G42 and Buffalo Bore 100 grain

Status
Not open for further replies.

herkyguy

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
1,409
I put a 20 round box of Buffalo Bore 100 grain hard cast ammo through my G42 today. I'd read that it offered some impressive velocities, and it certainly did. I bought three boxes of it on sale at a LGS for $19.95 per box. Pretty good deal if I do so say so myself.

Velocity averaged 1100 fps, about 50 less than advertised by Buffalo Bore, but still impressive for a 100 grain bullet.

I've shot hand loads through my G42 along with WWB, and all shot center mass at ten yards with respectable accuracy.

I found that the Buffalo Bore was low and left. Not sure if I was off today or what, but I kept working my sight picture until I was still left but Doing s bit better with elevation. Range was about ten yards, probably the max I would feel comfortable with a .380.

Lastly, I had a total of 2 failures to feed. The first had the slide lock back and the round after that was stuck against the feed ramp and I had to drop the mag to clear it.

Closing thoughts: Buffalo Bore......it's a tossup for me.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1414526064.666276.jpg
 
Yes Buffalo Bore makes some very good quality, very HOT ammo.

This is not the first time I've heard of this .380 load causing problems in some guns, I think Hickok45 actually had a malfunction in his G42 from shooting Buffalo Bore .380 ammo (not sure if this exact load), but I could just be crazy.

That's some very high energy for a .380, 269 ft-lbs of energy is generally .38 special +P territory. With that amount of energy I'd suspect a good hollow point could be used and expected to both expand and penetrate deep enough, sounds like the hard cast bullet would sail right through an attacker but perhaps not.

I think BB makes some excellent revolver loads where feeding is generally not an issue. For the autopistol loads however, I'd want to test a fair amount for reliabilities sake and that is not an easy task with how much the stuff costs!
 
Lastly, I had a total of 2 failures to feed. The first had the slide lock back and the round after that was stuck against the feed ramp and I had to drop the mag to clear it.
Just a quick question: Do you have the original slide stop, or the new improved slide stop? The original slide stop magazine follower tab could be hit by some bullet shapes, causing premature slide lock. Glock modified the tab to allow more clearance.

New Slide Stop on left, old on right.

img_8977.jpg

New slide stop on top, old on bottom.

img_8976.jpg
 
Are Glocks now OK to use with cast lead bullets?
I thought polygonal rifling and cast bullets was a no-no.
 
My understanding is that the hard cast is good to go. There was no leading.

lol double check the slide stop, but the gun is only a few months old.
 
I like Buffalo Bore in revolvers, they make some screaming loads, but I flat refuse to use their products in autos. I've had Buffalo Bore jam my LCP (to date, my LCP's only jam-filled magazine in 1500-ish rounds with a variety of ammo types) and I've seen it jam my friend's Glock and another friend's Sig that, to my knowledge, never malfunctioned with any other ammo.

In my opinion, take it or leave it as you like.
 
So what does Buffalo Bore Hard Cast offer that is better than Winchester White Box fmj/fp other than making your wallet lighter?
 
Even regular cast lead is not really a no no in a polygonal rifled barrel. Not cleaning it every range session after shooting cast lead is though. That's when problems start.

It's not like a double charged round. It won't destroy your gun when you shoot it.

Hard cast shouldn't leave any leading issues.


Hard cast for a .380 is great for winter carry IMO.
 
Even regular cast lead is not really a no no in a polygonal rifled barrel. Not cleaning it every range session after shooting cast lead is though. That's when problems start.

It's not like a double charged round. It won't destroy your gun when you shoot it.

Hard cast shouldn't leave any leading issues.


Hard cast for a .380 is great for winter carry IMO.
Why?
 
There's no doubt that they are getting through whatever clothing you may need to penetrate to hit vials.

This is especially needed when dealing with small and underpowered calibers.
 
There's no doubt that they are getting through whatever clothing you may need to penetrate to hit vials.

This is especially needed when dealing with small and underpowered calibers.
Every 380 FMJ round I have ever seen tested in balletic gelatin will penetrate at least 21 inches.
 
What about bone, denim, puffy down, leather?

I'd rather have more penetrating depth than FMJ.
Ok, but you realize your pretty much alone if you think more than 21" of penetration is a good thing.

Even the FBI ammo specs call for no more than 18" of penetration,
 
That hard cast load is what I carry in my Kel-Tec P3AT. I've fired about 150 rounds of it over a five year period and haven't experienced any problems.

It has more penetration than any FMJ I know of.
 
I'm sure that I'm not in the minority of folks who understand that ordinance gelatin is not a clear indicator of real world conditions.

Get a guy pushing 250-300 lbs wearing a leather or puffy coat you can take your chances with the low pressure target stuff. You'd probably be better off with a .22lr solid when it comes to depth of wound cavity.
 
I've not tested it, but I recall reading something about the hard cast expansion on Buffalo Bore's website. They indicated it would expand to some extent.

I'm not trying to fan the flames of the great .380 stopping power debate, but all my reloads top off around 900 FPS. With powder availability still low, I wanted to get my hands on the fastest .380 ammo I could and give it a spin.

While I did have two failures to feed, the silver lining is that it's a Glock and fairly easy to clear malfunctions.

I still don't have a holster for it yet and haven't worked it into my CCW routine, but I hope to do so soon.
 
IMO, any gun choice and ammo choice is a matter of how much of the bell curve you want to cover.

On one end of the spectrum is a frontal shot on the skinny guy wearing a T-shirt. The skinny guy is 11" from front to back - not much muscle. On the other end of the bell curve is having to take a cross shot on a barrel-chested, muscle-bound thug wearing a leather jacket over a shirt, and a T-shirt underneath that.

With these bullets, being able to reach vital tissue on 98% of the cases you might encounter also means punching holes out the back of your average assailant and having those bullets go on to impact other targets, hopefully solid inanimate objects like brick walls, trees and things like that.
 
I would buy Underwoods loading instead of the BB. At 30ish for 50 rounds it is a much better deal.
 
Some people judge a 'better deal' by the dollar and some by the effectiveness.
I'm in the latter group.
That's great. Underwood is better in both categories, at least in .380 and 9mm. Underwood uses Gold Dot bullets in their +P and +P+ rounds, whereas BB stopped using Gold Dot bullets a long time ago. For a while they were using Montana Gold target JHPs, which are complete and utter garbage for self-defense (all while leaving photos of their ammo with Gold Dots up on their website). I don't know whether that has changed, but I do know that there's no indication that they've gone back to a decent bullet in these rounds -- whereas it's clear that Underwood is using arguably the best bullet in existence for theirs.
 
AustinTX,

You need to get your facts straight when comparing the Underwood Gold Dot to the Buffalo Bore Hard Cast, which is what I related to.

kokapelli,

The same applies to you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top