:: Bersa Talk ::

The .380 portion of this post might be of use to Bersa folks...

Hello.  I recently bought a small quantity of Hornady's new "Critical Defense" line of ammuntion in both .380 ACP and .38 Special.  Neither is +P-rated.

Hornady's XTP line of ammunition uses a bullet that usually expands to about 1.5 times its original diameter (left).  The new Critical Defense ammunition uses Hornady's FTX bullet (right).  It is a jacketed lead bullet but one that has its hollow cavity filled with a very maleable plastic material that prevents its being clogged and almost guarantees expansion. Based on my admittedly limited and statistically-invalid layman's "tests", I believe it to be so.

I chronographed each load and found an average velocity of 911 ft/sec when the .380 ACP 90-gr. Critical Defense load was fired from a 3.5" bbl Bersa Thunder.  This does not meet the published velocity of 1000 ft/sec from the company.

The .38 Special load was fired from a well-used S&W Model 042 with the usual 1 7/8" bbl.  Its average velocity measured 856 ft/sec, far short of the nominal listed velocity of 1175 ft/sec. These figures are based on 10 shots fired 10 feet from the chronograph screens.

In my opinion, these are probably the best performing loads for a 38-caliber revolver.  All but the Hornady 110-gr. Critical Defense (far right) are +P.  L to R: Remington 158-gr. LHP +P, Corbon 110-gr. DPX +P, Speer 135-gr. Gold Dot +P, and Hornady 110-gr. Critical Defense.

It becomes pretty obvious that either longer barrels or pressure barrels were used when Hornady got their data.

In super-saturated newsprint, average penetration (also based on ten shots with 5 of each caliber fired through 4 layers of an old cotton/polyester towel) was 6.75" for the .380, which probably translates to just over 10" penetration in calibrated 10% ballistic gelatin.  This is as good as I've seen for an expanding bullet in this caliber.  Most do about 7.5 to 8" in gelatin, it seems.

The .38's were fired following the same protocol and achieved an average velocity of 856 ft/sec with penetration in the soaked newsprint averaging 7.6" or probably about 11.4" in ballistic gelatin.

I was amazed at the extreme consistency not only the expansion's reliability but the small differences in speed, shot to shot for each caliber. I could not differentiate between the expanded bullets fired through the towel and those that were not.

Both the .380 ACP and .38 Special Critical Defense loads proved exceptionally consistent. Average expanded diameter for the .380 was approximately 47-caliber and 48-caliber for the .38 Special load.

In my admittedly limited experience with this new ammunition, it appears to work and work very well.

For those interested in a more detailed report, it can be found here:

http://hipowers-handguns.blogspot.com/2008/12/informal-tests-hornady-critical-defense.html

Best.

Thanks for posting, Stephen. Maybe not totally scientific, but at least the chronagraph and the wet newsprint are a step or two above michael t's above-ground-swimming-pool, fence-post, pepsi-water-bottle, board-on-the-side-of-the-barn "ballistics tests" that he occasionally treats us to.  Your post raises the level of discourse here at BT, and I appreciate it.

Nice photography, too. Did you do that, too?

Hello and thanks very much.

 

Best.

 

PS:  Yes, the photos are mine, too.  Used an older Nikon CoolPix 995 camera.

Thanks for posting your test and results. As always, a very good read.

---

It aint easy bein' me !

p-t-max:

Thanks for posting, Steven. Maybe not totally scientific, but at least the chronagraph and the wet newsprint are a step or two above michael t's above-ground-swimming-pool, fence-post, pepsi-water-bottle, board-on-the-side-of-the-barn "ballistics tests" that he occasionally treats us to.  Your post raises the level of discourse here at BT, and I appreciate it.

Nice photography, too. Did you do that, too?

 I ask Steven to post this here I belived members would enjoy . And this is the thanks I get.

  My test tell you  the real world .  What happen when you miss  at the 7-11 and hit the pepsi display    the skinny runt hides behind a fence post  or tries to hide in the pool. or under water .    As for the barn  I heard you couldn't hit one so I add that for your pleasure

 

 

---

"Just say "Lay A Way"

"WWJBD" What Would James Bond Do?

"Hokey religions and plastic glocks are no match for a good 1911 at your side, kid."

michael t:

I ask Steven to post this here I belived members would enjoy . And this is the thanks I get.

  My test tell you  the real world .  What happen when you miss  at the 7-11 and hit the pepsi display   or the skinny runt hides behind a fence post , tries to hide in the pool. or under water .    As for the barn  I heard you couldn't hit one so I add that for your pleasure

You were right, michael t, our members will enjoy this post. And as I have said repeatedly elsewhere on BT, I love reading your ballistics reports and always enjoy them, too.

As for the side of a barn, I can too hit one. If I'm in side it.

In super-saturated newsprint,

Great write-up!! Thanks, Stephen! I'm very interested in personally testing the loads I use, and have learned a great deal about many aspects of their performance from doing so. I use dry paper because of many issues of the hassle factor in preparing and using wet pack. (And ballistic gelatin is not only a hassle to prepare, store, and transport; it is EXPENSIVE as well.) I know that dry paper does not mimic bullet performance in flesh, but if I want to look at strictly the pattern of expansion I've gotten very satisfactory results using ziploc bags filled with sand and water.


Have you written up your methods for preparing newsprint for testing purposes? I have read that it is very difficult to get consistent results. In particular, how did you address the following issues? -


1. Consistency test to test. Ballistic gelatin, even when prepared according to strict instructions, still needs to be calibrated with a standard shot. I have thought about how to make sure I get the same degree of saturation every time, and aside from just letting the paper soak for days about the only thing I came up with was to weigh the paper before and after soaking so that I always started with a known amount of paper and could make sure each batch absorbed the same amount of water.


2. How did you suspend the wet paper in a vertical position to shoot into? Wet paper is going to sag which is going to introduce wrinkles and random air spaces. Unless the entire pack is sandwiched between layers of something semi-rigid, like masonite, and compressed to a known thickness, I would think that there would not only be variation test to test, but also between different sections of the same batch of wet paper.


3. How long does it take you to set up and test a batch of loads? Do you keep the paper so you can study other aspects of the bullet path (wound channel) or are you simply measuring depth of penetration and degree of expansion and immediately throw the mess away?


4. What do you base your ratios of penetration in paper versus gelation on? Past experience?

Thanks for the report.  I would like to see "Critical Defense" vs Cor-Bon JHP & DXP

PS  Mike,, feel the love.

---

BCH-LAW

Bersa CC .380 (Satin)
Bersa Thunder .380 (Matte)
Sig/Sauer P-6 9mm.
Smith&Wesson SW9VE 9mm
Taurus Model 82SS .38 Special
Savage Model 1907 pocket pistol .32
H&R .22 revolver

Stephen,

  Thanks for the report.  I also have a .380 and a .38, this was very interesting to me.  I am still trying to decide which ammo to carry.

---

Dave

Hello, and thanks for the kind words; I'm glad that the post was of interest.

"(Uncle) Argyle" (my favorite character in "Braveheart" albeit not in the film long):

I don't work too hard at trying to get exact consistency but have found that the following works pretty darned well.  Take more newspaper than you think you will need and remove the "slick" pages.  I usually take about a foot thick stack.  I have a rock and a couple of bricks that I put on top of the stack in the container I fill with water; it completely covers the stack of papers with water by a couple of feet.  I'll soak them for about 24 hours.  When I retrieve them, I put a couple of strings around them to hold them (somewhat) in place. The strings are not tight.  I begin draining them on the way to the range (15 mins or so) and then I don't have to wait but about 15 mins at the range before shooting.  At the police range, I am able to get on top of a table and shoot downward into the pack so its being horizontal is no problem. 

The only time that I've gotten results with "known" loads that differed significantly in the soaked papers was when I purposely soaked them for about 2 1/2 days.  I guess that they were beginning to come completely apart.

Time doesn't appear to be very critical with this test media nor does temperature so long as the soaked papers are not left in freezing weather long enough to freeze.  (Don't ask...)

Multiplying by 3/2 was determined by trial and error with some data I have from a police ammunition school in which penetration depths were repeated and very consistent.  Using measured penetration depths from several trips to the range with the soaked papers and 3 constant loads, I was able to see how consistent the loads/soaked papers' results were and come up with the 3/2 conversion factor.  It is not exact, but it is close and easy.

Others may opt to go with data that is just as precise as is possible and I would too were it not for the cost and extra effort which may produce consistent data in gelatin, but I just do not believe that we will get the same consistency in the real world...at least I never saw in in after action shooting or post-mortem reports.  I have been told that gelatin's homogeneous consistency doesn't affect how it performs in the human body one wit.  I do not believe it.  A bullet smacking in a full stomach is going to have different expansion characteristics than one passing between ribs and through air-filled lungs.  Penetration will likely be dissimilar as well; I just don't see how it cannot be.

Anyway, that's pretty much what I've settled on.

I was able to find a picture of some 9mm 127-gr. Ranger (RA9TA)  fired into different test media.  Left to Right: Soaked newsprint, water, deer.  Each of these left a Browning Hi Power bbl at a little over 1200 ft/sec.  I cannot immediately lay my hands on the data concerning expansion/retained weight but it appears pretty consistent to me.

Best and good shooting.

 

 

I am currently using the Speer 135 gr short barrel in my S&W  637 1 7/8" and will be in my Rossi 461 2"(out for warranty work) it is supposed to expand properly from the short barrel.
I see in your test that you used a 1 7/8 also 10 shots fired.
Can you post a picture of all 10 of the expanded .38 slugs,were they all real consistant in expanded size,.48 cal..
I've been looking at these for my carry .38's

And as always thanks for the great information,your article "feeding the .38 snub" and "Bersa Thunder .380 with Corbon DPX" from Hi powers and handguns helped me make my choices on purchases .They are all great articles.

---

Unhappy citizen of the USSA

Hello.  I don't have the expanded bullets anymore.  I have learned not to keep all of the bullets I shoot; the numbers "grow" pretty rapidly.  I usually keep two or three and that's about it.  With some that I've tried, I kept the most different appearing after being fired into the wet pack.  With the Hornady bullets, just pick a couple at random; they were that similar. The "spread" between them was only about 0.02" and none in either caliber attempted to fragment and no apparent weight was lost.  I say that because I didn't pull any bullets to weight them before shooting but none were more than a couple of tenths of a grain shy of the advertised weight.  Of course, they may have been so before shooting or a few tenths greater.

Best.

PS:  I was able to retrieve 2 each of the 380's and 38's w/o having to dig around to the bottom of the trash can to go with the one of each I'd kept.  If it helps, here's a picture.

That was a very informative post Mr. Camp. It is extremely difficult for the majority of us to perform ammunition tests for numerous reasons. It seems that you were very pleased with the ammo in .380..(pretty nice shooting with the little Bersa, btw)....Thank you for taking the time to share your hard work with us......

---

You unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is another dimension: a dimension of sound, a dimension of sight, a dimension of mind. You're moving into a land of both shadow and substance, of things and ideas. You've just crossed over into... the Bersa Talk Zone.

News flash :   I want to be first to report that in my testing neither Critical Defense or DPX ammo  expanded  when tested thru air . 

---

"Just say "Lay A Way"

"WWJBD" What Would James Bond Do?

"Hokey religions and plastic glocks are no match for a good 1911 at your side, kid."

michael t:

News flash :   I want to be first to report that in my testing neither Critical Defense or DPX ammo  expanded  when tested thru air . 

How did you recover those bullets, michael t? Shoot straight up and then catch them when they came down?