In my ongoing series of testing .380 ACP ammo from micro-pistols, I’ve been repeatedly asked to test some of the so-called “+P” loadings. Various manufacturers including Buffalo Bore, Magsafe, Underwood and others offer .380 ACP ammo in a “+P” version. And now, with the 9mm Ammo Quest, I’m starting to get requests to test “+P+” ammo. People want these types of rounds tested, which I can understand, but I’d like to explain the reasons why I think it’s a bad idea.
What is +P anyway?
There’s a standards-setting organization known as the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturer’s Institute (SAAMI). SAAMI’s been around since 1926, and they establish and publish the standards for ammunition that the gun manufacturers then use to design their guns around. SAAMI specifies pressure levels that ammo is allowed to obtain, for any given caliber. For example, for .40 S&W, SAAMI specifies a maximum average pressure of 35,000 PSI. For .44 Special, they specify a maximum average pressure of 15,500 PSI.
But for a few rounds, they specify a second listing — a listing for “+P”. These are higher-pressure rounds and are listed separately, as a different caliber. You can think of them as “+pressure”, as they are all higher-pressure variants of an existing cartridge. There are four cartridges for which SAAMI has created “+P” categories: .38 Special, .38 Super Automatic, 9mm Luger, and .45 ACP. That’s it. There is no such thing as “.45 Colt +P” or “.380 ACP +P” in the SAAMI standards. There is no general understanding that “overloading ammo makes it +P”; instead “+P” has a very specific, very defined meaning — it is a separate category for specific cartridges. The differences are relatively mild, in that the +P variants are around 9 to 17% higher pressure than their “parent” cartridges:
Pressure: Regular +P
.38 Special 17,000 PSI 20,000 PSI
9mm Luger 35,000 PSI 38,500 PSI
.45 ACP 21,000 PSI 23,000 PSI
What About .380 ACP +P?
There isn’t one. There is no standard, as specified by SAAMI, for .380 ACP +P. It simply doesn’t exist. ANY ammo, claiming to be .380 ACP +P, is, by very definition, nonstandard. We don’t know how high the pressure levels may be. The only thing we do know, is that the pressure levels are almost certainly higher than what SAAMI has established as the standard.
What About +P+?
Same thing. There is no SAAMI standard for any caliber of ammo classified as +P+. And therefore any ammo claiming to be +P+ is, by very definition, nonstandard.
So — Wait — What?
Think of it like this — the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) establishes movie ratings of G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17. Those are the existing, standard ratings. Those are all the ratings. So what would it mean if someone released a move rated “PG-15”? Well, in terms of the existing ratings, it wouldn’t mean anything — it’d mean they basically made up their own rating, right? And what standards would it be held to? Certainly not the MPAA’s.
Same thing with ammo — the labels and standards are established, and the organization that establishes those standards has been around since 1926. So if some ammo manufacturer makes ammo that doesn’t comply with those standards… what should they call it? Apparently, ammo manufacturers have taken to making up their own names — such as .380 ACP +P, .45 Colt +P, and 9mm +P+. None of those are SAAMI standards.
So Is It Dangerous?
The gun manufacturers certainly seem to think so. If you read the owner’s manuals for their guns, as I’ve tried to do, I’ve never found a .380 pistol manufacturer that has said “it’s okay to use .380 ACP +P in this gun.” (edit: except for Kahr and now Beretta! See below.) And I’ve never found a 9mm pistol manufacturer that has said “it’s okay to use +P+ ammo in this gun”, including Kahr (edit: except for HK! See below.). Now, obviously I haven’t been able to check every pistol ever manufactured, so I guess it’s possible that there may be some special case out there (such as the Ruger Blackhawk being able to handle unusually powerful .45 Colt loads) but in general, the trend is very consistent and very clear — the manufacturers of the guns simply do not want you to use .380 ACP +P or any +P+ ammo in their guns. Here are a few example extracts from various pistol owner’s manuals:
Excerpt from Bersa Thunder .380 owner’s manual, (emphasis added).
Excerpt from Taurus PT738 TCP owner’s manual
Excerpt from Ruger LCP owner’s manual
excerpt from Ruger LC380 & LC9 owner’s manual
Excerpt from Diamondback DB380 owner’s manual
Excerpt from S & W Bodyguard .380 owner’s manual
But Buffalo Bore Says It’s Okay!
True, Buffalo Bore does have an FAQ answer on their site that says that they believe their .380 ACP “+P” ammo is safe for use in a Ruger LCP. Buffalo Bore acknowledges that there is no SAAMI standard for .380 ACP +P, but they say (paraphrased) “we’ve tried it and it works and we’ve never heard of any problems.” They acknowledge that the gun manufacturers warn against using non-SAAMI-spec ammo, and they attribute the manufacturer’s warnings against it as fear of lawsuits, rather than any inherent safety issue.
Is this true? Possibly. Or maybe not. Maybe it’ll cause a problem, maybe it won’t. But I’ve never been swayed by the argument that “we’ve tried it and haven’t heard of a problem” — because I’ve crossed the street many times and never been hit by a car, but I would never assert that “people don’t get hit by cars when crossing the street” because clearly they do. So the question is: who do you believe? The ammo company that’s trying to sell you ammo, thus assuring you it’s safe? Or the manufacturer of the pistol (who designed the pistol to be in accordance with SAAMI standards)? It doesn’t matter to me which one you choose, I’m just telling you why *I* won’t test or use it.
But… Isn’t .380 Deliberately Underloaded And I’ve Heard That .380 +P Is Really SAAMI-Compliant…
Okay, I’ve been asked this one multiple times — the thinking goes that in the 1970’s the ammo companies all decided voluntarily to just reduce the power of their ammo (for fear of lawsuits or for whatever reason), and as such no factory ammo really performs to the actual SAAMI specs. And, the people who advance this theory state that the so-called .380 ACP +P is really just loaded back up to the original standards, so it’s not really nonstandard at all.
Only — that’s just not true, at least according to Buffalo Bore. I wrote to Buffalo Bore, explained the theory going around, and asked them this specific question: “does your .380 ACP +P ammo exceed the 21,500 maximum pressure levels established by SAAMI?” I received a prompt response which says, and I quote:
YEs our +P 380 auto loads all exceed SAAMI specs. Whomever told you otherwise is misinformed.
That is exactly what I would have expected; they are using the terminology “+P” to inform the customer that their ammo is indeed not compliant within the SAAMI specs. They assert that it is still safe to use; I leave that to you to determine, but as always I want to provide the facts so that you can make your decision based on actual information, not hearsay and internet rumor.
Summary
Here’s the way I look at it — the manufacturers warn against using it. There is a standards organization that sets standards, and according to them there is no such standard for +P+ or .380 ACP +P. It may or may not be dangerous. It will certainly shorten the life of your firearm.
As a tester of self-defense/personal protection ammo, I don’t think it’d be responsible to use or recommend nonstandard ammo for such purposes. If there’s one absolute, overriding, unimpeachably important factor with self defense ammo, it is this: it absolutely MUST WORK when you need it to. To me, all other factors are subservient to this. As such, I cannot recommend using nonstandard ammo that the manufacturers expressly warn against.
Furthermore, I have a problem with the whole concept of using overpowered ammo in a defensive pistol. If you’re acknowledging that a given pistol and ammo platform is incapable of delivering the results you want, then you have two choices:
- Use hopped-up, nonstandard ammo to try to get better performance, or
- Just use a more powerful pistol.
To me, the right answer is simple and obvious (if expensive) — upgrade to a better-performing cartridge. If you can’t get what you need out of a .380, then it’s time to move to a .38 Special +P or to a 9mm. To me the answer is never going to be “just run nonstandard ammo in the underpowered pistol”; I think that’s just adding uncertainty (and, according to the pistol manufacturers, potential danger of failure or even injury) to the mix. And even if there is no failure in the pistol, you’ve almost certainly voided your warranty by using .380 ACP +P or any flavor of +P+. Is it worth it? Not to me… I say just get the more-powerful pistol and use the right tool for the job.
You don’t have to agree with me. You’re free to make your choices based on whatever criteria you want. I’m just laying out why I won’t use it, or test it, or endorse it for usage.
Edit 3/18/2014: In response to a reader comment saying that Kahr rates their P380 to “+P”, I called Kahr technical support for clarification. The technical support guy I spoke to sounded knowledgeable (i.e., he wasn’t just reading a printed statement, I spoke to him at length and he was able to explain reasons for his statements). He said that all Kahr firearms are rated for +P except for .40 S&W. I asked specifically about how they could rate a .380 for “+P” when no such standard exists from SAAMI, and was told that they consider “+P” to be between 17% to 30% higher pressure. They consider anything above 30% higher pressure to be “+P+” and they don’t warrant their pistols for “+P+”. I don’t know how they can make this statement about .380 ACP +P, since there is no standards body out there asserting that the pressures will be kept to less than 30% over standard, but — that’s what Kahr said. So if you want to use .380 ACP +P, apparently it’s okay to do so in a Kahr P380.
Edit 4/26/2014: Another reader has written in to show that the Kel-Tec P-3AT’s user manual sends a mixed message about .380 +P. The manual says “The P-3AT Pistol is designed and chambered for the .380 Auto cartridge. Do not use any other ammunition. The P-3AT will accept +P ammunition, however, not with continuous use.” That sure sounds like it’s saying that .380 +P is okay. However, a couple of paragraphs down, it also says “Never use ammunition where the pressure levels exceed industry standards.” Which, of course, is the very definition of .380 +P — the organization that sets the standards, has not set any standard for “.380 +P”, only for .380 ACP, and therefore any ammo exceeding .380 ACP pressure would, by this paragraph, be ruled out of consideration. So, it’s a mixed message. But I think the proper interpretation is that occasional, infrequent use of .380 +P is considered okay for the Kel-Tec P-3AT. Still seems curious as to how they can authorize the use of ammo that doesn’t comply to any existing written and codified standard, but — hey, at least there’s another option for those who do want to use that type of ammo.
Edit 3/25/2015: The Beretta Pico .380 pistol owner’s manual says that it is rated to handle .380 +P. The Pico has an unusual design with a very heavy barrel and two recoil springs, which make it able to absorb the additional energy from the .380+P rounds. Also, a reader wrote in to point out that HK pistols state in their operating manuals that they are approved for the use of +P and +P+ ammo, although with the usual statement that using such ammo will shorten the life of the firearm. I verified this by looking at the owner’s manual of the HK USP series (I don’t know what all HK pistols are listed as approving the use of +P+, but I can say that the HK USP definitely is). As of now I still haven’t heard of any other manufacturer authorizing the use of +P+ in their firearms.
excellent !! as usual, direct, to-the-point and clear. re 380 ammo. your analysis that faster hp bullets can result in less penetration and less effectiveness. hand cannons are not needed for SD, nor are RPGs. it is curious the number of people who look at direct evidence and still declare they know they can do better with just a little tweaking.
good on ya’ mate.
HK states in there manuals, at least 40sw and 45 acp models, that you can use +p+ in there guns without voiding the warranty. They say it will cause certain parts to wear slightly faster. That why I love HK! Mark
Excellent observation. I just looked up the PDF of the HK USP, and it does indeed say that all USP pistols are approved for use with +P and +P+ ammunition. (I only checked the USP manual). I haven’t seen that in any other pistol manufacturer’s manual. (Not saying it doesn’t exist, only saying that I haven’t seen every manual, and every manual I’ve seen up til now has said +P+ is a no-go). Thanks for pointing it out!
at least there are some sort of standards for .40/.45. the +P problem with .380 remains. one can use the +P in .380s (some of them properly, most not), but not knowing the pressure charge, thus not knowing the velocity, failure to expand will likely render the bullet less effective.
Plus, I could just see an anti-gun DA doing something like this:
“The defendant also loaded his weapon with exotic, non-standard, super-extra powerful ammunition that even the manufacturer of the pistol warns against using! Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, does that sound like someone who was ‘just trying to defend himself’ or someone who was wanting to cause maximum damage?”
That’s what you want to do , inflict max damage. You really want to go into a gun fight and inflict mininum damage? You’re that kind of special right?
I would be careful making public comments like these. In a bona fide self defense scenario you only engage lethal force for as long as it takes to STOP THE THREAT. Whether that involves just showing a firearm without actually shooting it or you end up shooting someone in the hand, foot or heart – when the “BG” breaks off the attack by falling, surrendering or running away, if the threat is neutralized you have an obligation to stop shooting.
The goal of a self defense situation is not to inflict maximal damage or minimal damage but to STOP THE THREAT.
You make an extremely important point here. I have had the (bad or good) luck to sit on more than 10 juries in my life, and I KNOW what you say is gospel. The same thing can be said for modification of a gun, e.g. lighter trigger-pull, etc. And if the modification was made by the owner rather than a gunsmith, well, that prosecutor will probably sound like Cicero denouncing Cassius in the Forum!
I know this is old….but wanted to point out that the two aren’t mutually exclusive. One could argue that he was just trying to defend himself BY causing maximum damage. Otherwise, the same DA could suggest he should have used a .22 instead of a .45, etc. Or, he could argue that I should have shot someone in the foot, rather than the face. God forbid us CC folks need to use our right to protect ourselves. I don’t want to have to do that. But if the life of me or my family is at stake, damn right I’ll be looking to cause maximum damage to stop the threat. I would expect nothing less from the bad guy, and that’s what he’ll get in response. So .44 magnum +P+ hollow points it is!! 🙂
Your points seem to make sense, however Kahr states that their P380 pistol is safe to use +P ammo. For you to say that this standard doesn’t exist just because the SAAMI standards Board doesn’t recognize it is not really a good reason, because of the fact that it is really there, and many ammo manufacturers and some pistol makers are recognizing it. It is just a matter of time before it is officially recognized, so why not just test it. People are using it, and both ammo and gun manufacturers are simply stating that you shouldn’t shoot it regularly but it is okay to use as carry ammo and will simply make the gun wear out a little faster if you were to use it a lot but since nobody really uses it a lot and only really carries it for self defense after some brief testing it’s not really an issue.
Hi Bill,
I called Kahr to get a statement from them on their stance on .380 ACP +P. The technical support guy I spoke to sounded knowledgeable, and he said that all Kahr firearms are rated for +P except for .40 S&W. I asked specifically about how they could rate a .380 for “+P” when no such standard exists from SAAMI, and was told that they consider “+P” to be between 17% to 30% higher pressure. I was quite surprised to hear this, but I’m just relaying what I was told.
I know of no other manufacturer of firearms that acknowledges or supports or warrants that their firearms will work with .380 ACP +P. My advice would be that if you really wanted to use .380 ACP +P, use a Kahr P380.
I will update the article with this info.
Second, you said “both ammo and gun manufacturers are simply stating that you shouldn’t shoot it regularly but it is okay to use as carry ammo”. I would not agree with this statement at all. I would say that the ammo manufacturers are saying that, yes, but the gun manufacturers (apart from Kahr) are specifically warning to not use .380 +P at all. Taurus says it “may be dangerous and should not be used.” Ruger says (in red, even) “Do not use ‘+P’ ammunition.” Diamondback says it “may be unsafe.”
Bottom line is: I think it’s a bad idea. I think if you need that additional performance, you’d be much better off by just going to a 9mm. I might consider it if I had a Kahr, but not with any other pistol. I simply don’t see any valid reason to take chances or vary out of standard when talking about something as vital and necessary as your carry pistol and ammo. If you disagree, that’s fine by me, you are free to choose however you see fit.
the “anything above 30%…” is curious. how much is “anything”? is it a consistent amount? is that percentage published?
would think anyone testing non-SAAMI +ratings might become entangled in someone else’s legal matters if that other party used the “tested” samples as a reliable/responsible/legal entity endorsing the use of non-standard munitions.
while it may seem attractive (logical?) to go with “everyone is using it already, why not test it” (or similar remark), any “testing” of non-standard would mean the results of a test are so unique as to be unusable for drawing conclusions. if the charge is non-standard, and not controlled (whereby it would become a standard, right?) what should someone conclude with their own box of ammo, of which they know nothing more than +P is ANYTHING (whatever it is) over 30%.
perhaps forrest gump’s mother was right.
I kinda agree with the direction of this question. For SAAMI standards, is there a standard deviation (+/- %) of the spec? Would a 380 loaded at 16% above standard still be considered 380 STANDARD for Kahr? I know SAAMI defines standards for 9mm+P and 38SPL+P but there is no defined standard of “+P” loads. Like, 17%-30% above any listed standard automatically qualifies for a “+P” rating – that’s Kahr’s definition, not SAAMI’s definition. For the same reasons discussed above, I would never carry any NON-standardized ammo for self defense lest I have to defend its use in a legal setting.
Do you honestly think all calibers are loaded close to their SAMMI specs or the ammo manufactures lawyers recommending most keep the PSI down to avoid possible lawsuits? You can believe what you want but one only has to look at the ballistics of the 38 special to realize they aren’t all up to specs.
Most carry a 380acp because of the very small size, a size the 9mm can’t equal. So for some going to a larger caliber isn’t a choice. You would use in a Khar but not anything else? Really if you don’t believe in the +P for the 380acp why would you come back and say you would use it in a Khar because they say it is ok but actually don’t believe it is a good ideal. Sounds like you are double talking now, can’t have it both ways either you would use the +P or not, the Khar is no stronger than say the Sigs.
Hi, seems to be not prudent to speculate that the powder load differential between “not loaded to SAAMI spec”, and something on the order of “somewhere between 17% and 30% over” ,. Not knowing the actual charge of the “not loaded to SAMMI specs” and cartridge loading to who knows what will lead at least to not knowing what you are actually shooting, with no ability to predict/assume any specific performance. Is that where one wants to be?
Thanx,
Kahr’s website does indeed say you can fire .380 +p rounds from their guns. One of the few manufacturers that stand by that statement.
Pingback: Taurus 380 and +P Ammo - Page 2
Underwood Ammo is gaining a reputation for some really hot 10mm ammo. Some people have pulled bullets from these rounds and found the powder to be off the shelf 800x, but they stuff about 20 percent more powder in the case than any reloading manual max charge I’ve ever seen. This is beginning to become common knowledge yet people think that since it comes in a box it’s ok. That’s just asking for trouble, as a reloader I’d never go that far over max charge in a 10mm handgun. The pounding the guns would take and the risk of personal injury just isn’t worth the 100-150 fps gain in velocity.
I’d like to know how they can tell it is off the shelf 800x? they have a chem lab at their house. Guess if it looks like it got to be it right? Awe Lawdy.
Well, that answers a question.
I was going to ask if you wanted me to send you some IMI Uzi black tip carbine ammo to test in gel.
I’ve shot it out of my glock many times. Very crisp ammo.
Every glock armorers course I’ve been to, I ask if it’s ok to shoot in my 17.
Every glock rep says it’s good to go.
Yeah, that stuff was marketed (IIRC) as being only appropriate for long guns, and said it wasn’t for use with handguns. I’ve heard reports of people firing it fine in Glocks, but it’s not SAAMI-compliant. And as far as I know, it’s got a really slow-burning powder, making it appropriate for a long barrel but not necessarily for a short pistol barrel…
I commend your effort on emphasising the correct grade of ammo for that type of firearm that should be used safely,alas people out there always feel more is better!.I feel that maybe,carrying a mag full for carry purpose after testing a few from the box aint that bad afterall,it is for self protection!
How about those clowns from the church of 10mm that worship Underwood ammo and refuse to believe it’s ridiculously over saami max pressure for the 10mm cartridge. They’re under the illusion or dilusion that their beloved Glock 20’s are as powerful as a 41 magnum. All it takes is 5 seconds to Google Underwood ammo kaboom and you’ll find page after page of broken guns ruptured cases and blown out primers. It’s only a matter of time before someone gets hurt shooting this garbage. If the people buying it had half a brain they’d realize Underwood ammo is poorly made using commercial loading equipment and off the shelf components with powder charges varying as much as half a grain from one round to the next. It’s no secret Underwood ammo uses 20 percent more IMR 800x powder than any max load you’ll find in loading manuals.
hi,
thought your significant points were important, but maybe you could have been a wee less vitriolic.
cheers,
Modern .380ACP is indeed being consistently light loaded by US manufacturers, this is not an Internet myth, this is a fact that has been evidenced by testing at Western Powders Lab. The average reduction in pressure for a US manufactured .380ACP round is a whopping 3,000psi or 14% below the AVERAGE recommended SAAMI pressure for that caliber, evidenced here:
http://www.shootingillustrated.com/mobile/article.php?id=20806
This is one reason why European .380 (and .32for that matter) is consistently more powerful than US ammunition.
I am not advocating unrestricted pressure in .380, but that round’s case is exceptionally strong and quite capable of handling the full 21,500psi SAAMI average pressure, so what I am advocating is that US manufacturers stop this habitual practice of “light loading” and give us the power back.
Hi Fonsini,
For clarification, I wasn’t saying that the so-called underloading was a myth, I was saying that the notion that “today’s +P is really only a return to the original standard” is a myth.
Some manufacturers do indeed deliberately underload their .380 ammo. As it’s been explained to me, the guns in use (such as the tiny LCP and TCP) are already enough of a handful, and at full power the ammo is difficult to shoot well, so they choose to ramp the power level back down. But that’s a choice that would be made on the part of each individual ammo maker; it’s not some big grand conspiracy to cheat users out of potential power (at least, as far as I can tell). Some loads are indeed hotter than others; if you want to find full-power .380, I’m sure it wouldn’t be hard to do so.
Regarding the .380 commercial ammo being loaded on average 3,000 PSI below max — I saw the statement in that (excellent) article, but I didn’t see any supporting documentation. I have googled a bit, and crawled all over Western Powders’ blog and website, and can’t find any mention. Do you have a link to the original story where they’ve tested commercial ammunition and determined that it is generally under-pressure?
Fonsini,
I would have to agree with you on that. Also goes for other calibers take the 38 special for example.
I have a Sig P230 – 380ACP — this gun is listed also as 32 and 9mm –
My question would be – since it can be chambered for a 9mm load can I assume it will handle a +p 380 .. I doubt that the gun itself is different between the 380 and 9mm otherwise Sig would have a different model number.. I have not asked the Sig techs though about their recommendations.
Just curious – I already have a clip full of +p 380 in my P230 for protection and have tried a few at targets just test it. I don’t use the +p for regular range practice.
I appreciate your opinion and understand your position as a safety issue. I am curious about your opinion on my Sig P230.
My Sig p230 is listed or rated as a 9mm Kurz
The Sig p230 apparently can be chambered for 380ACP (9×17 => Kurz) and 9mm 9×18 (Makarov) so the next question is what is the difference in pressure between 380ACP +p and the 9mm 9×18 cartridge? I am assuming they are both less than 9mm Luger (9×19)..
Well, you’ve hit the problem exactly on the head — we DON’T KNOW what the pressure is of a .380 ACP +P round! Because there is no standard for it, it could be anything. It could be a little bit over-pressure, or it could be massively overpressure. All we know is, the pressures it operates at are higher than the gun was designed to be used with.
9mm +P = 38,500 PSI.
9mm = 35,000 PSI.
9mm Makarov = 24,100 PSI.
.380 ACP = 21,500 PSI.
.380 ACP +P = ??? PSI.
Assuming is a dangerous game to play. Manufacturers who make .380 ACP +P ammo could make it to whatever pressure they want to, and you have no way of knowing.
All in all, I just think it’s not a wise or prudent situation. My standard advice is: if you need more power than the .380 ACP offers, get a 9mm gun. It’s much more powerful, and not much bigger (if at all), and the ammo is a lot less expensive.
Looking at the specs on the 9mm 9×18 which is supposed to produce 24,000 + lbs of pressure (as a Makarov) and my P230 is capable of being chambered for that cartridge safely by the manufacturer but mine is chambered for 380ACP (9×17) which is rated at 21,500 lbs. If the Ammo manufacturer publishes and guarantees a pressure rating not to exceed 23,000 lbs for the 380 +p then I would feel safe.
Again I am not firing this ammo on a regular basis – it is only in my carry clip.
But I agree – for safety reasons – and for those that don’t know their gun or what they are doing the best advice is to stick with the manufacturers recommendations.
well underwood .380 65 grain plus p is at 22500 psi
That doesn’t mean it can take 9mm ammo! 9mm Kurz is just another name for .380 ACP. Kurz means “short”, and it’s referring to .380 ACP since .380 is also known as 9x17mm, whereas 9mm is known as 9x19mm. So the .380 ACP has the same diameter (9mm) as the 9mm round, but is in a shorter case. .380 is also known as “9mm Browning”, “9mm Corto”, or “9mm Short”.
9mm is made to operate at pressures of 35,000 PSI (or 38,500 PSI if using 9mm +P). .380 ACP operates at a maximum average pressure of just 21,500 PSI. 9mm is a much, much more powerful round, and guns chambered in 9mm are designed to withstand that additional force.
Sig doesn’t claim the P230 can be fitted to use the what is referred to as 9mm Luger (9×19)
That would never happen with the physical size of the gun.
I was referring to the Sig P230 fitted for the Makarov round (9×18)
same gun or not? Different chamber / barrel —
One cartridge rated at 21,500 lbs – the other at 24,000 plus..
I guess I will call the Sig rep
Thanks for your responses – I love this stuff
Oh – the makarov round is also slightly larger in diameter so it is not a replacement for the 380 ACP It also has a slightly bigger case so there is room for more powder. and I believe this also means the 380 ACP round can not be safely used to replace a Makarov. Loose fit
Asking Sig is really the only way to know. I looked through the P232 owner’s manual and it contained all the same warnings that almost every other pistol manufacturer includes, which is to avoid overpressure ammunition and stick with strictly SAAMI-compliant ammo. Which would mean that it should not be used with .380 +P.
I couldn’t find an online owner’s manual for the P230, so the P232 is as close as I could come.
The notion that the pistol is available in other calibers has no real bearing on whether it could handle overpressure ammo. My advice is always to err on the side of safety; unless the manufacturer specifically says it’s okay, I would definitely say you should assume that it isn’t okay.
hi,
is it not interesting that you find revolvers that can manage two calibres (.38 and .357, etc), but nothing about auto-loader handguns that fire a main charge and a lesser calibre?
cheers,
Well, revolvers have a much easier time of it, since they don’t rely on the explosive force of the cartridge to operate the gun. With a revolver, if it fits in the cylinder and the bullet fits in the bore, and the pressure generated is less than the revolver is designed for, then it can probably technically be fired. Note: that doesn’t make it a good idea, of course! Just because a bullet can fit and won’t blow your gun up, doesn’t mean it’ll perform well. The standard wisdom is to never fire anything out of a gun other than what it’s specifically chambered for, and it’ll say so right on the barrel (well, more modern guns will).
With semi-autos, there’s much more that goes into it — the feeding, proper fit, recoil operation, extraction, etc. There just aren’t many cartridges that you’ll find that are close enough that they can be used interchangeably. I’ve heard tell of people who shoot .40 S&W in their 10mm pistols, and then of course there’s those who shoot .223 Remington in their 5.56 rifles or 7.62×51 in their .308 Win rifles. So sometimes it works. But the feeding and chambering and cycling issues make it much less common than the revolvers, where you’ll commonly have (for example) .38/.38+P/.357 in one revolver, or another example might be a .410/.45 Schofield/.45 Colt/.454 Casull revolver.
The ultimate multi-caliber weapon may be the break-action 12-gauge shotgun, because you can get chamber adapters to fire a wide variety of pistol and rifle cartridges, and smaller-gauge shotgun shells too…
thank you.
understand the explanation, but wouldn’t it be great to safely, reliable shoot 9mm and 9mm-k from the same weapon? or .38 super, 9mm and 9mm-k ???
I think George is talking about standards – and making all things the same size – Doesn’t work in today mentality. So Know your weapon and choose only what fits.
The standard .380 auto ammunition is manufactured to operate well in blow back operated pistols. There is no reason that a hotter loading than standard can’t be used in a locked breech gun like the Kahr P380. Sammi should come out with a p+ loading specification for 380 +P.
Well, if the Kahr rep is to be believed, Kahr assumes that standard pressure .380 ammunition under SAAMI has a maximum permissible pressure of 21,500 PSI. If they assume that “+P” in this caliber means 17% higher pressure, that’s up around 25,000 PSI. And they describe “+P+” in .380 as 30% higher pressure, which would be up around 28,000 PSI. And 28,000 PSI might be a lot to ask of the little P380, locked breech or no.
Regarding +P ammo for .380, here is an exact quote from the instruction manual for the finally-arrived Beretta Pico (.380 auto), p. 17:
“NOTICE: The Beretta Pico is designed to safely use the ammunition marked as +P. The extended use of +P ammunition may decrease the component part service life expectancy.”
The manual does not define “extended use” or “decrease” or “component part” or “service life expectancy.” When I asked a local Glock armorer (there is no local Beretta armorer) what he thinks this means, he said that given Beretta’s quality the Pico would probably last through my lifetime, and my son’s lifetime, but maybe not through my grandson’s lifetime (that is, tens of thousands of rounds).
