I recently purchased a 365xl. With the recent ammo shortage my lgs recommended FS 80gr tui ammo, which I bought. I haven’t found much info online but I did see a Paul Harrell video where it seemed to act like FMJ comparison. I am concerned about it now for edc and home defense. Too little tumble, too much penetration? Does anyone have experience or insight with this round with a small firearm?
No direct experience but it is light for caliber and my concerns are partly POI issues and will it develop enough recoil impulse to reliably cycle.
If it does cycle and hit reasonably close to the sights then the next concern is terminal efficiency. This round relies on tumbling in lieu of expansion. Not sure how effective such a thing is at pistol velocities. Sure tumbling can be nasty but probably not superior to a good JHP.
In short I would only carry that round if it were all that was available. Sadly in your area that my be the case.
At the range my 365 xl and gen 1 shield cycled fine. Accuracy was acceptable. The concern over wound cavity and over penetration will retire the fort Scott’s to last resort status. I may also go back to fort Scott to ask for meaningful proof of edc appropriateness. Thanks,
This thread piqued my interest so I went to the Fort Smith site to see what I could find out about the ammunition. First, the site doesn’t list an 80 grain load for 380 Auto, only 95 grains; is that what you have? If it’s 80 grains, do you know what the velocity is? (That was difficult to find for the 95 grain load.)
Whenever someone expresses concerns about how far bullets penetrate through test media like gelatin I do offer my opinion that we should never depend on bullet performance to avoid hitting people that aren’t our target. For example, if we’re thinking that because a bullet penetrates only some arbitrary distance in gelatin then we don’t have to worry about a third party who’s standing behind the bad guy, that is a mistake.
The first reason it’s a mistake is because a lot of bullets fired in self-defense situations miss their targets entirely. Studies have revealed that police officers hit their targets with their shots from less than 10 percent to perhaps 20% of the time. Even if we’re convinced we will do much better than that in a fight for our lives, how much better? Then there’s the fact that the hits we do achieve might include tissue that’s not as dense as “ballistic” gelatin. A shot to the chest that happens to miss the ribs (as I saw in one case I investigated) will usually penetrate much farther than one into the heavy muscles and femur of the thigh. Ballistics tests are useful for comparison purposes, but they don’t tell us everything there is to know about their real life performance.
I won’t get into all my other knowledge and opinions about wound ballistics other than to point out that in the vast majority of self-defense shootings by non-LEOs or military personnel it doesn’t really matter how well the bullets perform in test media. I look for those results when choosing defensive ammunition for myself, and I do have some definite personal preferences, but I wouldn’t walk away empty-handed and empty-gunned if those were my options because I couldn’t get what I preferred.
“I am prudent, you are fearful, he is panicking.”
My 365xl is 9mm. The fort Scott website claims the speed of the copper tui 80 gr 9mm is 1356fps. I am not trying to be less careful about missing or what’s beyond my target but I want to know as much as I can about the performance of any tool I am preparing to us. Thanks.
|Powered by Social Strata|