Has anyone loaded up heavy-for-caliber 380

As everyone here knows, normal bullet weight in the 38/357 is 158gr, for 9mm it's 115gr, 45acp is 230gr and 44 is 240 but there are several heavier bullets available that are commonly used in each of these calibers. Most heavy bullets are designed for specialized purposes such as heavy game hunting but are also useful for self defense.

One day I loaded up some .380 95gr FMJ to try out in a Colt Mustang I had acquired. The velocity registers about 930fps but oh what a kick! Although the powder charge was toward the maximum for the bullet, I thought they felt like heavy magnum loads. When I go home I discovered why. When loading had I reached down for the box of 95gr bullets but somehow brought up a box of 122gr instead! Since I don't have any comparable load data for that bullet/caliber I have no idea how far over max I was. I feel very lucky that the gun held together for 15 or 20 test rounds. A couple of them chrono'd over 1000fps. Now I weigh a couple bullets before loading no matter what the box says.

Thinking about how marginal the 380 is for SD and how other calibers have heavier than normal bullets available (147gr 9mm and 300 gr .44) I wondered how much heavier a bullet might be in the 380 for SD. I know there is a 100gr & 102gr JHP available but just how heavy can one go?

I did a quick comparison of the typical bullet weights available (over standard weight) for 4 popular calibers (38-44-45acp & 9mm). I then determined what percentage that was over the standard weight. Although there is a wide variety and several increments, I found three common percentage points showing up in all.

A slightly med-heavy bullet was about 7~8% overweight and what might be thought of as a heavy bullet fell in the range of 13% to 15% above normal. The extreme overweight was 25 to 30% over. examples of this are

Cal_____ Normal_____ Med-%_____ Heavy-%_____ Extreme-%
9mm____115gr_____124gr-8%_____130gr-13%_____ 147gr-28%
357_____158gr_____170gr-7%_____180gr-14%_____ 200gr-27%
44______240gr_____260gr-8%_____270gr-13%_____ 300gr-25%
45______230gr_____250gr+9%_____260gr-13%_____ 300gr-30%

Applying these percentages to the .380 standard 95gr and rounding to nearest available round yields 102gr and 115gr.

380 95gr 102gr-7% 115gr-21% 122gr-28%

Remington makes the 102gr JHP and the heaviest bullet I can find published load data for is 100gr, but I'm more interested in trying the normal 9mm 115 JHP

In my notes I do see where someone posted 380 115 JHP data supposedly from the #11 Speer manual and also a Guns&Ammo article but #8 & #12 which I have access to don't show any such loads.

Has anyone worked up a decent load using 115 gr in a 380 at velocities suitable for SD penetration & expansion?
Do you think this would be any improvement over the 90 JHP or 95 FMJ ?

Add Note- I did find a 115 jhp & 122gr cast load in Lyman #48 for the 380.

Well, digging a little deeper in my own resources i have found 115gr data for the 380. Lyman #46, Nosler #3 and that G&A article show loads for powder I have on hand. Seems the limiting factors are going to be OAL and magazine length. The 115 XTP with its truncated cone angle might be the one to try.

So nobody have played with this combo back in the day?

I have done some similar experimentation. As I have a full size Gov't Model 380 we are talking about the same gun only longer barrel.


I built a box to hold one gallon water jugs, it holds a total of 16 jugs. I shot from 10 feet away, the same distance that I chronograph from. Temperature was 70 degrees.

.380 handload of 4.6 grains Alliant Power Pistol with a Lee 120 grain Truncated Cone at 951 fps. Penetrated 10 jugs and stuck into #11. The bullet was holding #10 & #11 together.


380 handload of 4.6 grains Alliant Power Pistol with a Ranier Plated 124 grain HP at 870 fps. Penetrated 9 jugs and was laying inside #9. Very slight expansion.


.380 factory load, PMC 90 grain FMJ at 855 fps. The bullet passed through 4 jugs and penetrated the 5th, was lying inside the 5th jug.

9mm factory load, Winchester 115 FMJ at 1149 fps. I didn’t have any factory FMJ 9mm on hand and found this load at Bass Pro Shops. I selected it as the bullet was almost identical to my cast Lee 120 grain TC. Bullet penetrated 9 jugs and exited the bottom rear corner of the 9th jug and was found laying in the box next to the rear corner of the 10th jug. Fired from a S&W M&P Compact 3.5 inch barrel.

