Can a 226 handle +p or +p+?  Not for plinking but to shoot a few mags of and for carry?

The factory says your Sig can handle +P all day long.  They, however say, no to +P+.  My P-228 eats 127gr. +P+ Ranger SXT T-Series all day long though.

Well i dont plan on shooting them all the time probably just a few clips to make sure they run ok in the gun then just use the +p+ for carry.

Why not just use the 9mm with the best terminal performance instead?

Winchester RA9T 147 grain

Does not beat up your gun, yet expands and penetrates better than anything else.  Terminal performance is the same as 124 grain Gold Dot +P and 127 Ranger +P+ yet way less recoil , blast and flash.

good input devl, thanks for the info. Ill go do some research on that.

Quick! edit your post before the mag/clip police roast you!!

It's my understanding that many reputable manufacturers dont recommend using the +p+, but I think its because they decided to error on the side of caution.
I wouldnt think a few mags here and there and for carry wouldn't hurt anything

Quoted: Quick! edit your post before the mag/clip police roast you!!...

+1  (I’m surprised they haven’t already shown up – there must be a party somewhere!)

Anyway, you can certainly fire +P+ in a P226 without catastrophic results.

When the Secret Service carried P228’s, their standard round was Remington +P+ 115 grain 9MM’s.

That said, +P+ will accelerate wear – and most individual gun owners, unlike LEO agencies, don’t periodically turn over their firearms (or at least don’t want to!).

Also, I'd suggest you stay strictly with U.S. made +P+ ammo – apparently some of the foreign made stuff is really hot subgun ammo.

Oly-M4gery, Mag-police, everyone grab some wall.....................

clips

Sig-Sauer's recent guns should have no problem with +p or +p+. Some of their older, thinke 15-20 years, small frame 9mm's were a little more pressure sensitive. There should be some type of advisory in the owners manual.

We've had Sig-Sauers survive rounds being fired with a barrel obstruction, prior load was a squib round, w/o catastrophic failure.

You should plan on praciting with more than a few rounds, of whatever ammo you intend to use for carry ammo. Recoil will be different, as well as the trajectory, than "plinking" ammo. Also you want to shoot enough carry ammo to make sure it works 100% of the time.

What about Golcks. Are they safe to use +p's in?

Quoted: What about Golcks. Are they safe to use +p's in?

No, Glocks will explode with every type of ammo.  Never shoot a Glock, the sky is falling, the sky is falling...    ... Sorry, there are so many Glock haters at Arfcom, I had to beat somebody to the punch.

I doubt so many LEOs would carry Glocks if they couldn't handle +p, however, I've never done any research on it.

Your Sig can handle it. Re-loaders like Sigs becaue the quality of the bbl keeps brass from expanding a lot (in comparison with other brands).

If you decide you do want to shoot +p+ and NATO every trip to the range, get yourself a Bar-Sto. The supported chamber will have no problem with those pressures while remaining accurate as hell.

oh ok so sig 226s have supported chamber.  is there any website that explains the differences between unsupported and supported? I would like to read on the advantages of a supported chamber.

Quoted: oh ok so sig 226s have supported chamber.  is there any website that explains the differences between unsupported and supported? I would like to read on the advantages of a supported chamber.

I was refering to the supported chamber of a Bar-Sto bbl. But it isn't cause for concern, Sig bbls are plenty strong. Just don't feed it any super hot self loads and it will be fine.

There is an entire site dedicated to Sigs if you really want to study up on them. I forget the exact URL but I'm sure a Google search will get you there.

www.sigforums.com

I heard many of the new SIGs are not up to the old standards and the barrels get excessive wear.  This problem, I was told, gets worse by using +P munitions.

Quoted: I heard many of the new SIGs are not up to the old standards and the barrels get excessive wear.  This problem, I was told, gets worse by using +P munitions.

My understanding of the barrel wear issue is that it was a result of an overly abrasive Nitron finish that wore the barrel during cycling.  Don’t know if +P rounds would worsen that or not (though they’d certainly speed up the slide velocity).

Supposedly Sig has modified the finish to correct this problem.  However, they apparently aren’t being very cooperative about replacing damaged barrels.

yep read about that, hopefully mine wont be that way.  But i will be sure to pay CLOSE attention and watch the wear after every range trip.

