The primary differences in the design of self-defense vs. hunting ammunition in firearms relate not just to effectiveness but also to safety. Some would argue that hunting rounds kill via shock and overpenetration; nothing could be further from the truth. Both the hunting and self-defense rounds attempt to neutralize their targets, just through different design philosophies fitting their specific purpose.
Hunting ammunition is also manufactured to ensure a clean kill of the game in different sizes, weights, and thicknesses, often at ranges that may vary. This is with minimum loss of meat and/or failure at the impact when hitting bone. The design should be such that the cartridge and bullet will retain their accuracy and energy upon impact. Probably the most popular hunting ammunition, ballistic tip ammunition imparts the expansion of a hollow point without sacrificing any accuracy. The trick is simply to avoid over-penetration and let the bullet expend its energy inside the target.
Unlike self-defense ammunition that is made to neutralize a human-sized target at close range with shaking hands that might affect aim, or during very high-stress conditions-emphasis is drawn toward maximum cavity creation to thwart the threat as quickly as possible. While some secondary considerations have been directed to minimize damage elsewhere, expansion bullets provide a large temporary cavity with significant permanent damage, hence transferring more energy to the target.
Designs for both types of ammunition depend on several factors, including the amount of powder used, bullet caliber and weight, length of the bullet, the type of tip, shape, jacketing, and core composition. For example, self-defense hollow point ammunition is manufactured to expand faster, while a full metal jacket hunting round is made for deeper penetration.
A recent ballistic testing of several.38 Special and .357 Magnum self-defense loads are instructive. Fired from both 2-inch and 4.2-inch barrel revolvers, the test demonstrated large variations in performance based on barrel length. The Magnum .357 generally outperformed the .38 Special on both penetration and expansion, although several loads over-penetrated severely. Two other considerations were reinforced: first was that recoil was heavy with high-velocity rounds, sacrificing controllability, especially with smaller-framed guns.
The results indicated that the greater part of the .38 Special loads fell within their ideal 12-18 inch penetration with many failing to expand consistently, while its .357 Magnum counterpart came out a bit better though the added velocity from longer barrels at times caused over-penetration and less expansion.
Self-defense or hunting ammunition will thus become a matter of individual needs. Different design goals and disparate performance characteristics between these ammunition types profoundly enhance their effectiveness and safety for their specific purposes.