The Golden Sabers are very good SD rounds in all calibers except the .380. Like the Hornady .380 it does not have enough speed to expand. The bullet weight of 102 grains is just too heavy for the caliber with the lacking speed. There are some great videos on YouTube from tnoutdoors9 that illustrates this. The best ammo for .380 is Buffalo Bore in one of their +P loads. The 100 grain flat nose +P might be the best from what I have seen but all of their +P .380 ammo is tops compared to any other manufacture as of right now. Underwood might be equal but I am not for sure on that. If you Google and read all you can find about .380 you will see for yourself that Buffalo Bore is top dog in .380.
380 golden sabers vs hydra shocks
- Thread starter horsemen61
- Start date
- Status
If it kicks on your end of the gun it hits hard on the other end so I have been told and why do you want to be cheap with something your life may depend on?
CookeMonster
Member
Overpenetration is a serious concern of mine, and mine is a Kahr so no problem with the +P stuff, so I chose the Buffalo +P JHP.
"Cheap," what does that mean? I have fired thousands and thousands of rounds of WWB fmj/fp rounds and have yet to have a failure.
And that is based on what? In every gelatin test I have seen WWB fmj/fp 380 always produces excellent penetration and for that matter so does just about every other fmj round, so what is it that the Buffalo Bore 380 fp round will do that is better than the WWB fmj/fp round, other then making your wallet lighter?
If you want to spend twice as much to accomplish the same thing, don't let me get in your way.
481
Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,419
OK, so you don't foresee yourself shooting through windshields.
What about other barriers?
The upraised arms of an assailant (either as a 'defensive reaction' or when firing a gun at you) may constitute between 4" and 8" of bone and tissue that your round has to pass through. Then, assuming that your bullet (a JHP?) makes it that far, it will then have to pass through the ribcage (hopefully between ribs, but there are no guarantees) which can be up to 1/2 of an inch thick and then your bullet still has to reach vital organs/CNS/cardiovascular structures which may or may not be at the best possible angle of presentation given that even the most determined attacker will have the tendency to turn away from incoming fire. At that point, even 16" - 18" of penetration may barely be enough and .380 JHPs, which rarely make it past the 10" - 11" range, will have stopped far short of the desired vital anatomy.
I've always wondered about that arm as a barrier concept. A hit on an arm may not necessarily stop someone, but I'm betting it'd slow them down quite a bit, especially if the hit is from close range.
Barring the occasional drugged up zombie who's immune to pain (and how many of those are really out there?), a hit to the arm seems like a pretty useful hit. Most people won't have that arm up and in the way of a follow up shot. And you've just done serious damage to their offense in any case.
Barring the occasional drugged up zombie who's immune to pain (and how many of those are really out there?), a hit to the arm seems like a pretty useful hit. Most people won't have that arm up and in the way of a follow up shot. And you've just done serious damage to their offense in any case.
Tomac
Member
Read up on the infamous Miami Shootout. Platt took many hits, none of which seemed to slow him down much.
Tomac
Tomac
Yes but he was also on drugs.
Tomac
Member
"Toxicology tests showed that the abilities of Platt and Matix to fight through multiple traumatic gunshot wounds and continue to battle and attempt to escape were not achieved through any chemical means. Both of their bodies were drug-free at the time of their deaths."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout
I thought I had read they were on drugs, but guess I was wrong. Thanks for straightening me out on that, but in doing some more research on the Miami Shootout I find more information from the shootout that strengthens the argument for penetration.
For example "Because Dove’s 9mm Silvertip round did not penetrate Platt’s chest far enough to reach his heart they developed a new ammunition testing protocol that emphasized penetration"
And ” Mireles said in the training video. "I was wounded twice and I knew that my injury, my injury to my left arm was serious, but it was not immediately life threatening.
So I just basically ignored it.” So again it may be necessary to shoot through an arm or shoulder to stop a BG.
The source for the above is
http://www.examiner.com/article/a-look-at-the-1986-fbi-miami-shootout-27-years-later
481
Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,419
Yes exactly right. Sometimes you made need to penetrate arms or other objects before the round even makes contact with the body.
That's a great illustration of the point I was trying to make, koka. A lot of folks don't think they'll ever have to shoot through a barrier, but they forget that every assailant comes equipped with their own barriers (forearms, upper arms, body position).
Last edited:
Tomac
Member
Kokapelli, I'm w/you regarding penetration; penetration trumps expansion but it's nice to have both. 
Tomac
Tomac
No, I do not forsee that for my 380.
Now. I don't carry it much - I usually carry the 9mm Shield. But for when I have the LCP - no, my plans for it is not for shooting thru windshields. I am not a cop. Yes, there could be scenarios still that MIGHT require it. But, it's not that likely compared to a robbery or some other scenario. I do not want my round to have 18" of penetration. Once again - I'm not kicking down doors or pulling people over in a squad car. Even in 9mm, I personally don't want 18" of penetration.
I keep this in mind for other calibers too... In my Steyr AUG I use 55gr .223 TAP/VMax. I use it because I am in an urban environment, and I DON'T want over penetration... The round likely won't leave my house, unless it goes thru a window. However, it still has sufficient ballistics for self defense use in my opinion.
Yes, there are more powerful rounds in 5.56 rounds. I don't want that level of penetration. I'm not in the army.
In my 9mms, I use 124gr Hydrashok. I'm not into +P. Not my thing.
We all have our preferences...
Start with feed reliability
horsemen61,
My first question is which one feeds more reliably. I have shot the HYDRA SHOK round in several of my compact handguns and in both .32ACP and .380ACP, it may be less than 100% reliable with anything besides the open topped BERETTA 81,82,84 and 85 series. Both .32ACP and .380ACP HYDRA SHOK feed 100% in these pistols.
In my otherwise very reliable SIG 232, I have had the .380ACP HYDRA SHOK hang up maybe 1 out of 100 rounds. For that reason, I carry a HYDRA SHOK in the chamber and REMINGTON 88 grain jhp in the magazine of my SIG. The 88 grain jhp round feeds in almost anything.
I do the same with my .32ACP pistols, except for a BERETTA 82 which feeds everything without any problems.
If both are equally reliable, then accuracy would be my next stop. Every gun I have shot HYDRA SHOK in has given good accuracy.
In some of my 9m.m. pistols, it is the most accurate round (by the way, I have NEVER HAD A 9m.m. or 9m.m. +P+ HYDRA SHOK round hang up or misfeed).
Last, I would consider cost. I want ammo that is cheap enough that I can practice with it.
I like the HYDRA SHOK ammo and use it when it proves reliable as a feeder, but I would also try the GOLDEN SABRE (if I could get any at a reasonable price).
Jim
horsemen61,
My first question is which one feeds more reliably. I have shot the HYDRA SHOK round in several of my compact handguns and in both .32ACP and .380ACP, it may be less than 100% reliable with anything besides the open topped BERETTA 81,82,84 and 85 series. Both .32ACP and .380ACP HYDRA SHOK feed 100% in these pistols.
In my otherwise very reliable SIG 232, I have had the .380ACP HYDRA SHOK hang up maybe 1 out of 100 rounds. For that reason, I carry a HYDRA SHOK in the chamber and REMINGTON 88 grain jhp in the magazine of my SIG. The 88 grain jhp round feeds in almost anything.
I do the same with my .32ACP pistols, except for a BERETTA 82 which feeds everything without any problems.
If both are equally reliable, then accuracy would be my next stop. Every gun I have shot HYDRA SHOK in has given good accuracy.
In some of my 9m.m. pistols, it is the most accurate round (by the way, I have NEVER HAD A 9m.m. or 9m.m. +P+ HYDRA SHOK round hang up or misfeed).
Last, I would consider cost. I want ammo that is cheap enough that I can practice with it.
I like the HYDRA SHOK ammo and use it when it proves reliable as a feeder, but I would also try the GOLDEN SABRE (if I could get any at a reasonable price).
Jim
hariph creek
Member
I don't know? It seems that getting down into .380/.32 territory. FBI protocols and barrier penetration, even over penetration, cease to be realistic. These are "mouse" calibers. They can get the job done but, placement is key. I'll take whatever penetration I can get. Even if at the expense of expansion.
If you do the research on all the .380 ammo testing that can be found like I have done you will see that the Buffalo Bore +P is the best ammo going for .380. This is stated by many testers that do not work for Buffalo Bore. My point about being cheap is why would you risk your life not buying and carrying the best most powerful ammo available for a caliber that is marginal for carry to begin with. Would not make as much difference in a larger caliber.
That doesn't answer my question!
Just because someone says something is something doesn't make it so.
I can assure you that I have done and continue to do a lot of research on ammo performance and have carried BB/tc and have and am carrying WWB jhp/Tc in my 380 and have shot thousands and thousands of rounds of the WWB without a single negative incidence.
You call WWB cheap and imply that because it's inexpensive is not as reliable as BB. Well how about some facts to backup that up?
Are you trying to tell me that BB/Tc is better because WWB will not penetrate enough, or exactly what is it specifically that makes BB/Tc better than WWB/Tc in 380?
Last edited:
I'm with kokapelli on this. My choice is Winchester 95 grain fmj flat point, preferably the 50 round box, Q4206, and not the 100 round value pack. There are some who argue the somewhat slower round is better than the higher pressure, faster rounds because they have more tendency to tumble doing a bit more damage with a bit less penetration. At any rate, they penetrate enough, are more available, and cost less, allowing practice with your carry load. Makes sense to me.
I didn't say Winchester was cheap. I think you are along with being narrow minded.
Really? From one of your earlier posts
I interpret that statement was to imply that WWB is cheap and I think that coming to conclusions without looking at the facts is being narrow minded.
You continue to give your opinion without any facts to back them up!
Last edited:
<Edit> The facts are all on line if you know how to use a computer. It's not my opinion it is proven in testing by a lot of different people. If you don't want to do the research fine. I don't really care what you think. It's your life.
Last edited by a moderator:
Powerball,is what I used to run before I stopped using 380's , but I had used hydrashocks In 380 and 45 caliber, They run well, never had a FTF on any gun with them. Cheaper than Dirt sent out an email for "Atomic" 380"s, 90 grain, 1100 fps, that sound like they are worth a shot, I would try them at that speed and weight.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
