Advice on .380 ammo

[Newtonian 453]

I am thinking of purchasing a small .380 pistol. Looking around at ammo prices, I see the Tulammo for about 40 cents per round, whereas everything else is 50 cents and up. Anything wrong with the Tulammo? Thanks.

[brocglock23 4]

Tulammo is Russian made ammo that is steel cased. There are massive arguments on it as far as issues but I can say I have a S&W Bodyguard .380 and have ran tula through it and have had minimum issues with it. Just a few failures to eject. Also could have been from me.

[GRIZ 3,369]

No experience with Tula but I prefer to use fmj in a 380 if thats what I have. A good 380 hollowpoint (one that expands well) is very short on penetration. I'd rather have the better penetration than expansion.

[HODGIE 3]

Tula is fine enough for range time if you are going to carry or home defense with this then get something more reliable.

Also know that some .380 pistols do NOT chamber and feed hollow point ammunition very well and tend to be ammo sensitive

like the PPK's.

[High Exposure 5,678]

No experience with Tula but I prefer to use mj in a 380 if thats what I have. A good 380 hollowpoint (one that expands well) is very short on penetration. I'd rather have the better penetration than expansion.

 

^^^^^ THIS

 

If you intend to use a .380 for any social purposes (self defense/home defense/BUG) use FMJ.

[Sonnylee 20]

 

 

^^^^^ THIS

 

If you intend to use a .380 for any social purposes (self defense/home defense/BUG) use FMJ.

Really, I have the hornady xtp for my home defense although I've never fired those rounds... Now you got me thinking??

 

[High Exposure 5,678]

Posted by Dr. Gary Roberts on other forums:

 

http://www.tacticalforums.com/ubb/Forum78/HTML/000037.html

Many small, easily concealed semi-automatic pistols which are recommended for law enforcement backup or concealed carry use fire .380 ACP or smaller bullets. While these small caliber handgun bullets can produce fatal wounds,they are less likely to produce the rapid incapacitation necessary in law enforcement or self-defence situations.

Handguns chambered in .380 ACP are small, compact, and generally easy to carry. Unfortunately, testing has shown that they offer inadequate performance for self-defense and for law enforcement use whether on duty as a back-up weapon or for off duty carry. The terminal performance of .380 ACP jacketed hollow point (JHP) bullets is often erratic, with inadequate penetration and inconsistent expansion being common problems, while .380 ACP full metal jacket (FMJ) bullets offer adequate penetration, but no expansion. All of the .380 ACP JHP loads we have tested, including CorBon, Hornady, Federal, Remington, Speer, and Winchester exhibited inconsistent, unacceptable terminal performance for law enforcement back-up and off duty self-defense use due to inadequate penetration or inadequate expansion. The use of .380 ACP and smaller caliber weapons is not acceptable for law enforcement use and most knowledgable agencies prohibit their use--based on past experience, to my knowledge none of the agencies you mention currently use .380's.

 

This second quote deals with .380 and .38. (I left the whole quote intact because it is chick fi of good info, even though it veers slightly off the OPs topic)

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19914

10/23/12

 

If you are an LE officer, carry a BUG!!!

 

Many small, easily concealed semi-automatic pistols which are recommended for law enforcement backup or concealed carry use fire .380 ACP or smaller bullets. While these small caliber handgun bullets can produce fatal wounds,they are less likely to produce the rapid incapacitation necessary in law enforcement or self-defense situations.

 

Handguns chambered in .380 ACP are small, compact, and generally easy to carry. Unfortunately, testing has shown that they offer inadequate performance for self-defense and for law enforcement use whether on duty as a back-up weapon or for off duty carry. The terminal performance of .380 ACP JHP's is often erratic, with inadequate penetration and inconsistent expansion being common problems, while .380 ACP FMJ's offer adequate penetration, but no expansion. All of the .380 ACP JHP loads we have tested, including CorBon, Hornady, Federal, Remington, Speer, and Winchester exhibited inconsistent, unacceptable terminal performance for law enforcement back-up and off duty self-defense use due to inadequate penetration or inadequate expansion. Stick with FMJ for .380 ACP or better yet, don't use it at all. The use of .380 ACP and smaller caliber weapons is really not recommended for LE use and many savvy agencies prohibit them.

 

While both the .380 ACP and .38 sp can obviously be lethal; the .38 sp is more likely to incapacitate an attacker when used in a BUG role.

 

BUG--Infrequently used, but when needed, it must be 100% reliable because of the extreme emergency situation the user is dealing with. Generally secreted in pockets, ankle holsters, body armor holsters, etc... Often covered in lint, grime, and gunk. By their very nature, usually applied to the opponent in an up close and personal encounter, many times involving contact shots. A small .38 sp revolver is more reliable in these situations than a small .380 ACP pistol, especially with contact shots or if fired from a pocket.

 

--------------------------------------------------

 

There have been many reports in the scientific literature, by Dr. Fackler and others, recommending the 158 gr +P LSWCHP as offering adequate performance. Please put this in context for the time that these papers were written in the late 1980's and early 1990's--no denim testing was being performed at that time, no robust expanding JHP's, like the Barnes XPB, Federal Tactical & HST, Speer Gold Dot, or Win Ranger Talon existed. In the proper historical perspective, the 158 gr +P LSWCHP fired out 3-4" barrel revolvers was one of the best rounds available--and it is still a viable choice, as long as you understand its characteristics.

 

While oversimplified, bare gelatin gives information about best case performance, while 4 layer denim provides data on worst case performance--in reality, the actual performance may be somewhere in between. The four layer denim test is NOT designed to simulate any type of clothing--it is simply an engineering test to assess the ability of a projectile to resist plugging and robustly expand. FWIW, one of the senior engineers at a very respected handgun ammunition manufacturer recently commented that bullets that do well in 4 layer denim testing have invariably worked well in actual officer involved shooting incidents.

 

With few exceptions, the vast majority of .38 Sp JHP's fail to expand when fired from 2" barrels in the 4 layer denim test. Many of the lighter JHP's demonstrate overexpansion and insufficient penetration in bare gel testing. Also, the harsher recoil of the +P loads in lightweight J-frames tends to minimize practice efforts and decrease accuracy for many officers. The 158 gr +P LSWCHP offers adequate penetration, however in a 2" revolver the 158gr +P LSWCHP does not reliably expand. If it fails to expand, it will produce less wound trauma than a WC. Target wadcutters offer good penetration, cut tissue efficiently, and have relatively mild recoil. With wadcutters harder alloys and sharper leading edges are the way to go. Wadcutters perform exactly the same in both bare and 4 layer denim covered gel when fired from a 2" J-frame.

 

When faced with too little penetration, as is common with lightweight .38 Sp JHP loads or too much penetration like with the wadcutters, then go with penetration. Agencies around here have used the Winchester 148 gr standard pressure lead target wadcutter (X38SMRP), as well as the Federal (GM38A) version--both work. A sharper edged wadcutter would even be better... Dr. Fackler has written in Fackler ML: "The Full Wadcutter--An Extremely Effective Bullet Design", Wound Ballistics Review. 4(2):6-7, Fall 1999)

"As a surgeon by profession, I am impressed by bullets with a cutting action (eg. Winchester Talon and Remington Golden Saber). Cutting is many times more efficient at disrupting tissue than the crushing mechanism by which ordinary bullets produce the hole through which they penetrate. The secret to the increased efficiency of the full wadcutter bullet is the cutting action of its sharp circumferential leading edge. Actually, cutting is simply very localized crush; by decreasing the area over which a given force is spread, we can greatly increase the magnitude to the amount of force delivered per unit are--which is a fancy way of saying that sharp knives cut a lot better than dull ones. As a result, the calculation of forces on tissue during penetration underestimate the true effectiveness of the wadcutter bullet relative to other shapes."

 

Currently, the Speer Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP, Winchester 130 gr bonded +P JHP (RA38B), and Barnes 110 gr XPB all copper JHP (for ex. in the Corbon DPX loading) offer the most reliable expansion we have seen from a .38 sp 2” BUG; Hornady 110 gr standard pressure and +P Critical Defense loads also offer good performance out of 2" barrel revolvers.

 

Any of the Airweight J-frames are fine for BUG use. The steel J-frames are a bit too heavy for comfortable all day wear on the ankle, body armor, or in a pocket. My current J-frames are 342's and previously in my career I have used the 37, 38, 649, and 642. I like the 342 w/Lasergrips very much. Shooting is not too bad with standard pressure wadcutters and the 110 gr DPX, but not so comfortable with the Speer 135 gr JHP +P Gold Dots. Before the advent of the 110 gr Corbon DPX load, I used to carry standard pressure wadcutters in my J-frames with Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP's in speed strips for re-loads, as the flat front wadcutters were hard to reload with under stress. There is no reason to go with .357 mag in a J-frame, as the significantly larger muzzle blast and flash, and harsher recoil of the .357 Magnum does not result in substantially improved terminal performance compared to the more controllable .38 Special bullets when fired from 2” barrels.

