Is the .380 obsolete?

[Petrol & Powder]

When people seek a recommendation for a back–up gun, concealed carry gun or off duty gun - I suggest a DAO snubnose .38 Special. I know that a plethora of alternatives are out there but in the real world a concealed carry weapon must actually be carried to be useful. A gun that is left at home or in the car is about as useful as a parachute left on the ground when you’re in the airplane. Because of that day in, day out reality; a concealed carry gun that is small and light tends to be actually carried more often.
Now some people are just not revolver folks. If they are seeking advice for a CCW that must be a semi-auto pistol I have to change gears a little. 15-20 years ago that meant suggesting a high quality .380 Auto like a SigSauerP230/232 or a Walther PPK. In those days small semi-autos were almost always simple blowback designs and the .380 auto cartridge was about the limit for that system. There just wasn’t much else available back in those days unless you stepped up to a much larger pistol.
Fast forward to today’s world and we have some very small, locked breach designs such as the Kahr MK9, Kahr PM9 and the Ruger LC9; just to name a few. With those options available I see no reason to seek a .380 when for the same size/weight one can get a pistol chambered in 9mm Luger. The .380auto generally launches a 90grain bullet a bit slower than the 9mm luger and the 9mm projectile is at least 25 grains heavier. There are some very good .380 loads but the fact is the ballistics of the 9mm Luger is better, even when fired from very short barrels.
I know the debate between .380 vs. 9mm isn’t new. I’m seeking a reality check on my thinking. Does anyone believe I’ve lost touch by ignoring the .380 for that purpose?

[Artful]

The thing you didn't mention is recoil - a PPK/S sized gun shooting 380 recoil less than same size shooting 9x19 or 40 S&W. I have a Mak in 9x18 and it recoils noticeably less with 380 barrel installed

[Petrol & Powder]

Recoil isn't something that I consider much, particularly in a small self defense pistol but maybe I should. For me, when all else is equal, recoil is influenced by gun weight and bullet weight more so than by bullet velocity. I've shot the steel framed Kahr MK9 and a Sig P230 in the same session and found very little difference but both of those guns are heavy for their size. You bring up a valid point. With today's ultra light pistols with polymer frames, a hot 9mm luger round would have a lot more perceived recoil than a steel framed Walther PPK. I had a polymer framed PM9 for a little while but I don't recall shooting it alongside a .380 pistol.

[blueeyephil]

Depends on the size that you're looking for. I have the little Tarus 380 that fits very easily holstered in my front pocket, but it's no fun to shoot. And then I have a 9mm S&W Shield. I like the Shield a lot more as it's easier to shoot than that little 380. But there are times that I'll drop the 380 in my pocket. The Shield is just a little large for that to me. I have to put the holster on.

So, I wouldn't say it's a dead cartridge, but If I were helping a new shooter, and I have, I don't recommend the tiny 380 for a first gun, but the new Ruger 380 that's the same size as the 9, isn't a bad choice. A little less recoil than the 9mm.

[Petrol & Powder]

blueeyephil - I couldn't agree with you more - small guns and new shooters don't go together. In fact, about the only good attribute of a tiny gun is ease of concealment.

[JakeBlanton]

It is going to depend upon who the gun is for. As has been mentioned in various threads on this forum, many women just do not have the grip strength to pull back the slide on a semi-auto. Personally, a 9mm is the smallest that I would consider carrying unless it was in an area that greatly infringed upon our natural born right to bear arms (e.g. NY, Mexico, and other such socialistic strongholds). The smallest revolver that I would carry would be chambered in .357mag, even if I was only loading it to .38+P levels. I can easily put my .357 in my boot and it does not create a bulge that is noticeable.

[randyrat]

Not to mention, the chance of going through a wall and hitting a unintended bystander is a bit less with a 380 than a 9mm.

[fecmech]

I have a Keltec .380 and an S&W Model 36 in .38 spl. The .38 still requires a holster IMO and resides mostly in my safe. The Keltec is always in my front pocket with the RD 105 gr bullets. Do I think the .380 is the "be all" carry cartridge, no I don't. But it is ALWAYS with me due to it's light weight and ease of carry. If the stuff impacts the moving blades at least I'll have seven cards to play, maybe.

[JakeBlanton]

Not to mention, the chance of going through a wall and hitting a unintended bystander is a bit less with a 380 than a 9mm.

From accounts that I have read, even in extremely urban areas where there are a lot of people and when the cops are releasing significantly more rounds that we would be in any defensive situation, the chance of a bystander getting hit seems to be rather low even though the percentage of shots that hit the bad guys is not that high.

As such, I don't consider that a primary concern. Plus, there might be situations where one would *want* to be able to go through a wall and *intentionally* hit someone. Just like the federal air marshal logic for using the .357SIG on planes (they want to be able to go through a hostage [or seat] to be able to take out the hijacker if necessary).

And if you are talking about going through a wall, it's a good chance you are talking about home defense at that point and I suspect few people would recommend a .380 for home defense. Sure, it's better than nothing, but you're not limited by concealability in your home defense weapon, so why worry about it?

[rintinglen]

I know of no 9mm semi-auto as small and light as the tiny plastic framed 380's. True, there are some that are very compact, but none that run under 11 ounces empty, while there are a slew of 380's that weigh that little. I absolutely concur that for most people a bigger gun is better, but the .380 is a gun you can carry when you can't carry a gun.
Now the 25 ACP, that is obsolete. My Colt 1908 weighs within 1/2 ounce of what an LCP weighs.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

Two things:

1. I wear bluejeans 90% of the time. I can put the Ruger 380 in my front pants pocket, and even a couple cop buddies can't tell it is there. A friend was scoffing at my choice of CC this spring. I offered him a wager; he could load his Glock 40, holster it, and allow me just one round of 380 in the chamber of mine. At 30 feet I get to shoot at him once. If he is able, he gets to empty his big, bulky Glock into me.
For some reason he was, and still is, unwilling to take me up. I even offered to make a gentlemen's wager of my Jaguar convertible against his Dodge Cummins.

2. go to your local gunshop and find anything bigger you can hide wearing jeans and a T-shirt. CC is all and only about a close range defensive handgun that nobody can see when you carry it.

Rich

[GabbyM]

kinetic energy is not likely to be obsolete.

.36 cap and ball is obsolete. .380 acp took it's place.

[preparehandbook]

Unless you're talking about comparing a rifle to a pistol, or a shotgun to either... The differences are overblown.

All pistol rounds are woefully under powered for use against humans and human sized animals. As Clint smith said: "a pistol is for shooting your way back to your rifle"

Okay, arguably a pistol is what we can reasonably carry around, so that's what we've got to work with, but the differences aren't that predictable.

- I had a coworker shot in the torso once with a .22 short and died within seconds.

- A different coworker shot a drunk twice with a 9mm, hit both lungs and both rounds exited. The drunk didn't believe he was hit until the paramedics showed him the holes.

- I've seen a man who walked into the ER after taking a .45 acp clean through the abdomen, and seemed in little discomfort.

- An officer I knew was shot in the bicep with a .22 and died of shock and blood loss before EMTs arrived.

- My LGS owner took 6 .357 mags to the torso and still killed the robber with a single shot from a makarov, not one reached his vitals (he is very, very fat).

I have seen too many gunshot victims and unless you get a major blood vessel, vital organ, or bone, they may or may not go down. All too often the wound channels from many common rounds are indistinguishable. I love .45 acp, but strangely enough .32 acp has an uncanny knack for stopping bad guys in their tracks.

So yes, more power is better. I'd much rather have a .45 than a .22 but in my experience there is no guarantee either will have more or less effect than a .380 when reality steps in.

If a .380 is what you have, make it work.

[JakeBlanton]

I know of no 9mm semi-auto as small and light as the tiny plastic framed 380's. True, there are some that are very compact, but none that run under 11 ounces empty, while there are a slew of 380's that weigh that little. I absolutely concur that for most people a bigger gun is better, but the .380 is a gun you can carry when you can't carry a gun.
Now the 25 ACP, that is obsolete. My Colt 1908 weighs within 1/2 ounce of what an LCP weighs.

The only .380 that I would probably consider owning would be the Colt Mustang. Not to carry it, but just because it would be a nice collection piece with my other M1911s. Or maybe the Kimber version of it.

http://www.kimberamerica.com/1911/micro-carry/micro-carry
http://www.kimberamerica.com/1911/micro-carry/micro-carry-stainless

I might even be more inclined to carry the Taurus 8-shot .22mag revolver than a .380, come to think of it. 14" of penetration in ballistic gel is nothing to sneeze at, even if only a .22 bullet. Sure, it doesn't have the penetration (or diameter) of my 10mm, but "it's better than a long handled ice pick".

[M-Tecs]

My LCP380 or my Kahr P380 are always with me. My S&W 337 mostly stays in the safe along with the Kahr MK40 and the various other larger guns.

The latest generation of small 9 are close but they still print more and they don’t front pocket carry like the small 380’s

The 380 with Buffalo Bore ammo is a serious self-defense round. https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=127

[MtGun44]

Flat and thin are way important for CCW, this is why I leave my revolvers home most of
the time for CCW applications. Older .380s were all blowback guns, MUCH greater
recoil than modern locked-breech guns.

Bill

[warf73]

10+ years ago I would have said yes it’s gone by the way side. But today with CC being so popular, the 380 has made a huge come back in sales of guns & ammo.10+ years ago there might have been 3 or 4 companies that made a 380 as part of their regular production.
Look at all the defense ammo for the 380 that actually works as intended, compared to 10+ years ago. Defense ammo was a hollow point that might or might not work at the 380's low fps.

I would say the 380acp is alive and well with a great future in the CC arena.

[Petrol & Powder]

Unless you're talking about comparing a rifle to a pistol, or a shotgun to either... The differences are overblown.

All pistol rounds are woefully under powered for use against humans and human sized animals. As Clint smith said: "a pistol is for shooting your way back to your rifle"

Okay, arguably a pistol is what we can reasonably carry around, so that's what we've got to work with, but the differences aren't that predictable

10-4! handguns suck when compared to long guns but for the reasons stated - that's what we use.
The examples of handgun performance you provided mirror my observations.
The question is not: is some gun better than no gun. The question is- for the same ease of carry, why not select a 9mm over a .380?

So, as you point out, more power is better but no guarantee.
If I had a .380 I wouldn't throw it away. The issue comes about when deciding between equally sized pistols for that role.

[Petrol & Powder]

Flat and thin are way important for CCW, this is why I leave my revolvers home most of
the time for CCW applications. Older .380s were all blowback guns, MUCH greater
recoil than modern locked-breech guns.

Bill
Yes, flat and thin are important considerations for a CCW but we can now get the same flat & thin with a 9mm Luger that 20 years ago was only available in a .380auto.

[leftiye]

So, you've got a KelTec 9mm that you can't hit a barn with due to recoil, doesn't matter how slow the barn runs. So you obviously go to a 90 grain bullet and a medium hot load of 700X to reduce the recoil. Is that any betterer than a .380? Probly not much. BTW, gave the KelTec away, got an SCCY, Much betterer grip, and 10 rounds (a little more weight too), Trigger doesn't pinch my finger like the KelTec did either, and a much betterer triggerer besides.

[Murphy]

The .380

For decades the classic 5 shot revolver, has been the 'go to' gun for those who are by no means shooters. It's small, compact and light enough to not be much of a bother to carry. Sadly, the great majority of them wind up left in the console of the car, by the bedside...etc. Which, pretty much makes the reason for buying it in the first place null and void.

When asked for my advice by someone who has decided they want begin carrying a gun, many things come into play. The first, is the person. Many females simply don't have the strength to retract the slide on a large number of the small .380's in todays market. If they can and do have that strength, I have no problem steering them in that direction. The Keltec and Ruger LCP being the first two that come to mind. And lastly, is that party willing to take on the time to really learn how to operate it proficiently? Lets face facts, most self defense encounters are going to be at contact range or just beyond. What a person does in practice, is what they will do under extreme duress. We do not rise to the occasion, we default to our level of training. I discovered this as a fact long ago during a situation. I'd read about it, I just dismissed it as some writers drivel.

As for the caliber debate, .380 vs 9MM vs .38 Special. That is all subjective to the size and weight of the gun. I've not ran my .380 against my Model 60 for 5 shots on a timer and checked for accuracy. But here we are back to square one. A .380 with you? Or a .38 that isn't with you?

In the not too distant past, I found myself caught up in an unavoidable situation. To make a long story short. Once the dust had settled, I was winded and bloody. Thinking it was over, I decided to take my leave and contact law enforcement immediately. It happened in a remote area 35 miles from the closest redlight and 10 miles from any kind of pavement. Thinking it was over, I was existing the cabin where it took place. There was a kitchen island located in the same room. During the scuffle, in the back of my mind I was praying the party I was entangled with didn't spring up and find a knife on that island. Luckily, others who happened to have been in the room had already grabbed them all and hidden them. And thats a good thing for the other guy. I'm reasonable sure at a distance of 10 feet or less, the Keltec .380 in my pocket would have ended any and all worldly problems the man had.

All in all, match the person to the gun. One they'll carry, all the time. And, having a gun is a good thing. But failing to practice with it is as bad a mistake as not having one at all. The Springfield TRP in my truck that night, wouldn't have done me one bit of good inside that cabin if that fella had gotten his hands on a knife.

My .380, is alive and well. And seeing more and more practice all the time.

Murphy

[Rick Hodges]

P&P what you seem to fail to recognize is while the modern compact 9mm(even 40S&W) is much smaller and similar in size and weight to the older .380's, the modern 380's are smaller yet. For me the hardest part of a weapon to conceal is the width. No revolver (well, maybe the little NA .22 belt buckle revolver) is as flat and easy to conceal as a small auto.

Yes modern 9mm/40's are much smaller, but so it the modern .380. Personally, I don't feel that the 9mm is a significant improvement over the 380 for its intended purpose when used in ultra compact concealable handguns at close range. The new 380's are still smaller lighter and easier to carry. The 380 is probably more popular than it has ever been.

For me, I forgo carrying wearing a t-shirt and jeans. I always wear a shirt....I carry a compact 40. Yep is someone is looking closely in the right spot and knows what he is looking for.....it will print. I don't care.

[theperfessor]

To me it comes down to action type instead of caliber. Lots of good thoughts in this thread. I just prefer to carry a hammerless J-frame .38 just because of the reliability. I'm big enough that hiding a J-frame isn't too difficult, the DA only action seems inherently safe to me, and the wide choice of bullet types I can reliably use is large.

But I'm not saying any other choice is wrong, I just feel comfortable that my choice is right for me.

[Shuz]

After reading all the threads thru post 23, I've come to the conclusion that the .380 is not dead. I always carry my Ruger LCP when not carrying my preferred piece, the 329PD. The LCP is so easy to conceal, and it's there in my front pocket should I elect to use it.

[357Mag]

P & P -

Howdy !

Looking at those cartridges that have been proven to provide the most reliable level(s) of " stopping power "; it's pretty apparent the best combos are those able to
provide a minimum of some 425 ft lbs KE.

Things like " +P " .38 Specials and 9mm's are rather evident attempts to get those cartridges closer-towards the " 425 ft lb " threshold ( used as a guide ).
Well proven " stoppers" like .357Mag 125gr HP , some of the .40 S & W's and even .38 Super's can generate 425 ft lb ( and in the .357Mag's case; even more KE ).

My point:
There's not much to be done, that can make .380ACP achieve any more than it's already been able to. With a case capacity less than that of the 9mm, there are finite limits

Even as a back-up gun, should one get down to that point.... you'd fer sher want good stopping power; as whatever had been done up-to that point wasn't working.
Yeh... it's better than " no gun ", but hey...... there's a lot of guns one can carry.... instead of " NO GUN ".


With regards,
357Mag

[M-Tecs]

That’s the great thing about America. We are all have lots of options. My first carry gun was a 2 ½” S&W 66. Next was a full size 1911 than and officers model. All too thick or heavy for my threat level for daily carry. They only got carried when my risk level went up. I than purchased a Kahr MK40. Carried well but still heavier than I wanted. Next came a S&W 337 that at 10.6 ounces was a dream to carry but it still printed. Currently I carry a LCP380 or a Kahr P380. Both are under 10.5 ounces and don’t print.

When the LC9 came out I thought about getting one but it is large enough that front pocket carry becomes more of a problem. I am getting about 1050 out of my guns with the 100 grain Buffalo Bore ammo. That will get the job done.

If my threat level goes up I will carry larger. A friend of mine had a commercial alarm business (now retired). Sometimes he asked me to do a ride along when he went to check on the tripped alarms. For that I carried a hi-capacity 1911. For my threat level if it’s much larger than the LCP380 or the Kahr P380 it will get left home. For my normal threat level the subcompact 380’s are ideal and far from obsolete.

[9.3X62AL]

The concept of "matching the carry gun to the involved party" has considerable merit. But so too does matching the sidearm to the likely target of that effort.

As at least one other thread contributor here, I've had a good helping of investigation of armed encounters, and some personal participation in such events as well. So I'm NOT without my biases and pre-conceived notions, for certain. Chief among these is the idea that someone worth shooting is worth shooting well and thoroughly, once that need has been reasonably established. As for the pocket blowback calibers--22 LR, 25/32/380 ACP, I think the late COL Jeff Cooper summed up the subject succinctly when he wrote that "one was about as good as another" or words to that effect.

If any current caliber and platform selection has "obsoleted" the 380 ACP, it would have to be the 9mm Makarov. In my shooting activity, this combo made the 380 disposable 20 years ago, and I haven't owned a 380 since soon after the Mak arrived. The Makarov in its full-tilt form is 20% more power than the 380 has in its full-tilt form, and in truth about 35% more powerful than most USA-loaded 380s. The downside of this compact power is its recoil in its blowback platforms; the 9Mak is without doubt the top-end of blowback operation in a conventional pistol. The effort to work the slide under its considerable spring tension can be a problem for some shooters, too. The Mak was one of my carry options after retirement until HR 218 created new administrative restrictions for me.

Sub-compact 9mm pistols with locked-breech actions feel to me as if they kick with less vigor than does the Mak. Just sayin'. My thoughts are that the 9mm Makarov for my usage is a "floor caliber" for street carry, and most of my carry gets done with either a 4" 686 and 125 grain 357 JHPs or the 45 ACP with 230 JHPs. I want it all, I'm a hog! Any gun is better than no gun, but if you're going to the trouble to go heeled you should do so with something that skews the odds in your favor. Our assailants are not nice people--at all. Most of the time they are anaesthetized in some fashion, and it takes considerable ballistic persuasion to transmit the concept. God forbid its necessity, but be serious about this subject matter. In good conscience, I can only recommend that anyone going about armed do so with as much possible power as they can accurately project, and to stay sharp with that/those tool(s) through diligent practice and thorough familiarization.

[Petrol & Powder]

Interesting views and issues I hadn't considered, such as the fact that 9mm pistols got small but .380's got even smaller.

Let me be clear, I still prefer a small DAO 38 Special for the task at hand and I'm not looking for validation of my choice. Nor do I really care what other people elect to use. I still recommend a small revolver as a back-up/off duty/CCW to others but some people just will not use a revolver and that's fine. We don't live in a one size fits all world. I will say that as smaller locked breach designs and polymer frames become more prevalent, the choices of a small CCW pistols became broader. The days of either a .380 semi-auto or 38 Special revolver have become the days of .380 or 9mm or 38 special and maybe a few other choices.
I know guys that carry Tomcat's in 32 ACP. That's not my choice but it is A choice. I've also seen people shot with 45 ACP that were fine and people shot with a single .22 rimfire that were as dead as Julius Caesar. Handguns are not great tools to stop people bent on causing you harm but they are often the only tools available.
I don't think the .380 is dead and that wasn't my question when I started this thread. I do think that small 9mm pistols have become significant competition to .380's in the arena of small defensive pistols.

[Petrol & Powder]

9.3x62Al - excellent points and, as always, good information.
Allow me to state that by no means am I advocating that compact pocket pistols or small revolvers be relied upon as primary weapons. In fact, handguns in general suck as defensive tools but are selected because long guns are impractical as we go about our daily business.
As for the 9x18 Mak being a "floor caliber", I can't throw stones at that. I believe that with the new small locked breach 9mm pistol that are now available the 9mm Luger (9x19) may be the new "floor caliber" when talking about very concealable pistols.

[grumman581]

That’s the great thing about America. We are all have lots of options. My first carry gun was a 2 ½” S&W 66. Next was a full size 1911 than and officers model. All too thick or heavy for my threat level for daily carry. They only got carried when my risk level went up. I than purchased a Kahr MK40. Carried well but still heavier than I wanted. Next came a S&W 337 that at 10.6 ounces was a dream to carry but it still printed. Currently I carry a LCP380 or a Kahr P380. Both are under 10.5 ounces and don’t print.

When the LC9 came out I thought about getting one but it is large enough that front pocket carry becomes more of a problem. I am getting about 1050 out of my guns with the 100 grain Buffalo Bore ammo. That will get the job done.

If my threat level goes up I will carry larger. A friend of mine had a commercial alarm business (now retired). Sometimes he asked me to do a ride along when he went to check on the tripped alarms. For that I carried a hi-capacity 1911. For my threat level if it’s much larger than the LCP380 or the Kahr P380 it will get left home. For my normal threat level the subcompact 380’s are ideal and far from obsolete.

Unfortunately, you might not realize that your threat level has "gone up" until after you have been shot. At least that was my experience. I've decided that a .45 or a 10mm is small enough to carry.

[MtGun44]

"pretty apparent the best combos are those able to provide a minimum of some 425 ft lbs KE. "

Sorry, but KE is fundamentally oversimplified, and a bogus way to compare cartridge effectiveness.

KE included a velocity squared term which is mathematically correct as to actual energy, this is not
arguable, BUT KE (due to the V^2 term) has a very poor correlation with effectiveness. This has
been cussed and discussed at great length for about a century or more. We will not solve it here,
but be warned that KE is a poor measure of cartridge "effectiveness" - which is even a difficult
to define term in itself.

AL's comments in summary: " In good conscience, I can only recommend that anyone going about
armed do so with as much possible power as they can accurately project, and to stay sharp with
that/those tool(s) through diligent practice and thorough familiarization. " are wise words indeed.
I heed them all the time. 95% of the time a 230 gr 45 ACP is the tool for me.

I occasionally find a more concealable ' little gun' is the only thing which makes it possible for
me to avoid violating the First Rule - most often a 9mm but sometimes a .380, "better than harsh
language". The comment about 9mm locked breech being lower recoil than some .380 or Mak
blowback guns is a very valid point.

Bill

[Petrol & Powder]

So it wasn't my intent to spark the entire, "which gun is best" debate.
MtGun44 - you're engineering side is showing but that's OK because I come from a family of engineers :smile: I agree that KE is an oversimplification of the effectiveness of a cartridge. I've read a lot of the reports on the topic and without getting into a lot of anatomy & physiology - it basically comes down to being able to put the projectile in the right place, having that projectile penetrate deep enough to reach something important and having that projectile actually do some damage when it gets there.
Obviously, there are physics that can help us achieve success or at least improve our odds. Bullet weight, bullet speed, bullet expansion (or lack of expansion sometimes), etc.
Al is absolutely right in wanting to stack the odds as much in ones' favor as possible. All handguns suck at stopping people but some handguns suck less than others.
When the Kahr MK9 & PM9 had developed a solid reputation I stopped carrying and recommending .380 autos. Now that small 9mm pistols are readily available, I think that my "floor caliber" (to use Al's phase) is now 9mm.
That doesn't stop me from carrying a 38 Special DAO revolver, because as Theperfessor stated, it comes down to the system for me.

[Garyshome]

If a .380 is what you have, make it work. Be a better shot!

[MtGun44]

Good post. I am still OK with .380 when size constraints require it, which not often for me.

I will always push towards .45 ACP 230 HP, but there are times when that doesn't work, fortunately
very rarely for me.

Bill

PS --- "engineering side" LOL! 100% thru and thru, no side. :bigsmyl2: it is what and who I am,
can't turn it off if I wanted to, and don't want to. ;-)

[9.3X62AL]

If a .380 is what you have, make it work. Be a better shot!

Good outlook! Run what ya brung!

All of these formulae we use to calculate and attempt prediction of bullet strike effect square SOME element of the ballistic equation--velocity, projectile weight, or frontal area/diameter. As far as the "squaring" goes, the bullet diameter is the only one of these elements that is actually and demonstrably squared in reality......for whatever that might be worth. It is the basis of the Hatcher Index of Relative Stopping Power, the method I give marginal preference to over the others for making these predictions--though none of the methods even approach being "comprehensive". These formulae are reminiscent of medieval theology, and its questions about "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" This is why I like as much of all three elements of the equation as I can get, all the cartridge capacity I can manage, and every situational advantage I can call upon.

[JakeBlanton]

When these formulas start giving accurate predictions of the penetration of the bullet in a standard test medium (assuming complete wad cutter / flat bullet), I'll put a bit more credence in them. I still use kinetic energy since that is a common measuring unit, but I'm not so sure that it measures the true stopping power of a projectile.

Kinetic energy does not take into account the diameter of a bullet. As such, it would be entirely possible to have two projectiles of vastly different diameters hitting the object at the same speed, but the smaller diameter projectile would have less penetration. Taken to the extreme (theoretically), you could have one projectile that was the size of a pancake (but fairly thin) and another that was of normal bullet diameter (but considerably thicker). One would be able to break the skin and the other might be more like a very fast slap since it was spread over a larger area. Of course, this would only be applicable for projectiles fired in a vacuum plus all the other standard disclaimers.

A 230 gr pure lead projectile that is .452" in diameter results in a pure wadcutter that would be 0.49973" tall.
If you increase that to a 6" diameter, you would have a "wadcutter" that was 0.00284" tall.
So, both are going to impart the same amount of kinetic energy for a given velocity, but it should be obvious that the 2nd example is going to penetrate less since it is distributed over a larger surface area. The 6" diameter projectile has 176.21 times the surface area as the .452" projectile. So, if you figured that you were getting 400 ft-lbs from each projectile, the larger would would be exerting an equivalent 2.27 ft-lbs per area of the smaller projectile. Sure, that would smart on bare skin, but I don't think it is going to stop anyone, much less incapacitate them.

Anyone have the equation to go from mass and velocity to psi and how many psi it takes to penetrate flesh? I've seen figures that range from 100 psi to 450 psi, so I take them with a grain of salt.

[JHeath]

Anyone have the equation to go from mass and velocity to psi and how many psi it takes to penetrate flesh? I've seen figures that range from 100 psi to 450 psi, so I take them with a grain of salt.

No, but I have noticed that if you multiply the sectional density times the velocity you get an interesting number that helps compare penetration.

E.g. How do I compare the potential penetration of:

.355 cal 90gr at 1000fps
.30 cal 180gr at 2750fps
.243 cal 105gr at 2986fps
6.5mm 174gr at 1500fps
.410 240gr at 1327fps

. . . assuming bullets of similar construction?

If you multiply the sectional density and velocity, you get these respective numbers, which I call "sectional momentum":

102
745
759
535
271

I have no proof for any of this. I would have to cast round-nose bullets in each of those diameters and shoot them into ballistic gel to check. It doesn't mean that a .30-06 180 will penetrate 7.5 times deeper than a .380 90gr. But it gives a basis for comparison.

Like this, again assuming similar bullets:
.45acp 230 = 145
.357 158 = 248
9mm 115 = 169
7.62tok 86 = 191

. . . which seems to make sense.

I set up a spreadsheet so all I have to do is enter the bullet diameter, weight, and velocity. The sheet calculates the sectional density, "sectional momentum", and muzzle energy.

After I did this, I noticed an African hunter on the internet did something similar and calls it "momentum density."

[country gent]

Read once any gun is to big when you dont need it and any gun is to small when you do. I carry a sig 238? It is a close copy of the colt mustang/pony. I also carry 2 spare mags for reloads. It is loaded with Remington 102 grn golden sabers. I shoot thiss combo very well and it should be sufficent. When we were butchering on the farm we used a .22 to put steers and hogs down. Shot placement is more important than the actual gun. I have a 340 smith that is vile recoil even with 38 spls. At 12-14 ounces it is a dream to carry in lightwieght clothes. The newer powders and intrests in these cartridges are making the smaller calibers much more effective in real life. One of the most popular back-ups with law enforcement is the secamp in either 32 or now in 380. They bring a premium even used. Small and of a wieght that can be carried all day, normally accurate, reliable and functional, the new breed of pocket pistols are more than up to the task.

[Clay M]

Years ago I owned an AMT .380 Backup. It was my first jam-a-matic. I soon decided it might just get me killed, since it was so unreliable. I never really cared much for the 380,and dismissed the thought of owning one.
My son recently bought a Taurus TCP.I am amazed at how accurate that pistol is with Winchester white box.Plus no jams. It has me thinking about one again.

[MtGun44]

Actually, I can make head shots fast at 12 yds with the KelTech 9mm PF9. Nice little gun and recoil
is much more controllable than their P3AT .380 which is a lot smaller - it has pretty snappy recoil.
Also the PF9 has far better sights and the rear is shimmable for elevation and easily adjustable laterally
for windage. Of course, the Colt SS Ltwt Commander in .45 ACP is still my 95% or more choice.

Actually the numbers on sectional momentum don't seem to correlate with penetration. I am pretty sure
that a .45 ACP ball round will out penetrate a 158 .357, also non-expanding.

Bill

[hpdrifter]

Why would anyone carry a mousegun 9mm nowadays. There are small 45s out now that are not that much bigger than 9mms.

One mans trash is another mans treasure. I'd rather have a .380 than a rock.
I love shooting my .380 Bodyguard.

[9.3X62AL]

<----BIG believer in The Mozambique/Failure Drill.

No self-respecting bullet should ever attend one of these engagements unaccompanied.

[Hunter]

I would say with the advances in modern ammunition the .380 Auto is a viable but minimum choice for a defensive round. With that said it is not my first choice.

[Piedmont]

I am pretty sure
that a .45 ACP ball round will out penetrate a 158 .357, also non-expanding.

Bill

Is this a case where you meant to say the opposite? Sectional density is everything when it comes to penetration with bullets at equal velocities and the same expansion characteristics, or lack thereof. If something hinkey, like tumbling of one bullet, doesn't happen the higher sectional density always penetrates better, again assuming equal velocities.

[JHeath]

Actually the numbers on sectional momentum don't seem to correlate with penetration. I am pretty sure
that a .45 ACP ball round will out penetrate a 158 .357, also non-expanding.

Bill

Check this: http://www.grosswildjagd.de/momentum.htm He seems to know something about knocking down big animals that require deep penetration through bone. Or maybe he's a BS artist, you tell me. His calculation is the same as mine, but I got there by a slightly simpler equation.

Re the .45 vs. .357, the latter has higher sectional density and is going 500fps faster. I don't know what testing with gelatin shows but I would expect higher sectional density at higher velocity to have a penetration advantage, up to a certain disparity in mass. Probably a 20lb howitzer shell with a sectional density of .200 at 2500fps will outpenetrate the '06 bullet with an SD of .311 at the same velocity.

The value of sectional momentum (if it has any!) is in finding break-even points in a given caliber. E.g. say I am hunting moose or something where penetration is important, with an '06. Which is better, a 220gr at 2500fps? Or a 180gr at 2750? The muzzle energy is almost equal. But the sectional momentum of the heavier bullet is 828, and the lighter bullet is 745. So if I am right the 220 will penetrate better at those velocities. But if you drove the 180 a little faster it would even out.

This is waaay off the .380 thread so I will add this:

I leave my house say 8 - 10 times per week, 500 times per year. In 50 years I will leave my house 25,000 times. Say each time I carry a .380 instead of a .45

And say, for argument's sake, that one person in ten will have one gun-firing defensive gun use (DGU) in a lifetime. Which must be an overestimate.

And say in 50% of those cases, the .380 was inadequate when a .45 would have worked.

So each time I leave my house, I have a 1:250,000 chance of a DGU, and a 1:500,000 chance that I really needed a .45 that day and not a .380.

I do not live a James Bond lifestyle, and often go weeks without a violent encounter. But it seems to me that .45 vs .380 is like me buying a Powerball lottery ticket, and somebody laughing at my stupidity because he bought TWO tickets, which anybody knows is what it takes to actually win the thing.

I look at old footage of Ed McGivern with off-the-shelf .38s and target loads. And I have to think he'd probably do OK in a gunfight against a miscreant with an Automag. Because McGivern practiced, a lot. Supposedly somebody told McGivern that it's impossible to hit a falling can 5 times with a revolver. McGivern wondered about that, so he started practicing. And he discovered it's not all that hard, after shooting up 30,000 rounds learning to do it.

I think the guy that wears out three or four $400 .380s learning to shoot is better off than if he bought one $1200 - $1500 .45 and fired 100-200 rounds every now and then.

[warf73]

I think the guy that wears out three or four $400 .380s learning to shoot is better off than if he bought one $1200 - $1500 .45 and fired 100-200 rounds every now and then.

This was the reasoning for the p238 vs. TCP, the TCP hurt the wife’s hand to shoot more than a mag worth. With the p238 I have to cut her off (only take so many rounds for the gun) because she loves shooting the gun. We try real hard to make it to the range once a month to shoot just our carry guns, most outing we fire 200~300 per gun. I'm a firm believer in practice and when it’s fun to shoot the gun then practice isn’t practice but a fun outing.

[Rick Hodges]

<----BIG believer in The Mozambique/Failure Drill.

No self-respecting bullet should ever attend one of these engagements unaccompanied.

X-2.....Yes Sir! With whatever you bring.....I think some watch the movies and TV and expect people to drop at the shot. That is just not the norm.

[98Redline]

I have a host of potential options to fill my holster on a day to day basis, but on most days it is the .380 LCP that gets the nod. The fact of the matter is that my normal dress and the places I go it is problematic to carry a larger gun (I have tried). Even one of the more diminutive 9mm offerings is still too big. That little .380 literally disappears into my pocket and I can carry it everywhere. I accept that it is a non optimal caliber, I much prefer my 1911 commander with 230gr slugs, but I feel comfortable with my level of training that I could put enough .355 caliber slugs on target to make it effective for defending myself or others around me.

The first rule of gunfighting: Have a gun

[JakeBlanton]

No, but I have noticed that if you multiply the sectional density times the velocity you get an interesting number that helps compare penetration.

I've played around with a spreadsheet also on this trying to get some sort of meaningful numbers.

According to the wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectional_density), sectional density in ballistics is defined as the weight of the bullet divided by the square of the diameter whereas with other objects, it's defined as the weight of the object divided by the cross-sectional area. I find that a bit odd. I would think that it should be defined the same way and as such, for bullets it should be the weight of the object divided by the cross-sectional area (i.e. [pi * radius squared]). I wonder if someone was just too lazy to use the correct formula for the area of the cross-section of the bullet.

Of course, we're talking about ideal / theoretical situations here. Ones in which the bullet does not deform or fragment upon hitting the deceleration medium. As we saw in the Mythbusters episode about shots into water, high velocity rifle rounds tend to self-destruct rather soon after their encounter with water and do not go as far below the surface as slower rounds might do. Looking at the equation for calculating drag, we see that it is related to the square of the velocity, thus the faster a bullet it going when it encounters the medium, the drag forces is going to be more than just the same linear increase that one might expect from the increased velocity. What this means as far as the numbers calculated from the "weight * velocity / cross-section of bullet" column in my spreadsheet is that a value that is twice as high will not necessarily result in twice the penetration.

Of course, I'm making assumptions of a projectile that is completely flat faced, does not tumble, does not expand, does not fragment, and all those other "perfect" conditions. :)

So, I plugged some numbers in for various calibers and came up a case of a .38 special load of 200 gr at 679 fps having a slightly (i.e. 5%) greater penetration number than a .45ACP load of 230 gr at 900 fps which is interesting considering the kinetic energy of the .45ACP load was twice the .38 special load (i.e. 414 ft-lbs vs 205 ft-lbs).

[JakeBlanton]

The value of sectional momentum (if it has any!) is in finding break-even points in a given caliber. E.g. say I am hunting moose or something where penetration is important, with an '06. Which is better, a 220gr at 2500fps? Or a 180gr at 2750? The muzzle energy is almost equal. But the sectional momentum of the heavier bullet is 828, and the lighter bullet is 745. So if I am right the 220 will penetrate better at those velocities. But if you drove the 180 a little faster it would even out.

I plugged those numbers into my spreadsheet and they did not have the same kinetic energy. So, I increased the velocity on the 180gr round to 2764 fps and they both came out to be 3052 ft-lbs. With this, I got a weight * velocity / cross-section value of 7,381,955 for the 220 gr bullet and 6,677,582 for the 180 gr one. I calculate that you would need approx 3055.56 fps (which would be 3731 ft-lbs) before the 180gr bullet exceeded the theoretical penetration of the 220gr one.

It's fun to play with the numbers, but it would be even more fun if the numbers were to match up with empirical data from tests. :)

Of course, once you start factoring in the various types of drag (form, skin friction, etc), the Reynolds number, and such, it gets a bit complicated.

[grumman581]

Why would anyone carry a mousegun 9mm nowadays. There are small 45s out now that are not that much bigger than 9mms.

Because that is all that will fit in their metro-sexual "skinny jeans"? :)

I have a stainless Para Ordnance "WartHog" compact .45 that I sometimes carry (when I have a good belt). I consider it rather compact and if I run out of ammo, it's heavy enough to be able to be used as a club. :)

[JHeath]

I've played around with a spreadsheet also on this trying to get some sort of meaningful numbers.

According to the wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectional_density), sectional density in ballistics is defined as the weight of the bullet divided by the square of the diameter whereas with other objects, it's defined as the weight of the object divided by the cross-sectional area. I find that a bit odd. I would think that it should be defined the same way and as such, for bullets it should be the weight of the object divided by the cross-sectional area (i.e. [pi * radius squared]). I wonder if someone was just too lazy to use the correct formula for the area of the cross-section of the bullet. . . .


. . . So, I plugged some numbers in for various calibers and came up a case of a .38 special load of 200 gr at 679 fps having a slightly (i.e. 5%) greater penetration number than a .45ACP load of 230 gr at 900 fps which is interesting considering the kinetic energy of the .45ACP load was twice the .38 special load (i.e. 414 ft-lbs vs 205 ft-lbs).

Yes, bullet sectional density is typically calculated using the square of the bullet diameter. And no, it is not "correct" but that's how it has been done in loading manuals etc. since the 1920s I think. For comparative purposes it works. If you get a job designing airplane fuselages remember to do it the right way, using pi-R-squared for the cross-sectional area.

I just multiply the sectional density by the velocity to get sectional momentum. I do not use bullet weight at all (except to derive the sectional density). If you look at how that German/African guy does it, we get the same result but my method is more straightforward.

E.g. I would compare the following:

SD of .311 at 2200fps
SD of .330 at 2000fps
SD of .225 at 2800fps

. . . without regard to whether one is a .375 H&H and another is a 6.5x55. And I think in practice people find that 6.5mm 160s penetrate very deeply, they have a sectional density of .328. That is how WDM Bell used to brain elephants with a Mannlicher 6.5x54. They seem to penetrate about as well as a .308/220 or a 7mm/175 at equal velocity. From what I hear.

I got interested in this after reading "The Perfect Shot", where another African hunter advocated heavy-for-caliber bullets no matter the bore size. And what you find is this:

6.5mm 160 SD is .328
7mm 175 SD is .310
.308 220 SD is .331
.375 300 SD is .301

So if you ignore the difference in weight, and multiple the sectional density with the velocity, you would predict that a 6.5/160 would penetrate about as well as a .308/220.

But I only did this to find the breaking point within a given caliber. At what point does a long bullet go so slow that higher sectional density is less efficient? If I try to drive a 7mm/175 through a 7mm BR, is the velocity going to be so limited that I will lose penetration compared to a 140 at higher velocity?

What the African authors suggest (if I remember correctly) is that if you want to penetrate a big animal, a .328 SD at 2500fps is better than a .223 SD at 2800fps. And that this is true even if you compare a 6.5/160gr with a .358/200gr.

If you want to keep discussing this we should start a new thread, probably on the rifles forum but the formula applies to handguns too (if it applies to anything!).

I am required to say something .380. My 92 year old Remington Model 51 has a locked breech (sort of), which allows lower slide weight vs a blowback. The recoil spring is around the barrel (not under the barrel) which allows a lower-profile slide. This might allow the grip to be longer than other .380s -- at any rate the grip is super-comfy. This is all smart design that I do not see in current models.

Down side: the 51 has the potential to crack the breechblock and replacements do not exist. So I am reluctant to overdo it practicing. And +P is a no-no.

Had I more money I would literally buy 3 Bodyguards or LCPs and cases of ammo, and just shoot them one-by-one until they clapped out and throw them over my shoulder, until I could hit a pie-plate at 25 yards without aiming. Also, my wife would stand next to me at the range reloading mags and handing them to me, wearing a French maid's outfit. I don't have that kind of money, but do have that kind of wife, which is more important.

[hpdrifter]

Also, my wife would stand next to me at the range reloading mags and handing them to me, wearing a French maid's outfit. I don't have that kind of money, but do have that kind of wife, which is more important.


Keep doing what you're doing! You got something going there.

[9.3X62AL]

That sounds like one very special lady, for sure.

I don't know how "frontal area" is figured in the sectional density calculation; as long as all projectiles are measured with the same predication, and we remember that the measure is a RELATIVE COMPARISON and not a direct correlation.......no real harm gets done. It's angels dancing on pinheads.

Regarding Hatcher's IRSP, from "Hatcher's Notebook" he uses the actual frontal area calculated via use of "pi" to derive the decimal/fractional square inch measurement. Again, this formula is an Index of RELATIVE Stopping Power between given loads, and not a direct correlation to actual events. At best, all of these formulae are two-dimensional sketches of a three-dimensional reality that can shoot back.

[MtGun44]

No error, just based on a memory of actual tests. Not really certain.

OTOH, I have made a lifetime career of engineering simulation in many areas, and have enough experience to know
that just because the math of a particular calculation indicates that something will happen, doesn't necessarily mean it
will actually happen. Validation testing is a crucial and often overlooked part of the simulation process.

One classic and absolutely verified example is 405 gr non-expanding .45 -70 jbullets at 1600-1700 fps substantially out
penetrating 500 gr non-expanding jbullets in .458 Mag and .460 Weatherby at 2200 to 2400 fps at times, perhaps even
most of the time. This is on REAL game, not test media, which throws a huge inconsistency factor. This does NOT make
mathematical sense but HAS been repeatedly observed. My personal theory is that the 500 gr RN is less stable and
yaws, preventing full penetration where the FP 405 is more stabile and penetrates closer to the theoretical maximum.
Why? Not sure, probably nose shape, spin rate, wish I knew.

Ultimately, while I am an engineer that strongly believes in mathematical calculations and make my living that way and
have done many very complex engineering calculations (with the biggest supercomputers out there at times), I DO
understand that frequently the computations are not well correlated with reality, primarily because the theoretical
underpinning is not fully accounting for the real-world physics. My 45 years of shooting and ballistics experience
makes me extremely skeptical of much ballistic theory, ESPECIALLY impact modeling theories.

Is there a trend for higher SD bullets to penetrate deeper? YES, undoubtedly. Will a higher SD projectile at a
higher velocity ALWAYS penetrated deeper (assuming equivalent media)? Demonstrably NO. Why? It is not
clear, there is no good theoretical explanation, but the evidence is irrefutable, even though many want to
hang the observer when the observation fails to match the theory.

IMO, it boils down to two points:
1) as Al said - shoot the biggest bullet at the highest velocity that you can shoot
effectively and shoot often. This is absolutely an inarguable truth.

2) #1 is entirely irrelevant if you are not armed. Do WHATEVER it takes for YOU personally
avoid violating the First Rule. If you can only handle a .22LR, then carry one and as that great
American philosopher, Harry Calahan said - " A man has got to know his limitations." Cartridge
performance is a limitation. If I only had a .22 LR, a minimum engagement would involve about
5-6 rounds to the head, just as a starter. The good news is that this is pretty easy to do with
a .22 LR. If your body style and dress code will not conceal anything larger than a micro .380,
then carry one. DO NOT VIOLATE THE FIRST RULE!

Bill

[JHeath]

IMO, it boils down to two points:
1) as Al said - shoot the biggest bullet at the highest velocity that you can shoot
effectively and shoot often. This is absolutely an inarguable truth.

Bill

"Biggest" bullet in what sense? That interests me. A 6.5mm/160 is "smaller" than a .321/165. But the sectional density is MUCH higher.

In that example I was comparing a 6.5 Mannlicher to a .32 Win Special. The velocities are similar, but the Winchester bullet is slightly heavier, and bigger in diameter. I do not see the .32 Special as an African rifle, but the 6.5 has taken a lot of big game.

Your comment, the biggest bullet "you can shoot effectively" interests me a lot. Because if like WDM Bell I can reach pachyderm vitals with a 6.5mm, I am a lot happier than if I have to practice to the same level of marksmanship with a .416. I have a hunch that we would all be better off shooting large amounts of ammunition through smaller rifles at higher sectional densities. We would be much better shots, and our 6.5s would punch through to the vitals as well as larger bullets with the same SD at the same velocity.

But my purpose of the "sectional momentum" calculation was not really to compare between bore sizes, nor to predict inches of penetration in ballistic gel. The purpose was to help me find a theoretical break-even point within a caliber, where the product of a heavier bullet at a lower velocity is less than a lighter bullet at a higher velocity.

Also I was clear this excludes variables like bullet construction, tumbling, etc. These are theoretical generic bullets that do not exist.

Re the .458/405 paradox: I wonder if the speed of sound in animal tissue could have something to do with it? The faster bullets are trying to go supersonic in tissue. The .45-70 is probably near trans-sonic when it hits the animal.

Handgun-related content: I have a project to shoot .311/115s in a Tok. That's the same weight as the classic 9mm load, but much higher sectional density. Is the 9mm "better" because of the frontal area? The bullets are the same weight so which is "bigger"? The Tok will probably launch them about 150fps faster than a 9mm +P load.

[Piedmont]

Handgun-related content: I have a project to shoot .311/115s in a Tok. That's the same weight as the classic 9mm load, but much higher sectional density. Is the 9mm "better" because of the frontal area? The bullets are the same weight so which is "bigger"? The Tok will probably launch them about 150fps faster than a 9mm +P load.

I think the 9mm is better because it is bigger around. The only way that might not be true is if you are using a super bullet like that new Hornady Critical Duty, which they don't make in thirty caliber. The Germans back in the first decade of the 20th century thought the 9mm was an improvement over the .30 Luger when both were firing ball.

Your Tokarev is going to be very loud. I would rather a bit more recoil with less blast and think I would flinch less with that, too. A .45 is a great house gun imho just because it is low pressure and therefore less blasty, regardless of how effective it is or is not. I am a fan of the .357 Sig but don't own one. Every time I think through scenarios where it might be used, I reject it because I don't want that much blast in what will probably be an enclosed area. The ears are bad enough already.

What bullets will you be using in your Tok?

Your comments on the 6.5 are interesting and you may well be on to something, but with good expanding jacketed bullets. For a cast bullet rifle, going up in diameter makes things like perfect expansion less critical. Also, most of us don't run cast full out, so there is a recoil reduction from cutting the load, which then allows using heavier bullets and a larger caliber. Many of us are fans of .35s with cast. Maybe it is psychological, but in hunting one thing a larger caliber does better is give you a better blood trail.

There was a very interesting column in Handloader magazine years ago by Dave Scovill that ran down two surveys of Scandanavian moose hunters. Everything is more controlled there with reports to the game department on # of shots fired, distances of shots, distances the animals ran, etc.. Huge numbers of animals were recorded in the studies (several thousand, around 10,000 if I remember correctly). The conclusion was that though the big bores might drop them a few steps sooner there was very little difference between the 6.5s and even stuff like 9.3s and .375s. It made me want to go buy a 6.5mm!

[JHeath]

I have some Lasercast 115s and a 311316 mould.

"Better" re the 9mm and 7.62 depends on whether you want penetration. The Tok should penetrate great. Right through soft armor and a bad guy and the next three houses along the block, TVs and all. But I want it for a field pistol. For self-defense I would use different loads.

I think sectional momentum is useful added information. E.g. the muzzle energy of a .32 Win Special 165 and a 6.5 Mannlicher 160 are probably pretty close. If we were to judge them by bullet weight and ME, we'd say the two cartridge/loads are about the same.

But will they act the same? I do not think we would expect them to. Why not?

If we calculate the sectional momentum, the two loads show very different potential. It looks like the 6.5 will penetrate better. Which seems to be the case in reality. So the calculation tells us something that we otherwise know only by hunch.

Yeah, the Tok will be loud. And my ears are bad. I should probably pick another project. But it seems like a great field pistol, flat shooting and good penetration. If only I can get it to shoot accurately.

The pistol is slim and appealing. And the cartridge has the potential to be much like a .32-20 or a .327. I have toyed with the idea of converting a Model 1892 to 7.62 Tok. Not sure if the 92 can be made to work with rimless cartridges.

[Bret4207]

If the 380 is obsolete because of small 9mms, then isn't the 9mm obsolete because of small 40's and 45's? Where do you draw the line? I have a very nice 380 PP clone I like very much. I feel comfortable with it. The question is akin to a Dodge-Chevy-Ford discussion.

[MtGun44]

BRET! Sir, good of you to wade in with your typical sage comment. Very nice to hear
from you again.

Chevy-Ford, indeed. Carry the most capable gun you can and practice a lot. Don't violate Rule One.
After that, all is opinion and PLEASE follow the opinion that pleases you the most.

Bill

[9.3X62AL]

380 ACP beats throwing rocks by a large margin. Nice seeing you again, Bret.

[JakeBlanton]

380 ACP beats throwing rocks by a large margin.

That kind of depends upon the size of the rock you have and where you are throwing it from (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_event), doesn't it? :)

[clownbear69]

I won't say its obsolete but I believe its on its path. A lot has to deal with cost and specially finding the ammo. I only typically see a box on the shelf still. Its like the 25 32 use to be the go to CC now you just don't see it anymore.

[M-Tecs]

The manufacture (and sale) of .380 ACP pistols has been going up by leaps and bounds vis-a-vis the 9mm, which can be confirmed from the Bureau of ATF Statistics over the past few years. For the year 2010, .380 ACP turns out to be the MOST POPULAR handgun caliber for new gun sales! http://www.atf.gov/statistics/index.html


2008: .380 ACP - 278,945; 9mm - 421,746
2009: .380 ACP - 390,897; 9mm - 586,364
2010: .380 ACP - 665,510; 9mm - 629,995

Ammo comparison article

http://www.shootingillustrated.com/index.php/20806/new-life-for-the-380-acp/

[Hunter]

Here is a link to the ballistic test I just published on the .380 Auto.

http://rangehot.com/380-auto-ballistic-test/

[Bret4207]

I won't say its obsolete but I believe its on its path. A lot has to deal with cost and specially finding the ammo. I only typically see a box on the shelf still. Its like the 25 32 use to be the go to CC now you just don't see it anymore.


The same thing was said of the 45-70, 32-20, 9mm, 22 Hornet, all the old BPCR rounds and a lot of metric rounds. Don't cross it off the list just yet.

[Katya Mullethov]

No one makes a 38 that I can carry in the back pocket of my blue jeans without it making my butt look fat . Even the LCR is a bit less than thin . In fact , the only person that has ever called me on printing with my P3AT (and I have several pair of jeans with keltec pocket ,holes rubbed through, kinda like Skoal pocket)was a flaming lah-teeno homo that was checking out my sharpley chiseled motocross glutes while I was working on his truck . And he thayths " Oh my got... ith that a goan ?" To which I replied "Du-uh" and he sayth "Good fer yoo girl !" Flapping his wrist at me .

I lolled

[6bg6ga]

No one makes a 38 that I can carry in the back pocket of my blue jeans without it making my butt look fat . Even the LCR is a bit less than thin . In fact , the only person that has ever called me on printing with my P3AT (and I have several pair of jeans with keltec pocket ,holes rubbed through, kinda like Skoal pocket)was a flaming lah-teeno homo that was checking out my sharpley chiseled motocross glutes while I was working on his truck . And he thayths " Oh my got... ith that a goan ?" To which I replied "Du-uh" and he sayth "Good fer yoo girl !" Flapping his wrist at me .

I lolled

I'm not going to comment on if it makes your butt look fat. My wife bought a Walther PPKS with crimson trace in stainless steel. She can hit with deadly accuracy with it where as a 45acp makes her flinch. Having a 10mm, 40 cal, 45acp, 357,38, and 380 she has her choice as do I. I think it makes more sense to be able to hit the target where you aim instead of throwing lead around and missing the target. Bigger doesn't make it better. A couple of shots to the chest or a head shot will get the job done.

[Petrol & Powder]

I wonder where this thread would have gone if I had titled it, "Small locked-breach 9mm's - where are we now" ?

Not withstanding all of the great comments concerning ballistics, personal preferences and tight blue jeans (one of the funnier posts!) I'm still wondering if the prevalence of new, locked-breach design, very small/light 9mm pistols is impacting the market for .380 auto pistols? The .380 certainly ruled the small concealable pistol roost back in the day before guns like the Ruger LCP's and Kahr PM9's came along. I think the market is substantially different now.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the .380 or suggesting it will go the way of the Dodo bird tomorrow. I do think when faced with a choice between two pistols of similar size, weight and mode of operation (DAO, SA/DA, etc.); the option of a pistol that fires a more effective cartridge may come into play. Then we add the fact that the .380 and 9mm share the same bullet diameter but the 9mm has more energy with a casing that is only 2mm's longer.

[clownbear69]

The same thing was said of the 45-70, 32-20, 9mm, 22 Hornet, all the old BPCR rounds and a lot of metric rounds. Don't cross it off the list just yet.

The difference between 380 and 22 hornet and 32-30 is the amount of options you see on the shelf and a local gun store. I don't remember the last time that I seen a 22 hornet and 32-20 don't remember when I seen a box of ammo for it.

But lets look at the 380 vs 9mm. The main reason for many years people went to 380 for CC because they had the most options. Now a days we are seeing more and more options for CC in 9mm and now in 40 Both calibers are both cheaper (well if .40 is not cheaper its for sure more available) with more rounds having better ballistics and more options off the shelf. If this current trend happens, .380 may not be obsolete it will be a "niche" round much like the 25 ACP and 32ACP.

As a side note what I consider obsolete or niche rounds is the amount of chamberings of that round on the shelf in firearms and the amount of ammo difference on the shelf. The lower the number the closer to it being a obsolete/niche round to the average shooter

[grumman581]

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the .380 or suggesting it will go the way of the Dodo bird tomorrow. I do think when faced with a choice between two pistols of similar size, weight and mode of operation (DAO, SA/DA, etc.); the option of a pistol that fires a more effective cartridge may come into play. Then we add the fact that the .380 and 9mm share the same bullet diameter but the 9mm has more energy with a casing that is only 2mm's longer.

But it is not just the casing difference. The total cartridge length of the 9mm is 4.69 mm greater than the .380. The max chamber pressure for a .380 is 63% of what it is for the 9mm. I suspect that once you beefed up the gun to the point where it could handle 9mm pressures and bullet weights, you would end up with something that was pretty close to a 9mm in size also.

[1Shirt]

Have always considered a 380 as strictly a "get off me" gun, or a back away from me gun. Purely for defense, would absolutely prefer a 38S w/wad cutters.
1Shirt!

[JakeBlanton]

Have always considered a 380 as strictly a "get off me" gun, or a back away from me gun. Purely for defense, would absolutely prefer a 38S w/wad cutters.


In my opinion, a .357mag or a .38 special that can handle magnum level pressures is definitely more practical than the .380 since you can hand load them either really light or to a respectable level, but in compact form, the .380 tends to be smaller and for *some* people that is an issue. For some of us, anything smaller than a full size M1911 is considered "compact". :)

[AK Caster]

I bought two Ruger LC9's and two LCP's this year. Recoil for both are about the same. Ran a 100-200 rounds through all of them with no failure to feed, etc.
The .380 LCP's are easy to carry in a pocket and have their place. They are keepers.

[Petrol & Powder]

But it is not just the casing difference. The total cartridge length of the 9mm is 4.69 mm greater than the .380. The max chamber pressure for a .380 is 63% of what it is for the 9mm. I suspect that once you beefed up the gun to the point where it could handle 9mm pressures and bullet weights, you would end up with something that was pretty close to a 9mm in size also.

That was certainly true 10-20 years ago but there are now 9mm pistols that are practically the same/weight as .380's.

[grumman581]

That was certainly true 10-20 years ago but there are now 9mm pistols that are practically the same/weight as .380's.

You might be right... It's probably been 15-20 years since I paid much attention to .380 handguns.

[Piedmont]

That was certainly true 10-20 years ago but there are now 9mm pistols that are practically the same/weight as .380's.
Not really, when you stay in a particular manufacturer's line as you should when comparing. The smallest Kahr .380 is smaller and lighter than their smallest 9mm. The same is true of Ruger and Kel-tec. The .380 is always smaller and lighter. If it were not so very few folks would buy their .380.

It is true that we have small 9mms that are as small and light (or more so) as the last generation's .380s. My Kahr K9 is actually smaller than my Makarov and more comfortable to shoot since it is a locked breech design and the Mak is a blowback. Neither of those last two is the smallest of its category but I just like their size because I can get my paw on them and they are shootable.

[Petrol & Powder]

............It is true that we have small 9mms that are as small and light (or more so) as the last generation's .380s. My Kahr K9 is actually smaller than my Makarov and more comfortable to shoot since it is a locked breech design and the Mak is a blowback. Neither of those last two is the smallest of its category but I just like their size because I can get my paw on them and they are shootable.

/\ YES !! Finally !!!:bigsmyl2:

OK, all jokes aside, yes-there will always be something: smaller, bigger, more powerful, less powerful, lighter, heavier, more concealable, brighter and better looking :roll:
in the class of small (but not tiny) pocket pistols, the .380 was the leader in that TYPE, but it seems to be facing some serious competition from some really small 9mm designs. And for the record, I personally prefer the DAO 38 Special revolver but if I was going to recommend a pistol to fill THAT SAME role, I would recommend a small DAO 9mm now over the .380.

[bjeffv]

Ever since I picked up a beretta nano in 9mm the body guard in 380 has been sitting in the safe. The nano isn't much bigger, and I feel a lot better with 9mm in the pipe than 380.

[Bret4207]

The difference between 380 and 22 hornet and 32-30 is the amount of options you see on the shelf and a local gun store. I don't remember the last time that I seen a 22 hornet and 32-20 don't remember when I seen a box of ammo for it.

But lets look at the 380 vs 9mm. The main reason for many years people went to 380 for CC because they had the most options. Now a days we are seeing more and more options for CC in 9mm and now in 40 Both calibers are both cheaper (well if .40 is not cheaper its for sure more available) with more rounds having better ballistics and more options off the shelf. If this current trend happens, .380 may not be obsolete it will be a "niche" round much like the 25 ACP and 32ACP.

As a side note what I consider obsolete or niche rounds is the amount of chamberings of that round on the shelf in firearms and the amount of ammo difference on the shelf. The lower the number the closer to it being a obsolete/niche round to the average shooter

These days, judging by what I see at the few stores I go to that carry ammo, you're a lot more likely to find 22 H and 32-20 than 380, 9mm or 22LR! But, I digress. My point was that I can remember when finding a box of 9mm was about like finding a box of 222mag or 9mm Federal (that's a cartridge, not a brand) would be today. And 9mm came in one flavor. No one but a few Luger and P-38 owners shot the 9mm back in the day. Who knows where things are headed now.They said the 45-70, 32-20, etc were done for. They still survive.

[clownbear69]

These days, judging by what I see at the few stores I go to that carry ammo, you're a lot more likely to find 22 H and 32-20 than 380, 9mm or 22LR! But, I digress. My point was that I can remember when finding a box of 9mm was about like finding a box of 222mag or 9mm Federal (that's a cartridge, not a brand) would be today. And 9mm came in one flavor. No one but a few Luger and P-38 owners shot the 9mm back in the day. Who knows where things are headed now.They said the 45-70, 32-20, etc were done for. They still survive.

Absolutely correct on everything you said my main point when you can get a similar package in a larger caliber people will trend to it, specially when cost is involved. The consumer average consumer will always want the lowest price.

As for your 32-20, does anyone actually make any firearms chambered in that? .45-70 I can understand still surviving as being an awesome brush gun (as down here almost pointless). {this statement is not an attempt to hijack the thread}

[grumman581]

.45-70 I can understand still surviving as being an awesome brush gun (as down here almost pointless). {this statement is not an attempt to hijack the thread}

Are you saying that you have something against *artillery*? :)

[Piedmont]

And for the record, I personally prefer the DAO 38 Special revolver but if I was going to recommend a pistol to fill THAT SAME role, I would recommend a small DAO 9mm now over the .380.

I agree on both counts.

Was watching youtube videos on this new Hornady Critical Duty ammo out of a 3.1" barrel into gelatin through barriers, through denim, and bare. Even the non plus p stuff (it comes both ways) from that little bitty barrel it was expanding beautifully every time at sub 1,000 fps velocities. This ammo is great. It has a belt around it like the old Peters belted 220 or 225 gr. expanding .30-06 load from the early 20th century so it doesn't expand too much, combined with a heavier bullet (135 grs. in 9mm), and a piece of gummy bear candy up front in the hollow point so it cannot plug. The best part of this new ammo in my opinion is it penetrates better than just about every modern expanding load.

I carry the FBI load in my 2" .38 and it looks like it will probably expand about half the time from the extra short barrel, yet this high end 9mm ammo expands every time out the short barrel, penetrates well, and you have more shots to boot. The nine has come into it's own.

[Bret4207]

Absolutely correct on everything you said my main point when you can get a similar package in a larger caliber people will trend to it, specially when cost is involved. The consumer average consumer will always want the lowest price.

As for your 32-20, does anyone actually make any firearms chambered in that? .45-70 I can understand still surviving as being an awesome brush gun (as down here almost pointless). {this statement is not an attempt to hijack the thread}

Yes, the 32-20 is still offered in several rifles and revolvers. They make then in lots of other old calibers you won't find at Walmart too.

[grumman581]

Of course, a 9mm might expand larger, but a .45 will always be at least .45"... :)

[Piedmont]

Of course, a 9mm might expand larger, but a .45 will always be at least .45"... :)

I know you are at least half joking, but the standard pressure Critical Duty 9 was making a .48 caliber wadcutter consistently and the plus P stuff was making a .52 wadcutter. A .45 that doesn't expand makes a hole that is to a degree self sealing, unless it has a big meplat and then you have to worry about feeding. I have ball in my 1911 because I trust it to feed. The gun has to work. When I compare that to the 9mm with good ammo, there is really no comparison.

For some reason my 9s have always been more reliable than my .45s. Others may have different experiences, but it is hard to shuck your experiences when your life might be on the line.

[MtGun44]

It's OK to use HPs in the 9mm but you don't trust HPs in .45 . . . . . . ?

Makes no sense to me. Compare ball to ball and HP to HP.

Bill

[grumman581]

I know you are at least half joking, but the standard pressure Critical Duty 9 was making a .48 caliber wadcutter consistently and the plus P stuff was making a .52 wadcutter. A .45 that doesn't expand makes a hole that is to a degree self sealing, unless it has a big meplat and then you have to worry about feeding. I have ball in my 1911 because I trust it to feed. The gun has to work. When I compare that to the 9mm with good ammo, there is really no comparison.

For some reason my 9s have always been more reliable than my .45s. Others may have different experiences, but it is hard to shuck your experiences when your life might be on the line.

And if you use that same type of bullet in a .45, you're going to get even more expansion. All I'm saying is that with a 9mm, you *hope* for expansion to .45" (or maybe more if you are lucky), but with a .45, you're *guaranteed* to get at least .45" (even with ball ammo).

When I carry a .45, I carry it with Federal Hydra-Shoks (for at least the first mag). Lately, I've been carrying a 10mm with 175gr SWC from the Lee mold.

[w0fms]

All I can say about this is study after study says that the most important part of a defensive shooting for being effective is bullet placement. If you can't do that with a 380 or a small 9mm, then carry your 45. (or better practice more before you carry!) I personally like the small 380's and 9mm because after losing over 125 lbs I don't have to buy fat pants two sizes too big to IWB carry. And I don't ever plan on actually ever firing. If I do in a real situation .357 HP's from 95gr to 120gr travelling 800 to 1100 fps will be a lot better than getting stabbed...or beaten to death...and that's that. Having said that I would like something a little bigger with more capacity than a LCP in the winter.. But not much bigger...

[JHeath]

I personally like the small 380's and 9mm because after losing over 125 lbs I don't have to buy fat pants two sizes too big to IWB carry.

That's why the .380 won't go out of style!

Couple overheard at Cabela's:

Woman:
"Honey, does the .45 in my jeans make my butt look bigger?"

Man:
"No, dear. It makes the room look smaller."

[M-Tecs]

In the past 30 years I have only needed a gun once and I didn’t have it. I was walking in my dog with I came on a father and small son being attached by three pit bulls. The father was holding the kid in a tree as the dogs where ripping his legs to pieces. Luckily the house I was walking by was have some landscaping done so I was able to grab a steel post. I broke the back of one of the dogs and drove the other two off.

I am 6’ 4” and go about 240. I have both the leather and guns to carry a 45, 40, 357, 38, 9mm and 380. The only ones that are always with me are my LCP 380 or my Kahr P380. They get carried in a front pocket carry holster and I am never without them. I have looked at the current micro 9’s and they are still larger than the LCP 380/Kahr P380. While that are not much larger it is enough of a difference that I don’t want one for front pocket carry. If I am not front pocket carrying I might as well go with my 1911’s in a 45. The problem for me is if it’s not front pocket carry I will not always have it. When I carry a larger caliber the 380 is still in my front pocket.

I am never outside without my 380 in my front pocket. If all the larger caliber advocates can say the same my hats off to you. I don’t do yard work with my 1911 strapped on but my 380 is in my front pocket. I am quite confident that a 100 grain bullet at 1050 with get the job done if I do my part.

I would agree that the micro 9’s are reducing the sales of the 380’s but with around a half million new 380 pistols being sold per year it’s far from obsolete.

[clownbear69]

Are you saying that you have something against *artillery*? :)

Nope not at all

[clownbear69]

Yes, the 32-20 is still offered in several rifles and revolvers. They make then in lots of other old calibers you won't find at Walmart too.

Being almost all over here in NM I have yet to see a box nor a new gun in 32-20. Might still exist but others will go for a much common round than that

[beezapilot]

My wife carries a little S&W 351 .22 mag, 7 shot revolver. 9oz fully loaded. We hang 3 coffee cans 5 feet apart, in less than 5 seconds she can dump 2 in each one at 15 feet. Little to no recoil, light, and a pleasure to shoot-SO SHE PRACTICES WITH IT.

[dkf]

I have my little LCP for when I am working around the house or go somewhere and don't feel like lugging along any of Glocks. Also makes a decent little bug. I am experimenting with some 115gr XTP loads for it to try and get better penetration while still providing consistent expansion. Biggest downside to the little .380 IMO is the lack of penetration with the JHP designs that will actually reliably expand.

[9.3X62AL]

I think Grumman made a good point by saying "at least 45". I hear ya, sir.

I think VERY highly of the W-W 230 grain SXT I have carried for close to 15 years. I went to autopsies and emergency rooms where these expended bullets were recovered, and every one of them looked like ad copy for Winchester ammunition. Same goes for the 180 grain 40 caliber version. 20%+ diametric expansion, or more, weight retention, and 12"+ penetration. All the goodies.

I dunno what load I would recommend for the 380 ACP. I tend toward a 95 grain FMJ truncated cone, to prompt some penetration and cavity crush. I would likely start center-mass and march northward until the concept dawned permanently on the recipient. One less B.S. statement for the cops to listen to that way.

[Bret4207]

Being almost all over here in NM I have yet to see a box nor a new gun in 32-20. Might still exist but others will go for a much common round than that

I'm guessing you're not more than maybe 45 yoa and enthralled with high tech stuff. There are still a heck of a lot of us out here that don't need or want the latest whizz bang polymer and stainless super duper mall ninja piece of ordnance. I live in the sticks and I find 32-20, 32 S+W, 38-40, 30-40 Krag, 303 Savage, 22 Hi-Power and even 5mm guns and ammo in the little stores we have up here. I imagine you either never took notice of whats out there or only hit shops that cater to the crowd like yourself. No offense intended and I hope you didn't mean any towards me. But just because you don;t notice this stuff doesn't mean it's not out there.

[rhead]

The sales numbers would indicate that it is almost as obsolete as the 30-30.

[9.3X62AL]

The sales numbers would indicate that it is almost as obsolete as the 30-30.

The 30-30 WCF is anything but "obsolete". There must be a gunwriter inside you striving mightily to get out.

[rhead]

The 30-30 WCF is anything but "obsolete". There must be a gunwriter inside you striving mightily to get out.

Very true my statement was that the sales numbers indicate that the .380 was nearly as obsolete as the 30-30. both are no where near obsolete. I have never been tempted to write a firearms article.

[Katya Mullethov]

I would likely start center-mass and march northward until the concept dawned permanently on the recipient. One less B.S. statement for the cops to listen to that way.

Me and the old lady do a modified Mozambique ...most of the time . One low , two high , repeat . Always screw a couple or three Ranch Dogs into the loud mouth first , that's our theory at least .

[9.3X62AL]

Ammo sales figures by caliber--of loaded factory ammo--likely give a very skewed idea of "how many of what caliber" are actually being fired by the shooting public. Bullet casting and cartridge reloading are only two of the factors that can "*****" such results drastically. I surely wouldn't want to draw conclusions about ammo sales figures from my own ammo consumption over the last 10-12 years. Well under 5% of my ammo usage has involved factory loads, and much of that was in agency/CCW quals--in which I rotate out my carry ammo by firing it off. For sporting or training venues a factory round nearly never gets called upon--other than rimfires--and the shortage of those supplies has REALLY slowed my consumption of those ammo types markedly. Frankly, centerfire cast boolit loads are cheaper to make and much more readily available for use, and are completely recyclable in the bargain.

[9.3X62AL]

Me and the old lady do a modified Mozambique ...most of the time . One low , two high , repeat . Always screw a couple or three Ranch Dogs into the loud mouth first , that's our theory at least .

The closest loads I have on hand currently to the 380 ACP are the 32 ACP and the 9mm Makarov. In both I use blunt-profile RN cast boolits for most of my shooting, #311252 and the RCBS 365-100 RN respectively. When I used the Mak socially (pre-HR 218 fashion) I had full-value 95 grain HP factory loads running 1100 FPS on board, and thought highly of the combination. I have Speer Gold Dot loads on hand for the 32 ACP, but didn't trust them after chronography for social engagements; they barely managed 900 FPS with the lightened HP bullet. Both pistols are now relegated to small game and varmint venues as sports pistols, so the impetus to refine their anti-hairball attributes have faded for me. A truncated-cone bullet design--cast or jacketed--would probably reap a net benefit for all the pocket blowbacks in any venue as a critter or goblin stopper. The RN castings do well enough for my uses now as field items. I haven't seen the need to re-enlist the 380 ACP as a carry or sport caliber, in spite of its approved status as a CCW caliber by my old agency. There's no there there, as Gertrude Stein would say.

[WallyM3]

Ammo sales figures by caliber--of loaded factory ammo--likely give a very skewed idea of "how many of what caliber" are actually being fired by the shooting public. Bullet casting and cartridge reloading are only two of the factors that can "*****" such results drastically. I surely wouldn't want to draw conclusions about ammo sales figures from my own ammo consumption over the last 10-12 years. Well under 5% of my ammo usage has involved factory loads, and much of that was in agency/CCW quals--in which I rotate out my carry ammo by firing it off. For sporting or training venues a factory round nearly never gets called upon--other than rimfires--and the shortage of those supplies has REALLY slowed my consumption of those ammo types markedly. Frankly, centerfire cast boolit loads are cheaper to make and much more readily available for use, and are completely recyclable in the bargain.

I see your point, but I wonder what portion of the shooting population reloads? Or loads from scratch (like many of us do). And the extent to which the proportion of shooters to loaders has been stable over any given time, if indeed it is stable. Maybe ceteris paribus, could not a reasonable working assumption be derived.

I think it's easy to over-think the thing. The .380 is useful, viable and popular for readily graspable reasons, and, I suspect, will remain popular in spite of our debates over its theoretical merits.

Put otherwise, if the proportion of loaders to buyers remains materially constant, then sales figures could represent actual behavior. Unless it's the gub'ment that's buying the stuff.

I, speaking only about personal preference, would not care to walk towards a few fired rounds of this particular round.

[Newtire]

I even offered to make a gentlemen's wager of my Jaguar convertible against his Dodge Cummins.
Rich Is that the Jaguar pickup 4X4 model?

I really wish people would stop shooting those 9mm's at the range. It makes finding my little bitty .380's a beotch!

[Bret4207]

I knew a guy who had a BG get him down on his back and the BG was winning the struggle for his issue revolver. The way the guy told it was, "... so I reached into my pocket, got the NAA mini out, screwed it into his ear and that was the end of the story." Most people object strenuously to being shot no matter what you're using.

[9.3X62AL]

I knew a guy who had a BG get him down on his back and the BG was winning the struggle for his issue revolver. The way the guy told it was, "... so I reached into my pocket, got the NAA mini out, screwed it into his ear and that was the end of the story." Most people object strenuously to being shot no matter what you're using.

I do make an effort to avoid being shot, that's a certainty. One GOOD method of avoidance is to not conduct yourself in a manner that poses direct threats to others. Many former clients of both Bret and I can't quite make that leap of faith, though. Imagine that--the AUDACITY of taxpaying citizens to object in armed fashion to being robbed, carjacked, raped, or aggravatedly assaulted. I'm referring to a recent incident in Reading, PA that got some national press play when the mother of one of two goblins objected to her son being issued his toe tag by a CCW citizen; both store robbers (armed) got a richly-deserved and well-earned DIRT NAP. The Trayvon Effect, by which thug predators feel entitled to victimize without victim recourse. OOPS.

[JeffG]

I do make an effort to avoid being shot, that's a certainty. One GOOD method of avoidance is to not conduct yourself in a manner that poses direct threats to others. Many former clients of both Bret and I can't quite make that leap of faith, though. Imagine that--the AUDACITY of taxpaying citizens to object in armed fashion to being robbed, carjacked, raped, or aggravatedly assaulted. I'm referring to a recent incident in Reading, PA that got some national press play when the mother of one of two goblins objected to her son being issued his toe tag by a CCW citizen; both store robbers (armed) got a richly-deserved and well-earned DIRT NAP. The Trayvon Effect, by which thug predators feel entitled to victimize without victim recourse. OOPS.

HAHAHA, Dirt Nap, I love it.:lol:

[Bret4207]

I do make an effort to avoid being shot, that's a certainty. One GOOD method of avoidance is to not conduct yourself in a manner that poses direct threats to others. Many former clients of both Bret and I can't quite make that leap of faith, though. Imagine that--the AUDACITY of taxpaying citizens to object in armed fashion to being robbed, carjacked, raped, or aggravatedly assaulted. I'm referring to a recent incident in Reading, PA that got some national press play when the mother of one of two goblins objected to her son being issued his toe tag by a CCW citizen; both store robbers (armed) got a richly-deserved and well-earned DIRT NAP. The Trayvon Effect, by which thug predators feel entitled to victimize without victim recourse. OOPS.


I don't know how many people have been on the wrong end of a gun before, but every time I read some hairy chested he man type in Mall Ninja Monthly go on and on about how anything not starting with a "4" not being adequate to stop, say, a home burglary, I know that chances are he's never looked down the muzzle of a 22 and wondered if his bowels were about to void themselves.........

[9.3X62AL]

Yes sir--either that response, or the opposite extreme--in which a straight pin could not be driven through said orifice with a 10# sledge hammer.

[1Shirt]

Sure is hard to disagree with Bret! Even a 22 bbl facing you tends to look real big, and anybody who has never faced a loaded gun, regardless of cal or gage, will have a rude awakening when and if they do have to face one! It is one thing to pre judge without experiencing a situation, and quite another to have a damp or dirty spot on your clothes when it occurs!
1Shirt!

[9.3X62AL]

Reminds me of a story......young man at the Portola Avenue Circle K store that worked swing shift--good young guy, college student striving mightily (and subsequently succeeding) to raise himself out of the ghetto. He made the best coffee in Palm Desert, too. Bar none.

One fine evening, he got held up. Silent alarm call goes out, we're busy as hell 10 calls deep but break away and haul *** for the in-progress run. IIRC I was 2nd on-scene, and the perp had cleared off about a minute before the first car got on-scene. ITW--in the wind, no vehicle seen going away, but tire noise was heard seconds after the dude bailed. DAMMIT!

I get assigned the report, and interview the clerk--who is understandably in the shook-up-and-pissed-off mindset that most such victims feel at such times.

Me--(about the third or fourth question in the string) "Can you tell me what the guy looked like?"

Clerk--"Look like? LOOK LIKE?? Mr. Paine, that white dude looked like A MOTHERF---IN' HOWITZER IN REEBOKS, that's what he LOOKED LIKE!"

Succinctly put.

[grumman581]

Sure is hard to disagree with Bret! Even a 22 bbl facing you tends to look real big, and anybody who has never faced a loaded gun, regardless of cal or gage, will have a rude awakening when and if they do have to face one! It is one thing to pre judge without experiencing a situation, and quite another to have a damp or dirty spot on your clothes when it occurs!


You will either man up and do what is necessary or you will end up thinking about what you could have / should have done for the rest of your life. Looking back at it after all these years, I have to say that it was probably worth getting shot to be able to look myself in the mirror, knowing that I will stand up for what is right. Of course, I do have the satisfaction of knowing that I did more damage to him than he did to me and he didn't escape. Unfortunately for me though, if he had had a more reliable gun or ammo, I would have ended up with a bullet in the face.

Sure, a .380 can kill someone. It has the penetration and a proper shot will do the job. But will an improper shot still stop the person? I know that a .38 did not stop me when I felt my life in danger. The adrenaline was up and I didn't even know I had been shot until after the police came to take him off to jail. A .380 is less powerful than a .38. I really suspect that I would have "noticed" being shot with a .357mag or a .45 though. :)

[w0fms]

I haven't seen factory 380 ACP here in Eastern Iowa on any store shelf for about 6 months. 45 ACP, 40 S&W, 9mmx19 even 22LR I've seen and bought on occasion recently. I've been told 380 is now the "hardest to get" ball ammo from several stores. So it must be popular....

[9.3X62AL]

Lotta truth to what you say, Grumman. I could have done without the 20 gauge round to face and head, and it DID upset my family a lot. As you say, though, now I know that training and prep pays off.

[grumman581]

Lotta truth to what you say, Grumman. I could have done without the 20 gauge round to face and head, and it DID upset my family a lot. As you say, though, now I know that training and prep pays off.

Were you hunting with Dick Cheney? :)

In my case, it wasn't training and prep -- otherwise, I would have been armed. I just figured that since he was very close, all I had to do was grab the barrel and point it away from me and he could not shoot me. I didn't take into account that he would fall backwards when I grabbed the gun, causing me to release it, and he would shoot at that time. From that point on, it was nothing like the fights you see in the movies. It was more like the greased pig capture / wrestling that you see them have for the kids at the country fairs. The main thing that the incident taught me was to be aware of my surroundings and to not trust anyone.

[Newtire]

The consumer average consumer will always want the lowest price.

As for your 32-20, does anyone actually make any firearms chambered in that? I don't think that anyone who casts their own is an average consumer anyway. A .32-20 would be a great open carry gun for hiking out in the woods. You make your own ammo. A .380 would be a little better than a .22 short or a .25ACP I'd think for sure. 8-shots out of a .380 ought to slow someone down if they were intent on doing bodily harm. These are just closeup encounter type weapons anyway. I feel more comfortable these days with my .380. An extra mag. in the pocket brings the total to 15 shots. Hope I never have to find out if it is adequate!

[9.3X62AL]

HA HA! No, Mr. Cheney was not on scene that particular evening.

I'm not sure there is any such thing as a "classic" firefight. They are ALL clusterf---s on some level.

[Rick Hodges]

HA HA! No, Mr. Cheney was not on scene that particular evening.

I'm not sure there is any such thing as a "classic" firefight. They are ALL clusterf---s on some level.

Amen Brother....way to much happening way too fast without half enough information and they are way too f___ing loud.

I'm of the airtight sphincter type....

Although I was gratified to overhear a miscreant that was arrested in raid on a dope house.....I was carrying a BS 1911 Colt Series 70....the muzzle was polished like a mirror, as I entered the room he was reaching for a shotgun on the floor next to him....He took one look at the muzzle of that Colt and his eyes grew to the size of saucers and complied with my every order.....another officer was interviewing him and his description of the incident was priceless....I did get his undivided attention.

[grumman581]

HA HA! No, Mr. Cheney was not on scene that particular evening.

I'm not sure there is any such thing as a "classic" firefight. They are ALL clusterf---s on some level.

In my particular incident, I don't think it could technically be classified as a "firefight" since he was the only one who had a gun. All I had was testosterone and youth which probably made me rather oblivious to what *could* have happened. Of course, that was back in the "good old days" when the punks asked you for your money BEFORE they shot you. Ever hear of a town in the LA area called "Compton"? Well, *I* was probably the only person in the LA area that *didn't know* that you don't pull off the freeway at midnight for a burger around there. Sometimes, Darwin is asleep on the job...

[9.3X62AL]

COMPTON? Hijo la! Lovely area.

[grumman581]

COMPTON? Hijo la! Lovely area.

Nope, he wasn't hispanic... Different minority... Juvi, of course, so he was probably released to his parents before they had finished patching me up at the med clinic...

[9.3X62AL]

The Comptonians you speak of still make up a considerable portion of that community's membership, but Hispanic folks are making inroads into that dominance. Hell, between the Ninth Circuit and our own AB 109, the whole freakin' State is like a big-azzed bass tournament--all catch-and-release, and God help you if a fish dies in your live-well or during the catch. I could rave for paragraphs about THESE subjects, but the place IS about cast bullets.

[Petrol & Powder]

Nope, he wasn't hispanic... Different minority... Juvi, of course, so he was probably released to his parents before they had finished patching me up at the med clinic...

I wasn't there but I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that he was released to his parent (note singular) or his guardian (more likely). It's likely that father wasn't an option due to jail, death or unknown identity.

[9.3X62AL]

I wasn't there but I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that he was released to his parent (note singular) or his guardian (more likely). It's likely that father wasn't an option due to jail, death or unknown identity.

Feral people of any stripe are a PITA in three dimensions.

[Hickory]

Feral people of any stripe are a PITA in three dimensions.

Thank you


3000

[grumman581]

I wasn't there but I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that he was released to his parent (note singular) or his guardian (more likely). It's likely that father wasn't an option due to jail, death or unknown identity.

You make a good point... I had *assumed* that he was probably released to his parents before they had finished patching me up in the clinic, but you're right -- it might have just been a parent.

The doctors told me that they would do more damage to me taking the bullet out than just leaving it in, so they put a butterfly bandage over the entry wound and told me to come back in a couple of months after it had worked through my thigh and was under the skin in the back of my leg and then they'll slit the skin and pop it out like a zit. :)

Well, I went into the Navy right after that and towards the end of boot camp it had worked its way to the back of my thigh, so I went down to sick bay and told them that I had a bullet in my leg that I would like to get removed. Probably not a common request for the doctors from a recruit. :) I watched it in a mirror while they were doing it. Like the other doctors at the clinic had said, a small incision and then pop it out like a zit.

[9.3X62AL]

Probably not a common request for the doctors from a recruit. :)

Don't bet on that--Marie was an Army trauma unit nurse for 3 years and an ER/trauma unit RN for nearly ten years after that. The things that happen to people defy description at least once a week--sometimes once a SHIFT.

[clownbear69]

I'm guessing you're not more than maybe 45 yoa and enthralled with high tech stuff. There are still a heck of a lot of us out here that don't need or want the latest whizz bang polymer and stainless super duper mall ninja piece of ordnance. I live in the sticks and I find 32-20, 32 S+W, 38-40, 30-40 Krag, 303 Savage, 22 Hi-Power and even 5mm guns and ammo in the little stores we have up here. I imagine you either never took notice of whats out there or only hit shops that cater to the crowd like yourself. No offense intended and I hope you didn't mean any towards me. But just because you don;t notice this stuff doesn't mean it's not out there.

Even though im still 25 days late answering I can tell you what Ive found. I have still not found it going to pawn shops to the only LGS in my city. the nearest city with another LGS is an hour away. Nonetheless I don't what you mean by "places that cater to me". A gun store is a gun store specially when its the only one. And yes I look at every cal when I walk into a place. Even though I may not own it I usually pick it up for family or friends. and out of the places ive gone in my town still no .32-20 and still very rare to have .380 on the shelf

[Bret4207]

Got me pal. It's common everywhere I go. I've even seen 32-20 in Wal Mart up here. A gun store is not a gun store I'm afraid. Go to a place that caters to the AR crowd, where you never see old lever guns on the rack, and your chances of finding anything in the older lines is pretty small. Go to a place that specializes in finer grade collectable lever guns, single shots, etc. and your chances increase while the chance of finding the latest whizbang caliber fall. You don't find a lot of rice burners at a Harley dealer, know what I mean?

[clownbear69]

Got me pal. It's common everywhere I go. I've even seen 32-20 in Wal Mart up here. A gun store is not a gun store I'm afraid. Go to a place that caters to the AR crowd, where you never see old lever guns on the rack, and your chances of finding anything in the older lines is pretty small. Go to a place that specializes in finer grade collectable lever guns, single shots, etc. and your chances increase while the chance of finding the latest whizbang caliber fall. You don't find a lot of rice burners at a Harley dealer, know what I mean?

yup. Cept my gun store really doesn't cater to the AR crowd. Sure he has a few but he mostly sells Bolt actions (mostly hunting community) Even when I worked for Academy and Cabelas didn't see too much 32-20 Luck to have a facing (3 boxes up 2 boxes in) and when it was gone it was gone for a year (cabelas I worked for was in Wisconsin were leverguns were the preferred). But as before it was the same thing for the .380 low stock always. You would thing companies would produce top sellers, which it would be if available.

If I know my geography enough in NY lots of woods were shorter range guns are the norm making the 32-20 or 44-40 or any of the classic levers a need

[Bret4207]

The stores meet the demand. I would have thought NM would be prime country for old lever guns. Anyways, the original point was that the assumption you make that the 380 or 32-20 or anything is on the brink of extinction defies what we see around us. Look at reloading die sales, ammo sales, the cowboy action market, the outfits making new 92 clones in 32-20 or the vast choice of 380's you have today. Nothing is "obsolete" anymore, not your 32-20, not your 375 H+H, not you 22 Jet, not your 450 Martini or 50/110 Sharps. We live int he Golden Age of handloading and probably of guns in general. You can get almost anything you want today. It didn't used to be like that.

[9.3X62AL]

I have paid so little attention to presence or absence of centerfire ammunition in gun shops for so long.....I don't feel qualified to make judgements about what calibers are present or absent historically in the shops where I live now. "Very little of any caliber" has been the case for much of the time since the Obama Administration was installed, with a brief and shallow return of some products around 2011. Ammo shelves now look like food display racks in Soviet-era Moscow grocery stores--either bare, stripped out, or severely picked over. There is no "Golden Age" going on hereabouts, not when a brick of plain-vanilla CCI Standard Velocity 22 LR is priced at $100. Not Green Tag--not even Eley Tenex......just SV 22s.

I am a frequent shooter of 32-20 WCF and other less tactical calibers that go unadmired by the Mall Ninja Contingent. These calibers were never commonly encountered as loaded ammo locally, and were expensive as h--l when found. Early on, I concluded that the practical way to keep my 32-20 rifles and revolvers fed was to tool up--reload--and cast boolits. My reloads shot MUCH better than did the few factory loads I ran across, too.