Best .380 carry ammo

[BC38]

The problem with most of the ballistics testing you find online is that they use clear ballistics gel, which is not the same as the 10% calibrated gel that the FBI uses. When I found this site that does all of their testing with 10% and 20% calibrated gel, it really opened my eyes. The results for .380 JHP were worse than I would have guessed, and I'm going back to flat point FMJ, either SIG Elite or WWB.

380 ACP Ammo Selection

I like the RNFP FMJ too. The meplat punches a bigger, cleaner hole, while still getting the desired penetration of an FMJ.
I still alternate +P Hydrashocks with the RNFPs though, because I feel like it is the way to get the best of both worlds - as long as a double-tap is what you practice and plan for.

JMO, and YMMV and all that...

 

[ArchAngelCD]

No ammo can make a .380 effective.

My personal favorite is WWB. Yep, good ol' Winchester White Box. 95gr FPFMJ. A low price leader. Reliable, pretty accurate.

ANY .380 hollow point will fail the FBI test. WWB will pass it.

I'm not sure why so many shooters swear by the FBI standards? For a citizen you will not have a need to shoot through car doors or several of the other requirements the FBI test set.

Since when does a human heart sit 12" to 18" into their chest? Most will only need 6" to 8" to reach something important.

The .380 ACP is a viable SD handgun cartridge especially since the bullet companies have done so much research and improvements over the past Decade. (No, I don't carry one. I'm a .38 Special in a J frame guy.) In a pinch even the 32 ACP will do a fairly good job when loaded with Fiocchi SJHP ammo. Hit what you aim at the rest takes care of itself. IMHO of course.

 

[hardluk1]

I'm not sure why so many shooters swear by the FBI standards? For a citizen you will not have a need to shoot through car doors or several of the other requirements the FBI test set.

Since when does a human heart sit 12" to 18" into their chest? Most will only need 6" to 8" to reach something important.

The .380 ACP is a viable SD handgun cartridge especially since the bullet companies have done so much research and improvements over the past Decade. (No, I don't carry one. I'm a .38 Special in a J frame guy.) In a pinch even the 32 ACP will do a fairly good job when loaded with Fiocchi SJHP ammo. Hit what you aim at the rest takes care of itself. IMHO of course.

Using your analogy you may only need a 22lr handgun ! But I will say I could care less what the fbi test prove is the best ammo or what they carry .

Best 380 is a 9mm at least . My wifes 67 years old stands 5-2 and is small built but the only time she carrys a 380 is when a dress is needed then it was a TCP 380 for some years in a garter belt holster but now its a ruger max . Pants or shorts carry is ether a kimber ultra 9mm with a 9 round mag in it and 2-10 round back up in our rural county mags or p365xl with an 2- 15 round back mags when in the big city or on a road trip always on her body , not purse carry .

To many soft men and women today

 

[alwslate]

The reality is that there is no such thing as a non lethal handgun projectile. An old issue of Gun Digest had an article devoted to that very concept. Any handgun bullet, including a plated 29 gr .22 Short bullet can penetrate 8-9"deep into an upper torso on a frontal chest shot and inflict a fatal wound with one single shot. Shot placement and penetration count, and ammo does not have to meet FBI requirements to be useful.

 

[Gamecock]

The .380 ACP is a viable SD handgun cartridge especially since the bullet companies have done so much marketing over the past Decade.

Fixed it.

Bullet companies (sic) have found they can sell "SD" ammo for 2X to 5X more. Making them billions of unearned dollars.

 

[Gamecock]

I'm not sure why so many shooters swear by the FBI standards?

We prefer it over testing on people.

 

[BC38]

Using your analogy you may only need a 22lr handgun !

So then wouldn't it be just as valid to say that using your analogy (or more precisely, your logic) that you definitely need to carry at least a 44magnum?

 

[BC38]

We prefer it over testing on people.

Some of us prefer the meat tartget tests over jello tests.

Plenty of that kind of data out there.

 

[Talldog]

I'm not sure why so many shooters swear by the FBI standards? For a citizen you will not have a need to shoot through car doors or several of the other requirements the FBI test set.

Since when does a human heart sit 12" to 18" into their chest? Most will only need 6" to 8" to reach something important.

This assumes that your target is standing there directly facing you. If that's not the case, and it often isn't, then everything changes. For instance, if your assailant throws up his arm to protect himself, a normal and probably automatic action, you could waste several inches of penetration just getting through that with nary a vital organ in sight.

 

[Gamecock]

Some of us prefer the meat tartget tests over jello tests.

Plenty of that kind of data out there.

NONE of which are equivalent to SD shootings. Meat doesn't have a psyche. The assailant's psyche can't be molded into jello.

The fact is we can't test SD ammo. So we use gel tests as a proxy.

 

[Dave Lively]

Since when does a human heart sit 12" to 18" into their chest? Most will only need 6" to 8" to reach something important.

I have seen some of the YouTube channels that test ammo with gel mention that bullets penetrate about twice as far in gel as the do in real life. Particularly when the clear gel is used.

I don't know where they get that from but it sounds believable. Gel is supposed to proved a consistent media to evaluate how bullets perform, not necessarily to duplicate how far they will penetrate in real life.

It's useful for comparison only, kind of like the wildly optimistic EPA mileage ratings for highway fuel economy you used to see in the 80s and 90s. The EPA designed a test to measure tailpipe emissions and for the highway portion of the test never exceeded 47 mph and accelerated very slowly. It wasn't meant to measure fuel economy, let alone real life fuel economy, but was used for that. But was useful for comparing relative fuel economy. I view the FBI gel test protocols the same way, it does not duplicate flesh but is useful for comparing different ammo.

