380 carry ammo

[Perd Hapley]

I know they used to say that hardball was best in .380s, but there seem to be some good HP loadings out there today. "Shooting the Bull 410" tested about 6000 loads, and recommended some cartridges with XTP bullets, but that was 9 years ago. I don't think the Sig V Crown, or the 99 grain HST Tactical or Hydra-Shok Deep were available back then. Those last two are supposed to be very effective.

Lucky Gunner did the same kind of testing, but across multiple calibers. More recent results, but still doesn't include some newer offerings.

One notable difference between the two tests is that STB used a 2.8" barrel, and LG used a 3.25". The shorter barrel is more relevant to me. Also, STB's winning cartridge is dirt cheap. Might order a couple of boxen.

But then there's the Honey Badger, and Lehigh Defense, and whatever other solid projectiles are out there.

So confused. Good to have choices, though.

[Perd Hapley]

http://shootingthebull.net/blog/final-results-of-the-380-acp-ammo-quest/

https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/its-here-the-lucky-gunner-epic-handgun-ammo-ballistics-test/

[K Frame]

What's confusing about the two cardinal rules of being in a gun fight?

1. Have gun.

2. Have bullets in gun.

People go into serious analysis paralysis when it comes to carry ammo.

Let's face it...

Handguns really do suck as defensive weapons, and under stress, humans generally suck even worse.

I said screw the noise, hype, and analysis paralysis years ago when it comes to carry ammo.

I work off the following criteria, in order.

1. Reliability in my gun. Not reliable, as in doesn't feed or empties give problems ejecting? Pass.

2. Total penetration of at least 12". I know the FBI downgrades ammo that penetrates more than 18", but I don't care about that.

3. Bullet expansion. If this list were longer, this one would be further down the list. Expansion is nice, but penetration and reliability far outweigh it.

That's pretty much it.

None of this "Well, if it's Tuesday, midwinter, with a waning moon rising late and an air temperature of 33.2 F, Spunkly Gunzers says this is THE VERY BEST CARRY AMMO!

But... if the temperature goes up to 34.1 F and it's humid out, Derpsy D Gunboyze said this round actually HEALS someone when you shoot them...

Yeah, analysis paralysis.

Pass.

[Perd Hapley]

I don't find it paralyzing. I find it helpful.

If I were choosing carry ammo for a Glock 17, almost any hollow-point would work. But when we're talking about a very short-barreled .380, it makes sense to choose carefully.

[lee n. field]

I know they used to say that hardball was best in .380s, but there seem to be some good HP loadings out there today. "Shooting the Bull 410" tested about 6000 loads, and recommended some cartridges with XTP bullets, but that was 9 years ago. I don't think the Sig V Crown, or the 99 grain HST Tactical or Hydra-Shok Deep were available back then. Those last two are supposed to be very effective.

Lucky Gunner did the same kind of testing, but across multiple calibers. More recent results, but still doesn't include some newer offerings.

One notable difference between the two tests is that STB used a 2.8" barrel, and LG used a 3.25". The shorter barrel is more relevant to me. Also, STB's winning cartridge is dirt cheap. Might order a couple of boxen.

But then there's the Honey Badger, and Lehigh Defense, and whatever other solid projectiles are out there.

So confused. Good to have choices, though.

Might want to sit through this: P&S ModCast 308 - Pistol Bullet Performance.

For the short barrel guns, expansion is really iffy and inconsistent.  Pick something to poke holes.

[K Frame]

Did I say YOU were going into analysis paralysis?

No.

But you said, and I quote "So confused."

So what's confusing about this recommendation:

"I work off the following criteria, in order.

1. Reliability in my gun. Not reliable, as in doesn't feed or empties give problems ejecting? Pass.

2. Total penetration of at least 12". I know the FBI downgrades ammo that penetrates more than 18", but I don't care about that.

3. Bullet expansion. If this list were longer, this one would be further down the list. Expansion is nice, but penetration and reliability far outweigh it.

That's pretty much it."

A hardball that pokes a through and through is a lot more desirable than a light-weight hollow point that won't penetrate more than a few inches OR which won't feed/cycle your gun worth a damn.

[Perd Hapley]

Might want to sit through this: P&S ModCast 308 - Pistol Bullet Performance.

Not 308, silly. 380.

[Nick1911]

Not 308, silly. 380.

I bet the loadings would be even more confusing for a P3AT sized 308....

