The 43X/48 and 365/365XL are EDC game changers

[GJM]

Glock 19 barrel length - 4.02” / 102mm
Glock 43X barrel length - 3.41” / 87mm

Difference: 0.61” / 15mm

I guess I’m asking, is that really enough to worry about picking a new ammo over (147 HST), or would I be better off focusing on shot placement and dropping 20 lbs with better diet and exercise?

This thread might be worth looking at:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....ths-with-a-G48

[0ddl0t]

I don’t think it’s a matter of will it run in the 43x, but rather, will it expand due to velocity loss out of the shorter barrel? That would be my concern. I see a lot of people go +p for their shorter barrels to make up for the loss of velocity, the draw back being increased muzzle flip and felt recoil, even if the difference is subjective.

Doesn't Federal make a “Micro 9” HST load? 150gr I think.

They do, but despite the "micro" name I'm underwhelmed with the ballistic test results from short barrel pistols.

3.1" Shield heavy clothing (inconsistent expansion):



3.1" Shield heavy clothing (failed to expand):



It did better with the 3.4" Glock 43


But still occasionally overpenetrated through heavy clothing with a 3.5" M&P9c:



Of course all the above tests were in clear gel, which isn't as dense as ordinance gel so bullets don't always expand as readily. It did reasonably well in the real stuff from a 3.0" P938 although you can see 1 bullet had incomplete expansion through the 4layers of denim:

The 147gr load loses a lot less velocity out of a short barrel, probably keeping it still within its proper performance envelope.

That was what all the experts told us, but in gel it seems to vary bullet to bullet especially through heavy denim. For instance, here are Gold Dot 147s -- on Doc's list of recommended duty ammo -- after being fired from a 3" P938 into real ordinance gel covered by iwba 4-layer denim:

Assuming my G43X continues to run reliably, I’ll be using it for EDC soon.

Apologies if this was covered already, but my plan is to use the same Federal HST 147 in it as I do in my G19.

Am I gtg in using the same SD ammo in both?

HST 147 performed well from a 3" barrel so I wouldn't hesitate to use it in a G43.

[RJ]

This thread might be worth looking at:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....ths-with-a-G48

Phew. For a second, I thought you were quoting the "Weight Loss Challenge" thread.

Thanks, I will check it out.

[StraitR]

Let's keep in mind that:
1) The 147gr load loses a lot less velocity out of a short barrel, probably keeping it still within its proper performance envelope.
2) We're talking about pistol rounds, thus we're talking about making holes in flesh not tunnels of destruction. Even ball ammo can serve you right if you put it in the right spot.

I'm not concerned with expansion for the purpose of "stopping power", I'm concerned with expansion for the purpose of "stopping".

So, expansion and internal ballistics as it relates to tissue destruction is a distant second to reliable expansion for the purpose of reducing the risk and liability of over-penetration.

[HeavyDuty]

Brownell’s has a ‘Tangodown’ one. I have not seen an OEM one yet.

Definitely on the hunt for one; I bought a Glock one for my G19.5 and really like it. The little ‘bulb’ on the release really helps.

I’m using one from the GlockStore that is similar in design to the Glock one.

[CanineCombatives]

Been running the factory extended slide stop on all my glocks since they introduced it, consider it as essential as replacing the plastic sights, but damn if the 48 isnt the first glock I really dont need or want it on, the control interface on this model is the best they've ever done imo, and I've been running them since late 1985.

[Wondering Beard]

I'm not concerned with expansion for the purpose of "stopping power", I'm concerned with expansion for the purpose of "stopping".

So, expansion and internal ballistics as it relates to tissue destruction is a distant second to reliable expansion for the purpose of reducing the risk and liability of over-penetration.

I understand and I'm all in favor of finding the best performing round for one's pistol. All I'm saying is to not expect much, especially with very short barrels, no matter the bullet weight or level of quality of the hollow point, and even probably expect weirdness that wouldn't show up in scientific tests.

[Bucky]

I don’t think it’s a matter of will it run in the 43x, but rather, will it expand due to velocity loss out of the shorter barrel? That would be my concern. I see a lot of people go +p for their shorter barrels to make up for the loss of velocity, the draw back being increased muzzle flip and felt recoil, even if the difference is subjective.

Doesn't Federal make a “Micro 9” HST load? 150gr I think.

Let's keep in mind that:
1) The 147gr load loses a lot less velocity out of a short barrel, probably keeping it still within its proper performance envelope.

Yes, the 147 HST velocity loss is negligible. In fact, they clock in faster out of my G43 than my 92 Compact.

[Bucky]

From a post I made on another forum in 2016:

Beretta 92G Compact
147 HST - 944, 934, 937 Avg=938.6 PF=138.0
124 GD+P - 1208, 1190, 1194 Avg=1197 PF=148.4

GLOCK 43
147 HST - 939, 927, 957 Avg=941.6 PF=138.4
124 GD +P - 1101, 1098, 1104 Avg=1101 PF=136.5

GLOCK 19 G4
147 HST - 998, 995, 989 Avg=994.5 PF=146.1
124 GD +P - 1162, 1184, 1192 Avg=1179 PF146.2

[Grey]

Brownell’s has a ‘Tangodown’ one. I have not seen an OEM one yet.

Definitely on the hunt for one; I bought a Glock one for my G19.5 and really like it. The little ‘bulb’ on the release really helps.

Ordered a tango down, ill let you know how it is.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk