Community for Kel-Tec Shooters banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was reading in a gun magazine at the grocery store
about Rugers new 380 pistol and looking at the ballistics
of several different ammo and one stood out
way above the others in power.

The Buffalo Bore
100gr. Hard-Cast FN @ 1125 fps 280 ft. lbs

Has anyone shot this stuff in the Keltec and did they survive ?

The other question is how flat nose is it and
would there be feed problems in the 380AT

I cant believe the magazine didnt even mention or
compare the new Ruger pistol with the Keltec which
is the undisputed leader in 380. Seeing the
article did kind of make me wish I could
have a slide lockback feature.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
Awsome test link.

That Buffalo Bore packs a punch. I fired off some 158 gr. +p's outta my Airweight the other day... felt like I was catching a hardball without a mitt :eek:

Expensive stuff, but it seems to be the real deal for pocket cannons.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
181 Posts
I keep reading in many gun forums that there is no such thing as a +p for the .380. More promo than fact.

Plus, can the Kel-Tec P3AT handle such an animal -  if it existed? Maybe a few rounds, but certainly not on a consistent basis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,301 Posts
Super hot ball! In exchange for a, say, 25"x.355" hole in gelatin (vs approx 19+" x.355" for standard FMJ) you get to pay a lot more and have slower follow up shots.

This is like the kid down the street who puts a great big wing on the back of his Hyundai Accent: it looks cool and all, but it doesn't really do anything except cost money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
pocketgun said:
Super hot ball! In exchange for a, say, 25"x.355" hole in gelatin (vs approx 19+" x.355" for standard FMJ) you get to pay a lot more and have slower follow up shots.

This is like the kid down the street who puts a great big wing on the back of his Hyundai Accent: it looks cool and all, but it doesn't really do anything except cost money.
Flat-nosed projectiles cause far more tissue destruction than round-nosed bullets (except when the RNs tumble), and they are much more likely to travel straight through animals, and to not tumble. This is well-known in the big-game hunting community (I mean BIG game-- Cape Buff and up), but maybe not so well known to others. Still, it's demonstrably true.

I like the Buffalo Bore lead bullets, and they are what I carry. No ammo can make a .380 into a cannon-- but the BB ammo makes the right compromises, in my opinion.

Previously, I carried Golden Sabers. They would expand in water in my tests. But .380s are marginal in power, so I decided I'd take laser-straight penetration over some chance of expansion. Your mileage may vary.

Regarding the speed of follow up shots-- you are right. No two ways about it-- the BB ammo kicks harder than anything else I've tried. My grip is generally compromised on each shot, and I have to re-seat the gun in my hand. This is something to consider before carrying the BB ammo.

BB is low-flash too, compared to some other brands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
The buffalo bore is a real blast to shoot. Noticeably more recoil than regular ammo, I don't find it unwieldy, I'm also not the most experience hand-gunner in th world. Accuracy was the same, bang was bigger, I guess you get what you pay for. Actually at $1/round its in the same league as most defense ammo. The spoiler analogy is flawed. ;) Its more like putting on a flow master exhaust; it may improve the performance but its still an Hyundai Accent.

Anybody chrono this? I always hear about short barrels not developing full energy but all the other chrono results I've seen are >90% of the spec. Just making sure I'm not just paying for sound effects. I'd buy a box and shoot it just for kicks even if you don't plan on carrying it. The "regular" loads seem even lighter afterwards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,301 Posts
pertinax said:
Flat-nosed projectiles cause far more tissue destruction than round-nosed bullets (except when the RNs tumble), and they are much more likely to travel straight through animals, and to not tumble.  This is well-known in the big-game hunting community (I mean BIG game-- Cape Buff and up), but maybe not so well known to others.  Still, it's demonstrably true.
I have read some on the effects of flat-nose solid points on big game.  I personally have no opinion on it (for big game) at this time.  I have heard the argument for a flat meplat on .380 and .32 bullets, and I don't buy it.  I have yet to see any evidence that bears out that it does anything different than round nose FMJ, so if you have some I would be interested in seeing it. Without direct evidence, I think it is a dangerously broad assumption to apply terminal ballistics lessons from a .458WinMag or .600NE on a rhino to a .380ACP to a crackhead.

Not that it really matters anyway, as standard flat-meplat FMJ is available in FMJ ammo loaded to velocities that will likely provide well more than the commonly sought 12"-14" of penetration in gelatin.  And WWB is about the least expensive stuff you can get, not that I would carry it, even if it worked in my P-3AT (many 1G didn't like WWB, for those who are wondering). 

pertinax said:
I like the Buffalo Bore lead bullets, and they are what I carry.  No ammo can make a .380 into a cannon--  but the BB ammo makes the right compromises, in my opinion.
All the more reason to carefully consider your ammo choice.  I see no desirable features gained by using this round, except perhaps the low-flash powder which is available elsewhere.  I do see extra expense, high recoil, high wear on the gun, leading of the barrel, no expansion, and increased risk of hitting something beyond your target.

pertinax said:
Previously, I carried Golden Sabers.  They would expand in water in my tests.    But .380s are marginal in power, so I decided I'd take laser-straight penetration over some chance of expansion.  Your mileage may vary.
They consistently expand from a P-3AT in every test I have seen, including (apparently) the ones you put on yourself.  As for laser straight penetration, I think it is wishful thinking.  Even in gelatin, .45ACP will not do that.  Add in bones, air cavities, connective tissue, and organs...

pertinax said:
Regarding the speed of follow up shots-- you are right.  No two ways about it-- the BB ammo kicks harder than anything else I've tried.  My grip is generally compromised on each shot, and I have to re-seat the gun in my hand.  This is something to consider before carrying the BB ammo.

BB is low-flash too, compared to some other brands.  
Not good, you might want to try a grip sleeve if you are going to carry it.  BB is good ammo, and I am not knocking the brand.  I just don't like the HCL load.  They make a Gold Dot that is quite impressive, IMO.  It is still very hot, but the extra velocity for the JHP is worth it, provided it can be controlled.  The tests I have seen haven't pushed it past the Golden Saber or DPX however, but I would like to see more before making a judgment on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
pocketgun said:
[quote author=pertinax link=1220363758/0#10 date=1220556597]Flat-nosed projectiles cause far more tissue destruction than round-nosed bullets (except when the RNs tumble), and they are much more likely to travel straight through animals, and to not tumble. This is well-known in the big-game hunting community (I mean BIG game-- Cape Buff and up), but maybe not so well known to others. Still, it's demonstrably true.
I have read some on the effects of flat-nose solid points on big game. I personally have no opinion on it (for big game) at this time. I have heard the argument for a flat meplat on .380 and .32 bullets, and I don't buy it. I have yet to see any evidence that bears out that it does anything different than round nose FMJ, so if you have some I would be interested in seeing it. Without direct evidence, I think it is a dangerously broad assumption to apply terminal ballistics lessons from a .458WinMag or .600NE on a rhino to a .380ACP to a crackhead.
[/quote]

Aren't heavy wadcutter rounds supposed to be one of the most effective in .38 special also?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,301 Posts
byron2112 said:
[quote author=pocketgun link=1220363758/0#13 date=1220609686][quote author=pertinax link=1220363758/0#10 date=1220556597]Flat-nosed projectiles cause far more tissue destruction than round-nosed bullets (except when the RNs tumble), and they are much more likely to travel straight through animals, and to not tumble.  This is well-known in the big-game hunting community (I mean BIG game-- Cape Buff and up), but maybe not so well known to others.  Still, it's demonstrably true.
I have read some on the effects of flat-nose solid points on big game.  I personally have no opinion on it (for big game) at this time.  I have heard the argument for a flat meplat on .380 and .32 bullets, and I don't buy it.  I have yet to see any evidence that bears out that it does anything different than round nose FMJ, so if you have some I would be interested in seeing it.  Without direct evidence, I think it is a dangerously broad assumption to apply terminal ballistics lessons from a .458WinMag or .600NE on a rhino to a .380ACP to a crackhead.
[/quote]

Aren't heavy wadcutter rounds supposed to be one of the most effective in .38 special also?[/quote]

Another one of those things that people always claim to have heard is true, but no one can find any evidence to support.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top