+P+ in a Glock 26?
William P.N. Smith
just so the 'regular' P will seem tame in comparison, but the vendor
requires a "this stuff is OK for my gun" statement... I know they
don't like _underpowered_ loads, but what about high power?
Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please find out about rec.guns at http://doubletap.cs.umd.edu/rec.guns
*** Rec.guns supports MPFO's Millennial Rifle Raffle - donate today! ***
LaPopular
<<Do Glocks have any trouble with +P+ ammo? I thought I might try a box
just so the 'regular' P will seem tame in comparison,>>
Not sure what you mean by +P+
But +P such as Cor-Bon works fine in my M26 (&M17 as well) The round is listed
as: 115gr @ 1350fps
Seems like a strange reason for trying a hotter round tho....
-Mike
Ronald Shin
"William P.N. Smith" wrote:
# Do Glocks have any trouble with +P+ ammo? I thought I might try a box
# just so the 'regular' P will seem tame in comparison, but the vendor
# requires a "this stuff is OK for my gun" statement... I know they
# don't like _underpowered_ loads, but what about high power?
#
If the +P+ ammo falls within NATO pressures (which almost all of them do),
then your Glock will have no trouble.
If your ammo is the Federal Hydrashok +P+ or Winchester Ranger Talon +P+,
the answer is, yes.
Ask the vendor what the operating pressure of the ammo is.
Albert Brodinsky
<wp...@compusmiths.com> wrote:
> ...
William
Nope, don't do it, don't even think about it. Glocks (especially in
..40 and .45) have a very large area of the chamber where the case is
completely unsupported. They will bulge cases, and sooner or later, a
case will blow out. End of Glock, and very possibly end of you (or
parts there of).
For serious loads, you need a serious gun, something like a Para.
Al
Gary
#
# On 7 Oct 1999 19:57:35 -0400, "William P.N. Smith"
# <wp...@compusmiths.com> wrote:
#
#
# William
#
# Nope, don't do it, don't even think about it. Glocks (especially in
# ..40 and .45) have a very large area of the chamber where the case is
# completely unsupported. They will bulge cases, and sooner or later, a
# case will blow out. End of Glock, and very possibly end of you (or
# parts there of).
#
# For serious loads, you need a serious gun, something like a Para.
#
# Al
#
This is more than a little alarmist, don't you think? First of all, the
kB! phenomenon (Dean Speir's term) has never been attributed to 9mm
Glocks, like the G26. Secondly, the research I've read (which I would
recommend for your reading as well) indicates the kB!'s are associated
with specific circumstances involving yes, the unsupported chamber, but
also in a big way, the characteristics of the ammo used. To tell
rec.gunners that "sooner or later a case will blow out" is ill-advised
and simply wrong. Todd Green's and Dean Speir's research on the subject
can be found on the Calibers web site, next to ".40S&W"
http://www.greent.com/40Page/
--
Regards,
Gary
Albert Brodinsky
#Albert Brodinsky wrote:
##
## On 7 Oct 1999 19:57:35 -0400, "William P.N. Smith"
## <wp...@compusmiths.com> wrote:
##
##
## William
##
## Nope, don't do it, don't even think about it. Glocks (especially in
## ..40 and .45) have a very large area of the chamber where the case is
## completely unsupported. They will bulge cases, and sooner or later, a
## case will blow out. End of Glock, and very possibly end of you (or
## parts there of).
##
## For serious loads, you need a serious gun, something like a Para.
##
## Al
##
#This is more than a little alarmist, don't you think?
Not at all
#First of all, the kB! phenomenon (Dean Speir's term) has never been attributed to 9mm Glocks, like the G26.
That is because of the relatively small 9mm chamber. If you use +P+,
as the poster mentions, it certainly becomes an issue. I specifically
mentioned "serious loads".
# Secondly, the research I've read (which I would >recommend for your reading as well) indicates the kB!'s are associated
#with specific circumstances involving yes, the unsupported chamber, but
#also in a big way, the characteristics of the ammo used.
Like +P+??? You would have to be crazy to use a hot load in a Glock.
# To tell >rec.gunners that "sooner or later a case will blow out" is ill-advised
#and simply wrong.
If he was talking about using low pressure 9mm loads exclusively,
perhaps. But he was specifically talking about +P+, which a Glock is
not capable of handling.
Al
Belton1
know, the red rolls we used as kids. If you are real careful, that Glock of
your won't go kaboom!
VCopelan
##First of all, the kB! phenomenon (Dean Speir's term) has never been
#attributed to 9mm Glocks, like the G26.
#
#That is because of the relatively small 9mm chamber. If you use +P+,
#as the poster mentions, it certainly becomes an issue. I specifically
#mentioned "serious loads".
What do you mean by "the relatively small chamber". I've heard of tight
chambers, fully supported chambers and partially supported chambers. This is
the first time I have heard the claim that there are no Kb's with the Glock 9mm
because of "the relatively small chamber".
Perhaps you mean that it's more difficult to overload the smaller 9mm
cartridge? BTW the Glock 9mm chamber is more fully supported than their .40,
and .45 chambers. Don't you think that might be the reason that Kb's have not
been reported in the Glock 9mm guns?
## Secondly, the research I've read (which I would >recommend for your reading
#as well) indicates the kB!'s are associated
##with specific circumstances involving yes, the unsupported chamber, but
##also in a big way, the characteristics of the ammo used.
#Like +P+??? You would have to be crazy to use a hot load in a Glock.
Really? You seem to be the only one that knows that Glocks can't handle +P+.
Perhaps you could educate us with something other than your opinions and ill
conceived conclusions?
Big Bear
> ...
Sorry Al, but Gary is 100% on target with his comments concerning the
Glock 9mm.
The 9mm Glock is capabale of handeling LOTS of High Powered 9mm rounds
NATO and 9mm +P+ for Years! I bought several early Glock 17 9mms and
they have never missed a beat through over a decade of steady shooting.
I have shot lots (Cases!) of hot NATO subgun ammo and never seen a
problem with brass bulging.
You had a bit of it right in that the 40 Glocks DO have have a large and
unsupported chamber, which can cause case bulges on reloaded ammor,
which weakens more with each cycle. That is why I don't own any 40
glocks. Not a problem is you shoot factory loads, but I reload so...
But you missed the point that the 9mm glocks have (and always have had)
a FULLY supported chamber and will withstand absolutly ungodly abuse
without problems or hazards.
The Glock is THE toughest 9 on the planet, (I own/owned U.S.P.s, 92s and
226s also), but if I had to have one gun, with no service or parts,
ever, period, a 17 would be IT!)
B.T.W. a "Para" as a "Serious Gun"? R.O.T.F. L.O.L.!!!!!
Big Bear
Scott C
average ammo.
Just make sure that the stuff you're planning on shooting is for handguns
and *not* the Hirtenberger submachine-gun-only ammo.
William P.N. Smith <wp...@compusmiths.com> wrote in message
news:7tjc1f$a2t$1...@xring.cs.umd.edu...
> ...
mar...@webtv.net
only shoot jacketed factory ammo and some remanufactured ammo, but never
lead cast bullets. I was under the impression that Glock was a
top-quality arm. Do I have any reason for concern that my G27 will blow
up someday? Thanks
Marty
NiteOwl17
and Para's (problem prone)
I too would chose the G-17 or G-19 as my only handgun if forced to. Nothing
else would be close.
Scott
Ronald Shin
mar...@webtv.net wrote:
# I've seen this subject discussed before. I have a Glock 27(.40 S&W). I
# only shoot jacketed factory ammo and some remanufactured ammo, but never
# lead cast bullets. I was under the impression that Glock was a
# top-quality arm. Do I have any reason for concern that my G27 will blow
# up someday? Thanks
As long as you stick to jacketed ammo, being factory or quality reloads,
then no, unless you try some inbred fool's handloaded ammo that claims his
ammo can knock over a rhino...
Ronald Shin
Albert Brodinsky wrote:
#
# That is because of the relatively small 9mm chamber. If you use +P+,
# as the poster mentions, it certainly becomes an issue. I specifically
# mentioned "serious loads".
#
How serious is serious? Glock did their torture test with 124 grainers flying out at 1350+ fps, which is withing NATO
pressures, and certainly hotter than Federal's 124 grain Hydrashok +P+ load. This is also hotter than Winchester's 127 grain
+P+ Ranger load as well.
#
# Like +P+??? You would have to be crazy to use a hot load in a Glock.
#
Sorry, but many deparments issue the loads I just mentioned. No problems...
#
# If he was talking about using low pressure 9mm loads exclusively,
# perhaps. But he was specifically talking about +P+, which a Glock is
# not capable of handling.
+P+ is an ambiguous term. Some idiot out there may try to make his own "+P+" load that goes way beyond the hottest of NATO
maximums. Such loads would blow up any gun.
Some +P+ loads are barely warmer than other manufacturers' +P offerings.
My advice: check with the manufacturer. If their +P+ load uses a pressure lower than the NATO maximum, then the load is safe
to use.
