In this video, we test the old school 380 ACP Speer Gold Dot 90 grain hollow point ammunition in our ballistic gel test. More details: gunmagwarehouse.com/blog/ammo...
Hi. Just for a bit more information, I have done this test professionally with actual FBI spec ballistic gel (Clear Ballistics is good, but not the same for penetration) and the actual FBI "Heavy Clothing" test which does not involve four layers of denim, but rather a cotton T-shirt, a cotton dress shirt, a layer of fleece and a layer of denim. The test was set up for us by Speer and Federal at our law enforcement agency and we were allowed to test any brand or type of handgun ammunition we wanted to against their ammo. This was mostly to select duty ammo but off-duty and backup weapon ammo was also tested. When this test is done to FBI standards with Gold Dot .380 using a Glock 42 (they used mine for the test), you get right at 11 inches of penetration, and. expansion from .480 to .501 inch. They told us if you were using a shorter barrel to expect more penetration. We fired 20 rounds and had not one failure to expand. Penetration was incredibly consistent. The Speer technician told me to expect an inch less penetration and a bit more expansion on bare gel, but he also said that they considered the FBI Heavy Clothing test to be the more realistic test for a police backup gun. The boys at Speer and Federal know how to make cop ammo for sure and I bet my life on it in all handgun calibers from .380 ACP to .45 ACP. I tend to use HST more often but in .380 I like the Gold Dots a bit better. I mention the test not to be critical of your test or video, they are fine.. It is just that very few people will ever get to see an actual FBI spec test done since these workshops are for law enforcement only and a real pain to set up with refrigerated gel blocks held at the correct temperature and calibrated just before shooting. I'll also note that the Speer/Federal reps were cool guys, and when we tested our agency's Winchester Ranger T 155 grain .40 S&W loads that we already had, they told us that even though they would love for us to buy their ammo, that ours was very good and there was no need to change rounds. I went with their ammo on our next purchase because we changed to 9mm handguns. Cheers!
In 380 if GDs fully expand they under penetrate anyway. This is why I think xtp is the best round in 380. It's controlled reliable expansion always results in a little over 12" of penetration.
Good review. I have the Barnes Tac .380 as many videos have shown excellent expansion in all kinds of tests. The .380 is a good round for head shots as it is much more controllable than higher calibers and we all know that head shots stop the threat than any other body shot.
I've since moved on from HP rounds in 380. Unless you're getting close to 1100 fps, expansion reliability will always be questionable. I've gone with Underwood Extreme Defenders that get reliable penetration regardless of barrier and good wound tracks in gel.
Thank you for a very useful test! It is always good to SEE how the bullets work. The moral of this story: do not shoot anyone in the pants with Gold Dot and you will do well!..........................elsullo
Admittedly, this is the worst case and no cloth is best case. It is hard to split the difference in marginal calibers like 380. With that said, I think I will include a cotton t-shirt in an upcoming standalone video on barrier penetration.
@@professorpewpuew I think a hoodie with a t-shirt underneath would be the most accurate realistic real world representation of what you are likely to face. Just watch police activity or active self protection videos. Over and over it is a perpetrator with a hoodie. I just do not think four layer denim is in any way realistic or accurate. No one wears that. There isn't even any kind of conceivable outfit a person could wear that would equal that. Testing against a non-existent worst case is useless and yields no useful data. This is not your fault, it's the FBI that saddle us with this nonsense.
@@professorpewpuew I do agree that 380 is marginal, that's why I load 380 plus p in my pistol. It is a bit more powerful than 9 mm makarov if Barrel lengths are the same.
@@Valorius You evidently do not live in a Northern State where people wear HEAVY COATS for the COLD AND WIND four months a year! The "worst case" test design is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE REALISTIC for anyone. It is supposed to be a standardized testing setup to compare the results of different bullets and loads with each other under the same medium of test. That gives relative information that the reader interprets for their own situation and conditions...............................elsullo
