The Kel-Tec Range

[oldgranpa]

FlyandScuba flew to N.Ala. today to do another wetpack test with me (oldgranpa). We compared CorBon's DPX with Remington GoldenSabre and Speer GoldDot this time. Included with.380acp were the KelTec P3AT, SeeCamp LWS 380, SigArms P232, and we threw in some 9mm with a Kahr PM9. With the P3AT, DPX and GS were equal!! So those with GoldenSabre on hand can relax, it's good stuff.
You'll also see the results with a few rounds of SantaBarbara with the P3AT, hot stuff, good penetration, but no expansion as some may have speculated with the flat, exposed lead bullet.
Interesting, with the little 2"barrel LWS 380, the Rem GS gave the best performance (with no keyholing). However, that little pistol produced keyholing with much of the ammo tested which with the good penetration is excellent. Keyholing is a separate subject discussed in other places like the .22magnum mini revolver tests in the Articles Section. See my sig line for the link.
Picture below shows our test results today. You can compare this with our previous test posted May 18, 2006 here in the P3AT section.
By now everybody should be familiar with the ammunition shown, grain weights, etc. so those details are not shown.
We'll be glad to answer any questions.
BTW, we also ran a second, fresh wetpack using .45acp with 2 pistols, a Taurus and a Kahr. F&S will do the report on that, probably in the Other Guns section.
og
(next post is a pic of fly getting ready to shoot the PM9.)

[oldgranpa]

Here's FLY at work..
You've seen pics of me, F&S is a lot better looking!
og..(my real first name is Paul, his is Bill, that's all we'll tell.)

[norfdet]

Great as usual, thanks again for all the work.

[Bob O.]

Thanks guys -- great job as usual!

[rhinokrk]

Nice test. The one that surprised me was the Sig 232, similar expansion and penetration, with a longer barrel 3.75" I think. Why is that? Is it because it's a blow-back design?

I'm ordering a 5 pack of Extreme Shock 32NAA to test against the Corbon HP (the only 2 rounds to compare) for my first attempt at a wet-pack. I'll be sure to include some 380 for comparison to the experts results.

Thanks gentlemen.
rhino

[oldgranpa]

hi, rhinokrk,
you have sharp observation skills. Yes, the longer barrel P232 had very similar results. You'll notice a slightly larger expansion which results in less penetration. So the P232 ended up not looking much better than the little P3AT.
Bigger ain't always better.

Good for you trying the wetpack. Be watching for your tests.

Cheers,
og

[rhinokrk]

[pocketgun]

Nice job once again, OG and F&S! The expansion or the GS out of the LWS is less impressive to me given the shape/way it actually expanded (i.e. not fully).

rhinokrk, I look forward to seeing the results of your tests. Do you have a chrono at your disposal?

[rhinokrk]

[Flyer]

Get a Shooting Chrony.
I've had one for a long time and it's very reliable - and inexpensive! I recommend the Beta Master.
Flyer

[pocketgun]

The Beta looks good, but the F1 looks like one to avoid. I once saw a picture of a chronograph with the electronics integrated into the sky screen unit. It had a single 9mm hole right through the face, and was toast. I am sure I would find a way to screw the pooch with an integrated model. Shoot enough rounds at it and eventually, one will get away from you - right?

[DT Willy]

As always, OG, an excellent test, with clear presentation of the data. Here are a couple of random observations and questions:

1). I was struck by the winning penetration of the Gold Dot round. Although it didn't expand quite as much as the DPX or GS, I feel it is an excellent and consistent performer in .380 caliber. I will be doing a wetpack test of the GD ammo in several calibers in the near future. Will pass on the results.
2). I have noticed in many of your wetpack tests that there is damage to the expanded round, i.e., broken petals on the jacket or similar damage to the lead core. My tests, in an identical medium, show very little of this; most bullets expand symmetrically without damage. It makes me wonder if the bullets are striking fragments of other bullets in the wetpack, or even other bullets. Which brings me to a question: how many bullets do you typically fire into a wetpack? My maximum is usually about 12, often less. This is not to say that this is a better method, but rather a "best case" scenario. If your bullets are in fact hitting a non-homogenous medium, it is more true to life. In any case, I find this curious.
3). The excellent performance of the inexpensive WWB 9mm 115g. HPs in your test is consistent with other tests I have seen, and my own. I truly believe this ammo is a "best buy," both in 115 and 147grain varieties.
4) Why a 40 hour soak this time? What happened to the 24 hour "groundrule?"

Keep up the good work! Best, DT Willy

[norfdet]

The soak time has something to do with breaking down the chemicals in the paper. It's probably the same thing we will have to do to Byron one of these days.........

[mr surveyor]

Norf


Glad you're back

[oldgranpa]

hi, DT and all,
good questions!! I'll comment in reverse...

1. soak time. true, 24hrs is good enough. over 48hrs is a little too much, IMO, as the paper gets too mushy then (and even will begin to mould and stink if too long). I started the soak Wed about noon, best chance I had to get it started due to other jobs Thursday. F&S schedule was Fri 9a.m. to meet him at airport. So put papers in box Fri 7a.m. about a 40hr soak this time. Remember, on the other site where we talk, one guy leaves the paper in the tub for a week and never even takes them out. Of course, he's never published any results either Again, 24 - 48 hrs works the same for me.

2.Ah yes! Some of Winchester's JHP's are just as good as the expensive stuff!! I would never be afraid to use Win JHP. The only one I don't like is their "Silver Tip", old technology and low power. Doesn't always work good. The other stuff is OK. Check F&S report on the .45acp we also did this time at glocktalk, link is in Other Guns section. And also the last wetpack we reported here in this P3AT section in May. Winchester makes some good stuff. Their SXT is good ammo for the P3AT, IMO.

3. Bullet fragments. We actually fired .380acp rounds into 2 separate wetpacks for this test. I brought a tub with fresh paper already soaked same time along so we could use it to make up new packs to complete the test. (We also did a fresh third pack for F&S .45 test, had lots of paper this time. Took me a month to save it up.) Otherwise, it looks like we shot 28 bullets into one pack, which is not the case!! Two packs for the .380 tests shown in the photo!!
Distance was 6 feet. The LWS pistol has no sights, is really short and hard to aim. So a few shots were close to the same hole and easily could have some damage to each other. But, after many wetpack tests without bullets hitting each other, yes, we do see inconsistent results with jackets separating sometimes, partial opening of petals, petals folding under or breaking. Wet paper is pretty severe. And remember, this is "factory" ammo and every round is not the same. Just look at the ends of hollow points on factory ammo and you'll see sometimes the openings are not the same size. Ammo is not perfect.

4. GoldDot. Nothing wrong with Speer GoldDot if that's what your pistol fires well. Expansion and penetration is only part of the equation. The ammo has to function 100% in your pistol, have good accuracy, and be readily available enough that you can find some so you can practice with it. Due to the lower expansion with GoldDot after many tests (reported in the Articles Section) I'm just not a big fan of it. Personal preference is fine and I respect that. I just got on the GoldenSabre a while back and prefer it, but it's not perfect either.

Those wanting to do a wetpack test...Go for it!!

og

[oldgranpa]

Just a few more comments...

Note the results with the 9mm. That is always a good way to "calibrate" your wetpack. If 9mm hollow points over penetrate, or fail to expand, then you know the wetpack was not a good one. In our case, the 9mm did exactly what it normally does in a wetpack.

Also, if you enjoy reading BS the you need to read what we posted on the SeeCamp forum about this test. Lots more BS about wetpack test there. Check it out....

http://seecamp.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl/YaBB.pl?board=ammo;action=display;num=1151720139

Cheers, cu later,
og

[zeke]

Thanks for the test. I have some DPX on order from the local gun shop but have a box of Golden Saber here at the house. I've been carrying Hydro shock lately. I'll be double checking the function with the Golden Saber and changing over to that in one of the pistols.

[norfdet]

[mr surveyor]