Which 9mm jhp should i buy?

[CatSnoutSoup]

For what it's worth...

TSUSA has the Federal HST +P 9mm 124grain in stock right now for $34.50 per box of 50... A great price.
Federal Law Enforcement 9mm Luger Ammo 124 Grain +P HST JHP

Not productive I know, but I had to check. The last time I bought it was 8/2019 on one of those 1/2 off sale days and I got my fill at $18.40 a box.

 

[enbloc]

$18.40 a box.

 

[92G]

I think most Berettas are meh, and even I think that is probably one of the dumbest gun whine/fallacies ever. It was funny.... in 1989 maybe. It's just as dumb as the "porcelain glock 7 thing. That costs more than you make in a month!"

yes the slide separation thing was absurd and has never recurred. In some ways beretta‘s response to “correct“ it, with oversized hammer pin, probably validated the whole “problem” more than was necessary.

 

[AHM]

The Federal 9BP that I just received also has sealed primers. Not necessary, but nice.

Now you can oil your magazines...

yes the slide separation thing was absurd and has never recurred. In some ways beretta‘s response to “correct“ it, with oversized hammer pin, probably validated the whole “problem” more than was necessary.

Somehow "slide separation" sounds a tad a euphemistic;
like it is a code phrase for some failure mode that no one wants to talk about.

 

[enbloc]

Now you can store your magazines in oil...

FIFY

 

[92G]

Now you can oil your magazines...


Somehow "slide separation" sounds a tad a euphemistic;
like it is a code phrase for some failure mode that no one wants to talk about.

story is that a few slides broke in half and separated from the frame, striking the shooter in the face. call it whatever feels nice. As noted above it’s essentially irrelevant and cannot occur with any 92FS or later models.

 

[AHM]

story is that a few slides broke in half and separated from the frame, striking the shooter in the face. call it whatever feels nice. As noted above it’s essentially irrelevant and cannot occur with any 92FS or later models.

FS ::= Face Safe

 

[cdynak]

As a noob, I see a lot of negative talk about the .40 cal. I look at the ballistics and they're better than a 9mm. Since we're restricted to 10+1 in mASS it seems to me to be a better caliber for EDC. Is anybody willing to give me the abridged version of the .40 cal hate?

 

[drgrant]

As a noob, I see a lot of negative talk about the .40 cal. I look at the ballistics and they're better than a 9mm. Since we're restricted to 10+1 in mASS it seems to me to be a better caliber for EDC. Is anybody willing to give me the abridged version of the .40 cal hate?

-It sucks in small handguns, recoil can be annoying or excessive in those guns, compromising your split times or one handed drills
-During normal market times, 40 is more expensive than 9mm, and you're getting nothing from it, but punishment.
-It's not even available in most of the more common carry oriented handguns. The shield is the only one I know of with a .40 SW option at all. Every other 40 is either a chonk or much
larger, with the G27 being the only real winner down there.
-It's a dumb move for a newbie because like 80% of newbs that buy a 40 will soon dump it and buy a 9mm. So why not save the money and skip that expiriment?
-Resale value of common 40 SW handguns is total dog shit. (because the market is flooded with used 40s, good for buyers, bad for sellers. )
-The offset in ballistics for self defense between things like 9/40/45 is pretty negligible with modern ammunition, they all perform equally poorly vs a rifle, but better than mouse calibers like 25, 32, etc.
-It's basically slowly dying, shit caliber- LE is dumping it in droves (nearly every agency is going to back to 9mm or .45) and gun companies are loathe to make "new 40s" because everyone knows it sucks.
-10mm Auto fans are bitter because basically they took 10mm Auto and fagged it up/neutered it to make the .40 S&W. It's the product of a bunch of bad
decisions to solve fake problems that didnt exist.

It's not going away though. There are a ton of 40 handguns out there so the ammo will be around for decades to come.

Is it a viable cartridge? Yes, but its f***ing stupid. I would never tell anyone to run out and buy a 40, unless they had a specific
purpose.... like....

.....The only thing 40 is great at, IMHO, is if you're into USPSA and you want a gun to shoot Limited Major with it or
something. .40 is an affordable, simple way to facilitate that.

The only OTHER thing its great as... is you can pick them up used on the cheap, because everyone is dumping 40s constantly. So you can get them used cheaper tahn the equivalent 9mm
handgun. "Theres a reason for that, though" see above.