I suppose I could give Beretta a call to try to quantify all of this, but in coming years I do not expect to shoot the gun any more than necessary to keep it and me in good shooting condition, and I sincerely hope I never have to shoot it in self defense, though I am certainly ready and willing to do so.
I realize that +P ammo might get me more a bit more stopping power but I don’t know if I will bother to compare regular and +P ammo in my Pico–my most likely self-defense scenarios are home invasion or carjacking, where my targets would be a few feet to 26 feet away, where +P would be, so to speak, overkill.
By the way, I have looked at most of your videos and I greatly appreciate all of the good work you are doing on ammo testing; your research standards are high and your reports on testing and results are highly informative.
Keep up the good work!
Thanks for posting that! I had also seen that Beretta claims compatibility with +P in the Pico. I’m almost tempted to pick one up, just to test a few +P rounds with. This is an interesting development; still not sure how manufacturers can be comfortable claiming compatibility with a round for which there is no organized standard, but — I’m sure they’ve overengineered the gun to be be able to handle any likely scenario, and that has to be considered a good thing.
think STB covered the .380 +P, +p+ matter quite adequately. STB does not trust those designations; he does not use them, nor see the point in testing. the 100fps (or so) increase in velocity is tactically meaningless. IN A THREE EIGHTY handgun. the extra velocity may increase the so-called “energy dump”, but STB effectively countered the notion that “energy dump” has usefulness when arming-up for an SD situation. the short of it seems to be, “if you like your +P, you can keep your +P”. STB doesn’t use it, won’t recommend it, won’t conduct tests that may lead to a bad result for someone. over-powered ammuniton? it’s your gun, do as you wish. there is no victory to be had here, one way or the other.
cheers, ya’ll
you wrote this
Thanks for posting that! I had also seen that Beretta claims compatibility with +P in the Pico. I’m almost tempted to pick one up, just to test a few +P rounds with. This is an interesting development; still not sure how manufacturers can be comfortable claiming compatibility with a round for which there is no organized standard, but — I’m sure they’ve overengineered the gun to be be able to handle any likely scenario, and that has to be considered a good thing.
I’m sure they’ve overengineered the gun to be be able to handle any likely scenario,
When I posted my first post I stated that my Sig P230 was designed for Kurz – 9×17 but it can be chambered for 9×18 Makarov.. just a little more powerful
I’m glad you finally decided to let people know that their gun will not blow up in their face … You just need to stress that it’s probably not a good idea to shoot +P ammo every weekend at the range. What’s the point.?
I have fired a couple of Precision One +P rounds through my Beretta Pico, to get a feel for what I would be using as my protection bullets, after reading the manual stating +P rounds were safe to use. It’s definitely a big round and feels like a BIG gun when fired, as compared to standard bullets from Remington. It felt a lot like my Beretta P92 9mm. It made me feel extremely confident in using a .380 for personal, concealed protection. The Pico is one of the finest quality small guns (or any gun for that matter) I’ve ever seen. VERY smooth, minimal recoil and I’m thrilled to have one.
The Pico is one of only two guns on the planet (that I know of) that is actually rated to handle .380 +P. If someone just has to use .380+P, then I definitely recommend they use it only in a gun that’s designed for and rated for it, such as the Pico.
I have a 1983 star 380 ss and fired underwood 65 grain plus p ammo, no problem, would not recommend using that ammo all the time but one clip has not done any damage at all.so I keep a clip for just in case.
If one only shoots 380 +p 3 to 5 times to see how their weapon reacts then never shoots it again or only in self defense then what is the problem. If +p makes a small easily concealed self defense firearm almost equivalent to a hard to hide canon isn’t it worth keeping a few in the clip? Shooting at a target every weekend only proves you can shoot. You can do that with an air rifle — knowing how to site your weapon and repeatedly hitting the target doesn’t require JHP ammo… and self defense should not require anyone learning how to hit a running target 50 feet away. You only need to stop the perp that is on top of you.
“If one only shoots 380 +p 3 to 5 times to see how their weapon reacts then never shoots it again or only in self defense then what is the problem. ”
Well, the problem is — the gun isn’t rated to handle any firing of it. It is basically like if you were to use “+P” in a Taurus View — the View is a .38 Special revolver, it is not rated to handle “+P”, so … why do it?
If you’d like a better example, let’s consider the Diamondback DB9, a small 9mm pistol. It is not rated to handle “+P”, it is only rated for normal ammo. Now, note, +P is a recognized designation for 9mm, so there are legitimate 9mm +P rounds out there, unlike .380 ACP where there is no designation for +P at all. But even so, this is what COULD, POTENTIALLY happen to you if you fire just a few +P rounds in a gun that’s not rated for +P:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhkHML6LZv4
Will that happen to you? I don’t know. It may not, it may. Do you want it to happen to you? I sure wouldn’t want it to happen. According to the person making the video, this happened to the DB9 after only five rounds.
Now let’s look at .380 ACP — there is NO designation for +P. So how hot is +P ammo loaded? We don’t know. We don’t know because there is no standard! The only thing we do know about +P is that it is hotter than normal ammo. How much hotter? We don’t know! How dangerous is it, potentially? We don’t know.
Let’s take as an example how +P ammo affects velocity in 9mm. We’ll use Federal HST as an example. In 9mm, the 124-grain standard pressure is rated at 1,150 feet per second. The 124-grain +P version is rated at 1,200 fps. That’s a difference of only 50 fps. And SAAMI specifications call for 9mm +P at a pressure limit that’s 10% higher than normal, standard-pressure +P. So a 10% increase in pressure results in about 4.4% more velocity.
Now let’s look at .380 ACP, versus .380 +P. According to SAAMI standards, .380 ACP should propel a 90-grain bullet at 980 feet per second. According to Buffalo Bore, their .380 +P propels a 90-grain bullet at 1,200 feet per second! That’s almost 22.5% faster! If, in 9mm, a 10% higher pressure results in only a 4.4% increase in velocity, then just how much pressure must it take to send a .380 bullet 22.5% faster? My guess would be “a whole hell of a lot.”
” If +p makes a small easily concealed self defense firearm almost equivalent to a hard to hide canon isn’t it worth keeping a few in the clip?”
I’d say the exact opposite — if a nonstandard +P round pushes the performance well beyond what the gun was designed for, shouldn’t you keep that as far away from your firearm as you possibly can? Shouldn’t you use your firearm within its design limits, so that you know it performs reliably and properly? Using nonstandard ammo might turn your gun into a hand cannon, or it might turn it into a hand grenade. Or not. But why risk it?
Think about it in terms of tire pressure. If your tires say you should inflate them to a maximum of 32 PSI, then you should probably inflate them to a maximum of 32 PSI. If someone told you “hey, if you inflate them to 60 PSI, you’ll get better gas mileage…” would you do it? Wouldn’t you recognize that as being just a tad unsafe? How is running overpressure tires any different, fundamentally, from running overpressure ammunition? In both cases there’s a potential for slightly better performance, and the potential for catastrophic failure. Is it worth it?
I’d say no. I’d say that if you want a pocket hand cannon, why not buy a small 9mm, or even a .40 S&W? Those will vastly outperform any .380 +P, and they will do it safely with no risk of catastrophic failure from using nonstandard ammo.
Kahr Arms specifically states that their P380 guns are rated for +P, so I don’t see what the problem is. I’m sure they wouldn’t make such claims unless they knew their guns could handle the extra power.
Standard pressure 380 ammo has been known to sometimes under penetrate, so going from a standard round that has 220 ft lbs of energy to a Buffalo Bore +P round that has 289 ft lbs of energy could make the difference between stopping an attacker, or being attacked when using the weaker ammo. The extra 69 ft lbs of power is a huge increase, (31%) and there’s no reason why you wouldn’t want it for defensive purposes. If a 9mm gun is a tad too big to conceal, and you can’t comfortably do it, why not have a P380 loaded up with +P ammo, that is powerful enough to do the job?
Sure, it may wear your gun out faster, but if you only test it out to ensure proper function, I don’t see why some people get their panties in a wad because there’s no official “standard” for it. I’ve never heard or seen any Kahr P380’s blow up because of using +P ammo, they even say it’s ok to use, and that’s good enough for me.
And in context with the Kahr pistol (and only the Kahr pistol), you’d be right with that. Kahr does warrant their P380 to support the so-called “380 +P” ammo.
But practically no other pistol on the market is. I’ve only ever heard of one other, which is the Beretta Pico.
If I had a Kahr P380 or a Beretta Pico, I might even conduct tests on .380 +P ammo from them, because those two are warranted to support it. But from any other pistol on the market, I think it’s just a bad idea, if not downright dangerous.
Thanks – I’m keeping my Sig. and my +P
Sounds like STB is saying this —> no one should use anything the government does not approve. and only the “experts” are capable of making decisions for us.
For legal reasons he can’t say anything else……. but some of us do have the brains to think for ourselves and make decisions based on our own evidence .
If that weren’t true then no one would load their own.
So the only real statement to make here is “use at your own risk” and do not blame me if it fails — if your gun dealer tells you it’s OK and it fails sue the crap out of him..
Thanks
this comment is so wrong, so misleading and so off point, i don’t know where to start.
but, of course i will.
stb simply said he does not do testing of .380+P because he does not know exactly
what he would be testing/using, and the results not anywhere near conclusive. stb
also said he does not use such ammo because he chooses not to, and does not therefore
make a recommendation that anyone else use it. they are his tests, his guns, he gets
to do what he is comfortable with. for everyone else, it is your gun and your ammo and
your life to work out. if you like your .380 +p, you can keep it, period. stb isn’t going to
bet into testing the over-powered loads, no matter what our favorite cannon calibre.
please note that caution in all things does not prove intimidation by any government.
hasty lumbago
I said ‘sounds like’ and ‘For legal reasons he can’t say anything else’.…
Thank you for agreeing with me on the rest of it.
cheers
I’m 73 years old – I have always tried to check things out for myself because no matter what the “experts” say you can’t always trust them… My suggestion is if you don’t have time or interest in checking the facts for yourself then follow the ‘experts’ advice — and then you also have grounds for a lawsuit maybe. I don’t believe in that crap. Never had to sue anybody in my life.
What I would say in this blog is – I can not support this ammo for any gun but my own – I have used it and I like it for my gun – and based on the information I can gather for my gun – it won’t kill me but it may help me in an emergency. I don’t need an expert to give me permission. Common sense rules.
Why argue about this ?? STB has done his duty in warning against +P ammo for 380 acp.
It’s up to the guy shooting now. Do what you need to do and call the Rep. But get it in writing if you plan to sue if things go wrong.
All the warnings in all the manuals of everything you buy is for the idiot who uses something for which it was not designed and gets hurt.– I’m too old for this.
Waldegr :
The reason I wrote that “misleading”‘ comment: a quote from STB:
If I had a Kahr P380 or a Beretta Pico, I might even conduct tests on .380 +P ammo from them, because those two are warranted to support it. But from any other pistol on the market, I think it’s just a bad idea, if not downright dangerous.
This blog started with “why I will never” ===> not SAAMI
Wait, maybe I will ?? — still not SAAMI.. but the rep says it’s OK ??
But the rest of us are just adding – ‘why we do what we do’ — that’s all
I do understand his position – legally.. I was emphasizing my position as a thinker.
You know what – I just realized what this is all about – it’s economics. — if there is no standard then manufacturers are not required to prove they have added benefit. With no standards anyone can claim +P and charge more for the ammo. And without Standards and proper testing no one knows what the difference may be. So without this knowledge no one can sue the guy making the claims…. No matter what lawyers are get involved.
here, you may have broken the code. if we trust stb’s tests, the performance increase (velocity) for .380 +p (based on manuf statements) would truly be marginal, if not imperceptible. stb’s tests of 9mm +p indicate that the increased velocity (very little) may actually result in less penetration because bullet expansion may begin earlier and open wider. the hole size is important, but penetration is crucial. but if manufs can get more ($$) for very little (marginal performance), and increase the price for the +, hey, why not?
YES – your are right . some $$ are usually involved. but this where marketing comes in also. I can go to 10 different manufacturers that all claim to have the best penetration or expansion but it’s up to us to try to find the information that leads us to the best product that fits our own needs. Penetration on all of these depends on material and design. There are tests going through denim – how many layers – going through wood or sheet rock — what do you plan to use it for? And that’s where unbiased tests and testers are so important. STB being a volunteer or self proclaimed tester can not say a product is bad for all of us just because he has not tested it. I believe it is all in semantics. How you state your position. But if someone says I use it and I like it don’t take it personally.
Back to the beginning – If a person does his homework – asking the right questions – talking to the right people and knowing his weapon — it comes down to — what I said before ‘use at your own risk’ ..
I love this stuff —
I would also agree with some of the previous posts – if one is going to go out and spend $400.00 to $800.00 on a new weapon for concealed protection then I think it would be a good idea to look at the 9×19 versions first. Spending the money get the best. If they seem too big then look for the smaller versions and then the 380. I am not going out to spend more money – I have what I like in my Sig P230. I also have a Ruger P89 (9mm Luger) but it’s just too big. Fun to shoot (I don’t go to the range – I go to the forest) I also +P ammo for it. I hope I never have to use anything to harm anyone but I know I can if I have to.
Common sense rules – everything else is BS.
Smith and Wesson says +P is OK in the Bodyguard 380, but +P+ is not.
From page 11 of the manual.
“Use of ‘Plus P’ ammunition may result in the need for more frequent service. Plus P Plus (+P+) ammunition must not be used.
I’m not sure I read that the same way you do — I don’t see anywhere in the Bodyguard manual where they specifically say “Use of +P is okay in this firearm” or any statement to the like.
The way I read the manual, they don’t endorse the use of +P in this firearm. On page 9 they say “Use only commercially manufactured ammunition with internal ballistic pressures which are in strict accordance with the specifications of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturer’s Institute (SAAMI).” As said before, no .380 +P qualifies for being in accordance with the standards established by SAAMI, so by them telling you to only use SAAMI-compliant ammo, that automatically rules out any “.380 +P” offerings.
On page 10, in giant red letters, they warn to never use non-standard, re-loaded, or “handloaded” ammo, etc. .380 +P, by its very nature, is nonstandard.
The paragraph you quoted about +P is likely the same boilerplate language in all their owner’s manuals.
The only way to know for sure would be to call Smith & Wesson and ask them specifically, “do they warrant that .380 +P ammo is safe to use in the Bodyguard pistol?” If their tech support department says it’s okay, then that would be surprising, but good to know.
I read earlier a comment about the Kahr P380 – the person says Kahr claims it is safe for +P ammo ..
The thing to point out is that the Kahr P380 is a LOCK breech design which is thought to be safer than a ‘blowback’ design for higher pressure ammo. Lock breech vs blowback – things act different due to physics.
