Best 9mm ammo for self defence

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Best 9mm ammo for self defence

Posted: 3/14/2005 3:51:02 PM EDT

I have an XD-9, and was wondering what you guys thought would be the best self defence round. I live in Wisconsin(no concealed carry, and I'm not 21), so this would be for home defence.

What is your opinion of 147 gr. 9mm. ammo. I think this is sub-sonic, correct?????

Posting the approx. price of the ammo along with your opinions would be appreciated.

Thanks!!

Posted: 3/14/2005 4:02:01 PM EDT

[#1]

I like the 124gr speed gold dot hollow point.

The ranger series are also great.

Look around for more than a few threads, you may need to go back some time, but brouhaha and tatjana and troy have answered this question many times.

To me their answer is worth pretty much more than any other out there.

TXL

Posted: 4/11/2005 5:39:12 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
I have an XD-9, and was wondering what you guys thought would be the best self defence round. I live in Wisconsin(no concealed carry, and I'm not 21), so this would be for home defence.

What is your opinion of 147 gr. 9mm. ammo. I think this is sub-sonic, correct?????

Posting the approx. price of the ammo along with your opinions would be appreciated.

Thanks!!

I'm only repeating what I've read on the internet, but it seems to me that most 147 grain 9mm loads do not perform as well as 115-125 grain 9mm ammo. I use 115 and 124/5 grain mostly for carry, because all of the internet experts seem to agree that it's the best weight for hollow point loads. Take it for what it's worth.

Posted: 4/12/2005 5:07:30 AM EDT

[#3]

I like 124 +p remington golden sabers and 124 +p speer gold dots for my 9mm's

Posted: 4/14/2005 6:16:05 PM EDT

[#4]

TxLewis
Team Member

I like the 124gr speed gold dot hollow point.

The ranger series are also great.

+1

Posted: 4/14/2005 7:17:31 PM EDT

[#5]

Winchester Ranger 147gr. RA9T

Posted: 4/15/2005 11:47:54 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Winchester Ranger 147gr. RA9T

This is what I carry. Yes its subsonic. Yes its the best 9mm defensive ammo made bar none. Also I was at Brouahah's house the other day and he carries the same ammo in his 9mm.

Posted: 4/15/2005 11:49:05 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I have an XD-9, and was wondering what you guys thought would be the best self defence round. I live in Wisconsin(no concealed carry, and I'm not 21), so this would be for home defence.

What is your opinion of 147 gr. 9mm. ammo. I think this is sub-sonic, correct?????

Posting the approx. price of the ammo along with your opinions would be appreciated.

Thanks!!

I'm only repeating what I've read on the internet, but it seems to me that most 147 grain 9mm loads do not perform as well as 115-125 grain 9mm ammo. I use 115 and 124/5 grain mostly for carry, because all of the internet experts seem to agree that it's the best weight for hollow point loads. Take it for what it's worth.

Who gives a damn about MOST? Weight has nothing to do with performance. RA9T is THE BEST load in 9mm and its 147 grain. Your logic is flawed. You need to look at specific loads and compare those and not generalise by weight.

Posted: 4/19/2005 9:40:09 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
I like 124 +p remington golden sabers and 124 +p speer gold dots for my 9mm's

Thats what I carry too.I really like the golden saber.In my 1911 I carry the bonded sabers.

Posted: 4/20/2005 11:45:01 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Winchester Ranger 147gr. RA9T

This is what I carry. Yes its subsonic. Yes its the best 9mm defensive ammo made bar none. Also I was at Brouahah's house the other day and he carries the same ammo in his 9mm.

Any links to some data? I'd like to read-up on that round.

Posted: 4/21/2005 3:37:35 PM EDT

[#10]

I keep a mag of vintage Ranger Black Talons in my 226 when not using it. It's a range gun for me, I keep .45acp on my hip and on the nightstand.

Posted: 4/25/2005 6:10:48 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Winchester Ranger 147gr. RA9T

This is what I carry. Yes its subsonic. Yes its the best 9mm defensive ammo made bar none. Also I was at Brouahah's house the other day and he carries the same ammo in his 9mm.

Any links to some data? I'd like to read-up on that round.

Do a search in the ammo forum tacked thread on best performing self defense loads in various calibers and do a search on tacticalforums.com in the terminal ballistics section... sorry I am not doing the leg work for you but you will find it there if you look.

Posted: 4/29/2005 5:17:36 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have an XD-9, and was wondering what you guys thought would be the best self defence round. I live in Wisconsin(no concealed carry, and I'm not 21), so this would be for home defence.

What is your opinion of 147 gr. 9mm. ammo. I think this is sub-sonic, correct?????

Posting the approx. price of the ammo along with your opinions would be appreciated.

Thanks!!

I'm only repeating what I've read on the internet, but it seems to me that most 147 grain 9mm loads do not perform as well as 115-125 grain 9mm ammo. I use 115 and 124/5 grain mostly for carry, because all of the internet experts seem to agree that it's the best weight for hollow point loads. Take it for what it's worth.

Who gives a damn about MOST? Weight has nothing to do with performance. RA9T is THE BEST load in 9mm and its 147 grain. Your logic is flawed. You need to look at specific loads and compare those and not generalise by weight.

DevL, I have been to Tactical Forums on a regular basis, and keep hearing the same thing: That RA9T is the best 9mm ammo. However, I cannot find the raw data (only summary stats) for this ammo's tests, and those of other rounds like the Gold Dots. The reason I would like to see the raw shot-by-shot numbers is to perform an analysis of the rounds to determine if the alleged superiority of RA9T is statistically significant. Any suggestions on where I might find the raw numbers?

Posted: 4/29/2005 5:26:03 AM EDT

[#13]

As much as I want to, I wont troll....

Posted: 4/30/2005 1:41:28 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
As much as I want to, I wont troll....

I'm watchin' you, Mr45auto.

Posted: 4/30/2005 5:22:33 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
As much as I want to, I wont troll....

I got yer back if you can't resist the urge!

Posted: 5/6/2005 7:47:50 PM EDT

[#16]

Who gives a damn about MOST? Weight has nothing to do with performance. RA9T is THE BEST load in 9mm and its 147 grain. Your logic is flawed. You need to look at specific loads and compare those and not generalise by weight.

I have to agree....somewhat. This reminds me of several arguments I've had with my father-in-law, a State Farm exec., about safety ratings on cars. A five star safety on a Honda Accord does not mean that it's a safe vehicle. It's safe compared to all the other small compact cars, but I'll be happy to hop in my Dodge Ram for a head on collision test with a Honda any day. We will assess the damage afterward when I walk away unharmed.

Comparing apples to apples is fine in the supermarket, but in the gun world you need the best results whether it be an apple, an orange, or a banana.

RA9T is THE BEST load in 9mm and its 147 grain.

+1

Posted: 5/12/2005 11:57:51 AM EDT

[#17]

Spend a few bucks (or go to the local library) and pick up Evan Marshall's book titled "Stopping Power". The book has examined all of the available shootings to determine which brand and in which caliber and what weight had the highest one shot stop.
Their results in 9mm (if my memory serves me) was the 115gr. Corbon loading. The 147grs. consistently scored the lowest. The original loading was for the Navy Seals for their suppressed H&K subguns (to be used for head shots). When the FBI had their infamous shootout in Miami, the 115gr Silvertips were blamed as the cause of the failure so the 147gr was added as a stopgap until the Feds went to 10mm/40's.
When the chips are down, I would count (and do) on the hottest 115gr I could find. (Federal 115gr +P+ aka 9BPLE or Corbon 9+P+) Cost shouldn't be too big of an issue, Federals are about $20 for a box of 50. Then you could buy Blazers (or similar) for practice.

Posted: 5/12/2005 12:17:22 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Spend a few bucks (or go to the local library) and pick up Evan Marshall's book titled "Stopping Power". The book has examined all of the available shootings to determine which brand and in which caliber and what weight had the highest one shot stop.
Their results in 9mm (if my memory serves me) was the 115gr. Corbon loading. The 147grs. consistently scored the lowest. The original loading was for the Navy Seals for their suppressed H&K subguns (to be used for head shots). When the FBI had their infamous shootout in Miami, the 115gr Silvertips were blamed as the cause of the failure so the 147gr was added as a stopgap until the Feds went to 10mm/40's.
When the chips are down, I would count (and do) on the hottest 115gr I could find. (Federal 115gr +P+ aka 9BPLE or Corbon 9+P+) Cost shouldn't be too big of an issue, Federals are about $20 for a box of 50. Then you could buy Blazers (or similar) for practice.

"Stopping Power" and its offspring are the biggest load of crap ever perpetrated on the gun buying public. The scribblings of Evans and Sanow have been so thoroughly discredited that it is laughable anyone still believes them. If you want to read up on how worthless their information is, start Here.

If you want to find out what ammo you should be carrying, go to Tactical Forums. You can start with this thread.

Posted: 5/12/2005 12:29:34 PM EDT

[#19]

I won't get in a pissing contest with you over it, but suffice to say the Dr. Fackler is a person who has made his living testifying on witness stands. I wouldn't risk my life on his opinions.
I don't know of many other studies that have the size of data base that the Marshall/Sanow does. I carry 115gr +P+ and sleep well every night knowing I'm carrying the BEST 9mm ammo available. I don't agree with any of the 147gr theories, but everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

Posted: 5/12/2005 12:48:53 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
I won't get in a pissing contest with you over it, but suffice to say the Dr. Fackler is a person who has made his living testifying on witness stands. I wouldn't risk my life on his opinions.
I don't know of many other studies that have the size of data base that the Marshall/Sanow does. I carry 115gr +P+ and sleep well every night knowing I'm carrying the BEST 9mm ammo available. I don't agree with any of the 147gr theories, but everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

I don't much care what you carry. it is your life, not mine. I do care that people who may not know any better do not fall for Marshall and Sanow's discredited crap.

BTW, this huge database you allude to, have they EVER let anyone else see it? As in the raw data. REAL scientific research requires independent confirmation of the data.

I make my living using and teaching statistics. I can tell you without any reservations that the works of Marshall and Sanow are statisitically worthless. They are rife with sample selection bias and statistical errors. EVERY statistician who has reviewed their "studies" agrees that they are crap.

BTW, Dr. Fackler earns his living by studying and teaching about wound ballistics, a topic he has been studying professionally for over 30 years. He served as a combat surgeon in Vietnam and is a fellow of both the American College of Surgeons and the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, and former director of the U.S. Army Wound Ballistics Laboratory. Dr. Fackler is arguably the world's foremost authority on what happens when bullets strike flesh.

Perhaps you can post Evan Marshall's professional qualifications in the study of wound ballistics? Then people can decide for themselves who is more credible.

Posted: 5/13/2005 10:43:01 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Perhaps you can post Evan Marshall's professional qualifications in the study of wound ballistics? Then people can decide for themselves who is more credible.

Lemme help. I'll post Evan Marshalls professional qualifications.

<crikets chirping>

<cows mooing>

<grass growing>
<paint drying>
this is why he's qualified

The only reason he seems to endorse CorBon garbage, is because CorBon endorses his garbage. Its a kind off you rub my garbage, I'll rub yours.

Posted: 5/13/2005 10:47:39 AM EDT

[#22]

As for my choice of 9mm, well I wont use anything lighter than 124gr. It just so happens that my P-225 likes 147gr. Rangers, while my P-228 likes 127gr+P+, and 124gr+P Rangers.

I also believe, that across the spectrum of ammo calibers, the Winchester Ranger series is da best stuff on the market, with Speers Gold Dots and the Federal Tactical in a tie for second.

Posted: 5/14/2005 1:29:46 PM EDT

[#23]

I'm a big fan of black hills 124 +P, or Hydrashok 127 +P+

Posted: 5/15/2005 1:30:28 PM EDT

[#24]

My 4" XD9 is my daily carry piece, I carry 124gr Hydra shoks in her, 15 of them. They shoot strait enough and feed w/ out any problems.

Two in the chest, one in the head and you are sure enough going to come out of the situation alive, which is the purpose of a handgun, defense. If those 3 rnds are not enough, you have 12 more to follow....

Posted: 5/21/2005 4:01:48 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
I like the 124gr Speer gold dot hollow point.
TXL

+1

Posted: 5/21/2005 7:48:08 PM EDT

[#26]

Anyone have an opinion of Federal's HST?? The testing I've seen (by ATK) puts it on par with Ranger Ts and GDs.

Posted: 5/22/2005 4:11:09 PM EDT

[#27]

Check out Terminal Effects Forum at Tacticl Forums.com. They have tested it, and found some problems.

I believe the original HST stuff wasnt considered a very good choice. Federal then sold this stuff off cheap. I bought 50rd. boxes for $10. They now have HST2, which was redisgned a bit, and is now considered an adequate performer.

Posted: 5/22/2005 9:32:22 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Check out Terminal Effects Forum at Tacticl Forums.com. They have tested it, and found some problems.

I believe the original HST stuff wasnt considered a very good choice. Federal then sold this stuff off cheap. I bought 50rd. boxes for $10. They now have HST2, which was redisgned a bit, and is now considered an adequate performer.

HST2?

Just so we're on the same page, are they actually calling the current offering HST2? Or, is that an unofficial label used to distinguish the older stuff from the revised design? From reading the tactical forums I was aware of a revision in the HST bullet, but did the names and part numbers actually change?

The loads I'm wondering about are P9HST1 (124 gr, std pressure), P9HST2 (147 gr, std pressure), and P9HST3 (124 gr, + pressure) as listed in the Federal 2005 LE catalog.

The 3 test sessions done by ATK (sponsered by Pierce County, Portland, and San Diego LE): were they with the old design or the revised design?

thanks

Posted: 5/22/2005 10:13:29 PM EDT

[#29]

I dont think if its an official name change. That would be like admitting you put out faulty ammo. The HST1, as I call it, should have decals on the boxes saying something like "Reclassified: Not for LE Use". The newer stuff is going to be LE only for atleast a year.

I'm not sure about the ATK tests.

Posted: 5/22/2005 10:19:26 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
I dont think if its an official name change. That would be like admitting you put out faulty ammo. The HST1, as I call it, should have decals on the boxes saying something like "Reclassified: Not for LE Use". The newer stuff is going to be LE only for atleast a year.

I'm not sure about the ATK tests.

Cool. Thanks.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Best 9mm ammo for self defence

Handguns » Ammunition

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us