Handguns and Ammunition Forum banner

Best .380 Defensive Ammunition?

11K views 30 replies 16 participants last post by  oberstlt 
#1 ·
Hello,

I just bought a Ruger LCP. After installing the finger shelf on the magazine, it became very enjoyable to shoot. I'll do a write-up later as I'm going on 24 hours no sleep right now.

Right now it's loaded with ball. I like penetration and ball will provide it. As well, I cannot get anything else locally at this point.

I will be ordering more ammo, however. It will be Corbon DPX, Remington 102gn Golden Saber, or Hornady Critical Defense (this last, the gunshop just sold its last four boxes to a guy right before I got there!)

The way this lil' pistol is built, I'm confident it will handle any one of these rounds without choking.

Though I like to try before I buy a bunch, I will not shell out all that postage for test boxes.

I'm leaning toward DPX. I'd really like Santa Barbara, but shooting that stuff in a polymer gun probably isn't a good idea.

Out of those three, which would you choose, and why? Or would you choose something completely different?

Thanks in advance, I'm hitting the sack now, I'll read answers when I get up.

Josh <><
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Prefacing my remarks with the idea that there is no best 380 ammo, I would think I would go with the DPX. I know it to be sure feeding in the other variants. I have owned a few of them over the years and I have generally let them go for 9Ps. A KT P11 or PF9 is similar in size and both cheaper to operate and more powerful.

I know that the 380 will kill and I am feeling more confident that the new JHPs will expand. But, I am not so much interested in either but in the ability to efficiently stop a threat. The second rule of gunfighting is to have a gun. The first is to avoid them but these new JHPs have no history at present and I like to see the results before I go with it.

My limited experience with the LCP was not positive. Which is funny because I am somewhat enamored with the LCR. It may be ugly but it is light, accurate and easy to shoot even with full power carry loads. The LCP I shot was not reliable, accurate or even easy to shoot.

But what ever you decide, and I know it ain't cheap, you need to test it in your LCP to make sure it functions reliably. That will eat up a bit of money with premium carry ammo going for over a $1 a shot. 9k is hard to find here.

I would like to know your experiences with the LCP. Good luck.
 
#4 ·
Josh, my concern with .380 ammo is not so much if it will expand but will it both expand AND offer sufficient penetration? I know little of the newer loads but in the past had problems Hp's deforming just enough to not go deep enough to suit me. (not enough mass or speed with the old stuff) Whats the FPS rating on these newer loads?
 
#5 ·
Hello,

Currently if I carry my .380 it is loaded with WinClean; very uniform load, clean burning, flat point and no expansion. Flat points are theoretically more likely to penetrate in a straight line than round nosed ball.

I consider it the best compromise between penetration and reliability in my gun, which is approaching 80 years old now. I trust it to ALWAYS empty the first magazine from a clean, freshly lubed gun when using Silvertips, Winclean or old Super-X ball. History with all three loads is above several hundred rounds each now.

In the past I've used Silvertips in it but penetration was often lacking in tests I read. It also worked (in a limited test-one magazine) with the Golden Saber but thought that was a mite hard on the old girl. Hydrashoks failed the one-mag test.

No way was I going to put CorBon in it.

Preliminary tests look good on the Hornady Critical Defense. If I could find/afford several boxes I might look at it.

Blowing a hundred bux or more to try out a new load for a gun I rarely 'carry' isn't going to happen. Last time I actually carried it I also had an Airlite .38 in my pocket in case I needed a gun.

Before I traded off the BDA I was more interested in checking newer loads. When I replace it (with the Beretta variant) I'll need to get back to this project.

Since Ruger seems to use the customer as the QC/QA department I'd test it thoroughly with whatever I carried in it.


Regards,

Pat
 
#7 ·
Corbon. Take a look at the Hornady so-called "critical defense" ammo, which was apparently designed for use in diminutive semis like the Kel-Techs and Ruger LCPs...

Remember the occular window and the actual heart area as far as placement goes...

Good luck with your ballistics tests!
 
#9 ·
Like pff, I've heard the truncated rounds are the way to go.
For many years I carried a a PPK/s as a back-up. Back in the '80's it seemed the .380 was compared favorably to the .38 snub. I replaced by .38 J-Frame with the Walther. I scored much better with the PPK/s.
 
#8 ·
Like pff, I've heard the truncated rounds are the way to go.
For many years I carried a a PPK/s as a back-up. Back in the '80's it seemed the .380 was compared favorably to the .38 snub. I replaced by .38 J-Frame with the Walther. I scored much better with the PPK/s.
 
#10 ·
#11 ·
I am afraid that I disagree with the concept that a 380 is the equal of a 38 SPL. The 380 is generally a substantially lighter bullet than a 38 SPL with generally somewhat equal speed. The PP system was designed in the '20's for 32 ACP and later modified to accept the 380. Both of these rounds were FMJs at the time. The 380 PP/PPK/PPKS all had feeding issues even before the advent of JHP ammo.

The PP system is in fact easier to shoot that a J Frame when done so in the SA mode but no so much when you have to do the DA/SA transition. Still, it is no secret that the DA J Frame is a bear to shoot accurately at over phone booth distances. Nature of the beast with a short sight radius, thumbnail sights and stiff trigger pull. The Walther system in SA is significantly easier to shoot well.

Modern semiautos are designed to shoot JHPs but you still need to test them to see what they will and will not do. I have a PPS which I shoot regularly with FMJs but I did spend a bit on finding out which high quality JHPs it will feed with complete reliability. It will do the SPR GDs and the REM GS but not the HND Tactical or CorBon stuff.

Generally I do not find myself concerned with JHP for over penetration these days. Modern JHPs work much better than they did in the 1980s. Penetration remains an issue as it appears they now expand too quickly!

I know that CorBon is designed to feed well which removes that from the equation. I want to see a bit more data on the newer JHPs before I switch over to them. I keep telling myself there are no magic bullets. I may be alone in this thought.
 
#12 ·
Hello. I agree with the idea that there are no "magic bullets" insuring the elusive "one-shot stop" and also believe that current designs such as Gold Dots, DPX and so forth are more reliable performers than many from decades past.

In my opinion and observation, the primary problem with the .380 is that with it, one can have penetration or one can have expansion, but seldom adequate doses of both simultaneously. At the present time, the limited amount of gelatin shooting I've seen indicates that Hornady's Critical Defense comes close to providing both in "soft targets". It does seem to make the FBI 12" minimum...at least some of the time.

In my opinion, part of the .380's problem is that like everything else in life, it has limits. Ballistically and from blow-back firearms, particularly today's very abbreviated ones, there is only so much to be done with this cartridge and ammo-makers are doing all that they can to increase its effectiveness.

Were I having to use the .380, I'd find what was reliable in my own gun and that shot close to POA from it. I would then practice and count on placement coupled with multiple hits to stop a determined opponent. This is one caliber in which I see the merit of FMJ for penetration. The problem is that while I've seen one person decked from one chest hit with FMJ ammo, I've lost count of the "walking wounded" I've seen who took torso hits from such rounds. I really like some of the guns and own a few, but I just cannot bring myself to trust the cartridge. Other folks may feel differently. As has been noted, no handgun round commonly associated with self-protection can be counted upon to smack down an assailant anywhere near as reliably as about any centerfire hunting rifle round and placement with them is very critical. I think it is more so as we drop down the scale of handgun "power" levels.

Best.
 
#13 ·
Gents,

We no longer own a .380...wife sold here Beretta 85. It was a class act. IF I carried a .380 it would be that pistol. It even fed empty sized cases!

As for ammo...what Stephen said. I've got a box of 90. gr Federal Hydra-shok on the shelf and a bunch of ball ammo.

Wes
 
#14 ·
I have two .380 ACP pistols. An early Interarms made under license Walther PPK stainless and a Beretta 84 Cheetah.

My choice of carry load for either of these two pistols is the Remington 102 gr Golden Saber JHP. This load chrono's at 897 fps in the PPK. I consider that velocity equal to or better than the run of the mill 95 gr FMJ factory fodder currently available.

I agree that a .380 JHP bullet is questionable for both adequate penetration and expansion. My thinking is that the 102 gr Golden Saber is the best compromise for the .380 ACP. If it doesn't expand, then the extra weight and velocity will give it a reasonable chance to penetrate to vital organs. Its roundnose design gives it reliable feeding in both of my pistols. And the Cheetah with its 13 round mag and one in the chamber gives me sufficent round count for multiple hits. The downside is that the Cheetah is a big .380 pistol. One could carry a compact 9x19 for the same size and weight.


Roadster
 
#15 ·
I can vouch for the DoubleTap 95gr "Controlled Expansion" JHP, at least in my Sig P232. I've fired a couple hundred rounds and have not had a failure of any kind yet.

I have no real data on its performance, other than the data on DoubleTap's website. They claim 1080fps from a Bersa Thunder 3.5" barrel. I can say that the recoil is much more stout than the standard-pressure 95gr FMJ that I practice with. So much so, that the P232 becomes somewhat tiring to shoot for more than 20 rounds or so.

I've seen no tests of terminal performance of the Double Tap .380, and unfortunately I do not know what brand of bullet is used. However, it was available to me in quantity early this year when I couldn't get any other .380 brand.
 
#17 ·
I'll be very curious to hear your results, Josh. Especially if you do any kind of penetration/expansion tests. The Double Tap JHP is no longer made with Gold Dot 90gr, and as far as I know nobody has tested the 95gr yet.

I know that .380 has a bad reputation, but for me it suits a need. Others may (rightly) make different decisions which are comfortable for them, but my reasoning is as follows:

So far, I have no confidence in my ability to make follow-up shots under pressure with a snub-nose .38 loaded to +P and I do not trust standard pressure ammo from a 2" barrel. I also do not yet have confidence in the reliability over time of a sub-compact 9mm (3" barrel) loaded to +P, although I'm comfortable with my 3.5" FM Detective. A number of the new designs seem to have reliability issues when shooting +P, although I will reconsider after they've proved themselves for 10 or 20 years. :) Personally I also don't feel comfortable with high-performance .380 ammo from less than a full-size 3.5" barrel.

So, given that I require high-performance ammo in compact pistols, of no less than 3.5" barrel length and the fact that the dummy attached to my trigger finger under-performs with a snubby, there are times and occasions when the lighter-weight .380 is my best option. I am quite comfortable with my blued Sig, and think it is pretty much my best choice under some circumstances.

Others may make different decisions based on different circumstances, but I thought some folks might be interested in mine.
 
#18 ·
plinkerneil said:
follows:

Others may make different decisions based on different circumstances, but I thought some folks might be interested in mine.
A long time ago, when we were a one-income,2 infant family, I had to unload my armory in order to buy food.( I know--the foolishness of youth).
Gone were the beautiful, M27 and the sweet-shooting Ruger .22.The only thing I kept was a pre-GCA PPK in .380; this was simple logic-my wife had given it to me as a b'day present.
In those days, SuperVel was the only HP ammo ( I think they did .380). The drill was one JHP in the pipe, followed by a magazine of ball.
Just as we were poor and didn't know it, I was underarmed and didn't know it.But I knew I could hit with that gun and was happy.
In other words:it worked for me.
 
#20 ·
weshowe said:
whiskeymike,

Sounds like you had a perfect combination. I've always wanted a PPK or PPK/S, but have never gotten one

As I noted the wife's Beretta was a real peach...for a .380.

Wes
Hi, Wes.
Time has marched on, but I still have that PPK;if you check the timeframe ('64), you'll realize I was influenced by "Bond, James Bond."
I haven't shot it for a long time, but my son will get it some day.
OTOH, although the wife and I parted company years ago, we remained friends. So much so that she (and her husband!) got me back that same M27 for Christmas a couple of years ago!!

But, back to the topic: I felt well armed in my ignorance then and woud not be too worried if I had one of my other .380's with a modern, hot load now. I just have other choices,such as J-frames and pocket 9mm's.
Best;
Bill
 
#21 ·
Hello,

Received the ammo the other day.

Specs are thus:

Velocity: 975fps / Kel-Tec P3AT and Ruger LCP
3.5" bbl Bersa Thunder - 1080fps
Bullet: 95gr Controlled Expansion JHP

I can't say this hurts to shoot, but it does sting a little and the palm of my hand was a bit numb after a couple of magazines.

Feels like Santa Barbara stuff, and it looks like it's actually up there in velocity.

They do state that it's non-+P however, and when I get time to do a test, I most certainly will. Should prove interesting.

Josh <><
 
#25 ·
Since this thread got bumped to the top after 8 months, I'll update myself re .380. Now have a Beretta 85 and have decided to sell off the 1908 Colt Pocket Pistol.

The 85FS is a fun, reliable plinker with great ergos that I do not shoot very well.

The Colt is not much of a plinker, points terribly and I shoot it even worse.But it is very pretty and formerly filled a niche. A niche now filled by a couple of other very pretty guns.

It is also now worth a LOT of money that might be better spent on important things like stag and monogrammed ivory stocks. ;)

Were I to carry the 85 for some reason I'd still use WinClean. More data on the newer JHP might change my mind but is now lacking for now.


Regards,

Pat
 
#26 ·
A few more semi-related thoughts on this thread:

While friends do not let friends carry mouse guns, the 380 is right on the ragged edge of the cartridge wars. Increasingly I see the 380s and 32s in the hands of serious gunners. However, many carry ball (FMJ) instead of the newer expanding ammunition. When questioned they all cite the penetration issue with JHPs. Let's face it - we know they can kill but can they stop a fight? Here in lies the issue!

Now, the problem with this line for me is that the 380 comes in such great platforms! I will cop to always having a soft spot in both my heart and head for the Walther PP series even if reliability is a bit iffy. And, Beretta does make a great gun as well. No question of reliability there. But, I have always loved the Colt Browning pocket model semiautos. The M1903 and the M1908 were great guns. Even the European versions were very attractive.

But the best ammo over all for the 380 may in fact be FMJ. It will work well in most guns and it has the penetration to reach vital area. The JHPs may do neither. You pays your money and you takes your choice.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top