Tan Box 9mm Ranger T 127 +P+ Should This Ammo Expand?

[Rock185]

dukemason, yes. I'll list some of the averages.

Springfield, Kimber and Colt 5" semi-autos: 1258 FPS, 1281 FPS, and 1306 FPS.

Ruger SP101 and LCRx 3" revolvers: 1262 FPS, and 1210 FPS.

Marlin with 16" Bbl: 1316 FPS.

Others testing this ammo would undoubtedly get at least slightly different results, but this is what I got in a few real World guns..

[Clusterfrack]

This is the hottest factory 9mm load I've shot. It actually makes Major power factor in some guns.

[WDR]

This is the hottest factory 9mm load I've shot. It actually makes Major power factor in some guns.

Depending on the lot... it does indeed hit major sometimes. I chronographed a handful of rounds years ago, fired from a 3" Springfield XD-9 subcompact at just shy of 1200fps. This was back when it was brass cased, and the bullets were still black coated.

Back in the early 2000's I carried this load in a Kel-Tec P-11... shot a lot of it (got most of a case for $10/50rds)... and survived.

It would sometimes shed its jacket in my redneck home brew water jug "testing"... but expansion was impressive, often .75" max diameters.

[dukemason]

dukemason, yes. I'll list some of the averages.

Springfield, Kimber and Colt 5" semi-autos: 1258 FPS, 1281 FPS, and 1306 FPS.

Ruger SP101 and LCRx 3" revolvers: 1262 FPS, and 1210 FPS.

Marlin with 16" Bbl: 1316 FPS.

Others testing this ammo would undoubtedly get at least slightly different results, but this is what I got in a few real World guns..

Some older RA9TA I have, 2017 I believe, averaged 1267 from a Glock 19. I was pretty happy with that from a 4" barrel.

[Rock185]

For any that might be interested, I got around to chronographing the Winchester 127 grain in a Hi Power with ~4.7" barrel. Average velocity was 1320 FPS, actually exceeding any of the 5" barrel velocities I recorded earlier. Also slightly exceeded the velocity of this load in my 16" carbine. You just never know unless you test a particular load in your particular firearm. I know this load doesn't utilize everyone's favorite XY or Z hi tec bullet, but I'd sure hate to get in the way of it...

[Clusterfrack]

When I discovered the issue with earlier generation TauDevGroup SCD's, it was while shooting Ranger T 127 +P+. The recoil impulse is noticeably heavier than any other factory loads I've tried. It's also super duper loud. I do not like this load for those reasons, and strongly prefer standard pressure HST 147 for carry.

My understanding is that there are two generations of TauDevGroup SCDs, differing in the thickness of the "flange" that fits into the slot and the depth of the recess for the striker spacer sleeve.

Original (pre 2019): 0.092" +/- 0.002"
Newer (2019+): 0.097" +/- 0.002" with a deeper circular recess

It is possible for the original generation of SCDs to slip down under recoil--especially with tolerance stacking due to a larger slide slot. If a Glock & SCD are used for life-safety purposes, I would measure the flange, and replace any thin SCDs with the LTT units.

Attachment 86725Attachment 86727

[bfoosh006]

dukemason, yes. I'll list some of the averages.

Springfield, Kimber and Colt 5" semi-autos: 1258 FPS, 1281 FPS, and 1306 FPS.

Ruger SP101 and LCRx 3" revolvers: 1262 FPS, and 1210 FPS.

Marlin with 16" Bbl: 1316 FPS.

Others testing this ammo would undoubtedly get at least slightly different results, but this is what I got in a few real World guns..

FWIW.. With the 127+P+ , My SP101 chrono'd right there with yours. At the same time my friends SP101 in .357 Mag ( same barrel length ) chrono'd the same'ish velocity with Rem. 125gr Scalloped Jacketed HP. ( With much more blast, and dramatically better 24hr soaked "wet pack" newspaper performance, all we had at the era )