Okay, I can see my post didn't get thru. I posted it after the remarks were made about small and cheap guns not being able to take the pressure of +P+ ammo. That holds true for the LC9, which I favor over the Kel-Tec. But responses were defensive of the small gun's need for high pressure rounds, the reasoning stated being that not much is gained. My feeling is that "not much" is still some. If you fire the same weight non+P, +P, and +P+ from any given firearm (in that order), you will find an ascending increase of velocity and transmitted energy. No matter what the barrel length of auto or revolver. If you use the same gun.
It's been said here there's not enough return on the +P+ to make a difference, so there's no point to use it. How silly. More than some is always more than some. What you are really saying is that the abuse to the gun is not worth the extra velocity, which translates in the real world to the DESTRUCTION of my gun is not worth the extra velocity. If your cheap little gun won't handle the best ammo, get another gun. It's like when Buffalo Bore came out with their statement that our .44 Spl. ammo is safe in any gun, except the Charter Arms. That can't be taken for anything less than a statement that Charter Arms 44 Specials are structurally weak. If we have a Kel-Tec or an LC9, don't shoot +P+ in it. The gain of easy to carry may be more to you than what the cartridge can actually do.
For those not convinced, and who still lie to themselves about what they carry, why do you think it is that Ruger makes that warning with the LC9. It ain't because they don't want you to have the added energy. It's because they don't want their product to blow up.
One more item: It was stated above that if you can't use a cartridge's "full potential," what's the point? The point is that less than full potential in a +P+ is still more potential than a +P. If it's merely advertising hype, why is it that the actual ballistics are higher with the ammo with the most pressure? Any reloader knows that. If you stuff more powder behind any given weight projectile, it will produce more energy. If you're gun can't handle that extra pressure, then you ought not use it, but don't say the difference isn't worth the abuse to the gun. We all know those guns simply cannot handle the added pressure.
Certainly this is not a commercial for either Kel-Tec or Ruger compact nine's. I think it's more of a statement of truth that those who chose the little compactss for ease of carry are also choosing less strength, but they seem to have a need to justify their choice by ignoring or debating the obvious. I carry an LC9 with +P, but not +P+. I'm okay with that. I don't try to use faulty logic to say there's no advantage.
Okay, I said one more thing, but I still have one more thing. Ruger's plastic SR9c is not restricted on factory ammo pressure. I tried all three same weight bullets at the higher pressure ratings on water jugs covered with 4 layers of denim, along with the two lower pressure ratings. Not so scientific, granted, but the results were as expected. The +P+ round performed with expansion and penetration exactly the same as a .357 Sig. The other two 9mm rounds did not. Acceptable, but not as good.
So, as I said in the post didn't get through, I may not have convinced anyone, but I will get enough feedback to keep this post open for a while, and see all the new things that Swamp and Spirit will bring to the table.
