Originally Posted by Baldanders
The jacket looks to be of equal thickness all the way around. If my only choices were this or a FMJ, I'd probably still carry this just because it should theoretically have less chance to deflect off bone compared to a round nose. If it's expensive compared to FMJs like premium JHPs are in the USA, I'd likely just stick to a Flat Point FMJ. I'm skeptical that it will deform as advertised, though.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
JSPs in a 10"+ barrel do better than some jacketed HPs which may shed the jacket and fragment. That's the older HP designs, modern HPs don't usually have this problem.
Yes, I have seen those results while using various JSP factory brand.& handloaded...shot from my 14 in. TC Contender barrels.
35 Remington is prime example.
Last edited by Matt Helm; 12-06-2018 at 02:46 PM.
Custer wore the 1st "Arrow shirt".
Given the size & power of “Ivan”, we must now … and ever be Vigilant.
If quality JHPs aren't available, I would buy the highest quality FMJ I could. 9mm NATO would be my choice. 95gr seems very light - I would be concerned about getting adequate penetration. IMO, penetration > expansion if forced to rank-order by priority.
I always carry JHPs but ball has killed lots of people over the years. I wouldn't lose much sleep carrying quality 9mm NATO ball.
I think that in 2018 in free United States, any expanding 95gr .355 bullet is either a .380 round, cheap surplus/overrun to be loaded as .380 practice fodder, or can work well as a varmint round when loaded to 9mm +P specs.
As a 9mm defense option, I would rather have 147gr FMJ with the biggest flat on the nose that will reliably function in my gun. Then at least you know you’ll get penetration, versus just rolling the dice with this evolutionary dead end from the ancient past.
.
-----------------------------------------
Not another dime.
If I couldn’t carry Gold Dots or HSTs, I’d roll with Lawman/American Eagle in either 124 or 147 gr weights and not worry about it. Stupid laws are gonna be stupid. My ability to place my shots well as quick as possible is way more important than what I’m launching at a thing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
OP:
A recent reply:
12-08-2018, 09:30 AMOlongJohnson
I think that in 2018 in free United States, any expanding 95gr .355 bullet is either a .380 round, cheap surplus/overrun to be loaded as .380 practice fodder, or can work well as a varmint round when loaded to 9mm +P specs.
As a 9mm defense option, I would rather have 147gr FMJ with the biggest flat on the nose that will reliably function in my gun. Then at least you know you’ll get penetration, versus just rolling the dice with this evolutionary dead end from the ancient past.
Last edited by Duelist; 12-08-2018 at 11:43 AM.
I can almost guarantee (but currently can't find the evidence to back this up); that the original purpose of JSP 9mm was for use in submachine guns in an attempt to improve the efficacy over ball. In which case, a 95-grain bullet traveling at ~1600+fps isn't really concerned for penetration, particularly when it is followed by four or five more. But actually, most JSP 9mm I've seen is in 115-125-grain flavor. I ASSume that the reason this commercial load is 95-grains is because they're trying to get sub-gun like velocity from pistol barrels.
Most sub-gun ammo is loaded Hot (with a capital H), IMI stuff meant for Uzis is loaded too hot for most handguns and the Swedish M39/b round is way too hot for handguns. Neither of those are actually JSPs, but they are loaded to damn near the max pressure for the 9mm case, I've seen flattened primers from Swedish stuff when firing from an MP5. A couple of times I've seen case head separation on full auto (almost always with Mac-10/11 platform guns) using IMI stuff.
Which is my long way of saying, for handguns, a 124 or 147-grain flat nose loaded to NATO velocity would likely be roughly equivalent to any performance a JSP would give you from a handgun.
Last edited by RevolverRob; 12-08-2018 at 12:27 PM.
I seem to recall that the NATO specifications for 9mm ammunition were rather sloppy?
I once came across a ballistic study by a Swedish police department (Stockholm, perhaps? I can't accurately recall) comparing their duty round, a 147gr FMJ-TC to a regular round nose 124gr FMJ when fired into ballistic gelatin. While the round nose bullet eventually tumbled and thus penetrated 90cm of gelatin, the flat nosed bullet kept going nose first and penetrated 120cm. So yes, you do appear to get plenty of penetration with a flat nose FMJ. Enough for three to four bad guys, as long as you can get them to line up for the shot.
(I'm afraid I can't comment on the details of the study like the exact composition of the gelatin and so on. The whole thing was written in swedish, and I know very little swedish. Basically I just looked at the numbers and the pretty pictures.)
Looks like the STANAG specifications are 108-124gr bullet loaded up to 37k PSI.
So, yes, it looks like the actual specs leave some leeway - I was using the term to mean a 124gr bullet loaded to ~36.5k PSI, so ~ 124gr +P.
I am generally suspicious of very light/very fast pistol caliber ammo. I've seen bullets do enough weird things that I like the idea of a cartridge with enough mass to resist deflection from flat bones (esp ribs, skull). This is all subjective opinion of course. I also believe that most bullets hurt really badly, and that spending too much time over-thinking cartridge selection is entirely an academic endeavor (which can be fun at times)
Last edited by Nephrology; 12-09-2018 at 10:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
