Something to keep an eye out for: Hydra-Shok Deep .380

[Tokarev]

I have no info other than that Federal is releasing a 380 load that is reported to reach 12" in gel both with any without heavy clothing. If the load is reasonably priced and delivers consistent performance it should be a "game changer."

No info yet on weight, velocity, barrel used, etc. Will update when possible.

[TCinVA]

I wouldn't hate it.

[45dotACP]

If the numbers are good out of a LCP I'm down to clown.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[GearFondler]

If the numbers are good out of a LCP I'm down to clown.

Sent from my moto g(6) using TapatalkYou, me, and a lot of others I'm sure.

[Bucky]

Interesting they’re expanding what is considered to be an outdated old school design.

[Tokarev]

Interesting they’re expanding what is considered to be an outdated old school design.Hydra-Shok Deep is pretty new and is an update to the legacy Hydra-Shok.

Up to this point it has only been available in 9mm, 40 S&W and 45 Auto.

If the 380 load works like they're advertising it should be THE choice for pocket pistols and will hopefully lead to other stuff like a 38 Special.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Gater]

Interested in this one, as well.

FWIW, TFB mentioned 99 gr, 1000 fps.

[Tokarev]

TFB mentioned 99 gr, 1000 fps.

Seems a bit fast for a 2.75" barrel. I guess we'll see...

[Bucky]

If the 380 load works like they're advertising it should be THE choice for pocket pistols and will hopefully lead to other stuff like a 38 Special.


I agree. The only .380 I own is an LCP I and I don't trust it for anything, so that's a no go. Proper ammo makes me want to consider a GLOCK 42, as it's lighter / smaller than my 43, though I wonder how it compares to my P938 which is also smaller than my 43. :confused:

I'm assuming that Federal will make the ammo more accessible / affordable than the Hornady offering, which seems to be the go-to load for .380s today.

[spyderco monkey]

Seems a bit fast for a 2.75" barrel. I guess we'll see...

.380 99gr HST averages 925fps from the Kahr P380:
http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com/2015/04/federal-hst-9mm-and-380-auto-comparison.html

I wish the major manufacturers would work on getting a SAAMI .380 +P standardized. Current SAAMI is for .380 is 100 years old, and at 21kpsi, is 5kpsi lower then .25 ACP.

Underwood has been loading .380 +P's for ~7 years, and they have proven safe out of the all the modern locked breach pocket pistols (P380, LCP, Taurus.)

Standard Underwood .380+p is 90gr @ 1125fps from a LCP.

Paired with a limited expansion projectile (XTP, FTX, Hydrashok deep) that keep expansion around 0.45", a .380 +P would solve the current lack of penetration / expansion we see with .380.

Underwood .380 +P XTP makes it 15":
https://youtu.be/6F5rPTHcrmg?t=324

That said, I'm hopeful for the Hydrashok deep.

[Det1397]

Hydra-Shok Deep is pretty new and is an update to the legacy Hydra-Shok.

Up to this point it has only been available in 9mm, 40 S&W and 45 Auto...

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

When I picked up a G42 several years ago, one of the rounds I picked up and T&E'd was the Federal PD380HSI H, 90 grain Hydra-Shok JHP Personal Defense-Low Recoil. The round functions perfectly in my G42 but in the end I opted for the Precision One XTP and the Underwood/Lehigh Defense Xtreme Penetrator or Xtreme Defender loadings.

But up to this point keep in mind the words of DocGKR
"Many small, easily concealed semi-automatic pistols which are recommended for law enforcement backup or concealed carry use fire .380 ACP or smaller bullets. While these small caliber handgun bullets can produce fatal wounds,they are less likely to produce the rapid incapacitation necessary in law enforcement or self-defense situations.

Handguns chambered in .380 ACP are small, compact, and generally easy to carry. Unfortunately, testing has shown that they offer inadequate performance for self-defense and for law enforcement use whether on duty as a back-up weapon or for off duty carry. The terminal performance of .380 ACP JHP's is often erratic, with inadequate penetration and inconsistent expansion being common problems, while .380 ACP FMJ's offer adequate penetration, but no expansion. All of the .380 ACP JHP loads we have tested, including CorBon, Hornady, Federal, Remington, Speer, and Winchester exhibited inconsistent, unacceptable terminal performance for law enforcement back-up and off duty self-defense use due to inadequate penetration or inadequate expansion. Stick with FMJ for .380 ACP or better yet, don't use it at all. The use of .380 ACP and smaller caliber weapons is really not recommended for LE use and many savvy agencies prohibit them.
While both the .380 ACP and .38 sp can obviously be lethal; the .38 sp is more likely to incapacitate an attacker when used in a BUG role."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When carrying a .380 in the role of a BUG or deep-concealed primary or whatever role, Remember what the round is capable of and act/respond accordingly...

[GyroF-16]

When I picked up a G42 several years ago, one of the rounds I picked up and T&E'd was the Federal PD380HSI H, 90 grain Hydra-Shok JHP Personal Defense-Low Recoil. The round functions perfectly in my G42 but in the end I opted for the Precision One XTP and the Underwood/Lehigh Defense Xtreme Penetrator or Xtreme Defender loadings.

But up to this point keep in mind the words of DocGKR
"Many small, easily concealed semi-automatic pistols which are recommended for law enforcement backup or concealed carry use fire .380 ACP or smaller bullets. While these small caliber handgun bullets can produce fatal wounds,they are less likely to produce the rapid incapacitation necessary in law enforcement or self-defense situations.

Handguns chambered in .380 ACP are small, compact, and generally easy to carry. Unfortunately, testing has shown that they offer inadequate performance for self-defense and for law enforcement use whether on duty as a back-up weapon or for off duty carry. The terminal performance of .380 ACP JHP's is often erratic, with inadequate penetration and inconsistent expansion being common problems, while .380 ACP FMJ's offer adequate penetration, but no expansion. All of the .380 ACP JHP loads we have tested, including CorBon, Hornady, Federal, Remington, Speer, and Winchester exhibited inconsistent, unacceptable terminal performance for law enforcement back-up and off duty self-defense use due to inadequate penetration or inadequate expansion. Stick with FMJ for .380 ACP or better yet, don't use it at all. The use of .380 ACP and smaller caliber weapons is really not recommended for LE use and many savvy agencies prohibit them.
While both the .380 ACP and .38 sp can obviously be lethal; the .38 sp is more likely to incapacitate an attacker when used in a BUG role."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When carrying a .380 in the role of a BUG or deep-concealed primary or whatever role, Remember what the round is capable of and act/respond accordingly...

