Wilson Ammo -- Suitable 9mm SD Selection for Subcompacts - 1911Forum
1911Forum
Advertise Here
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > >

Notices


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-22-2018, 10:03 PM
chrysanthemum chrysanthemum is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Texas
Posts: 11,576
Wilson Ammo -- Suitable 9mm SD Selection for Subcompacts

On Wilson's website for 9mm ammo, the following statement appears:

"We have had case reports of bulged cases from our ammunition fired in S&W Shield handguns. Upon further inspection it was found that many of these pistols have unsupported chambers and are not safe for +P ammunition.

Although I mostly carry .45acp chambered Wilson 1911s, I occasionally go with a 9mm S&W Shield when minimal size is critical.

Given the above referenced warning, I would be most appreciative of anyone's input, including WCR of course, of any suggestions of Wilson ammo most suitable for SD/carry with a 9mm Shield. (This is for SD, not range practice, so cost is not a factor).

In .45acp chamberings, I'm a fan of the solid copper Barnes bullets, but Wilson's Barnes 9mm ammo offerings seem to be either +p or tested for 16" barrels. I've wondered if there's any reason NOT to use the 16" barrel tested ammo in a Shield. And if that's not a good selection, is there a better alternative (again, for carry/SD)?

----

On a sidenote, I now have a Wilson holster for the Shield; glad to see this offering ... It's very nice.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member

"Freedom is only a temporary thing unless it is backed by the blunt capability and willingness to fight back against evil with sufficient arms." -- Myself
  #2  
Old 04-22-2018, 10:43 PM
JollyRoger1 JollyRoger1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 2,384
Any reason for not considering Federal HST Micro?
__________________
John 15:13 - "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”

Self-Defense shootings are like a box of chocolates...
  #3  
Old 04-22-2018, 10:52 PM
chrysanthemum chrysanthemum is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Texas
Posts: 11,576
Quote:
Originally Posted by JollyRoger1 View Post
Any reason for not considering Federal HST Micro?
I'll put this on my list, so a big THANKS my friend.

I readily confess to be a Wilson-first customer, based on years of experience with Wilson. So I would prefer to look first at their ammo offerings.

But if that (Wilson) doesn't match up well in this specific situation, then a non-Wilson offering would be fine.

Thanks again
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member

"Freedom is only a temporary thing unless it is backed by the blunt capability and willingness to fight back against evil with sufficient arms." -- Myself
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #4  
Old 04-22-2018, 11:18 PM
tjpaxton tjpaxton is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 1,297
There is no bigger fan of Wilson Combat than I. Federal HST is the best SD ammo on the market for penetration/expansion and overall performance. This is my off-duty ammo in all my WC's. You can go with standard pressure in 124, 147 or 150 gr.

My personal preference is standard pressure HST 147 gr.

Here are a few videos for reference:

Some of Wilson's SD ammo is with Hornady XTP bullets, XTP does not expand as well as HST as referenced in videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8gm7ZTkDxc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYTd1lNx_TQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNRqrJRq4T0

Best price on HST is here:

https://www.bonefroggunclub.com/collections/ammunition

This is likely Wilson's best standard pressure 9mm SD ammo: https://shopwilsoncombat.com/9mm-Sub...A9-147-XTPSUB/

Last edited by tjpaxton; 04-22-2018 at 11:33 PM.
  #5  
Old 04-22-2018, 11:21 PM
chrysanthemum chrysanthemum is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Texas
Posts: 11,576
^^^

Another powerful endorsement... From one with much experience.

THANK YOU TJ.

---
I suppose this thread, if it has any further "legs", could go in either a Wilson or a non-Wilson direction. I appreciate both, but would ideally like to have some Wilson input, so as to keep the thread in the Wilson sub-section, rather than the Ammo sub-section. If there isn't a good Wilson ammo selection for this very common carry gun, then this might possibly be a new product idea for Wilson.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member

"Freedom is only a temporary thing unless it is backed by the blunt capability and willingness to fight back against evil with sufficient arms." -- Myself

Last edited by chrysanthemum; 04-22-2018 at 11:33 PM.
  #6  
Old 04-23-2018, 07:14 AM
Striker2237 Striker2237 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 7,046
I would say use HSTs in 124+p or the 150 micro, I use them in almost all my 9mm guns.
__________________
Carry gun:Wilson Carry Comp Custom .45S Pocket carry:on loan Other 1911s:WC Supergrade Accucomp .38, WC BW Opticomp, WC CQB Compact, WC CQB Professional, WC Super Sentinel, WC CQB Elite 9mm, WC EDC X9, WC X9S, Ed Brown SR, NHC Predator II Opticomp, NHC T3 Hardchrome, Kimber Ultra, ATI Tactical, RIA Tactical 10mm, Kimber Ultra Diamond 9mm, Detonics Combat Master MKVI, Colt Centennial .460 Roland
  #7  
Old 04-23-2018, 08:01 AM
Kelpiemonk Kelpiemonk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 398
There is zero reason to go with +p HST. Regular pressure is perfect. My favorite carry ammo for 9mm is ASYM barnes 115s.
I was nervous when Stan Chen sold, but quality is no worse with the new owners.
  #8  
Old 04-23-2018, 08:07 AM
apipeguy's Avatar
apipeguy apipeguy is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Michigan
Age: 64
Posts: 5,026
I’m certainly buy primarily Wilson, but only carry non +P HST’s in both .45 and 9mm.
__________________
David

NRA Patron Life Member
  #9  
Old 04-23-2018, 11:31 AM
tc215 tc215 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,533
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....f-Defense-Ammo
  #10  
Old 04-23-2018, 02:10 PM
Kelpiemonk Kelpiemonk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 398
I think the bottom line is that given excellent terminal performance (highest tier,) you should pick ammo that is the easiest to shoot (least recoil) and that is sufficiently accurate for its task. That way you will be most able to put multiple shots on target, which is most important. To me, the Barnes based stuff is always the lightest recoiling for its performance, so I take it very seriously.
  #11  
Old 04-23-2018, 02:32 PM
chrysanthemum chrysanthemum is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Texas
Posts: 11,576
Quote:
Originally Posted by tc215 View Post
Deleting the +p loads from the above linked list leaves us with this, including a couple favorites mentioned in our thread, which I've bolded:

9 mm:
Barnes XPB 115 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal Tactical 124 gr JHP (LE9T1)
Federal HST 147 gr JHP (P9HST2)
Remington Golden Saber 147 gr JHP (GS9MMC)
Speer Gold Dot 147 gr JHP
Speer G2 147 gr PT
Winchester Ranger-T 147 gr JHP (RA9T)
Winchester 147 gr bonded JHP (RA9B/Q4364)

Given the totality of everyone's recommendations (a round of THANK YOUs to all), that Federal HST surely looks good. I'll likely go with it.

On the Wilson ammo side, just to leave the door open and as both Kelpiemonk and I like the Barnes bullet (for the same reasons), I wonder if there's any cautionary reason not to use (in a S&W Shield) the Wilson Barnes 115gr loads that Wilson's website describes as being tested in 16" barrels (rather than subcompact pistol length barrels)? More specifically, this one:
https://shopwilsoncombat.com/9mm-115...A9C-115-TACXP/

I confess that it is the "tested in 16" barrel" description that's giving me reason to pause, as usually Wilson tests/rates their ammo for the gun it was best envisioned for.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member

"Freedom is only a temporary thing unless it is backed by the blunt capability and willingness to fight back against evil with sufficient arms." -- Myself

Last edited by chrysanthemum; 04-23-2018 at 02:51 PM.
  #12  
Old 04-23-2018, 02:57 PM
Kelpiemonk Kelpiemonk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 398
Asym and Black Hills both make excellent ammo with that same bullet. They generally run slightly faster than Barnes, but are pretty close.

Asym always made the most consistent ammo on the planet when Stan Chen was running it. I think they do just as good a job now, and their prices are pretty darn good for what they are selling.

That Wilson ammo is probably going to be a little slow in your gun. Estimating from Quickload, a load producing 1100 or thereabouts from a 16" 9mm is going to give you something like 800fps from a subcompact. The barnes load will give you closer to 1080 or so from the same gun, which is pretty much the low part of optimal with that bullet.
  #13  
Old 04-23-2018, 02:59 PM
Striker2237 Striker2237 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 7,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelpiemonk View Post
I think the bottom line is that given excellent terminal performance (highest tier,) you should pick ammo that is the easiest to shoot (least recoil) and that is sufficiently accurate for its task. That way you will be most able to put multiple shots on target, which is most important. To me, the Barnes based stuff is always the lightest recoiling for its performance, so I take it very seriously.
That's it's key edge, I ONLY keep HSTs and barnes based stuff around since one offers great results with minimal recoil and the other provides the absolute best amount of tissue damage available for a given caliber. Both are easy to control though, I only like the 124+P since the ammo gets fed to both handguns and "SMG" type "pistols" that like the hotter ammo. Short barrel stuff gets 150g. My only gripe with the barnes stuff is lower penetration VS HSTs I prefer more vs adequate in that department, this "problem" is only present in short barrels and in long barrel stuff it performs closer to HSTs but with only 2/3 felt recoil. I carry HSTs in standard PSI for .45 use personally.

Barnes stuff is also great for use in very powerful calibers since it WILL stay together and is not barrier sensitive and as such my long guns are loaded with it or TAP from hornady depending on caliber.
__________________
Carry gun:Wilson Carry Comp Custom .45S Pocket carry:on loan Other 1911s:WC Supergrade Accucomp .38, WC BW Opticomp, WC CQB Compact, WC CQB Professional, WC Super Sentinel, WC CQB Elite 9mm, WC EDC X9, WC X9S, Ed Brown SR, NHC Predator II Opticomp, NHC T3 Hardchrome, Kimber Ultra, ATI Tactical, RIA Tactical 10mm, Kimber Ultra Diamond 9mm, Detonics Combat Master MKVI, Colt Centennial .460 Roland
  #14  
Old 04-23-2018, 04:24 PM
TCFD273 TCFD273 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Somewhere south
Posts: 1,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrysanthemum View Post
Deleting the +p loads from the above linked list leaves us with this, including a couple favorites mentioned in our thread, which I've bolded:

9 mm:
Barnes XPB 115 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal Tactical 124 gr JHP (LE9T1)
Federal HST 147 gr JHP (P9HST2)
Remington Golden Saber 147 gr JHP (GS9MMC)
Speer Gold Dot 147 gr JHP
Speer G2 147 gr PT
Winchester Ranger-T 147 gr JHP (RA9T)
Winchester 147 gr bonded JHP (RA9B/Q4364)

Given the totality of everyone's recommendations (a round of THANK YOUs to all), that Federal HST surely looks good. I'll likely go with it.

On the Wilson ammo side, just to leave the door open and as both Kelpiemonk and I like the Barnes bullet (for the same reasons), I wonder if there's any cautionary reason not to use (in a S&W Shield) the Wilson Barnes 115gr loads that Wilson's website describes as being tested in 16" barrels (rather than subcompact pistol length barrels)? More specifically, this one:
https://shopwilsoncombat.com/9mm-115...A9C-115-TACXP/

I confess that it is the "tested in 16" barrel" description that's giving me reason to pause, as usually Wilson tests/rates their ammo for the gun it was best envisioned for.


NSW tested butt loads of 9mm ammo, they favored the HST

Having shot HST, G2, Gold Dot, Barnes, and WC loaded SD rounds at night, HST performed just as well as the others with flash signature. (Which I personally think is blown WAY out of proportion)

I subscribe to Dr Gary Roberts advice. Pick one, buy a lot of it, and train/shoot a ton.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
"Potentially, a government is the most dangerous threat to man's rights: it holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims." - Ayn Rand
  #15  
Old 04-23-2018, 05:32 PM
Grandpas50AE's Avatar
Grandpas50AE Grandpas50AE is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Waxahachie, Tx.
Age: 69
Posts: 13,404
One more perspective

I have one more perspective for chrysanthemum, but not aimed at him as much as those that are new to firearms. In the NRA Basic Pistol classes, we cover in detail the difference in guns and ammunition selection that is appropriate for it. In that curriculum, we address in detail the specific designation of the ammo types that have standard, +p, and +p+ ratings, and counsel the students on NOT putting +p or +p+ ammo in a gun that is NOT rated for it. For the most part, this is 9mm, .38 Spl., and .45ACP. Therefore, as an instructor, I would counsel and instruct students to look at the gun to see if it is marked "+p" anywhere or if the Owner's manual states it is "+p" rated, or if they have checked with the manufacturer to see if that model is rated for that.

Most of the folks on this sub-forum know these things and know where to look for the information to make the proper determination, but for newer shooters, I though it best to post this. I don't think the Shield is +p rated.

As a personal choice, I chose the Federal HST standard 147 gr. loading for SD usage - can be used in all 9mm guns.
__________________
Roger - Life GOA, CCRKBA, TSRA, VCDL
NRA Benefactor - Certs -Chief RSO; Instructor - Basic Pistol (D.E.), Rifle, Shotgun, PPIH, PPOH

Army M.P. 1971 - 1972
Wilsons: Several; Kimbers: 10mm (Wilsonized), .38S (Wilson barrel)

Last edited by Grandpas50AE; 04-23-2018 at 05:35 PM.
  #16  
Old 04-23-2018, 05:54 PM
chrysanthemum chrysanthemum is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Texas
Posts: 11,576
More THANKS for the added perspectives in most recent posts. And THANKS to a couple great friends who've shared excellent advice, similar to what's in the thread, via PMs.

Yes, the sub-compact Shield is definitely not the place for +p loads. I'm not one to try to "test" how far one can go beyond what's recommended.

A .45acp 1911 is a far better SD selection ... when one can carry it; but sometimes, some of us occasionally find a need for something much smaller than a 1911. When I now carry a Shield, in Wilson's recently added Lo-Profile holster for the Shield, it is usually in a circumstance where I previously went wholly without any means of SD.

And Kudos to Wilson for adding their cautionary language (+p ammo in a Shield) to this effect on their 9mm ammo webpages. Better to "lose" an ammo sale than to sell a poorly matched (to a specific firearm) ammo selection. Very classy.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member

"Freedom is only a temporary thing unless it is backed by the blunt capability and willingness to fight back against evil with sufficient arms." -- Myself

Last edited by chrysanthemum; 04-23-2018 at 06:15 PM.
  #17  
Old 04-23-2018, 06:08 PM
apipeguy's Avatar
apipeguy apipeguy is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Michigan
Age: 64
Posts: 5,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandpas50AE View Post
As a personal choice, I chose the Federal HST standard 147 gr. loading for SD usage - can be used in all 9mm guns.
I’m carrying 124 gr Standard HST’s. I’d like to pick up some 147’s to test and compare.
__________________
David

NRA Patron Life Member
  #18  
Old 04-23-2018, 06:23 PM
Kelpiemonk Kelpiemonk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 398
It is +p rated. Not all +p is the same. Barnes is +p because of the length of the bearing surface, not the strength of the load. It is not the same animal as a ranger +p or whatever. Maybe Wilson pushes that load up a bit to get enough speed from little barrels. Who knows.

