FMJ in .380 for carry, a question...

[JTQ]

All I’m saying is that .380 had almost no standing as a SD round prior to the development of HP bullets.

The .380 was a common LE round in Europe prior to the development of hollow point rounds.

It isn’t just about penetration and it isn’t about holes. It is about delivery of energy. When a bullet stops penetrating it means all the energy has been delivered. When a bullet exits the body, it means that it still has energy, energy that hasn’t been delivered to the target. That is not what is wanted. I would prefer a short penetration of a high energy round to an overpenetration.

This is the theory of "energy dump" that was popular in the 1970's and early 1980's.

 

[amd6547]

I often rely on an Israeli surplus Beretta 84F. While I keep it loaded with hot Underwood XTP's, I wouldn't feel bad about using good quality FMJ'S.

380 was the WWII service pistol cartridge for Italy. It also was used to assassinate an Israeli Prime Minister and Archduke Ferdinand. It is more capable than many American shooters give it credit for.

 

[rpenmanparker]

The .380 was a common LE round in Europe prior to the development of hollow point rounds.


This is the theory of "energy dump" that was popular in the 1970's and early 1980's.

European law enforcement is not an oft cited recommendation for bullet effectiveness in the USA. My reading suggests that the investment in .380 product lines by modern gun makers has resulted almost completely from the round achieving some credibility due to modern expanding projectiles. Prior to that .380s were largely considered a joke like .25 and 32. The recent popularity of .380 is due to its effectiveness reaching borderline status.

Do you have something better than energy dissipation? Whether it is explicitly said or not, that is what controlled penetration is all about. A bullet that stops inside the target has give up all its energy. A bullet that exits the target still has kinetic energy or else it wouldn’t still be moving. An expanding bullet tears more flesh than an integral one while assuring all the energy is expended. Seems like new and old have merged into a highly functional weapon.

 

[rpenmanparker]

I often rely on an Israeli surplus Beretta 84F. While I keep it loaded with hot Underwood XTP's, I wouldn't feel bad about using good quality FMJ'S.

380 was the WWII service pistol cartridge for Italy. It also was used to assassinate an Israeli Prime Minister and Archduke Ferdinand. It is more capable than many American shooters give it credit for.

And folks drown in a teacup. Sure every caliber can kill you even .22 Short. But is that what you want to protect your life? What choice do we have but to believe that more lead, more frontal bullet area and more energy mean more effectiveness. Remember that multiple anecdotes do not constitute data. Or put another way, this is all about probability. How many times out of a thousand will a .380 kill? Now how about a 10mm hot load? Do you doubt the number for the 10mm would be higher? Would you bet your life on it not being true?

 

[rpenmanparker]

Duplicate.

 

[MedWheeler]

rpenmanparker writes:

The recent popularity of .380 is due to its effectiveness reaching borderline status.

The recent popularity of .380 is due to the development and marketing of affordable, reliable, easily-carried (concealed) guns available in the caliber. It was the guns that started the new rage, not "performance ammo." In fact, the number of carriers who are knowledgeable, but still choose FMJ ammunition in their .380 caliber small guns, shows that the higher-performance ammo is still not dominating the concealed-carry market, so it can't get much credit for popularizing the caliber.

Incidentally, this is a thread on load options in this particular caliber, not the overall effectiveness (or lack of effectiveness) of it against the 10mm, or any other.

 

[JTQ]

My reading suggests that the investment in .380 product lines by modern gun makers has resulted almost completely from the round achieving some credibility due to modern expanding projectiles.

I think it is the other way around. The desire for small concealed carry pistols prompted the ammo makers to produce more expanding bullet options. In other words, the .380 guns got popular (again) because they were small. The ammo guys then followed.

Do you have something better than energy dissipation?

Penetration.

The "energy dump" theory went out the window with the FBI Miami shootout. You have to have enough penetration to reach something significant. If you can tear up more stuff on the way to something significant, that is better, but you've got to get to that significant something.

 

[JTQ]

The recent popularity of .380 is due to the development and marketing of affordable, reliable, easily-carried (concealed) guns available in the caliber. It was the guns that started the new rage, not "performance ammo."

Correct.

 

[C0untZer0]

Sig Sauer Elite

Are you talking about the V-Crown ?

