.38 special vs. 9mm in revolvers

The .38 special +P remains popular because the weight and size of the revolvers. These small revolvers are usually 13-15 ounces. A .38 +P revolver usually weighs 1/3 less than the equivalent 9mm model. In addition, the .38 +P already has a good deal of recoil in these small frame guns. The 9mm isn't a low recoil cartridge in a small frame revolver, in fact, it's a good deal more recoil than a standard pressure .38 or .38 +P.

Cost of construction is important, too. The .38 is a very low pressure cartridge and can be built on very light alloy framed revolvers without special consideration. To achieve the same weight as a .38 +P, a 9mm revolver would have to be built from expensive materials, like scandium aluminum alloy used by S&W. Usually, a 9mm revolver has to be all steel, which means they weigh significantly more. Typically, a manufacturer will rechamber a .357 sized frame for 9mm in a revolver, so the decision is usually between a .357 or 9mm, which are generally the same size and weight.

Cost of ammo seems to come up in a lot of threads, especially in the last few years. Casual shooters won't break the bank by buying a box or two of .38 specials a month to keep their skills up. Many of us that shoot a lot are reloaders and the .38 is cheap and easy to reload and requires only the most basic of setups.
 
Last edited:
While I am inclined to think the 9mm is not a $1000 bucks worth better than. 38 Special, I confess that Korth is pretty interesting. Maybe fits a niche for someone who has not invested deeply in .38 special.
 
Taurus actually did make a 9mm revolver that was shortened to the cartridge. For some reason they discontinued it- but the now make curved guns and standard .38 frames with tiny grips and stubby barrels and clear side plates.
You don't have to use clips in the Taurus revolver, but if you don't you need a stick to poke the empties out with.
 
New here, but I'v been reading your guys forum. Last summer I picked up a Ruger Blackhawk convertible 9mm / 357 and I have to say it's one of sweetest little shooters that I've shot. I do a lot of 9mm shooting with it and when I want something a little more I put in the 357 cylinder. It shoots great groups with either. I've been casting and loading for 357 for years and I also started casting and loading for the 9mm. I've got several rounds loaded up for it and as of right now the 9mm cost me $4.05 per 50 round box
 
It seems to me that this idea of a 9mm revolver comes up every few years. Someone tries it, everybody seems to love the idea (back in the day it was gunwriters, now it's the internet), and THIS is going to be the one that's different. It never is. After a brief flurry of interest, they just fade away.

I'll stick with revolver rounds in revolvers, and semi-auto rounds in semi-autos.
 
I almost grabbed a Taurus 9mm at adventure outdoors for 320$. it's a pretty sweet gun, although has a pretty stout trigger. but after reading the reviews on bud's, I decided against. I like Taurus, but the 905 seems to have been poorly executed. I still may buy one and just cross my fingers or keep shipping back til they get it right. apparently "some" people have good luck with it. but read the reviews....pretty bad. I would look into the lcr9 if they had an lcr9x which I haven't seen yet
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/manufacturers_id/85/products_id/32370

gun bloggers seem to like it....but that's always the case isn't it?
http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/17/gun-review-taurus-905-9mm-revolver/

http://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2012/12/taurus-905-9mm/3/#loading-a_phatchfinal
 
Last edited:
testuser79 pretty much summed it up. 9mm in standard pressure loadings operates at the same 35,000 psi max as .357 Magnum does and thus the construction of a 9mm revolver needs to be more similar to that of a .357 Magnum than a .38 Special. Because of this, a 9mm revolver will cost and weigh about the same as a comparable model in .357 Magnum and, while ammunition will be cheaper, one has a much wider range of ammunition to choose from in .357 Magnum.

Also, while a 9mm revolver with a shortened cylinder for 9mm may sound appealing, it would not be without drawbacks. Shortening the cylinder to 9mm length places the barrel-to-cylinder gap that much closer to the shooter's hand(s). While this might not be a huge issue with a medium or large frame revolver, it would likely be quite easy to get one's hand(s) too close to the b/c gap of a small frame revolver and be injured when firing, particularly if one has large hands.
 
Most think the necessity for moon clips is a big disadvantage for 9mm revolvers, but they are not really necessary. If I carry a short barreled revolver, I rarely carry a reload. It's five or six shots and finished. So, the lack of a reload doesn't bother me and you don't have to use moon clips if you're willing to punch out empty cases one at a time.

I had a SW polymer .38 spl BodyGuard that I really tried to like but just couldn't. I may give the Ruger LCR9 a chance.
 
9mm in a 357-length cylinder has some interesting advantages.

The bullet travels down a "smoothbore" section of cylinder around 1/2" long, which is pretty tightly fitted to the bullet and with very little blow-by if any. Bullet speeds increase in this area very quickly, apparently equivalent to up to 2" of regular barrel or so. Pressure remains very high in this section of cylinder smoothbore.

So a 2" barrel snubbie 9mm with a full-length cylinder will spit a bullet out about as fast as a Glock 19 with a 4" barrel.

There's probably a slight drop in peak accuracy with this trick as opposed to a 9mm revolver with a 9mm-length cylinder...but in a close-range combat gun I like the speed boost.
 