I think the point of post #1 (which, obviously, started this thread) is that this new .380 HydraShok Deep might offer better penetration, and therefore be more acceptable and useful in a self-defense roll.

[Tokarev]

Here is the latest from Federal:


– The newest addition to Federal’s Hydra-Shok Deep lineup is the industry’s first expanding 380 Auto to consistently meet FBI protocol recommendations for penetration (12 inches minimum) through bare gel and through heavy clothing.

In response to the growing popularity of ultra-compact handguns by citizens of all ages, genders and demographics particularly among shooters looking for a downsized yet effective defender Federal Premium has expanded its award-wining Hydra-Shok Deep lineup with a new 99-grain 380 Auto load.

This new offering is tailor-made for arming compact, concealed-carry “pocket pistols” or “micro guns” with an expanding, yet deepest-penetrating round. The new Hydra-Shok Deep 380 Auto even exceeds the FBI protocol performance measures of 12 inches minimum through both the bare gel and heavy clothing tests. These are achievements the industry has never seen before in the 380 Auto cartridge.

“FBI protocol incudes a series of rigorous scenarios. Bullets are shot through materials such as 10-percent ordinance gelatin, laminated automotive safety glass, plywood, wallboard and heavy clothing specified by the FBI,” said Federal Handgun Ammunition Product Manager Chris Laack. “While our larger caliber ammunition is designed to meet and exceed these requirements, the smaller 380 Auto is designed to offer the best possible blend of performance in a compact handgun platform.”

Testing done by Federal ammunition engineers in their Anoka, Minnesota facilities showed typical results of 13 to 13 ½ inches of penetration in bare gel and 13 ¼ to 14 inches through heavy clothing. Test gun barrel lengths were from common, compact handguns ranging from 2 ¾ to 3 ½ inches. The bullet and load are also fine-tuned to ensure delivery of consistent performance across all handgun platforms, including ones with longer barrels, to stay within that 13- to 14-inch goal range.

Hydra-Shok Deep has quickly become a favorite of those who rely on ammunition to protect themselves and their families. The product lineup now consists of four loads with the new 380 Auto 99-grain being the latest. Also available are 9mm Luger 135-grain, 40 S&W 165-grain and 45 Auto 210-grain. Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Prices range from $25.95 to $33.95 from 20-count boxes.

Federal ammunition can be found at dealers nationwide or purchased online direct from Federal. For more information on all products from Federal or to shop online, visit www.federalpremium.com.


Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[HeavyDuty]

Ooooh. I’m almost embarrassed to admit how much carry my LCP got, and now my 42. I switched to ball a few months back, but this may prove to be the best solution for a pocket .380 yet.

[Wayne Dobbs]

And Federal doesn't even know how to spell correctly in their ad. It's "ordnance gel", not "ordinance gel". And color me very skeptical on the performance. You cannot overcome the laws of physics with great ads and gimmick projectiles. Something was sacrificed for passing performance here. Was it expansion or chamber pressure?

[Velo Dog]

You cannot overcome the laws of physics with great ads and gimmick projectiles. Something was sacrificed for passing performance here. Was it expansion or chamber pressure?

Chamber pressure should be similar to the Federal 99 grain HST @ 1030 fps from a 3.75" barrel.

The Hornady 90 grain XTP and Federal 90 grain Hydra-Shok can penetrate to around 12 inches or so as long as average expanded diameter is less than about .450"

However, here is a quote from firearmstactical.com
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708141329/http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs26.htm

"The HydraShok ammunition of today is different from the version tested by the FBI. The primary difference is the thickness of the post. Federal apparently redesigned the post so it would collapse when the bullet expands. In previous generations of HydraShok the post remained erect after bullet expansion. This was not desirable for two reasons:

1. The erect post propelled tissue out of the path of the expanded bullet, reducing the amount of tissue that was contacted and crushed as the bullet penetrated. As a result, the bullet produced a narrower, but deeper, permanent cavity compared to conventional JHP bullets of the same caliber, weight, velocity and expanded diameter."

The new Hydra-Shok Deep offerings have VERY robust posts.

[Sigfan26]

And Federal doesn't even know how to spell correctly in their ad. It's "ordnance gel", not "ordinance gel". And color me very skeptical on the performance. You cannot overcome the laws of physics with great ads and gimmick projectiles. Something was sacrificed for passing performance here. Was it expansion or chamber pressure?

I’m surprised you would be a challenger of factory claimed data...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[0ddl0t]

Something was sacrificed for passing performance here. Was it expansion or chamber pressure?

My bet is on a reduced coefficient of drag: a larger post that helps deflect tissue around the expanded projectile.

[Bucky]

Chamber pressure should be similar to the Federal 99 grain HST @ 1030 fps from a 3.75" barrel.

The Hornady 90 grain XTP and Federal 90 grain Hydra-Shok can penetrate to around 12 inches or so as long as average expanded diameter is less than about .450"

However, here is a quote from firearmstactical.com
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708141329/http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs26.htm

"The HydraShok ammunition of today is different from the version tested by the FBI. The primary difference is the thickness of the post. Federal apparently redesigned the post so it would collapse when the bullet expands. In previous generations of HydraShok the post remained erect after bullet expansion. This was not desirable for two reasons:

1. The erect post propelled tissue out of the path of the expanded bullet, reducing the amount of tissue that was contacted and crushed as the bullet penetrated. As a result, the bullet produced a narrower, but deeper, permanent cavity compared to conventional JHP bullets of the same caliber, weight, velocity and expanded diameter."

The new Hydra-Shok Deep offerings have VERY robust posts.

My snarkasm meter is pinned with this explanation.

So to some it up, the newer design is thicker, but loses its erection much quicker.

