Heavy and Slow or Light and Fast?

[Dozer]

In general, heavier bullets travel slower and lighter bullets travel faster (obviously) for a given caliber. I believe that the loads are developed to keep the pressures within a specific range that is designed into the cartridge. The ballistic data for specific bullets usually show that the energy levels for lighter, faster bullets exceeds that of heavier, slower bullets. I have always been with the school of thought that states "the heavier bullet translates into better stopping power". I have heard stories about light and fast bullets that go all the way through a target (bad guy) but don't stop the threat because the energy was not transfered efficiently. I have also heard the stories about a big, fat, 230gr .45ACP hitting the target in the hand and knocking them down. Now, with the advent of high tech bullets of various weights that reliably expand and transfer their energy at various speeds, does the old school of thought still hold true? Would you now want the bullet with the most muzzle energy (ie lighter, faster)? I reload my own ammo to practice with so it becomes important to choose the weight of the reloads to match the weight of the carry rounds. Any thoughts??

[bossbird]

My school of thought is "speed kills". But I don't have any special knowledge at all on the subject. I will say this. The "GOLD STANDARD" for stopping power is the 125gr 357 magnum. The 357 mag will shoot heavier bullets and lighter bullets than the 125gr.. But the gold standard is the 125gr. So I would say a good balance of speed and weight should be the best for a particular caliber. Not the heaviest, not the lightest. For whatever caliber you look at I think somewhere in the middle would give you both. Adequate speed and adequate weight.

[lv2tinker]

Here is a link to a "very" interesting read. Be sure to click on the various other links embedded in the article as it will shead additional information on your ballistic questions.
Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo (http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm)

Cheers....

[Dozer]

That was a very interesting article indeed! Very informative. I will be refering to the article in the future when I buy my next box of carry ammo. So, it looks like heavy and slow(er) with the right bullet design is the way to go.

[bossbird]

Try this link. It is a very basic and simple article but I think the writer hits the nail on the head.

Bullet Weight vs. Velocity - striking the right balance is important | LearnAboutGuns.com* (http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/09/14/bullet-weight-vs-velocity-striking-the-right-balance-is-important/)

[johnh]

That AR15.com thread is really worth reading. I have tended towards heavier bullets over the years, in particular with .45 where I always use 230s. In a 9 I have been using 124s and 135s lately. Once I get setup to reload 9 I will probably work up some 147 JHP loads to play with.

John

[tv_racin_fan]

I generally prefer the slighty heavier bullets for caliber. I currently carry Federal HST 9mm 147 grn JHPs and the wife is carrying Federal HST 9mm 124 grn JHPs. I was only able to aquire one box of each so I haven't tested them as I would like. My intention is to test all the various Federal HST variations and to then stock up on whichever version performs best in all of our various Kahr 9mm handguns, and then find a FMJ round that shoots to the same POI. What I did was allow the wife to shoot one mag of each thru her CW9 to see if the increased recoil would be an issue for her as compared to the 115 grainers we generally shoot.

[zena]

How about the affect of seasonal clothing vs. weight of a bullet? I've heard some talk (here in the Northeast) that people change their carry ammo according to how heavily dressed (or not) the potential bad guy may be.:confused: Can it really make that much of a difference?

[ltxi]

How about the affect of seasonal clothing vs. weight of a bullet? I've heard some talk (here in the Northeast) that people change their carry ammo according to how heavily dressed (or not) the potential bad guy may be.:confused: Can it really make that much of a difference?

Yes(!)....but it's much more of a bullet design issue than weight.

[zena]

So, in 9mm, 115 FMJ vs. 147 hollow point, is the FMJ going to penetrate clothing layers better due to it's configuration?

[Dozer]

I believe that the kinetic energy is the part that does the clothing penetration, and the bullet design determines the expansion. In many cases, the JHP will not expand after filling the hollow point with layers of cloth. The FMJ, on the other hand, is not designed to expand, just to make holes. There is a new breed of bullets on the forefront of design today: they expand reliably in soft tissue after passing through several layers of clothing. Hornady Critical Defense (Hornady (http://www.hornady.com/story.php?s=786) is one of those.

[ltxi]

Zena...as Dozer noted, it's not quite as simple as FMJ vs HP. And bullet weight, within reason, isn't primary. Without going into great length on the subject.....given the same powder charge and weight, FMJ provides penetration. HPs such as HydraShok strike a good balance between penetration and expansion in tissue, but can become clogged by heavy outerwear and function pretty much as a FMJ. Later/current design bullets such as Gold Dot and Federal HST are designed to overcome the initial barrier issue a/r and then still expand as necessary in tissue.

So, yes.....climate change is, or used to be, a consideration. Not so much anymore.