115g vs 124g AMMO

[RustVendor]

This is also the case, but I've shot most of the big brands like Magtech, S&B, Federal, CCI, Super Vel, etc. and has been the case. At least for me, anecdotal can only get you so far

I dunno, maybe they load the heavys at lower pressure to stay subsonic and it doesn't burn as hot. But it can be a difference of almost a full grain of powder less for 147s vs 115s if you use titegroup for instance. I haven't honestly noticed but I don't have any ported or comped guns which is where you would see it, I never honestly think about how dirty ammo is I just clean every 1k or so

 

[Skilly]

I don't feel or see much of a difference (if it all). I do want to try 147 (subsonic) - found a cheap source for it. If anything, it will be quieter without the sonic boom. Isnt it used by law enforcement for stopping power?

 

[RustVendor]

I don't feel or see much of a difference (if it all). I do want to try 147 (subsonic) - found a cheap source for it. If anything, it will be quieter without the sonic boom. Isnt it used by law enforcement for stopping power?

There's as many theories about "stopping power" as there are grains of sand in the sea, but the one that makes sense to me is that hollow points require a certain velocity to be effective. This applies to rifle ammunition as well and especially the non tox hunting bullets we use in CA. But the fast the bullet is going the more it's going to open up, I think the Federal HST and similar have been designed to open at lower velocities than bullets in the 80s so it may not matter much anymore, but federal HSTs in 147s are going 1000 fps per the box. They don't appear to have a +p in 147s but in 124 +p you have a box velocity of 1200 or 1150 for regular pressure. In some of those ballistic gel tests I believe the 147s tend to penetrate more due to less expansion and the 124s expand more but penetrate less. Is one actually more effective than the other? who knows honestly they will probably both mess you up.

 

[rx_6jr]

If we’re talking standard readily available factory ammo none of them are loaded significantly differently enough to really tell too much of a difference in felt recoil to 99% of shooters with a naturally aspirated gun.

Once you get into heavily ported or comped guns, custom hand reloads, boutique loads like competition loads from like Supervel or formula shooting, or something like that then yes you notice a difference.

Anecdotally, 124g FMJ from something like S&B tends to feed reliably out of almost any factory gun I’ve ever shot. PMC 115 is similar, but doesn’t have as stellar a track record with me personally.

would a gun with 4 holes ported into the barrel require 124?

 

[rx_6jr]

Generally the higher the grainage the softer it feels. On the flip side the higher the grainage the dirtier your guns gets. Compensated and ported guns see this the worst. I shoot 124 and 147 most of the time in my ported guns and they get much dirtier quicker than 115

how does 115 feel on your ported gun vs a 124? is the difference noticeable?

 

[Z Arms LLC]

how does 115 feel on your ported gun vs a 124? is the difference noticeable?

So I shoot around 1k rounds every 2-3 weeks meaning I have enough trigger time to feel the ever so slight difference. For the general shooter who shoots maybe 1-2k rounds a year they probably won't.

The biggest difference I've felt between 115 and 124 is Sellier & Bellot, Super Vel, and Magtech

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

There's as many theories about "stopping power" as there are grains of sand in the sea, but the one that makes sense to me is that hollow points require a certain velocity to be effective. This applies to rifle ammunition as well and especially the non tox hunting bullets we use in CA. But the fast the bullet is going the more it's going to open up, I think the Federal HST and similar have been designed to open at lower velocities than bullets in the 80s so it may not matter much anymore, but federal HSTs in 147s are going 1000 fps per the box. They don't appear to have a +p in 147s but in 124 +p you have a box velocity of 1200 or 1150 for regular pressure. In some of those ballistic gel tests I believe the 147s tend to penetrate more due to less expansion and the 124s expand more but penetrate less. Is one actually more effective than the other? who knows honestly they will probably both mess you up.

I tend to use S&B 115 and 124 exclusively for training as I found both of them to be decent ammo, at a decent price, and fairly clean as well.
All 3 of CCW guns use the same ammo Federal HST 147. That ammo is pricey which is why I use S&B for training. Ideally I would train with the same HST but it's not that cost effective to do so.

 

[rx_6jr]

I tend to use S&B 115 and 124 exclusively for training as I found both of them to be decent ammo, at a decent price, and fairly clean as well.
All 3 of CCW guns use the same ammo Federal HST 147. That ammo is pricey which is why I use S&B for training. Ideally I would train with the same HST but it's not that cost effective to do so.

do you notice a difference in the 115 and 124?

 

[HarleyLowRiderST]

do you notice a difference in the 115 and 124?

The 115gr feels a bit more snappy compared to the 124gr in my P365X and G43X. In the G19, G17, VP9 I cannot tell the difference.
I try to use the 115gr for the larger barrels and keep the 124gr for the two smaller barrels.

My P365x is one of my CCW guns, and the difference is most noticable with that one.

I do like S&B as the price is right, and I like the 50 round packs for range use as 5 mags per gun x 3 guns and I'm in and out of the indoor range.

 

[Wolkenflieger]

115gr has a higher muzzle velocity generally and has more felt recoil.

124gr is a little slower with less felt recoil.

This of course depends on the gun too, where small and light 9mm guns (like a P365) mitigate recoil less than big heavy steel-framed guns like a TS2.

CZ tests with S&B 124gr so that's what I prefer and the guns shoot softer with this slower ammo.

At this point I've tested a lot of different guns as I'm too curious for my own good; Erebus, Platy, CZ SP-01, Shadow 2 and S2C, P365, PCR, P-10 C Ported, and more.

Generally a higher velocity or higher energy round is better for ported guns, as long as the energy is within spec per manufacturer guidelines.

S&B runs well through any 9mm I've shot.

 

[drinktothat421]

Shoot both see what you like.

 

[seanjq]

115s are snappier in general - higher muzzle velocity and quicker slide cycling.

 

[Jeffro_510]

what about your non comp guns?

I think non comped still shoot flatter.
115 is definitely snappier, but not uncontrollable.
Certain 115s wont cycle through my XC reliably, i dont think ive ever had an issue with 124s
I probably shoot 1500-2000 rounds a month, and I know my guns very well.

 

[Makoman]

As others have said, probably not much difference, though I prefer 124 for SD loads.

That said, I've settled on 124 grain mainly because back in the day, (early 90's) my first 9mm pistol was a Beretta 92 and I recall reading how the Beretta 92, Sig 226, and G17 were developed around the 9mm NATO round, and that the sights were regulated for that ammo, which is 124 grain.

The main thing is to shoot the ammo you settle on for defense, see how it prints for you, and what type of sight hold that ammo requires to put the bullets where you aim. Then try to find range ammo that comes as close as possible to mimicking that performance.

If you use a RDS of some kind, then of course you don't necessarily have to rely on matching the Ammo to your iron sites, you can adjust the reticle to your ammo.

 

[Davis378]

Well it's 9 more powerful, isn't it?