Capacity density? If you use that to choose a handgun I feel sorry for you, there are much more important things to consider... like can I shoot this well and put bullets where I want with
it, and do it under duress. All of those things are way more important that the specious/vague capacity density AWB pant shitting thing.

 

[cdynak]

Gotcha. It's uncomfortable to shoot and ammo is more expensive. I just bought a G26 but was on the fence with the G27. I still think the better ballistics are...better.

I still what to compare them side by side. I'll have to rent or borrow a G27 and confirm your assessment. Thanks. I appreciate the reply.

 

[Mesatchornug]

-It sucks in small handguns, recoil can be annoying or excessive in those guns, compromising your split times or one handed drills
-During normal market times, 40 is more expensive than 9mm, and you're getting nothing from it, but punishment.
-It's not even available in most of the more common carry oriented handguns. The shield is the only one I know of with a .40 SW option at all. Every other 40 is either a chonk or much
larger, with the G27 being the only real winner down there.
-It's a dumb move for a newbie because like 80% of newbs that buy a 40 will soon dump it and buy a 9mm. So why not save the money and skip that expiriment?
-Resale value of common 40 SW handguns is total dog shit. (because the market is flooded with used 40s, good for buyers, bad for sellers. )
-The offset in ballistics for self defense between things like 9/40/45 is pretty negligible with modern ammunition, they all perform equally poorly vs a rifle, but better than mouse calibers like 25, 32, etc.
-It's basically slowly dying, shit caliber- LE is dumping it in droves (nearly every agency is going to back to 9mm or .45) and gun companies are loathe to make "new 40s" because everyone knows it sucks.
-10mm Auto fans are bitter because basically they took 10mm Auto and fagged it up/neutered it to make the .40 S&W. It's the product of a bunch of bad
decisions to solve fake problems that didnt exist.

It's not going away though. There are a ton of 40 handguns out there so the ammo will be around for decades to come.

Is it a viable cartridge? Yes, but its f***ing stupid. I would never tell anyone to run out and buy a 40, unless they had a specific
purpose.... like....

.....The only thing 40 is great at, IMHO, is if you're into USPSA and you want a gun to shoot Limited Major with it or
something. .40 is an affordable, simple way to facilitate that.

The only OTHER thing its great as... is you can pick them up used on the cheap, because everyone is dumping 40s constantly. So you can get them used cheaper tahn the equivalent 9mm
handgun. "Theres a reason for that, though" see above.

Capacity density? If you use that to choose a handgun I feel sorry for you, there are much more important things to consider... like can I shoot this well and put bullets where I want with
it, and do it under duress. All of those things are way more important that the specious/vague capacity density AWB pant shitting thing.

All of this.

If you're buying based on limited magazines, get a 45. It's even more powerful that 40, so if that really mattered you'd be doing yourself a disservice with the 40 anyways.

If a student asked me that question, instead of telling them why they shouldn't, I'd ask why they should. What problem does it solve?

In 2020, its benefits were that you can buy used guns inexpensively, possibly as a package with a holster, and ammo sells out slower in a drought. In 2022, the former is true; to the latter, it comes back slower, too.

 

[drgrant]

Gotcha. It's uncomfortable to shoot and ammo is more expensive. I just bought a G26 but was on the fence with the G27. I still think the better ballistics are...better.

I still what to compare them side by side. I'll have to rent or borrow a G27 and confirm your assessment. Thanks. I appreciate the reply.

If you decide to bother with Glock 40s at all, I'd only be buying Gen5s if I were you- it's pretty obvious that they at least attempted to redesign the 22/23/37 to better thandle .40 S&W, they beefed up the slides a little bit.

 

[AFAR/PFAR]

-10mm Auto fans are bitter because basically they took 10mm Auto and fagged it up/neutered it to make the .40 S&W.

Quite the opposite. Since I'm back to carrying my G20 in the woods, I'm about to buy some 40 for training ammo.

but yeah, in general .40 S&W was a solution in search of a problem.

 

[AFAR/PFAR]

I use Federal 147gr JHP HST

Ever since the dentist came out with his defensive round list, this is my go to.

 

[chris_1001]

Gotcha. It's uncomfortable to shoot and ammo is more expensive. I just bought a G26 but was on the fence with the G27. I still think the better ballistics are...better.

I still what to compare them side by side. I'll have to rent or borrow a G27 and confirm your assessment. Thanks. I appreciate the reply.

Bought a Glock 27 in the mid/late 90’s sold it as it was a pain to carry. Recoil was “sharp”. But, I sold it for a Scandium/titanium j frame (sw 337, still have it). way worse recoil. I don’t miss the 27. However I have a 26 now. No regrets.

Ammo has improved and I used to hate 9. Now I’m comfortable with it.

And I carry a sig p365. But the 26 is not for sale. Still like it.

 

[cdynak]

All of this.

If you're buying based on limited magazines, get a 45. It's even more powerful that 40, so if that really mattered you'd be doing yourself a disservice with the 40 anyways.

If a student asked me that question, instead of telling them why they shouldn't, I'd ask why they should. What problem does it solve?

In 2020, its benefits were that you can buy used guns inexpensively, possibly as a package with a holster, and ammo sells out slower in a drought. In 2022, the former is true; to the latter, it comes back slower, too.

I also considered a 10mm as my EDC

 

[Chevy 2 65]

not all hp's are created equal. before you buy any jhp ammo in quantity via sugestions from an internet gun site, make sure it functions in your firearm. some hollow point ammo can be finicky feeding thru a semiauto pistol.

^^^^^^This buy test fire, buy test fire, repeat

 

[Chevy 2 65]

None of the above.

Hornady Critical Defense 115gr
Hornady American Gunner 124+P
Speer GDHP (124gr +P)
Sig V-Crown (115 or 124+P)
Winchester PDX1
Federal HST (newer) or Hydrashock 124gr

I don't buy "budget" personal defense ammo. YMMV

In other words don't be a cheap bastard.

 

[chris_1001]

I also considered a 10mm as my EDC

I have a 10mm. I call it a .40 for men.

Just not the ideal gun (not caliber) for carry (sw 1006)

 

[PappyM3]

As a noob, I see a lot of negative talk about the .40 cal. I look at the ballistics and they're better than a 9mm. Since we're restricted to 10+1 in mASS it seems to me to be a better caliber for EDC. Is anybody willing to give me the abridged version of the .40 cal hate?

With modern bullet designs, it has virtually zero benefit in terminal ballistics. Pistol rounds poke holes. The extra energy of the .40 doesn’t give it extra tissue disruption. And the maximum expansion on 9mm vs 40 s&w is virtually the same.

Even with just 10 rounds on tap, I’d choose 9mm over 40s&w. Much easier to shoot fast and accurate follow up shots with the reduced recoil. Plus, Preban mags do exist.

And the recoil on the .40 just sucks. I don’t mind .45 acp recoil, but the snappiness of .40 s&w is stupid.

 

[Christian]

Whatever I'm carrying, it'll have HST in it.


9mm, .40 S&W, .45 ACP
Pic grabbed from here.

 

[Ranger007]

I run Underwood

https://www.underwoodammo.com/handgun-ammo

Cor Bon is good stuff
Hornady Critical Defense is decent BUT the company went FUDD
SIG V-Crown is decent
Federal HST is good stuff

 

[chris_1001]

I run Underwood

https://www.underwoodammo.com/handgun-ammo

Cor Bon is good stuff
Hornady Critical Defense is decent BUT the company went FUDD
SIG V-Crown is decent
Federal HST is good stuff

Cor bon was the go to. Then gold dot.

I still like both.

The GD is my current carry load.

 

[Ranger007]

I have a 10mm. I call it a .40 for men.

Just not the ideal gun (not caliber) for carry (sw 1006)

One of my winter carry is a G29.

 

[MAGA99]

But a 380 and carry WWB ball ammo! Be ballsy!

 

[Waher]

As a noob, I see a lot of negative talk about the .40 cal. I look at the ballistics and they're better than a 9mm. Since we're restricted to 10+1 in mASS it seems to me to be a better caliber for EDC. Is anybody willing to give me the abridged version of the .40 cal hate?

More muzzle flash, more recoil, more muzzle flip, more expensive compared to 9mm with almost the same wound tract from the extra 1mm. Yes I own a girly .40, only because during the Obama era 9mm was frequently unobtanium.