[Bucky]

You cannot overcome the laws of physics with great ads and gimmick projectiles. Something was sacrificed for passing performance here. Was it expansion or chamber pressure?

What about chemistry? I believe that we still haven’t reached the peak of innovation with regards to propellant. This means that over time we may be able to develop more efficient propellants to launch bullets at higher velocities without the increase in pressure. It’s actually happened over time, but each improvement has been gradual, so it’s not as obvious.

[ccmdfd]

You cannot overcome the laws of physics with great ads and gimmick projectiles. Something was sacrificed for passing performance here. Was it expansion or chamber pressure?

I understand your point, but on the other hand, today's 9mm JHP rounds are considered very superior to the JHP of 10+ years ago. Was something sacrificed to make that happen?
if 9mm could be improved, why not .380?

cc

[BehindBlueI's]

Given the penetration capability of something like S&B FMJ in .380, I'm sure a minimally expanding .380 can consistently hit 12-14" without a bone strike. It doesn't strike me as terribly unbelievable. I note that they reference auto glass, etc. but then say their larger calibers are tested to those standards and then drop the matter for the .380. I suspect this is done so a casual reading makes it looks like it passes the entirety of the FBI testing protocols.

[Wayne Dobbs]

I understand your point, but on the other hand, today's 9mm JHP rounds are considered very superior to the JHP of 10+ years ago. Was something sacrificed to make that happen?
if 9mm could be improved, why not .380?

cc

The 9mm wasn't saddled with physical science limitations of mass, momentum and sectional density surfeits. It simply had horrible projectile design (a topic with which I'm very familiar from long ago LE experience), which as you've noted, is not an issue anymore.

[Wayne Dobbs]

I’m surprised you would be a challenger of factory claimed data...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not me! I'll just sit in my corner awaiting some actual DocGKR testing of this. My prediction is that it expands well in bare calibrated 10% gel but underpenetrates and is a fail in 4LD. Auto glass will be a hilarious failure. Let's see what it does in valid testing, because right now you're being romanced by ad copy that doesn't even have the terms spelled correctly.

[Navin Johnson]

To work within the pressure curve that allows pistols up to 100 years old function it likely has controlled (less) but more consistent expansion than current offerings. So likely not service caliber performance.

It's still a .380.

The cost of testing the ammo will likely exceed the cost of the firearm.

But, if it works I can see a 42 in my future possibly.

[BehindBlueI's]

Not me! I'll just sit in my corner awaiting some actual DocGKR testing of this. My prediction is that it expands well in bare calibrated 10% gel but underpenetrates and is a fail in 4LD. Auto glass will be a hilarious failure. Let's see what it does in valid testing, because right now you're being romanced by ad copy that doesn't even have the terms spelled correctly.

In fairness, they aren't claiming a pass for auto glass, only bare gel and heavy clothing.

[Wayne Dobbs]

In fairness, they aren't claiming a pass for auto glass, only bare gel and heavy clothing.

Agreed, but having gone from the police world to the gun industry world, I recognize ad writing that the typical customer, not as dialed in as are most in this group, would form the impression that this popgun ammo will pass the FBI ammo testing protocol.

I've learned from watching the ammo testing that really came to light about 1987 and morphed into what we see today, that if a load does well in 4LD and auto glass, you have a winner. If it doesn't, you're playing craps with your life and the lives of those whom you may have to defend. Do some circumstances require such risk? I guess so, but hopefully, Doc will come along and tell you about the repeat customer he saw with .380 torso wounds...three times in two years.

[BehindBlueI's]

Agreed, but having gone from the police world to the gun industry world, I recognize ad writing that the typical customer, not as dialed in as are most in this group, would form the impression that this popgun ammo will pass the FBI ammo testing protocol.

Agreed, which is why I previously posted: "I note that they reference auto glass, etc. but then say their larger calibers are tested to those standards and then drop the matter for the .380. I suspect this is done so a casual reading makes it looks like it passes the entirety of the FBI testing protocols."

That's the fluffiest way possible to say it won't pass auto glass. I suspect .38 wadcutters won't either, but we're not expecting them to. Ad fluff aside, this isn't a stand in for a duty cartridge and I suspect that people aren't cross shopping this with the 147gr 9mm offerings any more than they are the wadcutters. It's a compromise cartridge, not a duty cartridge. If it's an improvement over existing .380, great for .380 guys.

[Wayne Dobbs]

You just revived a curiosity on wadcutters vs auto glass. I'm guessing the factory swaged target loads would fail miserably on laminated glass, but would a relatively hard cast WC loaded to full power (say 800 fps or more) possibly make it? That's a test that should be done.

[Hambo]

Not me! I'll just sit in my corner awaiting some actual DocGKR testing of this. My prediction is that it expands well in bare calibrated 10% gel but underpenetrates and is a fail in 4LD.

Taking the safe bet, eh? ;) I'll say that this ends up being very similar to their .380 HST. Federal will have at least three .380 defense JHPs, each designed to capture a certain segment of the market. Whether you like your hamburgers round or square, it's still just a hamburger.

[SiriusBlunder]

You just revived a curiosity on wadcutters vs auto glass. I'm guessing the factory swaged target loads would fail miserably on laminated glass, but would a relatively hard cast WC loaded to full power (say 800 fps or more) possibly make it? That's a test that should be done.

From DocGKR in 2018 in the "Wadcutters vs. Hollowpoints for snubnose carry" (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?30080-Wadcutters-vs-Hollowpoints-for-snubnose-carry&p=716907&viewfull=1#post716907) thread:

Question:


Have you tested standard wadcutters through auto glass?

Doc's answer:


Of course.....about 2 decades ago. It is all about the hardness of the lead and the launch velocity when confronting glass. Harder lead WC's at 744 fps went 14"; softer lead WC's at 651 fps only went 9". Next time we gel test, I'll see if we can shoot some current factory WC's through some auto windshield glass.