[Perd Hapley]

I bet the loadings would be even more confusing for a P3AT sized 308....

308 +P+

[Nick1911]

308 +P+

That would light up the night

[Hawkmoon]

I don't find it paralyzing. I find it helpful.

If I were choosing carry ammo for a Glock 17, almost any hollow-point would work. But when we're talking about a very short-barreled .380, it makes sense to choose carefully.

Some people carry short barreled .22 rimfires.

I rarely carry a .380, but I own one and I have used it for pocket carry. My go-to self defense ammo is Remington Golden Saber. It may not be the "best" for .380 ACP (and, according to some sources, it may not be the "best" in any caliber), but I'm comfortable carrying it. I wouldn't volunteer to be shot with it, not even from a pistol with a short barrel.

[K Frame]

"Some people carry short barreled .22 rimfires."

I still do. Taurus PT-22.

I carry it with solids, Winchester Wildcats.

[Perd Hapley]

I wouldn't volunteer to be shot with it, not even from a pistol with a short barrel.

Some scholars maintain Our Lord was speaking of bullets when he said "it is better to give than to receive."

[HankB]

I think we all know that in any defensive pistol, RELIABILITY is the overriding requirement.

Having said that, for small caliber guns (I consider anything under 9mmP to be "small caliber") penetration is key. I don't trust lighter weight bullets to both penetrate and expand, so for a .380 I would choose a heavier hollowpoint - a "premium" load from any of the major makers that works well in my pistol is what I'd use.

Note that at luckygunner.com (Perd already mentioned them) they have ballistic gel tests for various loads - generally, in .380 the loads that penetrated well didn't expand much, and the loads that expanded didn't penetrate well. An HP that doesn't expand will behave more or less like an FMJ, but the blunter nose of the HP may make the bullet hit a little harder. (Many decades ago Hatcher credited flat points, SWCs, and WCs with more "stopping power" than round nose - makes sense, but assigning numbers is questionable without an awful lot more data and analysis.)

Note that ANY real gun - even a .22 rimfire - used well, is more of an upgrade from bare hands than a .44 Mag is from a .22. (Insert usual pontificating about shot placement, accuracy, situational awareness, etc.)

[Perd Hapley]

I think we all know that in any defensive pistol, RELIABILITY is the overriding requirement.

Having said that, for small caliber guns (I consider anything under 9mmP to be "small caliber") penetration is key. I don't trust lighter weight bullets to both penetrate and expand, so for a .380 I would choose a heavier hollowpoint - a "premium" load from any of the major makers that works well in my pistol is what I'd use.

Note that at luckygunner.com (Perd already mentioned them) they have ballistic gel tests for various loads - generally, in .380 the loads that penetrated well didn't expand much, and the loads that expanded didn't penetrate well. An HP that doesn't expand will behave more or less like an FMJ, but the blunter nose of the HP may make the bullet hit a little harder. (Many decades ago Hatcher credited flat points, SWCs, and WCs with more "stopping power" than round nose - makes sense, but assigning numbers is questionable without an awful lot more data and analysis.)

Note that ANY real gun - even a .22 rimfire - used well, is more of an upgrade from bare hands than a .44 Mag is from a .22. (Insert usual pontificating about shot placement, accuracy, situational awareness, etc.)

According to the sources I've linked, and a few others I didn't, there are a few loadings that have achieved 12" + penetration, with expansion. Maybe not very impressive expansion, but enough to make them better than FMJ. Also, expansion is only one half of the story. The expanded hollow-points are also going to be more wound-y than FMJ, being all jagged and everything.

[K Frame]

This is what you should be carrying...

Not 100% sure if you can handle it, though...

[Perd Hapley]

I tried one of those. Couldn't even hit the target, for some reason.

[lee n. field]

This is what you should be carrying...

Not 100% sure if you can handle it, though...

Interesting.  Whoever did that, had the Colt and S&W (I assume) cylinders revolving in their respective correct directions.

