This report pertains to the Speer 9mm 124 grain +P Gold Dot Hollow Point bulk pack ammunition being advertised for sale by Velocity Ammo Sales (VAS):
https://www.velocityammosales....riant=32350345527373

And being linked in this thread:
https://sigforum.com/eve/forum...3106699/m/4120038384

Using a LabRadar chronograph and a SIG model full size P320 (4.7" barrel), I measured the velocities of 20 shots of the VAS ammunition and of 10 shots of the same load that was purchased a couple of years ago and which was packaged normally and not advertised as “non duty.”

VAS ammunition (20 rounds):
Average velocity: 1236 fps
Standard deviation: 26.5 fps
High velocity: 1308 fps
Low velocity: 1202 fps
Extreme spread: 106 fps

Normal pack ammunition (10 rounds):
Average velocity: 1236 fps*
Standard deviation: 13.9 fps
High velocity: 1261 fps
Low velocity: 1215 fps
Extreme spread: 46 fps
* (Yes, by coincidence the average velocities of both lots were exactly the same.)

The velocity spread of the VAS ammunition was obviously much greater than the “normal.” In addition to the 1308 fps shot, other shots that were greater than the highest normal lot shot were 1263, 1263, and 1284 fps. The greater extreme spread and the high velocity readings for a few of the shots were the only thing that was noticeably different from the “normal” lot. All rounds fired functioned normally. I wasn’t able to check the accuracy (precision) of the VAS ammunition because I forgot to take a suitable target backer to the range. I may experiment more with the VAS later.

The velocity spread would probably affect long range accuracy, but I doubt it would be noticeable at common defensive shooting distances. I will point out that the extreme velocity spread of the VAS ammunition was greater than what I’ve measured for the Gold Dot 124 grain +P “normal” load with other guns, but not by much. I once got an E.S. of 102 fps for a different lot.

All of this is obviously provided for information purposes only, and does not constitute an endorsement of or caution about using the VAS ammunition.

------------------------

Update 16Aug21:
Below is a 10-round group of the VAS ammunition fired at 7 yards. Pistol was a stock full size P320, trigger pull weight about 6 lb, 6 oz.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sigfreund,

Interesting data. Out of curiosity, were the extreme upper speeds consistently at the end of the string of fire? Or spread throughout?

In the order fired.
Because I had a few shots whose velocities weren't recorded, I had to fire more than 20 and I don't know where in the string they occurred.

1213
1225
1308
1250
1232
1220
1227
1233
1218
1249
1284
1221
1214
1263
1240
1216
1219
1202
1263
1223

Hmm. Yeah. Random variance.

Updated with accuracy test results in first post.

Thanks again, looks to be very accurate. I'm still of the opinion it was a bargain. My 2nd order is scheduled for delivery today.

It would be interesting to know why the ammunition was “reclassified” and designated not for duty use. It’s obvious that Speer wouldn’t release something for sale that was unsafe to fire, even if there was a “fire at your own risk” warning—which there wasn’t. I have fired a total of 40 rounds of the VAS offering, and although that’s not a huge sample, I experienced no malfunctions or anything unusual with that series. The velocity spread which was greater than the other load I compared it with was more than we’d like, but as I say it wasn’t grossly different from what I’ve seen with other ammunition that I paid full premium price for.

Although I’m speculating, I suspect that even though the ammunition’s pressures didn’t rise to unsafe levels, it may be that their variations exceeded what Speer established as a standard for premium ammunition. My accuracy test was only at 7 yards because at anything much longer my eyes won’t begin to focus on both target and front sight. In fact, because I’m near sighted in my left, nondominant, eye, that’s what I use for shooting tests like this one to help minimize aiming errors. If the ammunition is capable of printing inch or less groups at 7 yards, that should be equivalent to acceptable groups for most purposes at longer distances for anyone with better eyesight or if using a laser aiming aid or optical sight.

Again, whether to rely upon and use the ammunition for any purpose, especially for serious work, is a personal decision, but after my own limited testing I have no reason to doubt anything significant about it.

Interesting and possible valid ‘speculation’ sigfreund.

Here is a link to Lucky Gunner’s testing of the same round. . .

https://www.luckygunner.com/9m...ot-20-rounds#geltest

. . .and their recorded velocities are lower than yours at 1124, 1135, 1142, 1150 and 1156.

Maybe barrel length and/or environmental conditions can account for the variation?

Rob

quote:

Originally posted by Cookster:
Maybe barrel length and/or environmental conditions can account for the variation?

There are other possibilities, including lot differences, but I’m guessing that barrel length is the primary reason. If the information I could find is correct the M&P9C barrel length is 3.5 inches versus 4.7" for the barrel of the full size P320. If we just take the barrel length ahead of the chamber, the full size P320 barrel is over 1.4 times as long, and that can definitely make a difference in velocity. For example, when I measured the velocity of non-reclassified 124 grain +P Gold Dot from a P365 (3.1"), the average was 1128 fps.

Normally velocities are measured so close to the muzzle that differences in environmental conditions won’t have any detectable effect.

I compared the data on Speer's website to that on Velocity Ammo's for both the 9mm +P amd the .40 S&W, and found some anomolies. I did the comparison since I'm thinking about betting some of the .40 for my own SD use.

In 9mm, Speer showed MV as 1220 FPS and ME at 410 P/F. Velocity gave MV as 1120, but the same 410 for ME. Poor data tramscription, obviously.

However, for .40 cal, data still differs, but may be consistent. Speer shows 1150 and 484, Velocity shows 1025 and 385., not even 9mm +P performance.

Do you think this is just some more sloppiness in traanscribing, or does the Velocity ammo fall short?

I have no way to test the ammo myself, so I'd like your opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:
However, for .40 cal, data still differs, but may be consistent. Speer shows 1150 and 484, Velocity shows 1025 and 385., not even 9mm +P performance.

Do you think this is just some more sloppiness in traanscribing, or does the Velocity ammo fall short?

I assume you’re referring to this load that’s on the Velocity Ammo site, 165 grain Gold Dot.
https://www.velocityammosales....ot-165-grain-jhp-can

If so, it may be the same as some of the same load that was packaged by Speer and clearly marked “reclassified, not for LE duty use, for practice only” some years ago. I purchased and tested some of that in 2006 and am a little surprised that any of the same stuff would still be around, but it’s possible, or perhaps it’s from a later batch.

In any event, the velocity of that ammunition did not meet Speer’s specs/claims. Below are the results of my measurements, and they correlate well with what VAS is claiming about what they’re selling. All three velocity figures are the averages of 20 rounds from each pistol.

P239, 3.6": MV = 994 fps, ME = 362 ft-lb
P229, 3.8": MV = 1007 fps, ME = 371 ft-lb
P226, 4.4": MV = 1035 fps, ME = 392 ft-lb

I suspect that the VAS MV figure of 1025 fps is from a 4 inch barrel which falls between the P229 and P226.

I never had any functioning problems with that load, but based on its subpar velocity even from a P226 and which is significantly less than factory spec, I wouldn’t use it for serious purposes unless it’s all I had. Some people claim to believe that things like the velocity and power of handgun ammunition makes no difference for defensive purposes, and for them it should be fine. In fact, if I’m ever shot, I hope it will be by someone who believes that and isn’t interested in maximum performance. Many commentators have pointed out the obvious that handgun ammunition isn’t as powerful and doesn’t have the wounding potential of rifle ammo, but if all I’ve got is a handgun, I don’t want to handicap myself even more by deliberately choosing a less-powerful load.*

* Unless, of course, other factors dictate. For example when carrying a P365 for whatever reason, I don’t have any choice but to limit myself to the 9mm cartridge.

Thanks for the quick response! Unlike the 9mm they were selling, there's a bunch of this stil in stock, so I'm suspecting that you are right and people compared Velocity's data to Speer's.

I wouldn't want to trust my safety to sub-par ammo, nor would I want to have practice ammo that could be confused with the real stuff!