Range report on Buffalo Bores "FBI"

[roaddog28]

Hi,
Well, I finally was able to try Buffalo Bores LSWCHP 38+P 158gr round at the range yesterday. I used my Model 10-14 4 inch revolver and a Ruger Police Service Six 4 inch 357 magnum. Like the model 10 the Ruger has fixed sights. I used 12 rounds in each revolver. Sorry for not including the results on a paper target but my camera is broken. Distance was 25 feet. I shoot double action only.

The model 10 would print in the black and red on a bullet eye target nine out of twelve rounds. I was able to get four rounds in the red and five in the black area. Three were outside the red and black but that was me. The recoil was stiffer than any +P round I have ever used in a 38 special. I like the round but I am more accurate with the Winchester or Remington "FBI" rounds.

My Ruger Police Service Six did not do as well. I only managed two rounds in the red and four rounds in the black. The rest were a little low just outside the black. I was sighting the revolver the same way as the model 10 but I can only assume that since the revolver is a 357 a person has to sight the target at a different point than the model 10.

Conclusion, I have about twelve more rounds left to use as my self defense round. The model 10 is my HD revolver and I will use the Buffalo Bore until it is gone. But will probably go back to the Remington round because I feel follow-up shots will be quicker.

Any thoughts, experience or input on this round would be great.
Thanks,
Howard

Model 10-14 4 inch

Ruger Police Service Six 357 magnum

[David Sinko]

There's no doubting the velocity that it achieves. You should get right around 1100 FPS from the 4" barrel. My only concern is that the soft hollowpoint bullet will expand too quickly.

How does it extract from the Model 10? Any stickiness at all?

Dave Sinko

[badguybuster]

Dont they typically advise not shooting those "BUFFALO BORE" rounds from a short barrel? Hows the wrist feel today? I shot some 357 mag BB out of my henry big boy and it was pretty good but not sure if a revolver would hold too well to much of it.

[APS]

This is an interesting round. Just because it's going faster doesn't necessarily make it a better stopper. The bullet could overexpand and underpenetrate or underexpand and overpenetrate compared to the Remington load. I found gelatin tests on brassfetcher's site for the 2" barrel. The Buffalo bore load expanded slightly less than the Remington and penetrated .4" farther. I suppose the extra velocity could create a larger temporary cavity.

[roaddog28]

Originally Posted by David Sinko

There's no doubting the velocity that it achieves. You should get right around 1100 FPS from the 4" barrel. My only concern is that the soft hollowpoint bullet will expand too quickly.

How does it extract from the Model 10? Any stickiness at all?

Dave Sinko

Dave, I had not had problems with either revolver extracting rounds after firing them. You are right about the 1100 FPS rating. Most information I have seen says the same. I was concern about the recoil. To me the recoil was like shooting a 357 magnum round. Now, I am a small person with small hands so I am more recoil sensitive to it. But I do shoot 357s and the Buffalo Bore seemed to have about as much as a lot of the 357 rounds. Maybe its me. As a SD round in my model 10, shot placement and be able to followup quickly with another shot too me is key. With the recoil on the Buffalo Bore I would rather use a larger frame revolver like a my L frame. The round to me is like shooting a 357 round in a 38 special revolver. I have always used the Remington LSWCHP 38+P round because it shoots POA in a model 10 4 inch revolver and is quicker on followup shots. I know the velocity is not as good but this round has worked well for years for a SD round in a 38 special revolver. I am wondering does it make sense to use the Buffalo Bore round when its almost equal to a magnum round?

Just some thinking.
Howard

[David Sinko]

I continue to be amazed by this concept of "overpenetration," especially within the context of a .38 Special with a 2" barrel. The .38 Special snub needs all the penetration it can get! Traditionally the way to do this is with a hard non-expanding bullet or velocity, or both. Soft bullets tend to deform badly against bone and get cut, and of course this slows penetration. The hollow point makes matters worse. At least you get the velocity with the Buffalo Bore load. I would carry it without reservation, especially in the K Frame. Increased recoil is a natural byproduct of increased performance. There are no magic bullets that perform well at .38 snub velocities.

