Final Results of the .380 ACP Ammo Quest (w/video)

Shooting The Bull ^ | 11-28-2013 | Shooting The Bull

[servo1969]

In July of 2013, I picked up a little .380 pocket pistol (specifically a Taurus PT738 TCP), and I started researching what would be the most appropriate ammo to use with it.

Turns out that pretty much nobody knew.  Well — I mean, sure, there’s lots of opinions, but I couldn’t find any comprehensive source of professional tests that were done from this particular barrel size, in ballistic gel, with a large sample size.  I found plenty of great tests from PocketGunsAndGear that were shot with a shorter 2.5″ barrel, and some tests from tnoutdoors9 that were shot with a longer barrel, but I couldn’t find any ballistic gel tests that were shot from the 2.8″ barrel.  And I knew that barrel length could affect velocity (especially as compared to the 3.5″ barrel) and that differing velocities can and will cause significant variations in expansion and penetration, so I wasn’t entirely sure that the results these other fine testers achieved would be directly applicable to these pistols with the 2.8″ barrel.

Furthermore, while I applaud the work that other testers are doing, I simply am not satisfied with a sample size of one bullet.  In my experience, ammo performance can vary so widely from one shot to the next, that I believe a larger sample size is necessary in order to have an idea of how the average round of the ammo is actually likely to perform.

So, as announced in a prior post, I decided to conduct my own tests.

Testing Standards

I set as my standard the guidelines established by the 1987 and 1993 Wound Ballistic Conferences, where wound ballistics experts, medical examiners, forensic pathologists, police officers, trauma surgeons, combat surgeons, and others who worked with street shootings and bullets (and the wounds they cause) day in and day out.  These were the recognized experts in their fields, and they conducted conferences to determine what properties and capabilities caused a bullet to be most effective, and how they could then develop tests that would best and most accurately reflect real-world results, so that ammo designers could then design ammo that would perform most effectively.  Effectiveness was determined to be the ability to penetrate deep enough into the body to reach the vital organs (such as the heart, circulatory system, and central nervous system).  A bullet that can’t reach that far, and can’t be relied upon to disrupt the vital organs, was deemed an ineffective bullet.

When it’s all boiled down to the simplest guidelines possible, the parameters work out like this, in order of importance:

1. A bullet needs to have enough power to penetrate AT LEAST 12″ of soft tissue.  If it can penetrate through 12″ of soft tissue, then that means it has enough power to pass through whatever combination of bone, muscle, skin, fat, and organs that it could possibly encounter, and still be able to reach the vital organs.
2. A bullet should penetrate LESS than 18″ of soft tissue.  Bullets that penetrated more than 18″ of soft tissue would usually end up exiting the body of the attacker, regardless of how much bone or tissue it had to pass through.  That meant that the bullet posed a very real danger of overpenetration, and also that it was wasting its energy by passing completely through.
3. The bigger the bullets, the better.  The bigger the hole the bullet makes, the more tissue it destroys, and the more likely it is to damage vital structures that a smaller bullet might miss.  In this context, expanding bullets (that penetrate deeply enough!) are much better than solid bullets, because solid bullets tend to pass right through, whereas an expanding bullet grows larger and is more likely to slow down and stop in the desired window of 12″ to 18″ of soft tissue penetration.
4. Sharper bullets are better than round bullets.  This isn’t the most important factor, but an expanded bullet with sharp petals on it is more likely to cut an artery or other vital structure than a round-nose bullet might, especially at the limit of travel when the bullet is going more slowly.  A round-nose might just push tissue out of the way, where a sharp bullet may still be cutting and damaging tissue.  This is another reason an expanded hollowpoint is a better wounder than a round-nose FMJ (Full Metal Jacket).
5. Of all the parameters that matter when evaluating a bullet’s terminal performance, the most important is to achieve sufficient penetration.  Overpenetration is bad, but “underpenetration will get you killed” (quote from Dr. Martin Fackler).

The FBI adopted these requirements for their duty ammo selection, which is only partially related to us in the self defense community; we’re not the FBI and we don’t need FBI duty ammo, but — ammo manufacturers love to sell ammo to the FBI, so many of the modern hollowpoint rounds on the market are designed to meet the FBI requirements.  Which is good for us, because what makes a bullet effective in stopping a criminal, are the same factors that make it effective in stopping someone who’s assaulting us.  The FBI requires their ammo to pass additional tests of barrier penetration, including auto windshield glass, plywood, drywall, and other tests.  In the self defense community, those aren’t likely realistic tests that we need our ammo to pass, so I didn’t bother with those tests, instead I focused on the two tests that are most important to self defense shooters: the bare ballistic gelatin test, and the 4-layer denim test.  The International Wound Ballistic Association standardized these two tests as a comprehensive evaluation of ammo performance in best-case and worst-case scenarios, and so that is the testing methodology I adopted.

I’ve blogged previously on the whys and wherefores of ballistic gel (for example, here, here, and here.)  In the simplest terms, it’s a soft tissue simulant that we use to evaluate a bullet’s performance through soft human tissue.  It’s not “jello”, it’s not a dessert, it’s actually powdered and reconstituted flesh.  Professional ballistic gel is made from ground-up and powdered pork skin.  It’s an effective flesh simulant because it actually is flesh.  I used genuine professional 10% ordnance gelatin from www.gelatininnovations.com for the 4-layer denim test, and synthetic ClearBallistics gel from www.clearballistics.com for the bare gel tests.  (I did a comprehensive comparison between the two gelatin products before starting this Ammo Quest, and found that the synthetic gel was suitable for handgun bullet testing.)

Testing Procedures

My testing procedure was to fire five shots into each block of gel, from 10 feet, through a chronograph.  All 10% ballistic gel was calibrated with a steel BB at ~590 fps, was prepared to FBI specifications using FBI gel preparation procedures, stored at proper temperatures, and shot at proper temperatures, for consistent reliable data.  All bullets were measured for penetration distance while they were in the block of gel, then cut out, cleaned up, measured and weighed for final details.

I tested a total of 18 types of ammunition through bare ClearBallistics gelatin.  I then repeated the test in 10% calibrated ordnance gelatin through 4 layers of IWBA-spec heavy denim, for those rounds that performed well enough through the bare gelatin (or, in some cases, just because I was curious; sometimes rounds did terribly in the bare gel but I was still curious how  or if they might change their performance through denim).  This resulted in a grand total of 27 test videos (sheesh!)

Results

The results are correlated in the tables below.  Links are provided to the YouTube tests for each round.  Penetration data is color-coded; red is totally unacceptable (either gross under- or over-penetration); yellow is a bad sign (indicating modest under- or over-penetration), green is considered good, and blue is considered excellent penetration.  I also include the MacPherson Wound Trauma Incapacitation value (previously blogged-about here).  If you want the brief summary, bigger numbers are more effective at incapacitating an attacker (and if you want the briefest summary, just go by the color code!)

Here is a video that summarizes all my findings and makes recommendations on the various ammo that has been tested.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNtPHYwcDts

Below is the summary table, results, and links for the videos of all the ammo tests that were conducted.

.380 ACP Micro-Pistol With ~2.8″ Barrel

Ammunition Test Results

Buffalo Bore 90-Grain JHP Standard Pressure, Item 27G

Average Velocity in feet per second	937
Average Expanded Diameter	.472” (12.0 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.505” (12.8 mm)
Average Retained Weight	90.02 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	18.58
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	10.88
	11.13
	12.00
	23.75
	25.13

 

Copper Only Projectiles 80-grain solid copper hollowpoint

Average Velocity in feet per second	835
Average Expanded Diameter	.433” (11.0 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.500” (12.7 mm)
Average Retained Weight	79.82 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	3.96
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	8.25
	8.38
	9.13
	9.25
	9.63

 

 

Cor®Bon 90-Grain JHP, CorBon part # SD38090/20

Average Velocity in feet per second	932
Average Expanded Diameter	.453” (11.5 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.512” (13.0 mm)
Average Retained Weight	90.06 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	26.35
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	11.25
	12.00
	13.00
	15.50
	16.00
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	16
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	22.50
	22.75
	23.00
	23.50
	23.75

 

 

DoubleTap DT Defense Barnes TAC-XP 80-grain solid copper hollowpoint

Average Velocity in feet per second	895
Average Expanded Diameter	.358” (9.1 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.358” (9.1 mm)
Average Retained Weight	77.02 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	18.64
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	11.25
	12.00
	15.50
	15.75
	19.00

 

 

DRT (Dynamic Research Technologies) .380 Auto 85grain HP “Penetrating Frangible”

Note: I tested this round, and it was very different, didn’t penetrate consistently, half the bullets failed entirely and just overpenetrated.  It is such a different round with such different design parameters, it doesn’t fit well with making a consolidated table like the other rounds in the test.  I recommend just going directly to the video to see how the DRT .380 ammo performed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx8pn5CadXI

 

 

Federal Premium Hydra-Shok® 90-grain JHP

Average Velocity in feet per second	889
Average Expanded Diameter	.426” (10.8 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.487” (12.4 mm)
Average Retained Weight	89.46 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	25.68
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	12.00
	12.88
	12.25
	12.75
	12.50
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	20.85
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	13.50
	14.00
	14.50
	15.25
	18.75

 

 

Fiocchi Extrema XTP(TM) 90-grain XTP JHP, part # 380XTP25

Average Velocity in feet per second	791
Average Expanded Diameter	.414” (10.5 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.455” (11.6 mm)
Average Retained Weight	89.96 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	27.72
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	12.88
	13.25
	13.50
	13.63
	13.88
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	25.40
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	14.25
	14.50
	15.25
	18.75

Note: only four bullets were used in the denim test for the Extremas.

 

 

Hornady Critical Defense(TM) 90-grain FTX® JHP with Polymer Tip

Average Velocity in feet per second	857
Average Expanded Diameter	.478” (12.1 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.533” (13.5 mm)
Average Retained Weight	88.92 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	2.11
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	7.75
	8.13
	8.25
	8.75
	8.88
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	18.84
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	10.13
	11.63
	11.88
	12.00
	17.00

Note: Critical Defense severely underpenetrated in the bare gel test.  In the denim gel test we had one round travel to good penetration, but it failed to expand.

 

 

Hornady Custom .380 ACP with 90-grain XTP JHP

Average Velocity in feet per second	851
Average Expanded Diameter	.438” (11.1 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.488” (12.4 mm)
Average Retained Weight	89.96 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	25.81
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	12.00
	12.13
	12.38
	12.88
	12.88
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	23.80
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	10.63
	11.75
	12.75
	13.00
	13.50

 

 

HPR HyperClean XTP 90-grain JHP

Average Velocity in feet per second	789
Average Expanded Diameter	.414” (10.5 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.454” (11.5 mm)
Average Retained Weight	89.96 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	27.11
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	13.50
	12.50
	13.88
	14.00
	14.50
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	23.03
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	12.75
	13.50
	14.25
	14.88
	15.00

 

PMC Starfire(TM) 95 grain SFHP, part #380SFA

Average Velocity in feet per second	788
Average Expanded Diameter	.381” (9.7 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.405” (10.3 mm)
Average Retained Weight	95.13 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	24.60
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	25.50
	16.00
	16.00
	14.75

Note: only 4 bullets were tested and recovered.

 

 

Precision One .380 ACP 90 grain XTP

Average Velocity in feet per second	810
Average Expanded Diameter	.413” (10.5 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.446” (11.3 mm)
Average Retained Weight	89.78 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	28.28
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	13.75
	13.50
	13.75
	13.88
	13.63
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	25.72
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	12.75
	13.25
	13.75
	14.38

 

 

Remington Golden Saber 102-grain BJHP

Average Velocity in feet per second	756
Average Expanded Diameter	.527” (13.4 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.624” (15.8 mm)
Average Retained Weight	102.5 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	8.89
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	10.13
	8.50
	9.00
	9.38
	10.50

 

 

Remington UMC 88-grain JHP, part #L380A1B

Average Velocity in feet per second	884
Average Expanded Diameter	.355” (9.0 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.355” (9.0 mm)
Average Retained Weight	90 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	16.00
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	22.75
	23.25
	23.63
	24.50
	25.50

Note: These were hollowpoints, but all failed to expand.

 

 

Speer Gold Dot .380 ACP 90-grain GDHP, part #23606

Average Velocity in feet per second	944
Average Expanded Diameter	.447” (11.4 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.487” (12.4 mm)
Average Retained Weight	89.36 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	23.25
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	12.00
	11.75
	11.25
	11.63
	13.00
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	19.20
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	10.00
	11.00
	11.00
	11.50
	15.00

 

 

Underwood Ammo .380 ACP 102 grain Golden Saber JHP

standard pressure 950 fps, item #142

Average Velocity in feet per second	827
Average Expanded Diameter	.503” (12.8 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.603” (15.3 mm)
Average Retained Weight	101.68 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	17.91
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	9.50
	10.50
	10.75
	11.00
	12.00
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	16.00
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	16.75
	18.63
	19.25
	20.25
	21.25

 

Win align=a href= chester PDX1® Defender(TM) 95-grain Bonded JHP

Average Velocity in feet per second	901
Average Expanded Diameter	.562” (14.3 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.655” (16.6 mm)
Average Retained Weight	95.28 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	1.80
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	8.25
	7.75
	7.63
	8.38
	9.00
MacPherson WTI in Denim Test	2.76
Penetration in Denim gel, inches:	8.38
	8.50
	8.50
	8.63

 

 

Winchester Ranger-T

Average Velocity in feet per second	907
Average Expanded Diameter	.595” (15.1 mm)
Average Maximum Diameter	.793” (20.1 mm)
Average Retained Weight	93.9 grains
MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator	12.07
Penetration in Bare Gelatin, inches:	21.25
	21.88
	15.00
	8.13
	9.50

This entry was posted in Ammo Quest, Ammo test, Ballistic Performance on November 27, 2013 by Shooting The Bull.

[servo1969]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNtPHYwcDts

[broken_clock]

Thanks for posting this.

I’ve had decent results with Federal Hydra Shok in my very picky Walther PPK/S.

[Buffalo Head]

First of all, if you want to play the game without appearing as a rank amateur, learn the language.

The cartridge designations incorporating "ACP" were obsoleted by SAAMI prior to WWII and replaced with the "AUTO" designations. Where have you and most of the uniformed gun writers been for 75 years?

To paraphrase James Carville, "Its the head stamp, stupid"!

Go to "SAAMI.org" to learn the correct designations of all American cartridges.

It matters not how many examples of other folks that you can find that are also ignorant of proper cartridge designations. And, do not waste your time, or others, by providing a listing of other folks using incorrect cartridge designations. Lots and lots of wrongs never make a right.

It is no more appropriate to use an obsolete cartridge designation than it is to address a married woman by her maiden name.

[Organic Panic]

Gimmicks are gimmicks.

Before mine fell in to a lake the best I used were golden sabers. Hydrashocks jammed in feed. My, now drowned mouseguns, never worked reliably with conical head bullets. Only ball shaped like the sabers.

Regardless of my experience. Spend the money and fire your weapon to learn what works with it. No sense in having the best ammo with a stovepipe to clear.

[Jack Hammer]

Mostly, a .380 is best used with the rounds it will feed. Lots of theory is nice, but if you need it, you need it very badly and you can’t afford jams; an FMJ that fires is better than a hollow point that hangs up on your feed ramp.

But, by all means, be sure you get your vocabulary items right; clearly, some people get very, very, very, very tense about that, and we don’t want to appear to be rank amateurs.

Yes, the right word is sometimes elusive for us rank amateurs. I myself have only been shooting for fifty years, and haven’t yet mastered the use of those terms, but... you know... they’re important!

[riverrunner]

2.5 to 2.8 inches of barrel has no effect on bullet performance.

There is so much difference between handguns that a lot of times a shorter barrel well give higher velocities then the longer barreled one.

Example 5 different 44 mags that I own between 4 and 7.5 in barrels.

Same load 315gr hard cast max load of H110 the fastest velocity is out of the 5.5 inch. The 3 7.5 inch barrels are consistently 30 to 50 fps slower then the 5.5.

3 tenths of and inch barrel wow.

What this shows us is the velocity in this peculiar hand gun and barrel.

But that aside he did take a lot of time and shot a lot of ammo to come up with these results.

I always like looking at shot bullets and see how they perform.

Just that the reason for doing so dubious.

[Gaffer]

Yes, SAAMI is a very useful organization indeed. Its efforts in providing exact information about, say, the difference between a 223 Remington cartridge and a 5.56 cartridge can be life-saving for the user who might make the mistake of equating them.

Despite your admonition not to provide a “list,” I will.

There are manufacturers out there that have used, and still use, ACP designations. Dynamic Research Technologies uses ACP - I have several calibers in my ammo safe that bear that designation. I also have some post WWII ammo in military packaging that say 45 ACP Tracer on them.

The point in this being that not all knowledge is ‘proper,’ particularly when it comes to usage; you need only go to Webster’s Dictionary to see the change in meaning and usage of a number of words.

SAAMI does a good job to get specifications out there that matter and I applaud them. But they are not a governing body that regulates everyone. People and companies use their output, but are not required to unless they agree to adhere to their specifications in some formal agreement as a Member Company.

As for AUTO and ACP designations, I suspect the primary reason for the name change was to get the “Colt” out of “Automatic Colt Pistol” designation for the cartridge in deference to the other member companies.

[DCBryan1]

Fantastic...gonna go shoot up my Remington Golden Saber carry ammo.

[outofsalt]

I shoot the Federal Hydro’s in my compact 9 and this is my carry load. The cost of these makes it hard to put many down range at the club. I do always finish with a couple of mags after popping a couple of boxes of much cheaper rounds as I believe it’s a good idea to practice with what you carry but, factoring in price, range time would be a lot less if I just shot hydro’s.

The article was great but the author needed to add cost to his analysis.

[Caipirabob]

Excellent post and very helpful - THANKS!

[04-Bravo]

You should be ashamed of your condescending reply to the OP. The tone was rude, and to top it off, you’re wrong.

Many industry professionals use the terms 380 ACP and 380 Auto interchangeably. The same is true for 45 ACP and 45 Auto. The head stamp and SAAMI designations serve a purpose, but it’s silly to suggest they must be used exclusively.

For example, if you look at the current website of MidwayUSA, you will see that they list 9 X 17mm ammo as “380 ACP”, and 11.43 X 23mm as “45 ACP”. The website of Natchez Shooters Supply does the same. Brownells lists them with both designations on the same line: “380 Auto (ACP)” and “45 Auto (ACP)”. To complain that only the exact SAAMI head stamp should be used in this context is as silly as saying the decimal point shouldn’t be ommitted before the caliber numbers.

The same thing can be said of the 7.62 X 17mm pistol cartridge being called 32 ACP and 32 Auto, and 9 X 19mm as 9mm Parabellum and 9mm Luger.

You owe the OP an apology.

[MileHi]

Your record is broken

...

Your record is broken

...

Your record is broken

...

Your record is broken

...

Your record is broken

...

Your record is broken

...

Your record is broken

...

Your record is broken

...

Your record is broken

...

Folks with abundant knowledge and confidence often seem arrogant to those without.

And some folks are just arrogant.

[Redcitizen]

Good work Servo. I appreciate the effort you put into your research. It’s good to know these things so you can have confidence in your handgun and ammunition.

[Tainan]

BH - Yeah...what he said.

-----
Servo - Good article and good reference material.
Been reading, studying and meditating of stuff like this since 1965 or so.
However...what it comes down to is "Shot placement."
That's it. End of story. Finito.
A hit to the vitals with anything is ALWAYS better than a hit to the non-vitals/covered extremeties with any caliber...or "headstamp."...heh heh heh...;)

Keep shooting till they go down and then give'em one more to keep 'em down.