New Ballistics Tests of Self Defense Handgun Ammo

Keep in mind sometimes people are a bit thicker than the FBI test, or a side shot goes through the shoulder (thus more penetration needed), or they are wearing heavy cloths, or the barrel length of the .32/.380 is so short the velocities are LOW.

Personally, I feel the .25, .32, .380 are all low penetration, low power weapons and don't put your faith in this stuff marketed to be 'the' load. I use Winchester flat nose FMJ in my .380s and FMJ round nose in my .32s.

Nice thing about them is the loads are very easy to find, not expensive like the JHPs, and my practice ammo shoots exactly like the carry ammo (cause it is the carry ammo!)

Deaf
 
folks, ballistic-gel tests are not meant to simulate the human body. they are designed to give a consistent medium to evaluate bullet performance.
 
Y'all don't forget, ShootingTheBull410's first tests in his "Ammo Quest" series were done on the .380 as well.
 
Last edited:
I'm staying with my .40's. With modern ammo, your getting equal and in some cases, better performance than the .45 ACP in a platform that has a capacity of 16 rounds. If this test is true, it is another indicator of how delusional our federal government is in their decision making process.
 
Hmmm?

Today, this type of testing is made even easier with the advent of synthetic ballistic materials. The “real” organic ballistics gelatin blocks used by the FBI today are still made from dehydrated animal tissue. They provide accurate results, but they’re time consuming to make and they have to be refrigerated until almost immediately before they are used. And after all of that, the fired bullets are difficult to see through the cloudy, mud-colored organic gelatin.

Synthetic gelatin from the company Clear Ballistics is temperature stable up to 240° F, so the blocks can be shipped directly to the end user without melting or deforming. These blocks are also completely transparent, so the test results can be observed without cutting into the block. Test results using Clear Ballistics blocks come very close to results using organic gelatin, at least for comparing the penetration and expansion properties of handgun bullets. In addition, the convenience of working with the synthetic gelatin allows testing on a scale that is not practical with a substance as delicate and labor-intensive as traditional organic ordnance gelatin.
Click to expand...

I appreciate what Lucky Gunner is doing, especially the use of barriers, but I'm a bit skeptical of their approach for the following reasons:

First the gel is not calibrated. They don't mention calibrating it or the importance of it. That means testing the gel to make sure that it is 10% ballistic gel, or synthetic gel. Without doing this you don't know if the block is up to actual standards or if one block is the same as another. If the blocks aren't uniform the comparison one caliber to another will be off.

Second, Without calibrating the gel you don't know if it's the same density as general ordnance gel the type used by the manufacturers and Brass Fetcher, for example.

Third, videos of the bullet strikes in the gel actually are useful. They show you how blocks of gel of the same density, size and weight react to the bullets impact and penetration. Useful to see.

tipoc
 
I have no idea how someone could study these results and continue to carry .380. 9mm is simply a ridiculous upgrade in expansion for not much larger of a weapon, and cheaper ammo to boot.
This is a great list but they really should have included the Federal HST 165gr .40 round, which just may be the best performing round in any caliber for the buck in existance.
 
Last edited:
Why, stupid people have been carrying .380s for years-and .32s AND .25s!
Guess what? If you put the bullet where it needs to go-they work!
If you don't put the bullet where it needs to go- nothing works.
 
Yeah, no kidding with perfect shot placement any caliber will work. Why is this obvious statement so ubiquitous? we all understand the concept.
I'm asking how someone could study this data and continue to carry the .380 in favor of the 9mm, not why stupid people have been carrying it and lesser for years. Most of the "stupid" people you refer to haven't studied this data.
If I was carrying, for example, a Ruger LCP - and came across this data, I would immediately trade for something like a Kahr CM9. No .380 is a true pocket gun anyway unless maybe the Seecamp (even then probably not), so if you are using a holster anyway why give up such a mammoth difference in effectiveness? Especially when the .380 ammo is more expensive? :confused:
Serious question, not trolling.
 
Last edited:
I carry an LCP occasionally. I am neither stupid nor unknowing. I've studied the data. An LCP is a true pocket gun, and with good ammo meets my requirements. Whether you agree with my choice or not makes no difference to me. You ask how anyone could study the data and not come to the same conclusion you have, and then imply that most of those who do simply don't/can't understand. You can't make a superficial internet study and presume to lecture folks who have spent years studying, training and practicing self-defense with a handgun. It lacks credibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top