J.
# NATO and 9mm +P+ for Years! I bought several early Glock 17 9mms and
# they have never missed a beat through over a decade of steady shooting.
# I have shot lots (Cases!) of hot NATO subgun ammo and never seen a
# problem with brass bulging.
This article (about ten years old) details the +p+ & NATO 9mm cartridges
in various pistols. It says Glocks are designed to eat 'em up no problem
but hte author experienced some problems in his experience. Interesting
read.
9mm AMMUNITION
by
Charles E. Petty
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Since the United States adopted the 9mm Luger (M882)
cartridge and M9 Beretta pistol for service use, interest in the
cartridge has greatly increased. Law enforcement agencies are
changing from the old standby .38 Spl., and ammunition
manufacturers are developing new loads and bullets for a
cartridge actually older than the .45 ACP it replaced in service
use.
The popularity of the 9mm Luger/Parabellum (9x19mm) has been
constant in Europe since World War I. Logistically, it is
desirable for its size and versatility that allows its use in
both pistols and submachine guns. It provides better ballistics
than its contemporaries such as the 7.63mm (.30) Mauser, 7.65mm
(.30) Luger/Parabellum and is comparable to other 9mm's such as
the Bergman-Bayard, Browning Long or Steyr.
Although the cartridge has been continuously available in
this country, the relatively recent popularity of high magazine
capacity double-action pistols, (known colloquially as
"wondernines") is largely responsible for the renewed interest.
If those pistols had been chambered for some other cartridge, I
would be writing a different story, for the affection seems not
for the cartridge but for the pistols. The interest is almost
exclusively in the area of defense, for although the 9mm can be
used in some competitive events, the military, law enforcement
and civilians are concerned about defensive handguns.
Ammunition for the 9mm is loaded by virtually every
manufacturer in the world, and within the U.S. there are at least
25 different loads produced by the five major companies that
market factory ammunition. Bullet weights available range from 88
to 147 grains, with ball or full metal jacket (FMJ), soft point
and hollow point types routinely loaded. There is even a lead
hollow point (Federal Nyclad), although all the others are metal
jacketed types.
Table 1 (at the end of this document) lists most of the
currently available loads from American makers. Looking at this
list, is it any wonder the 9mm users could be bewildered? Most
authorities would probably agree that the 124 grain FMJ and 115
grain JHP (Jacketed Hollow Point) are the "standard" bullets and
would also classify the 115 grain JHP as the "Standard" defensive
load, but this is far from settled. There has been an extensive
debate on the subject of 9mm bullets, and it seems to me to have
done little more than further muddy already murky waters.
The unfortunate FBI shootout in Miami (April 11, 1986) has
provoked controversy and widespread discussion over the
effectiveness of the 115 grain hollow-point (HP) ammunition used
by the agents armed with 9mm pistols. Equally learned authorities
cannot agree. One camp says the round was inadequate, while the
other thinks the ammunition performed as it was intended. If a
consensus has emerged, it is that we should rethink what
constitutes adequate penetration for a handgun bullet.
The argument of 9mm vs. .45 has also been resumed but not
settled. The debate of revolver vs. automatic has not been
settled either, although law enforcement agencies across the
country are switching to the high-capacity 9mm pistol. The
thinking behind this is that the magazine capacity, "firepower,"
is an asset.
Even though the average number of rounds fired in a gunfight
has remained relatively constant at approximately three, it would
seem that civilians and law enforcement have adopted some of the
same thinking that caused the Armed Forces to switch to automatic
weapons.
Extensive research has been done on ammunition and bullet
design for the 9mm, and it has probably received more attention
than any other handgun cartridge in history. This has led to the
great variety of ammunition available and the obvious question of
which one is best. If we were to ask each manufacturer, it would
surely pick one of its own loads, but would probably be hard
pressed to defend, on an objective basis, it's choice. In fact,
the whole topic of ammunition and bullet performance is short on
objective information. There simply is no clearly best gun or
load. Much of the information circulated, even in informed
circles, is simply based upon subjective observation or opinion.
But at least one much-reported myth seems to have been
debunked. Much credence was attached to the discussion by high
velocity bullets, and it was widely reported that this was
necessary and desirable. Research reported in the Journal of the
American Medical Association (JAMA) suggests that the truth is
something else. Col. Martin L. Fackler, M.D. of the Letterman
Army Institute of Research, an acknowledged and outspoken
authority on wound ballistics, writing in the May 13, 1988 JAMA,
reported that the elastic nature of most tissue tends to prevent
serious trauma caused by hydrostatic pressure.