Dave Sinko

[APS]

So do you prefer a non hollowpoint bullet? That's the easiest way you can be assured of the bullet penetrating deeply enough. How do you know that the faster speed of this buffalo bore HP won't underpenetrate b/c of expansion? I think they do make a non HP style in the same velocity.

[SMSgt]

Over/under penetration. Over expansion. Ineffective .38s. Just shoot the BG and let him worry about it. Heck, shoot him twice--three times--whatever makes you feel comfortable. Don't lose sleep over what magic load or bullet you use.

[APS]

Originally Posted by SMSgt

Over/under penetration. Over expansion. Ineffective .38s. Just shoot the BG and let him worry about it. Heck, shoot him twice--three times--whatever makes you feel comfortable. Don't lose sleep over what magic load or bullet you use.

Right on man!

[bronco45]

Gotta agree with the Senior Master on this one.

[nitesite]

Wanna see what Buffalo Bore 20A ammo looks when fired in the dark?

I took this photo (and lots of others with different factory and handloads) of the night time muzzle flash. That thread is now a couple years old so I thought I'd add it to your thread in case you find the pic to be helpful.

I have another shot of BB .38 +P from a 442.

[REM 3200]

Originally Posted by nitesite

I have another shot of BB .38 +P from a 442.

Let's see it.

[sheriffoconee]

Originally Posted by SMSgt

Over/under penetration. Over expansion. Ineffective .38s. Just shoot the BG and let him worry about it. Heck, shoot him twice--three times--whatever makes you feel comfortable. Don't lose sleep over what magic load or bullet you use.

to steal a phrase, "common sense is an uncommon virtue", ESPECIALLY on the internet.....
Thanks for condensing the nonsense SMSgt...

[nitesite]

Originally Posted by REM 3200

Let's see it.

Okay, but any more interest in my photographs should be directed toward finding my threads on this forum and glockpost. I want to keep the original topic uncluttered out of respect for the OP.

[chief38]

I carry Buffalo Bore ammo exclusively (after testing & chronographing over a period of a month) in my 2" Chief's Special on a daily basis. From a 2" barrel you will get about 1020 to 1040 fps which will relate to around 350 foot pounds of energy with the 158 grain bullet. Simply AMAZING for a 2" .38 special!! The extra length of a 4" tube will bring it up to 1100 fps.I find them to be accurate, reliable, and powerful - what else could you ask for? Those ballistics approach Rem. Win. & Fed. 158 grain .357 velocities out of a 2" gun. Yes the recoil is stiff, but nothing that with a little practice can't be mastered. Great stuff!

chief38

[coach22]

In my SS Ruger Speed Six 2 & 3/4 inch 357,
there are BB 158 +P's.
In my 640 (38), the first 2 up are
BB 158 non +P and the last 3 are the +P.
The first 2 are fast and warm up for the next 3.

[Dump1567]

From Doctor Gary Roberts:

There have been many reports in the scientific literature, by Dr. Fackler and others, recommending the 158 gr +P LSWCHP as offering adequate performance. Please put this in context for the time that these papers were written in the late 1980's and early 1990's--no denim testing was being performed at that time, no robust expanding JHP's, like the Barnes XPB, Federal Tactical & HST, Speer Gold Dot, or Win Ranger Talon existed. In the proper historical perspective, the 158 gr +P LSWCHP fired out 3-4" barrel revolvers was one of the best rounds available--and it is still a viable choice, as long as you understand its characteristics.

While oversimplified, bare gelatin gives information about best case performance, while 4 layer denim provides data on worst case performance--in reality, the actual performance may be somewhere in between. The four layer denim test is NOT designed to simulate any type of clothing--it is simply an engineering test to assess the ability of a projectile to resist plugging and robustly expand. FWIW, one of the senior engineers at a very respected handgun ammunition manufacturer recently commented that bullets that do well in 4 layer denim testing have invariably worked well in actual officer involved shooting incidents.

With few exceptions, the vast majority of .38 Sp JHP's fail to expand when fired from 2" barrels in the 4 layer denim test. Many of the lighter JHP's demonstrate overexpansion and insufficient penetration in bare gel testing. Also, the harsher recoil of the +P loads in lightweight J-frames tends to minimize practice efforts and decrease accuracy for many officers. The 158 gr +P LSWCHP offers adequate penetration, however in a 2" revolver the 158gr +P LSWCHP does not reliably expand. If it fails to expand, it will produce less wound trauma than a WC. Target wadcutters offer good penetration, cut tissue efficiently, and have relatively mild recoil. With wadcutters harder alloys and sharper leading edges are the way to go. Wadcutters perform exactly the same in both bare and 4 layer denim covered gel when fired from a 2" J-frame.

When faced with too little penetration, as is common with lightweight .38 Sp JHP loads or too much penetration like with the wadcutters, then go with penetration. Agencies around here have used the Winchester 148 gr standard pressure lead target wadcutter (X38SMRP), as well as the Federal (GM38A) version--both work. A sharper edged wadcutter would even be better... Dr. Fackler has written in Fackler ML: "The Full Wadcutter--An Extremely Effective Bullet Design", Wound Ballistics Review. 4(2):6-7, Fall 1999)
Quote:

"As a surgeon by profession, I am impressed by bullets with a cutting action (eg. Winchester Talon and Remington Golden Saber). Cutting is many times more efficient at disrupting tissue than the crushing mechanism by which ordinary bullets produce the hole through which they penetrate. The secret to the increased efficiency of the full wadcutter bullet is the cutting action of its sharp circumferential leading edge. Actually, cutting is simply very localized crush; by decreasing the area over which a given force is spread, we can greatly increase the magnitude to the amount of force delivered per unit are--which is a fancy way of saying that sharp knives cut a lot better than dull ones. As a result, the calculation of forces on tissue during penetration underestimate the true effectiveness of the wadcutter bullet relative to other shapes."

Currently, the Speer Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP and Barnes 110 gr XPB all copper JHP (for ex. in the Corbon DPX loading) offer the most reliable expansion we have seen from a .38 sp 2” BUG; the Winchester 130 gr bonded +P JHP (RA38B) and Hornady 110 gr standard pressure and +P Critical Defense loads also offer good performance out of 2" barrel revolvers.

Any of the Airweight J-frames are fine for BUG use. The steel J-frames are a bit too heavy for comfortable all day wear on the ankle, body armor, or in a pocket. My current J-frames are 342's and previously in my career I have used the 37, 38, 649, and 642. I like the 342 w/Lasergrips very much. Shooting is not too bad with standard pressure wadcutters and the 110 gr DPX, but not so comfortable with the Speer 135 gr JHP +P Gold Dots. Before the advent of the 110 gr Corbon DPX load, I used to carry standard pressure wadcutters in my J-frames with Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP's in speed strips for re-loads, as the flat front wadcutters were hard to reload with under stress. There is no reason to go with .357 mag in a J-frame, as the significantly larger muzzle blast and flash, and harsher recoil of the .357 Magnum does not result in substantially improved terminal performance compared to the more controllable .38 Special bullets when fired from 2” barrels.

For years, J-frames were considered "arm's reach" weapons, that is until CTC Lasergrips were added. With the mild recoil of target wadcutters, officers are actually practicing with their BUG's; when combined with Lasergrips, qualification scores with J-frames have dramatically increased. Now 5 shots rapid-fire in a 6" circle at 25 yds is not uncommon--kind of mind blowing watching officers who could not hit the target at 25 yds with a J-frame suddenly qualify with all shots in the black…

2" J-frames are great BUG's and marginally acceptable low threat carry guns because they are lightweight, reliable, and offer acceptable terminal performance at close range--downsides are difficulty in shooting well at longer ranges because of sight design and sight radius limitations, along with reduced capacity coupled with slower reloading. Nonetheless, with the addition of CTC Laser Grips and an enclosed or shrouded hammer, the 2" J-frame models without key locks (I personally will NEVER own firearm with an integral lock) may be the best BUG's and most reliable pocket handguns available.