.380 Ammo Quest: DoubleTap 95 Grn Controlled Expansion

Someday I’ll move on from testing micro-compact .380 pocket pistols, but every once in a while a round comes along that just warrants taking another look. In this case, DoubleTap sent me some of their new 95 grain Controlled Expansion .380 ammo. What stands out to me is that Mike McNett (owner of DoubleTap) is the designer of this bullet, designed specifically to get the bullet to penetrate deeply from a .380. Yes, this bullet was designed specifically to meet the FBI penetration standards through gel (and, therefore, more likely to be effective against a human attacker). Well, heck, this I gotta test . . .

Backstory: I’ve tested a lot of .380 ammo, from a pocket pistol. Nearly all of it under-penetrates (i.e., won’t reach 12″ through gel, at least not consistently). I found one type of hollow point bullet that would fairly consistently reach that depth, the Hornady XTP, but just about all the others fell short. So if DoubleTap has a bullet specifically engineered to reach that far or further — and especially if it’ll do so from a pocket pistol — well, that’d be big news as far as I’m concerned.

First thing I can say about the DoubleTap round: recoil is stout and the velocity is fast. Considering I was using a 2.8″-barrel pocket pistol, the typical velocity of most defensive ammo on the market seems to be about 800 to 900 fps with a 90-grain bullet. Heavier bullets go slower; the 95-grain PMC Starfire was 788 fps, for example. The previous “recoil king” was the Winchester PDX1, which pushes a 95-grain bullet at 901 fps.

But the DoubleTap is a lot more powerful; it pushes that 95-grain bullet at an average of 1,034 feet per second … from a .380. That’s 225 ft/lbs of energy, far higher than the 144 ft/lbs we see from normal defensive loads from this gun (90 grains at 850 fps). These rounds have a lot of recoil and they hit quite hard.

How is this possible? Is this actually “+P” ammo? No, it isn’t. I contacted DoubleTap directly and was assured that this is standard-pressure, fully SAAMI-compliant. Now, I do know that some other companies deliberately load their defensive ammo a little softer specifically to reduce recoil. HPR says that they made that choice on purpose with their .380 XTP load (which delivers 90 grains at 800 fps, for about 128 ft/lbs from this gun). DoubleTap must be loading this to the absolute limit of the caliber. It’s a heavier bullet traveling over 200 fps faster than some other companies’ offerings, and it shows in the recoil.

It also shows in the penetration. These things were insane for a .380. In the bare gel, the shortest bullet travel was 13.50″, and the furthest was 18.50″.  Two came in at 16.50″. And that’s for fully-expanded bullets. .380’s just don’t do this … it’s really hard to find a .380 expanded hollowpoint that’ll even reach 12″. But these were fully-expanded bullets (an average size the same diameter as a .45 ACP) that also penetrated an overall average of 15.90.” That’s rather incredible.

The results through denim weren’t as encouraging. I ended up with six bullets total; four failed to expand and the two that did expand shed their jackets. Not a good sign. However, looking at it in context, two things jumped out at me.

The bullets that did expand still penetrated to a good depth (14″+) even though they shed their jackets, and they still did more damage than an FMJ would have. And one of the bullets that failed to expand looks like it must have tumbled violently because the wound track through the gel was massive, far more destructive than a typical FMJ wound. The other three acted more like FMJs, a smallish wound track and penetration in the 21″ to 23″ range.

So it’s not an ideal performer. But maybe with a revision, it could be. And even as-is, it still is a damaging round.

The bare gel performance was the best I’ve ever seen from a .380 hollowpoint, scoring a comparatively huge 35.9 on the MacPherson Wound Trauma Indicator scale (the next-highest scoring .380 hollowpoint was 28.3. That’s a huge difference). And the denim bullets, while not performing well at all by conventional standards, were no worse than FMJs, and in half the cases were quite a bit better.

I would definitely prefer better and more consistent results from the denim test. I wonder if a Version 2.0 of these bullets could be developed, somehow fine-tuning them for better denim performance, because if so, these could be the “HST” that we’ve always wished for for the .380 pocket pistols.

I still don’t know how they got that much power out of a SAAMI-compliant .380 ACP round. I’m not a reloader, so I don’t have the experience to judge it. But DoubleTap’s president assured me that they were SAAMI-compliant so I guess that there’s some magic going on. Maybe an extremely fast-burning powder, but at this point I’m just guessing.

I can say that I don’t recall there being any powder spray on the gel blocks, as is typical with .380 ammo testing from the short-barrel gun, so maybe the powder is all being burned in the 2.8″ barrel. I don’t know how they do it, but I do know the results are the hardest-hitting .380 hollowpoint I’ve tested, which leads to great penetration in bare gel, but also leads to substantial recoil.