[Gater]

FWIW, dropping a link to the Vista press release. Same copy, but there's an enlargeable photo where you can get a glimpse of (allegedly) the .380 P380HSD1 bullet/post design.

http://media.vistaoutdoor.com/news/press_release/press_release.aspx?id=1239&brand=5&year=2020

[Baldanders]

I don't even own a .380, but considering that .38+p HPs in 2" barrels are still riding that thin line between expansion and underpenetration, I don't see the reason to switch my rule of thumb of FMJ/non-expanding bullets for everything in .380 and under. Under bullets have smart materials, sensors, and brains enough to modulate optimal expansion and penetration, I think we are solidly on a plateau for terminal performance.

I applaud attempts to boost performance, however. I'm no engineer. I would love to be wrong.

[jd950]

I have somewhat grudgingly migrated from J frame .38 revolvers to a .380 in certain roles (on-duty backup and extreme lightweight concealed carry in low threat environments). I find they conceal easier and that I can shoot them better than I can a super light J frame, I can carry spare ammo more effectively and I can get one or two more rounds in the smaller size gun. I still have the J frames and still like them in certain situations, but I can carry a small 9 in most situations where I would carry a J frame, and can carry a .380 where the revolver won't easily fit.

Clearly a compromise, but so is a 2" J frame. I have and will continue to watch .380 ammo developments with interest.

[the Schwartz]

In fairness, they aren't claiming a pass for auto glass, only bare gel and heavy clothing.

Given that the .380 is not a commonly issued primary-issue caliber for LE field operations and the limits imposed by its lower power level, I am not sure that this new offering's ability to pass all of the F.B.I. test protocols was ever the goal of Federal/ATK.

What I am getting at is that when/where departments/agencies do issue a weapon chambered in .380, it is done so most often in the capacity of a ''back-up'' weapon. Since ''back-up'' weapons are used under somewhat different circumstances than a primary duty weapon, perhaps the ability of the round to pass only those two protocols was all that Federal/ATK was interested in satisfying?

[BehindBlueI's]

Given that the .380 is not a commonly issued primary-issue caliber for LE field operations and the limits imposed by its lower power level, I am not sure that this new offering's ability to pass all of the F.B.I. test protocols was ever the goal of Federal/ATK.

What I am getting at is that when/where departments/agencies do issue a weapon chambered in .380, it is done so most often in the capacity of a ''back-up'' weapon. Since ''back-up'' weapons are used under somewhat different circumstances than a primary duty weapon, perhaps the ability of the round to pass only those two protocols was all that Federal/ATK was interested in satisfying?

I doubt it was the goal, just the marketing looking like it was specifically written to make the casual reader think it had was the reason for that sidebar.

I also get the notion of niche cartridges for niche uses. With the availability of so many solid 9mm offerings like the Shield available for on duty BUG use these days I don't know how much .380 fills that for on duty LEOs these days, but that's probably beyond the scope of the topic. For those who do elect to carry a .380, if this is an improvement then I welcome it.

[jd950]

With the availability of so many solid 9mm offerings like the Shield available for on duty BUG use these days I don't know how much .380 fills that for on duty LEOs these days

Although I rarely wear a uniform, my P380 is almost unnoticeable on a vest carrier and also an easy fit in the front back pocket of jeans or dress slacks or uniform pants and it has replaced a Seecamp .32 in those roles. If one was so inclined, it can even go in little holster on a neck chain, although that is not my thing. Kind of a modern vest pocket gun, like the little .25 pistols were back in the old days. The other thing I like is that for the most part every gun I carry, on duty and off, is a DAO semi auto and I believe there is value in that. But yes, a niche gun really, and when carried, very very rarely the only gun carried.

In a .380 I like the idea of good penetration with some possibility of some sort of ragged edge or expansion or something that might make it a little more likely to inspire greater blood loss and less likely to glance off bones than ball ammo. I don't care about windshields or car doors. I have been carrying Hornady XTP. I look forward to seeing some useful tests of this new round.

[spyderco monkey]

Took these pics today at SHOT:

https://i.ibb.co/zNvhndV/hydrashok-deep-380.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/wCrhFjh/hydrashok-deep-380-expansion.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/MGm0R5Y/Hydrashok-deep-380-brochure.jpg

[ccmdfd]

Does "heavy clothing" always refer to 4 layers denim, or are they allowed to use whatever they want for that definition?

cc

[BeckerBrain]

I seem to remember a thread on another forum a couple years back where a confirmed medical examiner and avid shooter agreed to answer a few questions and give his opinions on various calibers and bullet types. Anybody else see this? I could be wrong but iirc I think he said that a huge majority of the .380 he sees is FMJ (because those shot with SJHP’s tend to survive?). Hydra Shok deep seems pretty promising in other calibers, so if can really reach 12” consistently that would be very interesting indeed. There’s been so much talk the last few years about ammo tech advancement leading to much much better performance in 9mm, I always wondered if this would trickle down to .380 as well. . .

[0ddl0t]

Does "heavy clothing" always refer to 4 layers denim, or are they allowed to use whatever they want for that definition?

cc

"Heavy Clothing" refers to FBI standards established in 1989: (1) layer of Denim (14.4 ounces/yard), (1) layer of Polartec 200 fleece, (1) layer of cotton dress shirt (3.5 ounces/yard) and (1) cotton T-shirt (5.25 ounces/yard) layered firmly on the face of the ballistic gelatin block.

The 4 layers of denim standard is from the IWBA in 1998 and was developed by Duncan MacPherson because the California Highway Patrol kept having bullets that passed FBI standards fail to expand in the real world.


For a more detailed history see: http://thinlineweapons.com/IWBA/1998-Vol3No3.pdf

[Doc_Glock]

I like the idea of this round. Hopefully it is a well built cartridge for defensive reliability. By the photos, I assume they appear to be limiting the expansion to a modest amount so that they get the penetration desired. It won't expand like a 9mm, but will get deep enough. But then 9mm doesn't expand like .40 or .45 either.

Nice to see a manufacturer developing the .380 a bit intelligently as opposed to trying to get massive expansion at the expense of penetration.

[Danjojo]

13.5" in bare gel is very good. Probably 14.5-15" through denim. 380 sales will likely get a nice little boost from this round alone.

Between this, it's post-free cousins called "Punch", 10mm HST, and the Syntech Defense line, Federal is doing a good job at expanding offerings.

[Chuck Whitlock]

I like the idea of this.

I've weighed the Hornady Critical Defense's slick nickel cases and QC but shallow penetration against the XTP's penetration but brass cases and....supposed...lesser QC of the American Gunner or Custom lines. This could be the best of both worlds.

[Gater]

FWIW, a brief discussion of the genesis of this load as well as design of the Punch line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzM1n0aaHSY&feature=youtu.be

[TicTacticalTimmy]

I seem to remember a thread on another forum a couple years back where a confirmed medical examiner and avid shooter agreed to answer a few questions and give his opinions on various calibers and bullet types. Anybody else see this? I could be wrong but iirc I think he said that a huge majority of the .380 he sees is FMJ (because those shot with SJHP’s tend to survive?). Hydra Shok deep seems pretty promising in other calibers, so if can really reach 12” consistently that would be very interesting indeed. There’s been so much talk the last few years about ammo tech advancement leading to much much better performance in 9mm, I always wondered if this would trickle down to .380 as well. . .


Ah yes! This post colored my opinions about caliber/load selection for many years, basically from when I bought my first handgun around 2014 until I discovered PF. An enjoyable and interesting read:

http://southernoutdoorlife.com/mouseguns/deadmeat.htm

[Gater]

A bit more discussion:

https://videos.recoilweb.com/watch/channel/gun-digest-tv/r9Et9aBpDPtM-shot-show-2020-all-access---federal-ammunition-hydra-shok-380?_bta_tid=3666120076547639405876336542182645741 79638785132343658214151785116609637460752457971102 44609934284093047

[Amp]

Federal's new video on the differences between HST, Hydra-Shok Deep and Punch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEw4jgqKleg&utm_medium=email&utm_brand=Federal&utm_campaign=4_ways_to_stay_safe&utm_source=enews

[Tokarev]

Anyone seen the 380 load available anywhere?

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[Btp2332]

Anyone seen the 380 load available anywhere?

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

Curious also

[Btp2332]

https://karrisguns.com/fed-hydra-shok-deep-380auto-99gr-20-.html

[5pins]

https://karrisguns.com/fed-hydra-shok-deep-380auto-99gr-20-.html

Not in stock.

[Det1397]

No hits on AmmoSeek.com and the LGS where I work has not been able to find it either...

[0ddl0t]

Despite 2 cannelures, the 9mm hydra-shok deep repeatedly lost its jacket after going through 16ga sheet metal into clear gel:

(sheet metal test begins around 6:30)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho5tNO8oU0c



Note: This test was clear gel, not ordnance gel. And the FBI uses 2 sheets of 20 gauge (0.8mm) steel spaced 3.5" apart vs this guntuber's single sheet of 16 gauge (1.4mm) steel.

[Oldherkpilot]

I don't see the reason to switch my rule of thumb of FMJ/non-expanding bullets for everything in .380 and under.
Whew, I was starting to think I was the only one using ball ammo in my .380 & .32. While I'd love to have both, if I can only have one I'll always take penetration.

[Baldanders]

Whew, I was starting to think I was the only one using ball ammo in my .380 & .32. While I'd love to have both, if I can only have one I'll always take penetration.

On this forum, plenty of folks are carrying wadcutters in their .38s.

But watch out .32 will get you kilt in da streetz!

(Proud member of the PF P32 secret shame brigade-- I use Fiocchi fmj)

[Navin Johnson]

Despite 2 cannelures, the 9mm hydra-shok deep repeatedly lost its jacket after going through 16ga sheet metal into clear gel:

(sheet metal test begins around 6:30)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho5tNO8oU0c



Note: This test was clear gel, not ordnance gel. And the FBI uses 2 sheets of 20 gauge (0.8mm) steel spaced 3.5" apart vs this guntuber's single sheet of 16 gauge (1.4mm) steel.

Seems like it did not affect penetration (understanding clear jell is not any kind of realistic indicator of terminal performance).

[Gater]

https://soldiersystems.net/2020/07/10/federal-ammunition-introduces-new-hydra-shok-deep-380-auto/

"Shipments of this product have begun to arrive at dealers."

[5pins]

I just pick up two boxes at SG Ammo.

https://www.sgammo.com/product/380-auto-ammo/20-round-box-380-auto-99-grain-hydra-shok-deep-federal-premium-ammo-p380hsd1

[Gater]

I just pick up two boxes at SG Ammo.

https://www.sgammo.com/product/380-auto-ammo/20-round-box-380-auto-99-grain-hydra-shok-deep-federal-premium-ammo-p380hsd1

Good timing—looks like they have stopped most non-case sales (of all products) for a few days to catch up on orders.
Look forward to some tests!

[Tokarev]

I just pick up two boxes at SG Ammo.

https://www.sgammo.com/product/380-auto-ammo/20-round-box-380-auto-99-grain-hydra-shok-deep-federal-premium-ammo-p380hsd1Nice.

Looking forward to seeing your gel tests. Especially now that you're using the real stuff.

I'll admit to being a "what's the big deal" kinda guy when it came to gel testing and organic vs synthetic. But I've pretty much changed my mind.

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[37th Mass]

Here is the press release from Federal:

https://www.federalpremium.com/news/new-hydra-shok-deep.html

I too am looking forward to seeing some quality gel testing from a trusted 3rd party. If this performs as advertised I'll have to consider retiring my J frame and replacing it with an LCP II for pocket carry.

[Joe Mac]

Just got the in-stock notification from SGAmmo and grabbed some.

https://www.sgammo.com/product/380-auto-ammo/20-round-box-380-auto-99-grain-hydra-shok-deep-federal-premium-ammo-p380hsd1

[Btp2332]

I got some also

[Tokarev]

https://www.shootingillustrated.com/articles/2020/7/13/first-look-federal-premium-hydra-shok-deep-in-380-acp/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=insider&utm_campaign=0720

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[5pins]

Five shot average of 873fps from a Ruger LCP.

57523

57526

[ccmdfd]

Wow

Got a notification from Midway that it was in stock at 9:05 and when I saw it at 9:32, it was already out of stock.

[Tokarev]

Five shot average of 873fps from a Ruger LCP.

57523

57526Looking forward to some jello results.

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[5pins]

In stock at Federal. I'm hoping to test them by the end of the week.

https://www.federalpremium.com/handgun/premium-personal-defense/personal-defense-hydra-shok-deep/11-P380HSD1.html

[ccmdfd]

In stock at Federal. I'm hoping to test them by the end of the week.

https://www.federalpremium.com/handgun/premium-personal-defense/personal-defense-hydra-shok-deep/11-P380HSD1.html

Were you able to get more than 1 box?

That's all it would let me add to the cart.

[5pins]

Were you able to get more than 1 box?

That's all it would let me add to the cart.

I didn't order any from them.

[Gater]

In stock at SGammo:

https://www.sgammo.com/product/380-auto-ammo/20-round-box-380-auto-99-grain-hydra-shok-deep-federal-premium-ammo-p380hsd1-l

[ccmdfd]

Midwayusa also now reporting in stock.

[5pins]

I just got done shooting some in gel and I was impressed enough to grab two more boxes from Midway. I should have a full write up on my blog tomorrow.

[Btp2332]

Sgammo is out that was quick again.

[Tokarev]

5pins

Have you had a chance for gel testing yet?

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[5pins]

https://generalcartridge.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/20200717_162622.jpg?w=840

Test Gun: Ruger LCP
Barrel length: 2.75 inches.
Ammunition: Federal .380 ACP 99gr Hydra-Shok Deep.
Test media: 10% Clear Ballistics Gel.
Distance: 10 feet.
Chronograph: Caldwell Ballistic Precision Chronograph G2.
Five shot velocity average: 873fps
BB Calibration: 3.5 inches.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/07/30/federal-380-acp-99gr-hydra-shok-deep-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/

[Doc_Glock]

https://generalcartridge.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/20200717_162622.jpg?w=840

Test Gun: Ruger LCP
Barrel length: 2.75 inches.
Ammunition: Federal .380 ACP 99gr Hydra-Shok Deep.
Test media: 10% Clear Ballistics Gel.
Distance: 10 feet.
Chronograph: Caldwell Ballistic Precision Chronograph G2.
Five shot velocity average: 873fps
BB Calibration: 3.5 inches.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/07/30/federal-380-acp-99gr-hydra-shok-deep-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/



Dang! Looks like a strong contender. Thanks for the testing.

[Tokarev]

https://generalcartridge.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/20200717_162622.jpg?w=840

Test Gun: Ruger LCP
Barrel length: 2.75 inches.
Ammunition: Federal .380 ACP 99gr Hydra-Shok Deep.
Test media: 10% Clear Ballistics Gel.
Distance: 10 feet.
Chronograph: Caldwell Ballistic Precision Chronograph G2.
Five shot velocity average: 873fps
BB Calibration: 3.5 inches.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/07/30/federal-380-acp-99gr-hydra-shok-deep-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/


Impressive!

You need to post this as its own thread so people don't have to look through three pages to get to the gel results.

[Gater]

https://generalcartridge.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/20200717_162622.jpg?w=840

Test Gun: Ruger LCP
Barrel length: 2.75 inches.
Ammunition: Federal .380 ACP 99gr Hydra-Shok Deep.
Test media: 10% Clear Ballistics Gel.
Distance: 10 feet.
Chronograph: Caldwell Ballistic Precision Chronograph G2.
Five shot velocity average: 873fps
BB Calibration: 3.5 inches.

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/07/30/federal-380-acp-99gr-hydra-shok-deep-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/


Thanks—great info!

Also, looks like Federal has a relevant current rebate that’ll help a bit with recent purchases of this stuff:

https://promotions.vistaoutdoor.com/EN/US/Promo/16/188/EntryForm

[5pins]

Impressive!

You need to post this as its own thread so people don't have to look through three pages to get to the gel results.

That's not a bad idea.

[jh9]

Impressive!


I confess ignorance. Clear synthetic gel has several far more knowledgeable people than me noting that the FBI standards (i.e. 12" minimum) aren't relevant because it doesn't behave the same as the organic stuff the FBI uses. That much I understand .

This is...both? Neither? The color happens to be clear but the material is the same standard organic compound used by the FBI et al? What are we actually looking at?

[fatdog]

What are we actually looking at?

the article states: "I mixed up one block of Vyse ballistics gel using the 10% FBI method and let it sit, in the fridge, for two days and it calibrated to 3.5 inches. Two shots in bare gel and two through heavy clothing covered gel with the Ruger LCP."

the Vyse stuff is the same organic stuff the FBI uses.

[jh9]

the Vyse stuff is the same organic stuff the FBI uses.

Exactly what I was looking for. Thanks.

[Joe Mac]

Today I chronographed and function-tested this load from G42 and LCP-II. Temp was 83 degrees and sunny; I used a Shooting Chrony F1 at 10' from the muzzle. These are 6 shot samples from each gun:

G42
High 943
Low 918
Avg 926
ES 25
SD 9

LCP-II
High 911
Low 891
Avg 903
ES 20
SD 8

I used up 100 rounds of my initial stash in testing, 64 in the G42 and 36 in the LCP. I ran it at max speed, one-handed, limp-wristed, etc. There were no malfunctions (both of these pistols have already proven very reliable) and it was accurate in both. I will be buying more...

[Gater]

Appears to be in stock at Federal as of 5:50 ET today (Wed 12 AUG) if anyone is still looking

[Tokarev]

Another recent review:

https://www.shootingillustrated.com/articles/2020/10/3/the-380-acp-made-better-federal-hydra-shok-deep-punch-handgun-ammo/

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

Is anybody surprised by this????

Look at what the projectile is doing in simulant--pretty predictable performance:

[5pins]

Is anybody surprised by this????

Look at what the projectile is doing in simulant--pretty predictable performance:

I'm assumig that bullet was used in a RL shooting?

[Velo Dog]

I'm assumig that bullet was used in a RL shooting?

I think DocGKR was referring to the profile of the expanded bullet looking like an FMJ wearing a tutu rather than the mushroom shape typically seen with hollow points.

