Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns .380 ACP Bubba-style Torture Test

Today is a great day to be alive. The sun was shining, the temperature was in the 40s, and the wind didn’t appear to be above 15 mph, so I went out on the prairie to blast some inanimate objects with mighty .380 ACP ammo. People scoff at the round, and most people don’t test it against anything but gel and cloth covered gel. If you want to learn more about the capabilities of the cartridge, you have to do it yourself.

The test gun was a Sig P365-380 with a 3.1 inch barrel. The test target array consisted of a piece of pine 2X6, followed by 2 pieces of 22 gauge steel sheet metal taped together, and a backstop of water jugs. I shot a 100 grain Buffalo Bore Outdoorsman hard cast flat point standard pressure, followed by a Lehigh 90 grain Xtreme Penetrator standard pressure, followed by a 99 grain Federal Hydra-Shok Deep, followed by a 90 grain Federal Hydra-Shok Low Recoil. Try to figure out in advance what happened.

First up, For Bristoe (and me), is the Buffalo Bore hard cast.


I keep my wife’s S&W Shield EZ loaded with this round because she likes the gun and carries it on hikes around the cabin. The load chrono’d at 954 out of the Sig and at 1004 out of the EZ.

Second up is the Lehigh Xtreme Penetrator.


I was carrying this load in my Glock 42 because it was barrier blind and did not overpenetrate when I shot it through some ribs backed by gel, in contrast to the Buffalo Bore against the same media.
I am going to have to test some of these in the EZ now!

Next is the Hydra-Shock Deep.


Given its name, I was a little surprised at this, not that I should have been given marketing hype.

Finally, there is the Hydra-Shock Low Recoil


The Low Recoil round really is a low recoil round. It is pleasant to shoot, especially out of a S&W Shield EZ. It also runs 974 fps out of the EZ, which is higher than what I got out of a Glock 42. (Have not chronographed it out of the Sig.) I was more impressed with this result than with the Deep given what it did to the water jug.

Here is an array of the fired bullets. From left to right are the Buffalo Bore, XP, HS Deep and HS Low Recoil.





Between the Buffalo Bore and the XP, guess which one cut the cleanest hole through the steel.





Lehigh isn’t offering loaded ammo since Wilson Combat acquired Lehigh. I bought some Underwood Xtreme Penetrators in standard pressure. It is faster than the Lehigh factory ammo out of the Sig, at an average of 1048 fps MV, but the ES (5 shots) was 75, much higher than the 16 ES (5 shots) of the Lehigh factory round. I intended to shoot one today, but I didn’t have enough water jugs because of the surprises that I got from shooting the first 2 rounds.

Good work there, Cheyenne!
Reassures my choice of Buffalo Bore Hard Cast ammo I’ve carried for years in my little Ruger LCP 380.

Thanks! If you ever get a chance to shoot one of those rounds into a live or deceased pig, I would appreciate hearing your observations. Tim of Military Arms Channel fired a 9mm Xtreme Penetrator at a nice size deceased pig through the left shoulder from about 3 feet away, and it did not exit the off side.

Update

I wanted to try some Lehigh 68 grain Xtreme Defenders and also wanted to see if I could bust a couple of suspected myths. Here are some tests with different ammo than the first batch.

First up was the Lehigh 68 grain Xtreme Defense. These were purchased off of Wilson Combat’s website. It does not appear at this time that Lehigh is selling loaded ammo on its own website, which is different than before Lehigh Defense was purchased by Wilson Combat.



This penetrated one less jug than the 90 grain Xtreme Penetrators, and penetrated slightly less than the Buffalo Bore hard cast.

Next up was Blazer Brass 95 grain FMJ RN. A lot of people assert that hardball will penetrate just as much as hard cast or Lehigh copper solid ammo. What do you think?



I tried this test twice and got the same result both times.

Next up was Hornady 90 grain Critical Defense. I am skeptical of ammo that is only tested against bare gel and cloth covered gel. Guess what happened.

[video:youtube] [/video]

Here is a photo of the recovered bullets.



I wanted to try it with Hornady Custom and American Gunner with the 90 grain XTP bullet (another mythological favorite), but I get bad bullet setback when chambering .380 rounds in my guns. I don’t know if I got a couple of out-of-spec batches of ammo or not, or if specifications have changed since I bought mine, but I won’t shoot them out of my guns.

I've never lacked confidence in .380 ACP, assuming a bullet constructed for the purpose you seek to fulfill. Hard cast is going to drive deep. A well designed hollow point is going to penetrate sufficiently, while also nicely expanding. I have no qualms about carrying a .380 from time to time.

Now, a .32 ACP is another story completely. That's closer to the performance realm of the .25 ACP than it is to the .380 ACP. Even the .32 ACP satisfies the first rule of gun fighting, however.

not dumping on the 380 at all I've had several. but when these micro 9mm's came out for instance in the 365 why would one choose the same size gun chambered in a 380 over a 9mm ? only viable reason I could think of is someone was really recoil sensitive for whatever reason??

but it is always fun to test stuff and have excuses to shoot more rounds I agree

^^ That’s a valid question and a thought that I have seen expressed many times in forums. What seems like an obvious answer to choose the more powerful firearm became more cloudy after I shot the .380 and 9mm versions of the 365 side by side. The .380 weighs 4 ounces less loaded and is better in a pocket than the 9mm version. More important, the learning curve was less and speed was much faster with the .380. When Bluedreaux challenged us to do the 40 yard “Dicken drill” a few months ago, I was much faster with better hits with the .380 than the 9mm, and I had many more thousands of rounds through the 9mm than the near new .380. I also had a red dot sight on the 9mm compared to the open sights of the 9mm. If one can get a decent enough confidence level in ammo that will penetrate some barriers, the .380 can make sense, especially for those who don’t practice much. As for me, the 9mm “standard” version gets carried almost exclusively. But, I have ramped up my shooting with the 9mm in an attempt to better improve my skill level with it. Shooting on the clock can be intimidating and humbling, especially around people, on 24HCF and in real life, who are really good.

I merely throw up these videos so people who don’t have a place where they can goof off and try stuff can get some context other than corporate marketing and Internet forum “truths.” From what I’ve done lately, I don’t see myself carrying conventional ball or the commonly loved JHPs in .380.

Excellent posts, sir - and I think we all appreciate the work you're doing to educate us better in the .380.. By any chance, have you tried the 94gr. 'defense line' offered by Prvi Partazan?

Great post, Cheyenne.

Very well done, thank you.

Thanks for the kind words, people!


No. Sorry. It is hard to find a good selection of factory .380 ammo around here. Most of the hollow points I am shooting these days were acquired prior to the shortages occasioned by the COVID hysteria supply-chain issues and the 2020 election.

sounds like the best answer anyone's ever given..

I missed this thread the first time around. Looks like a lot of fun.

Didn't even know a 380 version existed.

380 LCP Custom is my most carried gun. Easiest gun to conceal that I’ve ever owned.
Here’s a pic of a Federal HST I recovered.




Just wanted to include this link from a previous thread about different carry gun weights. I want to add that it isn’t so much the weight as it is the thickness for me.
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...oad-out-weight-of-carry-gun#Post17106188

Great post, I too missed it!

I've been interested in getting my hands on some HST micro but I can't seem to find any around here. When I see on the box "Extreme bullet expansion for caliber," I get skeptical about penetration, especially if any kind of barrier is encountered. Can you tell us the medium from which this bullet was recovered and any objects through which it passed on the way to its resting spot?

I hope that anyone on 24HCF who is experimenting with modern .380 rounds would share their experiences and results. The ammo companies don't seem interested in doing so other than with bare ballistic gel and cloth covered ballistic gel. Thanks in advance!

Thanks. A lot of time and effort there.

I’ve thought about the Glock 42..for [bleep] and giggles. A kind of go anywhere pistol.

Yea that’s an old box I’ve had for awhile. You are right about the penetration. I can’t even remember what I shot that in to. It would definitely be a good summer carry bullet.
The box I’m showing is listing 1030fps and the newer HST on Federal’s page lists it at 935fps, same part number on both boxes. No idea of what firearm was used for either.

Check out the Kahr P-380... Only .75" wide... It's the slimmest handgun I own and can be very inconspicuous in the pocket..