Another claim is that the sonic pressure wave created by a
bullet entering tissue is responsible for trauma. Dr. Fackler
draws an interesting parallel between a relatively new medical
treatment, the lithotryptor, for the age-old problem of kidney
stones and bullet impact. He writes, "A lithotryptor generates a
sonic pressure wave three times the amplitude of the one from a
penetrating small arms projectile and up to 2,000 of these waves
are used in a single treatment session, with no damage to soft
tissue surrounding the kidney stone."
The widely accepted belief that increased velocity improves
performance has led to the development of high velocity and +P+
loads for the 9mm that are similar to those developed for the .38
Special. Remington, Winchester and Federal all market controlled-
distribution loadings that are sold only to law enforcement
agencies or the U.S. government. These are loaded to pressure
levels that are above those accepted as standard by the industry.
The current SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition
Manufacturing Institute) standard for 9mm Luger ammunition
specifies a maximum product average chamber pressure of 37,400
p.s.i., but, the +P+ loads exceed this by a substantial margin. A
limit of 42,000 p.s.i. has been proposed for this ammunition. For
comparison, proof load pressure (nominal average) is set at
49,800 p.s.i. Now the situation is even further confused, for
Remington has begun to market +P 9mm Luger ammunition with a
proposed pressure limit of 38,500 p.s.i. To clarify, +P
ammunition is available for commercial sale while +P+ loads are
not.
All of this raises the question of what the civilian shooter
can use in his gun. Even though the ammunition manufacturers take
pains to insure that special law enforcement loads do not
circulate in civilian channels, it is unrealistic to expect that
some will not "leak" out. The same is certainly true for M882
service ammunition, and it is important that the civilian shooter
who encounters any of these loads be able to recognize them and
understand that this ammunition is different. M882 NATO
ammunition as loaded by Olin Corp. (Winchester) and formerly
loaded by Federal is currently specified to drive a 124 grain FMJ
bullet at 375 meters per second (1230 f.p.s.), which puts it in
nearly the same league as the various +P+ loads.
U.S.-manufactured M882 NATO 9mm ammunition can be identified
by the headstamp which, in the typical military fashion,
identifies the maker and year of production--example WCC 88 or FC
86 (signifying Western Cartridge Company, Olin Corporation's
Winchester-Western ammunition division, manufactured in 1988 or
Federal Cartridge Company, manufactured in 1986). In addition,
the current production also carries the NATO stamp of a circle
with a + sign inside of the circle. Law enforcement loads will
usually have the +P+ designation as part of the headstamp and may
have "L" or "LE" as well. We should quickly point out that
civilian use of this ammunition is discouraged by all concerned
and carries many of the same cautionary statements that were
issued for +P and +P+ .38 Spl. loads.
Winchester requires purchasers of +P+ ammunition to sign a
release which states in part: "The 9mm 115 grain +P+ cartridges
covered in this purchase order are specially loaded to achieve
higher velocity. Therefore, the pressure level is higher than
standard 9mm Luger cartridges. Individual cartridges may achieve
pressure which may approach or exceed the proof load pressure a
particular pistol may have been subjected to in factory proofing.
This cartridge is not recommended for use in any aluminum frame
and/or cylinder pistols and may cause damage to modern steel
pistols because of the higher pressures. THESE CARTRIDGES SHOULD
BE USED IN MODERN PISTOLS ONLY. CHECK THE CONDITION OF THE PISTOL
OFTEN. IF DOUBT EXISTS AS TO THE USE OF THESE CARTRIDGES IN YOUR
PISTOL, CONSULT THE PISTOL MANUFACTURER."
The demand for +P+ loadings has caused some consternation
among firearm and ammunition manufacturers and there has been
some finger pointing both ways. So, in an effort to clarify the
situation, all of the major manufacturers and importers of the
popular "wondernines" were queried about their position on the
use of NATO and +P+ ammunition in their products.
This is something of a hot potato as far as the firearms
manufacturers are concerned, and most were understandably
cautious or did not reply at all.
A Smith & Wesson spokesman indicated that S&W was not in
favor of using +P+ ammunition, although it was studying the
subject. This presents an interesting paradox, for the Illinois
State Police, one of the first agencies to ask for +P+ loadings,
is a major user of S&W pistols.
Perhaps the most telling response came from Firearms Import
& Export Corp. (F.I.E. Corp. is the importer of the TZ-75 and TZ-
75 M88 pistols). Corporate counsel Patrick M. Squire responded:
"Although these pistols are tested with proof loads in the
Italian Proof Bank at Gardone, we do not recommend a steady diet
of high pressure ammunition for any firearms. We are strongly
against trying to get .45 performance out of the 9mm Luger
cartridge, or trying to "magnumize" any of the non-magnum
calibers, as this can push the limits of predictable pressures
too close to the boundaries of safety."
Beretta replied: "Beretta is still in the process of
evaluating many of the new +P+ loads and cannot advise on their
use at this time."
Browning, on the other hand, forwarded a copy of an internal
test report in which it fired 5000 rounds of Remington +P+ 9mm
ammunition in a Browning Hi Power pistol. "Inspection of the Hi
Power system reveled no unnatural wear to the locking surfaces or
any other area. Headspace was checked and found to be
acceptable." The conclusion: "...the 9mm Hi Power system appears
to be durable enough to withstand long-range [term] shooting of
the new ammunition from Remington."
Glock is even more positive and states that its guns are
designed for continuous use with NATO ammunition and, therefore,
may be used with +P+ because, "This type of ammunition does not
exceed maximum NATO specification pressure levels and is totally
compatible to be used in Glock pistols."
In an effort to evaluate the differences between standard
and +P+ loads, samples of each were fired in Glock 17 and 19
pistols. As expected the slightly shorter barrel of the Glock 19
produced somewhat lower velocities, but the gun, which had
previously been 100% reliable with a wide variety of ammunition,
began to experience some malfunctions when shooting any of the
+P+ loads. Sometimes the slide failed to go completely into
battery, and it was felt that the slide rebounded out of battery
in a whiplash response to the higher recoil. Thorough cleaning
and lubrication did not relieve the problem. But when shooting
standard ammunition, the pistol resumed its previous faultless
level of reliability. No malfunctions occurred with the Glock 17,
regardless of ammunition. M882 ball ammunition was fired in both
guns without malfunctions. The results of the shooting tests are
shown in Table 2 {at the end of this document).
If all of this sounds like a Catch-22 situation, it is.
People with whom I have spoken at all of the companies currently
loading +P+ ammunition have remarkably similar sentiments. All
have said that they provide what their customers ask for. At
first this may sound like a cop-out, but it is undeniably true,
for the ammunition industry is driven by consumer demand. Whether
consumers are the general public or law enforcement agencies does
not matter. Competition is so fierce in the ammunition business
that all of the makers feel they must provide products that are
asked for as long as the requests are reasonable. This situation
goes back many years to the original .38 Spl. +P+ loadings
developed for federal law enforcement agencies and, as the 9mm
has been popularized, has spread into that cartridge. Nor is it
without precedent in civilian circles. Handloader have long
sought to "improve" performance, primarily by increasing velocity
which customarily results in higher pressures.
Law enforcement leaders are concerned, legitimately, with
two factors which are more than a little contradictory. They wish
to provide their officers with ammunition which will incapacitate
a determined assailant effectively, but not endanger bystanders.
They want a bullet that will adequately penetrate to reach vital
organs, but not exit and create a hazard.
Products such as the Glaser Safety Slug or other pre-
fragmented projectiles have been offered as a solution, but no
consensus exists on their effectiveness.
One relatively new development attracting much interest is
the use of heavier bullets, specifically 147 grain JHP designs,
in the 9mm. Testing has shown that this particular weight seems
to provide the best compromise of expansion and penetration. The
ammunition is loaded to subsonic velocities of between 950 and
1000 f.p.s. Both Winchester and Federal load 147 grain
ammunition, but only Federal's is available to the general
public.
When Federal introduced its new Hydra-Shok line of premium
handgun ammunition, it originally offered the 147 grain bullet to
law enforcement in a +P+ load, but pressures were only slightly
above Federal's limits for standard loads. Testing found a
combination of components that reduced pressure to acceptable
levels and the ammunition is marketed for general sale. There is,
however, no conclusive evidence that the 147 grain loads perform
better than more conventional ammunition in actual shooting
situations.
Obviously all of this effort is directed at shooting human
targets, and this is where the research problems arise. While it
is possible to make a bullet perform practically any way you want
it to in a test medium such as ballistic gelatin, no two human
shootings are exactly alike and the intangibles often outweigh
the simple factors of penetration or expansion. In September,
1987, the FBI conducted a workshop on wound ballistics that
reached the following conclusion: "Except for hits to the central
nervous system, reliable and reproducible instant incapacitation
is not possible with any handgun bullet."
One of the participants, Sgt. Evan Marshall of the Detroit
Police Dept., commented, "It is often very difficult to
successfully produce incapacitation without producing death."
Over the many years that I have been shooting, I have
observed a lot of changes in both guns and ammunition and view
the modern expanding handgun bullet as a major advance. But they
are not the complete solution, for it is impossible to predict
how much, or even if, a bullet will reliably expand. In order for
a handgun to be a totally effective defensive weapon, vital
organs must be hit. It is desirable for the ammunition to expend
most or all of its energy in the target, but again this is not
entirely predictable.
While increasing bullet velocity increases energy, it is
questionable whether this is really meaningful in practical
terms. A 200 f.p.s. increase in velocity (about what you get
going from standard to +P+ 9mm ammunition) does not guarantee
significantly better results in actual shooting situations. When
you consider that this gain, roughly 15%, is accomplished at an
increase in pressure that could be as much as 33%, it makes me
wonder if it is all worthwhile.
A source familiar with the ammunition purchases of law
enforcement agencies agrees and reports that interest in the +P+
loads is limited. Some agencies are firmly committed to it, but
far more are looking at the improved standard velocity loads from
all the major makers as well as the 147 grain loads available
from Federal and Winchester. Very limited testing of the new
Remington +P 9mm load indicates that we may see a similar
situation to +P .38 Spl. ammunition. It produces a meaningful
energy increase at the expense of a relatively small rise in
pressure.
It would appear that the solution to the problem of
ammunition lies not with the ammunition at all, but with the
marksmanship of those using it. Evan Marshall began his
discussion of ammunition with a simple statement: "There are no
super bullets." A handgun is a compromise necessitated by
circumstances, but shooters subject themselves to more recoil and
noise, and their guns to exaggerated stress, in the mistaken
belief that velocity alone will magically "improve" handgun
performance. So, instead of searching for super bullets or higher
velocity, why not accept the limitations of handguns and
concentrate on marksmanship?
-= TABLES ACCOMPANYING THIS ARTICLE =-
TABLE 1
Factory ballistic data for U.S.-
made 9mm ammunition fired in 4 inch
test barrel.
BULLET MUZZLE
WEIGHT BULLET VELOCITY
MANUFACTURER (grains) TYPE (feet per second)
------------ -------- ---------- -----------------
FEDERAL 124 H-S 1120
FEDERAL 147 H-S 1050
FEDERAL 124 FMJ 1120
FEDERAL 124 FMJ MATCH 1120
FEDERAL 124 LHP NYCLAD 1120
FEDERAL 115 JHP 1160
FEDERAL 115 FMJ 1160
FEDERAL 95 JSP 1300
HORNADY 90 JHP 1360
HORNADY 100 FMJ 1220
HORNADY 115 JHP 1155
HORNADY 115 FMJ 1155
HORNADY 124 FMJ-FP 1110
HORNADY 124 FMJ-RN 1110
REMINGTON 88 JHP 1500
REMINGTON 115 FMJ 1135
REMINGTON 115 JHP 1155
REMINGTON 115 JHP +P 1235
REMINGTON 124 FMJ 1110
CCI LAWMAN 115 JHP 1155
CCI BLAZER 115 JHP 1155
CCI BLAZER 115 TMJ 1155
CCI BLAZER 124 TMJ 1155
WINCHESTER 115 FMJ 1155
WINCHESTER 115 STHP 1225
Velocities are instrumental at 10 ft. and are the average of
three 10-shot strings with each ammunition type. Abbreviations,
FMJ (full metal jacket), JHP (jacket hollow point), LHP (lead
hollow point), STHP (silvertip hollow point), JSP (jacketed soft
point), TMJ (totally metal jacketed) and H-S means Hydra-Shok.
TABLE 2
Actual chronographed velocity
for factory 9mm ammunition.
Bullet S&W M5904 S&W
M6906
Weight Bullet 4" barrel 3.5"
barrel
Manufacturer (grains) Type (f.p.s.) (f.p.s.)
------------ -------- ------ ---------
----------
HORNADY 124 FMJ 1129 1090
HORNADY 100 FMJ 1140 1089
HORNADY 115 JHP 1108 1061
HORNADY 90 JHP 1260 1220
REMINGTON 88 JHP 1412 1386
REMINGTON 115 JHP 1135 1113
REMINGTON 115 JHP +P 1245 1223
REMINGTON 115 JHP +P+* 1319 1276
REMINGTON 124 FMJ 1064 1041
CCI LAWMAN 115 JHP 1140 1119
CCI BLAZER 115 JHP 1136 1103
WINCHESTER 115 STHP 1117 1084
WINCHESTER 115 JHP +P+* 1313 1265
WINCHESTER 147 JHP * 958 926
FEDERAL 95 JSP 1225 1186
FEDERAL 115 JHP 1070 1042
FEDERAL 115 JHP +P+* 1270 1210
FEDERAL 124 H-S 1077 1025
FEDERAL 124 H-S+P+* 1135 1122
FEDERAL 147 H-S 1000 959
FEDERAL NYCLAD 124 LHP 1079 1043
* Indicates ammunition available only to government or
law enforcement agencies.
TABLE 3
Comparison of standard and +P+ loads.
Standard
Load +P+* M882 NATO
115 gr. JHP 115 gr. JHP 124 gr.
FMJ
Test Gun: Glock 17 (f.p.s.) (f.p.s.) (f.p.s.)
Winchester 1130 1391 1229
Federal 1171 1333 1219
Remington 1154 1328 Not
Loaded
Test Gun: Glock 19
Winchester 1117 1359 1184
Federal 1147 1302 1203
Remington 1114 1307 Not
Loaded
* Indicates ammunition available only to government or
law enforcement agencies.
-= End of article =-
Gary
#
# Not at all
#
# #First of all, the kB! phenomenon (Dean Speir's term) has never been attributed to 9mm Glocks, like the G26.
#
# That is because of the relatively small 9mm chamber. If you use +P+,
# as the poster mentions, it certainly becomes an issue. I specifically
# mentioned "serious loads".
If by "serious loads" you mean homemade loads that are outside SAAMI
specs, then they are dangerous in any gun. Otherwise, please present
evidence of your claim.
#
# # Secondly, the research I've read (which I would >recommend for your reading as well) indicates the kB!'s are associated
# #with specific circumstances involving yes, the unsupported chamber, but
# #also in a big way, the characteristics of the ammo used.
#
# Like +P+??? You would have to be crazy to use a hot load in a Glock.
Certainly you know that's not what I mean. Why not read the research I
mentioned in my original post?
#
# # To tell >rec.gunners that "sooner or later a case will blow out" is ill-advised
# #and simply wrong.
#
# If he was talking about using low pressure 9mm loads exclusively,
# perhaps. But he was specifically talking about +P+, which a Glock is
# not capable of handling.
See above.
--
Regards,
Gary
Albert Brodinsky
##That is because of the relatively small 9mm chamber. If you use +P+,
##as the poster mentions, it certainly becomes an issue. I specifically
##mentioned "serious loads".
#
#What do you mean by "the relatively small chamber". I've heard of tight
#chambers, fully supported chambers and partially supported chambers. This is
#the first time I have heard the claim that there are no Kb's with the Glock 9mm
#because of "the relatively small chamber".
#
#Perhaps you mean that it's more difficult to overload the smaller 9mm
#cartridge? BTW the Glock 9mm chamber is more fully supported than their .40,
#and .45 chambers. Don't you think that might be the reason that Kb's have not
#been reported in the Glock 9mm guns?
#
Yes, the reason that the chamber is more fully supported is that the
9mm chamber is much smaller, thus there is a lesser area unsupported.
I thought this was rather obvious. By the way, it is easier to
(accidentally) overload a 9mm than a .45, since the .45 is a much
more efficient stopper a much lower pressures. Look at the SAMMI specs
for max pressures allowed.
### Secondly, the research I've read (which I would >recommend for your reading
##as well) indicates the kB!'s are associated
###with specific circumstances involving yes, the unsupported chamber, but
###also in a big way, the characteristics of the ammo used.
#
##Like +P+??? You would have to be crazy to use a hot load in a Glock.
#
#Really? You seem to be the only one that knows that Glocks can't handle +P+.
#Perhaps you could educate us with something other than your opinions and ill
#conceived conclusions?
#
There are many sources of information on this topic, not the least of
which is Glock. In addition, I have personally witnessed two Glock
kB's, one in a .40 and one in a 9.
Face it, the Glock is merely a redesign of the old Browning-Petter
system, which was (and still is) incapable of handling large caliber
(or hot small caliber) loads. This reason is that, in order to ensure
reliable feeding in this system, the chamber ends up being compromised
by the feed ramp/turnover.
Al
VCopelan
#There are many sources of information on this topic, not the least of
#which is Glock. In addition, I have personally witnessed two Glock
#kB's, one in a .40 and one in a 9.
Where have you read that Glock is warning the users of their 9mm guns not to
use +P+? I've read warning about the 20 something Glocks but that's all.
However, those warning usually concern using lead bullets with the polygonal
Glock 40 barrel. There are plenty of aftermarket barrels with tighter
chambers/more support and land & groove rifling if your interested in using
non-copper clad bullets in a Glock.