 

For years, J-frames were considered "arm's reach" weapons, that is until CTC Lasergrips were added. With the mild recoil of target wadcutters, officers are actually practicing with their BUG's; when combined with Lasergrips, qualification scores with J-frames have dramatically increased. Now 5 shots rapid-fire in a 6" circle at 25 yds is not uncommon--kind of mind blowing watching officers who could not hit the target at 25 yds with a J-frame suddenly qualify with all shots in the black…

 

2" J-frames are great BUG's and marginally acceptable low threat carry guns because they are lightweight, reliable, and offer acceptable terminal performance at close range--downsides are difficulty in shooting well at longer ranges because of sight design and sight radius limitations, along with reduced capacity coupled with slower reloading. Nonetheless, with the addition of CTC Laser Grips and an enclosed or shrouded hammer, the 2" J-frame models without key locks (I personally will NEVER own firearm with an integral lock) may be the best BUG's and most reliable pocket handguns available.

 

Another great BUG option if it can be comfortably carried, is a compact 3-3.5" barrel 9 mm pistol like the G26, S&W M&P9c, Walther PPS, HK P2000SK, Kahr PM9, S&W Shield, Sig P239, or S&W 3913, as these offer superior terminal performance compared to either .380 ACP or .38 Sp handguns. A subcompact BUG (like the G26) is particularly nice if it can use the same magazines as the primary full size pistol (like a G17/19).

 

As always, don't get too wrapped in the nuances of ammunition terminal performance. Spend your time and money on developing a warrior mindset, training, practice, and more training.

 

If you don't know who Dr. Roberts is look him up. He is arguable the #1 guy out there dealing in terminal ballistics.

[Clintoon Eastwood 2]

Which 380 pistol you looking at if you don't mind me asking?

[BlueLineFish 615]

I have an opportunity to get a sweet deal on a new ruger 380. its real tiny and for the price i cant pass it up. Good info here for me to use

[High Exposure 5,678]

I have an LCP. It serves a purpose and gets carried often. It is never a primary carry though.

[BlueLineFish 615]

I have an LCP. It serves a purpose and gets carried often. It is never a primary carry though.

 

Is that the really tiny one.

[High Exposure 5,678]

Yup, it's the little .380 semi-auto.

 

http://www.ruger.com/products/lcp/index.html?r=y

 

I bought it used from a buddy with less than 50 rounds through it for $180.

 

It has no sights to speak of and while I can qualify with it, it is a pain. It is not the gun to take a HR shot with, but that's not what it is for.

 

Let me know of you are interested in a CT Laser for it at a good price. I took it off as it is out of policy for me and I will never use it.

[MattH 0]

Is that the really tiny one.

 

Yes the LCP is tiny. The new LC380 is built on the LC9 frame which is slightly larger than the LCP.

[BlueLineFish 615]

Yup, it's the little .380 semi-auto.

 

http://www.ruger.com/products/lcp/index.html?r=y

 

I bought it used from a buddy with less than 50 rounds through it for $180.

 

It has no sights to speak of and while I can qualify with it, it is a pain. It is not the gun to take a HR shot with, but that's not what it is for.

 

Let me know of you are interested in a CT Laser for it at a good price. I took it off as it is out of policy for me and I will never use it.

I will be in touch. For the new price i am getting it for I am going to add it to my multiple exemption. Why not. God i have a problem

[Newtonian 453]

Which 380 pistol you looking at if you don't mind me asking?

 

I was thinking of the Sig p238. Why do you ask?

[Newtonian 453]

I appreciate the reference materials. The caliber debate has always fascinated me. However, I've concluded that it hardly matters. Most people will run or stop as soon as they're shot, even with a .22 short. OK, maybe they're taking bath salts or crack, and they weigh 340 lbs, but even so I think a .380 (9mm "short") is more than adequate 99.9% of the time. Besides, we live in NJ, where self defense is a crime

[High Exposure 5,678]

The caliber debate has always fascinated me. However, I've concluded that it hardly matters. Most people will run or stop as soon as they're shot, even with a .22 short. OK, maybe they're taking bath salts or crack, and they weigh 340 lbs, but even so I think a .380 (9mm "short") is more than adequate 99.9% of the time.

 

What research or evidence have you uncovered that convinced you that "it hardly matters" and brought you to the conclusion that "Most people will run or stop as soon as they're shot, even with a .22 short."

 

Watch this video. Tell me what this guy does when shot with a service caliber weapon (Unsure of caliber).

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADHoBijaqNU

 

There are hundreds of after action reports/debriefs out there where multiple shots from service caliber guns failed to stop a determined threat that pressed the attack.

 

Yes, the caliber debate is interesting. Listening to a bunch of people arguing over esoteric points regarding "stopping power" and "diameter" "shot placement" can be enlightening and entertaining.

 

I for one am a big proponent of the Shot Placement argument. I believe given a service caliber weapon - 9mm, .38/.357, .40 S&W, .357 Sig, .45 ACP (large revolver calibers as well such as .44 SPL and .44 Mag as well) - shot placement is more important than caliber (when caliber is chosen from within that range). I limit my position to these calibers because they all repeatedly proven that have the ability to penetrate barrier/clothing/tissue enough to cause the damage necessary to do the job.

 

Sub-calibers such as .32 ACP, .380 ACP, .25 ACP, etc... simply don't typically have the ability to penetrate far enough to do the job. Yes, there have been self defence shootings and murders with these calibers, but they typically rely on extremely close range, multiple hits, a miracle or luck to be effective.

 

Given a choice I will never rely on a sub caliber gun, including .380 ACP, to be a primary weapon.

[Newtonian 453]

What research or evidence have you uncovered that convinced you that "it hardly matters" and brought you to the conclusion that "Most people will run or stop as soon as they're shot, even with a .22 short."

Watch this video. Tell me what this guy does when shot with a service caliber weapon (Unsure of caliber).

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADHoBijaqNU

Given a choice I will never rely on a sub caliber gun, including .380 ACP, to be a primary weapon.

 

It hardly matters because we don't have concealed carry in NJ, and I hardly spend any time in states where I'd be able to carry -- if I had, for example, a Fla. or Utah license. For us this is more of a philosophic argument. I didn't mean to imply that caliber didn't matter.

 

What I got from the video: The guy was either deranged or very high on something; it took a massive number of shots before the attacker died. He was clearly suicidal, and determined to inflict damage on the cops. I don't know when he was hit, but clearly two cops with LEO-level fire power had their hands full. Most of us, in that surprise situation, a .45 vs. a semi-auto rifle, are dead.

 

The other reason the caliber discussion is moot is that by far most criminals are cowards. They don't want to die, get hurt, or even get into a skirmish. They want the same thing as we do from these incidents: survival, preferably in one piece. Pro-gun literature is full of stories of bad guys simply running away when they see a gun, even if they are armed.

 

On the practical side, I know very few people even in an ideal world who can afford to practice and gain proficiency at $1.45 per round. That is one expensive day at the range. As Gerry Miculek likes to joke in his videos after shooting 10-12 rounds, "That was about $90 worth of ammo there." Then there is the issue of concealability. How baggy do you want to get? Finally there is shootability. Can the "caliber guys" shoot their .45s with one hand with any kind of accuracy?

 

Many, many factors. But thanks for the comments.

[High Exposure 5,678]

It hardly matters because we don't have concealed carry in NJ, and I hardly spend any time in states where I'd be able to carry -- if I had, for example, a Fla. or Utah license. For us this is more of a philosophic argument. I didn't mean to imply that caliber didn't matter.

So you are saying you have zero practical knowledge on the subject to make the statements you did.

 

Why does this only apply to CCW? What about home defense? What about to the Cops on the board? Or those that are here from PA, or FL or those that do often carry in other places?

 

Terminal ballistics is not philosophical. It is science with real world applications, recorded evidence, and provable and repeatable results.

 

What I got from the video: The guy was either deranged or very high on something; it took a massive number of shots before the attacker died. He was clearly suicidal, and determined to inflict damage on the cops. I don't know when he was hit, but clearly two cops with LEO-level fire power had their hands full.

If the bad guy is high, suicidal or deranged, how does that effect our ability to prepare for a deadly force encounter and should the bad guys mental or physiological status dictate our response? Are you going to get a medical history before you fight back? Do we only shoot sane and sober people that want to live? No. We fight against anyone that wants to do us harm regardless of who they are, how they feel, or what they are tripping on because they are attacking us.

 

The guy in that video may not have been deranged or high, he could have simply been determined. You think all the Jimmy Jihadi types or those two guys in Boston are deranged or high? Nope. They are committed. There are dozens of shootings every year where the bad guy sucks up 10-15 rounds and lives. This is a mindset issue. Both your mindset and that of the shooter. Remember, the bad guy gets a vote when the fight is over. He may be a genuine bad dude and simply not want to stop trying to kill you.

 

Most of us, in that surprise situation, a .45 vs. a semi-auto rifle, are dead.

So we shouldn't plan for a "worst case scenario" since we would likely fail anyway? If they guys gets out and starts shooting a rifle at you, you just throw your hands up and quit? You can win. The video shows that. I don't know about you but, I may not survive but I will win the fight.

 

The other reason the caliber discussion is moot is that by far most criminals are cowards. They don't want to die, get hurt, or even get into a skirmish. They want the same thing as we do from these incidents: survival, preferably in one piece. Pro-gun literature is full of stories of bad guys simply running away when they see a gun, even if they are armed.

 

This does not exactly mesh with my experiences, but I will play along. How is the "caliber discussion moot" because you believe that criminals are cowards? What if you get one that is determined to do you harm? One that isn't a coward? How does hoping that the bad guy runs away justify a sub caliber handgun being adequate? What if he calls your bluff and now you have to shoot it out with this guy? Why would you carry a gun only for "best case" deadly force scenarios?

 

Let me let you in on a secret. Some criminals are cowrds, yes, but many violent criminals are cunning. They ask themselves one question "can my violence defeat your violence?" if the answer is yes, it is on. They have had guns pointed at them before, usually by other criminals. They are not afraid of you or your gun and they have no respect for your lifestyle, your ethics or your morals. They just want your stuff and are willing to kill or injure you to get it. They won't run away with urine running down their legs when you whip out your pea shooter. They will snatch it from you and stick it up your a$$ right before they take your stuff.

 

On the practical side, I know very few people even in an ideal world who can afford to practice and gain proficiency at $1.45 per round. That is one expensive day at the range. As Gerry Miculek likes to joke in his videos after shooting 10-12 rounds, "That was about $90 worth of ammo there." Then there is the issue of concealability. How baggy do you want to get? Finally there is shootability. Can the "caliber guys" shoot their .45s with one hand with any kind of accuracy?

 

Many, many factors. But thanks for the comments.

 

What are you shooting at $1.45 a round? With the proper training program you can get very good with 100 practice rounds a week and 1 class a year under the eye of a reputable firearms trainer. You don't have be be JM to be able to protect yourself.

 

There is no concealability issue. The bad guys hide 1911s and Glawk Foteys with no problem. With the right holster and a little effort it is not hard. I regularly carry a G35/22/23 and a G27 or PM9 with no printing issues. I do it without appearing to dress baggy or sloppy and I am not a big guy.

 

"Shootability"? Seriously? I know plenty of hard dudes that can shoot everything up to .44mag with one hand accurately and fast. I shoot my .40 Glocks way better one handed than I do my Ruger LCP. I shoot all of my pistols better two handed though, so why would I want to shoot one handed if I can help it. I don't understand your point. What does shooting one handed have to do with anything? Are you implying that you should base your firearm/caliber selection on your ability to shoot it one handed so you are good if you are injured or otherwise unable to get two hands on the gun? The female cop in the video above had less than a month on the job when that incident took place. She was shot in the left hand and she finished the fight, I assume one handed, with a service caliber pistol.

[Newtonian 453]

So you are saying you have zero practical knowledge on the subject to make the statements you did.

I defer to your greater knowledge on these subjects. My points were mainly concerned with concealed carry, but refer to home defense as well.

 

I have studied all these issues extensively. What I've gleaned from hundreds of hours of reading and watching videos is that a successful defensive carry weapon is one that you carry more or less effortlessly, that you can afford to practice with, and that you can comfortably shoot and conceal. Most individuals have problems during the summer with concealability. Not everyone is allowed to carry concealed (e.g. people who live in NJ). High caliber ammo is extremely expensive and is difficult to shoot in a small-frame (i.e. highly concealable) gun.

 

There is also the non-trivial matter of probabilities. Don't frequent shady neighborhoods, stay away from topless bars, don't get involved in drugs, and above all get a burglar alarm and/or security cameras for home/business, and you'll improve the likelihood of never having to draw your weapon during your lifetime from 99.5% to 99.999%. Yes I made up those numbers.

 

If I told you there was a 0.0001% chance you'd be killed in a car accident, God forbid, would always and forever drive 20 mph UNDER the speed limit? Do you ski or swim? Use a stepladder? Order hamburgers or prepared salads in restaurants? Cross against the light? Always buckle up? Life is risky. As intelligent beings we manage risk. Defensive firearm choices are based on risk management.

 

If someone gets into a gunfight every time they leave their house they should move!

 

For many decades individuals carried little .22 revolvers for self defense. Not my recommendation, but not totally insane. For decades the Soviet Bloc and China issued 9x18s (Makarovs) to police and some military. Death wish, or managed risk?

 

I like your quotes, btw. I wonder what Mencken would have thought about this discussion.

[Newtonian 453]

So you are saying you have zero practical knowledge on the subject to make the statements you did.

 

Sorry, you were 100% right: