Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32

Thread: .380acp , has the SD bullet choices changed?

  1. #21
    All the Hornady .380 XTPs I tested had the expanded petals shear off, in both bare gelatin and denim covered gelatin, which is what allows the bullet to penetrate deeper than most other .380 JHPs. The recovered bullet looks similar to a wadcutter. Hornady factory loaded XTP is what I carry in my G42.

  2. #22
    Site Supporter DocGKR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    This was another eval which seemed reasonable: http://shootingthebull.net/blog/fina...#comment-34323
    Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightvisionary View Post
    What other body of recent test data do we have to refer to that is freely available to the users of this forum?
    AmmoToGo.com has conducted testing similar to that of Lucky Gunner.

    https://www.ammunitiontogo.com/lodge...-defense-ammo/

    380 Auto performance is so marginal and inconsistent that a small change in velocity or the testing protocol can significantly affect results.

  4. #24
    Member JonInWA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Auburn, WA
    Color me curious, guys. With the current amount of what seem to be pretty decent subcompact 9mm autos, such as the G43, G43X, G48, M&P Shield etc. and what seems to be pretty marginal and/or variable .380 performance, why the continued interest (in this forum in particular) in .380 platforms?

    I get that the Glock G42 (and perhaps others in the genre) is handy, reliable, and enjoyable to shoot. I get that perhaps .380 is the highest power cartridge some of us can convince significant others to use/carry. But with a generally low expectation of terminal performance, why bother? And ammunition price-and availability-wise, it's not like I'm seeing huge bargains in .380 as a financial incentive either.

    Best, Jon
    Last edited by JonInWA; 02-13-2019 at 03:02 PM.

  5. #25
    Deadeye Dick Clusterfrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Wokelandia
    @JonInWA, good question. You explained why the G42 isn’t of interest to me. It’s too big to justify the shortcomings of a .380. But the LCP is small. Really small. Sometimes I need a really small gun.
    "You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
    Shabbat shalom, motherf***ers! --Mordechai Jefferson Carver

  6. #26
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by JonInWA View Post
    Color me curious, guys. With the current amount of what seem to be pretty decent subcompact 9mm autos, such as the G43, G43X, G48, M&P Shield etc. and what seems to be pretty marginal and/or variable .380 performance, why the continued interest (in this forum in particular) in .380 platforms?

    I get that the Glock G42 (and perhaps others in the genre) is handy, reliable, and enjoyable to shoot. I get that perhaps .380 is the highest power cartridge some of us can convince significant others to use/carry. But with a generally low expectation of terminal performance, why bother? And ammunition price-and availability-wise, it's not like I'm seeing huge bargains in .380 as a financial incentive either.

    Best, Jon
    My only answer is that marginal might be good enough if the other option is not having that gun, and you end up needing it.

    For this forum in particular, I typically see people writing about making responsible decisions; i.e. carrying a 380 in an NPE, or using it as a BUG. Their other option would likely be unarmed, or not having a BUG.

    The G43, G43X, G48, and M&P Shield are nowhere near the same size category as a micro/pocket 380.
    Last edited by TGS; 02-13-2019 at 04:19 PM.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Quote Originally Posted by JonInWA View Post
    Color me curious, guys. With the current amount of what seem to be pretty decent subcompact 9mm autos, such as the G43, G43X, G48, M&P Shield etc. and what seems to be pretty marginal and/or variable .380 performance, why the continued interest (in this forum in particular) in .380 platforms?

    I get that the Glock G42 (and perhaps others in the genre) is handy, reliable, and enjoyable to shoot. I get that perhaps .380 is the highest power cartridge some of us can convince significant others to use/carry. But with a generally low expectation of terminal performance, why bother? And ammunition price-and availability-wise, it's not like I'm seeing huge bargains in .380 as a financial incentive either.

    Best, Jon
    Almost no one on here carries one as a primary. They are only interesting because you can fit them in a pocket.

    I’ve learned that there are two camps: those who always dress around the gun and those who pick the gun based on how they’re dressed.

    The problem arises, when one camp tries to tell the other camp, what they should do.

  8. #28
    Frequent DG Adventurer fatdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Rural Central Alabama
    Quote Originally Posted by Clusterfrack View Post
    @JonInWA, the LCP is small. Really small.
    And they actually will run reliably and let you hit something with a little work. That is the only .380 I currently own, and Clusterfrack articulated the only reason I own it.

  9. #29
    Site Supporter JodyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Mexico
    Quote Originally Posted by Clusterfrack View Post
    @JonInWA, good question. You explained why the G42 isn’t of interest to me. It’s too big to justify the shortcomings of a .380. But the LCP is small. Really small. Sometimes I need a really small gun.
    I went back and forth on the G42 for a while and ended up sticking it in the back of the safe.
    My Kahr PM9 is almost identical in size (actually a fraction smaller), is 6+1 9mm and has a better trigger for pocket carry IMO.
    My Kahr CW380 is much smaller and lighter than the G42 if I need to go real deep, is 6+1 and again IMO has a better deep carry trigger.
    The extra safety margin of a longer DAO revolver like trigger is worth it to me when it comes to unconventional carry methods.
    Both my Kahrs have been outstanding.

    On .380 ammo, I really like what i've seen from the Federal 99gr. HST and it's been reliable in both my G42 and my CW380. Fairly soft shooting as well, even in the Kahr.
    My plan "B" ammo when I can't find the HST is Hornady American Gunner 90gr. XTP which can be found damn near everywhere stacked deep and cheap.
    Last edited by JodyH; 02-13-2019 at 06:43 PM.
    "For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night."
    -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --

  10. #30
    Vending Machine Operator
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. West
    Quote Originally Posted by Clusterfrack View Post
    @JonInWA, good question. You explained why the G42 isn’t of interest to me. It’s too big to justify the shortcomings of a .380. But the LCP is small. Really small. Sometimes I need a really small gun.
    Yep. I have a pair of LCPs and that's it for .380 as a serious gun. I do own a Beretta Cheetah and Bersa Thunder because I think they're neat, but they don't get carried.

    .380 = LCP to me.
    State Government Attorney | Beretta, Glock, CZ & S&W Fan

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •