|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 31, 2020, 04:55 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 1998
Location: WV
Posts: 252
|
Federal .380 ACP 99gr HST in Clear Ballistics Gel.
Test Gun: Ruger LCP Barrel length: 2.75 inches. Ammunition: Federal .380 ACP 99gr HST. Test media: 10% Clear Ballistics Gel. Distance: 10 feet. Chronograph: Caldwell Ballistic Precision Chronograph G2. Five shot velocity average: 967fps Gel Temperature 70 degrees. https://generalcartridge.wordpress.c...allistics-gel/
__________________
www.general-cartridge.com |
January 31, 2020, 05:57 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 12, 2009
Location: Athens, Georgia
Posts: 2,526
|
Wow, that's not bad at all, especially for .380.
|
February 1, 2020, 10:55 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2, 2015
Location: Deepinnaheartta,Texas
Posts: 318
|
Agreed, not bad at all for a .380.
__________________
μολὼν λαβέ NRA Life Member |
February 1, 2020, 11:56 AM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 14, 2002
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,045
|
For .380 that’s damn respectable for a hollow point.
__________________
"Is there anyway I can write my local gun store off on my taxes as dependents?" |
February 1, 2020, 04:45 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 3,883
|
Can't really ask for more from a .380 out of such a short barrel.
Luckygunner did shoot this in their .380 tests years ago, but it was from a Glock 42 (a longer barrel) yet the velocity average was under 900 fps. You got almost 75 fps more with a shorter barrel... that makes no sense, but as Paul Harrell says, "not all chronographs agree with each other... certain environmental factors... you be the judge." I'm not sure if Federal has changed the powder used to get higher velocity or if there was something funky about the Glock 42 Lucky Gunner used. Either way, we have more data and it's making me wonder. I can't write the .380 HST off anymore, but I need to see more from others before it convinces me that it's worth trusting a hollow point in .380 vs a solid bullet like Inceptor or Lehigh.
__________________
"We always think there's gonna be more time... then it runs out."
|
February 1, 2020, 05:41 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2015
Posts: 777
|
Quote:
That is terrible penetration Expansion doesn't make up for poor penetration
__________________
Playboy billionaire Retired Colonial Marine 1st to walk on the moon without a spacesuit |
|
February 1, 2020, 06:45 PM | #7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 3,883
|
Quote:
You call 11.5 inches in bare gel, 13-15 inches in heavy clothed gel terrible? I have seen MUCH worse.
__________________
"We always think there's gonna be more time... then it runs out."
|
|
February 1, 2020, 07:11 PM | #8 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2015
Posts: 777
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Playboy billionaire Retired Colonial Marine 1st to walk on the moon without a spacesuit |
||
February 1, 2020, 10:18 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 3,883
|
__________________
"We always think there's gonna be more time... then it runs out."
|
February 2, 2020, 05:28 AM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
|
Quote:
75 fps is nothing. Go to ballistics by the inch and peruse the data there. |
|
February 2, 2020, 06:10 AM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 23, 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,968
|
looks like a good load!
|
February 2, 2020, 06:44 AM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 18, 2005
Posts: 367
|
That is penetration comparable to most standard pressure .45 acp defensive loads fired from compact pistols, along with perfect expansion in bare gel and denim.
I am skeptical. |
February 2, 2020, 01:31 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2015
Posts: 777
|
I'll trust my 40+ years in LE, my 50+ years hunting, and my 60+ years on a working ranch, over "You're wrong".
__________________
Playboy billionaire Retired Colonial Marine 1st to walk on the moon without a spacesuit |
February 2, 2020, 09:30 PM | #14 | |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,973
|
0.5" under the FBI spec for bare gel for .380ACP out of a sub-3" barrel with really good expansion isn't all that bad. Especially when it meets the spec in clothed gel.
I can see why some people might choose other options; but saying it's "terrible" seems a bit extreme. If anything, it's so good it's hard to believe. Both the velocity and expansion are much better than Luckygunner's results. I'm with roadrash in being somewhat skeptical. Quote:
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
|
February 2, 2020, 09:48 PM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 3,679
|
Quote:
|
|
February 2, 2020, 09:49 PM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2015
Posts: 777
|
Quote:
Where did I assert any such thing....
__________________
Playboy billionaire Retired Colonial Marine 1st to walk on the moon without a spacesuit |
|
February 2, 2020, 10:29 PM | #17 | ||
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,973
|
Quote:
Quote:
Do you have your own personal penetration standard for self-defense ammunition? How did you arrive at it?
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
||
February 2, 2020, 10:43 PM | #18 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2015
Posts: 777
|
My reading of the actual PME showed that the bullet traveled through 16" of bad guy.
Quote:
Quote:
If they were both on treadmills, would the 0.5" be negated or multiplied? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Playboy billionaire Retired Colonial Marine 1st to walk on the moon without a spacesuit |
|||||
February 3, 2020, 12:41 AM | #19 | |||||
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,973
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
However, I think you can see why your personal standard of what is "terrible" penetration might not be widely held given that it apparently (I'm still assuming because you haven't said yet what your personal standard is) doesn't agree at all with the (arguably arbitary) standard that is essentially universally accepted by U.S. LE.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
|||||
February 3, 2020, 01:10 AM | #20 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
Most highways in the northeastern U.S. have speed limits of 65 MPH. Most people drive them at 70, 75, or 80 MPH, and there aren't all that any accidents considering the number of vehicles exceeding the speed limits. But they want a speed limit, and they chose 65 because ... reasons. It's a standard, and it's arbitrary. I work in the building industry. Building construction is based on codes and standards, just about all of which are arbitrary. For example, a particular class of occupancy might allow a maximum travel distance to an exit of 100 feet. If it was 105 feet, would everyone die in a fire? Would anyone die in a fire? It probably would make any difference, but they needed a number and they settled on 100 feet. Snow loads. Different regions of the country use different numbers for roof snow loads and for wind loads. Who says 30 PSF is THE accurate number for a particular region? 35 would obviously be safer. How much less safe would 25 PSF be? If a region were to change from 30 PDF to 25 PSF, would all the new buildings collapse? Probably not. They needed a number, and they picked 30. It's a standard, and it's arbitrary. That's the nature of standards. Basically, they're all arbitrary.
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO 1911 Certified Armorer Jeepaholic |
|
February 3, 2020, 02:35 AM | #21 |
member
Join Date: October 2, 2019
Posts: 414
|
I use to worry about the efficacy of .380 for self defense back four or more decades ago because it seemed I could sometimes have created more penetration spittin darts through a straw.
Now with modern ammo and current pistol reliability factors, I'm tickled pink with .380 keeping in mind the tactical limitations of the round. Just like I do with every other firearm type and caliber. |
February 3, 2020, 09:32 AM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 12, 2008
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,598
|
Blah, blah, blah,........if you like and carry a .380 pistol, this looks like a pretty decent load for it. If you don’t like or carry a .380 pistol, then it does not apply to you. You people get way too worked up over your biases for or against a certain caliber or load.
__________________
Say when..... |
February 4, 2020, 08:35 PM | #23 | |
member
Join Date: October 2, 2019
Posts: 414
|
Quote:
Well yes and no. I sometimes tire of the relentless admonitions from occasional yahoos at the range when I'm shooting a .380. They will all of a sudden appear and stand on their soapbox and announce "I would never carry anything under a 9 mm." In one such case during a penis measuring contest a dude proceeded to tell me how his leg wound in Vietnam from a 7.62x39 AK round was worse than my arm wound from a .45 Mac-10 round. I pointed out that he was still walking around just fine on his leg and I was clearly shooting well with my arm! Sometimes folks just start pumping their jaws over the dumbest things. |
|
February 5, 2020, 07:50 AM | #24 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: on the lam
Posts: 1,735
|
Quote:
|
|
February 5, 2020, 08:24 AM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 3,625
|
I clicked on the XTP 380 test.
Looks a bit different than the shootingthebull results. On this site, the HST is the clear winner. The XTP didn't expand at in with denim. |
|
|