I look at it from a reloader's point of view. I reload both 9mm as well as 38 Colt Short, Long, Special and 357. Of all of them, I shoot and like the 38 special cartridge the best. For one thing, it reloads well and headspace on the rim, not on the casing throat like the 9mm. The only reason I even reload the 9 is because I have an SR9 . . . as compared with a dozen or so 38s/357s.

The 38 spl. cartridge is much easier for me to handle with my hands and fingers as well - I'm older and my "handling skills" are not like those of a 18 year old. Ad as an older person, I was brought up on SAA revolvers and later DA - and they shoot "rimmed cartridges". In essence, it sort of boils down to personal likes. Everyone is different and if a person likes to shoot rimless cartridges in a revolver - whether it be 9mm or 45 ACP - then I say more power to 'em! The "convertibles" that are being made certainly offer that option if a person wants it. :)
 
On the 9X19 rimmed cartridge I doubt if any manufacturer is going to expose themselves to the possibility that their cartridge could be chambered in an 1880's black powder .38S&W revolver, it would be a hand grenade the very first shot. The same liability issues led to the demise if the Heritage Rough Rider in .32 H&R Mag. They found out the .327 mag would fit in them and discontinued them to avoid liability issues.
 
If the rim were made thick enough, then it could be made to work, I guess. Either way, there isn't much advantage to it.

9mm revolvers have to be built on frames designed for the .357 magnum, because of it's operating pressure. So, the real comparison is between .357 and 9mm, since they'll be of equal weight and roughly the same size. For example, the 7 shot S&W 386 alloy revolvers that were in production a few years ago appear to be nearly identical in size and weight to the Korth model they've been advertising at the 2015 Shot Show.

As far as moonclips go, a .357/.38 can use those, too or you can fire and extract without them. You can't say that for the 9mm. No advantage there, the rimmed rounds are just more versatile, use them with moonclips or don't.

The 9mm advocates usually point to the ballistics of the 124 grain +P loads fired from short barreled revolvers, the 9mm will have less flash and recoil when compared to a 125 grain .357 with similar performance. They're also slightly faster to reload, because the cases are shorter. Ammo is cheaper, which is important to some.

The .357 advocates will point to heavier bullet weights, which don't lose as much velocity in short barrels. Also, heavier bullets when loaded to moderate velocities tend to produce less of an impulse when fired, which means less felt recoil than many 9mm loads, which can be "snappy" in a revolver. I can fire a 124 gr 9mm +P @1200 fps and felt recoil is probably going to higher than a 158 grain @ 950 fps, even though the power factor is the same. The 9mm looks good on paper, but the .357 is more versatile and can be fired with a multitude of different loads. That versatility is probably why the 9mm revolver concept never gains much traction. In all fairness, some have tried to chamber autos in .357 magnum and the results are usually pretty clumsy with low round counts and very wide grips. The 9mm is best for autos and .357/.38 is best for revolvers.
 
Last edited:
I like both...

A lot of folks made some great points in this thread. No arguments from me. I have an SP101 and a SW986, and like them both very much, but shoot the 986 a lot more. I don't understand why folks don't like moon clips. I love them. Load up a dozen or two ahead of time, and don't waste time handling individual cartridges when shooting. But they are fun/range/farm guns, not cc guns.
 
Simonrichter asked: Is it simply tradition or are there any advantages of .38 I didn't grasp?
Click to expand...

There are indeed. First of all the .38 Special headspaces on the rim, not the case mouth. This allows heavy roll crimps to make sure the bullets stay in place under recoil. The .38 Special has, obviously, greater capacity than the 9mm. This allows the use of heavy charges of slower burning powder, something that a 9mm can never duplicate. Remember that it was a .38 Special that provided the background for developing the .357 Magnum.

The rather dismal performance of surplus WW II era 9mm ammunition has tainted the views of older shooters, I for one, against the 9mm. The old steel cased cartridges with the jacketed iron bullets certainly did penetrate, but stopping power was non existant.

Bob Wright
 
If any ammo maker did re-introduce a 9x19 rimmed cartridge, I doubt that it would be any cheaper than .38 special anyway.
 
In SA land I have one of the Ruger Blackhawk convertibles in 357/9mm also. Fun to shoot. I have found that some 38 Super with their semi-rim will drop in 357/38 Special cylinder, although given the cost of 38 Super that is probably end of the world time when one would do that. Oh yes, a picture with a 45LC/45ACP convertible.

 
I'd go with the 9mm over the .38 special, only because the ammo is easy to find and very popular and the ballistics are way better than the .38 special, for example:the 9mm has about 125-150 more energy ft-lb and 250-300 for fps.

The 9mm would be better for hunting, home defense, and target shooting. But if you want to get something better than the 9mm and the .38 special, you would get either the .40 cal Smith & Wessen or the .45 ACP.
 
zachattack2 said:
...if you want to get something better than the 9mm and the .38 special, you would get either the .44 Special or .357 Magnum.
Click to expand...
There, fixed it for ya. ;)

This IS the "Revolver" subforum. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top