User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 1:05:50 PM EDT
Years ago I researched and tried several rounds and came to the conclusion that I wanted to carry HST 147, non- plus P, in my EDC. I won't bore you with the details as to how I decided this, suffice it to say I THOUGHT I had made an intelligent decision but upon discussion with a NEWBIE (albeit, pretty smart himself) and sending him this chart (see link), he pointed out that the 124 exceeds the 147 in all 3 categories: velocity, energy and drop.
Great! I thought, what the heck did I miss? So I'm putting it out to you for discussion: "what DID I miss, and why did I choose the 147 over the 124"? Needless to say I have stocked the 147 and am happy with my current inventory, but am now seriously second guessing my choice. 
124 v. 147 HST Please don't tell me why I should use Speer, or Remington, or that I should use +P or whatnot. KEEP THIS DISCUSSION TO THE 2 CHOICES I'VE MADE CLEAR IN THIS POST. thanks jack never mind the link, here you go.... 
And this is a table I made, way back when I was studying various rounds, and evidently I totally skipped the 124, non +p, for some reason, and this is perhaps why I chose the 147.... dunno.... (and YES, the 124+p is listed here, but having shot +p I didn't care for the kick and the slower re-acquisition times, 'nuff said on that) 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 1:30:58 PM EDT
[#1]
None of the three requirements you mention are even used by me for consideration. The 124 is lighter so the velocity will be higher. The HST is not a velocity dependent round like the older HP ammo. So it is kind of a wash.
I want a round that penetrates deep and I can control. Multiple rounds on target fast is my goal. I can do that better with a 147 of any brand vs a 124. Others pick the 147 because it has more documented real world shoots than the others. This is thanks to several large busy Agencies that have a lot of shootings. Real world results trump numbers on a graph or Youtube water jug tests. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 1:59:19 PM EDT
[#2]
You're overthinking this WAY too much. Just keep practicing fast COM hits with your pistol.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 2:49:17 PM EDT
[#3]
TNOutdoors9 does some pretty good (IMO) ammo comparisons:
I can't find where he tested standard pressure 124gr HST but here's the +P:
You could compare the 124+P versus 147+P and see if you can draw a conclusion about the standard 124. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 6:27:32 PM EDT
[#4]
None of those data points have anything to do with the terminal ballistics of the two rounds. What matters is penetration, followed by expansion and how well it performs through barriers. You're getting lost in the weeds here. The HST 147 grain load outperforms the 124 grain version, but pick a good load like the 147 grain HST, practice with it for proficiency, and then stop worrying about minutia.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 8:48:38 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
None of those data points have anything to do with the terminal ballistics of the two rounds. What matters is penetration, followed by expansion and how well it performs through barriers. You're getting lost in the weeds here. The HST 147 grain load outperforms the 124 grain version, but pick a good load like the 147 grain HST, practice with it for proficiency, and then stop worrying about minutia. Exactly. OP, none of those data points matter for your purposes, and like the guy I quoted said, the 147 grain does outperform the 124 in what matters for a self defense round. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 8:01:39 AM EDT
[#6]
As others have said, velocity/energy etc aren't really important.
124g HST fails the FBI min penetration in bare gel. 147g is better. If all you can find is 124g HST, I wouldn't feel bad about carrying it, but I'd also be shopping around for some 147g. 
ETA Grey boxes with red numbers indicate fail the FBI standards.... Green numbers are best in class. ETA: notice the 124 expands slightly more than 147, but the longer wound of the 147 makes a bigger volume of wound channel. Also notice that the HST 147g wound volume is head and shoulders above anything else. If you can find it, and your gun runs it well, there isn't any reason to use any other ammo...... Unless you live in a cold climate and expect heavy clothing, then I would use 147g Ranger T. EEETA: Notice the highest energy, the 124g Ranger T +p+ has pretty anemic performance (well, to be fair it is "middle of the pack"). So just to back up the posts saying "don't worry about energy" |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 8:12:47 AM EDT
[#7]
To muddy the waters a little, here is the data from Doc Roberts (may have to zoom browser to make legible). Shows 124g penetrates 12", and one test of 147g (HST) came short (could be the longer barrel, too much velocity???) His data doesn't show as conclusive a difference compared to factory data (chart in my previous post), but still shows 147g HST to be "the one to beat". I will say that I do trust the factory data, since a lot of the factory data shows failures/poor terminal ballistics, so I don't think they are fudging results.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 11:32:34 AM EDT
[#8]
Thanks guys, appreciate it. Makes sense.
Yes my weapons eat the HST no problem, and it's what I've been practicing with and my EDC for years now, so I'm totally comfortable with it and my shot groups. And as to my inventory, no worries about finding any... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 7:26:27 PM EDT
[#9]
Anyone have a source on the 147gr HST? I can never seem to find it in stock anywhere.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2014 7:31:24 PM EDT
[#10]
They are in between production runs so it is hard for us LE ammo Dealers to get.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2014 8:58:23 AM EDT
[#11]
147 will penetrate deeper and less chance of deflecting off bone. I always use the heavy for caliber stuff.