[JTHunter]

A .380 is the first centerfire that I started to reload for over 30 years ago.  I was using one of the little Lee box sets - until I got a Lee Progressive some years later. As I don't shoot this gun much, I haven't done any reloads in quite some time but there were 2 things I did in those reloads.  All of the loads were done with Winchester 231 (IIRC) at ~0.1 gr. below MAX.  And I was doing three loads - a 90 gr. HP, a 95 gr. JFP, and a 100 gr. FNJ-RN.  While I still have some of those jacketed flat points (JFP), I don't load them any more as they were the ones most likely to jam on the feed ramp.
Thew second thing I did was to take a very sharp knife to the HP bullets (before loading) and, where the creases were in the jacket materiel, I score the exposed lead across the top of the bullet in the hope that they will expand more readily.  I do not know if that will work as I have never been able to test, observe, and recover those bullets.  I also didn't do very many of them.

[MechAg94]

Regarding expansion versus penetration, I recall shooting some cheaper ammo with Hornady HP bullets (ballistic tip) and the bullet expanded beautifully, but it stopped in the first 1 gallon jug.  Other types didn't expand as much, but penetrated into the 3rd jug or through it.  I think I have some Fiochi HP ammo and some Underwood with solid Lehigh defense bullets.  I am leery of the bullet expanding too fast for 380 and 32.  I believe I remember seeing gel tests showing the Fiochi HP ammo doing well in 380 and 32 auto. 

[MechAg94]

I know they used to say that hardball was best in .380s, but there seem to be some good HP loadings out there today. "Shooting the Bull 410" tested about 6000 loads, and recommended some cartridges with XTP bullets, but that was 9 years ago. I don't think the Sig V Crown, or the 99 grain HST Tactical or Hydra-Shok Deep were available back then. Those last two are supposed to be very effective.

Lucky Gunner did the same kind of testing, but across multiple calibers. More recent results, but still doesn't include some newer offerings.

One notable difference between the two tests is that STB used a 2.8" barrel, and LG used a 3.25". The shorter barrel is more relevant to me. Also, STB's winning cartridge is dirt cheap. Might order a couple of boxen.

But then there's the Honey Badger, and Lehigh Defense, and whatever other solid projectiles are out there.

So confused. Good to have choices, though.

I think the HoneyBadger ammo uses Lehigh Defense bullets.  Underwood and others use them also.  Wilson Combat bought Lehigh Defense so we will see if anything changes down the road. 

[MechAg94]

What's confusing about the two cardinal rules of being in a gun fight?

1. Have gun.

2. Have bullets in gun.

People go into serious analysis paralysis when it comes to carry ammo.

Let's face it...

Handguns really do suck as defensive weapons, and under stress, humans generally suck even worse.

I said screw the noise, hype, and analysis paralysis years ago when it comes to carry ammo.

I work off the following criteria, in order.

1. Reliability in my gun. Not reliable, as in doesn't feed or empties give problems ejecting? Pass.

2. Total penetration of at least 12". I know the FBI downgrades ammo that penetrates more than 18", but I don't care about that.

3. Bullet expansion. If this list were longer, this one would be further down the list. Expansion is nice, but penetration and reliability far outweigh it.

That's pretty much it.

None of this "Well, if it's Tuesday, midwinter, with a waning moon rising late and an air temperature of 33.2 F, Spunkly Gunzers says this is THE VERY BEST CARRY AMMO!

But... if the temperature goes up to 34.1 F and it's humid out, Derpsy D Gunboyze said this round actually HEALS someone when you shoot them...

Yeah, analysis paralysis.

Pass.

I thought #2 was "Bring a bunch of friends with guns."



Ok, maybe it is #3.

[Perd Hapley]

Might want to sit through this: P&S ModCast 308 - Pistol Bullet Performance.

For the short barrel guns, expansion is really iffy and inconsistent.  Pick something to poke holes.

Turns out #s 306 and 292 were the pocket gun episodes. If anyone wants to save themselves a few hours of podcast time, they basically said everyone should be carrying a .22 cal LCR. Or maybe 2. Or possibly 4.

[T.O.M.]

Of late, I tend to choose handgun ammo based on ability, meaning reliability in my guns and availability.  I would toss I would add affordability, but that may be too difficult to ask.

Jokes aside, I load up the hollowpoints from reputable makers that work in my guns and I can find on the shelves at my LGS.  I know hollowpoints don't expand on target like they do in gelatin, but any expansion is better than ball, right?  Only exception is in my .38, where I fall back on the old FBI  158 grain SWCHP +P. 

[JTHunter]

If you are using either jacketed or semi-jacketed HPs in .380, look at the jacket material to see if it is "pre-scored" to make expansion easier.  If it is, you can enhance that even more by taking a razor knife and cut into the jacket material GENTLY to increase that scoring.