First, TYVM for such a quick reponse!

Flop-shank, that does make alot of sense. The DPX are seated waaaaaay deep and I'd expect the powder they have room for might get the 80gr bullet moving, but the type of powder needed won't be able to maintain that energy.

I have searched StoppingPower and found DPX tested in everything from 9mm to .30 Carbine to 7.62X39, but no .380 unfortunately. I forgot about Golden Loki. They show a beautifully expanded bullet that was recovered just short of 11". The FTX aren't much better, but the GD performed well, echoing your results. (Incidentally, my freebie Golden Saber's test no better than ball, no wonder they were given away)

I had forgotten about the Hornady ammo when it showed up out of the blue from backorder. I have already concluded to use the GD, but I'll give them a try. The Double Tap I have loaded now function perfectly and are accurate, but I think they are punishing my Kel-Tec a bit too much. Hopefully it'll like the taste of "Gold."

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

I used the tags ".380 DPX" to do a search in the test bed forum only at www.stoppingpower.net .

The threads I saw that were of interest were, Perma-Gel Tests and Corbon .380 80gr. DPX.

So knee, hip, and now the eyes are going. For a young guy I'm falling apart pretty fast! I'm not sure how I missed those.

Those are some pretty dismal numbers. As discussed many times before, when you get .7" expansion in a .380 it really puts on the brakes. The biggest problem I'm seeing is inconsistent numbers. One test shows .65" expansion and 10" penetration. Another shows .732" expansion and only 6.75" penetration in the same medium.

.380 is just not the caliber for DPX.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

Rich, while Perma-Gel and 10% gel aren't the same medium, they should give close enough results for a fair enough comparison. Even 10% gel varies a bit. I was thinking about the differing test results of DPX today, so I decided to see if the shallow results were the earliest. I was suspicious that the cats at Barnes and Corbon had tweeked the load. As it turns out the deeper penetrating test results in the Perma-Gel thread on Marshall's forum did come later and the second post is by none other than Mike Shovel from Corbon. He posted that yes, the ammo had been changed from early production so as to get better penetration without increasing pressure. I would look to more recent results than the original .380 DPX thread for a good idea of what one can expect from current production DPX. I'm glad you brought this up, because current production DPX would probably be the most reliable expander in that caliber. If the penetration is better than 10" it would be one of the best .380 defensive loads IMO.

Flop-shank, I just went back and looked both posts. It's good to know that Cor-Bon has paid some attention to improving this round. 10" is not horrible, especially with a .65" hole, though I'd like to see a little more out of it. By now, 3 years later, it might be there. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

I may have to invest in a block of Perma-Gel and try out the newest load.

DPX is beginning to look just as impressive as Gold Dot across the board (I've said before that numbers show GD is a good choice in ANY caliber). I hope they keep improving.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

Flop, have you tested the r357m2 (158grain sjhp)?

It's funny, your perma gel results with the r357m1, in terms of depth and penetration, are almost identical to what I see with firing into a rubber mulch bullet trap. (12-14 inches regardless of denim or no denim in front of the target)

For the 158gr @ 1250fps I've been getting between 15 and 18 inches of penetration and a little more than .500" of expansion. I was just curious to see how my cheap/reusable mulch compares as a test media to the perma gel.

PPS, I have absolutely no idea how rubber mulch combares to Perma-Gel. You might want to compare any test results you have to 10% gel and P-G results for various loads.

I have never tested R357M2, even though I think it's a super cool load.

Rich, thank you for making me revisit .380 DPX. My whole opinion on that load is different than it was a few days ago. I wouldn't have taken a second look were it not for your inquery.

DPX and Gold Dot are both cutting edge and, no doubt some great minds are behind both.

If you invest in a block of P-G you will get an incredible education in ammunition. Just like a chrono, P-G tells one just what his ammo is doing from his gun, how ammo behaves in general, and gives a great medium for comparing one's own test results to 10% gel results found online, as well as a great way to see which load works best when accuracy, reliability and power are comparable.

P-G was invented by Dr. Darryl Amick, who also invented Hevi-Shot. I've talked to him on the phone when I had questions about P-G. He's a very friendly, approachable, and helpful guy. No doubt he's a total gun crank not unlike any number of us. He's actually lurked here as he was interested in what was being done with and discussed about his product. It's a real shame more people don't use the stuff. It's not much more expensive than an entry level chrono.

I was just curious if you had any P-G results for that round. I have looked at my bullets performance in the rubber mulch compared to published results in 10% ballistics gel and it's darn close.

I had previously put these results elsewhere in the ammo forum. I don't know if they are still around, or lost to the sands of time, but I figured that I might as well put them in the P-G thread and thus do something meaningful and give the thread a bump at the same time.

Federal .38 spl. std. pressure 125 gr. Nyclad (P38M) / 3" S&W model 60

Round #1 4 layer denim/P-G, 15 1/2"+, .412 avg. rec. dia.

This bullet expanded poorly, but expand it did, and that's impressive from a std. pressure .38 through heavy cloth. The recovered bullet is flared not unlike the end of a trumpet. It took a curved path through the gel block, exited the side at 15 1/2" and was recovered from the lab floor. Although I tested this load from a 3" gun, my hunch is that from a 2" barrel through heavy cloth expansion would be iffy. I am, however, guessing that this load would be a reasonably reliable expander from a 2" gun during t-shirt weather.

Speer .38+P Short Barrel 135 gr. Gold Dot (23921) / S&W 360 PD 1 7/8"

Round #1 bare P-G, 14" pen., .572 avg. rec. dia.
Round #2 4 layer denim/P-G, 17 1/2" pen., no expansion

round #2 was right on it's expansion threshold and the prestressed lines inside the hollow cavity are visible, but it just didn't quite "pop". It did, however, tumble base forward and behave like a wadcutter as it penetrated very deeply. Other online tests I've seen show expansion through four layer denim.

Corbon .38+P 110 gr. DPX (DPX38110/20) / S&W 360 PD 1 7/8"

Round#1 4 layer denim/P-G 12.75" pen., .620 avg. rec. dia.

Who says 110s can't penetrate nicely? Here we see where bullet design is brought to bear. When the Barnes X bullet expands, it sprouts sharp claws that extend out. Due to having open space between the "claws" the bullet doesn't "hit the brakes" as hard as a traditional mushroom would, thus allowing more penetration.

Corbon 110 gr. JHP (38110/20) / S&W 360 PD 1 7/8"

Round#1 4 layers denim/P-G 16" pen., .590 avg. rec. dia.

Another deep penetrating 110 grainer. These are loaded very hot. No fragmentation is noted.

Hornady .38 Critical Defense is coming soon!

Flop-Shank, thanks for your time and dedication for this information. Your results with the Speer 135gr+P Short Barrel load is the second post I've seen where this load failed to expand after encountering denim. The first time I read about this load failing is here What is the scoop on Hornady's new handgun ammo with the plastic in the hollow point. - Page 2 - M4Carbine.net Forums
be sure to scroll down the page for the re-test results.

One of the local stores here finally got this ammo in stock, I picked a aouple of boxes for just in case since I can;t find the Rem "FBI" load. Then I read the above post a dy or two ago and now this one. I'm not so sure I want to use this for CCW purposes at this pont. I can't wait to see your results with the Hornady load, Mr. Camp had good things to say about not long ago. Thanks again.

336, you're most welcome. I'm glad to share. Thank you for posting that link. I'll read it tomorrow as I need to hit the sack here pretty quickly.

As far as Speer SB goes, the internet buzz I'm catching is that failure to expand hasn't been a real issue on the street. If any of you LEOs out there in cyber-space are seeing failures with the Speer SB load, please let us know.

A shooting friend gave me two rounds of Hornady CD. I have it tested and documented, but I forgot to ask if it was std. pressure, or +P. Once I get that info, I'll post. I will say that based on what I've seen, I would look for DPX. I like it more than Critical Defense. All things being equal, DPX should be better against auto glass. CD is not bonded.

Good stuff, Thanks for the info.

__________________
dd884
JMHO-YMMV

You're welcome, ddixie
336, I thought about what you said above and also the information in the link you posted. Two things immediately come to mind. The first is that the .38+P, not unlike the .380, really is a marginal caliber. It operates too close to it's expansion threshold for my comfort. I've circumvented the problem by using .357s in my snubs. I use Speer SB .357s in my 360 PD. I do not use or carry .38 spl. ammo. I can, and am willing to pay the price in recoil. YMMV

The second thing that has become painfully obvious is that big ammo is putting out inconsistent **** nowdays. I've had defective ammo in the last couple of years from Speer, Remington, Buffalo Bore and Hornady. QC is in the toilet. The saddest thing is that I don't buy a whole lot of factory ammo. I don't think the road I'm taking is right for everyone, but as I use up my stock of factory ammo, I'm going to use handloads for everything. I make better ammo than they do. Once again, YMMV

How about a test of Corbon DPX .380? I've given them more consideration since I brought them up a while back, but still haven't found any terminal ballistics from the current loading. I would gladly supply a few rounds.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

Rich, I'll PM you my contact info later.

Hornady Critical Defense .38 spl. std. pressure 110 gr. (90310)/S&W 360 PD 1 7/8"

Round #1, bare P-G, 13 1/2" pen., .436 avg. rec. dia.

Round #2, 4 layer denim/P-G, 17"+ (exited block), no expansion.

No fragmentation noted from either bullet. Round #2 was still cruising pretty good when it exited the block as evidenced by the severe flattening on one side of the bullet after impact with my fiberglass backstop.

Certainly this is a viable option in std. pressure .38 along with the Federal 125 gr. Nyclad and various maker's wadcutters.

Thanks for sharing all of these results with us

Thanks +1. I finally got around to reading the whole thread. Very interesting.

You're most welcome, guys.

That said, I want to extend a .500 S&W-size thank you to BigRich315. He donated the ammo for this test, and the one to follow, to the tune of twelve rounds of premium defensive ammo (all .380. three rounds ea. of Double Tap, Magtech, Corbon and Remington), plus shipping. I'm very appreciative. I likely would have spent the money eventually and many, including cops, will benefit from his generousity.

Corbon .380 80 gr. DPX (DPX38080-20)/Kel-tec P3AT
Round#1, bare P-G, 9 5/8" pen., .468" avg. rec. dia.
Round#2, 4 layer denim P-G, 8 3/8" pen., .573" avg. rec. dia.
The avg. rec. diameters are worthy of note. I get them by measuring the width of the bullet by measuring the widest and narrowest distance across the expanded bullet, then averaging the two. In this case and round #1 for the Golden Sabre listed below, that creates a somewhat blurred picture, IMO. Round#1 expanded, but only three of the six petals popped open. Three petals on one side of the bullet are still fused together. Round#2 did better five of six petals opened. That says something for DPX that it actually expanded better through heavy cloth.

Remington .380 102 gr. Golden Sabre BJHP (GS380B)/Kel-tec P3AT
Round#1, bare P-G, 13 3/4" pen., .417 avg. rec. dia. Two of six petals opened.
Round#2, 4 layer denim/P-G, 16 1/2" pen., no expansion.
This is a classic example of a heavy for caliber bullet from a slow, low pressure cartridge and a short barrel struggling to expand.

Conclusions; well, here we see two of the more highly regarded .380 loads working their ***** off like "the little engine that could" and proving that .380 is a pretty ****** caliber. The best and brightest engineers struggle to make mediocre loads. The lousy ones blow chunks. Of the two I like the Golden Sabre (I'll stick with Gold Dots however), in deference to my friend from New Mexico who is a big advocate of penetration. Neither is a bad load, after all it's a .380. Don't carry one as a primary if you have a choice!!!!!!

Coming soon, Magtech and Double tap!!!!!

First, I'm more than happy to contribute and do my part to increase the usefulness and knowledge of the forum (for a change , especially when it gives me the answers I want and saves me the price of a block of Perma-Gel). Thank you again, Flop-shank, for taking the time and effort of performing this test and all those in this very useful and knowledgeable thread.

These results support what we've seen from these loads elsewhere, but I had hoped the DPX had been improved. Even though I'd like to see another 2" of penetration from the DPX you have to like that kind of expansion. IF the Golden Sabers expand I would think they would be fairly effective; perhaps from a longer barrel, but then you get into the realm where a 9mm is more logical. I think I'll hold onto the DPX and "dispose" of the rest of the GS appropriately.

I'll keep the Gold Dots loaded for now, and I'm looking forward to seeing the Double Tap results, they are very accurate out of my P3AT, even unusually so, and seem to have alot of power (not as bad as the Buffalo Bore). They are a bit of a handfull though.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

My friend, never burn premium ammo as range ammo. Save it for reference (example; a you or a friend may want to see what's more accurate/reliable in his gun). It will save money later. Push come to shove, you can always burn it later. It goes a little deep, but that GS isn't the worst overpenetrator (well maybe it is in .380 for a JHP, LOL) and it does have weight (momentum) on it's side.

Rich, I'm glad the Double Taps didn't beat the **** out of your P3AT. I've wondered about that. How many have you fired?

I ran a few mags through when I was testing different SD rounds, 21 rounds total (I have the +1 extension). I took a close look when I got it home and found no evidence of damage like you did from BB. Gold Dot shot well also and your penetration numbers are great so I figured why punish the gun with DT if GD does the job.

And you have a point about burning through good ammo. They were freebies but that's still no excuse. A buddy plans on getting a Walther PK380 soon so I'll save them for him. Out of the longer barrel they should perform pretty well, and one of these days I'll invest in that block of P-G to find out. Heck, he might even go in for half.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

I have very strong opinions regarding P-G. The first is that I doubt Dr. Amick is selling a ton of it and if people don't buy the stuff it might go away. The second is that it's an irreplaceable ammo testing tool every bit as important as a chronograph. The third is that it is what hobbyist have needed; ballistic gelatin that doesn't need to take up valuable fridge space. My block must have been sitting ready to go for six months before I resumed testing recently. It's ready when you are and as long as it's close to room temp., it's good to go. It's available from Midway USA exclusively, last time I looked. The Midway reviews are very informative.

I'm answering my own question again with that, aren't I... Even if Double Tap performs well, Gold Dot still gets the nod. I guess it's still good to know for sure though, and to have a better second choice.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

Winchester .44 mag. 210 gr. Silvertip (X44MS)/5" S&W 629
Round#1, bare P-G, 12 3/4" pen., .808" avg. rec. dia.
One 1.7 gr. fragment penetrated to 13 1/2" right ahead of the bullet. Several small and two large fragments are observed in and approximal to the main wound track.
Round#2, 4 layer denim/P-G, 17"+ pen., .740 avg. rec. dia.
This bullet showed moderate flattening of it's nose due to it's impact with my fiberglass backstop after passing through the gel block. One large fragment is recovered at ~ 8" depth approximal to the main wound track it created it's own path of about 1 1/2" length.
Federal .44 mag. 180 gr. JHP (C44B)/5" S&W 629
Round#1, bare P-G, 13" pen., .681 avg. rec. dia. One 13.2 gr. fragment diverged from the main wound channel upon entry and created it's own secondary channel to a depth of 4 1/2". Two large fragments were also recovered from the main wound channel.
Round#2, 4 layer denim/P-G, 10" pen. .853 avg. rec. dia.
It was awe inspiring seeing over 900 fpe. stopped in only 10" from a handgun!!! The expansion of the block was violent enough to shear the drywall screws and split the 2x4s that my table is made from. Who ever said that the .44 magnum is an overpenetrator? It certainly doesn't have to be. This is the go-to load for the few seeking a full power factory .44 magnum load for self defense, IMO.
Remington .44 mag. 240 gr. SJHP (R44MG3)/5" S&W 629
Round#1, bare P-G, 17"+ pen. .753 avg. rec. dia.
This bullet was nowhere near spent when it hit the backstop. It knocked a big divot of fiberglass off from the back and would have penetrated several inches more P-G had it been present. The bullet nose was severely flattened by the impact and would have affected the above listed avg. rec. diameter. There were six secondary fragments radiating out into a 2" diameter area 3 3/4" deep from the initial entry. Their avg. weight is 7.13 grains. Two fragment were removed from or adjacent to the main wound channel. Their avg. weight is 3.7 grains. The impact on the gel block was, like the Federal load listed above, pretty ferocious. I did not test this load through heavy cloth since round #1 revealed that it obviously was an overpenetrator for self defense purposes and animals don't wear clothing. This would be a good one for deer.

Thanks for that!! Not many folks test the .44 magnum

Fed. 180gr JHP, WOW!!!

Now there's a man-stopper if I've ever seen one! That kind of energy dissipation in such a short distance has to be devastating.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

First, I would like to, once again, thank BigRich315 for providing the ammo in this test. Thanks to Rich, I think that we've now covered all, or at least most of, the serious top contenders in this caliber (excepting FMJ).

Magtech .380 First Defense 77 gr. SCHP (FD380A)/Kel-tec P3AT
Round#1, bare P-G, 12" pen.
Round#2, 4 layer denim P-G, 12 1/2" pen.
Double Tap .380 95 gr. Controlled Expansion JHP/Kel-tec P3AT
Round#1, bare P-G, 13 1/2" pen.
Round#2, 4 layer denim P-G, 15 1/2" pen.
The hollowpoints of all four bullets in this test flared open slightly, but did not exceeed the diameter of the bullet base.

IMO, the Controlled Expansion JHP is aptly named.
Once again, two decent .380 loads perform marginally. That's an achievement in the wimpy .380!

FWIW, folks, I have a Corbon .44 magnum 165 gr. JHP test in the works. It may take awhile, but I will post the results when they are complete.

Today I fired the last 4 .380 rounds as well Speer and Hornady Critical defense for accuracy. They all performed pretty well. Now with solid numbers of many top competitors, I can safely say Speer Gold Dot is the best choice. I do wish DPX performed better though: it was the most accurate and was the softest shooter by far. I'm glad we could help put some concerns to rest!

Keeping in mind that a P3AT is by no means a primary weapon (if you can avoid it), I feel alot better now carring it.

Just curious, what did you thnk of the recoil from the Double Tap?

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

Rich, to be honest, I didn't really form an opinion about the DT .380. It obviously wasn't mild, but I was super focused on putting the shot exactly where it needed to go, and my P3AT is actually one of the more pleasant guns I frequently shoot. My .357 snub dish out a lot more punishment. Thankfully, all the rounds in both of the last two test tracked reasonably straight, so I didn't need to do any reshoots.

Corbon .44 magnum 165 gr. JHP (SD44165/20)/5" S&W 629

Round#1 bare P-G, 12 3/4" pen. (the bullet itself), avg. rec. dia. .470", rec. wt. 84.4 grains. The jacket seperated and was recovered from the main wound channel at 11" from the initial entry along with five other fragments. The avg. wt. of the fragments is 2.6 grains. The jacket weighs 28.1 grains. A single fragment was recovered 1" ahead of the main bullet. It weighs 3.2 grains. A cluster of five fragments was recovered 1/2" ahead of the main bullet. Their avg. wt. is 6.6 grains. Five secondary fragments are recovered from between ~ 3" - 9" depth. Two, or three, of them diverged from the main wound channel enough that serious wounding on their behalf would be quite possible. Their avg. wt. is three grains.

I've personally pulled this bullet and loaded it up to full house levels (1656 fps.), then fired it into P-G. The rec. wt. and depth of penetration were similar to the downloaded factory load (the rec. dia. was bigger when loaded red hot [31.5 gr. H110, Starline brass and a CCI magnum primer]). When loaded hot, this bullet exibits the same type of radial fragmentation associated with hot 125 gr. .357s (see the test results for R357M1 from a 6" 686). This load exibited none of the "jello gymnastics" (the block went airborne and by no small amount) of R357M1 from a 6" gun, or hot .44 mags. the gel just layed there. I have previously chronoed a single round of the Corbon factory load at 1250 fps. (573 fpe., it's power is roughly eqivalent to a 4" .357 revolver loaded with R357M1) from my 5" gun.

As time allows, I intend to test this load through four layers of denim. The P-G is being remolded right now.

Thanks for doing that test.

I bought a few boxes of that at a good price when I was on a road trip a while back.

I shot a few of them last week and was suprized at how little they kicked.

Shot them in a Mountain Gun and a 6 1/2" Mod 29.

When I am on a hunting trip I most often carry a 4" 44 with penetration type loads, but I like to have a few lower penetrating rounds to use when traveling through cities.

Corbon .44 mag. 165 gr. JHP (SD44165/20)/5" 629

Round#1 4 layer denim/P-G, 11 7/8" pen., .782 avg. rec. diameter. On large copper fragment was recovered from the main wound channel directly behind the bullet. No other fragmentation was of noted.

That looks like a good "lower penetrating" load to me.

It still expands through clothing, even more than bare G, but fragments less, and still has low penetration [for a 44 Mag].

The recoil on this load is not to bad either.

What 44 Mag load is next, the Speer 200gr Gold Dot Short Barreled load.

Actually I haven't given that load any thought, but it would be nice to have a side by side comparison available for people to compare. I'll jump at the chance if someone is willing to part with three rounds.

As far as the Corbon load goes, it behaved somewhat like the Federal 180 gr. .44 magnum. The cloth retarded expansion so the bullet didn't suffer erosion and thus wound up bigger and penetrated a little less.

It's always interesting to see how clothing affects different bullets. Sometimes, because it cause the larger diameter phenomenon I described above they penetrate less. Sometimes that same "expansion retardation" causes less, or no, expansion and the bullet will go deeper. Normally the ones that penetrate less don't do so enough to warrant switching ammo in cold weather based on my limited experience. I consider it a waste of time. I'm also of the opinion that heavy clothing normally doesn't stop bullets worth a darn, it can only cause them to penetrate less, to any noteworthy degree, by how it affects expansion.

I always enjoy reading these very informative posts. Thanks!

I'm about to become the owner of a Ruger LCR .38, my first defensive.38, so I immediately thought of this thread to begin thinking of carry loads. Thanks again for such an informative and very useful compilation.

The few .38 tests here look promising. My choice would be between Speer 135gr +P Gold Dots and Corbon 110gr +P DPX. Both show good penetration, but WOW look at the expansion on the DPX!!! Gold Dot and DPX are quickly becoming my go-to rounds.

Do you have any further thoughts on these loads, Flop-shank? Or anyone else for that matter.

(P.S.: I know it is not a S&W .357, but I won it in a raffle, so can't complain!)

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

I guess the only thing I would suggest is that you try Speer SB first. If it shoots to POA, look no further. If it shoots high, try DPX, if it shoots low, try Buffalo Bore's, or Remington's version of the FBI load. The beauty of .38+P is that there are top notch loads in three weights, so something ought to shoot to POA elevation-wise.

Oh, FWIW, my range partner, Will, donated a couple Federal .357 130 gr. Hydra-Shoks. The gel has been shot and the results recorded. I'll post as time allows. The test gun was a 2 1/4" Ruger SP-101. I also have Remington .357 125 gr. SJHP (R357M1), 2 1/4" Taurus 605, four layer denim/P-G in the can.

Lookin' forward to the .357 mag loads from the short barrels. I've been carrying Speer's .357 mag Gold Dot 135 gr short barrel loading in my 640-1. Have you tried this load in the tube Flop-Shank?

That's the kind of insight I was hoping for, thank you very much.

I also look forward to the short .357 results.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

Thank for your kind words, guys. I'll probably have the .357 results up in a day or two. I've been busy getting caught up in the reloading room before the summer heat makes things miserable.Sure have, Lobo! Check out post #27. That's a great load and it's what I carry in my 360 PD.

Thanks bud!!

Speeking of #27...

It shows the difference between Speer Gold Dot 135gr SB in both .38+P and .357. At first the results are a little misleading. There is only an approximate 3% increase to the .357 numbers, but remember that this round begins with an extra 72 pounds of energy!

That's an extra 33%, and that extra energy dissipates in only an extra half inch! That is significantly more punch if you and your gun can handle it.

I've seen the debate (we all have) over if the difference between .38+P and .357 is worth it with shorter barrels, or even if there is a difference. I was arguing this point yesterday and earlier today. Here's the proof in numbers. (At least with THESE loads)

My .357's will have .357's.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

Yep, any increase in velocity can only help expansion.

..../2 1/4" Ruger SP-101

Round#1, bare P-G, 12 3/4" pen., .616" avg. rec. diameter. While still correctly located on the base of the bullet, the jacket seperated while being removed from the gel block. The jacket had a couple petals projecting out quite far and measures .540" x .975". No other fragmentation was noted.

Round#2, four layer denim/P-G, 17" + pen., .568 avg. rec. diameter. The bullet was mostly spent when it hit the fiberglass backstop as evidenced by the mild flattening of it's face. This flattening did increase the rec. dia. slightly.

Conclusions, while the #2 bullet didn't expand as big as #1 it did expand quite well. This load would be fine in southern climates and, although an overpenetrator, ought to work fine when faced with heavy clothing. While touted as being "low recoil", this load impressed me as being otherwise and when Will was firing them in the stall next to me a couple weeks ago, the muzzle blast was every bit as bad as Remington .357 125 gr. SJHPs (R357M1).

Remington .357 125 gr. SJHP (R357M1)/Taurus 605 2 1/4"

Round#1, four layer denim/P-G, 11 3/4" pen., .65" avg. rec. diameter. No fragmentation noted.

Conclusion; I've tested this bullet at the extreme ends of what one might expect it to be used at. At one end a snub through heavy cloth. At the other, a 6" gun into bare P-G (post #31). It seems to come out smelling like a lead rose every time.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the destructive force of the .357 Mag. Very impressive expansion even from such a short barrel. I can just imagine that Remington load out of a 6" gun, wow!!

I believe this gives me more reason to trade the LCR (which I picked up today, nice gun, incredibly light!) toward the S&W .357 that I really want. My FFL had nothing that caught my eye or I would have done it right then.

__________________
Fast is fine;accurate is final

I think the 130gr is low recoil only when compared to the various full-house 158gr loadings.

Back in the day we issued the .357mag 125gr Remington as our duty ammo, worked well from both 4" and 2 1/2" guns, winter or summer, through car doors, etc.
That loading beat the **** out of our issued model 66s though.

Reviving an old thread in hopes of some updates. In particular, has anyone seen any tests of the Winchester PDX1 in 380 caliber?

Goffman, I haven't seen anything regarding .380 PDX.