Let's talk about vetting carry ammo

[willie]

At least a couple posters mentioned carrying weapons that have had many 1000's of rounds fired through them. That to me is not logical. We make assumptions, and one of mine is that high round counts will eventually reduce reliability through wear and rear. I favor vetting a weapon and then using an identical version to practice with.

[willie]

Someone, I believe it was here on PF, mentioned at one point having slugged Beretta barrels, and they're slightly larger than other manufacturers. At that point, pretty much all I had were Beretta, Springfield, and a couple KelTecs in 9x19. Have since added CZ, S&W, Sig, HK, and multiple lengths on Glock. I would love to chrono through them all just for comparison's sake.

My study tells me that if you measure the velocities of different handguns, you will have a list of numbers without meaning. Variation within brands is high. Measuring and then comparing individual specimens would not permit making valid generalizations.

Earlier I was one of the posters who reported variations in 9mm groove diameters. My bore slugging supports this finding as do countless cites in the literature. My unsubstantiated opinion is that we routinely see .357/.358 diameters in 9mm pistol barrels for a reason. The reason is one small attempt to keep pressure within certain limits. The high pressure of this caliber will bump up a .355 jacketed bullet to fill out the larger groove diameter. In the early 1960's Lee Jurassic introduced a line of high velocity 9 mm ammo called Super-Vel. It was high pressure ammo, and he loaded .353/.354 diameter bullets to reduce pressure.

50 years ago I loaded .355 9mm slugs in .357 brass to stupid high pressures and fired them through Ruger Single Actions. I got very high velocity and very inaccurate ammo.