.380 load (Calling Erich)

I've been digging around on the web looking for info on the Hornady Critical Defense and so far I can't find anything negative. They seem to always expand and they penetrate to 10 or 11 inches in gel. Granted, some rounds expand more then the CD and 11 inches isn't up to FBI standards but any carry piece is a compromise and we aren't using this on the street as a LE round. It's standard pressure so the little guns can handle it. I'm starting to think it may not be such a bad choice for everyday carry.
 
Ya think Power Pistol is impressive in the .380, you ought to see it in the .38super.

It is my go to powder for full power, and +P loads in all my bottom feeders!!!
 
Florida J, I have a test of Hornady Critical Defense .380 in the thread Perma-Gel Test Results (post #12 on page 2). It's decent ammo, but nothing earth-shattering either. I prefer Speer Gold Dot, but there's certainly nothing wrong with the stuff.
 
Thanks Flop-shank, that's some interesting testing. Did you ever run the Golden Sabre test?
 
Every once in a while you run across a thread and marvel at the things you can learn on a public forum. This is one of those threads. Thanks for all of the info Erich. Truly a unique knowledge base you've shared with us.

For the record I'd been carrying 95 gr. Hornady XTP JHP's in my 9x18 Mak with a velocity of around 1000 fps @ 15'. I may reconsider and go to a FMJ after reading this thread.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Andy - I know that the number of shootings I've studied with this caliber is really too small to draw any scientific conclusions, but I was certainly struck by how often the JHPs failed to adequately penetrate in .380.

I used to carry those very same Mak JHPs when they were first released in the early '90s, in my EG Mak. I've got a Soviet military Mak (more rare on these shores) now, but I miss that EG still. :o
 
Last edited:
For those of us who don't "roll our own", Magtech sells a 95 gr. ball in 380, you can also order 95 gr. ball in 380 from Double Tap: DoubleTap Ammunition

Double Tap will even show you the chronos out of the very guns we've been discussing when you click on one of the individual pix to go to that round. (They have great service too; not a paid endorsement, I've just had good experience with them.)
 
Hi Brad,

I bought 100 rounds of the DT .380 ball when it first came out with great hopes, but just couldn't get it to be reliable in my P232. I gave the remainder to a friend with a P3AT, and he had similar problems.

It was a solid 100 fps faster than any other 95-gr ball I'd chrono'd.
 
Erich said:
Hi Brad,

I bought 100 rounds of the DT .380 ball when it first came out with great hopes, but just couldn't get it to be reliable in my P232. I gave the remainder to a friend with a P3AT, and he had similar problems.

It was a solid 100 fps faster than any other 95-gr ball I'd chrono'd.
Click to expand...

Hey Erich, what mean "reliable"? I haven't had any trouble with the P3AT, and have never heard of anyone else having issues. Perhaps you got a bum box? Too bad. I also run their 200 gr. Hornady XTPs through my G27 without a hitch.
 
That would be two bum boxes, then. No, there did not appear to be anything wrong with the ammo or the guns - it just appeared that the DT .380 ammo was performing outside the guns' envelope of function. (I honestly don't recall the nature of the malfs - I have pretty good notes on it at home.)

I was profoundly disappointed (and out a decent chunk of cash), as I happily used DT stuff in my .40 and my 10mm as well, and had eagerly purchased the .380 immediately upon release.

I'm not saying it's no good in all guns, just that this is a concern of which to be aware - believe me, I really wish that it had worked out differently in the guns I tried. :(
 
Well this is a very interesting subject for me since I just bought this :D

11r3imo.jpg


Shoots very well and just LOVES FMJ ammo,frankly I dislike threads with people who say what they think they know,guys like Erich make me comfortable since they've seen what actually happens.

Great thread.
 
A local dealer mentioned today that he is expecting 40 boxes of Win Ranger .380s (Talons). Any info on this round would be appreciated. I did a quick search and didn't come up with much info.
 
Brad, just checked my notes on the DT .380 malfs that I experienced back in July '07 - several hard primers that required multiple strikes to ignite and a couple of jams on feeding in both the P232 and P3AT. Might have been a bad batch, but the jams on feeding were power-related.
 
BigRich315: I am always up fpr a road trip to Florida, but I'll pass on the ammo!

Florida J-Frame: As much as I like the Ranger T's in 9, 40, & 45, I'll pass on them in .380. Winchester's own data shows them penetrating 7in. in bare gel, 8in. in 4ply denim, and 7.8in. in heavy cloth. Their data shows approximately .64-.68 expansion, which is pretty good, but that's not nearly enough penetration to suit me.
 
Last edited:
.60"+ expansion really isn't what you want in a .380 and the above data shows exactly why. While I do like expansion, I don't if it limits adequate penetration. Speer and Hornady's engineers got it right as their JHPs only expand to ~.43" and are designed to stop expanding at that point. They put on the brakes, but only enough to stop the bullet from going into overpenetration. It really looks as if the cats at both companies tweeked expansion just right so that the bullet wouldn't penetrate less than 12" in gelatin. That's impressive in a cheezy, light bullet, low case capacity, low velocity caliber like .380.
 
No big deal since it was only employed as practice ammo but, in firing a box of 50 rounds of Sellier & Bellot .380, I had a couple that required a second strike in my P3AT when I practiced with it last week.
 
I just found some useful .380/P3AT test results at www.goldenloki.com . Too bad they didn't include heavy cloth in their testing.

I think the Fiocchi Extrema is worthy of note. My hunch is that the bullet expanded, but the petals were folded back to the front when it tumbled backwards. I've seen that happen before. Had it not expanded, my hunch is that it would have penetrated deeper.
 
Very interesting, thanks for the link. I was interested to see the Gold Dot and Critical Defense rounds' performance. The performance from their GD differs from what I have previously seen, having decent penetration and deformation. Maybe it's due to their test protocol. IMO bare gelatin tests are not worth the time it takes to conduct them. The link states their test protocol includes 2 layers of denim, if they would have used 4 layers I believe the results would have been much different, and more comparable to others I've seen. With time and money limited, the last few times we tested duty ammo we cut to the chase and only used the auto glass (windshield) and the 4 layer denim protocols.

Ball is about the only .380 I have seen have acceptable penetration in the denim testing. No hollowpoint, one that actually expands anyway, makes 12 inches in my experience. Like Erich and others have said the .380, while very popular, has poor terminal performance; it either expands and has insufficent penetration , or has sufficient penetration (unless it strikes significant structures in the body) and pokes a very small hole. It's best to carry a larger caliber if at all possible.
 
Lt., I agree about the larger caliber, and thank you for pointing out what I'd missed regarding the test protocol being two layer denim. I hadn't scrolled down far enough and assumed that they shot bare gel.

Myself, I'm generally more interested in four layer test results since I really like to try to make the bullet fail. Bare gel is cool because it exposes the bullet to the other end of the spectrum where expansion should be the most violent and shows how consistent it's behavior is. Two layer is fish nor fowl IMO, but it was interesting to see that their results were consistent with mine when I used four layers of denim. I'm not a cop so I don't test with auto glass. I do, however, take comfort in the fact that Gold Dots are bonded.

In my tests, Golden Loki's and, IIRC, www.stoppingpower.net 's, Speer Gold Dot was good for 12"+ every time, four layer, or bare.
 
380 Penetration Testing

Well I got out to the farm and here are the results of the testing I did. I had a couple other things in 38 Special and 44 Special that I wanted to test but ran out of water jugs.

Attached is a picture of the box I built to hold the 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 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.

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

My conclusion is that the handload has too much penetration. What do you all think?
 

Attachments

  • 380 Project Pen 003.jpg
    380 Project Pen 003.jpg
    113.9 KB · Views: 150
  • 380 Project Pen 006.jpg
    380 Project Pen 006.jpg
    109 KB · Views: 146
  • 380 Project Pen 009.jpg
    380 Project Pen 009.jpg
    93.3 KB · Views: 164
  • 380 Project Pen 010.jpg
    380 Project Pen 010.jpg
    79.5 KB · Views: 196
  • 380 Project Pen 014.jpg
    380 Project Pen 014.jpg
    52.6 KB · Views: 171
Ho-ly smokes! :eek: I'd say that .380 handload is a bit more penetrative than I'd like to use for defensive use. As you certainly know, the 9x19 FMJ loading is essentially certain to overpenetrate a human aggressor. And your .380 handload equalled (or bettered!) its penetration. Wow.

Man, that really is a hell-on-wheels load! Great googly moogly! :) Tell you what, I know what I'm going to answer the next time someone asks me "What .380 load should I use for defense against black bear in the wilderness?" Holy smokes!

Thanks so much for following-up with your results - absolutely fascinating.
 
Maybe this will become my wild pig load! No, just kidding.

I have another load that I'm going to try next. It is the same 4.6 grains of Power Pistol behind a 124 grain Rainier Plated HP. It chronographs at 870 fps.

I'm going to try it on bare jugs like I did here and then with a layer of T-shirt and Denim.

I better get to drinking water this week if I want to test it out next weekend!
 
I haven't had an OAL issue with the Raniers.

I don't have any 124 gr Gold Dots. I have some 115 grain Gold Dots and some 115 grain Silvertips.

What do you think about those? The reason I loaded the Raniers originally was that I thought they would be softer and might expand at 380 velocity as opposed to the Gold Dots and Silvertips. Also that the pressure would be lower with the Raniers as they are plated lead bullets rather than jacketed. Although I wonder if Gold Dots are sort of the same as the Raniers.

I guess only testing will tell.
 
Last edited:
Your logic makes perfect sense to me. You just stated everything that occurred to me after I thought about your 124-gr HP proposition. As you state, the proof will be in the pudding . . . I'm really interested in hearing the results of this next experiment.

Keep drinking that water! :D
 
KSCowboy, I agree with Erich, I think your thinking is on the right track using plated lead Rainiers.

Where did you get your load data? My Modern Reloading manual lists 4.8 gr. as a max load for a 90 gr. XTP. Even though you're running a plated lead bullet, not jacketed, 4.6 gr. seems like a lot for a bullet that heavy. I could just as easily be wrong (and hope I am, this is cool). Are you getting signs of high pressure?

Also, what kind of gun did you use?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top