TexasCHLforum.com

Venus Pax wrote:I usually carry a .380.

Could you expand on that ?

I perfer a .45......period. And the reason I carry a .45 is that they do not make a .50 or .60 in a subcompact.

And I dress for it.

That being said. If I do not have a belt on.....you can bet I have my Keltec 380 in my pocket loaded with Corbon JHP's

I'm going to take to opposite side of the fence on this one.

Now, several posts have limited the choices to:

1. Carrying a .380
2. Carrying nothing

I want to involve a third choice: 3. Carry something else, instead of the .380.

Once the third choice is available, I would take that route every time. In my own personal opinion, and this in no way precludes anyone else's choice in the matter, I would not carry a .380, if I had a choice of something else.

The minimum caliber I would carry for self-defense purposes is 9x18, and reluctantly at that. I'm not saying that it would be ineffective, I just want to have every advantage I can have. In order to get these advantages, I'd want the most power available with the most capacity I could accommodate.

I don't want to tread on ground that has already been well-covered. I'll make some assumptions:

1. We are limited to handguns.
2. The chosen handgun will be carried as often as possible, and appropriate accessories will be available.
3. A modest amount of money can be spent acquiring a handgun, if it is not already available.

Assuming these things, there is no need to discuss the overall inadequacy of all handgun calibers in relation to shotguns, rifles, and anti-tank weapons. There is also no need to discuss the fact that a Ruger LCR is easier to conceal than a standard 1911 or a Glock. The appropriate accessories will include a good holster, gun belt, and cover garments. Finally, there is no need to discuss the scenario in which the .380 is the only option available due to the fact that it is the only gun currently owned and no other can be afforded. In that case, the question is moot, since the .380 must suffice and there is no choice.

Under these conditions, I would say that the .380 is an inadequate defense caliber. Another poster stated that, in smaller calibers, they would opt for FMJ instead of JHP. I personally agree with that, but I understand that others disagree. In my 9x18 pistols, I carry only FMJ. The penetration tests (that I have seen) of JHP in that caliber do not meet the FBI's minimum penetration requirements. There may be some 9x18, or even .380, penetration tests using JHP that do meet these requirements, and I am simply unaware of them. In that case, I will be happy to change my opinion, and also purchase the tested ammunition.

Only my opinion, I am not an expert.

I would trust my P238 with self defense, with the best ammunition I can find. I just ordered some Double Tap with the 80gr Barnes copper HP, and I bet I'll feel safe with those. Though the kimber with the Nosler 185gr at 1225fps and 616ft-lbs... that's a different ballpark.

Carry-a-Kimber wrote::dead horse:

Excuse me but this may not be a dead horse to some of the newer members here. If your not interested in a thread just don't click the mouse button on it.
Just a suggestion.

It goes back to what you are comfortable with, and your available dress. A good .380 is not as good as a full auto .45ACP Tommy gun, but its better than a .25.

Vic wrote: I would say that the .380 is an inadequate defense caliber.

Disturbing

If you've ever had a gun pointed at you with bad intentions behind it, you'll know that a barrel on a .25 looks to be about the same diameter as a garbage can.

iratollah wrote:If you've ever had a gun pointed at you with bad intentions behind it, you'll know that a barrel on a .25 looks to be about the same diameter as a garbage can.

True but if I pull out a gun someone is going to die; me or the bad guy, preferably the bad guy. No pointing.

Just about everything to do with carrying is compromise and some sacrifice. Dress habits, comfort, barrel length, caliber. I'm gonna spend some time researching the best ammo. I believe there is some good info on here but some half baked theories and opinions come along with that,I have some of those too.

handog wrote:

iratollah wrote:If you've ever had a gun pointed at you with bad intentions behind it, you'll know that a barrel on a .25 looks to be about the same diameter as a garbage can.

True but if I pull out a gun someone is going to die; me or the bad guy, preferably the bad guy. No pointing.

Well, I've been under fire and have "simply" had guns pointed at me. In the latter case it does indeed create apprehension. What's his name?...you know the shooting expert...name slips my mind right now, anyway I believe he said, "The best handgun for self defense, is the one you'll carry." That's why my wife has a P3AT and I a G23.

The 380 is a backup gun and a poor one at that. With similar sized 9mm and 38SP+P guns out on the market, I don't understand why people keep buying them other than price. The manufacturers crank them out because they are relatively cheap to manufacture (fixed barrel blowback action)

SAMMI pressure for 380 is 21,500 PSI compared to 35,000 PSI for 9mm and 38,500 PSI for 9mm+P. So using chamber pressure, the 380 is about 61% of the power of standard 9mm. Combine that with a max bullet weight of 100gr. (and most are 90gr.) and you get a wimpy cartridge out of a short barreled guns that have tiny sights, poor triggers and has poor penetration.

Even the vaunted Corbon 80gr Self-Defense DPX ammo is advertised as 1050fps velocity. That makes 84000 power factor (bullet weight x velocity). Compare that to 9mm 124gr Golden Sabers at 1125fps and a power factor of 14625. The 380 DPX is 57% of the power of 9mm 124gr Golden Sabers using power factor as a measurement.

Instructor Tom Givens at Rangemaster in Memphis has a spring clip of the type used to hang targets on their range. It was shot by a 380 and the round did not even penetrate the 1/16" metal clip. The bullet is still embedded in the clip. He uses it as a teaching aid when discussing caliber selection. You can guess what his opinion of the 380 is.

For the size of a pocket 380 you could get a 9mm Kahr, a Keltec 9 or an Airweight J-frame that shoots a cartridge that repeatedly passes FBI penetration and expansion tests.

Gringop

gringop wrote:The 380 is a backup gun and a poor one at that.

Obviously, a more powerful cartridge is better. But I think it’s useful to look at cartridges that were popular in the past, as well as cartridges that are/were popular in Europe.

A .380 generates approximately 200 ft lbs of energy. In the early 20th century, the lowly .25acp was very popular in pocket guns at 73 ft lbs. Even full size pistols were popular in .32 acp at 100 ft lbs. The .32 S&W was very popular in small revolvers at 87 ft lbs. The .32 S&W Long, aka .32 Colt New Police was a popular police cartridge at 132 ft lbs. The .38 Short Colt produced 165 ft lbs. The .38 Long Colt, which was the U.S. military cartridge from 1892-1911, offered 201 ft lbs. The .38 S&W, aka .38 Colt New Police, was carried by many police agencies until the mid 1900s at 150 ft lbs. The British adopted this round as their military round loaded with a 200 gr bullet as the .38/200. In that configuration, it ran 176 ft lbs.

All of the above were considered adequate defensive rounds in their time, yet only the .38 Long Colt, the predecessor of the .38 Special, is the equal of the .380 acp. I realize the poor performance in the Philippines caused the abandonment of the .38 Long Colt, but for 18 years our military cartridge had the same power as the .380.

Sure, carry the most powerful round that you’re comfortable with, but the weaker calibers should not be completely discounted.

Has the .380 ammo situation gotten any better?