Do You Use The Self Defense Ammunition Across The Board.

[Bucky]

What about the gold dot's performance is significantly better? Is it penetrating deeper, or expanding larger then the hst? What advantage are you gaining with one over the others? Just looking at the performance data that I care about, ie. expansion & penetration through heavy clothing, both of those loads seem to perform very well (and very similarly) accross a wide range of barrel lengths.

When I take the effort to carry a longer barrel, I might as well get better performance out of it as a pay off, no? 147 HST gets less velocity in my 92 compact than in my diminutive Glock 43. That's not to say that it wouldn't perform well, I guess I just feel like I'm getting ripped off. On the other hand, the 124 Gold Dot seems to take full advantage of the additional barrel length.

This wasn't meant to be a Gold Dot vs HST comparison, rather a 124 +P versus 147 comparison, and how they perform differently with different types of guns and barrel lengths. It just so happens these are the two I keep on hand.

As for the Gold Dot, did a bunch of testing years ago with different mediums and the 124 +P Gold Dots performed the best for me. So I bought a bunch (still have the older style gold/brown boxes). It should be noted, this was done prior to HSTs were around (either created, well known, or widely available as far as I knew at the time).

When I got my P938, I decided I wanted to keep a non +P round on hand. Admittedly, I didn't do my own tests, but did a lot of research and watched the ammo quest short barrel 9mm performance videos. The 147 HST seemed to work the best, and were readily available, so that's what I got.

[VT1032]

When I take the effort to carry a longer barrel, I might as well get better performance out of it as a pay off, no? 147 HST gets less velocity in my 92 compact than in my diminutive Glock 43. That's not to say that it wouldn't perform well, I guess I just feel like I'm getting ripped off. On the other hand, the 124 Gold Dot seems to take full advantage of the additional barrel length.

This wasn't meant to be a Gold Dot vs HST comparison, rather a 124 +P versus 147 comparison, and how they perform differently with different types of guns and barrel lengths. It just so happens these are the two I keep on hand.

As for the Gold Dot, did a bunch of testing years ago with different mediums and the 124 +P Gold Dots performed the best for me. So I bought a bunch (still have the older style gold/brown boxes). It should be noted, this was done prior to HSTs were around (either created, well known, or widely available as far as I knew at the time).

When I got my P938, I decided I wanted to keep a non +P round on hand. Admittedly, I didn't do my own tests, but did a lot of research and watched the ammo quest short barrel 9mm performance videos. The 147 HST seemed to work the best, and were readily available, so that's what I got.

What payoff? I guess, the point I'm dancing around is that velocity in the handgun range is relatively meaningless if you are talking about two rounds that otherwise perform in a relatively similar fashion (ie. both penetrate and expand similarly, which is the case with these two rounds). It's not until you get to rifle velocities where it has any real impact on terminal ballistics. The only two factors that really matter aside from shot placement are expansion and penetration and both of those rounds do that in spades. Both are great, proven rounds that would perform well out of any of your guns. I personally would rather have a consistent point of aim and low recoil accross all of my handguns.

[Odin Bravo One]

Sean M, you've explained this before and with respect I'm still not sure I understand the point you are making -- unless it is to say that shot placement trumps everything else.

If a bullet expands like crazy but doesn't penetrate enough to reach something vital, then a FMJ bullet would have probably been better in that case. On the other hand, a FMJ bullet or a hollow point that fails to expand might tend to poke a hole through the target without causing a bunch of damage. If a bullet design that is proven to offer ideal penetration and expansion doesn't matter then a lot of threads in this forum section -- including ones that DocGKR has participated in -- are just a big waste of time.

It's possible I'm too dense to pick up what you are putting down.

Penetration and expansion do factor in.....

My point is, always has been, and always will be that if people spent as much time on the range actually improving their skills as they do worrying about “what bullet is best”, then the type of bullet will be much less relevant.

Ball ammunition has easily killed hundreds of times the number of people killed by “high performance” ammunition.

The Indian has much more influence in stopping a fight than the arrow.

[Norville]

Penetration and expansion do factor in.....

My point is, always has been, and always will be that if people spent as much time on the range actually improving their skills as they do worrying about “what bullet is best”, then the type of bullet will be much less relevant.

Ball ammunition has easily killed hundreds of times the number of people killed by “high performance” ammunition.

The Indian has much more influence in stopping a fight than the arrow.

No argument with what you are saying but there is no point in purposely opting for a lesser performer. I’d say pick a load from Doc GKR’s list, buy a case and lots of equivalent training ammo and get to the range.

For the record, 147 HST across the board these days.

[VT1032]

Penetration and expansion do factor in.....

My point is, always has been, and always will be that if people spent as much time on the range actually improving their skills as they do worrying about “what bullet is best”, then the type of bullet will be much less relevant.

Ball ammunition has easily killed hundreds of times the number of people killed by “high performance” ammunition.

The Indian has much more influence in stopping a fight than the arrow.

I have zero personal experience with people popping, but this is how I see it. I use jhp's to limit over penetration liability more than out of lethality concerns. Every advantage and all that.

[Odin Bravo One]

It’s your circus, use whatever monkeys make you happy.

[Cypher]

I go out of my way to ensure I buy the ammunition that is on sale or least expensive.

All the talk in the world about this that and the other makes zero practical difference in the real world.

My intent in starting this thread was never to ask "What's the best ammunition?" I said it in another thread but when I was deciding on which ammunition I should use I sent a PM to Kathy Jackson and asked what she had in her gun. She sent me a link to Doc's list and told me that she used Speer 124 grain +P Gold Dots. I decided to go with that.

The only reason I asked this question was because I had just bought a new gun and I didn't happen to have any SD ammunition.

I've pretty much decided that logistically I'm better off just waiting for a sale and picking up a case of SD ammunition and using it across the board. I see no reason to to second guess the Gold Dots so that's what I'll continue to use

[Odin Bravo One]

My pistolforum-fu is weak...

[Odin Bravo One]

I've pretty much decided that logistically I'm better off just waiting for a sale and picking up a case of SD ammunition and using it across the board.

I go out of my way to ensure I buy the ammunition that is on sale or least expensive.

Looks a lot like we said the same thing.

[Cypher]

Looks a lot like we said the same thing.

My point is that I didn't start this thread with the intent of starting a "Which ammo is best" pissing contest and that im sorry it went there.