I was shooting a .380 today, I had both Remington and Winchester ball ammo on hand, both claim identical ballistics - 955fps at the muzzle.

Remington ball looks decidedly vintage, whereas Winchester ball has a flat metplat profile. Winchester also lists the ballistics right there on the box, Remington just lists a website.



IIRC 50 rounds of Winchester was like $30 at Academy, Remington $29. From here on in I’m going with Winchester.

Good luck getting 955 muzzle velocity out of a 3.25 inch or less barrel with “target” 95 grain ammo. A lot of “premium” 90 grain ammo struggles to do that.

I clocked about 930 average out of a Colt 1908 which is a little under 3-3/4” barrel. So pretty close.

My Keltec ran 838 to 889. More sd and if I recall 2-3/4” barrel, maybe 2-1/2?

I got a lot more than 955 out of some. I had some "good luck", okay. I'm extra careful setting the powder scale ever since.

What’s everyone’s thoughts on that flat point?

i WOULD THINK THE FLAT POINT SHOULD WORK OUT PRETTY WELL. Should also be pretty accurate.

While the flat point may cut a cleaner hole in a soft target than round nose ammo, I wouldn't expect it to do any better against a barrier than the Blazer FMJ bullet that I fired in the torture test thread, assuming that the velocities are both within the same range.

I had a P3at Keltec that would jam like an SOB on some Remington HP I bought, one time, that was much more truncated than the average HP ammo.

I don’t like that flat point, especially in little guns, with short/steep feed ramps, like a 380. If I’m gonna carry a 380, it at least needs to be a RELIABLE 380. (And, yes, I’ve long since put away the Keltec. Even with rounded fmj, it wasn’t 100%).

I've got the original LCP and the LCP Max. Both of them will feed anything. I shoot a lot of 100 grain cast flat points through them with 5 grains of AA#5.

From the figures quoted by the knowledgeable folks here it sounds like a short-barreled .380 is reaching about the same velocities as .38 Special out of a 2” revolver with a projectile around 30-40% lighter, with a concomitant reduction in muzzle energy.

In .380 I’m gonna go with a hardcast +P load for carry, a bullet profile similar to the Winchester ball. Whether a jacketed flat point is as disruptive to flesh as a hard lead version I dunno. It does seem logical that it would be potentially more disruptive that the classic FMJ round nose.

My opinion,..a JHP is superior if it functions like a JHP ought to.

Some do, some don't at .380 velocities.

As for a comparison between a jacketed bullet vs. a cast bullet, everything else being equal, a slippery cast bullet develops significantly more velocity.

I can't understand why a hand loader would choose a FMJ bullet over a hardcast bullet for anything below 1200 fps, or so. The hardcast bullets are cheaper and perform better than a FMJ at that level.