I'm not crazy about .380 but do carry it 60% of the time due to it's ease of concealment and comfort.

I carry a Colt .380 about 70% of the time.
If I'm going someplace really sketchy I bring its big brother.

This 380 ACP bashing grows tiresome.  It sure seems effective for backup for many US police depts and as a primary weapon for many European police.

There isn't much new here, except perhaps tying it all together.

1. I am not a fan of the Glock 42 given the 6"x4"x1" form factor, the 3.25" barrel and, to a lesser extent, the Glock safety system for a concealed carry pistol.

2. .380 ACP performance is very barrel length dependent.  As you go from .45 ACP to 9mm Para, to .380 ACP and to .32 ACP you'll note a clear trend in terms of greater loss of performance in shorter barrels as the caliber decreases.  The .380 ACP takes a greater hit than the 9mm Para in a short barrel, and the .32 ACP does even worse. In that regard, the absolute minimum barrel length I find to be effective with even a well designed hollow point is 3.4" and my preference is 3.9".  

While the .380 ACP has made great strides in hollow point performance (analogous to the improvement in 9mm 20 years ago), that all gets undone in a hurry when the minimum launch velocity can't be met in the short barrel of a sub compact .380 ACP.  

3. On the other hand, the .32 ACP is a very sweet shooting cartridge and the number of rounds you can get on target in minimum time is impressive.  The .380 ACP in turn, provided it's being shot from a PP or PPK/S sized steel pistol, is also impressive in terms of rounds on target in a given period of time compared to a sub compact 9mm.  Given the small size and light weight of the pistol, combined with the intensity of the cartridge, recoil in a sub compact 9mm is pretty sharp and interferes with both accuracy and rate of fire.   The same is true of a micro sized .380 ACP, where the even lighter weight and even smaller size still make it a handful in the lower pressure .380 ACP.

4. Someone above noted that all handgun rounds are inadequate when it comes to stopping power.  If you think a smaller number of poorly placed hits will be more likely to stop someone than a similar number of well placed hits you are mistaken.  Similarly, if you think a smaller number of poorly placed hits will have a greater chance of stopping someone than a larger number of poorly placed hits you are also mistaken.  Regardless of the the caliber, shot placement is what counts and, other than a possible psychological stop, unless you get a CNS hit or a hit in the upper chambers of he heart or the large arteries above the heart, you are most likely not going to stop an assailant in time.  

In that regard, I'd rather put five well placed .32 ACP rounds or three well placed .380 ACP rounds into an assailant rather than two well placed 9mm para rounds in the same amount of time.  Given poor bullet placement, I'll lean even ever toward the smaller rounds as drilling more holes in the target increases the chances that one of them create the required CNS or cardio-vascular hit.  

5. That leaves the sweet spot for a .380 ACP in a 3.5"-3.9" barrel, all steel pistol, in the 6"x4"x1" form factor - a pistol offering you acceptable ballistic performance in .380 ACP with good accuracy and controllability, in a size that can still be easily concealed.  

------

In that regard, I'll carry a Walther PP, a PPK/S or the FEG AP and APK equivalents in .380 ACP, and not feel under gunned.  I stay with a 90 gr XTP at a muzzle velocity of 1050 fps in the PP, as it will give reasonable expansion at that velocity as well as 12" penetration.  

You need to regard this chart with some caution as there are a couple different things occurring at once, and eventual fatality is not the same as immediate incapacitation.

First, the more bullet holes a person ends up with, the more systems are compromised and the harder it is to surgically repair the damage.  That's where the .22 LR fatalities end up above average.  

For example, I shoot a steel framed 5" 1911 in .22 LR in .22 class pin shoots, and I'm pretty good with it.  With the low recoil and short trigger reset and I put 10 rounds on target at 5 yards range with A zone hits in about the same amount of time it takes to get 2 A zone hit with a .45 ACP 1911.   On an assailant, I have no confidence this would produce an immediate stop, but the odds are very, very high that a fatality would result given the cumulative effects of the 10 separate wound tracks over the next few hours to the next few days.  

In comparison the two shots from the .45 ACP would cut bigger holes and penetrate deeper, with an arguably better chance of immediate incapacitation, but on average they would probably be more survivable.

Second, accuracy also matters.  The .44 Mag does significantly worse than the .357 Mag, and worse than the .38 Special, probably due to a combination of fewer number of rounds on target and reduced accuracy,   In that same regard, while the 9mm Para is more effective shot per shot to the .38 Special, officers with a .38 Special recognize they have only 5 or 6 rounds before they have to reload, and that the reload is comparatively slow even with a speed loader.  Consequently, they tend to fire fewer rounds than their 9mm Para equipped counterparts, but more rounds from the 9mm Para have not historically resulted in more hits.  

The shotgun is king of the hill in terms of fatality as it largely takes accuracy out of the equation as most people can shoot a shotgun more accurately than a handgun at social shooting distances, and the shotgun produces both adequate penetration and numerous wound channels.  

Well said.

I don't feel comfy with .380

Its better than nothing.

I own a .380 but never carry it

The guns I am best with and carry very well concealed comes in .45. So I guess you could say Im a .45 guy

I carry this Colt for formal  occasionso



This one when concealment  is the highest priority  



But my Para P-12   goes with me to rough places.

I don't disagree with you. Most of what you say is absolutely true. I think one of the reasons 9 millimeter does poorly in that chart is because so many of them are used in shootings by gang bangers who don't practice. Does the NYPD use 9 millimeter or 40's?

Surely, you lie

I'm fine with .380



Also okay with .38spl



9x18 is fine with me too

Nope, darn thing chased me. Found out a good whack on the head with the dustpan / scoop combo used for sweeping up brass didn't deter him much either.

Coons and possums are pretty freaking tough creatures from my experience. Got into hand to hand combat with one before. It didn't end well for him. But good god I wasn't sure he was ever going to stop fighting me

Not sure if this is too graphic for this side of the forum. But here goes

EPIC VARMINT BATTLE!

Liquor or beer night?

Holy shit

No BS story.

Grandparents got a coon stuck in their kitchen of their barn. I went and beat it for awhile with a stick trying to get it out of that corner. Left all the doors open and told it to leave before I got back.

Got back and it was still in the corner. Beat it some more. It lunged at me. So I took a .22 pistol and shot it once in the head. It was DRT but continued to thrash about for quite awhile

Every coon or possum I have killed has put up quite the fight. I shot a possum 3 times with a .223 before it finally died before. Their tough as hell

Bought a G42 because I had a GSSF coupon lying around and really like it.  Much better than I thought it would be, and carry it more then I thought I would. Just lighter and more comfortable than my M&P9c, XDS, G19.  I carry different guns depending on diff. factors. Great pistol to shoot and practice w/.  Got rid of my LCP which sucks to shoot and therefore never practiced w/ it.  My concern is more w/ capacity than .380 being effective enough. Each individual has to figure this stuff out on their own.

Chuck Hawks?

 I quit reading the rest.   The info given by Chuck Hawks is 30 years out of date.

I carry a Gen4 G21 w/TLR-1s attached IWB every day.....

So no, I don't think it's good enough for me

This has been my experience as well. Last possum I killed got two rounds from my ar15. Then I got closer and put two rounds of 9mm in him and he finally died. Crazy. Raccoons are worse.

I got a whole new level of respect for you now. No way I'd go after a raccoon with a stick.

It's not that I have a problem with .380 it's the platforms they are resigned to.  Small, hard to shoot effectively, crappy sights usually, low capacity etc.  But once you make the platform bigger you can get a bigger round like 9mm. The only thing a .380 gun has going for it is the size and weight.  

I carry a G19 so I feel less comfortable with smaller guns.

And slightly over half the chamber pressure. The max pressure on a 380 is about 21000 psi, the 9mm is about 38000.

I usually carry a KelTec P32. With FMJ it meets FBI penetration standards, locks open on the last shot, and carries an extra round.
The 32 is much easier to shoot accurately from a small handgun. I wish Glock made the 42 sized frame in 32, a 4 inch would be wonderful.

Crazy raccoon stories but I do carry a 380 and like it but I do carry my 9 also.

Which is why its nearly impossible to make a very small, pocket able, 9mm handgun that isn't on the very fringe of safety margin and design (and reliable).

.380 serves a design purpose.  It fits in to much tinier guns and does it well.  You shouldn't want a 9/40/45 super compact any more than you carry a full sized gun in .32 or .380.  It is a compromise.  

You could take this thread, and apply it legitimately to "why 9mm is no good" arguments 30 years ago.  Bullet technology has improved both.  Want to cover your bases, keep a mag of HP in the gun and a mag of FMJ in spare(s).  You SHOULD be carrying a spare mag for these 6-7 shot guns, those .380 mags are so small its no problem to fit one or two extra in a pocket.

Further more, why is .380 'bad' but .38 spcl is 'not bad'?

Comfortable=


Better than the .45 left in the car=

To be honest, I don't care for the .38 Special either, but then I am not much of a revolver fan in anything other than .44 Mag. IMO, the .38 Special always offered loads, such as the FBI load, 158 grain LHP+P, which wasn't really shy on penetration. I think the biggest detractor for the .380, historically, has been light penetration (sometimes even when using FMJ). Big, heavy and slow bullets tend to offer good penetration as do medium, fast bullets. But light, slow bullets really don't have much that interests me. If others are happy with the .380, more power to you (no pun intended). I just don't see the purpose on a personal level. Maybe part of it is that the .380 is usually in very small pistols and they simply are not comfortable to shoot since I have large hands.

I remember shooting a friend's Kel Tec .380 pistol and thinking to myself, if this thing has as much trigger sting as it does, considering the rather dismal ballistics it does, I'd rather just as soon find a way to carry a Glock 26/27. The most comfortable .380 pistol I have fired, was a Beretta 84. I really liked shooting the pistol, but then again, it isn't really more concealable than a baby Glock or a Sig P-239 in much more potent calibers. To each his own?

One of the reasons I prefer a 32 for a small pocket pistol. I use hot 32 FMJ and they will meet about anything the 380 will do from an identical sized pistol.
Like I said if glock made the 42 in a 32 with a 4 in barrel I would buy a couple.

It's a legitimate question.  The reality is that all standard pressure .38 Special loads out of a 2" barrel will be out performed by the best of the .380 ACP self defense load, when they are shot out of a 3.9" barrel.  Most people who carry a 2" .38 with standard pressure load are envisioning 4" barrel  performance and they'll come up well short of that.

When you consider that an LCR or a J-Frame .38 only holds 5 rounds compared to 7 or 8 in a PPK or PP sized pistol, the argument goes even farther in the .380 ACP direction. And, if you consider the greater time for reloads and the greater bulk of a reload in .38 Special, it becomes a pretty clear decision which handgun choice offers more firepower.

The real world incidents suggest the hollow point and the FMJ in the .32 ACP offer about equal performance.

My preference is still the Hornady 60 gr XTP in the .32 ACP, provided I can get at least 1000 for muzzle velocity out of it.   They won't over expand, and in the event they fail to expand, you effectively have a bullet that acts like an FMJ, so you've got nothing to lose.

If we compare 60 gr XTP to 90 gr XTP or compare 71 gr FMJ to 90 or 100 gr FMJ,  then I agree with you that a .32 ACP will perform comparable to a .380 ACP - but only when the .32 ACP has a 3.9" barrel.   The .32 ACP takes an inordinately large hit in performance when the barrel length drops below 3.9".

I don't feel undergunned on the occasion I pocket carry my LCP.

Wonder why I said I wanted a 4 inch barrel?  Some of the S&B stuff does pretty well from a 3 inch, but I would give a good bit more for a 4 inch.

The gel tests for these are pretty impressive. Permanent cavities as large as an expanded HP but for the entire length of the wound channel, and averaging 14" of penetration IIRC. For me the role of the 380 is my LCP. Its so concealable its perfect for my Phoenix attire. I carry 90gr XTP loads right now, but will be getting some of the Lehigh rounds shown above to try.

In an M11? Sure

Are there better cartridges?…Sure.

The .380acp was nasty enough to start WWI.
And it's power is roughly comparable to a .36cal. lead ball from a Colt 1851…plenty of damage was done over the years with weapons such as these.

It all comes down to risk assessment.  
If I had to make regular trips through the hood, I'd be sure to be carrying a 9 or larger.  
OTOH, I'm 63 and have never even once in my life encountered a violent felon…nor have any of my friends….or family….because we have lived all our lives in one of the safest and most affluent parts of the country.

Your mileage may very well vary.
Carry what you think you'll need in a worst case scenario and don't worry about what someone else is comfortable with.

I do. I'm not sure it's the cartridges fault though.

Could be the heavy ass non-straight pull trigger, combined with tiny frame, and lightweight.

No science...just feeeels.

I've a Keltec .380 for running... Am considering trading it for a .32.


When I'm running I don't carry an extra mag and all that jazz so the logic is mag dump and then sprint to get outa there. I'm probably more likely to face an aggressive dog then anything else. I'm thinking the smaller/lighter gun with 1 extra round may be a good trade off.

I have no problem with the .380 for pocket carry.

for what is intended to do, (be small & light so you will actually CARRY it on you)

When you need it, Better a .380 in your hand, than the .45 you left at home.

BIGGER_HAMMER

I'm not sure about weight but the P32 and the P3AT are the same size. You get one more shot, the mag holds open after the last shot, and it's easier to shoot well.
The extended mags are 10 and the regular mags are 7. P3AT mags are 6/9.

A 9mm wouldn't have done any better.  W/ raccoons, you either hit a vital spot, dismember them w/ heavy shotgun loads, or they soak up lead like a sponge.  Coons, possums and similar, have a very small heart lung area compared to a whole lot of guts.  

With FMJ, I don't doubt that at all. I saw first hand how ineffective 9mm FMJ was on a porcupine as well. I also totally agree on the shotgun. I have never personally killed either type of animal.

LCP is my "grab n go"  gun, but I try to wear something bigger if at all possible.

My wife could never shoot more than 10 rounds out of her 642.
Got her a G42 and she shot over 70 rounds before her hand got tired.
She loves that gun!

Way more accurate than she was with the Smith, and a couple more rounds on board.

So, yeah, in certain situations I'm comfortable with the .380.

Your wife is a trooper.  I rented a 642 once..shot ten rounds…the web of my hand started turning black and blue.  Shot two more rounds and I was done…..FOREVER.
People don't realize just how brutal those damn flyweight .38s are until they shoot them…truly horrible little guns.
And I'm not all that recoil sensitive, I love my Ruger Super Redhawk in .44 Magnum….totally great revolver… one of my favorite handguns.

But why would someone with a 2" .38 special be using a standard pressure .38 special loads instead of Gold Dot 135gr +P short barrel or Corbon 110gr DpX +P?

- There is no such thing as 'one shot stop'.  Never was.  All of this was shown to be BS long ago.
- Unless you hit the CNS or a major bone, people stop when they bleed out enough for the hydraulic system to break down.  That's why you want adequate penetration and the largest jagged hole possible.
- .380 FMJ's over penetrate with a nice, neat small hole.
- .380 JHP's that expand well usually under penetrate.

Is it good enough?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  Thing is, we have a choice.  Why not choose a better round and practice enough to be accurate with it?  Or get laser sights.  Or both.

Read the post directly above yours to find out why - air weight .38's can be brutal to shoot with a .38 +P load, and many people won't shoot them with anything more than a standard pressure load with a lightweight bullet.    

Consequently, I see people buying low recoil standard pressure self defense loads every day for 2" .38 Specials.

Is it a good idea?

Maybe.  

If they won't shoot or can't shoot a +P pressure load in an air weight .38 Special, than the standard pressure load is better than a pointy stick.  A .380 ACP  90 gr XTP load in a 3.5-3.9" barrel would be better, but you'd be amazed at how many people crap on the .380 ACP and think the standard pressure .38 is just fine in a 2" .38.

You've just contradicted yourself to some degree.  If you can get a CNS or cardiovascular hit, you'll stop the assailant in somewhere between right now and 10 to 15 seconds from now.

Beyond that, I agree with you that absent that, a larger hole with at least 12 penetration is better than a smaller hole and less than 12" penetration.

I also agree with you that .380 ACP bullets that are designed for maximum expansion will under penetrate and 10"-11" may not always be enough.

But where it starts getting grey is when you start talking about more smaller holes versus fewer larger holes, and in particular when you start talking about moderately expanding hollow points designed to mushroom less violently at the lower velocities found in those cartridges.

Assuming they all penetrate at least 12" and get moderate 1.5x expansion (which both can do with an XTP bullet and 3.5" -3.9" of barrel):

- five hits with a .32 ACP will produce five holes each with an area of  .171 square inches, for a total area of .855 square inches; and
- four hits with a .380 ACP will produce four holes each with an area of .223 square inches, for a total of .892 square inches.

In comparison with greater 165% expansion:

- three hits from a 9mm Para will produce three holes with an area of .270 square inches for a total of .810 square inches; and
- two hits from a .45 ACP will produce tow holes with an area of .446 square inches, for a total of .892 square inches.

In that regard, if a shooter can get more shots on target in the same available amount of time with a .32 ACP or a .380 ACP, than they can with a similar size and weight pistol in 9mm Para or a .45 ACP, then they are disrupting the same amount of tissue and are boring more holes in the target, creating more wound channels, and with a greater likelihood of scoring a CNS or cardiovascular hit.

----

So if you are comparing .380 ACP and .32 ACP pistols with decent barrel lengths (3.5" to 3.9") and a good performing moderately expanding bullet like the XTP, with similar sized 9mm Para sub compact pistols or the slightly larger .45 ACP compact pistols, then the .32 ACP and .380 ACP make up for the smaller caliber and reduced expansion with greater shoot ability and more rounds on target, producing about the same potential to stop an assailant.

Being able to put rounds on target quickly is undeniably true. However, in my opinion, if the compact or subcompact pistol in question has a capacity of, say 7 or 8 rounds and the average person carries perhaps one spare mag, if any, I still believe the 9mm and larger calibers hold the advantage, per shot. Sorry if I'm bull headed but aside from being available in a somewhat smaller size and maybe a little less recoil (totally subjective to the ammo and weapon used as well as the shooter) I see no worthwhile advantage in the less than 9mm calibers. Everybody's needs and abilities differ  as do their personal preferences. For me, being confined to a wheelchair severely limits my ability to retreat or even effectively take cover from a person or god forbid, persons, should they find interest in attacking me.

I realized several years ago that I likely would not have the time or opportunity to get as many rounds off as an able bodied person would simply because I cannot "shoot and move". The biggest threat in my position would be presented in a situation where an attack would come from behind, as this is where I am most vulnerable. As such, I feel that the old saying "carry the largest, most powerful caliber you can effectively shoot" is most imperative. I would prefer to be able to inflict as much damage to an attacker, per shot, as possible. I typically carry two pistols, with my primary being either my Glock 29, 30 or 23.

I also carry my Glock 26, in a MIC holster on my right rear hip. I carry the secondary pistol primarily as an option in the event that an attacker should knock me out of the chair and I lose control or access to my primary pistol. In a seated position, nobody can see that it is there because it is inside my jeans and belt as well as covered with whatever shirt/sweater I am wearing. In addition, it is literally between me and the back of the wheelchair.

All in all, everybody has to choose what they feel will work best for themselves. Myself, I won't sacrifice caliber for a little more speed, especially when time ain't on my side to begin with. I wish everybody the best and apologize to anybody if I ruffled feathers with some of my comments. Take care.

+P rounds in J frame may not be fun to shoot all day, but they aren't horrible.  Certainly not bad enough to resort to substandard ammo.  I'm not convinced this is commonly done.  Certainly not by those well informed enough to be reading this forum.

You can't compare the worst .38 special in short barrels to the best .380 in longer barrels.  If we're going to compare, let's compare a 2" S&W J frame to a 2.75" LCP (pocket pistols).  Best ammo to best ammo.  Or if you want to talk about a 3.9 inch .380, more of a IWB choice, then let's compare that to a 4" .38 special or better yet, compact 9mm's.  Again, best ammo to best because that's what people around here should have the sense to choose.  Result:  9mm > .38 > .380

Finally, I really don't buy the '.32acp or .380acp is better because of multiple hits'.  For one thing a blow back .380 like my Walther PP does have a fair amount of recoil.  That and, most importantly, I just don't see the bad guy standing around while you pop him three or five times with your favorite mouse gun.

Some thoughts…


1. You're suggesting among other things that we compare a 4" barrel .380  to a 4" barrel .38, but the problem with that is that a 4" .380 is still a compact pistol that will fit in the 4"x6"X1" form factor, while a 4" .38 Special won't even come close to being the same size or weight. One of the potential advantages of a semi auto is shorter overall length with a given barrel length.  

A 2" .38 will fit in that same form factor and I find both a J frame .38 Special and a Walther PP or PPK/S  in .380 ACP to be equally easy and comfortable to carry all day.  Provided the J-frame is steel framed, I also find the J-frame with +P loads to be as easy to shoot as a .380 ACP with a good SD load.    In that regard, I rate them as more or less equal.

The problem arises when you get into the lightweight .38 specials where recoil starts to go up, and people then back off to lighter, standard pressure "low recoil" loads.  Shooters are buying them for these revolvers, which is why companies are selling those loads.

2. I won't speculate on what arfcom folks buy, but I do note what walks out of the local gun shops and  reduced recoil self defense loads don't stay on the shelf long.  The problem is that even the best of them, if they expand, will come up short at about 10" of penetration from a 2" .38, and that's in the same ball park as 2.75-3" barrel .380 performance.

3. If you compare the best .380 ACP SD loads in a 3.5 to 3.9" barrel with the best standard pressure .38 Special loads in a 2" barrel, the .380 loads will give you better terminal performance.  My point is only that .38 +P loads are essential if you want to stay above 3.5" to 3.9" barrel .380 ACP performance in a .2" .38 Special.   If they don't expand they'll do about 14".

4. If you've read my posts above, you'll know I have a very low opinion of the .380 ACP and .32 ACP out of a barrel shorter than 3.5".  In my opinion a 2.75" .380 ACP is a waste of time.  They are small, (much smaller than an LCR or air weight J frame) and easy to carry, but they are generally not pleasant to shoot and the terminal ballistics are poor.  It is a comparison that makes an airweight .38 look good, but that still won't make an airweight .38 with standard pressure loads a good choice.

5.  I do own a compact 9mm - a CZ 75 Compact - and it is my primary concealed carry gun, particularly in the winter.   It offers 14+1 capacity, very good terminal ballistics,  and I shoot it quite well.

I carried a compact .45 ACP for about 8 years, and moved to a 9mm in part for greater magazine capacity but mostly because I noticed shooting both .45 ACP and 9mm in practical pistol matches that I could score 3 A zone hits with a 9mm in the same period of time it took to score 2 A zone hits with a .45 ACP.  

Once I set  aside the power factor bias, and started looking at real world shoots and real world results, I had a hard time maintaining the Jeff Cooper point of view and went with a 9mm for concealed carry as it allows more holes in the assailant in a given amount of time.   As you say, your target isn't going to stand around waiting to get shot, so male the most of the couple seconds you have.  They are also going to be firing back, so getting the first hit is a serious advantage even fit's not a critical wounding hit.

6. I've always liked the PP and PPK/S in both .32 ACP and .380 ACP, and in the course of collecting them as well as their FEG AP and APK counterparts, I noticed that a good shooter with a steel framed PP sized pistol that is still smaller than a compact 9mm, can once again put more rounds on target in the same amount of time.

Now, admittedly, I find the longer trigger reset on the CZ 75 to be a detriment to really fast controlled pairs and double taps, so it's not all caliber, but the PP is an incredibly sweet shooting pistol in .32 ACP and you can put rounds on target with impressive speed - nearly as fast as you can with a .22LR semi-auto.  It's not much slower in .380 ACP, the recoil is sharper, but it is still very controllable.  

The other concealed weapon I most often carry is an FEG AP  in .380 ACP (3.9" barrel).  It's slightly smaller and lighter than the CZ, and a whole lot thinner making it much easier to conceal in a shirt and tie.  It is also as accurate as a PP and it is relentlessly reliable while being slightly heavier than a PP and even quicker for follow up shots. In that regard I don't feel under gunned with it compared to a compact 9mm or even a compact .45 ACP.

7. In my opinion, the major advantage with the higher capacity 9mm  is more ammo for a multi-assailant scenario.  If I'm dumb enough to walk around in the hood at night, that might be a valuable asset, but let's be real - with decent SA and living outside the average getto, the odds of ever actually needing a self defense handgun are small, and in the rare cases where it's needed, the usual shoot is a single assailant scenario the is over in 5 seconds or less with 5 rounds or less fired at 5 yards or less.

As someone noted above, a .380 you're carrying is far better than a .45 ACP you left at home, and if you're carry weapon is too large or heavy for you to carry and you don't carry it 100% of the time, you have to start considering whether less gun offers