9mm Jacketed Bullet Comparo

Back in January I tested a bunch of 9mm cast bullet loads in the three handguns you see above:  A SIG P226 Scorpion, a Smith and Wesson Model 659, and the Springfield Armory 1911 Target.    For that test series (you can read it here), all the loads used the Missouri 125-grain cast roundnose bullet with different powders and different charge weights.  My cast bullet testing showed the SIG to be the most accurate, followed by the Springfield and then the Smith and Wesson Model 659.

I promised an update with jacketed bullets to assess accuracy and functionality of all three handguns (and to find favored accuracy loads for each).  It took a while, but I finally got around to making good on that promise this past week.  The six different loads I tested for the jacketed 9mm test series are summarized below:

Actually, the term “jacketed” doesn’t really apply to the Xtreme bullets (they are copper plated, not copper jacketed).  The Armscor bullets are brass jacketed.   Both the Winchester and Speer bullets are copper jacketed bullets.  As you can see from the table above and the photos below, the Xtreme, Armscor, and Winchester bullets were of the roundnose configuration.  The Speer 147-grain bullets were jacketed flatnosed bullets.  I didn’t try any hollow points in this test series; I prefer roundnose bullets in my 9mm handguns.  They are reliable.

All groups were 5 shot groups.   I shot a total of 360 rounds in the two test series (both the jacketed and cast bullet accuracy tests).

Winchester jacketed bullets.
Xtreme plated bullets.
Armscor brass jacketed bullets.

While I was shooting last week, I was a little disappointed.  I thought I had done a lot better with the cast bullets back in January.   I thought my jacketed groups were larger when I eyeballed the targets, but you never really know until you measure the groups.

9mm jacketed bullets on an Alco target. I like using the Alco target that has four mini-silhouettes on a single target. All testing was at 50 feet.

When I returned home, measured the group sizes, and tabulated the results, I was surprised.   The results of the jacketed and plated bullets were not too different from what I had achieved with the cast bullets almost a year ago.  Take a look:

The most surprising finding, for me, was that the average results with the jacketed bullets (versus the cast bullets) were almost identical.  Here’s that data extracted from the above, shown in a table that makes it a little easier to make the comparison:

My testing showed essentially the same results for the three handguns I tested whether I used cast bullets or jacketed bullets:  The SIG P226 Scorpion is the most accurate (it is a magnificent handgun), followed by the Springfield Armory 1911, followed by the Smith and Wesson 659.   It doesn’t matter whether it’s with cast or jacketed bullets:  The averages are eerily similar for each gun, with a very slight accuracy advantage going to the cast bullets for the SIG and the 1911, and a very slight accuracy advantage going to the jacketed bullets for the Smith 659.  But the differences between jacketed and cast bullets are so small they can be ignored.  Cast bullets are usually a lot less expensive than jacketed bullets, so this is good knowledge.


Help us continue to bring stories to you:  Please click on the popup ads!


More Tales of the Gun are here.


Sign up for free!

The Model 659 Smith and Wesson

After reading one of the blogs I posted on my most capable, TJ-customized  Smith and Wesson Model 59, good buddy Tom commented that he had a Model 659.  “I always wanted a Model 659,” I said.

My custom Model 59. I’ve been sending lead downrange with this one for close to 50 years.

Well, you know how these things go.  One thing led to another, and now I do.  Own one, that is.  A Model 659. Tom gave me a super deal on his Model 659, and after a visit to an FFL dealer and waiting the Peoples Republik of Kalifornia’s obligatory 10-day cooling off period, I had (in Kalifornia’s infinite left-leaning wisdom) chilled sufficiently.  I took possession of this latest addition to the ExNotes Armory, and let me tell you, this new-to-me 9mm is a honey.

My 659, along with a few 9mm reloads. The 659 has an ambidextrous safety. Mine also has Pachmayr grips, which make it easier to get a good grip.

The Model 659 was the follow-on in Smith and Wesson’s 9mm semi-automatic handgun evolutionary arc, and it sold riotously well. The 659’s all stainless steel construction gives it a comfortable heft and provides a stable firing platform.  High capacity, 9mm, stainless steel, and an American manufacturer with a storied reputation:  What’s not to like?  Police departments turned to the Model 659 in droves.  It was the right gun at the right time as police departments abandoned their .38 Special six-shooters and moved to 9mm autos.


Please click on the popup ads!  It’s what keeps the lights on.


As the police armament evolution advanced, the Model 659 Smiths were superseded by yet even newer wunderguns, and used 659s became widely available when the police departments traded them in.  I don’t know that this is my 659’s heritage, but I suspect it was.  My 659 was well worn externally with lots of fine scratches in the metal work, it didn’t have hardly any internal wear (it hadn’t been fired much), and the safety decocker didn’t work the way it was supposed to.  All these things were signs that pointed to lots of carry but little actual shooting.

First, the safety decocker.  It’s that gizmo on the rear of the slide that drops and blocks the hammer, and on mine, when it was fully depressed, the hammer wouldn’t drop the way it was supposed to.   I guessed it wore out from having been actuated a ton of times, which is probably what happened when whoever carried it put it away for the night every night.  This issue was slightly complicated by the fact that Smith and Wesson no longer supports these pistols (that’s the bad news).  The good news is that the old Numrich corporation purchased Smith and Wesson’s entire inventory of Model 659 parts (Numrich is now known as the Gun Parts Corporation, but everyone still calls them Numrich).  That’s where I found what I needed.  Numrich has exploded drawings of these (and many, many other) old guns on line, and you can dope out how older guns work and identify the parts you need.  With the help of their isometric drawing below, follow along with me as I explain how this safety decocker thing works.

The 659 Smith decocker is activated by a thumb lever. It’s Find No. 1 in the above drawing. The thing fits into a through-hole at the rear of the slide.  When you rotate the decocker down to the safe position, a slot in it pushes the sear release lever down, which is Find No. 63 in the above drawing.   When that happens, the sear release lever rotates and acts on the sear, which is Find No. 29.  When that happens, the sear releases the hammer (Find No. 61).  When the hammer falls, it can’t hit the firing pin because the hammer’s fall to the firing pin is obstructed by the decocker having been rotated to the safe position (which brings us back to Find No. 1). It’s all very clever.

So, like I said above, when Smith went to their newer series of handguns, they sold all their remaining parts inventory to Numrich. Numrich had the new sear release lever, and it was only $4.50.  Weirdly, I could have bought a used part from Numrich for $3.50, but the used part would be worn and it would probably not correct the problem I needed to fix (a problem which resulted from wear).  It was a no brainer to me, so I splurged for the extra $1 and bought the new part (I’m cheap, but I’m not stupid).  My new safety release lever arrived in the mail a few days later.

The 659’s original safety release lever. This one was worn beyond serviceable limits and I bought a new replacement. The upper arrow points to the part of the safety lever that rides along the decocker drum. The lower arrow points to the part that actuates the sear. It was this area (the area designated by the lower arrow) that needed to be fitted to assure proper function.  That .22 Long Rifle cartridge?  It’s only in the photo to provide a sense of scale.

When the new sear release lever arrived, I had to strip the gun down to the bare frame.   I installed the new sear release lever, but it needed to be fitted so that it actuated the hammer drop at the appropriate point in the decocker’s rotation.  It was a matter of assemble the gun, try it, take it all apart again, file the sear release lever a little bit, reassemble the gun, try it again, and repeat the process until the decocker worked the way it is supposed to.  The whole thing took me about an hour of disassembling, testing, filing, and reassembling.  I like doing this sort of stuff.  I imagine it’s a lot like resurrecting a 900cc Kawasaki.

The next step was to go to work on all the minor scratches on the gun’s slide and frame.  That’s one of the great advantages of a stainless steel firearm.  With a little bit of 600-grit sandpaper, you can keep a stainless gun looking new forever.  I was really pleased with the way this one turned out.  It looks like a new gun now.  Nah, scratch that (pardon the pun).  I think Smith finished these guns with 400-grit abrasive, which is a little rougher than 600-grit.  Mine looks better than new.  Polished, almost.  It really is a thing of great beauty.

My standard 9mm load is 5.0 grains of Unique behind a 124 grain roundnose bullet, and I’ve got a bunch reloaded and packed away in my ammo locker.  It’s an accurate load and it’s reliable.  Yeah, I know, you can buy 9mm ammo cheaper than you can reload it these days.  I don’t care. I like to reload.  Logic doesn’t always prevail when it comes to guns and ammo.

I grabbed a few hundred rounds and it was off to the range for me and the 659.  I was more than pleased with the results.  I didn’t have a single failure to feed, fire, extract, or eject, and the 659 is accurate.  It’s a lot of fun to shoot and the 9mm is a great cartridge.

50 rounds at 50 feet, fired offhand from the standing position. The 659 is a keeper. It’s a lot of fun to shoot, and the bullets go where you tell them to.  Nearly all shots were in the 10 ring, and only a few dropped into the 9 ring.  The shots that went low?  I mostly likely shifted my focus from the front sight to the target.   That’s what makes shots go low, and that’s the subject of an upcoming blog.

Want to read our stories about the Model 59 and our other Tales of the Gun?  Hey, it’s all right here!


The best reloading gear on the planet can be found right here!


We want you!  Sign up for our ExNotes blogs!