.380acp or 38 Special, Which.........

Hello FUD. I will work her up the caliber line. She can easily fire my 1911s, but doesn't like the way the gun "jumps up so much" and doesn't care for the weight. My BHP is better weight-wise, but the 9mm seems too "wrist snappy" to her! Cocked and locked doesn't bother her, but I'm not yet convinced that she'd automatically didengage the thumb safety, but that's a training issue and one I can "fix" when I find a gun she'll like. Practically all DAs are out due to very low finger strength. Right now, I'm considering the Star Model BM which is an old, all steel 9mm on a midsized frame. It is a locked breech 9mm. Loaded with Federal 9BP or Nyclad, it might not be the most potent 9mm around, but it would be better than a .32!
We'll see. Best.
 
I've got a S&W 342ti and a PPK (and a S&W 60/.357). I'd have to say powerwise that the .38 has more than the .380.

The reason I prefer the .380 is that it holds an extra 2 rounds, has a clip which can be loaded faster than a speedloader, has a safety, is narrower, is DA/SA, and I can shoot it better. When I carry the .38, it's because it's actually lighter; I can actually throw it in my pocket without a holster, though I usually carry it holstered.

Is one better than the other? Beats me. I alternate carrying them depending on what kind of mood I'm in.
 
Stephen A. Camp, you and I over time have had very few or no disagreements. I differ on the size of a Star BM it is closer in size to a Walter PP than to a mid sized weapon. I know it is a lot heavier but BMs aren't very large. We continue to share the same high opinion of the Star BM. Regards, Richard
 
Fud,

With respect, I take small exception to one comment made in your first post: "The increased extra rounds (from a fuller-size pistol) and better accuracy (due to the much lower recoil) will more than make up for any difference in stopping power between the two rounds".

I have no argument with your "accuracy" comment, although I suspect we'd both agree precision is more a function of the handgun and the shooter than the round. However, with regard to your "extra rounds" comment, I'd point out that very few personal defense scenarios -- particularly for non-LEOs -- will require more than six rounds. Therefore, additional capacity is likely to be irrelevant.

I opt for the .38 Special because it is a more powerful load than the .380 ACP.

Regards.
 
Hello. No problem, Richard. I just hope that the gambit works and she likes it and that it's not too "wrist snappy" and that it's pleasant enough for her to "want" to practice with it. If that happens, my little, forgotten Star BM will be a very, very worthwhile pistol for her needs. When I'm gone, I'd just flat feel better knowing that she had a nine with at least standard pressure loads than her little .32! Best.
 
RWK, This topic has caused me to do some thinking. You see, I don't remember the last time I armed myself with a .380ACP. Usually it's a .40S&W or a .45ACP for home defense and a .38 special or 9mm for concealed carry. However, I seriously had to ask myself what I would be better armed with: my 14-round Browning BDA380 (it actually belongs to my wife now) or my 5-round Taurus model 85 and in all honesty, I have to save that 14 rounds of .380ACP beats five rounds of .38 special.

I consider myself to be a fairly good shot. Not great and maybe not even good by TFL standards but better than average. However, realistically, I have to recoginize that shooting at stationary targets under calm & control conditions and that is different from shooting at a moving target (who will be using cover for protection and might even be shooting back) under stressful conditions. I completely agree that the .38 is a more powerful round than a .380ACP and five well-placed .38 rounds is more than enough to end a hostile threat. I would say that even two or three center of mass hits with a .38 special would be enough to end the encounter (although I wouldn't want to bet my life on that statement). However, if you only wing a person once or twice and miss with the rest (which is very likely to happen against a moving target -- 1997 DOJ data shows that trained LEOs hit their intended target 10-20% of the time in real encounters), chances are that that will not be enough to stop him.

Under these conditions, a hi-cap .380 seems to be a better choice. Some will say that this is the old "spray & pray" concept but I have to disagree. In the 1950's & 60's, most LEO shootings had only two or three shots having to be fired. This would imply that LEO were well armed with a five shot revolver but no one accused them of "spraying & praying" because they carried a six round revolver.

The same thinking applies here. I am assuming that most LEOs are better shots than I am and if they average only a 10-20% hit ratio, it is very unlikely that I will do better. Using these odds, all five of my .38 special could completely miss their mark. Where as one or two rounds of .380ACP could hit their intended target.

Additionally, people who are recoil sensative (like my wife, Stephen's wife, etc.) will be more accurate with a .380 than a .38 or a 9mm due to it milder kick. In all seriousness, my wife can put the bullets in the X-ring at 75 feet with a .380 but she barely hits the target at 25 feet with a .38 snubbie. Under these circumstances, she would be better armed with the .380 because she is more accurate with it and chances are that she'll be able to land more center of mass hits with it than a .38 special.

The bottom line is: where those bullets that you fired end up? In the center of mass or some wall? Like I said, this topic has caused me to do a lot of thinking and I'm still not finished with my final conclusion -- the wheels are still turning up there and I'll chime in with more comments as they come to me. Regards, FUD.
 
Fud,

THANK YOU for your comments, which have caused me to do some thinking.

First, with regards to your wife, there is no question that her precision with the Browning makes the .380 ACP ideal; I wish I could hit the X ring at 75 feet with the consistency she does.

Second, with regard to your comments comparing your accuracy with the approximately 10 percent LEO hit ratio, I am not at all sure (and, unfortunately, we've never seen each other shoot) that your accuracy isn't as good -- or better -- than the average police officer. Four days ago, in a different thread, you said -- and I specifically agreed -- that:
"Today, most people buys guns for the purpose of self defense and rarely even practice with the gun after the first few range sessions. This is even true for police officers, as a recent study indicated that a majority of today's LEOs do not even lists guns or shooting as one of their hobbies. Less interest translates into less practice, which translates into poorer shooting ability. I don't know if I believe this but I remember reading on TFL that a DOJ study showed that LEOs missed 92% of the time in actually street shootings".
Thus, my point re the .38 Special having adequate capacity (six rounds, for example) is based on your exact comment re a ~10 percent LEO hit ratio. I am absolutely sure that even an average marksman will achieve a far better accuracy percentage -- and I have been in combat and truly understand the differences between target practice and defending life.

IMHO, I'll always opt for the more potent round, which is why I now carry .357 magnum loads.

Best regards.


[This message has been edited by RWK (edited July 31, 2000).]
 
RWK, Thank you for putting things in perspective for me. I was beginning to question my own logic ... having a .38 in the drawer at work but thinking that I would be better armed with a hi-cap .380ACP. The police example was a good one. I'm still leaning toward the hi-cap .380 as being better (due to nearly three times the number of rounds) but I don't feel so unease about my .38 as I was starting to become. Thanks again, FUD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top