.380 Winchester 95 grain FMJ- FP for Defensive Carry ?

This is a discussion on .380 Winchester 95 grain FMJ- FP for Defensive Carry ? within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Ljutic Winchester flat points don't come close to making 900 fps. In short barrels, it's more like low 800's. I tried the ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 31
Like Tree4Likes

Thread: .380 Winchester 95 grain FMJ- FP for Defensive Carry ?

  1. #16
    481
    481 is offline
    Senior Member Array 481's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    US
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by Ljutic View Post


    Winchester flat points don't come close to making 900 fps. In short barrels, it's more like low 800's. I tried the 100 count, 50 count, and Win Clean varieties. I decided to use the Remington UMC Leadless Flat Point instead. They are harder to find, but I feel the performance improvement is worth it. The data sheet is from my comprehensive 380 velocity testing done last summer.

    Pocket Guns and Gear: The Great .380 FMJ & JHP Ammo test - The Results
    Hmm, that's very interesting, Ljutic.

    From the 2.5" barrel, at ~890 fps, it looks like the Rem/UMC stuff approaches the 900 +/- 25 fps that I mentioned- the others from that barrel length appear to suffer from the shortened runway and have an average velocity of ~815 fps. Quite a drop.

    Plugging this new (to me) information into the Schwartz bullet penetration model, it seems that a .380 95 gr. FMJFP @ 815 fps oughtta penetrate to a depth of 18.17".

    The MacPherson bullet penetration model agrees (it's slightly more optimistic) with the Schwartz model and says that it'll go about another half inch deeper than what the Schwartz model says for a max. penetration depth of 18.64".

    In the end, it strikes me that sticking with an FMJ of some sort in the .380 is the wisest course of action given the fact that the shorter barrels seem to reduce the velocity to the point that expansion may suffer.

    BTW, I really enjoy your tests. Keep 'em coming!
    My favorite "gun" book-

    QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Senior Member Array DocT65's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Gulf Coast
    Posts
    595
    My choice for my backup carry is Winchester Ranger T Series, 95 gr. These are somewhat rare, but you can find them around. A good second choice is Gold Dot in my opinion. I don't care for FMJ in a handgun (any caliber) as a defense load.
    "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6"

    Flight Surgeon, USAF
    Law Enforcement Tactical Surgeon

    NRA Patron Member

  4. #18
    VIP Member Array rammerjammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Posts
    3,416
    In the winter I change my carry ammo in my LCP from Winchester PDX1 to Winchester FMJ Flatpoint.
    "Was there no end to the conspiracy of irrational prejudice against Red Ryder and his peacemaker?"

    Revolvers, “more elegant weapons for a more civilized age.”

  5. #19
    VIP Member Array rammerjammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Posts
    3,416
    Quote Originally Posted by 481 View Post
    Plugging this new (to me) information into the Schwartz bullet penetration model, it seems that a .380 95 gr. FMJFP @ 815 fps oughtta penetrate to a depth of 18.17".

    The MacPherson bullet penetration model agrees (it's slightly more optimistic) with the Schwartz model and says that it'll go about another half inch deeper than what the Schwartz model says for a max. penetration depth of 18.64".
    "You have the ring, and I see your Schwartz is as big as mine. Now let's see how well you handle it."


    Sorry, couldn't resist
    paullie likes this.
    "Was there no end to the conspiracy of irrational prejudice against Red Ryder and his peacemaker?"

    Revolvers, “more elegant weapons for a more civilized age.”

  6. #20
    481
    481 is offline
    Senior Member Array 481's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    US
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by rammerjammer View Post
    "You have the ring, and I see your Schwartz is as big as mine. Now let's see how well you handle it."


    Sorry, couldn't resist
    Oh, that's OK. I understand. Sometimes you just gotta slide on the ice.

    You caught me off-guard and I had to read it three times before it sunk in.
    My favorite "gun" book-

    QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION

  7. #21
    Member Array Ljutic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    307
    What does your magic decoder ring tell you about BB 95 grain FMJ FP at 1044 fps? It's listed as (+P), whatever that means in 380.



    Quote Originally Posted by 481 View Post
    Hmm, that's very interesting, Ljutic.

    From the 2.5" barrel, at ~890 fps, it looks like the Rem/UMC stuff approaches the 900 +/- 25 fps that I mentioned- the others from that barrel length appear to suffer from the shortened runway and have an average velocity of ~815 fps. Quite a drop.