[DocGKR]

Think about what the effects of a pointed nose profile on drag, penetration depth, temporary stretch cavity, as well as permanent cavity?

What about the folding back the gilded metal jacket and how does that interact with the TC, PC, Pen, etc...?

[Wondering Beard]

Think about what the effects of a pointed nose profile on drag, penetration depth, temporary stretch cavity, as well as permanent cavity?

What about the folding back the gilded metal jacket and how does that interact with the TC, PC, Pen, etc...?


For those of us not as ballistically knowledgeable, could you expand on that?


...

Sorry for the pun ... not totally, maybe just a little bit. ;-)

[Velo Dog]

From post #16

"The erect post propelled tissue out of the path of the expanded bullet, reducing the amount of tissue that was contacted and crushed as the bullet penetrated. As a result, the bullet produced a narrower, but deeper, permanent cavity compared to conventional JHP bullets of the same caliber, weight, velocity and expanded diameter."

[DocGKR]

Yup....

[0ddl0t]

...so you're saying it needs some nice sharp talons to cut a wider wound cavity without adding enough drag to under penetrate?

[Velo Dog]

...so you're saying it needs some nice sharp talons to cut a wider wound cavity without adding enough drag to under penetrate?

Scroll down this FirearmsTactical.com article for more information on Winchester Ranger Talon.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140109035924/http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs2.htm#Black-Talon

"Upon impact with flesh Ranger Talon performs identical to conventional hollowpoint bullets. However, as it penetrates and slows it does not suffer a decrease in effective bullet diameter. This is because tissue that stretches and flows around the smooth shoulder of the mushroom-shaped lead core comes into contact with the sharp copper jacket claws and is lacerated.

These lacerations contribute little to overall wound severity."

380 Auto is too constrained by size and pressure limitations to equally benefit from modern bullet design that has improved 9x19mm terminal performance.

[GearFondler]

Anymore thoughts or whatnot on this round?
The new LCP Max has me reconsidering the .380 vs my current J frame.
While this new load still appears to be a compromise expansion-wise it looks like it may offer similar performance to the .38 Wad-cutters I currently carry.
Am I off base with that speculation?

[Tokarev]

Anymore thoughts or whatnot on this round?
The new LCP Max has me reconsidering the .380 vs my current J frame.
While this new load still appears to be a compromise expansion-wise it looks like it may offer similar performance to the .38 Wad-cutters I currently carry.
Am I off base with that speculation?You saw this as linked/posted above?

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/07/30/federal-380-acp-99gr-hydra-shok-deep-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/

J frame vs LCP Max is an interesting topic for debate. Twice the ammo capacity yet still chambered in a cartridge that may struggle to find a combination of penetration and expansion. 38 Special, especially from a snub, can also struggle with these.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[GearFondler]

You saw this as linked/posted above?

https://general-cartridge.com/2020/07/30/federal-380-acp-99gr-hydra-shok-deep-in-vyse-ballistics-gel/

J frame vs LCP Max is an interesting topic for debate. Twice the ammo capacity yet still chambered in a cartridge that may struggle to find a combination of penetration and expansion. 38 Special, especially from a snub, can also struggle with these.

Sent from my SM-G970U using TapatalkYes, the article is what sparked my question.

I still think that for a pure BUG role the J frame holds the edge but for a stand-alone option the Max has me reconsidering. If this new round consistently performs as seen in the article then the doubled capacity starts to look very intriguing.
There are simply NPE situations where a stand-alone pocket gun is the best option and the LCP conceals better than a J in a pocket... If the Max offers virtually the same superior concealment, with double the capacity and similar ballistics to a J then it's hard to ignore.

[Tokarev]

I still think that for a pure BUG role the J frame holds the edge but...the LCP conceals better than a J in a pocket...

Why does the J hold an edge?

The LCP II and LCP Max are the same thickness. The only real difference is in the length of the grip. The Max is about half an inch longer. Is this slight increase enough to ruin concealment over some other options?

The other thing to consider, as I mention in the LCP Max thread, is the size of the Ruger over something like the SIG P365. Is the step up from 380 to 380 Magnum worth the increase in size of the Max over the 365?



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

Here are a couple photos to show the length difference of the LCP II and the LCP Max.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210718/8cc4b94cb21ee5d03739b00948a4ea5e.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210718/32b06b4e6f31ccff397e02976f3eea55.jpg

[GearFondler]

Why does the J hold an edge?

The advantages have been expounded upon by people a lot more experienced than me, folks like DB. But off the top of my head...

- The Centennial profile is much better suited to snag-free draws, particularly from a pocket where the rear corner of a semiauto often hangs up
- The most dummy-proof, ND-proof trigger available
-More reliable with built-up pocket grunge
- Better ballistics than .380
- Will not go out of battery if push into an opponent
- Cannot be limp-wristed

[Tokarev]

The advantages have been expounded upon by people a lot more experienced than me, folks like DB. But off the top of my head...

- The Centennial profile is much better suited to snag-free draws, particularly from a pocket where the rear corner of a semiauto often hangs up
- The most dummy-proof, ND-proof trigger available
-More reliable with built-up pocket grunge
- Better ballistics than .380
- Will not go out of battery if push into an opponent
- Cannot be limp-wristed

All stuff that can likely be worked around with practice. And 38 can be pretty marginal if FBI ballistic requirements are applied.

If reliability is your goal (maybe that's ultimately the absolute requirement for a defensive handgun) then the LCR/J/Colt Agent likely wins. But if you want a combination of factors such as small size with some additional ammo, the LCP/238/938/G42 might be a better choice.

I think historically the private citizen self-defense scenario has always been a mugger(s) in a dark alley. In this scenario the 5 or 6 shot revo is likely more than enough. Now we have a modern era where active shooters and other deranged idiots seem to be the norm. Is your J frame enough gun for a defensive shooting that may involve some asshole(s) armed with a rifle or someone how's intent on killing rather than taking your wallet?

Why you're in the alley in the first place (buying drugs and/or soliciting a prostitute) is another matter of discussion....[emoji38]

Related to ammo performance vs small size and capacity it might be a good idea to explore the 327 Federal Magnum.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[TicTacticalTimmy]

All stuff that can likely be worked around with practice. And 38 can be pretty marginal if FBI ballistic requirements are applied.

