Ccw ammo
- Thread starter daleo8803
- Start date
I carry 9mm Winchester Ranger T-series +p+.
Great reliability, reasonable price, and is typically a L.E. ammo, which has the potential to help in court since there is no hype or private sector advertising.
I've shot several thousand rounds off it without a misfire.
~ Dale
Georgia, USA
Great reliability, reasonable price, and is typically a L.E. ammo, which has the potential to help in court since there is no hype or private sector advertising.
I've shot several thousand rounds off it without a misfire.
~ Dale
Georgia, USA
luckysaturn13
Smoke it if ya got it!
Hydro shock in 380 because its a small round and hallow point in my larger pistols
depends on barrel length. lots of stuff out there is designed for "standard" length barrels and will often over penetrate in short barreled CCW's due to reduced muzzle velocity not allowing projectile to expand properly. great youtube series on this. check out the 9mm ammo quest video playlist by shootingthebull410. TnOutdoors9 and "the wound channel" also have great ballistic gel comparisons of ammo.
^^^ this....
If youre talking a pocket rocket.. I prefer basic ball ammo in little .32's and .380's.. (many mouse guns have reliability issues.. and most mouse calibers have penetration issues)..
If youre talking typical self defense chamberings (9mm, .38, .40, .45, etc..)... there are lots of good options out there..
Some pistols are more finicky than others about what they will reliably feed.. I would test out a couple of well proven options from different manufacturers and see what your pistol "likes".. then decide from there.. If it feeds everything well.. then make a decision based 100% on performance (performance based on your needs/requirements).. if it doesnt like a particular round.. rule it out completely.. regardless of its performance capability..
Thanks for the reply guys. The new gun should be a rock island commander sized 1911 in 9mm/22tcm single stack. I have its big brother that's a full size double stack but its too much for ccw IMO. I will be carrying in 9mm. My local is looking for one now. If they can't locate one then I will go with a G19.
In that case, it is hard to go wrong with the Federal HST line of ammo. Gold Dot is still a well respected line of ammo. I've seen and heard some reports of over penetration from the new Hornady Critical Duty in +p.
Personally, I still carry Remington Golden Saber in 124gr. I got a great deal on it years ago and I shoot it extremely well. In my highly unscientific personal tests it will penetrate well through three or four milk jugs filled with water. In another highly unscientific test it went through a 1/8" thick piece of concrete and then through a four inch thick water jug. The bullet wasn't recovered, but there was evidence of expansion on the exit. So, I'm not really worried about the bullet doing the job if I do.
Last edited:
I catch flak for it from the ammo gurus, but that's what I carry as well.
+1
I wonder how many people most "ammo gurus" have actually shot... or how many times they have even been involved in, or around an actual shooting..
My G19's are loaded with 124gr Rem GS.. and have been for the past 16+ years...
I am sure there are other rounds out there that perform "better" (always a relative term).. but my pistols feed it with zero complications (extremely important to me).. and having carried it on NUMEROUS entries and seeing what it can and cannot do "live", I have full faith and confidence in it..
Just my .02 .... YMMV
From various tests that I've seen I wouldn't carry it in a micro (3" barrel) pistol. However, anything the size of a Glock 26 or up should perform quite well. I've seen several tests that showed complete jacket separation with smaller pistols. I haven't seen one using ballistic gel that showed similar results for a full size pistol. It still comes down to have the right combination of bullet for barrel length, I believe.
Federal HST is not a bonded hollow point. They sell the Federal Tactical Bonded, but that is a different bullet.
this is true... sorta..
Federal didnt use traditional bonding techniques to lock the jacket to the core..
but they did in fact lock the jacket to the core (like a bonded bullet does) using a mechanical technique..
Different way to accomplish the same intended result (a jacket that wont easily separate from the core of the bullet)..
But, Federal made a deal about it not being a bonded bullet when they were testing it against the old Ranger T design and the Ranger Bonded. Also when trying to sell it to my friend's department they made an issue about it not being bonded and that if the department felt the need for a bonded bullet they should buy the Tactical Bonded. So, even Federal doesn't call it a bonded bullet even though the jacket and core are mechanically locked together. Most manufacturers use either an electro-chemical fusion process to bond the jacket and core at a molecular level or a form of soldering. Mechanically locked bullets are not commonly thought of as being true bonded bullets, but more of an advancement on the older cup and core style. (Edit to Add) That is why Hornady also refuses to call the Critical Duty bullet a bonded bullet. It is actually a mechanically linked cup and core as well. It has a mechanically linked band around the bullet to stop over expansion and to hold everything together.
Last edited: