Comments on: 9mm NATO vs. 9mm Luger

By: Chuck R

Chuck R — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:02:09 +0000

I use the +P+ ammo in my Walther P88. If you read about this weapon, it was designed to usa all types of grades of 9mm to compete for the NATO contract to replace the 45’s.

This is the only gun in the world to be designed this way, until later on HK, Glock and Berette finally cought on.

By: Paul B

Paul B — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:17:55 +0000

Hi,

Having been an armorer in the U.S. military I can tell you that there is really only one loading that is authorized to be used in pistols, that is the M-882 124gr loading. This loading is spec’d to around 32k-psi. There is another loading that does not have a designation and is not authorized for use in pistols. It is the second loading that is really hot.

While the standard pressure spec can reach 35-36K for a max individual round, no one loads to the max. There is always a buffer factored in and the ammunition has to be able to be fired in the weakest pistol in the nato inventory and in the worst possible environment.

BTW, Nato countries can and do load a 115gr bullet but the pressure is still 32k-psi average.

By: misinformed

misinformed — Tue, 05 May 2009 17:11:51 +0000

not sure were you got you’re info but 9mm luger is the same as 9×19 9mmparabellum and 9mm nato.
nato does not make there own ammo they adopt whatever lack luster round is voted.
the loading of each round is done differently but all rounds should fire in the same guns.
9mm luger is or should be the euro and is probably loaded to ww2 specs”lower pressure.”
9mm nato is the one we currently use in the U.S. so of course it will be loaded to max cap.
if you don’t believe me look at a nato gun it will say 9×19 on it if H.K. usu, and 9×19 or 9mm para for Berreta.
europe has and still uses lots of 9mm that are shorter or otherwise incompatible with this offering.
esp 9mm glissenti 9×18 “Makarov” 9×17 380acp and far too many to list.
in closing treat 9mm nato as +p or +p+ should be fine in any functioning gun.

By: Matt Groom

Matt Groom — Mon, 04 May 2009 19:05:36 +0000

The real difference, according to the guys at H.P. White Laboratories, who do a lot of ballistic testing for the Gov’t and NATO, is in how the pressure readings are obtained, whether they use a pressure barrel and what type of test it is. Transducer and Crusher types of pressure tests are totally different, and where they are on the barrel also plays a role. NATO uses a kind of advanced CIP standard which is not directly translatable to SAAMI standards, so it’s all completely different, but usually safe. Most guns are built stronger than they have to be.