The pictures left to right show the cast 9mm fired Winchester 115 grain TC, PMC 90 grain FMJ, and the Lee 120 grain TC.


So I'm with you in spirit just haven't done exactly what you have with 115 grain bullets as I was trying to stay in a heavier for caliber mode.

__________________
KSCowboy

I think the .380 is more limited because of the straight blowback action in most of them. That with case capacity and OAL limits will narrow things down quite a bit. Revolvers will no doubt offer the widest range by not requiring the load to cycle the action properly, they can get by with more. Even if you spring the gun for the heavier load you're increasing pressures higher than originally designed for.

There is probably a reason that the "max" for .380 is what it is, as is the 9mm. Generally a lighter bullet will have a higher velocity. Heavier than the 100-102 gr will not perform well. The XTP would probably not expand. XTP's seem to do well (expansion wise) only at high velocity.

The heaviest bullet I find in Speer, Hornady and Lyman Cast is the Lyman 120 gr LRN cast.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

I have loaded 125 grain cast bullets in the .380. I'd have to check my notes for charge weights but I kept the charges low and the loads functioned fine for plinking. That being said I think that 100 grain bullets are "right" for the little .380 and that is what I prefer to load.

I shoot a lot of 380's and I guess I just do not see any advantage to a heavier bullet for the cartridge.
But I do not see any for the 147 gr in 9mm either (for SD reasons) Some like it for PF in gun games.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

Thanks all, for your insights. I agree with most of what was said. I'm doing this for fun and to satisfy my own curiosity, not necessarily for any real world purpose (although I have been accused of living in the real world once in a while).
KSCowboy - it's too bad we don't live closer - we do think along the same lines.

Unfortunately, I sometimes do stupid things. I read somewhere that with a lot of use, the little colts tend to wear out the barrel locking grooves in the slide and that you then have to replace the slide. I then went and sold it

I find it interesting the Rainier didn't expand. aren't those soft copper plated lead?

Yes I too am convinced that XTP have to be driven to higher velocity than the OEM states in order to expand. 900fps is marginal I think. Gold Dot Short barrel are hard to find and $$$. Rem. makes a 102 Golden Sabre which is on my list to try and Magtech makes a 100gr soft point (looks like a lead tip hollow point)

Hey there 125JHP,

Yeah I'm easily bored so I tend to experiment with stuff like this.

You are right about the Rainiers, I had thought they would be soft enough to produce some expansion. But obviously that is not the case. So now I just use a little lighter load with the 120 TC Lead bullet as the 4.6 grain Power Pistol is just too much penetration.

Although........I have some 115 grain Win Silvertips I could load up and test out.........? How far off is spring?

__________________
KSCowboy

I've loaded 122gr Lyman 356242 cast bullets in the 380 "back in the day." We found the OAL limits of many guns in this caliber really restrict one to what I call a "fat RN" where the out-of-case portion of the bullet is pretty wide, as opposed to a more pointed bullet nose. Even then, there's still a practical limit to how much of that fat nose can stick out of the case. Perhaps if you're loading for one particular gun that's more accepting of long OAL, you'll be OK, but not in many. That's why we used that particular mould design -it fit all the criteria and worked in all the 380s we tried it in (7 different brands/models, IIRC). This characteristic of moving bullet weight out into the nose also creates more free space in the powder chamber in the case, which is critically important in a case this small.

The other big factor is we have to find a powder compact enough to fit in that small space, slow enough to raise pressures slowly with this very heavy bullet load, but reasonably fast enough to give us a decent velocity given the other two limitations. If I was doing this again today, I'd look hard at AA#5 as a starting point. I'd have to look at my powder list for other good candidates. Even with an "ideal" powder, you're looking at being over pressure with anything over about 850fps - or for sure 900. There's no free lunch, and it gets more expensive with tiny cases with heavy bullets. Pressure will rise, possibly sharply, so be very, very careful.

Oh, and as far as expansion goes - unless your using an exotic bullet, like a Glaser or Magsafe, or a really light bullet at high velocity, don't count on any expansion from a 380, ever...

This leads back to the old debate of light+speed vs heavy+penetration (which is what started me down this road in the first place)

Current thinking places more value on penetration and heavier bullets tend to produce that. With only 800-900fps +/- to play with, I am going with the idea of loading heavier in the 380 to get more performance and just to see if the theory used in other calibers applies to this one as well and... is it worth the effort. Effectiveness will probably never be put to the test.

