consolidate in my half-and-half box. You can see the RA9T rounds on the left in this photo, with the thinner petals around the rim of the rounds:

Attached File


Last thing, and this is where my lack of expertise may be most apparent, but it seems to me that the projectiles look a bit inconsistent in these rounds. Most of the MHS and RA9T projectiles (bullets) were easy to tell apart, because the MHS JHP round has big, rounded petals in comparison. However, there were a few that were sort of in the middle, which made me wonder if they were improperly formed MHS or RA9T projectiles. This may not be the best example, but the one in the middle of this photo is one of the rounds that I had to stare at for a bit. It looks thin like the RA9T on the left, but its petals are more rounded like the MHS round.

Attached File


After tax (with free shipping), these came out to about 62 cents / round. That seemed comparable to HSTs and Gold Dots available via mail order, and definitely cheaper than anything I'm seeing in local stores. I thought it was worth it to get some of these MHS rounds that may not be available to the public otherwise.

Excellent review and pics, thank you!

I had wondered what the ratio was with RA9T.

I bought some of the 1152 ammo. I tried it in my m11a1. 229.  I had a failure to extract and eject /double feed.   Every magazine had at least 1 issue or more.  

I’ve used the 124 gr nato and Winchester ranger with ra9 load. I’ve used gold dot and several other loadings without issue

From what sig and Winchester theorize is the ammo was too hot for my m11

Try it out before committing to using it defensively

I’ve put a couple hundred rounds of M1152 through both my M17s and my M18 with no malfunctions at all. Flawless, but definitely hotter than most 115 gr 9mm.

The M1153 won’t be my carry ammo - I’ll continue to use HSTs for that. I just may keep some of the M1153 handy for my military production M17 that stays at home. I’m going to put at least 100 rounds through it to make sure it functions reliably.

Thank you OP really appreciate it.

I think the 1152 and 1153 were made for the m17m18,  but in use in other pistols Check a few boxes out before committing.  I had 300 rounds go back to Winchester.

I just had two m11’s come back from sig’s factory service, so at first I thought it was the pistols.  I tried different batches of the ammo too.  
But with hst nato gold dots etc the guns worked fine.  Just the 1152’s.

I have done a lot of shooting 40 years and never seen that many problems

For what it’s worth YMMV

The M1152 shoots the best groups of anything I've put through my 2.0 5" FDE 9MM.  Almost shoots like a CZ with that stuff.  On the other hand, my P01 doesn't shoot good groups with it.

The M1152 also shoots good in the M&P Shields and Shield Plus pistols.

Have not tried it in the SIG 2022.

Quality like this is why I won't buy Winchester ammunition. Their Oxford MS plant especially seems to have some issues.

From looking at the ammo, it looks like they started mixing bullets before/without changing out the dies. Some of those bullets look like regular Ranger T that have been punched with MHS dies.

I'm not sure how this happens. Carelessness or just trying to save time/money. This does NOT instill confidence in Winchester.

I'm glad that Winchester decided to sell them rather than dump the lot but as you state, it makes them look bad. Also, it should be much cheaper being mystery ammo.

We bought some of this but have not had a chance to run it in the Glocks yet.

Will report back.

hey OP -- thanks very much for the detailed write-up

to me -- it does look like there are (3) different bullets loaded into these cartridges

I think ITCHY-FINGER's assessment is spot on and makes sense - that they mixed the bullets in the dies. I hadn't thought of that, but as you said, it does look like three types of bullets, but the middle one in my photo of three rounds does look like a Ranger T formed into the shape of the MHS bullet.

I'm glad you all found this useful. I don't have a lot of heartburn about the price because I think they're both effective JHP rounds and should perform fine, despite the obvious mix-up and poor quality control. I'm glad to have about 300 good MHS rounds, and I'll use the others to function test my M17 and M18. I don't run enough JHPs through them to ensure they work smoothly, so the unsealed primers and mixed bullets are good incentive to shoot them. I'll still count on HSTs for defensive carry, but I like the idea of having some of these MHS rounds to go with my military production pistols.

Quick range report.

Out of the 100 rounds I had with me, 9 were the RA9T bullet and the rest MHS.
All cases were primer sealed.

I fired 37 rounds including all of the RA9T through a Glock G45 and I had no failures to feed or fire.
The rounds shot to point of aim.