Last edited by Grandpas50AE; 04-24-2018 at 06:22 AM. Reason: I accidently hit edit instead of quote - see below
  #19  
Old 04-23-2018, 09:10 PM
TCFD273 TCFD273 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Somewhere south
Posts: 1,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandpas50AE View Post
I have one more perspective for chrysanthemum, but not aimed at him as much as those that are new to firearms. In the NRA Basic Pistol classes, we cover in detail the difference in guns and ammunition selection that is appropriate for it. In that curriculum, we address in detail the specific designation of the ammo types that have standard, +p, and +p+ ratings, and counsel the students on NOT putting +p or +p+ ammo in a gun that is NOT rated for it. For the most part, this is 9mm, .38 Spl., and .45ACP. Therefore, as an instructor, I would counsel and instruct students to look at the gun to see if it is marked "+p" anywhere or if the Owner's manual states it is "+p" rated, or if they have checked with the manufacturer to see if that model is rated for that.

Most of the folks on this sub-forum know these things and know where to look for the information to make the proper determination, but for newer shooters, I though it best to post this. I don't think the Shield is +p rated.

As a personal choice, I chose the Federal HST standard 147 gr. loading for SD usage - can be used in all 9mm guns.


This

There is “0” need for +p-147gr or 230gr
HST or Gold Dot


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
"Potentially, a government is the most dangerous threat to man's rights: it holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims." - Ayn Rand
  #20  
Old 04-24-2018, 06:22 AM
Grandpas50AE's Avatar
Grandpas50AE Grandpas50AE is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Waxahachie, Tx.
Age: 69
Posts: 13,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelpiemonk View Post
It is +p rated. Not all +p is the same. Barnes is +p because of the length of the bearing surface, not the strength of the load. It is not the same animal as a ranger +p or whatever. Maybe Wilson pushes that load up a bit to get enough speed from little barrels. Who knows.
Incorrect. The rating of "+p" is a specification by SAAMI directly related to increased pressure levels of a cartridge and bearing surface of the projectile is irrelevant. Although bearing surface can affect pressure depending on powder used, it has nothing to do with the specification designation of "+p".
__________________
Roger - Life GOA, CCRKBA, TSRA, VCDL
NRA Benefactor - Certs -Chief RSO; Instructor - Basic Pistol (D.E.), Rifle, Shotgun, PPIH, PPOH

Army M.P. 1971 - 1972
Wilsons: Several; Kimbers: 10mm (Wilsonized), .38S (Wilson barrel)
  #21  
Old 04-24-2018, 07:21 AM
Kelpiemonk Kelpiemonk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandpas50AE View Post
Incorrect. The rating of "+p" is a specification by SAAMI directly related to increased pressure levels of a cartridge and bearing surface of the projectile is irrelevant. Although bearing surface can affect pressure depending on powder used, it has nothing to do with the specification designation of "+p".
Read it again. What I wrote is correct. It is a moderate load with higher pressure because of the particularities of the bullet. It creates pressure in the chamber, but not much recoil as it isn't very high speed or heavy, and it doesn't use excessive amounts of powder. I can explain this further to you if you like.
  #22  
Old 04-24-2018, 08:03 AM
flyrodr flyrodr is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 52
A bit off topic, but re. the Shield and +P:

From the owner's manual:

• “Plus-P” (+P) ammunition generates pressures in excess of the pressures associated with standard ammunition. Such pressures may affect the wear characteristics or exceed the margin of safety. Use of “Plus-P” ammunition may result in the need for more frequent service.
• “Plus-P-Plus” (+P+) ammunition must not be used in Smith & Wesson firearms. This marking on the ammunition designates that it exceeds established industry standards, but the designa- tion does not represent defined pressure limits and therefore such ammunition may vary significantly as to the pressures gen- erated and could be DANGEROUS.

So, +P is useable, but will beat up the gun faster (as would be expected for higher pressure loads in any gun, at least over many rounds, and relative to lower pressure loadings).