OTOH...
Unlike the 9mm, the 380 doesn't have the excess power to use propelling heavy bullets and 115 might be unsuited for it. There must be a reason it's been dropped from most load manuals. Everywhere I did find data was dated in the 70's and 80's so, there were probably others who thought the same thing and it probably panned out to be not that effective for some reason.... Maybe it did work to some degree but the lawyers felt there was too much liability that close to the edge,etc.

Thanks for all those great details...

hmmm, I see now that a RN design such as the Remington JHP might be better than the XTP's truncated cone for keeping more weight out of the case thus allowing more powder space.

When I loaded the 122gr Berry's FMJ test loads mentioned in the first post, I was using N-320 (925fps), AA-7 (900fps)& W-231(990fps) . I usually use AA-5 but didn't that day. All three chron'd over 900fps. Looking at old load data, I figure I was somewhere around .5 to .8 grains over max load with each powder. The W231 surpassed 1000fps on a couple shots, so I was real lucky there. Definitely a 'don't try this at home' moment.

I just carry the Rem GS 102gr. or Speer GD. If they do not expand then they are just FMJ. I here the Win PDX is also a good round

I tried the Hornady critical DF in several calibers and had failures to fire, They do expand though.

Played with a lot of Mouse guns in 32 ACP and 380. I reload everything but still carry factory (whole other discussion)

Speed does kill and velocity does play a part in physics. Out of a short little barrel I want as fast as can be.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

Lyman 47th Edition also has data for most of the popular powders for a 115 JHP and a 121 LRN. Pages 379 and 380. I don't reload .380 though, so I don't know how they actually shoot.

One other factor that is actually advantageous in the .380....It is generally underloaded. The SAAMI max is 21,500psi (old standard was 18.9kCUP)..........look at the loads that include pressure data in the manuals and you will notice that hardly any go over 16k CUP......which means that the most "MAX" loads are18- 25% under the pressure ceiling. I suspect that their are a couple reasons for that-First that the performance lkevel established a century ago can be achieved at lower pressures. Second-deeper seating in small capacity cases can increase pressures dramatically. Since many reloaders fail to use the precise same components and/or load for the same amount of case intrusion their is a safety margin. Likewise if bullets are seated deeper by multiple chamberings and extractions . In any case their, IS a little room for increased charges or heavier bullet substitutions if a loader is observant and cautious. I Note in Lymans data they pushed 115 grain bullets at virtually the same speeds as 90 grainers... at similar pressures.

I've loaded the .380 since 1978, successfully. For years, I carried a PPK and used "SuperVel" ammo. I spent months trying to duplicate the velocity of the early 90gr. SuperVel and finally did. 5.2gr. of AA5 with the Sierra 90 gr bullet recorded 1025 fps.....pretty screaming for the .380. Then CorBon came out with some loads that were almost identical, and that is what I use for "carry" now.
Here's my take on the 115gr.....in the .380 it can be loaded for sub-sonic use with a suppressor, but most blowback guns will not tolerate the larger bullet, especially with a suppressor. First shot is fine, but junk and gas blow back and foul everything. Back to the 90gr. As mentioned above, most of the the problems lie in magazine dimensions and blow-back design. In the larger Colts and revolvers, anything is fine.
Terry
PS> the 4.8-5.2gr AA5 is HOT. Load carefully and methodically.

Also as tjpopkink states above, 380 brass is not the most "robust" brass out there. It is pretty thin stuff and is easily deformed, crushed or otherwise weakened. Supercharging the round can lead to problems.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

From Speer #11
.380 ACP - 115 grain loads / TMJ or JHP
Powder - Min - fps - Max - fps
HS6 - 5.1 - 937 - 5.3 - 997
Unique - 3.8 - 916 - 4.0 - 968
SR4756 - 3.7 - 911 - 3.9 - 966
231 - 3.6 - 931 - 3.8 - 978

The test pistol is said to be a Browning with a 4.5 inch barrel.
My book was published in 1991 and many of the loads are higher than what is currently recommended by books today.
I have not personally tried any of these heavy for caliber loads.
I don't like the idea that all of them are .2 grains from min. to max.
Not much range to work with.
Probably, better off just getting some 100 grain or lighter bullets to load.

The Barnes 95 grain total copper shows a lot of promise.

__________________
USPSA CRO
Patriot Guard rider

Speer does show about the highest pressure loadings. I am below their level, in line with Hodgdon when loading 100 grn plated RN bullets. They cycle fine & I have some 90 grn gold dots to use if needed.