+P's usually work more reliably in SIG's than standard American loads, as typical Euro 9MM is loaded to a similar pressure as our +P. US manufacturers have traditionally downloaded 9MM due to concern that it would be fired in a gun chambered in a similar but much lower pressure round. As I recall typical German loading is a 124gn bullet at 1250 fps.
 

Quoted: +P's usually work more reliably in SIG's than standard American loads, as typical Euro 9MM is loaded to a similar pressure as our +P. ...

No doubt you’re correct about Sig’s design parameters.  But personally, I’ve never seen a 9MM round that didn’t function perfectly in a Sig.

Blaser, Wal-Mart Value Pack, 124 grain NATO, 147 grain subsonic, 115/124/127 grain +P+ - I’ve never seen a Sig choke on any of them.

YMMV, of course.

See some people swear by +p, but i guess if WWB at wallie world feeds and fires with no hitches then why not because its cheaper, less wear on the gun, and my sig isnt for carry so i dont need the extra power.  But i am going to run many different ammos through the sig when i get it (hopefully tomorow) to see what rounds i am most accurate with. Im gonna try some hornady, winchester, remington, cci, federal, and some NATO.

Be sure and clean off the protectant and replace it with a good lubricant such as FP-10 before shooting it.

It is possible that it will need a few boxes of ammo run through it to break it in.  In particular, I’ve found the newer Nitron finish is a bit abrasive (as already discussed) and it may need to wear in a little.

In other words, I wouldn’t worry too much about making ammo comparisons until you’re sure the Sig is reliable.

If you try any 147 grain subsonic ammo, you’ll probably find that your sights are off a bit.

Do you think adjustable sights are a good investment, and if so what is a good brand.  I want to take some training classes with my new 226 so i want it accurate,

Sig sights are already a little bit adjustable.  You may want to buy the Sig Sight Pusher to do the job, of course.  It should be plenty accurate with stock sights.  Just shoot it a lot.  You've got to meet the gun half-way alot of the time.

Quoted: Do you think adjustable sights are a good investment, ...

Adjustable sights are a bit bulkier and somewhat more delicate than fixed sights.  They also sometimes cause problems with holster selection.

Still, they work pretty nicely.

Thing of it is, you really just don’t need them with a Sig unless you plan on switching back and forth between various substantially different varieties of rounds.

Sig offers a variety of fixed front and rear sights of varying heights.  Simply decide on the specific round you intend to use and then get the sights that will give you point of aim hits.

You’ll note a small number (probably a “6” or a “8”) on your front and rear sights.  This tells you the height of the sight.

Here’s a chart of Sig sight heights I posted a while back:  photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=22034  

While I’ve never bought sights from them, CDNN seems to have the best prices for standard (non-nitesite) sights.

Note that switching out Sig sights can be surprising difficult without the proper tools.

Absolutely- the P226 is in my opinion one of the most reliable handguns made. Not to imply that is was unreliable with standard ammo. Only under adverse conditions would you notice better operation with higher pressure ammo.
 To explain, the military group I served in used the P226 very heavily- as in hundreds of thousands of rounds fired annually in the SIGs. Can't remember a malfuntion that was not ammo induced. I wish I could say that of our other hardware. We used the 226 in all sorts of conditions, and it remains as a favorite of mine.

Quoted: oh ok so sig 226s have supported chamber.  is there any website that explains the differences between unsupported and supported? I would like to read on the advantages of a supported chamber.

There is some info and pictures in this thread:

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=20&t=17855

Quoted: See some people swear by +p, but i guess if WWB at wallie world feeds and fires with no hitches then why not because its cheaper, less wear on the gun, and my sig isnt for carry so i dont need the extra power.  But i am going to run many different ammos through the sig when i get it (hopefully tomorow) to see what rounds i am most accurate with. Im gonna try some hornady, winchester, remington, cci, federal, and some NATO.

Even if it was for carry there is not reason at all to use +P in your Sig.  None.

Quoted: Quoted: See some people swear by +p, but i guess if WWB at wallie world feeds and fires with no hitches then why not because its cheaper, less wear on the gun, and my sig isnt for carry so i dont need the extra power.  But i am going to run many different ammos through the sig when i get it (hopefully tomorow) to see what rounds i am most accurate with. Im gonna try some hornady, winchester, remington, cci, federal, and some NATO. Even if it was for carry there is not reason at all to use +P in your Sig.  None.