If you can handle the recoil, you might like these rounds a lot. If you want a softer-shooting round, there are several choices that are loaded softer. I think it would be interesting to try these rounds from a GLOCK 42, which is the softest-shooting .380 pocket pistol I’ve used. Maybe it would tame some of the wrath and fury of these DoubleTap Controlled Expansion 95-grain bullets.

comments

  1. avatar bontai Joe says:

    Well, I am a reloader and there is no magic here. The rounds go faster and recoil is harder, so Newton is still right. As to how they are keeping pressures within std. limits? Must have found or developed a powder that burns completely in the short barrel and spreads the pressure out over the full duration of time the bullet is in the barrel.

    1. avatar Achmed says:

      Right – there’s pretty much no other answer other than what this person wrote. Powder that is very closely matched to the most efficient pressure curve. Impressive.

      1. avatar int19h says:

        I wish there was more of that type of thing. How about, say, 5.56 loads that are designed to burn fully in 8 inches of barrel, for all those SBRs?

        1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

          A little late, but that’s why AAC improved the 300 black/whisper.

  2. avatar CoolBreeze says:

    Thanks for the test. I will try some in my 42 but not in my LCP.

  3. avatar JS says:

    I’ve spoken with McNett several times, he seems to be a stand up guy and if he said they’re SAMI-compliant I would absolutely believe him (not to mention he’d probably get his pants sued off if they weren’t). I keep DT in my 9mm nightstand gun, looking forward to trying these out.

    1. avatar Jeremy B. says:

      According to Hodgdon you can push a 95 bullet up to 986 fps with their CFE Pistol powder. Alliant Powder states that you can hit 1,047 fps with their BE-86 powder.

      And thats just commercial handloading powders, most of what ammo manufacturers use are specific boutique blends that only sometimes make it to civilian use, like Hornady and Hodgdon’s Superformance powder.

      1. avatar JS says:

        Keep in mind that Hodgdon data is from a 3.75″ barrel, an inch (35%) longer than the test gun.

  4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Thank you very much ShootingTheBull410 for the test … I am eternally grateful as always.

  5. avatar Frank says:

    They could use a compound powder that mixes faster and slower (comparitively) burning powder to achieve a more even pressure wave.

    Or I could be completely wrong.

  6. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    Nice. I am not really worried about extra recoil on my mouse gun. I don’t plink with my LCP. I just put a few mags through it here and there of my SD ammo.

  7. avatar dwb says:

    “If you can handle the recoil” is implied with all DT stuff I’ve shot… dayum.

    Some people recommend checking or changing recoil springs because… dayum.

    Which reminds me…. too-light recoil springs + “full powered ammo” = inconsistent results? I have read that can happen. Could it be happening here?

  8. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    I used to have a Taurus TCP. I shot Pow’rball out of it with no problems at all. It is supposedly going 1200fps too. This beats the hell out of every published 380data I’ve ever seen. Any answer to this?

    1. avatar Chris says:

      The unusually high for caliber velocity of Powerball is because their loads use light for caliber bullets. Powerball is garbage, I would find a new SD load asap.

  9. avatar Paul says:

    I’ve bought from McNett several times. Questions are answered very promptly, orders ship out. Problems are handled. Seems like he runs a tight ship.

    I’m really glad you tested this. I was thinking of buyings Sig 232, but thought most of the .380 was wimpy compared to a 9 or 45, with the exception of the Double Tap….I like Mike, but wasn’t sure I could trust the marketing.

    Great Write Up.

  10. avatar percynjpn says:

    Thanks for another fascinating review!

  11. avatar Sian says:

    1084fps from a 2.8″ 380 does another thing:
    It makes damn sure that the gun has every opportunity to function and cycle properly, even with a little pocket lint in the works. < 900 fps rounds not so much, especially with the Kel-tecs and such favored by pocket-carrying non-gun people.

  12. avatar Sian says:

    ” I think it would be interesting to try these rounds from a GLOCK 42, which is the softest-shooting .380 pocket pistol I’ve used.”

    So you haven’t tried the Sig 238? Having shot both extensively (800 rounds from the G42 this week!) I’d give the slight edge to the Sig. Plus that trigger Hhnnngggggggggg

  13. avatar Kev says:

    Hi, I shot 22 rounds of this DT 95 gr load from my Glock 42 .380 the other day.

    Noted muzzle blast and loudness, but not any real recoil to comment on.

    Like most DT products, the Controlled Expansion rload was very accurate.

    Please give us a test from a Glock 42 through denim.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email