You guys are making a lot of valuable points as to why it probably isn't a great idea in the first place. If I wasn't the type A personality that I am, I would probaby heed your warnings and shelf the whole project but I have a curiosity to satify... here kitty kitty kitty.

I got my XTP's in the mail today and made up a couple test rounds. The shortest OAL I can make them is .970" and those feed from the magazine without issue. There is a slight visual ring in the case at the base of the bullet and the case measures .374 at that point but it chambers fine. Next I will determing the longest OAL I can get reliable function and hopefully the case ring from the bullet base will disappear.. Might pull some Rem JHP's out of some 9mm I have to see how the differnt bullet shape alters things.

Say Ballistic... thanks for retyping that data from #11, it confirms the data I found in another old post somewhere however could you do me a favor and lookup the OAL on those loads? I agree with you that .2 gr is not much room for error - did they indicate any pressure data with those loads? Some of the other listings give much wider powder drops but that Speer #11 is the hottest with like powders. Once this experiment is done I will most likely drop back to something around 100 gr like you suggest. I have some 90gr XTP but I agree with MMA10mm and don't think they will expand at any speed obtainable from a 380 - probably better off with plain lead HP.

tjpopkin - Thanks for your experience and insight. You bring up a valid point vis blowback vs locked breech, unfortunatly I have a blowback tester.

Treeman - As you say, there is a little room but not much to play, but .1gr might be that limit in that small case. I see that Lyman #46 shows the same loads and almost the same velocities for both 90 and 115 - makes one wonder who wrote their tables.

Rule3 - You probably have the best solution going.

I'll update y'all as I progress down the path

Speer #11 - 380acp

For overall length it only says, " The SAAMI recommended cartridge overall length for auto-loading pistols is .984".
Pressure - These loads do not exceed 18,900cup, the industry maximum for this cartridge.
These statements are for all .380acp loads, 88 grains up to 115 grains.

If I was to try to load 115 grain pills in .380, I'd load them on the long side. Checking that they would fit in the magazine, and checking fit in the chamber of my pistol.

As long as that little swell in the case right at the bullet's base doesn't cause feeding issues, it's actually an advantage, not a bad thing. It is an artificial shelf that keeps the bullet from inadvertantly getting seated deeper during the feeding process (which drastically sky-rockets pressures). It works just like the cannelure the factories put in cases right below the seated bullets' bases. You're just doing it with your seating die instead of an extra step. If they feed good don't change it. It's only cosmetic from the bad point of view, and considering the loads you're playing with, its function far outweighs the cosmetics...

After hand cycling a magazine of dummy rounds thru the test gun several times I settled on .970" as a functional OAL. One thing that bothered me is how far the bullet seats into the small case, reducing volume and raising pressure. It requires .096" more case space than a similar 90gr XTP. This would be like seating the 90 gr to an OAL of .874" which is way shorter than any standard and insane to consider in the first place. Seems like every time I find an answer to one question, all I come up with is more questions.

I spent some morning coffee measuring various case dimension of both OEM loaded and (10 case) groups of various brands of fired cases. The different brands varied quite a bit from one another in their extremes. Maybe I've been handling 44's too much lately but the 380 impressed me with just how small it is for the performance derived. I "discovered" two things that have already been mentioned by the experienced posters above.... 1. there isn't much case capacity so pressure is gonna be tricky to handle safely and 2. the .380 brass is thinner than most. The .380 cases I measured with a tube micrometer are typically .008" at the mouth while a 45acp is usually .011". I suppose I could use nickle cases which are .009", but that would reduce the internal volume and drive pressures more. A quick check shows SAAMI max is actually 500psi less for the 45 and 38 SPL +P than it is for the .380 ! I'm not so sure I want to play in that sandbox.

I decide to find more info on powders, pressure and the 380 in order to consider which powder to work with. Since most of the old manual data gives pressure in CUP I was looking for info on a way to correlate CUP and PSI. I did find one study by Denton Bramwell that seemed to support a correlation formula that works for rifles but the author cautioned that it didn't hold true for pistol cartridges. Also the math involved in creating my own regression plot is more than I want to get into at the moment. At some time in the future, I might purchase the Quickload program, but I doubt it, as retirement affords a lot of things but extra cash is not one of them.

