sourdough44
Member
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.
Has anyone loaded up 115gr JHP in .380
- Thread starter 125JHP
- Start date
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
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
ballistic
Member
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.
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.
Last edited:
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
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
Last edited:
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.
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.
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.
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
Last edited:
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
Size might matter
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
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 - YouTubeNice 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.
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.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2016
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
Loading .380 with HS6 and 115gr
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
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.
Similar threads