Dont sweat the slight loss of energy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2014 7:41:35 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: None of those data points have anything to do with the terminal ballistics of the two rounds. What matters is penetration, followed by expansion and how well it performs through barriers. You're getting lost in the weeds here. The HST 147 grain load outperforms the 124 grain version, but pick a good load like the 147 grain HST, practice with it for proficiency, and then stop worrying about minutia. I know I need the penetration and expansion...but the old geezer in me says needs more velocity and ft. Lbs to kill them deader. I shoot a .40 and use the 180 grain Winchester ranger t rounds...and when I get my VP9, will just find out what 147 grain bonded JHP it shoots best and use that...despite my desire for speed speed speed.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2014 10:01:10 AM EDT
[#13]
Work expansion out of your shooting plans. No mfg guarantees that it will always happen.
You need multiple rounds on target fast. It is what the bullet damages or destroys passing through that matters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2014 7:27:06 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As a child of the 80's...I know this..and yet I'm drawn to hot, fast moving rounds such as the Winchester RA9TA and the old Federal 9BPLE +P+ loads. I know I need the penetration and expansion...but the old geezer in me says needs more velocity and ft. Lbs to kill them deader. I shoot a .40 and use the 180 grain Winchester ranger t rounds...and when I get my VP9, will just find out what 147 grain bonded JHP it shoots best and use that...despite my desire for speed speed speed.. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
None of those data points have anything to do with the terminal ballistics of the two rounds. What matters is penetration, followed by expansion and how well it performs through barriers. You're getting lost in the weeds here. The HST 147 grain load outperforms the 124 grain version, but pick a good load like the 147 grain HST, practice with it for proficiency, and then stop worrying about minutia. I know I need the penetration and expansion...but the old geezer in me says needs more velocity and ft. Lbs to kill them deader. I shoot a .40 and use the 180 grain Winchester ranger t rounds...and when I get my VP9, will just find out what 147 grain bonded JHP it shoots best and use that...despite my desire for speed speed speed.. I understand what you're saying, but don't get paralysis by analysis, especially when it comes to terminal ballistics. I happen to prefer the 147 grain loadings if I can get them, but I don't worry about walking around with 124 +p Gold Dots or any of the other good performing loads. I don't even feel bad if all I have is 147 grain WWB hollowpoints or some other budget SD ammo. Your VP9 will eat whatever you throw at it. I like my VP9 to be stoked with 147 grain Ranger Bonded because it's a little more comfortable to shoot than with the 124 +p Gold Dots. I am a wuss and I don't like recoil, whether it be in 9mm or .40 (I carry both depending on my mood). But, I like the 124 +p in my Glock 17 gen 4, because the dual recoil spring really soaks up the recoil, and I like having the +p to ensure good functioning in that particular gun, again due to that stiff dual recoil spring. It's only my personal preference, and thats it. I know both rounds are fully capable of doing their part if I do mine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2014 5:01:43 AM EDT
[#15]
I went with the 147gr simply because they are not as velocity dependent. I carry a S&W Shield9 and a S&W M&P9c, both have short barrels. I trust the 147gr to do its job.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2014 1:35:18 AM EDT
[#16]
Get the 147gr HST's
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2014 5:14:03 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote Historyand the only two that are worthwhile are the Federal and Speer, the rest are shit |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2014 6:25:03 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
and the only two that are worthwhile are the Federal and Speer, the rest are shit Quote HistoryQuoted:
and the only two that are worthwhile are the Federal and Speer, the rest are shit I don't know if I'd go that far. But the federal and Speer are better by a small margin. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2014 6:28:55 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know if I'd go that far. But the federal and Speer are better by a small margin. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
and the only two that are worthwhile are the Federal and Speer, the rest are shit I don't know if I'd go that far. But the federal and Speer are better by a small margin. I don't know much about PDX-1, but Golden Saber is absolutely terrible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 7:59:26 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know much about PDX-1, but Golden Saber is absolutely terrible. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
and the only two that are worthwhile are the Federal and Speer, the rest are shit I don't know if I'd go that far. But the federal and Speer are better by a small margin. I don't know much about PDX-1, but Golden Saber is absolutely terrible. Not starting a war, Just curious. I'm confused by your statement, saying that the Golden Saber is terrible. Can you give a credible source for your statement? One that is not just hear say. Here is my source below saying that its a decent round and showing it performs well. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NvLvVONAiAg |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 2:31:47 PM EDT
[#22]
