9x18 Ballistics

N

Nightcrawler

New member
I, for one, wouldn't feel too secure with a .380. I'd worry that the round wouldn't penetrate deep enough.

9x18 Makarov, though, is supposed to be better than .380. Okay, Cor-Bon loads the .380 ACP as follows: 90grn hollow point at 1050 feet per second, for 220 foot-pounds of energy, at the muzzle.

How do typical 9x18mm Makarov loads compare? The bullet weights I've seen most often are 95grn and 108grn, or something similar. What kind of velocities do they get?

Thanks.
 
Most authorities I have read on state that there is not much difference between the two rounds though you will hear otherwise.

Along these lines when you are talking about a belly gun destined for close-in, defensive work, I 'm not so sure that a P+-rated .38 Special with good, hand-filling, oversized wood grips isn't the more suitable choice.

Any good JHP +P offering from a major maker should fit the bill and give you a much better platform in terms of failsafe reliability and power.

I agree the Mak is a great weapon but again, I must refer to one of the most intelligent commentsave ever come across on this forum put forth by someone who has been there, C.R. Sam, on the revolver section. It went something like this:

"Semi-Autos are better for offensive operations and Revolvers are better for defensive tasks."

If you must have a semi in either .380 or 9MM Mak-----------------I would go Mak and take advantage of every bit of added power I could muster. I will also add I believe the Mak is one of the finest handguns ever made regardless of the price.
 
I find it kind of odd...

...that the Russians would switch from 7.62 Tok, while being small bore and high velocity, could do everything 9x19 could do, energy wise (not to mention had longer range) to 9x18, which, apparently in its original loading was very anemic.

Nowadays, the Russians are using "9x18 Improved", which tells me they've upped the velocity somewhat.

You know, if I were one country, having a cold war with another, I'd adopt the calibers of ammunition THEY used (unless they were completely unsuitable to my uses). That way, I could acutally USE captured ammo depots.

Therefore, if I had been the Russians, I would've switched to 9x19 for a pistol cartridge, and 5.56 instead of making my own cartridge, the 5.45mm. That's just me, though.
 
Russia has always opted to use calibers that were exclusive to them. The 9x18, contrary to what there propaganda machine will tell you was a copy of the 9mm Ultra pioneered by the Germans at the end of WWII in an effort to tender the most effective round possible using the least amount of materials possible.

The Mak is a copy of the Walther PPK with improvements like the slide release lever. The Russians actually took German factories apart, piece by piece, and trucked them back to mother russia where they were re-assembled. Take the AK, yes the little story about the tank driver, Mr. Kalashnikov is true but I guarantee you the German Sturmgewehr (SP?) released under Hitler's nose at the end of the war infuenced that design. The Russians have always relied on designs from others since they started outfitting their military----------------take the contribution of S&W and the .44 Russian Revolver. For that matter, America has relied on the developments of Nazi Germany-------------namely the swept-wing design and the V2 rocket.

We must go back to the basic concept of the pistol in Europe as a close quarters back up weapon to a leashed Dog and Sub Machine Gun versus the American role where the handgun is often the only weapon an LEO may have. I believe when we come to the realization that a handgun is truly a last resort option, we lose the anxiety of the unending quest for a controllable one-shot-stop caliber in favor of a recoil-managable round capable of excellent close-range accuracy and multiple firing rapidly. That said if you justifiably shoot an attacker between the eyes serveral times with a .380 or 9mm Mak and they continue undaunted, I suggest you try another another avenue of defense like flight, dipolmacy or prayer.
 
I know very little about the other things discussed..but the difference between the .380 and the Mak. are roughly 5% for
the Mak for commonly available loads. I have heard of 109 gr JHP's that have a 1050-1100 fps velocity in the Mak. But they are not commonly available as far as I know. At least in a defensive JHP. I carry a .380 at times..Good JHP's. It has the energy that a 38 special has, the 38 sure killed plenty of people over the years. But also carry a 9mm and 357..just depends.

Shoot well
 
You know, with the number of sub-compact 9mms out there, I can't think of any reason to carry a .380 instead. It's not like they can't make small guns in more poweful cartridges anymore. I suppose .32 still has a niche as it's a smaller cartridge and can be fit into a tiny gun, but I'd go so far as to say that the .380 is on its way out as a popular cartridge. It won't die altogether, though, cartidges rarely do. They still chamber .38 Super, though few guns are made for it. (Though .38 Super is pretty powerful. Check out some of Cor-Bon's self defense loads.)
 
Use Enough Gun

My thanks for this discussion. I have been carrying a 9X18 but considering going to 9X19mm. I will, I won't, I will, I won't.... But your discussion knocked me off the fence. As was said, the 9X19 has an "edge" over the Makarov. The Mak is "good," but maybe not quite "good enough." I have been bitterly debating buying an FEG P9RZ with myself. I had pretty-well convinced myself to save the money and continue carrying the Mak, your discussion tipped the scales. Now, I have another arguement--9mm or .40 S&W? (I have been researching and can afford an FEG P9RZ or 40RZ.) As old Robert Ruark wrote years ago--"Use Enough Gun."
Tom K.
 
Either way...you are ok. If you plan on alot of range time and want to eat things other than Makandcheese..go for the 9mm.
If you main goal is a defensive gun...40 is a nice round.
Shoot well
 
Be careful of which 9mm you go with Tom. I am a duck hunter and I consider myself moderately tough when it comes to harsh events but the recoil of a Smith 3953, to me any way was enought for me to sell the gun at a loss.

If you do look at a smaller 9mm, I would go for a Glock 26 or Kahr--------------both had a mild report. I would not discount that 9mm Mak. I know an Estonian Gentleman who was an armorer in the Soviet Armed forces. He said the original Mak's were designed to hold groups of 5" at what would be equivalent to say 15 yards for us. Per him, the orignal bullets tumbled and could inflict deadly harm on an idividual. Never doubt the Russians, they can be lethal and they have a knack for making durable, dependable weapons. I do not feel undergunned with a Bulgarian Makarov.
 
You know, if I were one country, having a cold war with another, I'd adopt the calibers of ammunition THEY used (unless they were completely unsuitable to my uses). That way, I could acutally USE captured ammo depots.

Therefore, if I had been the Russians, I would've switched to 9x19 for a pistol cartridge, and 5.56 instead of making my own cartridge, the 5.45mm. That's just me, though.
Click to expand...

One argument against adopting the "enemies" chosen munitions for standard issue is to avoid your own captured ammunition from readily being used against you.

As for Russia switching to the 9x19 during the cold war, that could only have happened towards the latter era, since the .45acp in 1911 format was our standard sidearm up until '84.
For some reason, I just can't imagine the Russians adopting a .45 caliber handgun. :D


As for the switch from the 7.62x25 to the 9x18, I scratch my head on that one too... perhaps because it could be had in a more compact sidearm? That's a good question.
One thing I do know is that the 7.62x25 was feed reliable and at 1600 fps, possessed some decent stopping power as well.


Back to your questions on effectiveness; have you looked into the Russian made "SilverBear" ammuntion? Granted, it's not a typical load for the Makarov, but it was made specifically for it by LVE. If you already have a Makarov with 9x18 barrel, you might be able to make do with these until you decide on which 9x19 to carry.

After firing 70 or so rounds (before I became convinced a stouter $7 Wolff 19lb recoil spring was needed), I became impressed with the reliability and particularly the accuracy of the ammunition.
It still utilizes the berdan-primed steel case, but these are nickel plated... and the 120gr JHP bullet with huge gaping maw expand even after first punching through 4 layers of denim.
Once I get the recoil spring replacement, I will throw this puppy in the car's lock-box and have no worries.
 
Last edited:
When loaded to its full capability, the 9x18 is almost exactly a half step between the .380 and the 9x19.

Bullet weight, velocity and energy all fall almost exactly halfway between the two.

The search function seems to be a bit sluggish at the moment, but not too long ago, I posted the numbers and calculations that showed this to be true.

The problem is that most U.S. manufacturers load th 9x18 to exactly the same specs as their .380 loads. That practice has led many to believe that the two rounds are identical in performance.
 
John..hmmmm. I wont disagree but almost. The .380 and Mak calibers are designed around blowback guns requiring a lower pressure round. The 9mm luger is designed around a locked breech gun and from the start was a high pressure round.

Size of the case and bullet, yes you are right, the .380= 9x17
the mak= 9x18 and 9mm=9x19 Diameters vary by .010"
The .380 and 9mm are the same diameter...And the length of the case cant determine if the gun will handle the case pressure.

Because of the guns designed for the 2 smaller rounds, they cant begin to get near the pressures created by a 9mm. Therefore, they are not usually loaded as hot.

Even later when russia made the Mak-plus" cartidge in an attempt to update the older tech. used in the guns. They made it a "delayed blowback" design, grooving the chamber to retain the shell for a longer time, which will take more pressure than they original. This was a nice attempt to Keep up with the Joneskies"
I wish it had taken off, I think I would like the gun.
But still not near 9mm pressures.

Typically the hottest rounds have energy for a 380 200-225 FPE, Mak up to 250 FPE (FMJ rounds like wolf & sil bear) and 9mm
up to 400-450 FPE. The 9mm can have 2 times the energy of the .380 acp...which is only 2mm shorter in case length and has the same dia. of bullet. Its all up to case pressure.

Just a thought....shoot well
 
Hello. The below-listed velocity figures are 10-shot averages chronographed from a Bulgarian Makarov. The caliber is more akin to a very warm .380 than a very light 9x19mm.

TCW ball (not sure of wt): 1043 ft/sec

Fiochhi 95 gr FMJ: 1018 ft/sec

CorBon 95 gr +P JHP: 1098 ft/sec

Hornady 95 gr XTP : 937 ft/sec.

Best.
 
Will Beararms said:

The Mak is a copy of the Walther PPK with improvements like the slide release lever.
Click to expand...

Using the word "copy" isn't exactly true, & may be a little mis-leading.

Externally they look very similar; it would seem that the Walther was used by Nikolay Fyedorovich Makarov as a design model for his pistol. It is possible that he had the opportunity to closely examine the PP late in WWII when the Walther plant in Zella Mehlis, Germany, was taken over by the Russians. But internally they are entirely different. The Makarov is a much more simple design; the Walther PP is comprised of 42 pieces where the Makarov contains only 25.

Also - for what it is worth - the 9x18 Makarov is not really a 9mm round. A 9mm bullet is between .356" - .357", the Mak round at .363" - .365" is larger. The round was designed to be as powerful as possible in a straight blow-back pistol, the pistol design is simple to manufacture but robust. The proprietary round would also prevent captured weapons from being loaded with ammunition produced by the enemy & turned against the Russians themselves.
 
I figured I'd have to dig this up...

The figures for .380 and 9x19 are from a Federal Ammo catalog.

The figures for the 9x18 are the advertised numbers for the new Wolf 9x18 load.

I posted this on another thread back in November.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=89279&highlight=9x18*

.380--95 Grains @ 1000 fps for 211 ft/lbs
9x19--115 Grains @ 1150 fps for 338 ft/lbs

If there were a cartridge exactly halfway between .380 and 9x19 would be:

105 grains @ 1075 fps for 270 ft/lbs

...And, from the previous post... [about the new 9x18 Wolf loading]

9x18--109 Grains @ 1050 fps for 267 ft/lbs

There's less than 4% difference between the 9x18 and whatever's EXACTLY halfway between the .380 and 9x19 Luger--that's close enough for me.

American shooters have been duped into thinking that the 9x18 is a clone of the .380 by the American ammo makers who load the cartridge down to .380 specs.
Click to expand...
 
John,
Just a couple of thoughts. I think its too bad we cant get a Mak load in a JHP that puts out that kinda energy. Wolf is the most I have seen or shot in a FMJ. Silver Bear is close to the Wolf ammo.
I think if you are going to compare the hottest Mak loads with the others, throw in the hottest from the other 2 also. Corbon makes some pretty stout stuff. 380=225 FPE and 9mm = 465 FPE.
I think this would give a more accurate comparison.
Shoot well
 
Does anyone have specifications for the Silver Bear Mak ammo? My experience with it would lead me to believe it's hotter, +p at least. It's definitely hotter than Wolf ammo. I also know that Snowdog, a member here, has done some informal studies on Silver Bear. But I've never seen any numbers.

Any help out there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top