#Face it, the Glock is merely a redesign of the old Browning-Petter
#system, which was (and still is) incapable of handling large caliber
#(or hot small caliber) loads. This reason is that, in order to ensure
#reliable feeding in this system, the chamber ends up being compromised
#by the feed ramp/turnover.
You do know that there are several gun which use the same modified browning
lockup as Glock and they have fully supported chambers. We really don't hear
about feeding problems with those gun either. The H&K USP, SIGs and Walthers
have fully supported chambers. BTW Kb's happen with 1911's too. Even
Para-Ordinance. Any gun can KB but to single out Glock (a 9mm Glock at that)
and the modified Browning lockup looks more like the rantings of a Glock hater.
Just come out and say it! You believe that the only "real" gun is a 1911.
Todd Louis Green
all in rec.guns:
#If by "serious loads" you mean homemade loads that are outside SAAMI
#specs, then they are dangerous in any gun. Otherwise, please present
#evidence of your claim.
Plenty of guns are designed to handle NATO-spec ammunition. A
great deal of NATO-spec 9mm ammunition is "outside SAAMI specs,"
specifically it has a higher Mean Average Pressure at the chamber
than the 38.5kpsi allowed for by the highest 9x19mm SAAMI
specification (for 9mm +p). There is no SAAMI specification for +p+
ammunition in any caliber.
Use of +p+ 9mm ammunition will accelerate wear in any gun,
compared to "standard" (<35kpsi) 9mm ammunition. But that doesn't
make them dangerous ... unless the bullet flies in your general
direction upon discharge. Accidental, negligent, or purposeful. <g>
--
Todd Louis Green, m...@greent.com CALIBERS - The Handgun
Ammunition Information
Beretta-L Resource
http://greent.com/beretta http://greent.com/40Page
--
usm...@webtv.net
David Steuber
-> My advice: check with the manufacturer. If their +P+ load uses a pressure lower than the NATO maximum, then the load is safe
-> to use.
What is the NATO maximum? My Speer manual says the industry max is
35,000 PSI. Does NATO go over that?
--
David Steuber | david at david-steuber dot com preferred
SAJ7580C2 | If you reply to me and the group, please say so
"There was a boy called Eustace Clarence Scrubb, and he almost deserved
it."
-- C. S. Lewis, The Chronicles of Narnia
William P.N. Smith
#I wrote:
## Do Glocks have any trouble with +P+ ammo?
#If your ammo is the Federal Hydrashok +P+ or Winchester Ranger Talon +P+,
#the answer is, yes.
Remington 9mm 115 grain +P+ hollow point ammunition. Kinda looks like
a cheaply made Hydra-Shok.
#Ask the vendor what the operating pressure of the ammo is.
"Maximum average pressure (approximately 40,000 C.U.P.) is 20%-25%
higher than industry standard".
Thanks for all the discussion!
Walt&Ann
Scott C wrote:
> ...
Albert Brodinsky
#B.T.W. a "Para" as a "Serious Gun"? R.O.T.F. L.O.L.!!!!!
#
#Big Bear
#
#
Bear
Go to the next USPSA/IPSC match in your area and see how
many serious shooters use Paras, and how many don't use Glocks.
Al
Todd Louis Green
<abrod...@excite.com> wrote to all in rec.guns:
#>#B.T.W. a "Para" as a "Serious Gun"? R.O.T.F. L.O.L.!!!!!
#
#Go to the next USPSA/IPSC match in your area and see how
#many serious shooters use Paras, and how many don't use Glocks.
When's the last time you saw a serious shooter at an IPSC
match? <g> IPSC shooters use guns which are chosen for winning IPSC
matches. I don't believe "winning IPSC matches" ranks as "serious"
for the original poster.
Go to the next IDPA match in your area and see how many serious
shooters use Glocks, SIGs, Berettas, even revolvers ... and how many
don't use race guns.
--
Todd Louis Green, m...@greent.com CALIBERS - The Handgun
Ammunition Information
Beretta-L Resource
http://greent.com/beretta http://greent.com/40Page
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Steuber
-> Go to the next IDPA match in your area and see how many serious
-> shooters use Glocks, SIGs, Berettas, even revolvers ... and how many
-> don't use race guns.
For competitions that are intended to simulate real world conditions,
it makes the most sense to require all the equipment to be typical of
everyday carry.
--
David Steuber | david at david-steuber dot com preferred
SAJ7580C2 | If you reply to me and the group, please say so
Think of your family tonight. Try to crawl home after the computer
crashes.