Anything less than 380 I would choose a FMJ to get enough penetration. Anything 9mm or up I use HP ammo. Not sure which way I would go with 380 but would lean to FMJ.

 

[BC38]

NONE of which are equivalent to SD shootings. Meat doesn't have a psyche. The assailant's psyche can't be molded into jello.

The fact is we can't test SD ammo. So we use gel tests as a proxy.

It sounds like you missed the point.

You are correct, meat targets AND jello neither one have a psyche.

However, a meat target is a far closer real analog to a human body than jello will ever be.

So I see the meat target as a much better test than jello - which has no bones, skin, or other variances in composition.

YMMV. You do you, I'll do me.

 

[Gamecock]

Well poot! I can't find any Hornady Critical Defense meat tests.

Well, yes, BC38, meat tests would be 'better' than gel tests, but there ain't none.

 

[Talldog]

Well poot! I can't find any Hornady Critical Defense meat tests.

Well, yes, BC38, meat tests would be 'better' than gel tests, but there ain't none.

Check out Paul Harrell on YouTube. He puts together these meat targets that use leather (skin), pork chops (flesh), pork ribs (ribs), watermelon or grapefruit (lungs), and more pork ribs to simulate an actual human body. Seems reasonable.

 

[BC38]

Well poot! I can't find any Hornady Critical Defense meat tests.

Well, yes, BC38, meat tests would be 'better' than gel tests, but there ain't none.

I beg to differ
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e[/ame]
bKAr4CyscE
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnOOBquiej8[/ame]
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbJXTkNnyWw[/ame]

 

[ArchAngelCD]

So much passive aggressiveness in this thread after my post, wow. I never said to use a 22LR for SD. I never said someone was standing facing me either and never assumed it.

Just because you don't agree with someone's opinion doesn't make them wrong. When I said research has been done on the .380 it was changed to marketing. It sounds to me the marketing has been done on many who feel only 9mm and above will protect them. You buy what you want but don't disparage other's choices. I carry a .38 Special because I like the guns and the round, not because of someone saying it's good or bad. That still doesn't make the .380 inadequate.

 

[Bill Lear]

Remington 95 gr FMJ. Slightly higher velocity than other domestic brands
in my guns and deeper penetration in pine. It also tumbles in wet
newspapers but so do most other FMJ rounds.

As trite as it sounds, "they all fall to ball" is forever valid in the world of marginal power handgun rounds and that INCLUDES the weak big sister of the 9x17 known as the 9x19!

The one thing you KNOW about a round that goes all the way through a target is that it went through all vital structures on the way. The target zone for any low-powered handgun should be center mass, face, or my personal favorite, center pelvis. Ball rounds have the best chance of passing deep enough or through. Of what value is an expanding round that never makes it to the aorta?

My tiny Kahr P380 feeds ANYTHING I load into it, and I prefer either standard ball, or Underwood 90 grain hardcast though that puts a serious strain on such a tiny gun.

The key isn't overpriced non-performing performance ammo, it's good old non-expanding boolits in quantity. You pump 6 or 8 rounds of "ball" .380 into someone and they go down. For those who claim they know someone who knows someone, who's sister's cousin's brother did just that and it failed to stop....they're either lying, or leaving out the detail that the bullets missed. From personal experience I know that three quick shots of .380 ball to the chest will indeed put a big man down right where he stands! I'm sure adding the extra 4 would certainly get the job done on the hard cases.

 

[alwslate]

Good point here. Too much focus is on the one shot stop percentages where the smaller rounds are going to be rated lower. Also the idea that a bullet must expand or is useless for SD. Who is going to fire one shot when faced with a serious attacker? The smaller rounds allow fast multiple hits with controllability and deep penetrating ball ammo will make two holes with every shot leading to rapid loss of consciousness due to drop in blood pressure.

 

[BC38]

Good point here. Too much focus is on the one shot stop percentages where the smaller rounds are going to be rated lower. Also the idea that a bullet must expand or is useless for SD. Who is going to fire one shot when faced with a serious attacker? The smaller rounds allow fast multiple hits with controllability and deep penetrating ball ammo will make two holes with every shot leading to rapid loss of consciousness due to drop in blood pressure.

Yeah, and the really ironic part is the studies that show that the common SD calibers (32acp, .380, 38spl, 9mm, 10mm, 357mag, 40 S&W) have proven to be statistically very close in terms of ability to stop an attacker and end the fight. Even the one-shot stop statistics are comparable.

It isn't until you get down into the 25acp/22LR territory that the statistics show really significant drops in effectiveness and it isn't until you get up into the 45ACP+ & 44mag territory that the statistics get more than marginally better.

 

[Gamecock]

Yeah, and the really ironic part is the studies that show that the common SD calibers . . . have proven to be statistically very close in terms of ability to stop an attacker and end the fight. Even the one-shot stop statistics are comparable.

Stopping a fight and "ability to stop an attacker" aren't the same. Many attackers will stop when someone is shooting at them; they don't like being shot at. What is being shot doesn't matter, as long as it sounds like a gun.

SD calibers matter only in the extremely rare circumstance that an attacker persists after seeing a gun, and after being shot at. The first may be that he didn't see the gun, but then heard it.

It all comes down to what level you prepare for. For example, carrying extra magazines. The odds you will need extra magazines in a civilian SD shooting are astronomical. Yet some choose to prepare for it. Virtually no one will ever need SD training, yet some get it. They aren't wrong, they are just preparing at a deeper level. Like preppers. They aren't wrong, just preparing for a more remote possibility.