I also wanted to see if there were any powder pressure curve charts available for study. I wasn't able to find much info on the subject (ignoring most internet forum chatter as opinion) but I did turn up some interesting articles discussing pressure and powders in general. One that some here might find interesting, is a 2011 Shooting Times article by Allan Jones. He relates his experiences testing load pressures and converting from CUP to PSI during the writing of the Speer 12th edition manual. For those interested, it can be found here...

CUP, psi & Reloading Data

Some of the info in that article and a couple others, plus considerations posted in this thread, have caused me to reconsider my original idea. I believe I now understand one reason those heavy bullet .380 loads were dropped from the manuals...They are a little too close to the edge and unpredictable reloading variables are just too much of a risk (for my comfort) without a big budget test lab to control & verify results. I might still try a couple of 115gr with the old starting loads, but I'm not so sure there is anything to gain except bragging rights. I might just spend the emergency room co-pay money and buy some Cor-Bon or Buffalo Bore fodder to play with instead....

Thanks for all your input, I appreciate it and I hope this thread hasn't been a waste of time, I know it hasn't been for me. If I do go ahead with this, I'll report back my results.

Thanks
Al

There is (to my knowledge) no conversion factor or calculator to convert cup to psi or visa -versa.

A member here and another forum whom I have not heard from for a long time had quickload and did some calculations for me on other calibers and I asked him about it. No, it does not so save your money for that aspect of the program. It would be nice to have for all the other neat stuff it can do.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

You came to the same conclusion I eventually came to after playing with these. Another, more concise way of putting it is to apply the same expression used by many experts about the 44Spl/44Mag (don't try to make the 44 Spl a 44 Mag) by changing the names: don't try and make a 380 into a 9mm...

The best thing that has happened to 380s in over a decade is the Hornady Critical Defense ammo. It's not super-hot like BB or C-B, but it's hot enough, and it's bullet is the first (and still the only - as far as I know; I still haven't checked out the Barnes bullet someone recommended earlier, but I will - I'm very impressed with that company) to reliably expand at standard 380 pressures. It's what I carry in my back-up/off-duty pistol.

One line of thought it appears someone did some work on was to use CIP as an intermediary . I haven't read all of this site yet as I want to brush up on using the Powley Computer model but most of these computers are more applicable to rifle than they are for pistol cartridges. Some of the theory might make me a better guesser.

Have you seen... Cartridge Pressure Standards

No had not seen that nor the Powley Computer. Looks pretty neat. Book marked it.

"There's an App for that"

I have enough trouble dragging my chronograph to the range and setting it up

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

Came across this thread and have often wondered the same thing regarding the 115 grain bullet. My curiosity was peaked when I started comparing one of my handloads with a Montana Gold 95 grain JHP to a Remington Ultimate Defense .380/ 102 Grain BJHP round. I found it interesting that while all the .380 bullets I can find are .355 in diameter the Remington measures .3485. This is measured just above the case mouth as I've not yet pulled the bullet but the case seems to indicate this measurement is true to the base of the bullet. Seems like a good way to keep pressures under control

The Remington GS bullets are 0.355 below the case mouth; you're measuring the part above the case mouth, which is meant to approximate land diameter, not groove diameter. All GS bullets are designed this way. Making bullets 0.0065 under groove diameter would definitely not be a good way to lower chamber pressure, but it would be a good way to destroy accuracy!

Looks as if scientific testing says the .380 90/95s are the best for SD. The Precision One 90 XTPs in particular : Ammo Quest .380 Final Wrapup: finding the BEST ammo for a .380ACP pistol - YouTube

Nice report, it certainly challenges a lot of popular recommendations.
I would have liked to see a larger sample tested for each bullet. I wonder if 5 shots is sufficient but then OTOH I only test 5 to 10 in my messing around. I have also settled on the 90gr XTP (@975fps), 95gr Magtech filled-nose XTP (@975fps) and 102gr Golden sabre (@1010fps) [eta- my reloads of course] for my 380.

Today I loaded .380 Blazer once fired case with Extreme 9-115-RN using 3.1 gr HS6 powder COL .980 in my CZ83 I only loaded 4 rounds. Loaded 1 in mag chambered fine shot it ejected fine slide locked open loaded another same results loaded last 2 both cycled fine I found more load data at reloadammo.com

I only tested 2 115gr XTP loads in my 380 - both with Zip powder and got 825fps out of the higher charge. Best 5-shot group was just under 2" at 10yd. I decided the 102gr Golden Sabre was a better choice. 3.3gr of N320 gets me over 1000fps and a 1" group.