The ONLY advantage 10mm short (.40 S&W) has over 9mm is better penetration of clothing and laminated glazing. Which unless you are in a cold climate where people wear heavy coats all the time or a highway patrol officer/professional driver that does nothing but deal with people in cars all day doesn't provide enough of a reason to sacrifice better 'shootability' for a very situationally specific benefit of increased penetration.

 

[weekendracer]

Gotcha. It's uncomfortable to shoot and ammo is more expensive. I just bought a G26 but was on the fence with the G27. I still think the better ballistics are...better.

I still what to compare them side by side. I'll have to rent or borrow a G27 and confirm your assessment. Thanks. I appreciate the reply.

Everyone, by that I mean feds, are moving back to 9mm. I know my old agency is using Speer bonded 9mm. I bet they spent more money researching it than 99.99% of the people on this page.

It's better to hit a vital area than just sling lead. Ballistics have changed dramatically over the last 30ish years. 9mm will do the job in most cases. I can also quote a CSI guy I know, the difference between a vital hit with a 9mm vs a 45 is minimal, a miss does nothing (that follow-up shot might be meaningful). This post might be a few beers old, but I carry a 9mm now and have access to both fortay and fo-five.

 

[40 Creedmoor fan]

Which 9mm should i buy for my subcompac ccw? Federal 9mm 147 jhp subsonic , s&b 9mm 115 jhp or s&b 124 jhp? I got a few hundreth dollars for my bd so ill put it to good use lol.

There are many choices and because there are so, so many choices, no wonder many get confused as to what to get. I suggest you simplified the problem. Pick a series of ammo, HST in my case, and buy that ammo in every caliber you use(9, 40, and 45 in my case).

P.S. HST is not the absolute best kind of ammo for self-defense nor do I think other self-defense brands/series are terrible. I just simplified the choices to get around the "too many choices shopper paralysis" problem.

 

[40 Creedmoor fan]

As a noob, I see a lot of negative talk about the .40 cal. I look at the ballistics and they're better than a 9mm. Since we're restricted to 10+1 in mASS it seems to me to be a better caliber for EDC. Is anybody willing to give me the abridged version of the .40 cal hate?

Just for the record: I DID NOT suggest to this user to trigger NES perennial grumpy crew.

Even with just 10 rounds on tap, I’d choose 9mm over 40s&w. Much easier to shoot fast and accurate follow up shots with the reduced recoil. Plus, Preban mags do exist.

Riight. Especially, the +P 9mm ammo being suggested above.

A typical 9mm does not have the same amount of energy as a typical 40. To get anywhere near the energy of a 40, 9mm needs to go faster thus the +P. The recoil of a +P round is a lot more than a typical range-quality 9mm.

According to the Federal website, 9mm 124gr HST delivers 494 joules of energy, meanwhile, .40 180gr HST delivers 553 joules. That's 20% more energy. No wonder there's more recoil! Now, 9mm +P 124gr HST delivers more energy(538 joules) than a regular HST but less than a 40 cal. In the end. +P also recoils more than a regular 9, just like a 40.

 

[PappyM3]

Riight. Especially, the +P 9mm ammo being suggested above.

A typical 9mm does not have the same amount of energy as a typical 40. To get anywhere near the energy of a 40, 9mm needs to go faster thus the +P. The recoil of a +P round is a lot more than a typical range-quality 9mm.

According to the Federal website, 9mm 124gr HST delivers 494 joules of energy, meanwhile, .40 180gr HST delivers 553 joules. That's 20% more energy. No wonder there's more recoil! Now, 9mm +P 124gr HST delivers more energy(538 joules) than a regular HST but less than a 40 cal. In the end. +P also recoils more than a regular 9, just like a 40.

Okay…? Did I say you needed to shoot +P 9mm?

It doesn’t take a lot of energy for a pistol bullet to penetrate 18” of gel and expand well. Sure, some combinations of bullet and barrel length may require a +P load to meet effective metrics. But most do not. People just buy +P because they think it results in a more lethal cartridge.

495 vs 553 joules of energy dumped into human tissue will not show a difference, strictly from an energy transfer standpoint. The elastic nature of most tissue will be able to accommodate that. What energy gets you in pistols is the tradespace of penetration and expansion. And 9mm can get you effective levels of both, without whatever combination of pluses and Ps added.

Edit: also, 553 vs 493 is 12% more, not 20% more.