Interesting links. Chuck Hawks does not cite a source, but his small caliber SD load choices reflect Marshal/Sanow choices based on reported shootings. Personally, I think their data is fine, taken within the limits of what it can tell you, but they are the folks people most love to hate when they describe a load that performs well but with less than the 12" FBI minimum penetration, and people get hung up on the whole concept of "stopping power" and misinterpret it as something other than what it is - a relative score to compare different rounds, not a guarantee of effectiveness.
The .32 ACP 60 gr Corbon and 60 gr Silvertip loads fall in that category as they penetrate only around 9"-10" but give reliable expansion and seem to work better than expected in real world shoots.
The problem with the .32 ACP and the .380 ACP is that they have very little excess performance or margin for error and consequently, the envelope for optimum performance of a hollow point is very, very narrow.
Faster is not always better as if you push one of these small hollow points too fast, you get premature expansion, which reduces penetration. And if you push them too slow, they may not expand at all. That means that muzzle velocity is key and a round that performs well in a 3.5" or 3.9" barrel may not do well at all in a 2.5" micro pocket pistol.
I've found that even the .4" difference described above in PP and PPK/S pistols can equate to a 50 to 70 fps difference in velocity in the .32 ACP and .380 ACP. That's another challenge to those small calibers as they are much more susceptible to velocity loss in short barrels than the 9mm Para and larger calibers.
There are too hollow points that i will carry in a .380 ACP PPK/S or PP:
- the 102 gr Golden Saber, which will penetrate about 9"to 10" and expand to about .60". The 3.4" PPK/S actually gives a bit more penetration than the slightly faster/longer barreled PP; and
- the 90 gr XTP. It's available in a few different loadings with Hornady, Fiocchi Extrema loadings being generally available and loaded to similar velocities of 1000-1050 fps in 3.5-3.9" barrels and it will deliver an honest 12" of penetration, but it does that by relying on only moderate expansion to about .53".
That's along the same lines as what Buffalo Bore is saying in their link, except their hard cast flat point bullets are not known to expand, and they penetrate around 17"in SAAMI pressure loads and around 21" in their greater than SAAMI pressure loadings, with, IMHO the extra penetration being a total waste that's not worth the downsides of greater pistol wear.
In the .32 ACP I also prefer the 60 gr XTP for similar reasons - moderate expansion and adequate penetration. In pistols where the XTP won't feed the 60 gr Silvertip generally will, but the penetration is on the short side, so it's only getting the nod due to demonstrated results in real world shoots, not on nay theoretical basis. But practically speaking in .32 ACP FMJs have been just as effective as a hollow points in real world shoots, so it's a wash.
[/size]In .380 ACP a hollow point does make a difference, with a well designed .380 ACP hollow point in a 3.5" to 3.9" barrel performing better than the any .38 special load in a 2" barrel, and performing better than the .380 FMJ based on the results in reported shootings. -----In terms of operating the pistol itself for persons with physical impairments and/or limited hand strength, any given pistol in .32 ACP will have a lighter recoil spring than the same design in .380 ACP. Similarly, a longer barrel and slide mean a longer recoil spring of lighter weight than the same design in a shorter slide. For example, the standard recoil spring for the 3.9" PP in .380 ACP is 15 pounds, while for the 3.5" PPK or PPK/S in .380 ACP it's 20 pounds. That 1/2" reduction in barrel length costs you 5 pounds of extra effort to rack the slide.
Also, technique matters a lot. Holding the slide firmly in the support hand then explosively pushing the strong arm forward, and/or rotating your torso forward will let you use much larger muscle groups to rack the slide. For persons withe reduced strength, those approaches will work much better than holding the pistol in the strong side hand and trying to push the slide back with the weak side hand. [/font]
----[/font]
The take away here is to avoid the temptation to go with a smaller micro sized pistol, as you gain very little in reduced mass and size in these small calibers as the standard post GCA 68 format for imported semi-auto pistols of 6"x4"x1" still readily concealable, but you greatly increase the effort needed to rack the slide in those smaller pistols. [/font]