That said, as others have said above, there's relatively little gain in velocity in short-barreled guns with +P. Going with normal pressure ammo and judicious bullet selection should provide greater gains. As also said, go with what Dr. GKR recommends. He has extensively tested various ammo.
  #23  
Old 04-24-2018, 08:42 AM
chrysanthemum chrysanthemum is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Texas
Posts: 11,576
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyrodr View Post
A bit off topic, but re. the Shield and +P:

From the owner's manual:

• “Plus-P” (+P) ammunition generates pressures in excess of the pressures associated with standard ammunition. Such pressures may affect the wear characteristics or exceed the margin of safety. Use of “Plus-P” ammunition may result in the need for more frequent service.
• “Plus-P-Plus” (+P+) ammunition must not be used in Smith & Wesson firearms. This marking on the ammunition designates that it exceeds established industry standards, but the designa- tion does not represent defined pressure limits and therefore such ammunition may vary significantly as to the pressures gen- erated and could be DANGEROUS.

So, +P is useable ("yes" per this interpretation of S&W language, but maybe not so true per opinion of an experienced safety-conscious user; note also the vague "exceed the margin of safety" language), but will beat up the gun faster (as would be expected for higher pressure loads in any gun, at least over many rounds, and relative to lower pressure loadings).

That said, as others have said above, there's relatively little gain in velocity in short-barreled guns with +P. Going with normal pressure ammo and judicious bullet selection should provide greater gains. As also said, go with what Dr. GKR recommends. He has extensively tested various ammo.

Exactly right, and not at all off-topic. +1911. I've inserted a qualified opinion -- mine -- on one point above in bolded blue).

In relation to this, I, for one, give Wilson credit for going beyond these statements (in S&W manual) and referring to occasional instances of bulged brass cases.

S&W didn't go in to such details, even thought it's their gun... but Wilson did.

While an occasional bulged brass case doesn't automatically mean that a Ka-Boom is imminent, this is something that gives a knowledgeable, safety-conscious shooter good reason for pause. And it is separate from the matter of increased wear, which might be irrelevant to many people in an $300-ish handgun purposed (by them) only for emergency SD... which is my circumstances. (The Shield often costs less than one case of Wilson's ammo; while I take great care with my $6,000+ Wilson SGs, the Shields are more like a commodity).

Personally, I take Wilson's warning as better (at least for a knowledgeable user) and reflecting better judgment and customer safety concern than the S&W advisement as to "more frequent service" and the vague "margin of safety" (what exactly is the "margin of safety"? ... probably an attorney's language... for courtroom use, just in case).

+1911 Wilson.

---

Given the widespread use of S&W Shields for deep concealment carry purposes (even among many 1911 users), I still think it might be a "win-win" outcome for Wilson to offer their own premium SD-purposed 9mm ammo precisely spec'd for this -- and similar -- sub-compact designs.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member

"Freedom is only a temporary thing unless it is backed by the blunt capability and willingness to fight back against evil with sufficient arms." -- Myself

Last edited by chrysanthemum; 04-24-2018 at 12:31 PM.
  #24  
Old 04-24-2018, 01:33 PM
fj40 fj40 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 690
https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/sel...tic-tests/#9mm
  #25  
Old 04-24-2018, 01:39 PM
chrysanthemum chrysanthemum is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Texas
Posts: 11,576
The problem, in this context, with most standard penetration/expansion tests and articles is that these tests generally pre-suppose that the ammo is o.k. for use in a given gun.

I think it is first important to assess whether a given ammo load, perhaps especially one rated as +p, is even suitable for use in one's chosen firearm.

Notwithstanding this observation, it is obvious that the 147gr Federal HST (non-+p version) repeatedly shows up as a top 9mm choice, exactly as suggested in a number of excellent replies in this thread.... The 124gr Federal HST and Barnes (again, the non-+p version) also shows up well. In a different firearm, the +p versions would likely be suitable as well, but probably not so in a sub-compact S&W Shield. Thanks Again for each of those replies.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Life Member

"Freedom is only a temporary thing unless it is backed by the blunt capability and willingness to fight back against evil with sufficient arms." -- Myself

Last edited by chrysanthemum; 04-24-2018 at 01:53 PM.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:20 PM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2015 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved