ron wrote:BC38 wrote:
It is debatable whether the 32acp with 71gr FMJ's or JHPs is as effective as the 380 with 95gr FMJs or JHPs. What is not debatable is that the 32acp SD ammo tops out at about 260 ft-lbs ME, whereas the 380 tops out at about 425 ft-lbs ME.
Hold on just a cotton picking minute! I'd like to know who makes a 380 load that tops out at 425 ft-lbs ME and who makes the gun that will handle the pressures necessary to achieve those figures out of a dinky little 380 case.
Buffalo Bore's hottest load is 380 Auto +P HC-FN 100 grain hard cast flatnose that produces 1150 fps and 294 ft-lbs ME, while Underwood's 380 Auto +p Gold Dot HP 90 grain does 1200 fps 288 Fpe and Speer's gold dot only drives a 90 grain GDHP 990 fps 196 fpe and the
average 380 load produces about 200 FPE.
Your figures on the 32 auto are also inflated. The average FPE for the 32 auto is about 140 FPE while the buffalo bore 32 ACP plus+ p load will drive a hardcast 75 grain flatnose at 1150 FPS for a ME of 220 foot lbs. 7 rounds of that ammo in a keltec P-32 is nothing to sneeze at and does better better than a .380 Speer gold dot 90 grain GDHP at 990 fps 196 fpe or even the Remington Golden Saber load that drives a 102 grain brass jacketed Hollowpoint at 940 FPS for 200 FPE . That's why I prefer a 9mm Makarov to a 380 because Underwood makes a 115 grain plus+p load for the 9mm Mak that drives that 115 grain bullet at 1000 fps.
We are all entitled to our own opinions but not our own facts, so check your sources. I think you may have been looking at 9mm Plus P data rather than any 380 data in existence to get a figure like 425 ft-lbs ME.
Read back a couple of posts my friend - the last couple of exchanges between Badger and I.
The data came from Ballistics By The Inch and he made the point - and I acknowledged it - that I mistakenly quoted the highest ME numbers from the hottest ammo listed
when fired from an 18" barrel.
In the same post I also noted that the 95gr 380 from a 2" barrel is listed at 220 ft-lbs ME and the 71gr 32acp when fired
from a 2" barrel barely hits 100 ft-lbs ME. I only chose the 71gr 32acp and the 95gr 380 as examples because they were what was referenced in earlier posts. So not only does my point stand, but the gap between the two calibers is even wider when you look at the right numbers for these two calibers out of a 2" pocket gun.
BTW, comparing the HOTTEST 32acp load to the AVERAGE 380 load is an apples to oranges comparison. You need to either compare average to average or hottest to hottest and the measured numbers need to be from the same length barrel. I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers from - the manufacturers maybe? But you didn't list barrel lengths for any of them, and that is a critical piece when making this comparison.
Looking at the data for the loads tested on Ballistics By The Inch (which I think is generally regarded by most people as a pretty authoritative source) the HOTTEST listed 380 load is Buffalo Bore 90gr JHP at 220 ft-lbs from a 2" barrel, and the HOTTEST listed 32acp load is the CorBon 60gr JHP at 115 ft-lbs ME from a 2" barrel. In fact the WEAKEST 380 listed was the Hornady 90gr HP/XP at 120 ft-lbs from a 2" barrel - which was slightly higher than the HOTTEST listed 32acp load from the same barrel.
Here are the graphs so you can see where my numbers come from and confirm them for yourself.
32 ACP
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/megraphs/32auto.html
380
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/megr ... o2010.html
FWIW, I also agree that 9mm is a far more potent caliber - about as much better than 380 as 380 is compared to 32acp. I'd like to take a look at your little Mak. IIRC they are more comparable in size and weight to the subcompacts chambered in 9x19. Like the PF9, LC9, DB9, etc. When I'm going for something in that size class, I pack one of my compact 9x19s - there are some REAL barn-burners in that caliber and the practice ammo is WAY more affordable and available.
But then you already knew I'm not into niche guns/calibers so much...
Always looking for a deal on more ammo and reloading components.
I've tried to see things from the liberal point of view - but I'm just not flexible enough to get my head up my ...