Sig 365 V-Crown JHP

[tlong17]

Hello all. I've spent the better part of the last 2 months scouring the internet a couple times a week for more info on this ammo and test results. What little I've found doesn't really convince me one way or another of its efficacy. It doesn't seem like anyone has done high level of testing similar to that of ShootingTheBull in his previous YouTube video series. What I've found are a few guys who shot two rounds, couldn't find the rounds, and general half-assed attempts at analysis.

My question is two-fold, has anyone found any test results on this ammo that are at least somewhat scientific? And second, I'm interested in the concept of this "Micro-Compact" Ammo designed for 3.1" barrels using a 115 grain bullet with approx. 1050 fps muzzle velocity as compared to Federal's Micro round being a 150 grain bullet with 900 fps., why the two extremes?

Ultimately, I trust Federal's reputation and proven track record more, but the 365 ammo interests me nonetheless. Thank you for humoring me if you care to leave a reply. I know the typical answer is, stop worrying about it and pick one off the list.

[Redhat]

Here's one from youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Lr23j0Vx6g

And from Lucky Gunner:

https://www.luckygunner.com/9mm-124-...rounds#geltest

And from this very sub forum:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....-V-crownttp://

[tlong17]

Thanks for the links Redhat. I have seen these ones in my travels and they are all for different loads, either the 124 grain or regular 115 grain which has a different spec than the 365. I suppose one could extrapolate the performance, or lack thereof, of the vcrown bullet itself but I feel like the powder mix being used and barrel length should also impact the performance.

[Velo Dog]

Have you seen Paul Harrell's velocity testing?

His numbers closely match all the other sources I've seen online.

The terminal ballistics should be very similar to the standard Elite V-Crown from a short barrel; same bullet going 39 fps slower in real world testing. Therefore, felt recoil would also be very similar.

[Navin Johnson]

Whats wrong with the list?

[0ddl0t]

Between Shootingthebull410 & the tests posted in this thread, I count 8 V-Crown rounds that failed to meet FBI/IWBA standards out of 18 rounds tested. How much more evidence do you need?

And second, I'm interested in the concept of this "Micro-Compact" Ammo designed for 3.1" barrels using a 115 grain bullet with approx. 1050 fps muzzle velocity as compared to Federal's Micro round being a 150 grain bullet with 900 fps., why the two extremes?

Both of those rounds are poor choices, with many examples of them failing to expand and/or failing to meet penetration standards - especially from 3" barrels.

The Micro HST goes heavy & slow to reduce felt recoil (the heavier bullet takes longer to leave the muzzle, spreading the recoil impulse over more time which reduces the feeling of sharpness/snappiness). Unfortunately, it often fails to expand after encountering denim.

The Sig 365 rounds goes light with a slightly reduced powder charge to reduce felt recoil. The light bullet tends to expand nicely in bare gel, but sometimes comes short on penetration. At the same time, its reduced powder charge from an already short barrel means it often fails to expand through denim and over penetrates. The Sierra V-crown that Sig is using is just is not a very robust bullet design.

Ultimately, I trust Federal's reputation and proven track record more, but the 365 ammo interests me nonetheless. Thank you for humoring me if you care to leave a reply. I know the typical answer is, stop worrying about it and pick one off the list.

With a barrel under 3.5" I would not "just pick one from the list" because some choices on it are truly unsuitable for short barrels. DocGKR has said as much:

There is minimal difference using well designed 9 mm ammunition in barrels from 3.5" - 4.5". Now go down to a 3" barrel or use another caliber, things can change a bit.

Shootingthebull410 has probably the most comprehensive micro barrel test and he ultimately decided 147 winchester train & defend was the winner. HST 124, 124 +P, and 147 also performed very well, as did gold dot 124 +P. I would also look at the new Hydra Shok Deep which came out after his testing. It doesn't expand quite a much as 124 HST, but also seems to penetrate closer to 18" than 12...

[tlong17]

Thank you for the Paul Harrel video and for your detailed post as well Oddlot. This helps answer the question and satisfy my curiosity. I must confess that the idea of the ammo was appealing to me but as expected, the main problem is the lackluster design of the V-Crown JHP. I'll stick to the HST 147's.