.38 snub or .380 pocket

Status
Not open for further replies.
.38 Snub!

Reasons; 1, it's reliable! No matter how much gunk, pocket fuzz, or dust gets on it, it still revolves and goes BOOM! (Yes I clean my guns often!)
2, it can eat the whole range of .38 Special loads, wadcutters, standard pressure, +P, and shot shells!
And 3, the little bugger is accurate! I took a racoon out of a tree in my backyard with my model 60 loaded with wadcutters at 30 yards!
And lastly, no need to carry a spare magazine! Granted speedloaders or speedstrips make reloading easier, but if you have a pocket full of ammo and the revolver, your ready for business.
 
I prefer the revolver for a variety of reasons. The smallest .380's that I can shoot well enough to be confident with and that I trust to be reliable are still roughly the size of a Walther PPK. In a similar-size package, I can get a .38 Snub that has, for me, a more trustworthy cartridge. Simply put, there are only a handful of .380 JHP's that I trust to both expand reliably and penetrate adequately, but there is a plethora of .38 Spl +P loadings that perform satisfactorily. I don't really view capacity as much of an issue because, unless you go with a rather large .380 like a CZ-83 or Beretta 86, the auto will have, at most, a 3-4 round advantage. While I do carry spare ammo (a Bianchi speed strip in my watch pocket), I'm also not particularly concerned about reloading speed as such a gun is the definition of a bad-breath-distance, need-it-right-now, "get the hell off me" gun. The way I see it, if I had to reload with such a gun, my number is probably up regardless of whether I'm armed with a revolver or small auto.
 
They both have their strenghts that have already been mentioned by the previous posters.


I had owned a sig P230 (.380) and a Taurus Model 85 (snub .38) after carrying them both I sold the Sig. I just feel more confident in the .38 round and how simple the snubby is to operate. It's also been 100% reliable.
 
I used to alternate back and forth between a 642 and a SIG P230 until I got my first Glock 26. Now neither of them get out much, other than the range for practice. I get double the number of rounds in the gun with the Glock, and even with 127 grain +P+'s in it, its still WAY easier to shoot well with than the 642, especially with ammo in the power range that I carry in it.

The 26 really isnt any harder to hide than the 642, and in a couple of ways, its actually easier. Did I mention its also a LOT easier to shoot well with. I dont really pocket carry anything, so thats not an issue for me. The big advantage is, the 26 is the perfect back up to the 17 I always have along, so pretty much everything is the same when it comes to shooting them, and I can use my 17's reload with the 26 if need be.
 
The LCP is certainly easy to carry, but I have more confidence in my S&W640. I keep it loaded with 38+p and while it is heavier than the airweights, it gives the solid feel of a real gun.
 
Neither of the above. While I'd have no problem carrying a .38 snub, I'd rather not drop down to .380 if I don't have to. And I don't have to. I carry a KelTec PF-9 (9mm) in order to fill this role. Easy to conceal, has more shots than a .38 snub, has more punch than a .380.

The only viable role I can think of for .380 nowadays is in the subcompacts (P3AT, LCP class), and for the most part I don't need them to be that small. Maybe if I ran around wearing shorts (which I don't, even in the heat) or needed a BUG (which I don't), I'd feel the need to have one. Other than that, why would you carry a compact .380 when you could just as easily carry a similar sized, similar capacity compact 9mm? I mean, if you already have the .380 then carry it, but if you were going to buy a new carry gun then why wouldn't you just go with a similar sized compact 9mm?

If I were to have to choose between a .38 snub and a compact size .380, well, it depends on the holster. All things being equal I'd go with the wheelgun. Since these are intended to be "up close & personal" SD guns, I don't see where the additional capacity is going to be all that much help, and I'd rather have the extra per shot performance that the .38 provides. But -- the cylinder of the revolver makes it bulkier and that can bring about concealment issues that can be at least partially alleviated with a good holster.
 
I own both a .38 S&W Airweight and a .380 Ruger LCP. While both are small guns, by far the easiest to conceal and carry is the Ruger LCP. It is smaller in every aspect including width and is truely a pocket gun in my opinion.

I know people carry Airweights in their pockets but I can't pull it off. The gun is too thick and bulky for from pocket carry and no matter what pants I'm wearing, it looks like I've got a revolver in my pocket.

With that said, I'm more comfortable packing the .38 since it has a lot more power than a .380. With that said, the LCP is a lot easier to carrying in the summer months in a t-shirt and shorts so it's a trade off between power and easy of carry.
 
I have both a 380 bersa & taurus 85 .38 snub.
The tarus .38 spl. is my daily carry , more comfortable to carry for me all day.
 
Kinda the age old question about the one in the hand or two in the bush (or at home).

First off, I pocket carry. Right off the bat that colors ny decisions.

I have both the LCP and a Model 442 S&W .38. If I had only these two and I knew that now was the time...I'd carry the .38 Spl. I think it's a significantly more powerful round. But I hardly ever carry it. I find myself carrying the LCP more and more, because it's so easy. Everyone says their CCW "disappears", but I really feel like that with the LCP, and I've been a pocket pistol afficianado for years, from derringers to Seecamp. The LCP is so slim and lightweight, there is ever only one reason not to carry and that's where illegal. The .380 is not my favorite round, but this isn't Afghanistan, and if shoot once, I'll shoot all 7.

use1.jpg

use2.jpg


That being said, though, and I know you didn't ask, my main carry is a 9X19.

kahrandsmith442.jpg
 
I have both a KelTec P3AT and a S&W 642. I feel more confident with the revolver, but there are times it just isn't practical to carry it and the choice for me is the P3AT or go unarmed. And I think with proper ammo the 380 can get it done.
 
The big advantage of the J-Frames, for me, is their grab-ability ~ they're quick and easy to get a proper grip on, even from an awkward position. This is also why they point well. I don't experience the same w/ small pistols like the LCP. There's always an extra beat to acquire the grip. I don't trust that I'd be able to wield one effectively under stress.
 
MLeake said:
...small guns are often used at contact range. A revolver will work just fine when jammed into the BG's body. An auto may very well get knocked out of battery.
Click to expand...

IM_Lugger said:
I'd keep my gun as far from the BG as possible no matter the circumstances. LAst thing you want is to get have the BG grab the gun and take it away from you (you cant pull the trigger if someones hand preventing the cylinder from rotating)
Click to expand...

IM_Lugger: Unfortunately what you intend to do with your gun, and no matter how much you train and prepare for every conceivable scenario, if you do have to fire or even just draw your pistol, the actual event will probably be different enough from what you prepared for that you may not be able to prevent getting "up close and personal" with the BG.

Since I live in NJ and cannot carry a concealed firearm, I can't say what type of gun would work better for me in the concealed-carry role. I generally prefer semi-automatic pistols over revolvers, for several reasons. For range use and home defense, I would choose a semi-automatic pistol over a revolver any day. The extra firepower is a huge factor for me. I also prefer the way a semiautomatic fits in my hand compared to a revolver.

For a CCW handgun, however, I would strongly consider a revolver. Not worrying about knocking a revolver out of battery when you're up close and personal with the BG might be enough to convince me to get a revolver.
 
Last edited:
If size is a factor, the .32ACP guns are slightly smaller & lighter than the .380's while delivering similar ballistics.

Another option I'm looking at is the .410 Bond Arms derringers. With modern 00Buck loads, shooting one .410 round is like shooting a 3-round burst from a .380....
 
I'd take a semi any day over a snubbie ... I own both, and the semi is far easier to shoot accurately (unless you are constantly practicing with the snubbie), holds more ammo and is way easier to reload if it comes to that ... I'm not sure I'd pick a .380, since my daily carry, a PM-9, is almost as small and packs more of a punch, but IMHO it's a semi every time .. (Ok, I'm behind cover, let me have it ...)
 
The big advantage of the J-Frames, for me, is their grab-ability ~ they're quick and easy to get a proper grip on, even from an awkward position. This is also why they point well. I don't experience the same w/ small pistols like the LCP. There's always an extra beat to acquire the grip. I don't trust that I'd be able to wield one effectively under stress.
Click to expand...

This ^^^

Plus the ability to shoot 158-gr LSWCHP +P.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top