Federal HST 147 gr for all my pistols

[J4Me]

Need some advice from the more experienced. I have a Glock 17, a Beretta Nano, and a XDS in 9 mm. I'd like to consolidate to one round for all three and am strongly considering the Federal HST 147 gr (non +P). Assuming the round cycles and functions correctly is there any reason not to go this route?

 

[GPD177]

Most all modern hollowpoints are about as good as the others. The most important thing is reliability in your chosen platform, followed by shot placement. "Terminal Performance" would be a distant third. The only thing that I would insist on is a bonded bullet. Jacket-core separation is in my opinion where most of the issues would arise.

 

[in625shooter]

Any 9mm JHP specifically the 147 gr are more reliable than they were 25 plus years ago when they first came out. The whole 9mm failure myth is loosely carried on from those distant issues. Recent "incidents" with newer 9mm JHP have been VERY successful. The ammunition companies have in the last 15 plus years gotten the velocity/alloy mixture for reliable expansion down. With the advent of all the sub compact 9mm's there is a huge market now of non + P 9mm. About all the major brands Gold Dot, Federal and Remington offer the same versions in both.

Like GPD177 stated make sure your loading works in your firearm and the rest will fall into place.

 

[STEEL CORE]

Fed 147 Gr HST is a great performance round, a year ago in Delaware County (Muncie) I witnessed tests of the Federal HST brand (.40/.45/9mm.357 sig) through Sig test Pistols. The 147 gr 9mm test was impressive in the proper 12- 14 in penetration of balistic gel through denim (FBI Protocol). The 165 gr Federal .40 HST round was also tested and the test administrator brought to all Officers attending's attention to the fact that the test results of the 165 gr .40 HST round and the 147 gr 9mm HST round (all things considered), produced almost identical results. Basicaly .40 performance in a 9mm round. Trust me I was impressed.

 

[cosermann]

Hand gun bullets are designed to function best within a fuzzy velocity envelope, and most of the published tests that you see are 4" barrels.

Velocity is correlated w/barrel length, which is why some mfg have specific loads for short barreled handguns.

See the note on "barrel length implications" on this page - Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo

So, the farther you get under 3.5" of barrel, like with the Beretta Nano's 3" barrel (or the 3" barreled XD models), the more likely the bullet may not expand as designed. It should still penetrate adequately, it just may not be as likely to expand.

You could do some testing to validate the performance with your short-barreled guns.

 

[venenoindy]

I would not hesitate to carry that round in any of my handguns, I do have some in that flavor but also like to have other brands and weights.

 

[nm0369]

Hand gun bullets are designed to function best within a fuzzy velocity envelope, and most of the published tests that you see are 4" barrels.

Velocity is correlated w/barrel length, which is why some mfg have specific loads for short barreled handguns.

See the note on "barrel length implications" on this page - Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo

So, the farther you get under 3.5" of barrel, like with the Beretta Nano's 3" barrel (or the 3" barreled XD models), the more likely the bullet may not expand as designed. It should still penetrate adequately, it just may not be as likely to expand.

You could do some testing to validate the performance with your short-barreled guns.

I'm thinking the same thing in regards to your two short barrel pistols. You're likely to see less than optimal performance from a heavy for caliber round in a barrel shorter than 4". For your application (no +p loads), I would lean towards the 124gr HST.

 

[J4Me]

Thanks, guys

 

[bw210]

Federal HST is my preferred round in any of my EDC's. As for expansion, I have no troubles in expansion in very soft media using 3" barreled EMP. I absolutely would use 147gr over 124gr any day of the week.

 

[Hohn]

Another vote for the 147gr HST being the do-all 9mm. IN a truly TINY 9mm, I'd want to do some testing, sure-- but for the most part I'd say you're home free and anything over 3" bbl

 

[WebHobbit]

HST is my choice as well...

While I understand the 147 has come a long way since the early failures I still harbor some trust issues with it. For one thing the 124 grain weight was the original loading for the caliber and I just can't see going heavier (and slower) than the original loading. I would opt for 115 before I would 147. I think the 124 is the best choice. I also can't see any reason NOT to go for the slight velocity advantage of +P. 9mm+P is a fairly mild recoiling round so why NOT? I think I'd be hard pressed to tell the difference in a blind test with my XDm 3.8 shooting the 124+P versus the 124 standard. Maybe with a MUCH lighter gun?

 

[netsecurity]

HST is my choice as well...

While I understand the 147 has come a long way since the early failures I still harbor some trust issues with it. For one thing the 124 grain weight was the original loading for the caliber and I just can't see going heavier (and slower) than the original loading. I would opt for 115 before I would 147. I think the 124 is the best choice. I also can't see any reason NOT to go for the slight velocity advantage of +P. 9mm+P is a fairly mild recoiling round so why NOT? I think I'd be hard pressed to tell the difference in a blind test with my XDm 3.8 shooting the 124+P versus the 124 standard. Maybe with a MUCH lighter gun?

