147gr. Golden Saber tested by TNoutdoors9

[baccusboy]

Looks like these did very well. I was surprised. What I liked about them were that they were very mild in recoil. That's what I want in a carry round, when possible.

Tested here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvLvVONAiAg


And you can buy them here at a good price:

http://www.slickguns.com/product/rem...a=2093&k=other

[Laudanum]

a few things ...

I dont know if Ive seen more than a couple tests of the non-bonded GS's in any caliber or weight that dont show atleast some clear sign of jacket seperation, partial or complete. Im not a ballstics expert and I dont think it's always a bad thing but the experts claim it isnt a good thing. I still think they are effective rounds.

I know that the guys Youtube videos are very popular. But, his penetration generally seems deeper for the same rounds as stated in FBI and other calibrated ballistic gelatin tests. I know he had problems with calibration with that Sim material he uses when he first got a hold of it. Not knocking the guy at all, it's great that he takes the time and spends the money to do the testing and shoot the videos. Kudos to him, it's good, interesting, general information.

I always liked the Golden Saber rounds and am considering the 124 gr. bonded (+P) for my 9mm defensive round.

[Bigapple828]

Originally Posted by Laudanum

I always liked the Golden Saber rounds and am considering the 124 gr. bonded (+P) for my 9mm defensive round.

His tests with the bonded Sabers fared much better. If you're shooting at someone, it really isn't all that important whether or not the jacket is still intact. But for me, I want to be at the greatest advantage possible with the best-tested ammo possible.

I was talking to a friend the other day who said he wanted to buy a pistol for home defense and only needed 4 rounds loaded. I said "Have you ever shot at a crackhead before? Why 4 rounds?" He proceeded to tell me that's all he would need because he could make the shot. This lead me to a conversation about being at the best advantage possible. I may not need a full mag in my gun or two full mags ready to roll, but I'd rather have them if I need them than to not have them at all.

[Laudanum]

Originally Posted by Bigapple828

His tests with the bonded Sabers fared much better. If you're shooting at someone, it really isn't all that important whether or not the jacket is still intact. But for me, I want to be at the greatest advantage possible with the best-tested ammo possible.

I was talking to a friend the other day who said he wanted to buy a pistol for home defense and only needed 4 rounds loaded. I said "Have you ever shot at a crackhead before? Why 4 rounds?" He proceeded to tell me that's all he would need because he could make the shot. This lead me to a conversation about being at the best advantage possible. I may not need a full mag in my gun or two full mags ready to roll, but I'd rather have them if I need them than to not have them at all.

I should have mentioned that I've been using Federal Hi-Shok (Classic) 115 gr. seemingly forever. Finally changing to a different round. I agree with you on the ammo.

But anyway ... ask your friend how he would feel about having only 4 loaded with 4 perpetrators in his house. Trust me, it happens.

[Bigapple828]

Originally Posted by Laudanum

But anyway ... ask your friend how he would feel about having only 4 loaded with 4 perpetrators in his house. Trust me, it happens.

GREAT point. I wish I had used that, haha.

I hate when you have a conversation and you think of a better "last word" after the fact. Especially with women.

[Horoscope Fish]

Originally Posted by Bigapple828

Why 4 rounds?" He proceeded to tell me that's all he would need because he could make the shot.

Ummm... Not to pick on your friend but I'm honestly confused. Make what shot, exactly?

Is this some imagined scenario your friend has, the one where the BG stands full-frontal like one of those old-school silhouette targets, patiently holding still, avoiding any cover or concealment, while your buddy lines up a head shot?

[DeltaKilo]

Bonded golden saber ammo is good, on par with Gold Dot and other bonded loads. Same basic principle, just different jackets.

Non-bonded, the golden saber ammo is not a wise choice compared to other options.

[Bigapple828]

Originally Posted by Horoscope Fish

Ummm... Not to pick on your friend but I'm honestly confused. Make what shot, exactly?

Is this some imagined scenario your friend has, the one where the BG stands full-frontal like one of those old-school silhouette targets, patiently holding still, avoiding any cover or concealment, while your buddy lines up a head shot?

Yea, I tried to talk him out of it because it was a ridiculous statement.

But he's a stubborn idiot so I quit...

[Laudanum]

I dont carry this 147 gr. Golden Saber round, in fact I dont think Ive ever shot it. But I am considering the 124 gr. +P bonded as my SD/carry round.

Every time I see the 147 gr. Golden Sabers being mentioned it reminds me of the completely opposite rating/opinion of this round. I wont link the article but it is older and "famous/infamous" and most will probably know what I am referring to. A web search for best self defense ammo probably would have this come up at or near the top. Basically, it lists the 147 gr. Golden Saber round as one to stay clear of for personal defense.

On the other hand, the SD ammo sticky at the top of this forum lists this round as one of the "approved" 9mm SD rounds.

There seems to be a clear bias against the heavier rounds in the former article. And maybe a preference for them in the sticky (preference, not bias - big difference).
But either a round is effective or it isnt no matter ones general opinion of heavy versus lighter bullets. So how you have two diametrically opposed viewpoints on something like this is kind of strange.

Go figure

[Rifter]

Originally Posted by Laudanum

I dont carry this 147 gr. Golden Saber round, in fact I dont think Ive ever shot it. But I am considering the 124 gr. +P bonded as my SD/carry round.

Every time I see the 147 gr. Golden Sabers being mentioned it reminds me of the completely opposite rating/opinion of this round. I wont link the article but it is older and "famous/infamous" and most will probably know what I am referring to. A web search for best self defense ammo probably would have this come up at or near the top. Basically, it lists the 147 gr. Golden Saber round as one to stay clear of for personal defense.

On the other hand, the SD ammo sticky at the top of this forum lists this round as one of the "approved" 9mm SD rounds.

There seems to be a clear bias against the heavier rounds in the former article. And maybe a preference for them in the sticky (preference, not bias - big difference).
But either a round is effective or it isnt no matter ones general opinion of heavy versus lighter bullets. So how you have two diametrically opposed viewpoints on something like this is kind of strange.

Go figure

You're gonna find that a lot of people have a hard-on for Remington in general. I've used their brass and bullets off and on for four decades, same as most of the other brands like Winchester, Norma, etc., and it is just as good for the most part. Every brand has clinkers, and Remington is no different.

The standard issue Golden Saber bullets lose the jacket if pushed too hard, but so do other non-bonded bullets from other makers. The bonded bullets do not, just like the bonded stuff from others. I've found the GS bullets to be easy to feed and very accurate, whether standard or bonded. I would not hesitate to use either version. Frankly, I don't much care if it losing the jacket three inches in, because I'm gonna tag the bum at least twice anyway.

[kennethhardy]

Finding bonded golden sabers is hard as hell in 45 acp.

[hotpig]

Originally Posted by kennethhardy

Finding bonded golden sabers is hard as hell in 45 acp.

Tell me about it. I normally sell them in 50 round boxes but I can not seem to get any.

[kennethhardy]

If you do hotpig hit me up.

[klix58]

You guys looking for this stuff?
http://www.sgammo.com/product/reming...-ammo-gsb45apa
Or a better price on this?
http://www.sgammo.com/product/reming...47gr-bjhp-ammo
I've purchased from this company and have yet to experience any issues

[Jim_L]

^^What he said^^

[hotpig]

I normally sell the 230gr in the 50 round boxes. The lighter load does not sell very well.

[DarkBlue]

I've been carrying the 147 grain Golden Sabers in my 9's for some time now. Very accurate, low recoil, available, affordable in bulk and it's subsonic so it's quieter.

[PolymerMan]

I found 147 grain 9mm to be an excellent load. I have 147 grain in Federal HiShok JHP, Winchester Silvertips, and Winchester Ranger T-series. Never had a jam or misfeed, but ironically I came across an article years ago that warned never to choose 147 in a 9mm. Too slow and heavy for 9mm and you will not get proper expansion.

