Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
Originally Posted By: Ws6
If you have a pistol that is so small that you can't control it because you can't grip it properly, either figure out how to properly manage it, or get a pistol big enough to fight with, is my .02.
...... or get what I currently use, that being Ruger ARX Polycase 80+p grain ammo for my sub-compact 9mm. Definitely more controllable / lighter recoil ammo, that keeps me more on-target / improved accuracy. These bulets faired very well in gel tests done at truthaboutgunsdotcom, using the Ruger's virtual twin-sister bullet, that being the Polycase ARX Inceptors.
There appears to be mixed reviews/opinions here on the 147gr's felt-recoil, in comparison to the very commonly used 115 and 124gr varieties. So I will venture over to Bass Pro Shop to purchase the 147gr Hornady Custom HPs and conduct my own testing on how those 147s recoil, in comparison to the 80+ps - 115s and 124s.
Thanks everyone for their opinions here.
The mixed reviews are due to different powder being used by various companies. The RA9T is confirmed as a soft shooter in my book, and by others who have opined on it. I have always heard that, tested it, agreed. It's more of a "shove" than a "snap", as it were.
The Polycase ARX is not as effective, terminally, as a quality JHP. This is because the velocities involved (14-1500fps) are insufficient to cause TSC to be an actual wounding mechanism. Below about 1800fps or so, the only tissue a bullet will destroy, is tissue that it physically touches (gross skewing out of the norm lowers this to around 1500fps, in the case of .78 caliber soft lead musket balls that flatten on impact, etc. and displace tissue very violently, so yes, there are exceptions, but a pointy little 9mm isn't one).
Basically, you're shooting FMJ that looks sexy in gel, and might create a larger permanent cavity than a round-nose fmj, but not one that extends beyond 0.355" or so of the caliber diameter.
The only reason this round is "impressive" in gel is because gel shows TSC, even when it's below meaningful thresholds of velocity in actual tissue.
Originally Posted By: Ws6
If you have a pistol that is so small that you can't control it because you can't grip it properly, either figure out how to properly manage it, or get a pistol big enough to fight with, is my .02.
...... or get what I currently use, that being Ruger ARX Polycase 80+p grain ammo for my sub-compact 9mm. Definitely more controllable / lighter recoil ammo, that keeps me more on-target / improved accuracy. These bulets faired very well in gel tests done at truthaboutgunsdotcom, using the Ruger's virtual twin-sister bullet, that being the Polycase ARX Inceptors.
There appears to be mixed reviews/opinions here on the 147gr's felt-recoil, in comparison to the very commonly used 115 and 124gr varieties. So I will venture over to Bass Pro Shop to purchase the 147gr Hornady Custom HPs and conduct my own testing on how those 147s recoil, in comparison to the 80+ps - 115s and 124s.
Thanks everyone for their opinions here.
The mixed reviews are due to different powder being used by various companies. The RA9T is confirmed as a soft shooter in my book, and by others who have opined on it. I have always heard that, tested it, agreed. It's more of a "shove" than a "snap", as it were.
The Polycase ARX is not as effective, terminally, as a quality JHP. This is because the velocities involved (14-1500fps) are insufficient to cause TSC to be an actual wounding mechanism. Below about 1800fps or so, the only tissue a bullet will destroy, is tissue that it physically touches (gross skewing out of the norm lowers this to around 1500fps, in the case of .78 caliber soft lead musket balls that flatten on impact, etc. and displace tissue very violently, so yes, there are exceptions, but a pointy little 9mm isn't one).
Basically, you're shooting FMJ that looks sexy in gel, and might create a larger permanent cavity than a round-nose fmj, but not one that extends beyond 0.355" or so of the caliber diameter.
The only reason this round is "impressive" in gel is because gel shows TSC, even when it's below meaningful thresholds of velocity in actual tissue.
Last edited: