.380acp... myth or reality?

[johndavid400]

C'mon guys... I am kind of having a hard time believing all the hype that the .380acp round is not a sufficient round for self defense. It seems like almost everyone says that the .380 is too small to take care of a possible attacker, and I am sure that someone will reply to this thread with a link to some story about some guy trying to stop a bad guy with a .380... and the bad guy keeps on coming at him. But I will also push those of you who would reply in this manner to look this thread on TFL URL=http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=806]amazing story [/URL], where the guy shot a BG in the right side of his chest with his .45 Colt 1911 and the guy kept coming at him. So if a .45 to the chest can't stop a guy pumped with adrenaline... what can? And if your next argument is 'shot placement', would a well placed .380 not take someone out (say the heart, or head) ??? Furthermore, a .22lr hollowpoint will flare out to almost the size of a dime upon impact (I know this from experience)... if a .22lr had enough power to go through the skull, it would not be a pretty picture for the guy that got shot.

Basically what I am saying is that if you think about it, all this badmouthing of smaller calibers is kind of all theory, is it not? If you are so sure that a .380 wouldnt kill you, then let someone shoot you with one.... exactly. Heck, I wouldn't let you shoot me with a .22lr... not for a million bucks. You hear about Accidental Discharges killing kids and innocent people that improperly handle their .22's. There was even a thread on TFL a week or so ago about an ex-cop in new york that accidentally dropped his .380 and it fired upon impact, killing the clerk at the deli he was eating at.... A.D.!!! HE wasn't even aiming!!
Anyways, I know you guys that feel that the .380acp (and smaller) is inferior, don't mean any harm... it just makes me wonder whether or not there are people on here that decide against buying their gun of choice because they read on TFL that you can unload on a BG with a .380 and he will most definitely still be coming at you.

I am a victim of this hype. I used to carry a Beretta tomcat 3032, but sold it to buy an XD-9 9mm. I sacrificed the most comfortable carry gun I've ever used for more power. I'm not saying that I regret the switch, but now that I think of it, it seemed a little unnecessary. Given a .380 is not as powerful as a 9mm, I'm saying that it is still a very lethal weapon, and is severely under-rated by the people on this forum, IMO.

Forgive me, I just have to explore both sides of the story.

[IM_Lugger]

I think .380 is 'enough' for self defence. I also believe that a .22lr can easily kill someone. I'm not saing that someone shot with a .380 will be thrown back 10 yards, but a .45acp woun't do it eather.

Last week I heard on the news that 21,000 people in USA get injured every year by BB guns. And keap in mind that real guns are 100's of times as powerfull :eek:

[Double Naught Spy]

Well johndavid400, it really doesn't matter what you think. It doesn't matter what I think. All that matters is what the bad guy you shoot is thinking or is able to keep thinking. Various shooting report data seem to indicate that folks shot with .380 often manage to keep thinking and keep acting for some time, more often than with larger or more powerful calibers.

Any predictive outcomes for caliber performance are theoretical until applied. You don't know if the person is going to be stopped when you shoot him until after he is shot. That is why we look to historical or actual information to see how things have performed in hopes that they will give an indication of how they are likely to perform in the future. It is not an exact science, but going with a smaller caliber or less powerful caliber does not appear to be the way to increase your odds of stopping your opposition.

Calibers do not care if they are badmouthed. My guess is that if you are being defense about .380 as a good self defense round, then you apparently need to prove something to yourself and you are hoping to do this with this thread. In other words, the fact that you feel the need to make the argument that the caliber is good enough seems to be a real attempt at convincing yourself. The rest of us don't care what you carry.

It is your call. You carry what you want. Remember, bad guys don't read gun rags and don't always know that they are to stop and lay down when they get shot.

[Haycreek]

IMHO, the 380 is a good concealment round---if--- it is carried in the right handgun. A handgun such as the CZ 83 is a very good defensive pistol. I believe that one of the problems with the 380, is that it is often carried in a very small, short barreled pocket pistol, which may not be fired accurately. I sometimes carry the CZ 83 instead of a Glock or 1911. I will be first to agree that the CZ 83 is not as powerful as either the Glock or 1911, but the CZ 83 is just as accurate as either, The CZ fits my hand so good that it is more accurate with two or three rounds, in a shorter time frame than either the Glock or 1911. HITS COUNT ! Fact is, we are more hyped about magnums and 45's here in our country, than folks in other countries. Different handguns for different occasions. A 44 mag is my wild hog hunting handgun. I like them all :)

[johndavid400]

well maybe thats why I find it hard to believe... I have never heard a story where the bad guy was shot by a .380 and kept attacking. I have nothing to prove, I own a .380, but I carry my 9mm.

I'm just wondering why when a guy is asking advice for a .380 carry gun, there is always about 3 or 4 people telling him not to buy a sissy little .380 because it won't do any good; I mean, think what you want... just don't force your arguable opinions on others, thats all.

Couldn't agree with you more haycreek.

[JohnKSa]

It'll stop someone if you hit them right with the right ammo.

There are failure to stop stories about every common self-defense round.

[Ala Dan]

Not trying to be a wise guy or anything, but a quality* .380
ACP in my trained hands, and a perp is in deep doo doo! :) :D

*FootNote: Bersa Thunder, Walther PPK or PPK/S, SIG P230 or P232
Beretta models 84,85, or 86, Mauser Hsc

Best Wishes,

[ampleworks]

I do agree proper training can have a ton to do with whether a 380 would stop someone or not but looking at ballistics data it just looks too much like a 22 to me. :( However, I can see me packing a Bersa Thunder if it comes down to concealability. Lower magazine capacity and weaker ammunition makes one be quite a bit more careful about shot placement.

380 CCI Blazer 95gr JHP

Muzzle/50yd/100yd
Velocity 980/900/836
Energy 192/162/140
-----
22LR CCI Mini-Mag HP 36gr GLHP

Muzzle/50yd/100yd
Velocity 1260/1118/1035
Energy 127/100/86
-----
9mm CCI Blazer 115gr JHP

Muzzle/50yd/100yd
Velocity 1145/1029/951
Energy 335/271/231

[croyance]

A .45 ACP can't stop a guy if it is put in the wrong place. The thorax is full of places where a guy can temporarily take a bullet. The extra diameter gives you a slightly higher margin of error. The extra weight gives you more penetration, increasing your chances of hitting something vital. The extra velocity does the same and adds to the chances of good expansion.
The added power adds some shock, which, if it hits the right bundle of nerves will give a pain reaction.

There is no magic bullet that does it all. Handguns especially are a compromise. You just have better chances with some than others. Where your minimum performance standard is entirely your choise.

[LAK]

A reservation I have over .380s applies equally to the .38 Special; the ability to defeat tactical barriers. Additionally with the .380, because bullets are on the light side, I would only load them with hardball to ensure adequate penetration in tissue.

[Brick]

In 1904 Thompson and Col. Louis A. LaGarde conducted tests to find the caliber most suited for military handgun ammunition. The tests included firing shots into live cattle at a Chicago slaughterhouse, and into human cadavers obtained from medical schools. The conclusion? Large and slow moving bullets of about .45 caliber were much more destructive than smaller bullets moving at high velocity. With this knowledge in hand, Thompson was instrumental in developing the .45 caliber rimless cartridge, later adopted for use in the Colt Model 1911 pistol designed by John Browning. Eventually this same cartridge would be chambered in Thompson's Submachine gun.

http://www.nfatoys.com/tsmg/

Maybe. But the problem is that someone hears massive publicity about that guy who kept coming after being hit with a 9mm, then everyone hates the 9mm. But what about those instances where a suspect pulled a .22 on a cop and the round entered on the cop's side and bounced around in his ribcage? And then the cop pulled a .357 Magnum let loose...the bad guy lived. :(

[Danindetroit]

.380 ACP Hornady 90gr XTP JHP the fbi gave this bullet an optimal rating when shot out of a Beretta 85, 3.8" bbl 10 rd Avg. Velocity: 1013 fps, into denim covered ballistic gelatin to simulate a person wearing clothes. On bare gelatin it was marginal.

Marginal - average bullet penetration is between 9- and 12- inches.
Optimal - average bullet penetration is between 12- and 16-inches.

I saw that this round is still offered by hornady.

Hornady says out of a 3 inch barrel they get 1000 fps.

[Arc Angel]

:rolleyes: Let’s see? I don’t think there is any handgun caliber that will guarantee a stop against a, ‘pumped opponent’. I’ve been shot in the ankle with a 22LR. It hurt like the dickens when it hit and knocked me, clean, off my feet. I, also, took a glancing shot to the skull; (I know; it explains a lot!) it definitely took me out of the fight. I once knew a coworker who accidentally shot himself with his own gun at lunchtime. He got hit in the lower abdomen; and I didn’t see a whole lot of fight in him afterwards. I’d have to conclude that an individual’s psychological state-of-mind has a lot to do with being stopped by any bullet; but, particularly, all bullets traveling slower than 1,500/1,600 fps.

Neither am I a great believer in what I like to call the, ‘hollow-point’ myth. Never shot a person with a hollow-point; but I’ve dropped my fair share of game animals; and there have been any number of times when hollow-points have mushroomed beautifully and penetrated very little in the process. Hollow-points seem to work well on soft-skinned targets like people; but, you have to remember things, sometimes, get in the way. (Like Teddy Roosevelt’s speech papers rolled up in his vest pocket!)

Then there’s the large volume of information available about the April 1986 Miami shootout. Early on Michael Platt took a solid hit from a 9mm handgun round. Forensic analysis later concluded that this wound was NOT survivable; but, carrying it, Platt continued to take the fight forward and went on to shoot multiple FBI agents. If a man isn’t willing to, ‘lie down’ your pistol bullet(s) may not be able to convince him, soon enough, that he’s supposed to be, either, dead or out of the fight.

I’ve tried using a 44 magnum in handgun competition. Forget about, ‘Dirty Harry’. Even loaded at 44 Special velocities, the 44 magnum is difficult to control and slow – too slow to post a decent score with. So what do I carry? Well, everything that’s already been mentioned. Usually it’s some combination of 45acp and 32acp. Often it’s a 357 magnum and 32acp. (I like the 357; it hits hard and shoots straight for me; but, in a revolver, it’s also slow on repetitive shots; and I wouldn’t want to have to face more than one opponent at a time with it.) On Sundays I’ll often have a 380 auto under my suit jacket. Many years ago I, occasionally, carried a small 22LR revolver. I stopped after an incident with 4 very large men and a baseball bat. (The guy with the bat was, definitely, better armed than I was.)

Earlier this week I was shooting in an IDPA match. Some of the guys were complaining about one stage where we had to make frequent head shots. The rhythm was two to the torso and one to the head. At another stage, we had to make frequent magazine changes in order to finish the run. Granted this is a, ‘gun game’; but I have to say, in my opinion, it’s a good one. Boredom and creativity aside, during these, ‘gun games’ I’ve picked up any number of subtle little points that, someday, may help me to protect myself. Sure Jeff Cooper’s right: ‘If you need to make a magazine change in a gunfight, you’re already in a world of trouble!’ Nevertheless, we all need to understand the technique and mechanics of magazine changes.

Here’s the way I’ve come to see things: It’s annoying as the dickens to have to suddenly, ‘run dry’ and need to make a magazine switch in a gunfight. Personally my own concentration tends to go to … . Consequently I have long had the tendency to keep, at least, a running pattern of the number of shots I’ve fired. Yeah, I know, you can’t do that in a gunfight; I, also, realize that there’s no accurate way to determine what some people can (and will) do in a fight. During, ‘gun games’ I tend to count my shots; this way it’s easier for me to remember where I am, and what I’m supposed to be doing BEFORE my magazine runs out.

Does this technique always work for me? No, not always; but it does work often enough for me to constantly attempt to use it. The results I get are always better; and, in all honesty, I have never found it to be that hard to keep a running count on 10 rounds fired over a few seconds of time. Now if I had to slow fire each shot, one at a time, that might be tougher; but, heck, one’s, two’s, or three’s consistently going off ain’t that tough to follow.

As for all those head shots, well, personally I like them! As a matter of fact the more I pull the trigger the stronger my tendency is to go for the head. The closer a target is to me, the stronger my tendency is to, again, go for the head. These are some of the reasons, ‘Why’ I travel so far to shoot IDPA. No, it’s NOT the real world; but these, ‘make believe’ gun fighting scenarios introduce just enough stress and confusion to make these training efforts worthwhile for me.

In a practical sense, you get to watch a lot of different people shoot during a, ‘gun game’ match. I find it interesting to note that time is, almost, an irrelevant consideration. Sure time restrictions make for a better match and improve the perception of artificial stress; but, whenever, I watch a decent shooter move down the line, hitting what he’s aiming at, it’s obvious to me that while this person isn’t going to win the match, he would, nonetheless, be a truly dangerous opponent in a real life gunfight. Fact is I wouldn’t want any, ‘consistent hitter’ shooting AT ME – period!

It’s, also, apparent to me that you have to be, ‘comfortable’ with whatever weapon you’re using, and have some sense of appreciation for what it can and cannot be expected to do. I’ve long stressed the concept of, ‘vertical shooting’. Whenever I have a new student, one of the first things I try to get him to do is vertically line up his groups. One of the reasons I do this is because the really vulnerable – highly stoppable – targets on a human being are all centered around the vertical line of the backbone between the groin and the head. Vertical shot disbursement doesn’t bother me; in fact, I prefer it! Horizontal shot disbursement, on the other hand, annoys me because I fully realize, ‘What’ it might represent to my own personal safety in a real gunfight.

If the fight ends up coming straight at you, I think I’d prefer to slow down and hold back for a head shot. At, ‘kissing distance’ I’d even settle for giving the other guy a good dose of muzzle blast in the face or ear. Then I guess everything’s about the reasons, ‘Why’ you spent all those years in a dojo!

Let’s, also, take the time to remember that: Drug dealers love the 25acp! Whether it happens sooner or later in the fight, this little round remains the all time record holder for ultimately killing people! As far as I’m concerned, I’m not particularly bothered by carrying a 32, or a 380, or a 9mm – whatever.

To my mind it’s more important how well the pistol FEELS in my hand, and how easy it is to sight, than what particular caliber I’m using. Are you going to stop a Rottweiler or crazed drug addict with a 32 or a 380? Probably not! You may not stop them with a 9mm or a 45acp - either. Get ‘um in close, shoot straight, and be prepared for a little hand-to-hand. Personally I like moving diagonally or, even, backing up as I shoot; (I shuffle.) and I, always, always, love cover! Under certain circumstances, (You’ll know, ‘When’.) if you hit an opponent and stun him, do exactly the same thing you’d do in a fistfight: (Hell, while I hate the guy, do what Michael Platt did!) Close with your opponent and take your final shots real close in.

Finally, in my opinion, gun fighting is more about FOCUS, and the individual gunman’s personal ability to focus, than it is about caliber – any caliber! There’s too much, ‘socio-political crap’ around today about, ‘shooting-to-stop’. If it’s come down to gun fighting I can’t imagine an experienced gunman who's involved in a real life gunfight, ‘shooting-to-stop’. Out on the street, ‘shooting-to-stop’ means, ‘shooting-to-kill’. Regardless of whatever caliber you’re using, as long as the other guy keeps coming forward, or hangs onto his weapon, my recommendation would be to: FOCUS and, ‘shoot-to-live’ instead. Shoot straight, line up, ‘vertical’ and, ‘shoot vertical’. As the old cops like to say; ‘Freight ‘um down!’ ;)

[Brick]

All this gelatin stuff all over again. As if you test your bullets with a 20x20x20 inch block...As if humans are 20x20x20. :eek:

Just test it on animals!

If it works well on bear, it'll probably work very well on mutant zombies! :barf:

I know. But the perfect bullet isn't out there.

[Danindetroit]

I think jd that you should carry what you feel most comfortable with. I just thought I would post some data that said the .380 can be a decent seld defense round. The FBI and other agencies test there bullets with a medium that can be replicated in any lab all over the world. If you think that the best way is to shoot bears, then start shooting them. I posted for porpose of helping the originator of the thread. I might even put in hollowpoints and fmj bullets alternated in a mag.

[Geoff Timm]

Anything less than a .45-70 out of a rifle has no stopping power!

If it worked for Colonel Custer.... umm... uhhh...

Never mind.

Geoff
Who adapts ancient jokes as needed. :cool:

[Majic]

Why do you see so many posts recommending the .380 as too weak?
To many people reading gun mags as if they were the holy scriptures.
To many people looking at statistical analysis when it's known that the data can be made to come out with any solution you want it to.

[Erich]

As others have said, one needs shot placement and adequate penetration. And luck. Expansion is gravy.

I have mentioned the case I presently have in which a 280-lb man with a BAC of .15 was stopped after seven rounds of .380 hardball. Only two of the rounds did serious damage. One of these went through his liver and lung and would have eventually been fatal but did not stop him. The other completely penetrated his torso and upper arm, going through his aorta and putting him down on the way.

The remaining five shots did very little damage.

If you're going to carry a .380, I'd recommend that you carry hot European hardball, since I don't think that you want low-speed/low-mass projectiles slowing down during expansion . . . they might not reach "the good stuff" and they might thereby not work.

I'm often tempted to buy a .380, and I've owned them before . . . but I just can't bring myself to rely on one for protecting myself.

[Double Naught Spy]

The .380 isn't a sissy caliber. If somebody is using such a term, then they probably are clueless. They probably haven't fired a .380 out of one of the little concealment guns either. Shooting a .380 out of a small gun, such as a Colt Pony, the recoil can be pretty darned significant. For comparison, my wife prefers shooting her full-sized 1911 over my Colt Pony.

Majic, a lot of the gun rags and data are in fact factual about the problems associated with smaller calibers. The real error I see being made here by a lot of people is that they the smallest caliber that is good enough and they want it for personal protection. So they are requesting the weakest round that will hopefully work well. That is the wrong end of the scale by which to judge personal protection. That is sort of like trying to buy the smallest fire extinguisher to protect your home against a fire. Sure enough, you might get by with a little kitchen fire extinguisher, might.

The prudent way to look at the situation is to determine the largest caliber you can handle from a platform that is reliable and can be concealed.

[DPris]

The .380 is marginal, period.
In my uniformed years, it wounded more often than it killed.
One case sticks in mind. Ex boyfriend abducted girl at gunpoint, carjacked a vehicle at gunpoint, subsequent police chase ended up rolling the stolen vehicle on a freeway offramp. Boyfriend & girl got out OK, boyfriend stood off surrounding officers from several jurisdictions for some time by using her as a hostage, then shot her in the chest at very close range with his .380 auto once. She ran around the corner of the car, he may have been temporarily diverted from a second shot in astonishment when she didn't go down, but as soon as she was clear enough he was permanently diverted by incoming fire from 9mms & .40s. She survived. He didn't make it to trial.
I was working that day, but not there. We were shown the video at a later briefing. The girl was maybe 110 pounds, about 20 years old. There was absolutely no visible immediate effect on her, she just turned around and ran away.
I have a very nice Walther PPK/S in .380, but I'm fully aware of the old cop joke- if you want to hurt somebody, shoot 'em with a .380, if you want to stop them, use something bigger.
Bullet type & placement are important, but so is caliber (bullet weight, construction, and energy).
If you carry a .380, just be aware that you're at the bottom end in effective defensive calibers.
I know, somebody killed a grizzly with a .22 once. But that was a very lucky shot through the eye into the brain, and it doesn't hardly make the .22 a good grizzly gun.
Denis

[BigG]

I will just say that it makes a big difference whether your target is aware or unaware. A 22 LR in the back of the neck or a 7.62 russian something or other in the same place will do more than a big magnum if the person is scared and running and you just wing him. The 380 is a marginal piece but better than nothing. There are better choices now in the same size pkg. JMHO.

[horge]

How many here have even presented their .40's, .45's and 9's in real life
home or street defense? When it goes down bad on your virgin butt,
maybe it helps to have a piece that is

1. dead-nuts reliable.
2. light enough to be an instant extension of your transitioning arm
3. a natural pointer, since that sighted fire stuff goes out the window
4. an accurate rapidfire piece, its muzzle coming down quick for follow-ups

Placement, placement, placement. Number of holes too.
You don't have all day to shoot, and the BG ain't posing for a picture.

If you can rely on a larger caliber in a CONCEALABLE piece to do that,
then good for you.

I might suspect that nearly all of the people commenting negatively on the .380
have ZERO actual experience defending themselves from BG's on the street
or in their home with ANY firearm. Well? Not everyone is a cop or security
officer whose job it is to look for creeps (and thank God for cops) and have
their firearms in easy access open carry. --others tend to live their different
lives focused on other things, meaning the BG's get the jump on them, their
defense weapons tucked away into reduced accessibility.

We all have a$$es, and like opinions, they are ony worth what we are willing
to defend them with.
Would I choose to defend mine with a .380 pistol? No. No. NO.
I choose to defend mine with my training.


My .380 is just a tool.
A reliable, accurate, high-ROF, extremely pointable tool.
Ditto the Remington Golden Sabers in it.
There are, or ought to be, many other tools in the toolbox,
besides any weapons.

Mabuhay.

[Brick]

Good point horge.

Totally agreed.

Ever hear of the American-180 submachine gun with 280 round drum? It's a .22. If you have the training to get consistent stopping shots, then excellent. Now be prepared to put it to use. :D

Five accurate head shots with a .22 is just as equal to two .600 Nitro Express SA Revolver shots to the lungs.

[JohnKSa]

it wounded more often than it killed.I believe that's probably true of virtually any handgun round.

[DAVID NANCARROW]

The only caveat I have for smaller calibers-the smaller the bullet, the more accurate you have to be with it under stress.

[WillBrayjr]

The round regardless of its size is only as effective as the person shooting it.

[Bob Freddy]

It's all about placement of the shots. Not too long ago there was a police chase in our town that went over into the neighboring town. One LEO shot the perp 3 times with .45acp the other LEO shot him twice with 9mm . Five holes in all and he is doing fine. Yes the BG was stopped, but it took all five shots to stop him. Maybe if the hole from the fifth shot was made on the first shot he would have stopped right away, but we will never know. Not actually sure where any of the shots landed though. I am just happy they hit the guy. The last police shooting in town , one LEO emptied his glock and sent 18 rounds flying. He never hit the guy once, he did manage to ruin a parked van and some siding on a nearby house. :eek:

BOB

[Labuyo]

I'm with most people here. Mindset and shot placement is paramount. But ammunitions do have some limitations. I just don't think that a .380 has enough power to overcome barriers than say, a 9mm.
A .22 cal might have killed a grizzly, but that's one lucky shot. I don't think everyone can be that lucky everyday.

John,
I do think that your move towards the XD-9 is a good one. Its sturdier than the Tomcat and fires a much more powerfull cartridge. 9mm' are so afffordable these days too, that should allow for more range time.

[DPris]

OK, how about "wounded MUCH more than it killed"? :)
Denis

[BusGunner007]

Good timing on this Topic.

Soon, I'll be putting my Beretta 84F on consignment to help finance the purchase of a Beretta 8040F Mini Cougar.
The reason is simple: I have .40's and the safety will work the same way.

The 84F is used with Remington Golden Saber 102-gr. ammo and it's pretty snappy and accurate.
I really like the gun, BUT ---
I want a CCW that works the same way as the 96's and uses the same ammo.
The .40 is my choice, as is the Beretta platform, both of which I feel comfortable with.

Also, I was going to place a 3032 Tomcat on consignment.
I'd bought it for my Wife, who told me what she would like in a CCW. The Tomcat was the ONLY gun that fit her parameters.
So, the reason for NOT getting rid of it is equally simple: She'll use it.

The 84F is a great firearm and everybody who shoots it likes it.
The fact is the Mini Cougar / .40 will be about the same size but have much better results if I practice with it and ever have to use it.
Therefore, I will be getting rid of MY .380 :( to get another .40 :D and keep the .32 for my Beloved because she will have something she'll practice with and use :) .

I've also been reading again in some of my old magazines about the Pocket Pistols and the .32 Winchester Silver Tip seems to get about the same 'rating' as a .380ACP or .38 Special in the 'one-shot-stop' description.
I understand that this is not the best rating system, but it'll do and gives us a gun that is far more concealable and will BE THERE vs. nothing at all.

Meanwhile, I'm getting excited at the prospect of having a new Beretta .40! :p

[Eric Larsen]

Mucho good info on this thread. Shooting my guns this weekend just kinda adds to this thread.....my wifes makarov, much like a hot 380 in feel and recoil, is very easy to shoot very quickly and rapidly. Faster than my 9mm at least in my hands. This has to be worth alot in a real life BG situation.
Ive shot more 9mm's and even with semi warm loads recovery time between shots is more with the 9mm than the little mak.

I say carry what you want just be damn good with it.........Shoot well.

[CZ75daddy0405]

I carried a Russian Makarov 380acp around for years. I never felt under gunned. :)

[care-less]

I would only add that James Hickock used a 36cal percussion revolver (well, actually a pair of them). He used these Colts even though bigger and more powerful weapons were available such as 44 and 45 cal pistols. Now the 36 cal 1851 Colt percussion pistol is significantly less powerful than the 380 acp. Why was Hickock; using such an obviously wimpy round; able to survive so many gunfights? Because he handled those wimpy weapons with superior expertise; that why. He preferred these wimpy Colts precisely for their balance and handling qualities/speed into use. Many men on both sides during the Civil War also preferred the 1851 Colt for the same reasons. Yes, the 44's were more powerful; but the handling qualities of the 36 outweighed this power advantage in the minds of many. Just something to think about.

[Geoff Timm]

care-less opined: "I would only add that James Hickock used a 36cal percussion revolver (well, actually a pair of them). He used these Colts even though bigger and more powerful weapons were available such as 44 and 45 cal pistols."

His targets were smaller, poorly nurished, disease and pariste ridden, normal people for the times. The "pisonous red yankee whiskey" didn't add to resistance either.

Now days the criminal is a five or six time convicted criminal who has spent weeks in prison working out every day, with excellent medical care and a scientifically balanced diet. He (statistically) has probably participated in a few killings and wants to kill you to gain the admiration of his peers.

Now, do you think the .380 is a good idea, given that 9mm Lugar is available in the same size weapons at the same prices, and with cheaper practice ammo (roughly speaking.)

Geoff
Who is looking more and more at the Glock 26, Berretta Cougar, SIG 239, but then there are the small .45s.....

[horge]

Geoff,

The two sides here could go round and round all day on this,
Sidestepping one other, so I'll address your thrust, and then reiterate ours.

A 9mm Parabellum will do more damage than a .380 ACP...
A .45 ACP will do more damage than a .380 ACP
A .600 Nitro Express will do more damage than a .380 ACP...

Nobody disputes any of that, so let's not beat a dead horse here.
We were talking about handling --how fast you can get your CCW-sized iron out,
on target, and then on target again, and yet again, and then onto target #2.

Telling us there are 9mm platforms the same size as the .380's is a little misleading. Same-size means same-concealability, but it doesn't mean same handling, if it packs a more-powerful cartridge. You know that 9mm, .45, .40, are all native to larger platforms. Confining them to CCW-downsized pistols means there's less pistol weight to soak up recoil, and this means more difficult and likely-slower target reacquisition, at a time when all your shooting abilities are being sapped by fear/excitement.

For the .380 ACP, a CCW-sized piece is its natural, native platform. It handles well for us. That's all it is, really. Maybe we're just not man enough for 9, .40 or .45....n ot like you big-caliber manly-men are
;)


As for those 7-foot, 370 lb solid-muscle behemoths that often get cited in threads like these.... they can perhaps be spotted from far away and thus avoided, unless one's piece has a bore so big, its really all that its owner sees...heheh. One of those what-gun-for-bear threads might be useful reading.

[care-less]

Good reply Horge! Personally, I think that people back in the 1800's were much healthier than those of today. Oh, we may live longer due to drugs that were not available then, but they were a much hardier people. all of that is really off topic though. I will say that a 9mm sized bullet is a 9mm sized bullet; whether fired from a 380, 9mm luger, 357sig, 38 super, 9mm largo, or any other 9mm. To increase stopping power; bore size must be increased. This has been a recognized fact for a very long time, and one is kidding themselves if they think that one 9mm is more effective than another 9mm just because of its velocity. With proper bullet construction, penetration is the only thing affected by velocity, and the 380 already has enough penetration for its intended human target.

[juliet charley]

I will say that a 9mm sized bullet is a 9mm sized bullet; whether fired from a 380, 9mm luger, 357sig, 38 super, 9mm largo, or any other 9mm. To increase stopping power; bore size must be increased.
That's quite a misleading statement.

Current generation premium 9x19 bullets will consistently expand to .60+ calibre and still achieve adequate penetration (12-16 inches).

The 9x17 can achieve adequate penetration when it doesn't expand, but even the best 9x17 severely underpenetrate when they expand (and they do NOT expand to same degree the 9x19 does).

Basically, the 9x19 gives you both penetration and expansion. The 9x17 gives you the choice of penetration and expansion (but not really you MUST have penetration--expansion is merely icing on the cake).

[postal1911]

For me the 380acp is a great backup weapon. I personally carry a 45 each and every day. sometimes i carry a 38spl or 380 as a back up. yes it matters where you place your shots, but that is just practice and allot of it. thats me.
if you feel the best you can handle and shoot well is a 380 then that is what you should carry and be fine with it. i love hearing about the husband who goes out and buys his wife a snubbie 357 and wonders why she doesnt want to shoot anymore with him, a smaller caliber would have been better for her. i wouldnt be ashamed of carrying a 380 if that was the best i could control and shoot. carry the best, biggest you can shoot well. :eek:

[horge]

Hi, juliet charley :)

Just for reference

The penetration of commercial .380 JHP is between 6 and 12 inches.
The penetration of commercial .380 FMJ is well over 14 inches.
Clothing on the target tends to greatly increase the penetration of JHP's.
and, again they're easier to send con rapido on-target.

The oft-quoted 12" minimum penetration is not there because of very thick humans. It's there to account for interposing limbs, bad angles and whatnot: in other words POOR SHOT PLACEMENT. If a handgun-and-cartridge combination tends to provide GOOD SHOT PLACEMENT almost naturally, then I have to wonder -- in the real world, just how many inches of tissue are really between your pece and the assaialnt's vitals?

[SIGLOCKAUR]

May as well add my two cents. These days the big argument against the .380 is that their are guns of the same size envelope that can deliver much more potent rounds (9mm, .357 Sig, .40, etc.,..). I have an older book that gives performance data on the .380 out of short vs. longer barrels. As someone pointed out their is quite a bit of difference in performance between guns of around 4" barrels and those shorter than 3". The problem with the .380 seems to be that it (like the .38 out of a 2" barrel) has difficulty getting a good balance of penetration and expansion. From actual shooting reports from LEO organizations that issued the .380 ( I think the Kentucy State Police issued .380 PPK's to their officers for awhile, then switched to Glock 27's for instance) they just don't stop an attacker very fast. Kill them yes. Stop them quickly, no. Also some of the small .380's are bad for jamming. Can a .380 be used successfully to defend ones life? Of course. And have been. One LEO who teaches gunfight survival related a story of how a female student of his carried a SIG 230 in .380. Coming home one night she surprised a would be robber. He happened to be very large. He also was very stupid he said "you won't shoot me". He advanced on her and she fired once hitting him in the arm. He was shocked and said "you b*&%$! You shoot me! Upon advancing again she put a bullet throuh his heart. He just sat down, looked at her, passed out, and later died. So it was a a successful stop. But after that she switched to a 9mm SIG. Another man's Cadillac was carjacked and they placed him in the trunk of his own car. He heard them talk about where to kill him at. The one not driving backed out. The driver was still determined. Luckily the owner of the car had been to the range and had his Beretta 84 in the trunk. He found it and waited for the trunk to open. When it did as soon as he saw the man's chest he put a bullet through his heart. The man dropped the old 1911 he was carrying and fell down. Called the guy a bastard and said you killed me. Believe it or not the bad guy survived! I think the second one falls under the catergory of phychological stops. He could have shot the man with the .380. I still don't understand why the man just shot once. Point is yes they can work. If you must carry one get one with close to a 4" barrel that is reliable. The Bersa (which I had a Nickeled version I sold and regret to this day) is probably best bang for the buck. To me the .380 has taken on the role of a "niche gun". It is often the limit of what someone of limited hand strength can shoot well. In the hot weather my Kel Tec P-3AT is my back-up gun. It is also sometimes the only gun I can carry in special cicumstances. Those are a couple of it niches it fills. Much rather have a small .380 than a .22 or .25. Seven rounds of rapid fire .380 would surely deter an attacker. Would still rather have at least a 9mm though.
When the weather gets cooler my MK40 or 642 S&W replaces the KT as my BUG. As someone mentioned in tesing different rounds I have found the Hornady XTP an excellent compromise round. Although it doesn't expand much it actually penerates deeper tham alot of the fmj rounds I have tried. Also very a very accurate round. The XTP was designed to lace more of a premium over penetration than expansion. Tha's why the bulet is very popular for hunting. Just food for thought. Lot's of police departments have forbidden the use of anything smaller than 9mm for their officers as BUG's and off duty guns.

[donkee]

I can put my 9x18's right where I want to with my ultra reliable Makarov. 8 shots in the mag, one in the chamber. A guy at the range once told me, he sure wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of that little mak. If you can put em where you want em, I don't see where .380 would be bad. I tried to capture one of the bullets when I first got it. blasted right through 3 phone books using FMJ. I don't think penetration is much of an issue and 9x18 is close enough to .380 i'd think the results would be similar. The issue I think, is training and practice.

IMO

[juliet charley]

horge -

Your penetration figures for the commercial .380 JHPs is a little of the generous side. For example, the Winchester 95-grain Ranger T only does 8 inches (though it does expand to .64 calibre) after 4 layers of denim. The Remington 102-grain Golden Sabre does worse. FWIW, while clothing does tend increase the penetration of JHPs, it hardly qualifies as "greatly." For example, to use the Winchester Ranger T round again, the penetration is bare gelatin is 7.7 inches--only 0.3 inches less. In the heavy cloth test, it does 7.8 inches--only 0.1 inch more than bare gelatin.

Your belief that, "The oft-quoted 12" minimum penetration is not there because of very thick humans. It's there to account for interposing limbs, bad angles and whatnot: in other words POOR SHOT PLACEMENT," is just plain wrong. It has nothing to do with "poor shot placement," but rather recognition of the fact that most BGs are not going to stand there with their arms at their sides and give you an obstructed shot at their thoracic cavity. In will life people do all sort of things like lift their arms, turn sideways, etc. The 12 inch figure is a realistic minimum to account for real life--not a fantasy land where every BG is cooperative in his own demise and every shot is perfect.

The bottom line is the .380 cannot effectively deliver both penetration and expansion. If you choose carry, you do need know (and acknowledge) that you are compromise one (expansion) for the other (penetration) or vice versa. I will occassionally drop a 9x19 Mak in my pocket (loaded with FMJs), but when I do so I am fully cognizant of the compromise I am making and am willing to live with the implications and consequences. FWIW, I will not carry JHPs in my Mak even though it brings about 10% more power to the table than the .380. It is still not enough to give reliable penetration and expansion.

[Arc Angel]

Tim,

:rolleyes: I don't agree with THR communication protocols and will not answer any personal message, there - Especially about something I originally posted at The Firing Line in the first place.

I'll be glad to answer your questions in regard to comments I made at;

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154532&page=1&pp=25

but, first, let's stay inside the right forum - OK! :)

If you're not a TFL member, then, take a few minutes and join in. :cool:

[45 Fu]

I might as well jump in on this.

I agree that mindset and the proper placing of shots goes a long way in a fight. I'll agree they are the most important things, but they are not the only things. The argument of "a properly placed .22 will kill someone," is nto really an argument with any merit as I am sure I an find some account of someone throwing arock and killing another person, but that doesn't mean I will opt for a pocket of stones as my primary mode of self defense. I posted this on another thread but it bears repeating here: Sure, a person can be killed with a .22, .32, .380 (add any other minor caliber here), but the point is not only will they die but how fast they will do so after being shot.

No one in their right mind, or who knows what they are talking about, will tell you that a .45 will absolutely drop someone instantly 100% of the time. Same for a .357, .38, .40, or 9mm. But, the chances are much greater than with something the caliber of .380 or smaller. The .380 is great if it's the only thing you'll carry. But why limit yourself when there are other options that are of similar weight and size and have the potential of doing the job much better?

Simply put, dumb luck can be on your side and you may drop someone easily with a .380. However, it may not be on your side and you may be involved in an animal brawl for your life. In this situation how exactly are you going to take the time for a well placed eye socket shot when the other guy(s) is trying his best to bash your brains in/stab you/shoot you? It is best to have something that has more of a chance of working as intended.

Just something to think about.

[Grayfox]

I've noticed that the one consistant theme in this thread is stop the bad guy. However you put it, instant stop, incacitate, end the threat or even kill him. Everybody is focused on doing in the BG. Is there any law or rule that says you have to stand and fight? I don't think so.
If a shot from a .22 is enough to make the BG pause for a second so that you have a chance to escape, then haul ass! Break off the fight and get out of there. I doubt if he will pursue and risk being shot again. The object is to survive. I could care less if the the attacker lives or dies as long as I'm still breathing.
Carry whatever you're comfortable with and don't worry what others have to say about it. As long as the attack ends with you still alive, the gun has done its job.

[michael t]

Well ,I own several 380 and have faith any one of them will work. I remember reading some place that todays 380 is almost exactly the same as old 36cal.

[LAK]

care-lessHe preferred these wimpy Colts precisely for their balance and handling qualities/speed into use. Many men on both sides during the Civil War also preferred the 1851 Colt for the same reasons

This is an often neglected point, and the reason I especially like the 9mm Browning Hi-Power and the S&W 3" 65 over larger and heavier pieces in their respective catagories.

[horge]

Juliet Charley,

1. I'm not THAT unfamiliar with the various published and unpublished tests for .380 performance.
This (http://www.geocities.com/bersa_thunder/cartridges.html) was
collated from several sources. The numbers I actually put up were a fraction
of all reports collected. All sources used are cited and even linked-to, and
anyone with a decent number of such 'reports' ought to know just how badly
the results can vary, despite sticking to the same protocols for the test,
especially BB calibration.

2. Neither am I THAT unfamiliar with real life.
I have a first hearing set for January 24, and my own vivid memory to tell me
how accurate a .380 is in real life, and how it stops people, in real life.
Maybe when it's no longer sub judice we'll see, but really, everyone's
resting their opinions on their own experiences or the trusted, related
experiences of others. Or preferably both.In {real} life people do all sort of things like lift their arms, turn sideways, etc. The 12 inch figure is a realistic minimum to account for real life--not a fantasy land where every BG is cooperative in his own demise and every shot is perfect.
Thank you. I think I made this same point in my first post on this thread.
Thanks particularly for the 'fantasy land' reference.
There's 'doing' something, and then there's 'fantasizing'.
I guess one can fantasize, based upon a few bits of 'fact'.
Then again, maybe one might actually have some direct experience in the subject,
and thus have a broader base to consider --which is neither 'fantasizing'
nor its worse cousin which is parroting the unfamiliar.

I'm a bit familiar with the first FBI WBS, and then the origins of FTU's 12" minimum:
mostly Platt's arm-and-chest wound nearly to his heart.
Given the ballistic and legal differences between that hose-fest
and a realistic civilian defense situation, 12" is perhaps a much more arbitrary
construct than some think.

Now, I'm not trying to convince anyone to carry .380.
I've only been explaining the other factors for MY choice in a firearm-cartridge
combination, aside from those terminal performance stats you refer to.
Those stats try to model a hit, while I'm looking more to the
factors that determine how easily one CAN score a hit, repeatedly.


Thanks for the discussion.

[juliet charley]

horge -

1. Your table supports what I said. If a .380 JHP, you cannot count on penetration. You cannot depend on consistent, reliable expansion and penetration with the .380, period. The bottom line is there are a lot more rounds (equally shootable, accurate, carryable, etc.) that are capable of delivering far more consistent, relibable expansion and penetration than the .380.

2. Nobody said the .380 wouldn't or couldn't stop. What has been said is the .380 is not a consistent, reliable stopper. It worked in your case (and others). There has been a lot more cases where it hasn't. The bottom line is there are a lot more rounds (equally shootable, accurate, carryable, etc.) that are far more capable of delivering fast consistent, relibable stops than the .380.

I believe if you go back and read my post you will see my remarks about the real world versus fantasy world were a direct comment on your highly inaccurate statement the twelve inch minimum penetration is to account for poor slot placement. The twelve inch minimum recognizes the actuality (and variability) of what really happens. Again, if you can count on the target to stand meekly with his hands at his side, facing you, giving you an unobstructed thoracic cavity shot, twelve inches of penetration might be a little much, but it real life that really doesn't happen.
while I'm looking more to the factors that determine how easily one CAN score a hit, repeatedly.
You get just a little confusing here. While I know the .380 can be shot accurately, the relatively short sight radius, the usually small sights, and the harsh blowback action are not necessarily conducive to scoring repeated hits. A recoil operated 9x19 is generally far easier to shoot accurately and rapidly that a .380 (and delivers a far more consistently performing bullet).

Again, I not really taking a stand on the matter. As I stated, I occassionally shove a Mak in my pocket when feeling lazy. BUT if one chooses to carry a .380, they need to be very aware of the compromises they are making in selecting that round. Any handgun is a compromise--the .380s require more compromises than any weapon chambered for a service calibre. I am a strong advocate of selecting a weapon that fits, points and shoots good for the shooter, BUT I also acknowledge that weapons like that are not limited (nor should you limit yourself) to a particular calibre calibre.

[horge]

jc,
[EDIT: errors marked corrected, ater JC pointed out a glaring one]

The penetration figures in the table are deemed insufficient only if you believe the 12" minimum. I don't really care to repeat why I hold that 12" less than sacrosanct, without even touching on the inherent danger to a consistent 12" penetrator.

A poorly placed shot is a poorly placed shot --the arm and chest wound that Officer[sic] Platt sustained, the key support to FTU's 12" minimum-- was the result of poor shot placement, whether by direct fault of the shooter or other. For WHATEVER reason, the shot was poorly placed. From the start I was arguing that a weapon that allows faster target reacquisition alows[sic] you to take advantage of fleeting unobstructed lines of fire --especially in the stand up exchanges like Miami that motivated the FTU.

No handgun caliber is a guaranteed manstopper, so really, this 12" minimum is an arbitrary cutoff chosen because the FTU believed that beyond it, odds are significantly increased for a stoppage --and the basis for their belief is both well-documented for examination and criticism.
You get just a little confusing here. While I know the .380 can be shot accurately, the relatively short sight radius, the usually small sights, and the harsh blowback action are not necessarily conducive to scoring repeated hits.
Bringing up short sight radii may be misleading, since the immediate past arguments centered around similar-size 9/40/45 vs 380. You can't just jack the argument to include fullsize 9's with longer slides to make up a point. Why else my early comment on native [edit:should be non-native, but works as well] platforms and forcing a 9/40/45 into a small package with less weight? I'd posted early what I thought of "sighted fire" in real-life SD situations --people who cite/presume it likely haven't been there to try to use it, have trained like pros for such situations, or are simply lying about their experiences.
A recoil operated 9x19 is generally far easier to shoot accurately and rapidly that a .380 (and delivers a far more consistently performing bullet).You further say a locking breech 9 is easier to shoot than a 380 blowback?
Sure, but again, only if you shift your argument to consider fullsize 9 platforms. I think that for honesty's sake, you should first try banging away with a SMALL locking-breech 9 alongside a same size blowback .380, and only then make the claims on recoil.

Again, if you can count on the target to stand meekly with his hands at his side, facing you, giving you an unobstructed thoracic cavity shot, twelve inches of penetration might be a little much, but it real life that really doesn't happen.
I'd already indicated in my last post that your last similar comment was stating the obvious. To repeat it again, as if having to reinstruct me may please you, but not everyone. I may be misunderstanding you, but repeating ourselves yet again would be a waste of bandwidth

Whether you have any actual experience at all defending yourself with a firearm, which I might be forgiven for doubting, or are merely repeating what you've read on the internet and/or in nice books, I'll just thank you for sharing them with us all.

Have a nice day and enjoy your caliber.
:)

[bubbygator]

If shot placement is critical, perhaps this (http://www.pocketslipper.com/p3at.html) would help.

[juliet charley]

horge -

A poorly placed shot is a poorly placed shot --the arm and chest wound that Officer Platt sustained, the key support to FTU's 12" minimum-- was the result of poor shot placement, whether by direct fault of the shooter or other.
You have your facts really muddled here. First off, Platt was not "Officer Platt." He was the BG. The shot that SA Dove made was not "poorly placed." It was spot on (under very difficult circumstance)--and fatal BTW. The problem is the bullet stopped to soon (i.e., didn't penetrate deep enough). The FTU's 12-inch minimum is not the result of poor shot placement. It is the result of years of research conducted by professionals in the field of wound ballistics (much of it by the military--not the FBI as you evidently incorrectly believe). There's nothing arbitrary about it, and to say it is based strictly on Miami, is just plain wrong (and very misleading).
Bringing up short sight radii may be misleading, since the immediate past arguments centered around similar-size 9/40/45 vs 380.
Actually, the point included small sights and harsh blowback action--not just sight radius. Generally speaking, the small 9x19 handguns have better sights than the small .380s, and the recoil of lockbreeched pistol is considerably less harsh than that of blowback pistol--even given the same size pistol.
I'd posted early what I thought of "sighted fire" in real-life SD situations --people who cite/presume it likely haven't been there to try to use it, have trained like pros for such situations, or are simply lying about their experiences.
There's a place for both sighted and unsighted fire--no one's disagreeing with with you there, but you seem to be presuming (incorrectly) that the .380 somehow gives the shooter an advantage in unsighted fire. Bottom line, there's no difference in instintive or unsighted fire between the two platforms, and mosts service calibre handguns have the advantage when it comes to sighted fire.
You further say a locking breech 9 is easier to shoot than a 380 blowback? Sure, but again, only if you shift your argument to consider fullsize 9 platforms. I think that for honesty's sake, you should first try banging away with a SMALL locking-breech 9 alongside a same size blowback .380, and only then make the claims on recoil.
No, that's not true. I was talking about ive or take the same size platform. The recoil of a locked breech 9x19 the size of a G26, 3913, CS9, Kahr K9, etc. is less harsh than the recoil of blowback 9x17, period. I've shot lots of both, and the locked breech recoil is easier to handle than that of blowback, period.

You seem to be repeatedly missing the point. I am not making any particular calibre recommendations one way or the other. I'm not saying don't choose a .380, or choose something else. Like I said I occassionally carry a Mak myself when I'm feeling lazy.

I am merely pointing out that there are certain limitations/compromises inherent in choosing a .380 (or other non-service calibre) for self-defence. If you choose to carry a .380 or similar, you need to be aware of the limitations/compromises inherent in that calibre. Feel free to advocate a .380 if you want, but don't sugar coat it.

[bullfrog99]

assuming that the lethality of buckshot is not from the multiple pellet strikes but the increased chance of hitting something vital, and realising that a pellet of buckshot is about equal in power to a 32acp, One could conclude that a 32acp when aimed properly would be a 90% one shot stopper. Larger rounds make larger holes (temporary cavity-not bullet diameter) so with them close can do the same job as exact, but that is the only difference. Larger calibers give you larger margin of error, though not by much.

Oh by the way my Glock20 with defensive ammo kicks less then my makarov with mil surplus. The two guns weight the same and the rounds aren't even in the same class. There is a lot to be said for the recoil absorbing locked breech system. If I went with a .380 It would be in a Kel-tec format.

[OrangeSkies]

9mm Versus .380 ACP For Self-Defense
By Dick Metcalf, Technical Editor, Shooting Times.

“The .380 is simply not in the same performance class as the 9mm....”

Good reading...
9mm Versus .380 ACP For Self Defense (http://hunting.about.com/library/weekly/aast9mmv380a.htm)

[horge]

JC,

You have your facts really muddled here. First off, Platt was not "Officer Platt." He was the BG.
You're right. Thank you for pointing that out.
I had been compressing several paragraphs, moving sentences around, and then restructuring them to make sense, and that 'Officer' got left behind. An original reference to FTU Exec. Officer Urey (hierarchy cartridge preferences versus the actual caliber that hit Platt arm-and-chest-cavity) left a few bits when I shuffled it out of the way. I've since noticed other mistakes/nonsense, and will mark them as such.



If neither of us is advocating or bashing a particular caliber...
perhaps the kernels of our disagreement lie in

1. 'weak' cartridges and 12 inches.
Let me get this straight...
It's rational for you to trust a 'weak' cartridge occasionally,
but somehow if I do it to, I'm wrong?
I'm blind to the limitations?
That's unfair and you know it. Despite our apparently-similar carry regimens (I pack a 1911 .45 fullsize, or CZ 85B whenever clothing, space or a vehicle allows.) you feel I'm wrong or worse, just because I'm calculating my compromises (all CCW choices are compromses) based on something other than what you'd read and absorbed.

2. the definition of 'poor shot placement':
Let's go slowly on what may be a language difficulty. I am translating from my native tongue half the time, and then re-editing repeatedly to get English-style conjugation and 'flow' going.
Say I shot someone.
If it was aimed right and it wound up in the wrong place, like an arm, it was still placed wrong.
If it went where I aimed but I aimed at the wrong place, like an arm, it was still placed wrong.
If I'm not sticking to some gun guru book definiton, my apologies...
In placing a 'shot', is that positioning the sights or the bullet?
Now what if I'm PS'ing (whatever the hell that is these days...),
is it placement of the bullet or placment of the sights?
Lots of loose room in there.

3. Handling issues.
I find my 380 works better for me than a 9, 40 or 45, with respect to natural, rapid accuracy at realistic range. I've found it true for my wife, and five other friends. I've found very many who found no significant difference. I've met a few for whom the chopped-down 9 was easier to shoot accurately and fast than the .380, as you claim. I did seem to assume a generalization, despite woefully small sample and the number of online comments.



I fear "proper cartridge choice" debates can detract from "proper cartridge-and-platform choice" discussions, and even those can detract from more-"training" considerations (see my first post on this thread).

Again, thanks for spotting the 'Officer' error,
and thank you for your profound contributions to us all on this thread.

[JohnKSa]

bullet stopped to soon (i.e., didn't penetrate deep enough). True, but that's because it had to go through Platt's upper arm BEFORE it got to his chest. Actually, it was an unsurvivable shot even so--it just didn't kill him fast enough to keep him from doing a lot of damage. It doesn't matter what pistol caliber you choose--if enough gets in the way it will stop too soon. IIRC, the total penetration of the round (including the distance traveled through the upper arm) was over 12".

I hate to see this shootout used as an argument for or against any pistol type or caliber. The real problem with the Miami Dade shootout wasn't caliber selection--it was firearm selection. The FBI went out armed primarily with pistols to do battle with two criminals known to carry and be proficient with long guns. If Matix hadn't been incapacitated by Platt's muzzle blast in the first few seconds of the shootout, they would probably have killed or incapacitated all the FBI agents and one or both of the two criminals might have escaped.

[care-less]

Ok, I am not going to quote a bunch of ballistics and penetration tests, but instead would like to tell you a personal story. This is for all of the detractors of the 380's penetration and expansion capabilities; it is also to let the supporters of the 380/9kurz feel comfortable with their choice.
About ten years ago I had an accidental discharge with a 380 loaded with Corbons. Corbon was using Hornady's XTP Hollowpoint in their round. I say accidental and not negligent since the firearm did in fact have a broken part, and fired while decocking the piece. For that reason I no longer trust any decocker system. I use some of them, but I will never put any faith in any of them no matter how "safe" and "foolproof" the system is said to be; but that is another subject. Anyhow, at the time, I was in my bedroom and had loaded the pistol, racked one in and hit the decock. The pistol was pointed in a safe direction; in this case, my waterbed. The round went through a hard shell pistol case full of egg crate padding. It then went through a very thick comforter, a wool blanket, another cotton blend blanket, the sheet, the sheet on the mattress, the very thick mattress cover, and then penetrated through approximatly a foot of waveless waterbed mattress. This is one of those filled with that polyester fiber/ cottony looking stuff. After exiting the mattress, the round went through a very heavy vinyl waterbed liner, a three quarter inch piece of marine plywood, one of the marine plywood crossbraces which support the bed, and since it was a pedestal bed with the drawers underneath, the round continued into the top drawer. It went through all of my clothes in that drawer, and exited through the bottom and on into the bottom drawer. After penetrating all of the clothes in that drawer, it came to rest in the bottom of that drawer; perfectly mushroomed. Range was approximatly three feet from the bed. Now somebody please educate me regarding the supposed lack of penetration of the 380! Besides the near cardiac arrest from the incident itself; I was in shock due to the water now running all over my bedroom. Initially, I figured "damn, got to patch the top of the mattress". Then I saw the water pouring out between drawers, etc; and could not believe that that little ineffective round had made such a mess. As I peeled off layers and followed the bullet path, I was incredulous as far as the damage was concerned.
Here is another little tidbit. About a year ago, I decided to run my own little test on the capabilities of the Makarov round. Unwilling to shoot my waterbed again; I mixed up a large amount of jello, and filled some one gallon milk jugs and stuck them in the fridge to set up. I know that this is not the same as ordnance gelatin; but you have to cut me some slack on this point. After the jello jugs were set up, I placed them in the freezer for an hour or so to stiffen them up a little more. I then proceeded out behind the barn to my "range", and set two jugs up with a one by four board in between them to simulate the bullet striking a bone on the way through. I then fired a Mak round into this set up. Can't really tell you how the bullet expanded as it penetrated both jugs and wood and sailed off across the field. I repeated the same test with a nine millimeter hollowpoint. As expected, the nine went through both jugs and wood also. The interesting thing about this is that if I laid both sets of what was left of those milk jugs in front of you; you would not be able to tell me which set was hit by the little Makarov, and which was hit by the 9. Damage was equally impressive. Now would the 9 have penetrated three or four of these milk jugs? Would it have penetrated more than the Mak round? Probably so, but I don't know since I didn't have any more jello in the house, and my wife was already looking at me a little "funny". The point is that the Mak round did quite enough damage, and penetrated enough for me to feel totally confident as to its capabilities. The Mak round is only one silly little millimeter longer than the 380, and the 9mm parabellum is only one single little millimeter longer than the Mak round. They are all 9mm rounds (well actually the Mak is a 9.3), and a 9mm is a 9mm no matter which case you fire it from. There are those of you who would argue this point, but you are arguing with experts from the last fifty plus years such as Jeff Cooper; who would tell you the same thing. If you wish to increase killing power, you must increase caliber, not velocity! As Mr. Cooper would and has put it, "This is a ballistic fact which we thought was well known by now".
Those of you who carry the 380/9mm kurz do not need to explain yourself to anyone. It is quite enough for its intended purpose as a close range defensive round. The 9mm offers only range, and theoretically has greater penetration; though that is a matter of both velocity and bullet construction. The difference in "killing' power", if any, is not worth worrying about.

[45 Fu]

Again, the point is not how much a given round will hurt a water bed, frozen Jell-O (better hope Bill Cosby doesn't find out), or any other thing. The point is that human beings have this nasty habit of not dying as soon as they are shot. Sure, some do (excepting point-blank shooting here), but many still have enough left in them to continue to do nasty things before they reach room temperature. The larger the caliber the better your chances are that the time between placing your shot(s) and the expiring of your target is as soon as possible, assuming you are hitting.

[care-less]

yes, that is exactly my point 45FU; if you wish them to bleed out faster; make a bigger hole; not the same size hole "faster".

[Wadoo]

While a 380 doesn't look like much, let's keep in mind the chaos that Hinkley's 22 caused, literally sweeping the street in his assassination attempt. And a 380 is twice the bullet weight and energy of a 22.

[Geoff Timm]

Well, I think the ballistics are well covered.

Thing is my experience with small pistols, including renting a couple and owning a couple, I shoot a Glock 26 better than a Walther PPK/s. I find the locked breech to be beneficial in .380 or 9mm.

I had a Star DK once, the tiny little locked breech .380 and liked it, got rid of it because I couldn't get additional magazines, and the one I had was damaged.

"Handling" is a highly individual thing. If you can hit the target, consistantly, under stress, that's more important than caliber. But, carry the most powerful caliber you can hit with, all other things being equal.

Geoff
Who would prefer the 9x18 Mak to the .380 if I liked the CZ-83 :cool:

[Crimson Trace]

I can't believe I am posting in a "caliber controversy" thread, but here goes...

The best advice on the subject I have heard is:

"Carry the most gun (with respect to size/caliber/capacity) that you can manage at the time."

-Z

[DOCSpanky]

I'd rather not get shot with anything thank-you very much!

And if I have to shoot someone I'd like a 155mm howitzer please :D

Talk about stopping power! I wonder what that's do to your beloved 20X20X20 Jello block or even to your beloved goats :eek:

[care-less]

Doc, can I have a muzzle break on my 155?

[yaotlone]

yea i guess i would say the same,,,as well as more rounds to work with...my choices of small would be a 22lr and 357sig,,other than that,ill stick with the baby 45 11 round. Stay calm,and fight with your hands when you run out,dont just run.

[Geoff Timm]

Care-less asked, "Doc, can I have a muzzle break on my 155?"

It pretty much comes standard on all modern 155s, cross reference the Paladin system. http://w4.pica.army.mil/paladin/overview.html

Geoff
Who notes even with the muzzle brake the 155 has substantial recoil. :cool:

[Ledbetter]

There are great differences between one .380 round and another. In addition to Crimson Trace's very good advice about carrying the most gun you can comfortably carry, the corrolary advice would be to load the hardest hitting round you can find.

I haven't seen them discussed here, but Hornady (naturally) makes some extremely effective personal defense ammo in various calibers including a very hot .380.

Would anyone like to get shot with one (or two or three) 90 grain Hornady hollow point/XTP bullet in .380 caliber traveling at 1000 fps out of a 3" muzzle?

Regards.

Colt Govt. .380
Walther PPK/S .380
FEG SMC-380

[juliet charley]

Would anyone like to get shot with one (or two or three) 90 grain Hornady hollow point/XTP bullet in .380 caliber traveling at 1000 fps out of a 3" muzzle?
Nope, but then I wouldn't really want to be "with one (or two or three)" BBs out of some kid's BB gun either. I suppose if I had to have someone shooting at me, I'd lot rather it be a .380 than same 9x19, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, etc.

[Bennett Richards]

I actually have know a few people that thought that a 22 LR was not a dagerous weapon. They were surprised when I informed them that 22's kill more people in the US each year than any other cal. The 22 is just plain deadly... so is the 25, the 380 , the 9mm and the 45.

Just remember when you see those folks getting blown out of their sock in the movies the truth is that physics dictates that for every action there is an equal and oposite reaction... ergo if a 12g shotgun lifted the target off his feet something similar should happen to the fellow firing the weapon...
My 45 or 44mag has never come close to knocking me backwards when I fired them...

The truth is that bullet weight is important for penetration and diamiter is important (to facilitate bleeding out more rapidly) but MOST important is the kinetic energy imparted by velocity... and the truth is that none of us have a handgun that produces such velocity save a Reminton XP firing 30'06. A piddling 900 to 1,500fps is chump change in the kinetic energy department.

Given all this it must be said that a 380 will do the job if you are lucky... same must be said for the 9 and the 45 as well.

Ben

[juliet charley]

The truth is that bullet weight is important for penetration and diamiter is important (to facilitate bleeding out more rapidly) but MOST important is the kinetic energy imparted by velocity
With handgun ammunition, velocity/kinetic energy plays almost no role in effectiveness. While it becomes more important in rifle ammunition, it is only because of the physical damage to tissues and critical organs in causes. In handguns, it is the bullet penetrating and expanding that causes physical damage to tissues/organs. Handguns do not develop enough velocity/energy for it to be a factor in wounding (effectiveness).

[Walter]

I'm brand new to this forum and I have to say this is one fascinating place.
To the point at hand, I have carried a Walther PPK .380 for a few years and I have never felt under-gunned. My first rule of concealed-carry is "If I can
turn the other way and get away, I'm GONE". And I figure if I have a twenty foot head start, I am out of there. Of course, if the BG points a gun and
acts like he intends to use it, that's another story.
I load Federal Hydra-Shoks. They feed perfectly, and all the data I have read indicates they are one of the best performing cartridges out there. And the PPK is one of the best guns around for concealed carry.
As for the age-old disagreement between big, slow bullets and small, fast
bullets, I will give you one example to ponder. The U.S. military dumped the
perfectly serviceable, very reliable M-14 .30 cal. rifle, and adopted the highly
suspect M-16, a .22 caliber nightmare. The "Powers-that-Be" in charge of arming our military sacrificed distance and power for comfort and weight.
There is no "formula" to give you the correct answer. It's just a matter of choice.

[JohnKSa]

With handgun ammunition, velocity/kinetic energy plays almost no role in effectiveness. The fact is that you can't hang your hat on any single parameter and say that it plays the critical role OR that it plays almost no role.

Penetration, momentum, bullet diameter, kinetic energy, velocity, and bullet weight are all important factors. Some are more important than others, but you can't pick just one and say that it trumps all the others any more than you can pick one and throw it out as unimportant.

the bullet penetrating and expanding that causes physical damageBullet expansion is a function of velocity/energy.