9mm,45 auto self defense ammo

[mildot]

I did some search on the "web" and the consensus is that 147 in 9mm and 230 in 45 auto, with the "hydra shok" bullet are the best choice? am I GTG?

[Oscar 319]

I did some search on the "web" and the consensus is that 147 in 9mm and 230 in 45 auto, with the "hydra shok" bullet are the best choice? am I GTG?

If the data is citing "Hyda-Shock", I would say your data is at least 10 years or older.

[.357sigger]

I would check out Winchester ranger T or Federal HST as carry ammo. Speer Gold Dots are gtg also...

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Pistol ammo
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19887



Hydroshock discussion
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=31770

[Kimbo]

Honestly any major name brand JHP (Jacketed Hollow Point) will work. Winchester Ranger T's, Speer Gold Dots, and Federal HSTs are my favorite ones. Shoot each and see which one is more accurate in your pistol.

[citizensoldier16]

I choose the heavier bullets...specifically Speer Gold Dot 147gr GDHPs.

9mm 115gr:
Velocities 1210 (muzzle) 1071 (50yds) 981 (100yds)
Energy in FP 374 (muzzle) 293 (50yds) 246 (100yds)

9mm 147gr:
Velocities 985 (muzzle) 932 (50yds) 887 (100yds)
Energy in FP 317 (muzzle) 284 (50yds) 257 (100yds)

[stony275]

Really? Lighter bullets deliver more energy?

I always thought E=MC2!

Quick physics lesson. E (energy) = M (mass) x C (velocity) squared. Obviously the speed of the bullet is the most important since it's whats squared, but mass has considerable effects as well.

Would you rather get hit by a baseball thrown at 85mph or by a car going 85 mph? If speed is constant, or fairly constant, a heavier bullet delivers more energy.

Now, not saying 9mm sucks...because I carry a G19 myself. I choose the Speer Gold Dot w/ 147gr GDHPs.

Check Speer's website for technical info. You'll see that, even given the slower velocities, heavier bullets develop more energy across the spectrum, albeit a negligible amount.

http://www.speer-ammo.com/ballistics/ammo.aspx

C= the velocity of light. You're using a formula that does not apply to this topic.

Maybe you're thinking of KE = 1/2 MV^2
KE=Kinetic Energy
M=Mass
V=Velocity

Also your baseball and car analogy loses relevance in the discussion as it has the underlying false assumption that projectiles of differing weights from a handgun can be launched at the same velocity.

A 124gr 9 mm bullet travels faster (1150 ft/sec for Speer GDHP) than the 147 gr 9 mm bullet (985 ft/sec for Speer GDHP). Hence the dilemma for the shooter in ammunition selection. The 124 gr load has 47 more ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle than the 147 gr load at the muzzle and 13 more ft-lbs at 50 yds.

I'm not advocating that the effectiveness of handgun ammunition can simply be decided by a formula, but if physics is going to be introduced into the discussion, it should be factually correct.

[Jay Cunningham]

C= the velocity of light. You're using a formula that does not apply to this topic.

Maybe you're thinking of KE = 1/2 MV^2
KE=Kinetic Energy
M=Mass
V=Velocity

Stony, you are truly a Renaissance Man!

E=MC^2 has to do with mass/energy conversion... possibly applicable to .40 Glocks...

[citizensoldier16]

And thus the dilemma with E=MC^2. Can it be applied in the real world? We could argue all night about it. True, it may not yield the numbers in the chart on Speer's website, but it does illustrate certain facts about bullets, expressed not in FP, but in Joules. In truth, foot-pounds is a measure of work, not energy. A heavier bullet has more energy since it is Mass x the speed of light ^2. Velocity is not used in the calculation.

The baseball/car visual illustrates perfectly Einstein's equation, and the concept of energy and transfer. We're attacking the same question from two different angles. And with that, goodnight.

[wake.joe]

Deleted