Why's that?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: See some people swear by +p, but i guess if WWB at wallie world feeds and fires with no hitches then why not because its cheaper, less wear on the gun, and my sig isnt for carry so i dont need the extra power.  But i am going to run many different ammos through the sig when i get it (hopefully tomorow) to see what rounds i am most accurate with. Im gonna try some hornady, winchester, remington, cci, federal, and some NATO. Even if it was for carry there is not reason at all to use +P in your Sig.  None. Why's that?

 

Because it serves no purpose.  What will +P do that non +P will not?  Nothing.  No greater wounds.  No extra expansion.  No better pentration.  Just more recoil, blast and flash.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: See some people swear by +p, but i guess if WWB at wallie world feeds and fires with no hitches then why not because its cheaper, less wear on the gun, and my sig isnt for carry so i dont need the extra power.  But i am going to run many different ammos through the sig when i get it (hopefully tomorow) to see what rounds i am most accurate with. Im gonna try some hornady, winchester, remington, cci, federal, and some NATO. Even if it was for carry there is not reason at all to use +P in your Sig.  None. Why's that?   Because it serves no purpose.  What will +P do that non +P will not?  Nothing.  No greater wounds.  No extra expansion.  No better pentration.  Just more recoil, blast and flash.

Hmmm.  I'm not convinced, for a couple of reasons.

--Many of the most widely tested and best performing (and hence, most widely recommended) 9mm loads ARE +P and +P+.  The reason is because when those bullets are loaded to std pressure they don't perform in ballistic testing as well at when they're at +P or +P+.  Is that difference in performance worth a little extra recoil?  It is for a lot of poeple.

--Some standard pressure loads penetrate, expand, and perform overall very, very well.  Others DO benefit from the higher velocities that are often realized with higher pressures.

--When we talk about standard pressure rounds vs. +P rounds we are talking about SAAMI specifications.  "Standard" SAAMI pressure for 9mm is lower than any other 9mm standard in the world (that I'm aware of).

--+P isn't allways specified just to meet a certain bullet velocity.  Sometimes a round can be +P only so the manufcature can use lower flash powders and maintain velocity.

--What about very short barrels?  Wouldn't the extra velocity common with +P aid in keeping a particular bullet at an optimal velocity?

--Your statement that +P loads offer no advantage over std press is based on what?  Some loads work fine in std pressure (147gr Rgr T is a stand out).  However, that doesn't mean that other loads with different manufactures, bullets, powders, etc. don't benefit from more pressure.

--I'm not saying that high pressure 9mm is the only thing going.  Like I pointed out, there is some std pressure 9mm that performs very well.  But there is also +P and +P+ 9mm that also performs very well while providing different performance characteristics.

--Really, the difference in flash and recoil isn't all that dramatic with +P.  Wear differences are harder to measure, but I'm convinced certain makes of gun were designed for higher pressures.  For me and my 9mm, accelerated wear is a non-issue.

--If there is ANY terminal performance advantage, than some will want the trade-off.  That's why some shoot .357 mag while others feel OK with .380ACP.

The bottom line as I see it is that you can't dismiss ALL +P 9mm just because there is some std pressure 9mm that also works.  You really have to make a go or no-go decision based on an individual load's advantages vs. disadvatages.  

Where am I going wrong?

Because you can use WWB for practice and RA9T for carry.  No reason to subject your pistol to +P rounds and cause excessive wear and blast and flash and slower follow up shots, etc.  No reason not to use those ammunition choices.  Why would you NOT use RA9T?  It readily available and does everything the best while being standard pressure.  You could never convince me to use a different load like the Gold Dot +P stuff.  It would be foolish for me to do so.  Using a poorly designed round that requires excess velocity to work makes no sense when you dont have to do that.

Quoted: Because you can use WWB for practice and RA9T for carry.  No reason to subject your pistol to +P rounds and cause excessive wear and blast and flash and slower follow up shots, etc.  No reason not to use those ammunition choices.  Why would you NOT use RA9T?

Why not?  
-It's too slow to generate decent energy.  
-It's too light to compensate for low velocity with mass.  
-It, like other 147 grain loadings, is most likely to overpenetrate, and I'd rather have a round stop in the first 6", explosively, than zip thorugh my target and hit someone on the far side.  
-It's loading is least likely to shoot to point of aim past 10 yards in most Sigs.
Other than that, it's a great round hoosing
Regards,

Kevin

Quoted: Because you can use WWB for practice and RA9T for carry.  No reason to subject your pistol to +P rounds and cause excessive wear and blast and flash and slower follow up shots, etc.  No reason not to use those ammunition choices.  Why would you NOT use RA9T?  It readily available and does everything the best while being standard pressure.  You could never convince me to use a different load like the Gold Dot +P stuff.  It would be foolish for me to do so.  Using a poorly designed round that requires excess velocity to work makes no sense when you dont have to do that.