I don't have a chrono but it seemed they were fairly hot loaded.

I liked it and will carry it.

Thanks for the feedback. I haven’t had a chance to get to the range since moving this past summer. Life has been too busy. I hope to put 50 of these through both my M17 and M18 sometime soon.

Ouch. I just noticed the price of this ammo has gone up by $100 to $389.50. I’m glad I got it when I did, because I don’t think it’s worth that price for what appear to be rejects from the production line.

Just noticed the price went back down to $289.50, in case anyone is interested in picking some up.

I finally had a chance to try this ammo in my military production M17 today. I put 100 rounds of M1152 115gr FMJ through it first, which, as discussed before, is a pretty hot round - averaging around 1327 fps in a 4.5" barrel based on Buffman's testing (the M17 barrel is 4.7"). After that, I shot 50 rounds of M1153. I ended the session with another 50 rounds of M1152. I may be soft, but 150 rounds of M1152 leaves the web of my strong hand a little sore. In contract, I found the M1153 to be pretty soft shooting - it didn't feel like +P to me. Buffman's test in the video above recorded 964 FPS for the single round of M1153 he was able to test in a Beretta M9 5" barrel.

Both type of rounds functioned perfectly in my M17, and I found them both to be accurate, but I really struggle to avoid anticipating my shots with M1152, while the M1153 was much more comfortable to shoot. Unfortunately, I didn't think to bring any other JHPs for comparison during this session, but I was saving time to shoot my new P265XL. This was a pretty simple test, but I don't want to expend too much of this ammo, since it was expensive and questionable from a quality control standpoint. I don't plan to buy more of it at this point. Although I'd like to put a couple hundred rounds of M1153 through it, this was enough to make me feel fairly confident that I can use this round accurately and reliably in my M17. I'll save some for my M18 next time I can get out to the range.

The concern with the 'Talon' design, and generally bullets with a folded over jacket in the cavity like that, is if the cutting die that punches is the hollow point and cuts/skivs the jacket is dull, it will fail to expand.

This has previously occurred with the Ranger-T 127gr +p+ and 124gr +p. These rounds have plenty of power and velocity, but when a batch from the dull cutting dies came out, they failed to expand reliably.

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/#9mm



At a minimum, I'd fire some of the weird looking bullets into water to see if they expand.

It appears that’s the case with most mil type Winchester ammo on the civilian market.  Show me actual mil spec double sealed win m1153 m1152 or even q4318 and I’m a buyer.

https://www.sgammo.com/product/9mm-luger-ammo/500-round-case-9mm-nato-124-grain-winchester-mil-spec-ammo-q4318

Is this what you seek?

Looks like this ammo may have popped up in another form.

He stated in his promo email he is forbidden from saying what this ammo really is from Winchester, but that it is loaded 10-15% above spec, and that if you are versed in premium hollow points you'll know what it is.


Attached File


https://www.sgammo.com/product/9mm-luger-ammo/50-round-box-9mm-high-pressure-147-grain-jacketed-hollow-point-winchester-def

I ordered a few boxes of it. Hopefully it's actually +p like they're claiming.

From their latest promo email:

"We got great velocity numbers and bullet expansion out of this ammo in our recent test, youtube video coming soon!"

Don't see the video yet but sounds encouraging.

That's good to hear.  I'll chrono some when I get it and post the results.

Just got some of this in this evening.

My guess is, it may be a rejected lot of M1153 due to primer and case mouth sealant missing on some.

It's hard to see the sealant unless you get out a UV light.  But I noticed that all the rounds that had primer sealant had case mount sealant too.  And all the rounds that did not have primer sealant did not have case mouth sealant either.

My guess is someone probably let the case mouth/primer sealant tank run out and just kept making rounds.

Here is a pic with some UV light on.  As you can see it appears that there is not consistent ratio of sealed to unsealed from box to box.

All the bullets look consistent and normal.

It may be a few weeks before I can get to shooting any of these, but if they chrono good it may be a way to get a rejected lot of M1153.

Attached File

962 from a G19 and 981 from  G17 with a Garmin chronograph.  5 round average.

EDIT:  Not sure what the problem was with my original test. My target distance might have been too short. Anyway, I've since tested it 3 more times with a 15 yard target, and it averaged between 1012 - 1015fps all three times from a Glock 19.