The V-Crowns haven't really done that well in testing. Here is the Highroad thread on it:

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/sig-v-crown-9mm-in-clear-ballistics-gel.827956/

 

[Wanderling]

BTW, just placed an order for 3 boxes of Fiocci Extrema 90 gr XTP, that performed very well in ShootingTheBull's test. If no feeding issues, this will probably be my carry round, along with Federal Hydra-Shock.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Correct.

rpenmanparker writes:



The recent popularity of .380 is due to the development and marketing of affordable, reliable, easily-carried (concealed) guns available in the caliber. It was the guns that started the new rage, not "performance ammo." In fact, the number of carriers who are knowledgeable, but still choose FMJ ammunition in their .380 caliber small guns, shows that the higher-performance ammo is still not dominating the concealed-carry market, so it can't get much credit for popularizing the caliber.

Incidentally, this is a thread on load options in this particular caliber, not the overall effectiveness (or lack of effectiveness) of it against the 10mm, or any other.

I think it is the other way around. The desire for small concealed carry pistols prompted the ammo makers to produce more expanding bullet options. In other words, the .380 guns got popular (again) because they were small. The ammo guys then followed.


Penetration.

The "energy dump" theory went out the window with the FBI Miami shootout. You have to have enough penetration to reach something significant. If you can tear up more stuff on the way to something significant, that is better, but you've got to get to that significant something.

Correct.

I yield. Doesn’t make sense to me, but hey, you can’t be right all the time. Thanks for the education.

 

[rpenmanparker]

So penetration has replaced energy dump. But the expanding bullet can be designed to provide any level of penetration with a compromise in expansion. You get the safety against shoot through, still good penetration, and complete energy dump. What could be wrong with that? I just don’t see giving up and choosing a hardball. There is too much data out there that can guide an educated choice to just opt for the FMJ extreme.

 

[Livin_Cincy]

It always seems we do not apply what we know about hunting deer to our hand cannons ammunition selection.

 

[rpenmanparker]

It always seems we do not apply what we know about hunting deer to our hand cannons ammunition selection.

Once again I ask the question. Do you hunt deer with a handgun? If you use a rifle, the premise you suggest in your post is totally false. If you hunted deer with a handgun, I suspect your load would more resemble what we use for self defense.

 

[JTQ]

If you hunted deer with a handgun, I suspect your load would more resemble what we use for self defense.

My guess is most handgun hunters use heavy for caliber semi-wadcutters (for the most penetration - probably the point Livin_Cincy was making).

 

[scaatylobo]

Was Mr. Keith using a handgun against elephants, rhino, cape buffalo, hippos and the like? I think not. A whole different story.

Cute, but obviously he was referring to dangerous game.

And sorry that I did not quote his whole theory.

But he stated that man is THE most dangerous of game ,and if your armed with a 'mouse gun' then penetration is THE main object.

Do as you see fit,I saw his truths and see that it works on any and all materials that are as close to the material of the human body as possible.

Also worked on woodchucks.

 

[rpenmanparker]

My guess is most handgun hunters use heavy for caliber semi-wadcutters (for the most penetration - probably the point Livin_Cincy was making).

Not likely they are using .380 FMJs or am I wrong? More likely 357 Mag, 41 Mag, 44 Mag and so forth. Also the side-on heart shot on a big buck requires a lot of penetration to get to the intended target. How much penetration does a heart shot require on a human, 4-8 inches if that much?

 

[JTQ]

Not likely they are using .380 FMJs or am I wrong? More likely 357 Mag, 41 Mag, 44 Mag and so forth. Also the side-on heart shot on a big buck requires a lot of penetration to get to the intended target. How much penetration does a heart shot require on a human, 4-8 inches if that much?

You're not wrong, they're not using a .380.

The point is while they are using a .357 Mag, .41 Mag, .44 Mag, etc., they aren't using lightweight, rapidly expanding bullets and "dumping energy". They are using a big heavy bullet that drives through the flesh and bones to hit something vital.

I'll let Livin_Cincy explain further in the event I'm wrong about the point he was making.

You could ask some of the forum's experience handgun hunter's, like CraigC (or just read his posts), what kind of ammo he uses for hunting, especially something that can stomp or chomp him, and that he has to stop right now (much like a defensive situation).

 

[rpenmanparker]

You're not wrong, they're not using a .380.