Well, I guess I don't feel the difference in shootability between std and +P us enough to ristrict my ammo choice to ONE carry round.  I say why not have several good rounds to choose from?

I don't disagree that RA9T is a good carry round.  I have some and often carry it.  It's in the 90th percentile along with half a dozen other rounds.  However, I also have RA9TA, Speer GD 124 +P, Speer GD 124, 9BPLE, and P9HS3G1.  In a variety of situations, I wouldn't feel inadequately armed with any of them.

To each his own, I guess.  

Quoted: Quoted: Because you can use WWB for practice and RA9T for carry.  No reason to subject your pistol to +P rounds and cause excessive wear and blast and flash and slower follow up shots, etc.  No reason not to use those ammunition choices.  Why would you NOT use RA9T?   Why not?   -It's too slow to generate decent energy.   -It's too light to compensate for low velocity with mass.   -It, like other 147 grain loadings, is most likely to overpenetrate, and I'd rather have a round stop in the first 6", explosively, than zip thorugh my target and hit someone on the far side.   -It's loading is least likely to shoot to point of aim past 10 yards in most Sigs. Other than that, it's a great round Seriously, if I was choosing a 147 grain load, RA9T would be my choice, or the "new" Silvertip loaded to 1,050 FPS (allegedly).  But, if I had the choice in ammo carry, I wouldn't pick ANY 147 grain load, for the reasons listed above.  YMMV, of course. Regards, Kevin

You just displayed a total ignorance of terminal ballistics.  I hope everyone understands that after reading your post and that you stay happy with your BMT ammo.

Pick a load that has excellent penetration, excellent expansion practice with the load you choose, and dont worry about the rest.  Just shoot, shoot, shoot, and train, train, train and dont freakin worry about it.

My P-228 shoots 127gr.+P+, 124gr+P Rangers more accurately than the 147gr loading, so thats why I choose them out of that particular handgun.

My P-225 shoots all of them well, but the 147gr. Rangers seem to shoot just a lil bit better, so thats why I go with that one.

My P-226R is in the same boat as my P-228, and since I have more 127gr+P+ than all the  others, thats why I'll go with that particular load until I run out.

Quoted: You just displayed a total ignorance of terminal ballistics.  I hope everyone understands that after reading your post and that you stay happy with your BMT ammo.

DevL - what exactly are your credentials to question other people's knowledge of terminal ballistics?  I've got 18 years experience in the military and law enforcement; have been to hundreds of autopsies; and seen on the street what works, and what doesn't.  Sorry my experience doesn't jive with your pet theory.  

FWIW, EVERY major LE agency that has kept the 9mm is giving up on the 147 grain loadings for all the reasons listed in my earlier post.  The FBI is the only agency still using the 147 grain loadings in the Federal system - you might find it interesting that the ATF SRT guys I work with refer to 147 grain JHP as "Less Than Lethal" ammunition, and they used it, and saw it fail, in more shootings than you'd care to know.   I don't know a single agency, country wide, who has given up a high velocity +P or +P+ loading in favor of the 147.

But, what do I know; I'm obviously ignorant, and my relatively new status on this board clearly doesn't make me up to your Internet Commando status.

Regards,

Kevin

Quoted: FWIW, EVERY major LE agency that has kept the 9mm is giving up on the 147 grain loadings for all the reasons listed in my earlier post.  The FBI is the only agency still using the 147 grain loadings in the Federal system - you might find it interesting that the ATF SRT guys I work with refer to 147 grain JHP as "Less Than Lethal" ammunition, and they used it, and saw it fail, in more shootings than you'd care to know.   I don't know a single agency, country wide, who has given up a high velocity +P or +P+ loading in favor of the 147. Kevin

Sorry "K", but Dallas PD ditched the 115gr loadings and went with the 147gr. Ranger SXT T-Series.  They've been using it for several years now, and have had great sucess with it.  Yeah the .357sig is authorized, but the 9mm is issued.  Most of DPDs SWAT officers use the 9mm also.

If I'm not mistaken, San Diego PD, LAPD, and LASD also use the 147gr. offerings in 9mm.

Quoted: Quoted: FWIW, EVERY major LE agency that has kept the 9mm is giving up on the 147 grain loadings for all the reasons listed in my earlier post.  The FBI is the only agency still using the 147 grain loadings in the Federal system - you might find it interesting that the ATF SRT guys I work with refer to 147 grain JHP as "Less Than Lethal" ammunition, and they used it, and saw it fail, in more shootings than you'd care to know.   I don't know a single agency, country wide, who has given up a high velocity +P or +P+ loading in favor of the 147. Kevin Sorry "K", but Dallas PD ditched the 115gr loadings and went with the 147gr. Ranger SXT T-Series.  They've been using it for several years now, and have had great sucess with it.  Yeah the .357sig is authorized, but the 9mm is issued.  Most of DPDs SWAT officers use the 9mm also. If I'm not mistaken, San Diego PD, LAPD, and LASD also use the 147gr. offerings in 9mm.

I think Gold Dot, and Ranger have 124 and 127 gr rounds that are more "state of the art" than 147 gr rounds.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: FWIW, EVERY major LE agency that has kept the 9mm is giving up on the 147 grain loadings for all the reasons listed in my earlier post.  The FBI is the only agency still using the 147 grain loadings in the Federal system - you might find it interesting that the ATF SRT guys I work with refer to 147 grain JHP as "Less Than Lethal" ammunition, and they used it, and saw it fail, in more shootings than you'd care to know.   I don't know a single agency, country wide, who has given up a high velocity +P or +P+ loading in favor of the 147. Kevin Sorry "K", but Dallas PD ditched the 115gr loadings and went with the 147gr. Ranger SXT T-Series.  They've been using it for several years now, and have had great sucess with it.  Yeah the .357sig is authorized, but the 9mm is issued.  Most of DPDs SWAT officers use the 9mm also. If I'm not mistaken, San Diego PD, LAPD, and LASD also use the 147gr. offerings in 9mm. I think Gold Dot, and Ranger have 124 and 127 gr rounds that are more "state of the art" than 147 gr rounds.

Actually if you go to tactical forums and ask Dr. Roberts about it he will tell you there is no difference in penetration in the +P loads over the RA9T.  Its not the RA9T is so much better but that it does not need high velocity to get the job done.  The use of +P is due to the ignorance of the general public who lump weights and velocities together rather than looking at individual bullet performance.  Being involved with law enforcement and seeing dead people does not mean anyone is any more educated.

kjdoski,

I would like a rundown of the autopsies you viewed in which current RA9T Ranger ammo was used and had failed in some way.  Perhaps you can change my mind.  I would post your studies on tacticalforums.com in the terminal ballistics section so you can educate Dr Gary Roberts,  the nations leading authority on terminal ballistics, on your findings.

Quoted: Quoted: You just displayed a total ignorance of terminal ballistics.  I hope everyone understands that after reading your post and that you stay happy with your BMT ammo. DevL - what exactly are your credentials to question other people's knowledge of terminal ballistics?  I've got 18 years experience in the military and law enforcement; have been to hundreds of autopsies; and seen on the street what works, and what doesn't.  Sorry my experience doesn't jive with your pet theory.   FWIW, EVERY major LE agency that has kept the 9mm is giving up on the 147 grain loadings for all the reasons listed in my earlier post.  The FBI is the only agency still using the 147 grain loadings in the Federal system - you might find it interesting that the ATF SRT guys I work with refer to 147 grain JHP as "Less Than Lethal" ammunition, and they used it, and saw it fail, in more shootings than you'd care to know.   I don't know a single agency, country wide, who has given up a high velocity +P or +P+ loading in favor of the 147. But, what do I know; I'm obviously ignorant, and my relatively new status on this board clearly doesn't make me up to your Internet Commando status. Regards, Kevin

