The Rohrbaugh Forum

Miscellaneous => Other Guns => Topic started by: Richard S on February 20, 2013, 04:47:01 PM

Title: Recommissioned "Safe Queen"
Post by: Richard S on February 20, 2013, 04:47:01 PM

Look what the Winchester Ranger T +P .380 ACP ammunition has caused me to recall from "Safe Queen" status and recommission as a rear-pocket backup to my front-pocket R9 -- my NAA Guardian .380. This piece was the 64th one sold to the public, has been "melted" and high-polished with the slide scalloped fore and aft, fitted with gutter snipe signts, wears sterling silver grips, and is wrapped in a Hedley "Back Pocket" holster:

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/RichardS/g380-meltedpolishedguttersnipesights.jpg)

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/RichardS/R9G380Side-by-Side.jpg)

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/RichardS/G380HedleyHolster.jpg)

This little all-stainless steel piece is built like a tank, weighs in at seven ounces more than the R9, but  digests +P ammo like candy. The Ranger T ammunition is the successor to the old Black Talon line that was phased out by Winchester due to PR concerns. The name, "Black Talon," was apparently too "scary" for the "sheeple" crowd.

The teaming of the G-380 with +P Ranger T ammunition results in what I consider to be a worthy backup to my venerable and treasured "Farmindale" R9.





_{[Edit: Corrected typo.]}
 

Title: Re: Recommissioned "Safe Queen"
Post by: tracker on February 20, 2013, 05:59:53 PM

Now there is a pair of aces in the hole.

Title: Re: Recommissioned "Safe Queen"
Post by: Reinz on February 20, 2013, 08:26:16 PM

A worthy back up for sure!

Title: Re: Recommissioned "Safe Queen"
Post by: Ljutic on February 22, 2013, 08:59:27 AM

I guess I missed the Ranger T +P 380 news.  I've tested the RA380T, would you please be so kind as to let me know the new model number for the +P variety.  A tip on where I could find a box for testing would also be appreciated.  RA380T expanded really well, but fell short on penetration.  I really like the idea of putting more speed behind the 95 grain bullet to help it penetrate just a bit more.

Beautiful blinger by the way.  Really like the scallops.

Title: Re: Recommissioned "Safe Queen"
Post by: Richard S on February 22, 2013, 01:18:31 PM

Ljutic:

I am one who strives accuracy, but you have caught an embarrassing mistatement in my original post when I referred to the Winchester Ranger T .380 Automatic ammunition as "+P."  I should have used instead the term "Law Enforcement." According to my understanding, there is no SAAMI standard for +P in .380 Automatic, and SAAMI specifications rate the .380 at approximately 950 fps velocity and 200 foot-pounds (ft-lbs) energy for JHP bullets. 

Winchester rates its Ranger T Law Enforcement 95-grain .380 as providing 1,000 fps muzzle velocity (length of barrel not reported but assumed to be 4"):

http://www.winchester.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/flash-SWFs/law_bullit.swf

. . . while the 95-grain Remington Express from a 4" barrel, by way of comparison, is reported to produce muzzle velocity of only 955 fps:

http://www.remington.com/ballistics/results/default.aspx?type=pistol&cal=7

Add to that an article I recalled reading in Guns & Ammo magazine, I believe, stating that Winchester's Ranger T Law Enforcement series was loaded to higher pressure levels and you have the basis of my misstatement. Mea maxima culpa, and thank you for pointing out my erroneous use of the +P term. The ammunition I was describing is the same one you tested, Winchester Ranger Law Enforcement .380 Automatic 95-gr. T-Series, Product No. RA380T.

In closing, I notice that your test of the Ranger T Law Enforcement .380 showed 896 fps from the 2.53" barrel of a Kahr P380 with 10.5" of ballistic gel penetration:

http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com/2012/03/denim-and-gel-testing-380-ammo.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfpMwElw0Qo

Given the extensive amount of time and effort you have devoted to the study of ballistics, I would sincerely be interested in your thoughts on why penetration of 10.5" falls short of the optimum, given the average size of the human torso and the need to avoid through-and-through shots in self defense situations. And believe me, I have an open mind on this subject.

Thanks again for catching my misstatement and giving me the chance to correct the record.  Also, thanks for the compliment on the "blinger." It was my EDC before the R9 came along.

Title: Re: Recommissioned "Safe Queen"
Post by: Reinz on February 23, 2013, 12:26:21 AM

Richard, as usual, you are quite the GentleMAN.  8)

Title: Re: Recommissioned "Safe Queen"
Post by: Ljutic on February 23, 2013, 12:57:41 PM

Quote from: Richard S on February 22, 2013, 01:18:31 PM

Given the extensive amount of time and effort you have devoted to the study of ballistics, I would sincerely be interested in your thoughts on why penetration of 10.5" falls short of the optimum, given the average size of the human torso and the need to avoid through-and-through shots in self defense situations. And believe me, I have an open mind on this subject.

Thanks again for catching my misstatement and giving me the chance to correct the record.  Also, thanks for the compliment on the "blinger." It was my EDC before the R9 came along.

Hey Richard.

First, no worries on the +P thing.  I thought Winchester had come out something new and that I had missed it.  It did have me scratching my head as to why Winchester would label any 380 as +P when 380 +P isn't a recognized SAAMI classification.  I thought they had caught the Buffalo Bore complex or something.   ;D

As far as 10 .5" of penetration being sub-optimal, I honestly could care less how far any round penetrates.  I just collect the data from my tests and the data "is" what it "is".  Interpretation of the data is always up to the reader.  The FBI test protocol crowd interprets any penetration result less than 12" as garbage ammo.  This myopic and unrealistic expectation of ammunition performance ends up driving some people to carry guns that produce way too much recoil and the learning curve to fast accurate shooting becomes so steep that they may never master their firearm.  I'm not sure about you, but I certainly don't have the same ammunition requirements as the FBI. 

The RA380T tested well.  It has quite a few things going for it.  A bit more zip may have allowed it to hit the magic 12" of penetration that many consider the minimum.       

As I close in on my 100th test, I can honestly say that I would not volunteer to stand in front of any round tested so far.    ;)

Title: Re: Recommissioned "Safe Queen"
Post by: Richard S on February 24, 2013, 10:50:43 AM

Thank you, Reinz, for the kind words, and thank you, Ljutic, for the informative response and the extensive amount of testing you have done and posted on your blog site.

For those who have not reviewed Ljutic's work, here is a link to his many reported ammunition tests:

http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com/p/ammo-tests.html

I wonder if the action of companies such as Buffalo Bore, Underwood, and Magtech to manufacture some higher-pressure .380 loads and label them as "+P" will prompt SAAMI to come up with a standard for such ammunition. Until then, I suppose it's going to be a matter of "paying your money and taking your chances" on using the higher-pressure .380 rounds through a pistol. At least with the all-stainless G-380, I don't need to worry much about pressures.

Thank you again, gentlemen.