PDA

View Full Version : Buffalo Bore .380 +P Barnes ammo, good to go?



Haraise
12-01-2012, 07:31 AM
https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=87

289 ft/lbs, 80 gr, 1275 fps.

I've read that .380 is marginal for self defense, but this seems to have a good deal more power to it, in a bullet that was recommended in other calibers (the lead free Barnes). I can't find a 9mm pocket gun that works for me, and I'm curious if this should turn that marginal into good, given the combination of velocity, low expansion threshold (down to 900 fps, they said), bullet construction and energy.

TGS
12-01-2012, 12:30 PM
Energy isn't really what you should be looking for. Penetration depth and expansion is much more important.

With that said, take a look around the Brassfetcher website for their tests on the SCHP .380. At 1100fps, it's making 11" of penetration. Certainly a huge improvement over the 7-8" of penetration from traditional 380 JHP's, like the Silvertip or Ranger. That, and the Barnes SCHP is a reliable expander, makes it the best 380 from a terminal ballistics standpoint (IMO)......and a good choice compared to other BUGs.

Just realize that it has some pretty snappy recoil. It's not the easiest round to control with a small pocket gun. With my Kahr P380 it was doable as that gun is super soft recoiling for a pocket 380, but the Kahr P380 simply didn't work so I had to ditch it. I haven't tried it in my newer MDE, but I don't think it'd be a combination I would have confidence in shooting quickly. I imagine most pocket 380's would be difficult to control with the BB Barnes SCHP in anything but perfect range conditions with a perfect grip and concentration.

Haraise
12-01-2012, 12:38 PM
Ah, yes. They said they were getting 11-12" of penetration on it.

Definitely a big concern. My P238 shoots super soft with non-+P ammo, not like my LCP at all (which would bruise my hand), wasn't all that worried about the recoil for that reason. Will have to test to see, but I think it should be easily managed in comparison (+P P238 vs normal load LCP).

Haraise
12-01-2012, 01:03 PM
Found some info: http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Ballistic_Gel_Experiments/BARNES/Barnes_.380ACP_80gr_TAC-XP.pdf

Only 8.6" of penetration.

The email from Buffalobore:

"Yes your pistol can handle a steady diet of that ammo. If you are going to
shoot more than a hundred or so rounds, contact Wolff Gun Spring Company and
they will tell you the factory rating of your recoil spring, then simply
order a spring that is two lbs. heavier from them. This heavier-than-factory
recoil spring will eliminate most of the excessive wear caused by +P ammo.

Your pistol will generate roughly 1130 fps with this load. The bullet will
still expand at velocities as low as 900 fps. You'll get roughly 11 to 12
inches of penetration.

Tim"

So add 200 FPS, get ~3" more penetration, though 'roughly' isn't the most hopeful phrasing out there.

ToddG
12-01-2012, 01:58 PM
There is no such SAAMI specification as .380 +p, so either Buffalo Bore is just calling it that even though it's made within SAAMI limits or they're making ammo for which no pistol manufacturer has designed a gun. I'm reasonably confident that you'd be hard pressed to find a gun company that would concur with the simple solution of a heavier recoil spring for overpressure ammo.

If you want 9mm performance, get a 9mm pistol. Shoehorning some extra powder into the case and calling it "good" isn't proper load development. Ammo companies that play these games are basically counting on the fact that most samples of most models of most brands of handguns are over engineered to have a certain margin of error in the event of an overpressure round. It's basically like saying you can make your car faster if you take out the excess weight caused by things like antilock brakes, air bags, and seatbelts. Sure that will work... until it doesn't.

Tamara
12-01-2012, 02:41 PM
There is no such SAAMI specification as .380 +p, so either Buffalo Bore is just calling it that even though it's made within SAAMI limits or they're making ammo for which no pistol manufacturer has designed a gun.

When looking at their roots, which include making "Ruger only" .45 Colt loads that would grenade a Peacemaker and .45-70 loads designed for modern leverguns and not Trapdoor Springfields, it makes more sense, but I think that with a lot of their newer self-loading offerings, they have really moved away from their institutional knowledge base. There's a bunch more data out there for "This .45 load will be safe in a Bisley Blackhawk" than there is for "I think this .380 probably won't break an LCP."

I hate feeling this way because I'd always looked at them as one of the higher quality ammo companies, but I have pretty indifferent feelings about their stuff that strays away from their corporate slogan of "Strictly Big Bore, Strictly Business."

TGS
12-01-2012, 04:29 PM
It's basically like saying you can make your car faster if you take out the excess weight caused by things like antilock brakes, air bags, and seatbelts. Sure that will work... until it doesn't.

Your lavish American indulgence is showing. :p

Lotus has been quite successful with this approach, and without doubt is the most amazing car I've ever driven. :cool: .....and that's probably because I still haven't driven the even more spartan Caterham Super 7 (a Lotus design).

Even the first couple generations of the Suby STi used this approach. No radio, no insulation, minimally cushioned seats, ect.

Haraise
12-01-2012, 04:32 PM
Your lavish American indulgence is showing. :p

Lotus has been quite successful with this approach, and without doubt is the most amazing car I've ever driven. :cool: .....and that's probably because I still haven't driven the even more spartan Caterham Super 7 (a Lotus design).

Even the first couple generations of the Suby STi used this approach. No radio, no insulation, minimally cushioned seats, ect.

Yeah, you lost me there. Pulling out/not having airbags, ABS, interior... just makes things more fun.

Not so much on the seat belt though. Roll bar and seat belt stay.

...someday, a Lotus 7 for me....

ToddG
12-01-2012, 05:00 PM
I didn't say anything about a radio or a back seat. You're talking about weight. I'm talking about safety margins.

Haraise
12-01-2012, 05:05 PM
I didn't say anything about a radio or a back seat. You're talking about weight. I'm talking about safety margins.

Safety controls were a part of that. No ABS, airbags, no traction control, no electronic brakeforce distribution, a ton of other acronyms that are normal these days.

Your point was understood though.

The problem with their advice on a more practical level is that there is no two pound heavier spring for a P238. There's a +1 lb spring for a Colt Mustang that'll work, but reviews put that as the same weight as a stock P238 spring.

SouthNarc
12-30-2012, 10:50 AM
Any data on the ASYM Precision .380 offering using the Barnes bullet?