On compact pistols you can definitely notice the extra pressure. It produces more snappy recoil. My experience has been that the 147gr is a smoother shooting bullet with less recoil. I carry 147gr, 124gr+P, and 124gr HST, as well as 147gr Ranger Talons, which I think might be the smoothest of all.

All I know for certain is that 147gr will penetrate much deeper, and that it will mushroom larger. i believe the higher velocity 124gr will mushroom quicker and is less likely to over penetrate, which is why I'm using it for the summer. But I do believe 147gr is probably the best all around bullet, simply because I'd rather over penetrate than not penetrate enough.

Your biggest issue will probably be whether the Nano will cycle the longer 147gr. I'm just guessing here, but I would suspect problems with it--or at least you won't have problems with the others. It all depends on the feed ramp really.

 

[WebHobbit]

Well my XDm IS a compact....but not a subcompact

 

[netsecurity]

To me 124gr NATO (+P) rounds made my full size M&P feel like my compact, which is to say a mild increase in recoil. And the same rounds in my M&P9C aren't very fun to shoot on the range due to their snappiness.

I once bought a thousands rounds of NATO ball 9mm (+P) on sale, so I shot them on and off for several months. I actually tested about five different brands of 9mm range ammo during that time to seem which ones were the most accurate, and it was not the NATO loads (presumably due to recoil), but they were all similar.

 

[WebHobbit]

Well recoil is pretty subjective. Up until my recent switch to 9mm autos I was used to shooting full power .357 Magnums in J-Frames and SP101s. That is a whole other level of recoil than ANY 9mm auto-pistol! So to me 9mm +P has very little recoil.

 

[walleyepw]

Shot placement is 1st. I you don't hit your intended target, no bullet can do the job. I personally like the Federal HST, but there are many other good choices of personal defense rounds available.

 

[in625shooter]

HST is my choice as well...

While I understand the 147 has come a long way since the early failures I still harbor some trust issues with it. For one thing the 124 grain weight was the original loading for the caliber and I just can't see going heavier (and slower) than the original loading. I would opt for 115 before I would 147. I think the 124 is the best choice. I also can't see any reason NOT to go for the slight velocity advantage of +P. 9mm+P is a fairly mild recoiling round so why NOT? I think I'd be hard pressed to tell the difference in a blind test with my XDm 3.8 shooting the 124+P versus the 124 standard. Maybe with a MUCH lighter gun?

Totally understand most folks hesitation however the new 147 gr are not what they use to be. They penetrate deeper and expand/perform once they hit that they did. And the way the projectile performs/opens up is the most important factor, velocity don't matter as long as it's not too fast or too slow. Just enough so everything is JUST RIGHT (think Goldie locks). All of the companies have done a great job getting that balance down with about all of the bullet weights.

 

[Hohn]

Totally understand most folks hesitation however the new 147 gr are not what they use to be. They penetrate deeper and expand/perform once they hit that they did. And the way the projectile performs/opens up is the most important factor, velocity don't matter as long as it's not too fast or too slow. Just enough so everything is JUST RIGHT (think Goldie locks). All of the companies have done a great job getting that balance down with about all of the bullet weights.

Definitely agree on the "Goldilocks" aspect. Most of the modern "duty" loads are pretty optimal out of the box because the bullets are designed for the expected velocities from common barrel lengths. The difference between bullet weights isn't very big any more.

But there's an important corollary to this fact. Namely, those who load bullets at vastly different (usually faster) speeds may be giving you LESS performance. Speer kicks out a Gold Dot that it thinks is in the 'sweet spot" in the factory form. But some handloader or boutique ammo company will come along and "improve" the round by loading it 100-200fps faster than the factory loading.

The testing I've seen so far implies that most of the time, this makes the round LESS effective. More muzzle energy does NOT always equal better terminal ballistic performance (which pains me, as a 10mm guy to admit!). A bullet that optimized for 400lb-ft can be more effective than a severely compromised design at 475lb-ft.

Perhaps the worst offenders are guys using 9mm JHPs in .357Sig cartridges and the 10mm guys pushing .40 loads to nuclear levels.


ALL that to say that the "tuning" that goes into making a 147gr round effective is fairly complex. It's certainly a lot more than just making the 115gr or 124gr bullets longer.
As a result, the modern 147s are a very capable round.

And the testing I've seen of the HSTs shows the +p version to penetrate LESS than the standard pressure 147 HST. Again-- more is not always more. Sometimes more is less.

 

[WebHobbit]

Well I for one would rather risk under penetration than over.

 

[Hohn]

Well I for one would rather risk under penetration than over.

Why?