Plinkning Ammo Shoot-Out...

Discussion in 'Ammunition and Reloading' started by Guest, Dec 5, 2005.

  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I've done some more useful tesing on various "defensive" ammo, but since I hear a lot of discussion on this forum about what cheap target ammo everyone likes, I figured I'd test out some of the more common brands. Besides, I'm breaking in my M9 :D

    Being FMJ "plinking" stuff, I wasn't concerned with penetration or expansion or anything, just accuracy and basic chrony numbers, so, here they are...

    First, here are the contestants -
    [​IMG]

    And here is the setup -
    [​IMG]

    I used a "Chrony Alpha", set up on a table about 6 feet from the muzzle. It was about 25 degrees F, so I tried to finish up quickly. I fired 10 rounds of each ammo, then went back and did it again in the same order. Each brand has the average numbers from each 10 round string listed.

    Accuracy, shooting freehand at about 10 yards, was a non-issue. Any of this ammo is more accurate than I am and POI was consistent with all three. I can typically keep a 3" group at 10 yards, which is not outstanding, but is pretty good among honest people :wink:

    WWB
    aka: Winchester white box, 115gr, 100 round bulk-pack ($11.67)
    aka: The wally-world special
    Impression: this is the most affordable ammo in the free world, that I am aware of. Even the Wolf junk can't usually be had any cheaper by the time you ship it and who doesn't have a wal-mart nearby. I have fired thousands of rounds of this stuff in multiple guns and never had a single issue with it. Of the three, it has the "snappiest" sounding report and is indeed a little faster than the others. It is also the least consistent though.

    String #1:
    low - 1119
    high - 1195
    avg - 1157
    spread - 76.02
    s.d. - 27.71

    String #2:
    low - 1068
    high - 1167
    avg - 1130
    spread - 98.84
    s.d. - 32.09

    Blazer
    aka: CCI Blazer Brass, 115gr, 50 round box ($5.97)
    Impression: I have always liked this ammo. Of the 3 here, I have fired the least of this because Dick's and Wal-Mart both carry it on occasion, but never have more than a few boxes at a time and I tend to buy in bulk. I would estimate that I've fired about 500 rounds of this ammo in 9mm and have had 1 malfunction that I can recall. A primer which required a 2nd strike to fire. It was not a light strike, it simply did not fire the first time. This is the most consistent brand of the three based on my very limited testing. Consistancy is probably the biggest factor in considering a plinking ammo IMHO.

    String #1:
    low - 1106
    high - 1146
    avg - 1123
    spread - 33.91
    s.d. - 15.36

    String #2:
    low - 1085
    high - 1117
    avg - 1101
    spread - 32.25
    s.d. - 12.60
    * you can see the velocity difference between this round through a 4" barrel vs. a 3.1" barrel by comparing this report to the one linked below.

    UMC
    aka: Remington UMC, 115gr, 50 round box ($5.99 on sale)
    Impression: Some people report issues with this ammo feeding properly in their M9, but I have had no problems. I have put about 600 rounds of this ammo through my M9 and over 1000 through my P11. This is, by a very small margin, the slowest of the bunch and based on my observation, also the dirtiest. There is a more noticeable amount of smoke after firing this round than with the others. It is remarkably consistent though, nearly as consistent as the Blazer. This is the only ammo I have ever encountered with a visible manufacturing defect as I recently found a round with a "partial" primer in it while loading a magazine.

    String #1:
    low - 1062
    high - 1113
    avg - 1089
    spread - 51.53
    s.d. - 15.52

    String #2:
    low - 1077
    high - 1131
    avg - 1097
    spread - 53.87
    s.d. - 18.94

    PS - you can see a review I did of various JHP ammo for short-barrelled guns here - http://www.rochesterwatch.com/phpbb/vie ... php?t=2037
     
  2. Syntax360

    Syntax360 Moderator

    5,073
    12
    0
    Good post! Great contribution!
     

  3. FlaChef

    FlaChef Guest

    and either way your at $11.67 to $12 per 100.
    so if your gun doesn't like one, there's the others.

    thanks for the testing 8)
     
  4. srfl

    srfl New Member

    171
    0
    0
    Nice report! Thanks for enduring the cold for our benefit.

    I really need a chonograph.....
     
  5. RiceCakes

    RiceCakes New Member

    287
    0
    0
    When wil the .40 ammo be posted :wink:
    just kidding man, im a cheap whore, so WWB 165 FMJ are pretty much all my gun gets anyway.
     
  6. theFiasco

    theFiasco New Member

    106
    0
    0
    Excellent posting!

    -tF
     
  7. Ramshackle

    Ramshackle New Member

    26
    0
    0
    Thanks. I had wondered whether I would make the IPSC power factor with WWB or Blazer and now I know. Blazer (127 pf) cuts the 125 pf a little too close for comfort, while there's a comfortable margin with WWB.
     
  8. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I just now read this thread. Thanks again for a fantastic contribution!

    The reply about IDPA power factor is right on, I better not use Remington UMC at major matches, except in my Glock 34.

    This test validates my subjective impressions of shooting all the same ammo at IDPA matches. I bought a bunch of UMC for this purpose because I also noticed considerably less recoil than WWB.

    Jeff