better bullet: .38 or 9mm?
- Thread starter Lo-khem
- Start date
They are very similar in ballistics, but comparing standard loads I think the 9mm has a slight edge. FYI: if you want lethal dropping power, a 9mm +p hollow point is very good and so is the .38 +p. I think they are so close it really is the shot placement that determines the winner.
I agree with the above as far as ..."it depends".
The .38 special is considered to be one of the most accurate handgun rounds in exsistance. It is however woefully inadequate for fighting purposes in its target version. Good bullets at reasonably fast velocities will give the .38 a fighting chance to defend yourself with.
The 9mm is also a very accurate round and king in europe. The fact it is most often used in semi's gives it an edge as far as consistancy is concerned. The target and defense loads have to be able to work the action reliably. Similar feel and performance from target to defence loads.
Im my opinion the deciding factor is what do you want to shoot it out of. Then decide what ammo type is available for your weapon. I choose a J frame revolver for most of my offduty carry as I feel it will meet my low risk lifestyle. On duty as a police officer I carry a high capacity 9mm pistol. I want a lot of bullets on tap with a reasonable level of stopping power.
It all depends.
The .38 special is considered to be one of the most accurate handgun rounds in exsistance. It is however woefully inadequate for fighting purposes in its target version. Good bullets at reasonably fast velocities will give the .38 a fighting chance to defend yourself with.
The 9mm is also a very accurate round and king in europe. The fact it is most often used in semi's gives it an edge as far as consistancy is concerned. The target and defense loads have to be able to work the action reliably. Similar feel and performance from target to defence loads.
Im my opinion the deciding factor is what do you want to shoot it out of. Then decide what ammo type is available for your weapon. I choose a J frame revolver for most of my offduty carry as I feel it will meet my low risk lifestyle. On duty as a police officer I carry a high capacity 9mm pistol. I want a lot of bullets on tap with a reasonable level of stopping power.
It all depends.
Blue Duck357
New member
Maybe not of too much consequence considering ammo makers now spend nearly all of thier "defensive use" development dollars on ammo for autos but what the hey...
Any 9mm bullet design (since it's most likely going to be fired in an auto) must take into account both shape of the bullet for feeding from the magazine and the type of recoil produced to properly feed the next round. Only then can they start playing with getting reliable expansion, proper pentration etc..
When designing a round for a 38 special (which is nearly always fired in a revolver) a designer could throw away worrying about shaping the bullet to smoothly go up a feed ramp and whether the recoil impulse was a little different and just concentrate on terminal effect. The shape issue is why you never see really sharp shouldered keith style semiwadcutters for autos and I understand the recoil impulse problem was why the very light (but fast) Glasers were often unreliable in some semi-autos.
So at least in theory, considering a really hot +P+ 38 Special that would equal the 9mm's noramlly slight power advantage I'd think a better load *could* be made for the 38 than the 9mm.
Any 9mm bullet design (since it's most likely going to be fired in an auto) must take into account both shape of the bullet for feeding from the magazine and the type of recoil produced to properly feed the next round. Only then can they start playing with getting reliable expansion, proper pentration etc..
When designing a round for a 38 special (which is nearly always fired in a revolver) a designer could throw away worrying about shaping the bullet to smoothly go up a feed ramp and whether the recoil impulse was a little different and just concentrate on terminal effect. The shape issue is why you never see really sharp shouldered keith style semiwadcutters for autos and I understand the recoil impulse problem was why the very light (but fast) Glasers were often unreliable in some semi-autos.
So at least in theory, considering a really hot +P+ 38 Special that would equal the 9mm's noramlly slight power advantage I'd think a better load *could* be made for the 38 than the 9mm.
Lo-khem
Although I am a revolver guy, I give the slight edge to the 9x19. Please emphasize the world SLIGHT. This is important, because the round is only one part of a system that includes the firearm (reliability, accuracy, capacity, etc.), the holster, and -- most important -- the marksman.
When I CCW my CZ 75B, I carry either Federal +P EFMJs or Remington +P Golden Sabers (both 124 grain). These are fine defensive loads, which will certainly do their job if I do mine. Similarly, when I load any of my .357 revolvers with .38 Specials for defensive purposes, I use 124 grain Federal Nyclads, which are also excellent defensive rounds.
My overall points are simple: The differences between first-rate .38 Special and 9mm defensive rounds is quite marginal, the caliber is only one part of a much bigger system, both will serve well, and the shooter is the truly dominant element in the system.