If reliability is your goal (maybe that's ultimately the absolute requirement for a defensive handgun) then the LCR/J/Colt Agent likely wins. But if you want a combination of factors such as small size with some additional ammo, the LCP/238/938/G42 might be a better choice.

I think historically the private citizen self-defense scenario has always been a mugger(s) in a dark alley. In this scenario the 5 or 6 shot revo is likely more than enough. Now we have a modern era where active shooters and other deranged idiots seem to be the norm. Is your J frame enough gun for a defensive shooting that may involve some asshole(s) armed with a rifle or someone how's intent on killing rather than taking your wallet?

Why you're in the alley in the first place (buying drugs and/or soliciting a prostitute) is another matter of discussion....[emoji38]

Related to ammo performance vs small size and capacity it might be a good idea to explore the 327 Federal Magnum.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

I agree with your statement that "38 can be pretty marginal", but it also can be pretty impressive, depending on which .38 load you are talking about. I feel that this is because of the fact that revolver bullet designs are not restricted by bullet profiles which will move smoothly up a feed ramp, so there are a lot more options available to the ammunition designer, and these options have the potential to give better performance than what you would see from autoloading bullets of similar diameter/mass/velocity. I think the best two examples of this are standard low velocity wadcutters and the Federal 130gr HST.

Plenty has been said on this forum about wadcutters, but check out these tests of the 130 HST:

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

https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/tested-federal-hst-38-special-p/

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

The first test uses ballistics gel, while the luckygunner test uses clear gel. It seems to me this load penetrates nearly as well as 9mm, and expands just as much as the best 9mm loads. The only thing you give up is penetration through intermediate barriers, and (I assume) ability to maintain that expansion at longer ranges as the bullet slows down. There is no load that performs like this in the .380, and this is why I feel much better armed with 5 rounds of .38 than 7 rounds of .380, particularly knowing a typical civilian self-defense situation isn't likely to involve more than 5 rounds anyway.

To your second point, the idea of a low odds but very high stakes encounter with an active shooter or similarly well armed adversary, I would say that carrying either an LCR or an LCPII would be leaving you severely underarmed. I think we can all agree that it is best to carry at least a compact service pistol whenever possible to give you the best odds of solving whatever problem you face. Snub nosed .38's and pocket automatics are for those times you just can't/wont carry a bigger/better weapon for whatever reason.

[Tokarev]

I agree with your statement that "38 can be pretty marginal", but it also can be pretty impressive, depending on which .38 load you are talking about. I feel that this is because of the fact that revolver bullet designs are not restricted by bullet profiles which will move smoothly up a feed ramp, so there are a lot more options available to the ammunition designer, and these options have the potential to give better performance than what you would see from autoloading bullets of similar diameter/mass/velocity. I think the best two examples of this are standard low velocity wadcutters and the Federal 130gr HST.

Plenty has been said on this forum about wadcutters, but check out these tests of the 130 HST:

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

https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/tested-federal-hst-38-special-p/

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

The first test uses ballistics gel, while the luckygunner test uses clear gel. It seems to me this load penetrates nearly as well as 9mm, and expands just as much as the best 9mm loads. The only thing you give up is penetration through intermediate barriers, and (I assume) ability to maintain that expansion at longer ranges as the bullet slows down. There is no load that performs like this in the .380, and this is why I feel much better armed with 5 rounds of .38 than 7 rounds of .380, particularly knowing a typical civilian self-defense situation isn't likely to involve more than 5 rounds anyway.

To your second point, the idea of a low odds but very high stakes encounter with an active shooter or similarly well armed adversary, I would say that carrying either an LCR or an LCPII would be leaving you severely underarmed. I think we can all agree that it is best to carry at least a compact service pistol whenever possible to give you the best odds of solving whatever problem you face. Snub nosed .38's and pocket automatics are for those times you just can't/wont carry a bigger/better weapon for whatever reason.

I note in the LCP Max thread that the P365 is likely the better choice based on size vs possible terminal performance.

Here is more gel info:

https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/testing-the-38-special-cartridge/

Note compared to 357 Magnum:

https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/testing-the-357-mag-cartridge/

And 32 H&R and 327 FM:

https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-underappreciated-32-magnums/



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Bucky]

Related to ammo performance vs small size and capacity it might be a good idea to explore the 327 Federal Magnum.


This is an intriguing round. Have you ever shot one? If so, how would you describe the recoil say compared to +P. 38 special or .357 magnum? Particularly in a lightweight J frame.

[Tokarev]

This is an intriguing round. Have you ever shot one? If so, how would you describe the recoil say compared to +P. 38 special or .357 magnum? Particularly in a lightweight J frame.

Recoil is snappy but not severe. More than anything in .38 but not as bad as some .357.

Muzzle blast is pretty loud. Very much a high pitched crack.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

All this stuff reminds me that the choice of 380 quite often boils down to two categories. One is a good JHP that readily expands but offers shallow penetration. The second is a non-expanding bullet that offers good (aka excessive) penetration.

The HSD may be a proper combination for 380 even if the amount of expansion is more or less academic. Too bad it isn't readily available. I'd like to try some through my LCP Max.

Regarding the non-expanding option; I recall reading a review of the Buffalo Bore 100gr cast lead bullet where a Marine had used a 380 against an enemy combatant in Iraq. The bullet worked well and saved the Marine's life. Anyone else recall this story? I swear it was posted on the BB website but I can find it now.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Hambo]

This is an intriguing round. Have you ever shot one? If so, how would you describe the recoil say compared to +P. 38 special or .357 magnum? Particularly in a lightweight J frame.

I've not shot .327 in anything but my Single-Seven. Recoil is, as Tokarev say, snappy. Muzzle blast is impressive. My guess is that in a J-frame it would be similar to the +P .38 I carry in my 442.

[Tokarev]

My guess is that in a J-frame it would be similar to the +P .38 I carry in my 442.

I'd say more akin to a 125gr .357 Magnum load fired from a snubby. Maybe not as hard on the wrist. But whatever it lacks in recoil it makes up for in BANG!

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk