Looking into a back up pocket carry gun or on rare occasions; ankle carry.

I am considering getting a back up carry gun.
It would be a back up to my EDC gun.
May serve as primary carry in some situations.

So I am looking at single stack sub compacts in 9mm or maybe 45 ACP.
Walther PPS, Glock, P2000SK
Then I see there are more 380 offerings than I thought..

Is there a good .380 ACP defensive round?

What gun would you look at if you were going to go with a .380 ACP?
Consider this as a gun is better than no gun type of situation.
I don't want to have a debate about caliber.
My preference is 9mm or 45, I just want to get some information.

for "small" guns i love my P238 in 380

but for a slightly bigger you can go XDS in 9 or 45, mine carries awesome in an ankle holster or jacket pocket

Whatthetruck

What ankle holster for the XDS?
Which model of XDS?

I often carry a P238.  Great, accurate little gun.

Never had to fire a shot.  But I will say, there have been times that having a .380 pistol in my pocket has been far more comforting than having a knife in my pocket, and a .45 at home.  Everyone's lifestyle is different.  In mine, the size difference between 9mm and .380 is small enough, that a subcompact single stack 9mm may still not be small enough, when a .380 is.

Most times my G42 is my primary EDC and I keep it loaded with Underwood Ammo/Lehigh Defense Penetrator ammo. MAC did a video on it showing a fairly consistent 18" of penetration in calibrated gel with a 2" temporary wound cavity. I'm confident that can get the job done should the need arise.

https://youtu.be/-PDQcE-1T40

clee109
Very helpful - thanks

Normal carry is a Shield with 9mm Critical Duty, sometimes a G19 with the same ammo.
When I can`t hide one of those I use a Bodyguard with Critical Defense .380.

Go handle a Glock 43 or a Glock 42 and pick one.  I think something like a P238 is too nice for ankle carry.  YMMV plus the Glock 42 is one of the softest shooting an accurate 380s out of the box I have shot.  
You won't go wrong.  

I personally wouldn't go with 380 because of what is available in 9mm now but the 380 with modern defensive ammo is not the 380 of yesteryear.

I love my Glock 43 though.

I carry a G42 in a Recluse TS cargo holster daily....I can shoot the G42 much more accurately and quicker than my LCP or P3AT...pic is for relative size

Federal Hydra-Shock HST

i'll just leave this here...

Nothing pockets like a lcp, just so dang small and slim. 8rds of 380 is better then my spyderco.

I occasionally pocket carry a Mustang XSP. Beautiful gun, well designed in my opinion and there is no other .380 I'd ever consider using.

And yes, I've tried the 42 and it didn't impress me and felt a lot more snappy for just a .380.

I use a "J-Frame" airweight .38 special. Small enough for pocket and ankle carry.

G42 + Federal HST's, my friend.

For pocket carry/bug I'd stay away from the 42, it does have great reviews but it is one of the largest .380 options and since it will be a BUG and likely a pocket/ankle carried one I wouldn't consider it personally. If you're going to opt for a gun the size of the 42 I'd look into a 9mm option as the size will be fairly comparable.

If you want a small and proven ".380 sized" gun look towards either the Bodyguard or LCP. Personally I would look at a j-frame since size and weight will be comparable but SD ammo will favor the .38 much more.

Bersa with Gold Dots or the Remington HP.

excellent gun and ammo match.

I carry a BG .380 non-laser with HSTs.

I would opt for a J frame as well. Prefer the 38 Special to a 380.

LCP with hydra shocks everyday. Flush fit mag with the expended mag backing it up. I am a painting contractor and I can't carry all my whiz bang gear while I am at work, so this is my EDC. I also carry a Milwaukee hawkbill knife and an Energizer ruggedized stylus style light. It's all very disposable stuff, but I use it everyday, so if it starts having issues I replace it immediately

All of you that are recommending ammo, how have you vetted that ammo?

I so far have only tested Ultimate Defense and HST so far. UD is in penetration while the HST make's it up to the FBI minimum at least.

I've cycled the underwood rounds through my 42 with no issue. Haven't done my own ballistics gel testing, just taking MACs word on it. Seems in his video it's holding up to it's rep and even it's advertised velocity out of a 42 to boot. I'm sure the OP is aware to always run your SD ammo through your carry piece prior to carrying it

Ruger LCP is my deep carry or backup carry. It's the lowest power pistol caliber I would carry for self defense.

Normal carry is one of two .45ACP pistols, either my Glock 30S or Springfield Armory 1911A1 Range Officer.

No offense to MAC, but his tests don't look professional as tnoutdoors9's is, and I question his mutiple uses of the same block where media gets softer near the wound channel and his shots are close to it and then he says look at the penetration

I'd like to look at Buffalo Bore and Double Tap before my final decision but for now the HST is my EDC ammo.

buffalo bore fauled up hickocks 42, haven't bothered with it. My 42 has also cycled the Hornady XTP loads as well which I carried in the past. Also a great .380 round. Don't know much about double tap, will have to look into it.