I have Golden Saber +P 124gr and 147gr Golden Saber rounds and the are both on the Ammo FAQ. They cycle well in my FNX-9 and since they are on ammo FAQ, I feel comfortable using them for SD.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 4:49:58 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quote Historyand the only two that are worthwhile are the Federal and Speer, the rest are shit RA9T is shit? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2014 8:33:59 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have Golden Saber +P 124gr and 147gr Golden Saber rounds and the are both on the Ammo FAQ. They cycle well in my FNX-9 and since they are on ammo FAQ, I feel comfortable using them for SD. One of the local PDs in my area uses 9mm +P Golden Saber and it does take care of busiiness quite well I'm told. I carry it with confidence, although there are many other good choices out there too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2014 9:43:27 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
and the only two that are worthwhile are the Federal and Speer, the rest are shit RA9T is shit? Quote HistoryQuoted:
and the only two that are worthwhile are the Federal and Speer, the rest are shit RA9T is shit? That is just his opinion. Everyone has one, it is not fact based if you are worried that The RA9T suddenly went to shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 12:38:52 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
None of those data points have anything to do with the terminal ballistics of the two rounds. What matters is penetration, followed by expansion and how well it performs through barriers. You're getting lost in the weeds here. The HST 147 grain load outperforms the 124 grain version, but pick a good load like the 147 grain HST, practice with it for proficiency, and then stop worrying about minutia. According to the ATK own gel testing all 3 9mm HST loads fail the auto glass test. Both the 124gr loads failed the bare gel test. And the standard pressure penetrated and expanded more than the +p 124.HST The 147 barely passed the BG test and P= 12 BTW The standard pressure 124 expanded 880 caliber in the BG test and penetrated 11 inches. I would use the 124gr standard pressure without any fear. Same with Doc. However I wont use any 147gr loads in my P30S because of the impulse. A different pistol a different story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 12:42:17 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
147 will penetrate deeper and less chance of deflecting off bone. I always use the heavy for caliber stuff. Dont sweat the slight loss of energy. My friend was shot at close range in the knee cap dead center. load was 147gr Hard Cast Lead Flat Nose. It slid behind his knee cap and went down the back of his leg and out by the ankle . He has no never damage. and out of the hospital the same day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 12:52:07 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As others have said, velocity/energy etc aren't really important. 124g HST fails the FBI min penetration in bare gel. 147g is better. If all you can find is 124g HST, I wouldn't feel bad about carrying it, but I'd also be shopping around for some 147g. Yes the 147gr HST according to ATK own testing penetrated a big full 1 inch more than standard pressure 124gr HST . But that's because the standard pressure load expanded a lot more than the 147gr 124 standard pressure EXP = .888 caliber And all 3 9mm HST loads fail the auto glass test. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 12:55:34 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is just his opinion. Everyone has one, it is not fact based if you are worried that The RA9T suddenly went to shit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
and the only two that are worthwhile are the Federal and Speer, the rest are shit RA9T is shit? That is just his opinion. Everyone has one, it is not fact based if you are worried that The RA9T suddenly went to shit. I got a Email the other day from a gel tester who just got done testing the 147gr T in short barrel 9mm. He was impressed with his results. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 3:46:18 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
According to the ATK own gel testing all 3 9mm HST loads fail the auto glass test. Both the 124gr loads failed the bare gel test. And the standard pressure penetrated and expanded more than the +p 124.HST The 147 barely passed the BG test and P= 12 BTW The standard pressure 124 expanded 880 caliber in the BG test and penetrated 11 inches. I would use the 124gr standard pressure without any fear. Same with Doc. However I wont use any 147gr loads in my P30S because of the impulse. A different pistol a different story. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
None of those data points have anything to do with the terminal ballistics of the two rounds. What matters is penetration, followed by expansion and how well it performs through barriers. You're getting lost in the weeds here. The HST 147 grain load outperforms the 124 grain version, but pick a good load like the 147 grain HST, practice with it for proficiency, and then stop worrying about minutia. According to the ATK own gel testing all 3 9mm HST loads fail the auto glass test. Both the 124gr loads failed the bare gel test. And the standard pressure penetrated and expanded more than the +p 124.HST The 147 barely passed the BG test and P= 12 BTW The standard pressure 124 expanded 880 caliber in the BG test and penetrated 11 inches. I would use the 124gr standard pressure without any fear. Same with Doc. However I wont use any 147gr loads in my P30S because of the impulse. A different pistol a different story. Quite frankly, it's to the point where my head hurts when I start thinking about all the different varibles involved between weights, velocities, barriers, and different results from different ballistic gel tests conducted on different days. I don't dispute anything you've written here, but I'm also certain that I could find numbers to contradict yours if I looked hard enough, so in the end it really is kind of a wash between all viable contenders. I've resigned myself to picking one, practicing as much as possible with it, and forgetting about it. I do see your point about the recoil impulse, but that doesn't have any bearing on the terminal performance of the round. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