Here's an excerpt from the article, and how accurate it is, I cannot vouch for it but it did influence me on my carry choice. I generally stick to 124 grain +p Golden Saber or Winchester T-Series (when I can find it).

http://www.chuckhawks.com/ammo_by_anonymous.htm (at least halfway down on that page)

Bad 9mm Loads to avoid (and certainly NEVER carry). Numbers given:

Federal Gold Medal 9mm 147 grain JHP (9MS)
Federal Hydra-Shok 9mm 147 grain JHP (P9HS2)
Winchester 147 grain 9mm Silvertip Subsonic JHP (X9MMST147)
Winchester 147 grain 9mm Super-X Subsonic (XSUB9MM)
Remington 147 grain 9mm JHP (R9MM8)
Remington 147 grain 9mm Golden Saber JHP (GS9MMC)
Remington 140 grain 9mm JHP (R9MM7)
Remington 88 grain 9mm JHP (R9MM5) This bullet is far too light.
CCI Lawman 147 grain 9mm PHP "Plated Hollow Point" (3619)

[hotpig]

That old 1980's Chuck Hawk thing just will not go away. I'm sure he is embarrased that it still lives on. It hurt his credibility way too much.

[PolymerMan]

Originally Posted by hotpig

That old 1980's Chuck Hawk thing just will not go away. I'm sure he is embarrased that it still lives on. It hurt his credibility way too much.

It convinced me not to carry 147's to this very date.

[hotpig]

It is based on bullet designs from the olden days. It does not reflect 147gr ammo made in the late 90's to date.

The reality with modern ammo is the 124 and the 124+P will perform just as well as 147 in most cases. What matters the most is what you and your gun likes.

[BillD]

OP, do you normally get a lot of recoil from your 9mm?

[PolymerMan]

Originally Posted by hotpig

It is based on bullet designs from the olden days. It does not reflect 147gr ammo made in the late 90's to date.

The reality with modern ammo is the 124 and the 124+P will perform just as well as 147 in most cases. What matters the most is what you and your gun likes.

I may have run 1000 or more rounds of various 147 through many of my 9mm guns and I have to say I have never had a failure of any type. But I generally do steer away from anything heavier than 124, mainly because of what I have read. I recently bought 500 rnds of surplus L.E. Federal HiShok 147gr from SGammo that was highly discounted. It was a good buy, cheaper than some of the FMJ target loads. I bought it mainly for the Kimber Solo traget practice. It ran fine. In fact it ran fine in my Kahr PM9, Kahr MK9, Berreta Nano. I still have to test it out in my Rohrbaugh R9. But if it's still available, I'll probably get more.

I don't have any ability to test ballistics such as in gelatin or a place to shoot (the indoor range I visit doesn't allow that) or a chronograph to calculate muzzle or terminal kinetic energy, so I am totally dependent on what others here and on other gun sites on the internet report on ballistics. I'd have to join a membership type gun range to be able to use an open gun range that lets us set up targets like gelatin or water jugs. I just haven't gotten around to that. I live in a congested suburban area and finding open land to legally shoot is impossible. Back in the old days, in the 1970's and 1980's there was no problem finding an abandon rock pit to use legally. I used to reload and shoot Black Powder as well in those days.

But as of now, I am totally dependent on what people claim is good bullet expansion or what not. I just have no way of testing bullet performance myself, but I plan to change that soon.

BTW, that Chuck Hawkes article was updated in August of 2011. But I also read somewhere else, in one of my Self-defense books I have on Kind1e that lighter bullets perform better in 9mm. The rule of thumb is not to exceed the 124 grain treshold. I'll see if I can find the author of that.

[Laudanum]

Originally Posted by hotpig

That old 1980's Chuck Hawk thing just will not go away. I'm sure he is embarrased that it still lives on. It hurt his credibility way too much.

That is the article I was referring to and the one I didnt want to link. I wouldnt send anyone to it as a reference. The fact that it remains at or near the top of the results when web searching SD ammo is kind of ominous though.

But the point was that the 147 grain Golden Saber is listed among the ammo to avoid in that article and yet it makes the modern list as an effective SD round.

If nothing else, Remington deserves a nod for the Golden Sabers. They still make the "lists" while ammo from other manufacturers that was once touted as among the best is now considered old hat and no longer recommended (Federal Hydro's as one example). The Golden Sabers just live on without change.

[PolymerMan]

Originally Posted by Laudanum

That is the article I was referring to and the one I didnt want to link. I wouldnt send anyone to it as a reference. The fact that it remains at or near the top of the results when web searching SD ammo is kind of ominous though.

I took the plunge and linked to it.

I always knew it was dated material becuase many items on the list are simply no longer in production, as well as the guns listed as substandard, but I did use it as a guide because it did make sense. It's not the only source that discourages the use of 147 grain 9mm for self defense.