.380 ammo test....very in depth

Was hickok using the G42? If so, that would explain why as the first gen G42's had an issue where they would not work with that and the Barnes. I heard they fixed that, but it is something to think about when buying a G42 and asking which gen it is first.

Yep his was a first run of 42s. There is that loose rounds article floating around that shows you how to tell the differences between generations or iterations of the 42.

The question becomes is 5 of .38 better then 7 of .380?  Furthermore, for someone inclined to carry a reload. Is the slimmer 6 round mag thats faster/easier to reload superior to the 5 round strip or speedloader?


I carry a SW Bodyguard .380 as a backup (no reload). It just conceals so nicely in my vest.

I used to carry one but still prefer a semi-auto.  Now carry a CM9 in pocket or ankle holster.

I would rather have more rounds on board. Is long is it penetrates vitals... Hydrashocks for me

Agree. For some the answer is yes; for some it would be no.

I used to carry J-frames, since at the time the .380's weren't much smaller than the revolvers. This is a J-frame with the PPK, which was THE standard for small .380's back then:

The .380's back then only had advantages in (minor) capacity gains and thinner profile. They were not only much bigger that what we have to choose from today, but they also weighed roughly the same as the revolvers did. The ammunition selection back then was also much less capable than today's, especially for the auto.


Fast forward to this century...

As above, this isn't my pic, just one I googled up to show the side by side difference between a J-frame and a current .380 pistol:

I'm an unreconstructed revolver guy at heart; but for me personally, the much more concealable .380 wins in the question of which I'm going to conceal all day, every day. Ammunition options are hugely better than they were back years ago, and the fact is, nowadays you can find a .380 load that will penetrate 35+ inches if you don't care about expansion (not my comfort zone), one that will expand to .45 caliber and even greater if you can live with substantially reduced penetration (also not my comfort zone), or one that penetrates 13-15 inches and expands to more than .40 caliber (my comfort zone).

The silly little LCP also gives a 40% increase in capacity over the J-frames I used to carry. Is two more rounds a big deal..? I can understand those who say "no", but ask the question a different way. Is two LESS rounds a big deal..? I suspect most J-frame carriers (as I was) would howl if we suggested giving up two rounds from their gun. If two rounds less (40% less than their five) is a big deal, then how can two rounds more (40% more than their five) possibly NOT be considered a big deal...

The reasons I'm okay with the LCP instead of my old J-frames, are really the same reasons I'm okay with a Kahr CM9 instead of my old Detonics mini-1911. Ammunition advances have seriously narrowed the gap between the normal service calibers, and for the weight of the Detonics, I could carry two of the CM9's. Obviously, there's a lot of subjective, personal comfort-zone things there, but the numbers are what they are. I believe (although I know I'll never convince some) that my pocket .380 is about as effective on a shot-for-shot basis as the .38 snubs were back 30 years ago. I also know that my LCP conceals better than the J-frame, and gives me 40% capacity advantage, as well as faster reloads over the J-frame.

This isn't a religion for me personally; I'd be totally comfortable with the J-frame even now, as long as I got to pick my own carry load. I'm just more comfortable with the pocket auto nowadays.

OP,
What is your EDC? I didn't catch it, if you mentioned it.
If your EDC is a G17, your backup should be a Glock. Etc. Consistent manual of arms.

My recommendation for .380 is Glock 42. Excellent pistol.
Suitable for EDC and backup. However, if you will use the pistol solely as a backup, ankle carry, the Kahr cw380 (?) might be a better choice. It's a great pistol.

As an owner of several different designs and has taken several courses with each, consistency of manual of arms does not change at all, period.

Kahr in 9mm is smaller than many .380's.  Yes you must break them in.  200 rounds per the manual, mine was 100% after 75 rounds or so.  

Kahr also makes a .380 that is a schoch smaller.  It is the same thickness. IMHO thin conceals better than small.

Nice post.

Basically my same reasoning, plus the better triggers, sight options, shared manual of arms, and accuracy, at least for striker fired autos that can take aftermarket sights, such as the G42.  I carried a Chiefs's Special for years before the 642.  For both, the double action trigger pull was less than ideal, and they were truly 'gas station' guns for me in that I didn't trust them past the end of the Doritos rack in terms of my ability to balance speed and accuracy.  Even on deliberate slow fire, J-frames have never worked well for me.

I carry a G19 still, as I subscribe to Ken Hackathorn's rule that a pocket gun is great unless you need it. I have unfortunately found myself under-gunned in real life on two occasions - one of those with the Chief's Special facing a large group while helping a helpless and innocent man (did not shoot), the other with an M9 in Iraq at rifle range (due to a series of events, never to be repeated).  Since I can't carry an M4 IWB, I'll stick with my G19 with HST and 17-round reloads.  However, my wife is an avid shooter, but petite  and not willing to EDC her G19.  She loves shooting her G19 and is very skilled with it, but it just doesn't work for her for CCW.

As such, she's just getting into the G42, which we've both become quite fond of.  The S&W 642 was a real put off for her, and she is not recoil sensitive - she can shoot full house .357 and 10mm all day, but the J-frame was simply a bitch to her.  The G42, on the other hand, disappears in her waistband, is a pleasure to shoot, and she can get accurate, speedy hits at 2-3x the range with it.  Not to mention the Magguts +1 gives her 7+1, and a reload with 9 rounds (Magguts and Ghost+2) is very fast and based on the same Glock manual of arms she has trained in for years.  

She considered the G43, but ultimately the G42 was the one she felt would get her into everyday concealed carry, and that's the objective.  Now we're working on finding the best load we can for her.  This would certainly not satisfy everyone, but I am very pleased to have found her a solution.

Same here for me, or close to it. That said, I admit freely that even a J-frame can be astonishingly accurate if the shooter is enough above average. If you've watched many of Remington's youtube channel videos, you've seen a guy they call "vinny", who usually ears a bowtie and glasses. He and I used to be on the same LE dept, and while he looks like the king of the nerd people, that guy used to blow my mind with his two-inch 36 Chief's Special carry gun. When we shot against each other, I never had top qualification score; not once. Frankly, in all the years I knew him I never outshot him even one time. I swear that guy could probably deer hunt with that gun; it was just freakish how fast and accurate that J-frame was in his hands.

Succinct and correct.  Though recent test results for rounds with the Hornady XTP aren't too bad. I sometimes carry this:

QFT

Can't resist...

.38 135+P Gold Dot thru denim - (13.8" penetration and no expansion)
.380 Hydra Shok thru denim - (15.2" penetration with minor expansion)

.38 135+P Gold Dot thru denim - (14.4" penetration and no expansion)
.380 XTP thru denim - (15.6" penetration with minor expansion)


.38 135+P Gold Dot thru denim - (excellent .544 expansion, but only 12.3" penetration)
.380 XTP, thru denim - (13.5" penetration & .42" avg expansion)


Personally - when we're talking about little micro-autos and snubnose revolvers - I'm not seeing a massive advantage in either caliber. Don't get me wrong - I still think the average-loaded .38 snub is probably better than the average-loaded .380 auto is, and a 3" or 4" .38spl is going to have a marked advantage. But when loaded as well as possible, the gap between small .380 and snub .38 is just very narrow nowadays.

For those who question some of the authenticity of MACs video, here is ShootingTheBull - Ammo Quest .380 doing the Lehigh extreme penetrator (same round as the underwood load, lower velocity) with equal results: http://youtu.be/LczfeWK9lHw

While I'm not really fond of .380, I have an LCP that I carry on occasion, for those times when I want to be armed but can't (or shouldn't) "officially" have a gun. I carry it in a DeSantis Nemesis pocket holster and always make sure I have at least 1 spare magazine.

I have been watching Shootingthebull410's "Ammo Quest" videos about .380. He was looking for the absolute best .380 defensive ammo out of a Taurus TCP, the barrel length of which is pretty much the same as the LCP, S&W Bodyguard, the Kahr micro .380 and some others. He was looking for defensive ammo that meets the FBI specs for duty ammo, meaning at least 12" but no more than 18" in properly calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin, both bare and with "heavy clothing". From what I have seen, his testing is thorough and methodical.

Based on what his testing shows, there are a few ammo selections that do make the FBI recommendations out of the mini .380s. There are also quite a few that are decent performers but may not strictly meet the recommendations. Typically, those that do met the recommendations penetrate pretty well but don't expand very much, like several different manufacturers that use Hornady's XTP bullet. Hydra Shoks typically seem to perform decently but expansion is either non-existent or not very uniform. I follow the train of thought that believes that penetration (as long as there isn't too much penetration) trumps expansion. With .380, you can typically have one but not both. If a bullet expands very well, .380 typically doesn't have enough velocity to push it deep enough and if it penetrates well, there isn't enough energy to expand to large diameters, if at all.

I (and the PD I work for and am the head firearms instructor at) don't have the money or the resources to do ballistic testing. Sad to say, but we just don't. Because of this, I'm always on the lookout for reputable people who test ammo and what their results are. We have a few guys that carry micro .380s for backup and off duty guns, so .380 testing is one of my interests. Our current .380 issued ammo is Speer Gold Dot, as is the issued ammo for the rest of the calibers we shoot (.38, 9mm, .40 and .45). Based on Shootingthebull 410's testing, while Gold Dots aren't the absolute best in .380, they are good enough that I feel confident with them in my LCP and with the rest of the guys carrying them in their guns. I'm really interested in both Shootingthebull410's testing of the Lehigh Xtreme Penetrator, as well as Mac's on Military Arms Channel, but FMJ carry ammo is strictly verbotten at the PD, so that won't be happening and the Gold Dot seems pretty decent.

In the end, .380 seems to be a compromise caliber. You can have large expansion or adequate penetration but not both. Do some research (sad as it is to say, Youtube seems to be a good resource for ammo testing as long as you watch several and and check to make sure that the tester isn't full of crap) and pick a load that meets your needs and I think that one of the micro .380s can be a decent choice. Not a great choice, but a decent one. If I have a choice, I'll always pick something bigger, but sometimes you can't reasonably carry anything bigger and, as the saying goes, a .380 in your pocket beats the .45 that you had to leave home.

Bub75