But I see an advantage in my Sig p380 over this Kahr p380 – my barrel is over an inch longer. can you say muzzle velocity. accuracy, …
But Al, Sig doesn’t make a P380, they make P238….. 🙂
There’s another advantage to the P380 over the Sig, the smaller barrel makes the Kahr more concealable, and lighter….. The difference in Muzzle velocity and accuracy is pretty much negligible, especially since most pocket guns are really only used for close quarters defensive purposes, usually within arm’s length, and not much more, accuracy isn’t going to be any different…. In addition, your 1 inch + barrel length won’t do much for this type of usage, except for snagging on your clothing when you’re trying to draw it out ! NOT an advantage….. !
you are right – sorry –My Sig P230. is a 380 — i must gotten too excited writing this _ I’m going to get anther glass of wine..
Yes the Kahr is shorter in length – it’s not as tall and it’s not as thick. all god things for concealment. my Sig is the same thickness except for the grip – that’s 1″. and you are right – if the perp is on top of you accuracy doesn’t matter too much. It is lock breech design which should make it safer for +P loads.
but it doesn’t fit my hand as well.. but anyone else – go for it.
Speaking of snag.. You could point out another advantage of the Kahr – it doesn’t have an exposed hammer.
and I think the SW bodyguard also does not have an exposed hammer but the bodyguard is double action only..
Also in regards to accuracy – in my state a person has to qualify at the range with the weapon on his list for concealed carry – that means if one can not hit the target to qualify it can’t be used… So be careful – one too small or too short or too powerful to handle may not be controllable enough to qualify.
Smith and Wesson Bodyguard 380 _ haven’t found it yet but this gun looks like ‘lock breech’ design and someone says the rep approved +P ammo and it’s only about $400.00 good reading.
from this web site: http://www.bluesheepdog.com/smith-and-wesson-bodyguard-380-review/ qutoe follows”
In April, I reported that the Los Angeles, CA Police Department had approved the Smith and Wesson Bodyguard 380 for back-up and off-duty carry. BlueSheepdog.com obtained one for review, so here we go!
LAPD’s initial specifications for the gun called for a deactivation of the laser sight, which is an integral part of the receiver’s polymer frame. In addition, their specs requested a removal of the left side safety lever.
The laser and safety lever are present on current guns, but a S&W representative told me that future production guns for the LAPD would eliminate these two features.
the SW bodyguard is a lock breech design https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PLLEgwRiG4
I’m going to post this again just for hell f it.
Sig P230: (no longer available so –> Sig P232 may be a different story)
Due to its small dimensions, it is easily carried as a backup weapon or as a CCW handgun, holding 8 + 1 rounds of .32 ACP or 7 + 1 rounds of .380 ACP, respectively. A special police model was available, chambered in 9mm Police, actually a 9x18mm casing, which is very similar to 9mm Kurz but slightly more powerful.
the SW bodyguard 380 is a lock breech design : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PLLEgwRiG4
Research:
The 9×18mm Ultra is a German pistol cartridge.[1] It was originally developed in the 1936 for use by the Luftwaffe, but was not adopted at that time.[1] In the 1972-1973 time frame, Walther introduced the Walther PP Super chambered in the cartridge for the West German Police.[1] The Walther PP Super was discontinued in 1979.[2] The cartridge was made available to the civilian market in 1975.[1]
In addition to the Walther PP Super, the SIG Sauer P230,[1] Mauser HSc-80,[3] and Benelli B76[1] were also produced in 9x18mm Ultra.
The 9×18mm Ultra is not interchangeable with the 9×18mm Makarov.
People forget that All saami pressure standards are set low to guarantee safety In Even the weakest of guns and also they allow much room for error as I once read that most saami specs don’t reach actual consistent critical failure pressures until almost doubled the standard so this large margin almost garnered 100% safe operation in even the weakest of guns as the manufacturers clearly consider the spec as maximum when designing a gun. therefore the stronger/better made 380 gun could very well fall into a safe pressure margin with over pressure rounds . There are safe ways to test ammo with a remote trigger set up. Until I hear either way that a 380 gun has blown with an over pressure rounds then I would not rule out the notion of it being safe. But without adequate testing data of a particular over pressure round through a specific pistol it’s not very logical to do so.
I have tested my Sig P230 – 50 rounds of +P. No explosions or even signs of damage to the gun .. In the simple blowback design of my gun the first signs of danger would be the weakest point which is the locking block and lever. When the slide flies back it is stopped by that block — the wear on that block or any signs of cracks would be the first signs or danger.
I’m not worried.
Thank you for the clearly written unbiased article. The most informative and concise I’ve read in quite some time. Keep up the good work.
Pingback: .380 AmmoQuest: Buffalo Bore 100 gr. Hardcast Flat Nose Regular and +P - The Truth About Guns
Pingback: .380 AmmoQuest: Buffalo Bore 100 gr. Hardcast Flat Nose Regular and +P | PartnersForever
Pingback: .380 AmmoQuest: Buffalo Bore 100 gr. Hardcast Flat Nose Regular and +P - TOTAL Firearm Techniques Inc.
One serious concern I would point out, is that of the 4 major producers of .380 auto +P; Underwood ammo, Buffalo Bore, Grizzly cartridge, and Magtech (he says “Magsafe”, but means Magtech) – that only Magtech actually uses brass that is headstamped “.380 AUTO +P CBC”. The others just use Starline, JAG or whatever which is standard .380 auto headstamps. So if you mix these cartridges up, then somebody may get a little more kick than they expect. I would think it would be a liability issue to not have the cartridges labelled correctly (manufacturers would typically not think of ever selling 9mm +P on standard 9mm brass). They are essentially selling a caliber unto itself, but marking it as another caliber, unless they are in fact not bona-fide +P (after all, there is no standard)? Magtech has done this headstamp on both nickel-plated brass and standard brass – mostly encountered on their Guardian Gold line.
Matt C — correct I have Magtech and Buffalo Bore — Magtech is stamed +P and BB is not..
This web site lists the specs on may 380 auto loads available on the market – It’s interesting seeing the range of velocities and energy available. http://www.ballistics101.com/380_acp.php
Look at a box of 60 year old .380 specs – they were propelling a 130gr (no type) bullet at over 1000fps.
Modern .380 “limits” are based on the fact that the the market has been introduced to a new world of ultra light weight firearms using composites and also because of direct blow-back guns that really can’t effectively contain as much pressure.
My point is, know your gun. If you are using a keltec .380 that weighs 7oz, don’t use or reload super hot loads. If you have a sturdier, locked breach gun it isn’t going to have any issue with using rounds similar to what the .380 was designed for.
http://www.ballistics101.com/380_acp.php
Check out the many differences in muzzle energy and velocities and ask the ordinary guy on the street what he is shooting – It’s my guess 90% of the guys buying ammo couldn’t tell you what they have or what their gun is rated for….
So I agree don’t shoot anything until you know your weapon and what it is capable of – then check out the ammo before you shoot it.
I realize that the context of the post was handgun cartridges, but there is a +P SAAMI standard for another round, .257 Roberts.
http://www.saami.org/pubresources/cc_drawings/Rifle/257%20Roberts%20-%20257%20Roberts%20+P.pdf
The firearm manufacturers know how much pressure their guns can handle before they explode because they have done the testing so that you don’t have to. If they say not to use high pressure ammo, then it’s because the gun can’t take the pressure and might explode in your hand. It might not explode the 1st time you fire it, or even the second, but the risk becomes greater with each hot round that you fire through it until eventually your luck runs out and you lose some fingers. If the parts were reinforced to take the added pressure, the manufacturer would tell you in the documentation. It’s not worth the risk of having your gun explode in your hand, especially if you’re in a situation where you need it to work properly or you will die. An attacker will take quick advantage of you while you attempt to nurse your bloody stump and your gun is on the ground along with your fingers.
There are a few 380s that are rated for +P, and for those guns it isn’t a problem, and it won’t blow up on you.
Pingback: Buffalo Bore .380 +P
Pingback: Second-Guessing My Choice Of H/D Cal - Page 2 - SIG Talk
Quite the interesting chat you fellas had here. I don’t shoot .380 but have studied it a bit. Seems I read awhile back that inertial slide speed is a problem with the ‘Blowback Design’ as chamber gasses can blow out of the action when higher pressures (resulting higher slide speeds) are encountered, along with spring issues & others, causing all sort of mayhem. Just as with Mr. Luger, Mr. Mars, Mr. Mauser & others, Mr. Browning therefore designed his ‘Locked-Breech Delayed-Action HI-Power’ to resolve such issues for the 9mm Luger. An interesting Italian concept came along, the ‘9mm FAR’ with hopes of resolving some of the issues but the idea is not too practical. As stated above, your .380 “Blowback-Design Pistols’ must not be used for +P ammo!
as a reloder I’ve never understood taking the risk of pushing the limits with a given cartridge. if I want more I’ll move up to a more powerful one.
as a result of that I still have all my fingers and both eyes.
Agreed.
Friends dont let friends use +p ammo
Good day! I could have sworn I’ve visited this site before but after going through many of the articles I realized it’s new
to me. Anyways, I’m certainly delighted I discovered it
and I’ll be book-marking it and checking back frequently!
walther owners manuals only say do not use +p+ and use of +p may cause premature wear http://www.waltherarms.com/wp-content/uploads/WALTHER-PPK-S_US_2013.pdf
I’ve had no problems when testing +p380 thru my Kahr P380 or my wife’s CW380, fired every time, no signs of damage to the handguns when cleaning. I’m also told that I should not jump small parachutes, but have 1000s of jumps on chutes that say that I’m to heavy, its just a recommendation and the little extra pressure is, in my opinion (who cares right) not an issue.
Well said Dick S. I don’t get it, how is Shooting the Bull making a statement that he knows more than the Manufacturers or assuming they are making unsafe ammunition? Especially when two firearms like the Kahr and the Pico are rated for Plus P. I also have shot Plus P ammo through these guns and absolutely no effects on the gun. The slight amount of difference in shooting the ammo is marginal. For instance, he rated PrecisionOne ammo as a top contender. However, after he rated this ammo, PrecisioOne later came out with a Plus P. It simply increased the velocity from 925 FPS to 975 FPS. Shooting it, has very little effect on recoil and shoots very well and in fact I have shot quite a bit of this ammo down range in both guns.
I like Shooting the Bull, but just like everything on the internet, you have to take with a grain of Salt.
On another note. I am a pocket gun enthusiast. It is my niche in the gun world. Yes, I have shot Plus P 380 ammo out of a Kahr and a Pico with no affects at all. But would never do it in a Ruger LCP for instance. Just because SAAMI does not recognize it, does not mean it does not exist. There are hotter loads from certain manufacturers and you can run but you cannot hide. They exist. But what is more important is the fact that Beretta Pico and Kahr are making a statement. These guns are built stronger. And they ARE! I know for a fact that they will run many thousands of rounds longer than the aluminum chassis LCP. The Pico for instance is all steel components )other than the Modular grip). The Kahr has Steel inserts at all the stress points. The cheaply made LCP has nothing.
Again, PrecisionOne which he rated #1 was 935 FPS later they came out with a Plus P rated at 975. Yes, it was a Plus obviously. And guess what? The Pico and the Kahr shoots it just fine and a whole lot of it. The LCP will crack like a cheap lawn chair.
Pingback: 9×18 Makarov, the other 380 – littleroundblog
I carry several 1911 variants and have found standard .45acp loadings to be quite adequate. Most of them are high round count and very reliable with proper maintenance and care. Call me old school, but bigger is not always better and the 230 grain standard loadings have served me well with no undue wear on the firearms. To be fair, I have extensive experience and training in several arenas including military service. Also, much more accessible, reliable, and shootable under high stress situations. Just my $02. I stick with tried and true.
Not sure I fully understand the fear over +P ammunition.
And yet, somehow shoving a .380 ACP cartridge into a 9mm pistol (it clearly does nor fit properly), is somehow safe?
While .380 ACP does not have a +P rating, reputable ammunition producers are not taking the pressures to magnum levels – your buddy at the range might be doing just that.
We do have some known factors in firearms:
Many older weapons may be of dubious quality. +P should be avoided – possibly ANY shooting for some.
New weapons from reputable manufacturers, are indeed “overbuilt” for safety reasons and durability.
Some modern blowback pistols may not correctly handle +P pressures – despite metallurgical strength.
Modern locked-breech pistols can easily handle +P type pressures – but wear will increase.
A couple of examples are the SIG P938 and Kimber Micro 9 – both were originally .380’s, and the 9mm versions did not increase the size of the structural components to handle the massive increase in pressure.
Yes, we can carry 9mm’s instead of “hot” .380’s. And practical accuracy for most folks, is probably dismal with extremely hot cartridges, from many micro-pistols. I know of more than one person who dislikes even practicing with their micro-380, due to the tiny size and lack of weight – it smarts.
Pingback: Ammo 49 Test Answers
Pingback: Ammo Grain Definition
Pingback: What Ammo To Use For Target Practice
Pingback: Ammo Plus P
Pingback: Can A Glock 19 Shooting Plus P Ammo
Pingback: P Ammo
Pingback: 380 Ammo Test
Pingback: P 90 Ammo
What about the Russian Makarov…which is chambered for the 9×18?
I have a Mak chambered for .380. The 9×18 is more powerful anyhow so a .380+p should be ok…right?
Pingback: What Does 9mm P Ammo Mean
Pingback: 380 Ammo Reviews
Pingback: Why Is 357 Sig Ammo So Expensive
Pingback: 38 Ammo Reloader
Pingback: 9 Mm Ammo Kaboom – Hunt Sodak
Pingback: Ammo Velocity Tool – Hunt Sodak
Pingback: Kahr Pm9 Plus P Ammo – Hunt Sodak
9×17 ammo is hotter in Europe and before WWII, it was even hotter. The Czechs pushed the envelope with the CZ 24 handgun, which had a rotating barrel(was not blow back). Any well made or modern .380 should be able to handle any .380 ammo off the shelf.
I would be wary of Spanish handguns made before WWII, since they were made in many little home/village workshops and did not have the inspection process of today’s manufacturing. Other than no-name pocket pistols, I would think that any handgun also made in Mak or 9MM models would be fine with any commercially available .380 ammo.
My PPK/S manual limits my 380 ammo to 855 fps and 90 grain bullets. Various brands of self defense ammo are rated at 1000 fps and 102 grain.
I have never seen “380+P” on a box of ammo.
Got a recommendation for a Self Defense pistol for 380 rated at 1000fps and 102 gr bullets?
Really? Even Hi Point claims all of their guns, in every caliber, are +P rated….. are you afraid to put gas in your car too? Wow…