How about this... the basically reccomends BMT or Glasers...  He is an idiot.  Nothing more need be said.  If you agree with him then you are an idiot too and there is no scientific study that will convince you otherwise.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You just displayed a total ignorance of terminal ballistics.  I hope everyone understands that after reading your post and that you stay happy with your BMT ammo. DevL - what exactly are your credentials to question other people's knowledge of terminal ballistics?  I've got 18 years experience in the military and law enforcement; have been to hundreds of autopsies; and seen on the street what works, and what doesn't.  Sorry my experience doesn't jive with your pet theory.   FWIW, EVERY major LE agency that has kept the 9mm is giving up on the 147 grain loadings for all the reasons listed in my earlier post.  The FBI is the only agency still using the 147 grain loadings in the Federal system - you might find it interesting that the ATF SRT guys I work with refer to 147 grain JHP as "Less Than Lethal" ammunition, and they used it, and saw it fail, in more shootings than you'd care to know.   I don't know a single agency, country wide, who has given up a high velocity +P or +P+ loading in favor of the 147. But, what do I know; I'm obviously ignorant, and my relatively new status on this board clearly doesn't make me up to your Internet Commando status. Regards, Kevin How about this... the basically reccomends BMT or Glasers...  He is an idiot.  Nothing more need be said.  If you agree with him then you are an idiot too and there is no scientific study that will convince you otherwise.

Well interesting points, but it also seems your philosophy coming into this is +P, or +P+, sucks.......... Then you set about to prove it.

How is it possible that 2 bullets, weighing the same, constructed the same, with one travelling at a higher velocity perform the same? That is what you are claiming. Intuitively it sounds nonsensical. If higher velocity isn't indicative of bullet performenace, why were rifles invented? Why did the M16 replace the M14?

Plus, look at +P, or +P+, what does it mean? It means the round uses higher than SAAMI pressures. Saying +P is universally bad might make sense if all pistol cartriges worked at the same pressure. They don't. .45 ACP (IIRC) is 23,000 PSI in the standard load, 26,000 PSI in +P, hardly sounds that high when .40 S+W is like 35,000 PSI. (Sorry doing this "off the top of my head").

Why do short barrelled handguns perform worse  than full size hand guns using the same loads?

Why does 5.56 out of an M16 perform better than 5.56 out of an M4?

Your comments about faster follow up shots, is subjective, but is certainly supported. But that is a choice the person purchaing the ammo should make.

Higher velocity rounds also allegedly perform better when barriers must be defeated.

But again, hitting something vital is most often more important than the bullet.

I will say the I disagree with DevL's comments that +P and +P+ rounds arent good choices.  He cites DocGKR, but according to DocGKRs own ballistic testings, the 124gr+P Ranger SXT T-Series and Gold Dots are proven performers.  The 127gr.+P+ Ranger SXT T-Series is also consider to be a top performer by him as well.

Forget it!

Use the load you and your gun shoot best, and practice with that load as much as possible.  Do not worry about what others think of your choice.

Retzam, if you're still concerned about the +p in your Sig, you might want to consider www.sprinco.com/recoil.html

Quoted: Retzam, if you're still concerned about the +p in your Sig, you might want to consider www.sprinco.com/recoil.html

Dead link, please re-post

Their site must be down. I accessed it last night. Not getting anything from here.

Some retail contacts:

www.advancedperformanceshooting.com/wst_page5.html May or may not have for Sig. Several had them for Glock/Browning, not Sig.

Try the Sprinco link later.

I heard somewhere that a Sigma is better than the Sig 226

Quoted: I heard somewhere that a Sigma is better than the Sig 226

J, your right, my sig is way crappier than yer 50 dollar sigma with the 30lb trigger pull  

I've shot lots of +p+ in two different 226's no problems.

My dept uses Federal +p+'s esclusively. Thousands of rounds through our P226's and not one failure or broken pistol. Oh, and 147 gr 9's SUCK!

I am not saying that higher velocities are a bad thing.  In a hand gun you get very marginal increases in performance for the penatly of blast, flash and recoil.  Show me a situation in which a +P load is better than RA9T and I can show you 2 where RA9T is better suited to the task.  The point is there is no reason to use +p ammo in your 9mm.  That means no reasonable, inteligent, decison making process that will mandate non +P as a clearly superior choice.  I dont have to use +P 9mm to get the terminal effectiveness I want.  Why would I use it if I dont have to?  I dont use 5.56 pressure loads either.  I dont have a use for them.  .223 pressure ammo with the appropriate load is as good and often better than 5.56 loads.  If you take the superior .223 bullet and load it hot is it better?  Well yes it will perform better at distances I dont care about and provide better terminal ballisitcs to a degree that does not matter but I sacrifice a larger muzzel flash, more blast, slower follow up shots, more weapon wear, etc.

I do not think high velocity ammo sucks.  I just think its not needed for my uses. I am better served by using standard pressure ammo.