.380 ACP Powder Loads

[Mark K]

Been a while since I've posted here -- moved since to Ohio and now to Colorado Springs.

I'm doing a lot of reloading these days, for obvious reasons... but just for range ammo, not for carry ammo (sorry, guys in Maryland...).

As background, I've been experimenting with "hot" commercial ammo for when I carry my Bersa Thunder 380CC -- figuring that if over-penetration can be controlled, more energy that transfers to the target is better.

I found out that another consideration is not destroying the gun. A couple months ago I put a couple boxes (about 40 rounds) of Underwood 90-grain Xtreme Penetrator through the 380CC to test it. I'd read good things about the cross-tip copper bullet, and I figured that I couldn't go wrong with a reputable brand. Wrong. After only about 40 rounds, the action started getting grittier and grittier, and finally stopped working all together. When I finally got the slide off, I noticed it was really horribly peened under the muzzle where the slide was apparently hitting the frame. I was fortunately able to get the gun replaced under warranty.

So now I'm really, really leery about over-powered ammunition. An expert at a local gun club advised that for .380 ACP, the maximum muzzle velocity should be around 200 ft-lb -- and the bullet weight/powder charge combination should be chosen accordingly. (The energy of the Underwood rounds at the marked 1100 fps velocity was about 242 ft-lb, I assume with a SAAMI-standard 3.75" barrel.)

Which brings me to my range reloading. For a given caliber, I try to use the same type and weight bullet, and same powder. That way I'm just varying the powder charge as I'm working up loads. For .380 ACP FMJ reloads, I use 100-grain bullets and Hodgdon HP-38 powder.

I started out years ago with a weak charge of 2.9 grains, the minimum recommended by Hodgdon. This worked somewhat reliably in my 380CC -- a few FTFs, but acceptable for the range. But they chronographed at only 676 fps, which was a muzzle energy of only 101 ft-lb.

But my wife's new Glock 42 just hates those loads. Many, many FTFs and FTEs. When the case does eject, it sort of anemically plops out within a couple inches of the ejection port.

So 2.9 grains of HP-38 is way too weak, particularly for the Glock.

OK, so a larger charge. Problem is, different sources give slightly varying recommendations as to maximum charge with HP-38 and this weight bullet:

Hodgdon on-line load data shows 3.1 grains max, resulting in a nominal 819 fps (I assume using a SAAMI-standard 3.75" barrel). Which would be only about 150 ft-lb of energy. And it would be even less with the shorter barrels of the 380CC and the G42; but who cares since it would be range ammo.

Lee also shows 3.1 grains max for 100-grain FMJ and HP-38, on the data with their reloading dies.

But there's something strange in my Hornady Handbook of Cartridge Reloading (9th Edition). It shows the max load for 100-grain FMJ-RN to be 3.3 grains of HP-38. That's supposed to give 900 fps, and 190 ft-lb of energy.

That doesn't sound right. I actually loaded some cartridges (100-grain FMJ) with "only" 3.2 grains of HP-38, and with my 380CC (3.2" barrel) got chronograph readings averaging 1001 ft/sec -- which would be energy of 222 ft-lb, significantly higher than the 200 ft-lb maximum goal. (Come to think of it, shooting those particular reloads may have contributed to the demise of that 380CC.)

So is there something wrong with the Hornady data?

Seems like 3.1 grains (according to Hodgdon and Lee) would be safe, as long as it functions reliably.

Thoughts?

 

[Biggfoot44]

Yes , blowback pistols in particular have a window of " suitable " power levels . The best single factor rule of thumb is probably Momentum rather than ft lb of Energy per se .. Of course in .380acp there is a fairly narrow range of common projectile weights , so the two things track fairly closely . ie .380 is commonly 85-90gr , occasionally 80- 100-ish , compared to 9x19 commonly 115- 147 .

No , I don't have any charge weights for you . But since you have a chronograph and a test pistol :

Establish a baseline of ( non- exotic ) factory load(s) from Your Gun . Seek to keep momentum within 105% or less of the factory load baseline . ( Of course presuming such is also both reliable functioning , And within pressure .

Sideways curiosity - Do you have reason on purpose for going with 100gr ?

 

[Mark K]

Thanks for the reply. No, no particular reason for 100-gr FMJ. It's just what I was finding readily available a few years ago at reasonable cost (e.g. Berry's Bullets), and I decided to stay with that for consistency. I've still got a lot of those projectiles. Besides, changing too many variables and using a chronograph on the indoor range every time I shoot really is a hassle.

You say that momentum is a better measurement than muzzle velocity. But aren't those exactly the same at the muzzle, depending on units of measurement? Mass times velocity squared?

So why is so much "reputable" commercial defense ammunition so hot? (Understanding there's no such thing as SAAMI +P for .380 ACP.)

And why the 6% discrepancy regarding max charge between Hornady on the one hand, and Hodgdon and Lee on the other?

 

[John from MD]

I shoot a Kel Tec P3AT, Kahr P380 and S&W Shield 380EZ. All are locked breeches and this load was developed to work in all three.

95gn LRN, 3.3 WW 231 COAL .940. If you use jacketed bullets, you can have a longer OAL but not with lead due to the lack of a leade in most .380 barrels. This load is mild, accurate and your brass won't go to the next county.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Energy = Mass x Velocity x Velocity
Momentum = Mass x Velocity

Ignoring units for the moment , and making decimal points , I'll make a. " hot" .380 relevant arbitrary example ; 85gr @ 1000fps , and 100gr @ 850fps .

Momentum

85 x 1.0 = 85
100 x .85 = 85. Same Momentum

85 x 1.0 x 1.0 x ( conversion factor ) = 189 ftlb
100 x .85 x .85 x ( c.f.) = 161 ftlb , a significant difference.

To reach similar Energy w/ 100gr , takes about 920fps

100 x .92 x .92 x ( c.f.) = 188 ftlb .

But to do that you're increasing momentum -

100 x .92 = 92 , aka 8.2% more momentum for same energy .

Meanwhile , 90% of readers eyes glazed over , and the other 10% think I should have shown more decimal places , and used proper engineering units for the momentum examples .

*********************

 

[Mark K]

Energy = Mass x Velocity x Velocity
Momentum = Mass x Velocity

Doh, you're right. That's what I get for more than four decades since college physics, working in military and defense intelligence most of my life...

Problem is, commercial ammo boxes often show muzzle energy, not momentum. Like the box for the Inceptor ARX rounds I've got for .380 ACP (with 56-gr fluted copper-polymer matrix bullets), shows "56gr/1260 fps/197 ft-lbs."

I've got some Cor-Bon 80-gr DPX, where the box shows 1050 fps and 196 ft-lb.

And some Cor-Bon 90gr JHP, with 1050 fps and 220 ft-lb -- which I would say now is way too hot.

It shouldn't make any difference if you're calculating energy or momentum at the muzzle, as long as you're doing one or the other consistently...

So what would you say should be an energy benchmark? should be <= 200 ft-lb, like I was advised? Or somewhat less than that?

 

[Biggfoot44]

Wow ! I'm feeling multiple levels of self- irony given my frequently pointing out that ft lb of energy is usually a weak predictor of " effectiveness " of the various contexts , and my well known opinions of .380 , but I will put forth some observations :

.380 velocities vary significantly with barrel lengths .

.380 ammo has great differences in velocity from brand to brand , and also significantly between Lot to Lot of same ammo .


Industry Standards for Velocity testing involve 3.75in test barells . Compact , Subcompact, and Micro pistols will NOT give velocity/ energy comparable to full size pistols . Back during my brief , misguided flirtation with .380 , I did most of my chronograph with a subcompact , so I briefly checked some data for current ammo from 3.2 inch- ish , " medium- short " guns .

From well regarded premium ammunition , from major makers , from this length barells , the " good stuff " clusters in the area of 180- 200 ft lbs . THIS should be your yardstick . ie , if your handloads deliver anywhere between 180- 200 ft lb , you may declare sucuess for essentially duplicating the external ballistics of top performing mainstream loads .

What's What about actual defensive performance at that level ?

Your handloads are FMJ . Is that a sign that you fall into the Camp of * FMJ is a Good Thing in .380 * ? If so , virtually any .380 fmj will penetrate more than 16 inches in the usual formats , and incremental differences will have minor differences in end results .

Are you * Expanding .380 JHP is a Good Thing * ? Enter the Controversy Zone ! Conflicting mandates here , worthy of campfire and adult beverages by themselves . Short Answer if 180- 200 ft lb from short-ish blowback pistol doesn't sufficiently suit you , the answer is a Different Pistol .

 

[Mark K]

Hey, wait a minute, I'm actually pretty-much agreeing with you!! (Except that I do think there's a self-defense role for .380 ACP.) My responses below in red:

.380 velocities vary significantly with barrel lengths .

Yup.

.380 ammo has great differences in velocity from brand to brand , and also significantly between Lot to Lot of same ammo .

Yup, that's what I'm seeing, though I didn't realize such differences between lots.

Industry Standards for Velocity testing involve 3.75in test barells . Compact , Subcompact, and Micro pistols will NOT give velocity/ energy comparable to full size pistols .

Yup.

From well regarded premium ammunition , from major makers , from this length barells , the " good stuff " clusters in the area of 180- 200 ft lbs . THIS should be your yardstick .

Yup, that's essentially what I'm saying (or asking). 200 ft-lb max. You're bracketing that at 180-200 -- fair enough.

, if your handloads deliver anywhere between 180- 200 ft lb , you may declare sucuess for essentially duplicating the external ballistics of top performing mainstream loads .

Great!

Your handloads are FMJ . Is that a sign that you fall into the Camp of * FMJ is a Good Thing in .380 * ?

Nope. I'm just using FMJ as range ammo, because it's relatively cheap (if such a thing can be said about .380 ACP). And I'm asking about what maximum power I should load to, because I don't want to damage my guns. While maintaining reliability -- not fun to have to rack the slide after every round.

If so , virtually any .380 fmj will penetrate more than 16 inches in the usual formats , and incremental differences will have minor differences in end results .

Yes, I'm aware of the over-penetration problems with FMJ. That's one of the reasons why JHP and other bullet configurations were developed in any caliber -- to stop the bullet within the target, and make sure all the energy is transferred to the target. Plus causing other wound effects.

Are you * Expanding .380 JHP is a Good Thing * ?

So yes, pretty much.

Enter the Controversy Zone ! Conflicting mandates here , worthy of campfire and adult beverages by themselves . Short Answer if 180- 200 ft lb from short-ish blowback pistol doesn't sufficiently suit you , the answer is a Different Pistol .

So 180-200 ft-lb is what I wanted to hear -- you're validating my understanding and experience. So I'll stick with 3.1-grain loads, hoping they function well. Thank you.

Incidentally, to digress, my carry gun (I'm in Colorado, remember?) is currently a 9mm Sig Sauer P290RS, 8+1 mag, loaded with NovX ARX ammo (65-gr copper-matrix bullet). From that stubby 2.9" barrel, I've chronographed that at a screaming average of about 1591 fps. And if my calculation is correct, that means a muzzle energy of 365 ft-lb -- more than .45 ACP with 230-gr ball out of my GI M1911A1.

Why am I even bothering with my Bersa 380CC as a possible carry gun? Because everything is a trade-off. The Bersa is much more comfortable and easier to conceal.

Plus I've shot and carried DA/SA all my life, and I really don't like the DAO of the P290RS.

I'm not thrilled about striker guns, but I am considering getting a Glock 43X as a 9mm carry gun -- if I can ever find one under the Blue Label program...

 

[PowPow]

Are you * Expanding .380 JHP is a Good Thing * ? Enter the Controversy Zone ! Conflicting mandates here , worthy of campfire and adult beverages by themselves . Short Answer if 180- 200 ft lb from short-ish blowback pistol doesn't sufficiently suit you , the answer is a Different Pistol .

If it is sufficient, perhaps a well-placed shot with a 22LR pistol would also be considered worthy?

 

[Mark K]

If it is sufficient, perhaps a well-placed shot with a 22LR pistol would also be considered worthy?

Well, we are digressing... I'd say a well-placed shot with a .22LR would be better than a miss with a .45 ACP... (Is beer an adult beverage?)

Let's see... the box of Remington .22LR "standard velocity target" rounds I have shows a 40-gr bullet at 1150 fps and 117 ft-lb at the muzzle. I can't find what length barrel it was tested from -- rifle or pistol...?

So, yeah, that's not a lot of energy -- though surprisingly, more than the minimum-charge .380 ACP from my Bersa. It wouldn't be fun to be hit by the .22; but I have no idea what the (over)penetration might be, or what the wound effects would look like.

 

[Buster Brown]

I need to find a pretty hot 380 load myself. I have a frommer stop in 9mm frommer (hot 380). Regular FMJ 380 wont reliably cycle the action. It's weird because it operates on a long stroke recoil system like a browning A-5 with a rotating bolt that looks similar to an AR-15. Probably the most over engineered 380 ever made.

 

[Mark K]

I need to find a pretty hot 380 load myself. I have a frommer stop in 9mm frommer (hot 380). Regular FMJ 380 wont reliably cycle the action. It's weird because it operates on a long stroke recoil system like a browning A-5 with a rotating bolt that looks similar to an AR-15. Probably the most over engineered 380 ever made.

Wow, I had to look that up. Forgotten Weapons, anyone? Hungarian, adopted by the Hungarian Armed Forces after WWI, but used in limited quantities by the Ottoman Empire in WWI.
But the militaries only used it in a proprietary 7.65mm...

Wikipedia says it was also manufactured in 9mm Kurz (.380 ACP), but doesn't say anything about a proprietary or hot 9mm Kurz. I guess you're lucky you've got that caliber!

Long stroke rotating bolt for that power cartridge....

I assume you won't be using this as a carry gun, but just on the range. Someone else will certainly give you knowledgeable advice; but all the hot .380 ACP ammunition I've seen offhand is defense ammo, and is really expensive... The FMJ stuff all seems to be "normal" power...

Is reloading an option? Assuming you can find good data...

 

[Biggfoot44]

Oh ! Oh ! I get to show off 19th Century Ballistic Trivia ! Running out the door , back in about 2hrs .

 

[Buster Brown]

Wow, I had to look that up. Forgotten Weapons, anyone? Hungarian, adopted by the Hungarian Armed Forces after WWI, but used in limited quantities by the Ottoman Empire in WWI.
But the militaries only used it in a proprietary 7.65mm...

Wikipedia says it was also manufactured in 9mm Kurz (.380 ACP), but doesn't say anything about a proprietary or hot 9mm Kurz. I guess you're lucky you've got that caliber!

Long stroke rotating bolt for that power cartridge....

I assume you won't be using this as a carry gun, but just on the range. Someone else will certainly give you knowledgeable advice; but all the hot .380 ACP ammunition I've seen offhand is defense ammo, and is really expensive... The FMJ stuff all seems to be "normal" power...

Is reloading an option? Assuming you can find good data...

You almost got all that history right. The austro-hungarians started out only using 7.65 but when production couldnt keep up with demand during ww1 they experimented with some 9mm guns since they were commercially available. They wound up really liking the 9mm and ordered a batch for the military. Mine is withing the first 130 guns accepted in that contract.

I reload so working up a load shouldnt be too much of a problem. Just need to do some research if I can use silhouette or power pistol since they're good for potent 9mm luger. I think I have some 3n37 left also. I usually just start at a known safe powder weight then work it up slowly until I see signs of overpressure hopefully getting good function before it gets that far.

 

[Buster Brown]

Wow, I had to look that up. Forgotten Weapons, anyone? Hungarian, adopted by the Hungarian Armed Forces after WWI, but used in limited quantities by the Ottoman Empire in WWI.
But the militaries only used it in a proprietary 7.65mm...

Wikipedia says it was also manufactured in 9mm Kurz (.380 ACP), but doesn't say anything about a proprietary or hot 9mm Kurz. I guess you're lucky you've got that caliber!

Long stroke rotating bolt for that power cartridge....

I assume you won't be using this as a carry gun, but just on the range. Someone else will certainly give you knowledgeable advice; but all the hot .380 ACP ammunition I've seen offhand is defense ammo, and is really expensive... The FMJ stuff all seems to be "normal" power...

Is reloading an option? Assuming you can find good data...

If you want to see something crazy, look up a frommer stop machine gun. I wont ruin the surprise but it's not exactly what you would think.

 

[Mark K]

I'll do that.

Meanwhile, in case you might not know, the Hungarians would have pronounced "Stop" as "Shtop." The "S" has an "sh" sound in Hungarian.

Actually sounds better than Stop, as in coming to a halt...

 

[Buster Brown]

I'll do that.

Meanwhile, in case you might not know, the Hungarians would have pronounced "Stop" as "Shtop." The "S" has an "sh" sound in Hungarian.

Actually sounds better than Stop, as in coming to a halt...

I just asked my coworker who's grandma was from hungry how she would pronounce it. I'll give him credit, he said the same thing "shtop". I figured he was bs me.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Disclaimer - No , I wouldn't want to be shot with even a .22 Short.

Disclaimer - Various Mouse Gun ballistics are being used as reference points , and in this thread not addressing one way or the other modern era suitability for any particular purpose .

The quoted .22lr Target velocity is indeed from a rifle . Having chrono'ed a buttload of .22lr from 4in , standard goes mid to upper 800's , normal high velocity low to mid 900's . Normal high velocity HP 36- 40gr from a Rifle is nothing to sneeze at , typically expanding , and giving penetration in the so called FBI range .

In the neighborhood of .380acp FMJ from a compact pistol are whole bunch of historical ctgs . .38 Rimfire , .38 ( Short ) Colt , .380 Revolver , and probably more obscure European ctgs . In a thread I started a few years ago about carrying a then 117 year old S&W Hammerless Breaktop 4in , I commented that I would rather carry a 146gr .38S&W than any pocket .380acp .

Short Bbl .45acp originally in modern times meant Colt Officers ACP with 3.5in . Today there are a plethora of .45s with 3- 3.5in bbls . And a substantial portion of those users favor 230gr FMJ . Into that neighborhood were :

.44 Rimfire , .44 American , .44 Colt , .44 Remington, .46 Rimfire, .442 Webbly aka .44 Webbly , and .450 Adams . ( Bulldog aka .44 Bulldog * Revolvers * were an excellent revolver mfg by Webbly , and also a generic moniker for a bazillion knockoffs marked with uncountable house brand names , manufactured world wide , particularly the US and Belgium , quality ranging from serviceable to total junk . .44 Bulldog the * Ammunition * so headstamped by UMC was a shortened case , with extremely weak loading . Some modern pundits theorized it was intended for pleasant low recoil practice/ plinking with .44 Bulldog Revolvers , but most plausible to me was simply price . When "real " full power Bulldog ammo was $ 0.90 for 50 rounds , it was 0.66 for 50 rounds . In perspective , the less expensive knockoff Bulldog guns were $2-3 . )

In what we would consider .25acp neighborhood , .32 ( Short ) Rimfire , .32 ( Short) Colt , .32S&W , 41 Rimfire ( definitely the Short , the Long was only marginally more )

And that's focusing on 1873 & earlier primarily , and primarily used for what we would catagorize as " CCW Guns " in the usage and marketing of the era .

.44 Russian , and .45 S&W aka Schofield were intended as full size Military Duty Guns . Likewise , the Colt SAA aka Frontier aka Peacemaker were intended as full size Millitary and civilian Belt Guns ( and another discussion in themselves ) . I also skipped early ( other than British) European big bore early Service Revolver Ctgs on the gounds they were not widely used or well known in North America in 1800s . And finally , I omitted the excellent bS&W and Colt .32 Longs , as they are worthy of their own discussion , and don't fit neatly into the above discussion catagories .

 

[Mark K]

I reload so working up a load shouldnt be too much of a problem. Just need to do some research if I can use silhouette or power pistol since they're good for potent 9mm luger. I think I have some 3n37 left also. I usually just start at a known safe powder weight then work it up slowly until I see signs of overpressure hopefully getting good function before it gets that far.

I did some YouTube research this morning, and found some info on the Frommer Stop. You're right, the Hungarians did procure some commercial 9mm Kurz guns during WWI.

What a weird gun. Ejects the casing after the barrel moves forward again, on the same bolt stroke that strips the next round out of the magazine. Interesting. And the ejection port is farther back than normal because of that. Besides the weird spring housing on top of the barrel...

While the info did mention in passing that the gun used hot 9mm Kurz (like hot 7.65mm Frommer), there sure wasn't much info regarding the 9mm gun itself... pretty rare.

I assume the usual reference sources don't give that 9mm Kurz info for the Frommer Stop...? You should start a separate thread here on the reloading forum, to see whether anyone can help you out with powder and loads...

 

[Mark K]

Mouse Gun

Hey, I resemble that remark!

the above discussion catagories

OK, now you're just showing off. Nothing wrong with showing off.