Frankly, I don't think Ruger is wanting to spend the money on an empirical test of all available ammo fired through the dozens of guns necessary to pick just which one is "The One." Especially when an ammo maker will just come out in another year and make a better one.
The situation is made more difficult by what parameter rates higher, like velocity vs footpounds of force, at what effective range, penetration vs expansion, etc. Ruger makes them to fire the general envelope of .380 as an overall application. Even the magazine article testers use the caveat that "that's what we choose for this pistol today." It really is like nailing jelly to the wall. You can do it, but it may not be there tomorrow.
Add to that, there is really a very small percentage difference in whatever available factor between the closest competitors in a class. And .380 has no +P, it's out of the performance window for a short gripped pocket auto.
As for internet posts, we lose 85% of the message because you can't see our friendly face, watch our gestures, or hear the way we pronounce and say words ("which is reel gud fer sum of us," the writer said, rubbing his palm on a three day old, tobacco-stained stubble.)
Please don't read in too much in our short responses - very few have the time to compose a nice return letter sneaking a look at work and all . . .