The point is while they are using a .357 Mag, .41 Mag, .44 Mag, etc., they aren't using lightweight, rapidly expanding bullets and "dumping energy". They are using a big heavy bullet that drives through the flesh and bones to hit something vital.

I'll let Livin_Cincy explain further in the event I'm wrong about the point he was making.

You could ask some of the forum's experience handgun hunter's, like CraigC (or just read his posts), what kind of ammo he uses for hunting, especially something that can stomp or chomp him, and that he has to stop right now (much like a defensive situation).

You didn’t address the question of how much penetration is needed on a human to hit a vital organ with a frontal shot. It is under 6 inches for sure.

 

[Wanderling]

Cute, but obviously he was referring to dangerous game.

And sorry that I did not quote his whole theory.

But he stated that man is THE most dangerous of game ,and if your armed with a 'mouse gun' then penetration is THE main object.

Do as you see fit,I saw his truths and see that it works on any and all materials that are as close to the material of the human body as possible.

Also worked on woodchucks.

So if - and I repeat, IF - someone decides to use FMJs, why would a hotter round result in a different outcome vs a, say, Remington UMC FMJ, if both are going to overpenetrate ?

The reason I brought up Remington UMC is that in another ShootingTheBull's video, where he tested FMJs from .380, this round resulted in minimal penetration (18" IIRC). Still overpenetrated , just not as much as the other two.

So for all these people claiming JHPs aren't efficient enough as SD round for .380, and choosing to carry FMJs, wouldn't the weakest FMJ with minimal overpenetration be a better choice than a hottest FMJ that has more chance of overpenetrating and harming someone innocent, as long as both have more than sufficient penetration ?

The energy dump theory assumes that the round is transmitting all of it's energy into the body. This makes sense for properly expanding JHPs, because a JHP that stopped without overpenetrating has expended all of it's energy inside the body, so the hottest round transmits most energy, the best rounds go as far as possible while "breaking" by expending energy on mushrooming.

However any FMJ of the same caliber, mass, and geometry, going through the same exact channel and exiting clean through will spend exactly the same energy punching through the body. At least according to simple physics. The only difference between a hot overpenetrating .380 round and a weak overpenetrating .380 round is the exit speed. Which is precisely the one variable that you'd want to keep as low as possible to avoid unintended damage. So I can see choosing flatnose over roundnose (higher resistance, more spent energy, hopefully slower exit speed), but I absolutely don't see the value of one similarly shaped round over another if both are going to overpenetrate. To me it seems that the one that has the least amount of speed upon exit is preferable.

I may be wrong... so I am open to explanations.

BTW, ShootingTheBull reviewer - who seems to be very thorough in his approach, and certainly worth having his opinion respected - believes that any FMJ round is a bad choice for a .380 mousegun.

 

[BSA1]

It is about delivery of energy. When a bullet stops penetrating it means all the energy has been delivered. When a bullet exits the body, it means that it still has energy, energy that hasn’t been delivered to the target. That is not what is wanted. I would prefer a short penetration of a high energy round to an overpenetration. .

The FBI disagrees with you. They placed a lot of blame on the failure of a single 9mm Winchester Silvertip to penetrate deeply enough to hit the heart of Michael Platt in the infamous Miami shootout.

The SIlvertip performed exactly as you want. It fully expanded and stopped in the body. Unfortunately it was just 1" short of the heart.

 

[JTQ]

You didn’t address the question of how much penetrstion is needed on a human to hit a vital organ with a frontal shot. It is under 6 inches for sure.

As long as you can get your opponent to stand still right in front of you, squared away with a frontal shot, at 10 feet (like a block of ballistic gel), you're good to go.

If he's farther away, or is wearing heavy clothing, or you have to shoot through his arm or shoulder, and maybe he has a backpack slung over that shoulder (or all of the above), then you have some variables and may need a little better performance.

Hey, it's your call. I'm not trying to talk you into anything. Anything you choose is the right answer, for you. What I'm trying to illustrate is the constant "this is the right answer, and if you choose something else, you're wrong", is wrong.

These are living creatures we're talking about shooting. In some cases hollow points will perform better, in other's, a ball round or semi-wadcutter may perform better. You could make the "right" choice in gun or ammo, and it could be the "wrong" choice. On the other hand, a .380 with ball ammo is a lot better than a pencil, unless you're John Wick, of course.

The other point is this constant fear of over-penetration. There just isn't any evidence of this being an issue. Missing your intended target, sure, but most self defense gun uses are not in crowed areas, and even if they weren't, handgun rounds, especially non-magnum rounds just don't penetrate that much.

If I told you on Monday, at 10:00AM, at 5th and Main Street, you were going to be in a gunfight. There is no getting out of it, but you can bring any gun you want, and you don't have to conceal it. Would you bring your .380 with 80gr hollow points to ensure you don't have a shoot through and dump all the energy into your opponent, or would you bring your AR-10 with 30 round mags and 165gr .308 rounds that could probably shoot through three people and waste all kinds of energy down range? I'm guessing most people would choose the AR-10 and take their chances they won't hit somebody else because the .308 performs a whole lot better than a .380, in most instances.

 

[rpenmanparker]

The FBI disagrees with you. They placed a lot of blame on the failure of a single 9mm Winchester Silvertip to penetrate deeply enough to hit the heart of Michael Platt in the infamous Miami shootout.

The SIlvertip performed exactly as you want. It fully expanded and stopped in the body. Unfortunately it was just 1" short of the heart.

So the penetration was like what, 3 inches? That’s not what ai want. How about you? I guess we shouldn’t be using Winchester Silvertips.

 

[BSA1]

So if - and I repeat, IF - someone decides to use FMJs, why would a hotter round result in a different outcome vs a, say, Remington UMC FMJ, if both are going to overpenetrate ?

Because in the real world the bullet angle may be less than perfect. A bullet traveling in the body at a angle has to penetrate deeper than straight on shot. You may have noticed that most American Adults are on the plus size now days.

In addition the bullet may have to pass through other barriers. For example maybe the attacker has his arm raised in such a angle that the bullet has to pass through it shattering the bone and muscle in it along the way.

Or as pointed out maybe the attacker is heavy clothing or maybe the bullet has to penetrate through a backpack and it's contents.

BTW, ShootingTheBull reviewer - who seems to be very thorough in his approach, and certainly worth having his opinion respected - believes that any FMJ round is a bad choice for a .380 mousegun.

I like his videos and really like how he tests 5 rounds instead of just one. I do tend to disagree with his arbitrary standard of 12 - 18" penetration.

A close friend and I have the same model CZ-82 9x18. The 9x18 is my .380 as they are so close. He carries hollowpoints and I carry FMJ's just for the reasons being discussed. We both feel we are well armed.

 

[rpenmanparker]

As long as you can get your opponent to stand still right in front of you, squared away with a frontal shot, at 10 feet (like a block of ballistic gel), you're good to go.

If he's farther away, or is wearing heavy clothing, or you have to shoot through his arm or shoulder, and maybe he has a backpack slung over that shoulder (or all of the above), then you have some variables and may need a little better performance.

Hey, it's your call. I'm not trying to talk you into anything. Anything you choose is the right answer, for you. What I'm trying to illustrate is the constant "this is the right answer, and if you choose something else, you're wrong."

These are living creatures we're talking about shooting. In some cases hollow points will perform better, in other's, a ball round or semi-wadcutter may perform better. You could make the "right" choice in gun or ammo, and it could be the "wrong" choice. On the other hand, a .380 with ball ammo is a lot better than a pencil, unless you're John Wick, of course.

The other point is this constant fear of over-penetration. There just isn't any evidence of this being an issue. Missing your intended target, sure, but most self defense gun uses are not in crowed areas, and even if they weren't, handgun rounds, especially non-magnum rounds just don't penetrate that much.

If I told you on Monday, at 10:00AM, at 5th and Main Street, you were going to be in a gunfight. There is no getting out of it, but you can bring any gun you want, and you don't have to conceal it. Would you bring your .380 with 80gr hollow points to ensure you don't have a shoot through and dump all the energy into your opponent, or would you bring your AR-10 with 30 round mags and 165gr .308 rounds that would probably shoot through three people and waste all kinds of energy down range? I'm guessing most people would choose the AR-10 and take their chances they won't hit somebody else because the .308 performs a whole lot better than a .380, in most instances.

Of course the .223 from the AR has approximately 10X the muzzle energy of the .380. It probably gives up more energy in the body than the .380 even though it exits at good speed. It is funny to talk about how energy dump is unimportant while citing a case of massive energy dump. Which brings us back to what we are really discussing: how underpowered the .380 is.