Although I am a revolver guy, I give the slight edge to the 9x19. Please emphasize the world SLIGHT. This is important, because the round is only one part of a system that includes the firearm (reliability, accuracy, capacity, etc.), the holster, and -- most important -- the marksman.
When I CCW my CZ 75B, I carry either Federal +P EFMJs or Remington +P Golden Sabers (both 124 grain). These are fine defensive loads, which will certainly do their job if I do mine. Similarly, when I load any of my .357 revolvers with .38 Specials for defensive purposes, I use 124 grain Federal Nyclads, which are also excellent defensive rounds.
My overall points are simple: The differences between first-rate .38 Special and 9mm defensive rounds is quite marginal, the caliber is only one part of a much bigger system, both will serve well, and the shooter is the truly dominant element in the system.
Doing a rough average of manufacturer's stats from S&B, Winchester USA, Remington UMCs and Federal American Eagles, the 9mm has a substantial edge on muzzle energy of about 100 ft/lbs with the S&B being the leader at 1280ft/sec and 423ft/lbs. The best of the .38spls is UMC 130grain FMJ at 950ft/sec and261 ft/lbs. Average for the 9mm is about 1180ft/sec, or so and 360ft/lbs, for the .38spl avg velocity comes in at about 900ft/sec and energy at 250ft/lbs.
Accuracy depends on weapon and shooter combination.
Accuracy depends on weapon and shooter combination.
DMK, I'm not RWK, but it doesn't seem like it would be difficult at all. The CZs are about like my BHP, and I carry that concealed easily in an IWB. Lord knows a lot of boys out there packing 1911s in IWBs, as I type this (can I get an amen, brother Freeman?). They're slim, and the longer bbl stabilizes the butt of the gun up against the, erm, glut of the carrier.
I prefer a 9x19 to a .38 spl in a snubnose revo, which is not exactly what Lo-khem asked.
I prefer a 9x19 to a .38 spl in a snubnose revo, which is not exactly what Lo-khem asked.
On paper they're close enough to where other factors like platform, etc. matter more.
As a reloader, I like the 38S a little better because:
a) Significantly wider choice of bullet designs available, and selection is performed w/o concern for gun function.
b) Even at +P load levels, 38S is still running at half the pressure of 9mm. Hence brass lasts allot longer so I get to practice with my "good" loads more frequently.
BTW, I own, shoot and enjoy both calibers!
As a reloader, I like the 38S a little better because:
a) Significantly wider choice of bullet designs available, and selection is performed w/o concern for gun function.
b) Even at +P load levels, 38S is still running at half the pressure of 9mm. Hence brass lasts allot longer so I get to practice with my "good" loads more frequently.
BTW, I own, shoot and enjoy both calibers!
DMK . . .
I use a Fobus strong side belt holster to CCW my CZ 75B [http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/ctd/...gid=&mscssid=819KKUTWJ0QP9JDSASLCJKU34S3QE0BB]. No greater problem than with any other full-size sidearm, such as 1911A1s or four- and five-inch barrel S&W N frame or Ruger GP100 revolvers.
I use a Fobus strong side belt holster to CCW my CZ 75B [http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/ctd/...gid=&mscssid=819KKUTWJ0QP9JDSASLCJKU34S3QE0BB]. No greater problem than with any other full-size sidearm, such as 1911A1s or four- and five-inch barrel S&W N frame or Ruger GP100 revolvers.
Gee Whiz-
Some excellent reply's folk's. Sometimes I carry weapons
chambered for both the 9m/m and .38 Special, and
have found that with the right load and launch platform
both are formiable foe's. In .38 Special, I like Federal's
110 grain +P Hydra-Shok's for defensive work; while
in the 9m/m Federal's 115 grain or 124 grain Hydra
Shok's work equally as well. My weapons of choice
for each caliber are a vintage (1979-80) Smith & Wesson
model 60 (Chief's Special) in .38 caliber; and a high
capacity Sig-Sauer P228 in 9m/m.
Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
Some excellent reply's folk's. Sometimes I carry weapons
chambered for both the 9m/m and .38 Special, and
have found that with the right load and launch platform
both are formiable foe's. In .38 Special, I like Federal's
110 grain +P Hydra-Shok's for defensive work; while
in the 9m/m Federal's 115 grain or 124 grain Hydra
Shok's work equally as well. My weapons of choice
for each caliber are a vintage (1979-80) Smith & Wesson
model 60 (Chief's Special) in .38 caliber; and a high
capacity Sig-Sauer P228 in 9m/m.
Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
. That way you also avoid the whole .38 vs 9mm argument by going .45 ACP The 9mm has the edge in "raw horsepower" but that is NOT the only factor here . Especially not for defense against humans.
For personal defense use, you need a hollowpoint or functional equivelent, and it must expand.
Expansion is assisted by three things:
1) Size and shape of the hollowpoint cavity;
2) Speed of the round;
3) Construction & material of the bullet.
On a .38Spl round that the manufacturer knows is going to get used in a revolver of some sort, no compromise in bullet shape/materials need be made in order to reliably feed in a semi-auto!
A few attempts have been made to produce similarly "uncompromizing" 9mm ammo with giant hollowpoint cavities, such as the 115grain Cor-Bon - which is notorious for hanging up on the feed ramp of many slideguns.
Now take your typical .38+P 158grain lead hollowpoint moving at around 900fps from a 4" barrel. There's no way in hell those would feed and work in a 9mm, because of the shape, weight lack of jacket. Despite being primitive and slow, it will reliably expand at the velocities you get out of a 4" tube, and has a superb track record going back to the days of Elliot Ness. I would rate this round as more real-world useful than at least 50% of the 9mm JHPs out there, despite being down on peak muzzle energy.
Another good choice in a 4" .38 tube is the Winchester Supreme 130grain JHP. The hollowpoint cavity is enormous, bigger than anything you'll see in the 9mm world. If you re-sized it down to .355 and fit it into 9mm shells, the feeding issues would be horrendous but in .38, who gives a dang about "feeding"?
I could go on and on but basically, in a revolver round there's a whole set of design constraints related to semi-auto feeding that simply don't exist in the revolver world, and often let the wheelgun rounds work well at lower peak energies.
The guy armed with a 4" .38 and good ammo is at no disadvantage.
With a 2" barrel, ammo selection for expansion at the lower speed is more critical, but there's still good choices available.
. Especially not for defense against humans.For personal defense use, you need a hollowpoint or functional equivelent, and it must expand.
Expansion is assisted by three things:
1) Size and shape of the hollowpoint cavity;
2) Speed of the round;
3) Construction & material of the bullet.
On a .38Spl round that the manufacturer knows is going to get used in a revolver of some sort, no compromise in bullet shape/materials need be made in order to reliably feed in a semi-auto!
A few attempts have been made to produce similarly "uncompromizing" 9mm ammo with giant hollowpoint cavities, such as the 115grain Cor-Bon - which is notorious for hanging up on the feed ramp of many slideguns.
Now take your typical .38+P 158grain lead hollowpoint moving at around 900fps from a 4" barrel. There's no way in hell those would feed and work in a 9mm, because of the shape, weight lack of jacket. Despite being primitive and slow, it will reliably expand at the velocities you get out of a 4" tube, and has a superb track record going back to the days of Elliot Ness
. I would rate this round as more real-world useful than at least 50% of the 9mm JHPs out there, despite being down on peak muzzle energy.Another good choice in a 4" .38 tube is the Winchester Supreme 130grain JHP. The hollowpoint cavity is enormous, bigger than anything you'll see in the 9mm world. If you re-sized it down to .355 and fit it into 9mm shells, the feeding issues would be horrendous but in .38, who gives a dang about "feeding"?
I could go on and on but basically, in a revolver round there's a whole set of design constraints related to semi-auto feeding that simply don't exist in the revolver world, and often let the wheelgun rounds work well at lower peak energies.
The guy armed with a 4" .38 and good ammo is at no disadvantage.
With a 2" barrel, ammo selection for expansion at the lower speed is more critical, but there's still good choices available.
Sprinco USA
Inactive
You are fine in the revolver forum, because one of the best 9mm's made, IMO, is a S&W 940 revolver. I tested a number of conventional 9mm rounds agains .357 loads from a 3" S&W mod 65. The 9mm was very close or surpassed the velocity of most of the .357 loads. It is much closer to a .357 than a .38 Spec. Remember that the .38 and .357 need a longer barrel to reach there full potential. For my favorite RBCD we see these ballistics:
9mm 60 gr. TFSP 2010 fps / 539 flbs
38 Spl. 60 gr. TFSP 1705 fps / 385 flbs
For the same bullet weight the 9mm is nearly 20% faster with an even higher percentage of energy.
9mm 60 gr. TFSP 2010 fps / 539 flbs
38 Spl. 60 gr. TFSP 1705 fps / 385 flbs
For the same bullet weight the 9mm is nearly 20% faster with an even higher percentage of energy.