I don't know if FBI load changes regionally but a local field agent friend has Gold Dot 124 +P. I might have a case or so from him.

I made a quick range trip this morning and remembered to bring some of the 147s. They turned out to be Hornady HST (honestly I couldn't remember what I'd bought).

Didn't shoot many, really only fired for function and POI changes vs the 115s. What really surprised me was how "torque-ee" they were. I could feel more twisting than I've noticed with any other loadings.

HST in any weight. +p or standard pressure. I prefer 147gr, but in testing they all do about the same.

124+p Gold Dot. We issue the standard pressure load for our secondary duty weapons and it’s done well in our testing, but I’m not crazy about it out of the short barrel. It’s perfectly fine out of a duty size gun, but I’d prefer a bit more speed with this projectile.

I’ve still got a good bit of 147gr Ranger T that I’d not hesitate to carry either. Nasty round in gel, even out of a short barrel.

I’ve got no idea what the FBI issues for small guns (if it’s different than their duty load) but their duty load last I talked to one of them was 135gr +p Critical Duty. I’d have no issues with that load in a duty weapon, but it probably isn’t ideal out of a sub compact.

End of the day though it’s whatever you have that feeds in your gun and hits point of aim. Everything else is secondary.

I find the recoil of HST 124 grain +P to be slightly stouter than the Gold Dot 124 grain +P, so I don't know if I would want to use it in small 9mm pistols.

147 grain HST seems to have slightly less recoil than the HST 124 grain standard velocity and I think thus 147 grain load is optimal in the smallest 9mm pistols.

Anyway, these are my perceptions of felt recoil with these loads. Other shooters using other kinds of pistols will have differing opinions.

I guess I am the odd man out on this topic thus far.

Many years ago I bought a couple boxes of the Barnes 115gr. +P TAC-XPD and they shot great and were very accurate. After that I purchased a 500 round case that I still use today in my P365’s (guessing I have fired about 250 rounds thus far).

Lucky Gunner conducted testing that is dated, and Federal HST’s were also tested. As you can see the Barnes TAC-XPD bullet performed quite well. Below is a link to that ballistic gel testing.

https://www.luckygunner.com/la...ballistic-tests/#9mm

With that said I will be buying me some 124+p HST’s real soon for functional and accuracy testing.

Heavy HSTs; 147gr and 150gr when I can find it. Likely that it's a mix of both in my Shield+ right now as I was finishing up a box of 150s when I was testing and breaking in HSTs with the pistol, but I used both with my earlier micros and subs that came before the S&W.

Agree with Para about using standard pressure in smaller guns. I use standard pressure HST 124 in my G43.

A few years ago, a Hornady rep came to our academy to test some Critical Duty 9mm using a G19. Shot through building materials, car glass, and gel. It was fun and the Critical Duty did okay. It's expansion wasn't dynamic, but it was consistent.

The Hornady rep asked if we had a duty load we'd like to test for comparison. My friend said, "Yeah, HST." The Hornady rep replied, "Oh, shit. It's always HST." He already knew the score. The HST had better expansion in gel and matched or surpassed the Critical Duty performance in barriers.

Been carrying HST ever since.

Duty vs Carry:
Performance thru barriers is an unlikely requirement for non-LEO/Military "carry" use and can be a liability so tailoring your ammo to your mission and most likely scenario is essential. No magic or even best cartridge.

-- Chuck

Don't forget guys that the Hornady XTP probably has the best penetration from any short barreled gun. As long as you're ok with less expansion, which along with it's legendary toughness (no shedding), being the facilitator of said penetration, I like it for short barrel guns in the 9x17 and 9x18 class more than the more modern bullets being discussed. My take is that if for some reason there may be issues with insufficient penetration, I'd take the XTP. As an example, if I were to take 9x17 or 9x18, or the 9x19 on the trail, I might prefer an XTP since it might better handle four legged threats with better penetration.

Para's recommendation for std. pressure heavy for caliber HSTs and God Dots for short barrelled guns for urban SD, is spot on. But if there's any concern for penetration even with those, I might use the XTP.

So for penetration, you can use XTPs in higher pressure rounds without expansion limiting sufficient penetration in short barrel guns when circumstances may favor more penetration with non-shedding, low expansion HP, at +P velocities.

Hunters have been using heavy for caliber XTP pistol bullets in various calibers for a long time. Think boar, bear, those sorts of critters, when expansion without sufficient penetration might be a problem. And... they're less expensive.

My 365 shoots Federal 147gr HST better than anything I've tried.

Another vote for 147 HST standard pressure. Carried a PPS-M1 for about 10 years with 16 total rounds carried. I use the same 147gr HST in a PPQ-M1 (since the 2020 unpleasantness began), doubling capacity to 31 rounds carried.

quote:

Hornady Critical Defense

^^^^^^^^^
This right here! Critical Defense was developed for short-barreled pistols. All of the CD ammo I have fired through my short-barreled pistols have been very reliable and accurate!

I'd carried the standard pressure Federal 147 grain HSTs, but upon purchasing my P365 a few years ago, I switched over to the standard pressure Winchester "T" series 147 grain ammo. Both are accurate, feed well in my Sig, Glock (Model 43X), and Wilson X9 EDC, but the Winchester loads have noticeably less muzzle flash and seem to shoot softer. Everything I've read about these and the Federal HST rounds (I used previously) indicated that expansion and penetration are pretty much identical.

A couple of things-

Normally, I would not recommend any 115 grain load, due to a tendency for inadequate penetration, but there is one exception: the Speer Gold Dot 115 grain. I've shot a fair amount of this load and it's a thumper.

Those of you who are fans of tnoutdoors, who over the past decade or so has published informative videos on pistol cartridge ballistics- he has made the comment that of all major manufacturers of pistol ammo, Speer ammunition has chrono'd the closest to advertised velocities (usually out of a 4" barrel).

This 115 grain Gold Dot is no exception, clocking in right on top of Speer's advertised velocity of 1210fps/4".

In this video, he got 1202fps/4" and around 17 inches of penetration in ballistic gel/4 layers denim. Most impressive. In a 3" barrel, you'd likely get around 1100fps.

BTW, Speer used to offer a +P+ version of this 115. If you want to see a Glock malfunction, hand a Glock loaded with this round to someone who limp-wrists. The slide velocity is out of this world and if you don't take a firm grip, you'll get failures to feed or stovepipes. I've seen it with my own eyes, more than once.



As to the HST 147, there's something I think you should know if you're considering this load.

A while back, Federal changed the bullet design, giving this 147 projectile an additional cannelure, which seems intended to inhibit expansion a bit, thus enhancing penetration. Additionally, tnoutdoors says he gets the impression that the lead core is now slightly harder, also a nod to enhanced penetration of barriers.

At the same time, he says it appears Federal appears to have slightly reduced the muzzle velocity of this load, and that may be to make it easier to shoot in smaller pistols, but that's speculation.

Anyway, take a look at this. Date of publication, 12/21/21:

Liberty Civil Defense