I know they made changes to the 9mm JHP after the initial reviews on that showed it was garbage. Hopefully they take the feedback from the marketplace and make changes.
tools used a ported 4in barrel and sam used a standard 4 in barrel ... i think the ported barrel is more like the 3inc maybe .. I get closer to your numbers with my 686+ consistently with this ammo... and it is easier shooting than the Remmington 125 gr 357 which i constantly get 1350 + /- in my 686+. thanks for the video
Different revolvers are going to have different gaps between the cylinder and forcing cone, different length of forcing cone prior to the start of rifling ( can you call it rifling if it's in a pistol?). Also the actual diameter of those lands and grooves vary between different revolvers. Until you can account for all of these variables (oh, and different chronographs are ANOTHER variable, along with atmospheric density, temperature and I don't know what else) I don't worry about the divergence in various bullets speeds from different testers.
To some extent I hear that. But I don't think the variance should be that great unless different batches of ammo are not held to stringent quality control. Tools and Targets used 2 different 4" revolvers and avg difference was only 2 FPS between the two with the rounds he tested.
