CW380: getting flat nose/hollow Pt/XP to feed (using new MagGuts no less)

[erichard]

You may have to bend your mag tabs out alittle, did you have this problem before the change??

Are you speaking of going to full battery or nosediving for bending the tabs out a little? I'm more concerned about the nosediving.

Had both problems before the switch.

Last night I did buff/polish up the lips of the mags and the breech and exterior extractor (without disassembly) and it did feed better when hand cycling. Today, firing the top two rounds in the mag with flat nose ammo, the 6 round magazines are working on all fronts, but the 7 rounder still has nosedives. Are you saying I should bend the lips out a little on that one maybe?

No failure to go to full battery today while gun is super lubed and clean and polished.

[TheLastDaze]

^^yes.. if you have a caliper on hand check the 6 rounder compared to the problem child, It may have bent out of spec a hair, may need to bend out the lip where it meets the bullet ever so slightly.. Does the 7mag have the guts also??

I plan to buy another extractor (just in case) as I want to mod this one a bit more where it will feed any kind of ammo, I'm positive the tight tolerance is where the extractor lip grabs hold of bullet if I increase that gap by say .006 or more it will be able to feed anything..

I think you may be surprised how well the gun will run just by what you've done so far, also Muggsy here advised me these guns like to run wet for a while so make sure you lube it up good...

[erichard]

^^yes.. if you have a caliper on hand check the 6 rounder compared to the problem child, It may have bent out of spec a hair, may need to bend out the lip where it meets the bullet ever so slightly.. Does the 7mag have the guts also??.

Yeah, they all have MagGuts now, and I like them so far. They have not created any new issues.
Thanks for the advice.

The enemy of good enough is perfect, so I'm not sure how far I'll go.

[erichard]

Update: got some Lehigh XP and CF bullets in the mail. The XP seem a little fatter at the tip than the WWB, so keep that in mind. In hand cycling the ammo, it didn't seem like the XP would be reliable in the top spots of the magazine, so my plan has always been to put CF bullets (controlled fracture) in the top spots and one XP in the chamber for carry. The CF bullets are shaped in a friendly way for feed purposes, and the CW-380 hand cycled them well in all spots of the magazine. One good point about these bullets is that they are very well made in that they do not suffer from setback due to hand cycling, so you can test out load strategies by hand cycling over and over again without wearing out the bullet (which is great since they are so expensive).

Once I got the gun lubed sufficiently (lots), cleaned, and the recoil spring stretched just a little to empower it a bit more, everything fed OK with 2 exceptions in 4 magazines. Two of the XP bullets that were in the 4th and 5th position from the bottom of the magazine hung on the way up the ramp. They seemed to veer a little to the right and were in the "X" orientation looking head on at the bullet. What I found was that if the bullet was in the "+" orientation in those lower 4 or 5 spots of the mag, I didn't get that hang up (which is the opposite of what someone else suggested...different guns, different outcomes).

So to summarize, I think my gun will reliably cycle the XP in the bottom 4 or 5 spots of the magazine when the top of those 4 or 5 (and maybe next one too) XP bullets is in the "+" orientation, and then plan to use a reliable feeder in the upper portion of the magazine, something like the CF bullet or Hornady Critical Defense, and then put one XP in the chamber. With the MagGuts in the extended magazine, that's 5 XP, 3 CF, + 1 XP (in chamber). One less CF in the normal magazine with MagGuts. It might be more conservative to use 3 or 4 XP rather than 5, as the XP get more reliable the lower they are in the magazine. The reason for that, for those curious, is that they maintain the follower orientation upward better the closer they are to the follower (as mentioned in the OP) AND they have significantly less friction leaving the magazine as the magazine spring is pressing much less on the follower and stack of bullets as there are fewer and fewer bullets left.

I can't say this will work for everybody (although they apparently work in every case for some here) because I did work on the gun by polishing and sanding the ramp and magazine lips, by stretching the recoil spring a bit, by polishing the breech and extractor, by adding MagGuts and bending the that follower slightly upward, and finally, I lubed and cleaned throughly before trying.

Finally let me say that the CF bullets are impressive, and may be all you need. I haven't seen official ballistic gel tests through denim, but the gel test I did see looked great:
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v...tal_comments=3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sZEd_kTh6I

These CF seem like better feeding ammo, and while they aren't geared towards penetration like the XP, they seem to have a hand grenade effect once they hit gel with one main body and three pieces of shrapnel triangulating outwards (petals of the CF bullet). FWIW, I took a couple photos. Target was shot from about 22ft or a little over 7 yards, generally thought to be the long side of the typical self defense range. Here are jpgs of the 9 shots taken from the extended mag with magguts (+ one in chamber), 6 XP and 3 CF (target photo) and a jug of water placed behind the target for one of the CF bullets.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/42563sw4m...EXFuYBEAa?dl=0
For the jug, note how wide and symmetrical the 4 exit wounds are. The jug is maybe a gallon jug 6 inches in diameter. The triangle formed by the exit of the petals of the bullet is about 5 inches per side, with the holes being about 1 inch in length (more like a cut or rip than a hole). The center hole was just a little bigger than the other 380 bullets possibly from tumble (can't see other bullet holes in that photo, but they came later). The third photo shows the entry of the CF bullet (was shooting downhill, so the entry is higher than the exits). Would not want to be hit with that CF round.

[KingWulfgar]

Sorry, I just don't understand the fascination with these bullets. I just don't think the slight added benefit is worth the potential problems. I would much rather have a bullet that feeds reliably in 100% of the spots. For me, the XTP loads like Critical Defense and PrecisionONe do just that. I didn't have problems with HydraShok either. All of those expand and penetrate well both in plain gel and through denim.

If I couldn't find a HP that performed reliably, I would carry ball ammo or get rid of the gun.

[erichard]

Sorry, I just don't understand the fascination with these bullets. I just don't think the slight added benefit is worth the potential problems. I would much rather have a bullet that feeds reliably in 100% of the spots. For me, the XTP loads like Critical Defense and PrecisionONe do just that. I didn't have problems with HydraShok either. All of those expand and penetrate well both in plain gel and through denim.

Well, so far no problems with the CF. They are more narrowed pointed, not unlike the CD. So for reliability, not sure CD is better. They are quite explosive once they hit the body. The wound tracks in that one video were quite dramatic compared to CD. I'd still like to see more on penetration through denim.

The XP in my opinion moves the damage up to the level of a 9mm. The CD, while reliable in feed, doesn't really reliably penetrate to FBI standards. XP does, and in some ways leaves a bigger permanent wound track than a 9mm, though not a 9mm in XP. The permanent wound cavity is around 1" by 12 inches, and the bullet continues to penetrate around 14 to 19 inches, depending upon whether there's denim or not. The CD is around 5 inches of permanent wound cavity with total penetration of 10 inches, and the thickness of the permanent wound cavity is smaller.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tujq9nMCR0 The Brand X in that video I strongly suspect is Hornady CD (it might even show that at one point.) Also keep in mind, not all maintain expansion through denim (esp. HydraShock), and those that do, penetrate even less than normal. Not such a problem with XP.

I know most people here are pretty savvy, but remember, the FBI standards were put in place after their 1986 shootout in Miami. The intent for using standardized gel tests was to come up with a bullet that had sufficient stopping power to end the fight early. In that gunfight, the FBI had some hits on the bad guys, and while they were ultimately fatal (meaning unsurvivable) wounds, they didn't stop the adrenaline pumped up opponents for what must have seemed a long while. The FBI came very close to losing all the agents at that scene. Worth a look at that video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlSCE88UhyA . After that, you get the 10mm and .40 caliber bullets looked at, mainly for penetration. I would say that, now, I think the FBI could go back to 9mm and use the XP and be better off than .40. I have 17 rounds of 9mm XP in my Glock 17 as of this week, and another 17 in the second magazine. They feed extremely well. Those rounds are devastating and don't depend on hollow point expansion (which is another plus vs. CD). Also, near where I am (3 miles away), NJ has outlawed hollow points.

I may in the end use only CF bullets in the 380 caliber, but since we don't have much data on their behavior in denim/ballistics gel, I'll use XP in the spots where they are proven reliable so far. I did send them a request to make a more narrow pointed XP version, that would feed very well in guns like ours. They could develop it pretty fast. Their setup is amazing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=LaIXACtWwIo

[DavidR]

From what I see, with 380 being a borderline caliber, ammo performance makes a real difference. My CW380 will not reliably cycle either Hydra Shok or XP which are my preferred choices in ammo. That's why I carry an LCP.


Dave

[KingWulfgar]

I was pretty impressed with this guy's testing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNtPHYwcDts Even if you don't watch the whole thing, skip to the last few minutes where he talks about the best. After watching that, I'm not at all concerned with being undergunned carrying a 380 with good, reliable hollow points like the XTP bullet or HydraShok. My 9mm, I carry HST, but they don't make that design in 380. Everything's a trade-off. Sometimes, I need the easier-to-carry and more concealable 380 and sometimes I don't. If I could carry anything, it would be my .45, but I didn't like lugging around a 2+ pound, double-stack .45 on my belt.

Also, he has TONS of individual videos that get more into the nitty-gritty of each round tested. I don't think Lehigh was available at the time he did the full test, but here's an individual video of the XP: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LczfeWK9lHw Cool stuff.

I'm not saying the XP isn't great. it actually looks pretty impressive--especially the wound channel. I just wouldn't even give it the time of day if it didn't feed/function reliably (20-30 rounds minimum without a failure). Reliability is my #1. The risk is just not worth the reward to me. I definitely don't like the idea of loading a magazine with different rounds in specific spots just to make it work.

[erichard]

Yeah, I'm with you on that. I did see those videos before, and the last one is what got me interested in Lehigh. I don't think he or anyone has tested the 380 CF. The CF may be the way to go for the Kahr 380's (vs. XP's).

Right now, I'm carrying the extended mag and extra regular mag. I've got 4 XP, then 4 CF, and one XP in the chamber. So the top 5 bullets in the gun I'm relatively certain will go bang, and the bottom 4 I'm almost certain will go bang, based on different people reporting the lower 4 in the mag. working, including the company tests. BTW, they were pretty up front in saying the top round didn't feed well in the Kahr 380's, so I do think they have credibility. They said the rest of the mag fired OK.

You may have seen in the ammo forum here, I have a running post where people can report their experiences with the XP. Since it's so expensive to test, maybe we can develop a broader consensus as a community in testing.

[Also, one hint for the cheapskates like me, when testing feed issues, it is possible to use ball ammo in firing the gun and the XP in the mag to test out feed (redoing that over and over). That doesn't test out firing and extraction/ejection for XP, but those don't appear to be issues at this point. Just use a second mag. to reload ball ammo into the chamber so as not to disturb the positioning of the XP in the test magazine. The target in my photo was not shot that way. It was just shot straight through, one after another.]

[SlowBurn]

I'm NOT an expert. I'm willing to be wrong. But the reading I've done on this issue says with handguns, shot placement counts for everything, and magic bullets almost nothing.

The essential reason the FBI and so many law enforcement agencies are going back to 9mm seems to boil down to - your gun holds more rounds so you have more chances of placing shots where they need to be. The difference in effectiveness in defense situations among different handgun calibers turns out to be very small (they're not switching to 380 but then 9mm is cheaper than 380 and they're concerned with service guns, not pocket guns)

My takeaway is: feeding and firing reliably, and not having to worry about malfunction, is much more important than how much damage the projectile does when it hits. If it hits at all, I'm probably going to be satisfied. Since pocket guns are limited in number of rounds, the few we do have better at least fire when we pull the trigger. Otherwise we have no chance at shot placement. Until the new bullets work consistently and reliably in my gun, I'm sticking with what does.

[erichard]

I'm NOT an expert. I'm willing to be wrong. But the reading I've done on this issue says with handguns, shot placement counts for everything, and magic bullets almost nothing.

I've seen that reasoning before, and I think it's based largely on the fact that there wasn't a whole heck of a lot of difference between 9mm up through 45 caliber when reviewing past gun fights and the objective data from those gun fights. What I'd say is, I'd wager that magic bullets in those cases at most amount to hollow points, and perhaps it's 9mm hollow point vs ball .45, but regardless, I agree shot placement counted the most, much more so than caliber. The problem is, a huge section of self defense experts (I'm like you not one of them) say 9mm is the low end of what you can trust in a gun fight, and they won't carry 380's. So if you could find a round that up's the 380 game to the 9mm territory, then it's in the game at least. The best ballistics I saw in 380 were Hydra Shock due to penetration consistency, but at max, their expansion is about to .45 inches, and they more or less consistently plug with clothing without expanding when going through denim (which aids penetration ironically). 9mm and above, I think your logic is sound, but largely based on historical rounds up to and including hollow points.

Those studies don't reflect the new magic bullets, which are in a different class, not just better hollow points a la HST's (which has been my load in .40 and .45) And they basically discount using the 380 at all.

The Kahr 380 I can pocket carry without trouble, but it is at the limit of what I want to carry. So I want the best magic bullet that gets me in the game. I do want it to go bang every time, and hopefully we will find out as people add experiences to that thread in the ammo section. BTW, many are reporting reliable XP feeding in that ammo section. Different Kahrs feed different bullets well. Hard to generalize from gun to gun.

I have a Para P-13 which used to be fussy before I replaced the mag springs. Now that gun will fire .45 ball ammo all day long (it's a 13 +1 gun, so a lot of fire power). I'm relatively certain that the HST's will jam long before the ball ammo will, but do I carry ball? No, I carry the HST's even though ball might be marginally more reliable because I want expansion and I don't want over penetration that FMJ may cause. Same could probably be said for ball and the Kahr 380. Trade offs basically.

But I will acknowledge, we need very good reliability in order to carry the rounds. I think it's good to keep an open mind regarding progress, though. I'm sure they went through a similar phase as hollow points were introduced.

[erichard]

You guys making me nervous, I had to put another mag through the gun. From the bottom of the mag: 4 XP (in + orientation), 4CF, +1 XP in the chamber (using magguts in extended magazine). All fed without hiccup.

Now I'm going to have to start charging you guys if you make me do that again. I just want soothing words of assurance that everything will be OK ;^).