Why isn't the .380 considered a viable self defense round by many, but the .38 special is?

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Flaman

New member
Hi everyone,

Why isn't the .380 considered a viable self defense round by many, but the .38 special is?

Thanks!
 
Ask six people and you’ll get seven answers. An effective caliber is the one in a gun that you can effectively use whose bullet you can effectively place on target. Many people have been incapacitated by .22s.
 
Flaman said:
Why isn't the .380 considered a viable self defense round by many, but the .38 special is?
Click to expand...

Short answer old school b.s. and mostly from revolver people. The .38 special is a horrible defensive round. The longer version is people who will follow anything the cops or the military are doing even though they don't have much choice in the matter, the bean counters make the decisions.

If they had the ballistic testing even in the 1970's that we have today they would have been shocked how terrible the .38 special performs.

And not much has change, now some try to hype that +P crap.
Have no fear carry your .380 just understand it's limitations. Double taps to the front at no more than 15-20 ft. One to the head for good measure. (just kidding) :)
 
Everyone has their own idea of what constitutes enough.
A popular measure of "power" is bullet weight times velocity, and .380 is about 75% of .38 Special.
Bullets weights and velocities can be fiddled to change the balance some, but the low bullet weight of .380, 90-95 grains, hurts it compared to the 125-158 grains of .38 Special.
 
Probably because with the bullet weights and velocity of the .38 you have the potential of greater penetration. I have investigated a few shootings involving the .380. My conclusion is that I don't want to be shot by one (or .38, or .32, or .25 etc...). The .380 is available in a smaller package than the typical .38.

Here's a link to Lucky Gunners ballistic tests of various calibers. Have a look and draw your own conclusions.

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/
 
Ignorance, misinformation, biased, and Urban Legends, of course.

Here in the United States of America, the .38 Special cartridge has a reputation as an effective round which has served both civilians and law enforcement for decades. Whereas unfortunately the .380 ACP has a reputation as an ineffective round used mainly in cheap Saturday Night Specials (Röhm Gesellschaft) as well as the infamous Ring of Fire (Bryco/Jennings) guns.
Also, there's no shortage of tall tales which come courtesy of someone's "father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate" regarding the .380 ACP's physics-defying failures in when the bullet it stopped by everything from Winter clothing to skin. Basically, the polar opposite of the .45 ACP's legendary stopping power which tossed enemy soldiers 20+ feet backwards and left bowling ball sized holes in them from WWI onwards until the dreadful day that it was replaced.

Outside the United States, .380 ACP tends to have a better reputation where it served in various Militaries and Law Enforcement agencies clear into the 1980s.
 
Last edited:
When I worked Ambulance and Fire/Rescue many years ago, I saw gunshot wounds from everything from a 45 ACP down to a 22 - trust me, you dom't want to be shot by any of them. The best self defense round rat there is, is the one you hopefully are carrying at the time you need it.

I used to cow a 38 spl. - still do at times. I switched to a Glock 26 9mm a couple of tears ago as I felt more comfortable with a higher round count. At times, I carry a .380 - I am fully comfortable in carrying a .380 - I have seen what one will do - but, I pray that I will never have to use any of them.

Everyone has their opinions and that's fine - the only opinion that really matters is your own personal opinion as to what you feel comfortable with. IMHO
 
The .380 is a 9mm it's just 9mm short. I carry it now and again, I also carry a 22mag revolver. They all will work if needed.
 
Flaman said:
Hi everyone,

Why isn't the .380 considered a viable self defense round by many, but the .38 special is?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
It is widely held that the round Jack Ruby fired into Oswald was one of two rounds popular at the time... a 159 grain LRN or a 200 grain LRN. Both have way more weight than a typical 85-95 grain .380 round. Consider that " The bullet entered Oswald's left side in the front part of the abdomen and caused damage to his spleen, stomach, aorta, vena cava, kidney, liver, diaphragm, and eleventh rib before coming to rest on his right side." It is doubtful that a .380 round, given its light weight would have had that much penetration and resultant organ damage.

Unless I missed something there, the .38 (with its heavier bullets) would be more lethal than a .380 (at least in theory anyway). However, Archduke Franz Ferdinand and Mahatma Gandhi were both killed with a .380 so success as an assassination weapon may not be a good measure of lethality after all.
 
I think they're both marginal for self defense while .32 ACP and .32 H&R or .327 Magnum are superior. The reason .380 is considered inferior is the bullet is always lighter than .38 Special and every boomer has this belief that the heaviest bullet is the only bullet that should ever be used and .38 has stuff like 148gr wadcutters and 158 gr lead round nose and those have more lead than .380's typical 95gr bullet.

That said, there are some very good .38 Special loads for use in snubs while .380 in LCP sized pistols is limited to a handful of self defense ammo that's actually decent. It's when you get up to a 4 inch barrel that .38 really shines over .380
 
I choose firearms for specific purposes. The .380 has a specific purpose for me—-ultra concealment. There are times when a Glock 42 is ideal. Driving a Ski Boat, jogging, etc.
 
dahermit said:
I will go out on a limb here and say: heavier = deeper pentation (Note: Ruby/Oswald) = more organs hit = better.
Click to expand...

Yet people are frequently cautioned against .380 FMJ based on it's alleged overpenetration.
 
Flaman said:
Hi everyone,

Why isn't the .380 considered a viable self defense round by many, but the .38 special is?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
Lol, Answer: the internet.

Here is the truth. If you are carrying anything less than a 40.cal, high capacity firearm, and no less than than three extra Magazines, a Good Fighting Knife,then face it, you are a DEAD MAN WALKING! PERIOD.
 
Here is the truth. If you are carrying anything less than a 40.cal, high capacity firearm, and no less than than three extra Magazines, a Good Fighting Knife,then face it, you are a DEAD MAN WALKING! PERIOD.
Click to expand...

To a certain extent, this joking answer describes truth. People often decide that they have made the correct decisions on self defense and variation from that is wrong...as if there is only one solution.

Why on the .380/.38 SPL? Old data.
 
I read a study of shootings in a large metro area. It's been awhile so I can only give you the gist of it :
Shootings involving .380, 9mm and 38 special were equally incapacitating. Shootings
involving 45 acp were noticeably more incapacitating.

Sorry I can't refer you to the site or give more detail but I usually read various Bersa forums so I suppose it was there. You can draw whatever lesson you care to and apply it to your own carry situation/objective. For me, the study was a real eye opener.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top