/Huh!/ Bad bullet weight tradeoffs!  What'cha gon', what'cha gon, what'cha gonna do,
when Roy J. Tellason and I come for you?

 TS>> You might check ballistics tables and compare projectile energys.

 RJT> Where would such tables be found?

/Guns/ & /Ammo/ prints Annuals, and the tables are in the back, behind the
catalog section.  The 2003/4 issue ought to be out.

If not there, the ammunition companies print theirs, and are available at a
nominal fee.  Might be on their web sites.

 TS>> Lighter rounds generally are faster, but most people prefer
 TS>> heavier, as they keep their energy further downrange.

 RJT> Considering the "up close and personal" nature of using
a defensive
 RJT> round,  I don't think that's going to make a whole lot of difference.

The heavier rullets still retain more energy, and at close range, velocity
won't matter that much.  Sub-sonic rounds are cheaper, IIRC.

 TS>> over-penetrate, but the worst offenders are all high-velocity,
 TS>> that exceeding 1000 f/s, IIRC.
 RJT> It may be a concern,  yeah.  Depending on the circumstances.

Lawsuits aren't just for the corporations.

 TS>> Just off the top, I'd say the 147 gr JHP would be a good beginning,
 TS>> as they're available almost everywhere.

 RJT> When I first got this gun a number of years ago,  that was the only
 RJT> bullet out there in hollowpoints.  As I recall,  I tried both Speer
 RJT> Gold Dot (?) and Remington Golden Sabre.  The gun seemed to like them
 RJT> both.  I'm looking forward to seeing how it likes these Hydra-Shocks.

I've read nothing bad about any of the three you mentioned.  According to
the G&A staff, Black Hills makes some excellent 9mm JHPs.

Todd Sullivan
NRA Member # 132667460

... Of course there have to be kittens; otherwise there wouldn't be cats!

--- Spot 1.3b Unregistered