Chrono'ed several Glocks

I like data, I figured some of you do too. Here is some chrono data from a Glock 17, 19, 26, and 43. Ammo consisted of my three preferred carry loads: 147 HST, 124+p HST, and 115 9BPLE.

No surprises here really other than the 124+p was a teensy bit hotter than I've seen and the 9BPLE was a teensy bit slower than my last lot. I noticed negligible differences in recoil though the 124 did have more blast.


https://drive.google.com/file/d/133PbS_5Nh-xJPqQxPlM-Z0gzm0-q3Xv_/view?usp=drivesdk

Didn't realize how slow the 147 HST was...

147gr was always under 1000 fps....I have always like loading 9mm with 124gr to NATO specs, (1200fps).

We're stuck with our 147 FMJFP at 1,200 fps out of a 5 inch gun.

Meh, as long as it's going fast enough to penetrate deep enough and expand the HST petals then I'm happy. Not like you're relying purely on velocity in a handgun round.

Yea I don't get too worked up about it. I'd be fine carrying any of these loads.

147 at 1200 is spicy!

I carry 124 usually, but have got some 147 for the bigger pistols and keep the 124 in the short barrels.

Realistically, Im not sure there is ANY difference in its effectiveness to kill. between the 124 and 147

Might have X,XXXs rounds of 9 MM and my guess all but 500 to 750 are 124 grn bullets.

Thanks for posting this @KnotRight ! It was great for my confirmation bias!

jmccracken1214 said:

I carry 124 usually, but have got some 147 for the bigger pistols and keep the 124 in the short barrels.

Realistically, Im not sure there is ANY difference in its effectiveness to kill. between the 124 and 147

Click to expand...

I do the exact opposite. 124 for bigger guns and the 147s for the small guns. There is a lot of data out there that shows, in small guns, heavier bullets perform better.

Derek8404 said:

I do the exact opposite. 124 for bigger guns and the 147s for the small guns. There is a lot of data out there that shows, in small guns, heavier bullets perform better.

Click to expand...

I thought the lighter bullets were better in smaller guns due to the reduced velocity from the short barrel?

A heavy slow bullet going even slower seems like it wouldn’t expand as intended?

Derek8404 said:

I do the exact opposite. 124 for bigger guns and the 147s for the small guns. There is a lot of data out there that shows, in small guns, heavier bullets perform better.

Click to expand...

jmccracken1214 said:

I thought the lighter bullets were better in smaller guns due to the reduced velocity from the short barrel?

A heavy slow bullet going even slower seems like it wouldn’t expand as intended?

Click to expand...

I am not sure how to think about this. The lighter bullet exits the barrel quicker which mean less time to build up the pressure in the barrel and it is opposite for the heavier bullet. My take is in the shorter barrels use a faster burning powder for the lighter bullets. All of the above might be why I am using a 124 grn bullet in a 9 mm instead of a 115 or 147.

My hard cast 147 grain ammo......is usually around 930 fps. Its a fairly mild load. Im sure it could get over 1000 with a jacketed bullet.

jmccracken1214 said:

I thought the lighter bullets were better in smaller guns due to the reduced velocity from the short barrel?

A heavy slow bullet going even slower seems like it wouldn’t expand as intended?

Click to expand...

So I’m out on the trail right now, doing some biking/beer drinking so I don’t have the data right off the top of my head. I’ll try and remember to look it up and post links when I get back, but the jist is, yes, heavier bullets perform better out if shorter barrels than lighter ones do. Just look at the companies who market special “short barrel” ammo; it’s gonna be a heavy bullet. Federal has a product of their HST line called “micro” or something like that. It’s a 150gr bullet.


As a disclaimer. I only carry/shoot 9mm, so that’s the only data I ever concern myself with. Perhaps this isn’t true with other calibers, but with 9mm, in short barrels...heavier is better.

Derek8404 said:

So I’m out on the trail right now, doing some biking/beer drinking so I don’t have the data right off the top of my head. I’ll try and remember to look it up and post links when I get back, but the jist is, yes, heavier bullets perform better out if shorter barrels than lighter ones do. Just look at the companies who market special “short barrel” ammo; it’s gonna be a heavy bullet. Federal has a product of their HST line called “micro” or something like that. It’s a 150gr bullet.


As a disclaimer. I only carry/shoot 9mm, so that’s the only data I ever concern myself with. Perhaps this isn’t true with other calibers, but with 9mm, in short barrels...heavier is better.

Click to expand...

I think the science behind it is same caliber cartridges with heavier bullets have less case capacity and are therefore less able to take advantage of the longer barrel length...or said another way, there is a better chance the 147 gr 9mm would have burned more of its powder in a shorter barrel than a 115....making the heavier bullet loads more efficient in shorter barrels.

Someone mentioned less expansion and that is true in extreme cases but hollow points are typically designed to expand over a range of velocities. The better 9mm/40/45 heavy for caliber loads are usually still moving fast enough out of 3-3.5 inch barrels to expand.

It has been years since I messed with 380 but back in the day we always carried fmj in 380 and smaller cartridges because they lacked the velocity for good expansion with most of the bullets available.