    Plugging this new (to me) information into the Schwartz bullet penetration model, it seems that a .380 95 gr. FMJFP @ 815 fps oughtta penetrate to a depth of 18.17".

    The MacPherson bullet penetration model agrees (it's slightly more optimistic) with the Schwartz model and says that it'll go about another half inch deeper than what the Schwartz model says for a max. penetration depth of 18.64".

    In the end, it strikes me that sticking with an FMJ of some sort in the .380 is the wisest course of action given the fact that the shorter barrels seem to reduce the velocity to the point that expansion may suffer.

    BTW, I really enjoy your tests. Keep 'em coming!
    Author of the Pocket Guns and Gear blog. Stop by for a peek at http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com

  8. #22
    481
    481 is offline
    Senior Member Array 481's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    US
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by Ljutic View Post
    What does your magic decoder ring tell you about BB 95 grain FMJ FP at 1044 fps?
    No magic, plenty of math though.


    Oh, lemme see... for a 0.354" 95 grain FMJFP at 1044 fps:

    The Schwartz model says it should reach a maximum depth of 21.29"

    The MacPherson model says it should reach a maximum depth of 22.07"

    Have you shot this stuff in the clear gel yet?


    Quote Originally Posted by Ljutic View Post
    It's listed as (+P), whatever that means in 380.
    Heh. Yeah, I'll never know why they don't just label ammo that has no SAAMI spec. for a +P or +P+ rating in the chambering as "over-pressure" and be done with it.
    My favorite "gun" book-

    QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION

  9. #23
    Member Array Ljutic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    307
    Wasn't planning to, but I think I still have a few rounds left from the original test. The Buffalo Bore +P stuff is hard on the guns. The blocks are 16", which I plan to upgrade to 20" soon. It looks like I would need two 16" blocks if I wanted to catch the bullet.

    I did shoot a 73 grain .32 ACP RN FMJ into bare gel this weekend and caught it. 865 fps actual captured test shot velocity about 4" away from the block. If you're game, let me know what your models predict and I'll tell you what I measured in the gel. As we all secretly hoped it would, the .32 FMJ did indeed tumble as it passed through the block.

    Quote Originally Posted by 481 View Post
    No magic, plenty of math though.


    Oh, lemme see... for a 0.354" 95 grain FMJFP at 1044 fps:

    The Schwartz model says it should reach a maximum depth of 21.29"

    The MacPherson model says it should reach a maximum depth of 22.07"

    Have you shot this stuff in the clear gel yet?
    Author of the Pocket Guns and Gear blog. Stop by for a peek at http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com

  10. #24
    Member Array DooSPX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    194
    I am going to switch from Winchester in my P3AT to Speer Gold Dot JHP 90gr after this video on Youtube. Hog's Head Ballistics - Speer Gold Dot 90gr .380 ACP - YouTube
    I'm satisfied that it will penetrate bone, muscle to do some damage. Not to mention that my .380 is only a BUG to my Kahr CM40 .40 or primary if wearing gym shorts or something.

  11. #25
    481
    481 is offline
    Senior Member Array 481's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    US
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by Ljutic View Post
    Wasn't planning to, but I think I still have a few rounds left from the original test. The Buffalo Bore +P stuff is hard on the guns. The blocks are 16", which I plan to upgrade to 20" soon. It looks like I would need two 16" blocks if I wanted to catch the bullet.

    I did shoot a 73 grain .32 ACP RN FMJ into bare gel this weekend and caught it. 865 fps actual captured test shot velocity about 4" away from the block. If you're game, let me know what your models predict and I'll tell you what I measured in the gel.
    Sure why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ljutic View Post
    As we all secretly hoped it would, the .32 FMJ did indeed tumble as it passed through the block.
    That's funny!

    Always happy to give something like this a shot-

    For a .3125" diameter 73 gr FMJRN @ 865 fps-

    the Schwartz model says it'll go 18.48 inches

    the MacPherson model says it'll go 18.66 inches

    I find it interesting that the issue of bullet yaw is addressed in the Quantitative Ammunition Selection website FAQ (page 2)

    A: The quantitative model operates under three conditions:

    1. All significant plastic deformation of the projectile occurs within periods of 10^-4 seconds.

    2. The projectile behaves as a rigid body after expansion (no further ductile or ablative erosion occurs) and exhibits no significant yaw during any portion of the penetration event.

    3. The terminal behavior of the projectile is governed by a material strength variable and the inertial and viscous (or frictional) drag losses that occur during the projectile's penetration through the medium.
    So whadja get for penetration?

    Oh, the suspense is killing me!
    My favorite "gun" book-

    QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION

  12. #26
    Member Array Ljutic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    307
    Sorry....my measurement is 13.75" and it ended up butt forward.

    This FMJ wound channel thing has me totally engrossed. I caught .32 FMJ two weeks ago and I caught .380 FMJ last weekend. If you would be so kind as to run the 380 numbers that would be great. I had a 100 Grain FMJ Round Nose at 849 Feet per Second.

    Even though the gel looks fluid when shot, it is a solid so I'm not surprised the numbers don't match. I bet your 380 penetration numbers will be "off" by the same percentage as the .32 numbers.
    Author of the Pocket Guns and Gear blog. Stop by for a peek at http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com

  13. #27
    481
    481 is offline
    Senior Member Array 481's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    US
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by Ljutic View Post
    Sorry....my measurement is 13.75" and it ended up butt forward.
    That is not surprising. RNs tend to yaw in these tests which bleeds velocity off which means we see reduced penetration.

    FMJFNs tend to do better due to the larger stagnation front which tends to keep them oriented "nose forward" throughout their flight through the gel. The use of an FMJFN will reduce the confounding effect (yaw & overturn) and probably give you a better idea as to just how closely the clear gel matches ordnance gelatin if you are so inclined.

    Penetration, with all else being equal (diameter, velocity), will be about 3%-5% greater than with the FMJRNs -just a "heads up" if you decide to give it a try.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ljutic View Post
    This FMJ wound channel thing has me totally engrossed. I caught .32 FMJ two weeks ago and I caught .380 FMJ last weekend. If you would be so kind as to run the 380 numbers that would be great. I had a 100 Grain FMJ Round Nose at 849 Feet per Second.
    Sure. I think this stuff is pretty cool, too.

    For a 0.354" diameter 100 gr FMJRN @ 849 fps-

    -the Schwartz model says it'll go 18.92 inches

    -the MacPherson model says it'll go 20.11 inches

    Quote Originally Posted by Ljutic View Post
    Even though the gel looks fluid when shot, it is a solid so I'm not surprised the numbers don't match. I bet your 380 penetration numbers will be "off" by the same percentage as the .32 numbers.
    I would not be surprised either. Both models (Schwartz & MacPherson) were developed using calibrated ordnance gelatin so it is hardly surprising that there will be considerable skew due to the introduction of the "unknown" physical properties of this medium.

    I wonder if the manufacturer has done anything in the way of establishing its equivalence or a conversion rate to calibrated ordnance gelatin or soft tissue.

    The clear gel you are using reminds me quite a bit of some of the newer biomimetic physically-associating gels (like the polystyrene-polyisoprene triblock copolymer gels) being researched as alternatives to calibrated ordnance gelatin which offer the considerable advantage of being stable across a broad range of conditions.
    My favorite "gun" book-

    QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION

  14. #28
    VIP Member Array Smitty901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,285
    The 95 Gr flat nose for a 380 is a very good round What we settled on around here.

  15. #29
    Distinguished Member Array lchamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Florida's Space Coast.
    Posts
    1,604
    I use hornaday in the gun and my backup mags contain both fmj and SD rounds. One mag each.

  16. #30
    Member Array Ljutic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    307
    Not sure why my velocity data image isn't working so I'll bring that back into the tread.



    481 Said:
    For a 0.354" diameter 100 gr FMJRN @ 849 fps-

    -the Schwartz model says it'll go 18.92 inches

    -the MacPherson model says it'll go 20.11 inches


    The 380 didn't tumble at all so I captured 18.5" total penetration. Much closer to your model predictions. I think the gel is a valid Ordnance Gel substitute as long as bullets "behave" as they go through the gel. I believe the difference with the 32 test was due to tumbling.
    Author of the Pocket Guns and Gear blog. Stop by for a peek at http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Search tags for this page

380 flat nose fmj
,

380 winchester white box

,
fmj fp
,
fmj-fp
,
winchester 380
,

winchester 380 ammo

,
winchester 380 auto 95 grain
,
winchester 380 auto 95 grain fmj
,
winchester 380 fmj ammo
,

winchester 95 grain fmj 380

,
winchester white box .380
,

winchester white box 380

Click on a term to search for related topics.