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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Also Buffalo Bore makes some crazy stuff. :). I’m waiting for the 5,000 FPS .22lr hollow point or some such from them. 8P. They make good quality stuff though.
 
Check out this comparison of various ammo and size. Its interesting to see that the ammo type of 380 really made a difference in meeting the FBIs, 12'' minimum but for 9mm+ more ammo seemed to pass the test. But ammo even mattered for the .45 as not all made it. Anyway, I love seeing these type of tests, really makes me think about what type of ammo I am carrying. The brand/type could potentially matter more than the caliber.

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/
 
For anyone wanting to calculate their own, you convert grains weight to slugs of mass by dividing by 225218. With the mass expressed in slugs, the half mass times velocity squared formula for energy works.

124 / 225218 x 1100 * 1100 * 0.5 = 333.1 ft-Lbs.
125 / 225218 x 1100 * 1100 * 0.5 = 335.8 ft-lbs
 
which puts the original German 9mm 115gr load (1150fps) at 337.7 ft/lb energy.

What do you get from a .380??
A 95gr at 982fps works out to 203.3ft/lbs
 
I'm not comfortable with less than 10 rounds and I won't carry less than 10 rounds if I have any choice. So, regardless of performance, I wouldn't even consider .38 Special.

.380 really doesn't offer any viable (IMO) defensive ammunition choices AND again, I'm not aware (doesn't mean they don't exist) of any .380 handgun that has a greater than 10 round capacity (Maybe a CZ83?). So again, no .380.

There was a time when I had a run in with a street rat every time I went to work and it's been my experience that Tweakers hunt in packs. I'm not willing to face that with <10 rounds of .380 Really I'm not willing to face that with 15 rounds of .40 S&W but if I got to pick...

Now I'm retired there's really no where I've got to be. I get to dress any way I want. So I just don't see that .380 offers me anything.

FWIW I have a friend who worked in the criminal justice system his entire career. Based on what he's seen dealing with murders and autopsy reports and ballistic studies his opinion is that if you're going to carry .380 (he does periodically) you're better off with flat nosed ball ammunition.
 
Here is the original post.
Why isn't the .380 considered a viable self defense round by many, but the .38 special is?

To the OP. Millions have carried the 38. and the 380 for years. Both are viable defense rounds. There are a hundreds of ballistic tables that show the difference between the two. It is like Ford vs Chevy. I carry and shoot both. I prefer the 380 and own many, shot thousands of rounds down range for years and have no problem with either one. I do have a LCR 9mm which I love but carry the 38 revolver more for the lighter weight.
The 380 I would say has more options now than the 38. Example the new Ruger Max, or slimmer 380's available or even the larger pistols like the Shield EZ slide.
I believe the most important criteria between the 380 and the 38 is not which caliber but diligent training and Practice.
All that said, there are millions that just love a Snubbie 38. And I have to say, I love shooting them as well, love the simplicity for Practical EDC, even love the 22cal Snubbie for Training/Practice and Plinking. If you are trying to decide between the two then I would shoot different firearms and make my decision after you find what suites you best.

PS I also own many 9mm's. Presently 6 micro 9mm's. Great guns, but that is for a completely different topic or thread and has no bearing on your question.
 
Last edited:
Moonglum said:
I'm not comfortable with less than 10 rounds and I won't carry less than 10 rounds if I have any choice. So, regardless of performance, I wouldn't even consider .38 Special.

.380 really doesn't offer any viable (IMO) defensive ammunition choices AND again, I'm not aware (doesn't mean they don't exist) of any .380 handgun that has a greater than 10 round capacity (Maybe a CZ83?). So again, no .380.

There was a time when I had a run in with a street rat every time I went to work and it's been my experience that Tweakers hunt in packs. I'm not willing to face that with <10 rounds of .380 Really I'm not willing to face that with 15 rounds of .40 S&W but if I got to pick...

Now I'm retired there's really no where I've got to be. I get to dress any way I want. So I just don't see that .380 offers me anything.

FWIW I have a friend who worked in the criminal justice system his entire career. Based on what he's seen dealing with murders and autopsy reports and ballistic studies his opinion is that if you're going to carry .380 (he does periodically) you're better off with flat nosed ball ammunition.
Click to expand...
Beretta 84 is chambered in .380 and .32....kind of a smaller version of the 92

13 round magazine capacity in 380... well made and a sweet looking pistol.
 
Posts 8 and 25 pretty much answered this. The original question can be answered by an informed but outmoded bias.

(And, oh, do we in the gun culture hold on to those for decades sometimes. Don't get me started on Fackler.)

Traditionally, the .380 only came in ball ammo because it wasn't believed 90gr hollow points would have the velocity to achieve sufficient penetration. The problem is, conical ball ammo stinks for self-defense. That has changed quite a bit with newer loads, especially the Hornady ones.

The .38 Special always came in a variety of bullet types, weights, and velocities. It also had the advantage of widespread police and military deployment for decades, which means we have tons of data on its effectiveness. The .380 was an infrequently-used backup loading, so there was never really much data beyond the occasional anecdote.

Would I trust a .380 for defense? Hmmm. Yeah, maybe. There are great pistols out there for it, and there are decent loadings. If a good loading in a pistol that shoots well is the best thing I have at hand, I can make do.

Why? Because there's one thing that's all too often left out of these debates. Shot placement is (nearly) everything. A .380 that I have on me, and that I can shoot well, beats the Model 28 sitting at home in a safe.
 
Tom Servo said:
Posts 8 and 25 pretty much answered this. The original question can be answered by an informed but outmoded bias.

(And, oh, do we in the gun culture hold on to those for decades sometimes. Don't get me started on Fackler.)

Traditionally, the .380 only came in ball ammo because it wasn't believed 90gr hollow points would have the velocity to achieve sufficient penetration. The problem is, conical ball ammo stinks for self-defense. That has changed quite a bit with newer loads, especially the Hornady ones.

The .38 Special always came in a variety of bullet types, weights, and velocities. It also had the advantage of widespread police and military deployment for decades, which means we have tons of data on its effectiveness. The .380 was an infrequently-used backup loading, so there was never really much data beyond the occasional anecdote.

Would I trust a .380 for defense? Hmmm. Yeah, maybe. There are great pistols out there for it, and there are decent loadings. If a good loading in a pistol that shoots well is the best thing I have at hand, I can make do.

Why? Because there's one thing that's all too often left out of these debates. Shot placement is (nearly) everything. A .380 that I have on me, and that I can shoot well, beats the Model 28 sitting at home in a safe.
Click to expand...
Where did you hear that?
 
Where did you hear that?
Click to expand...

To be honest, probably outmoded bias. I never really paid much attention to the loading until the 2000s, but there was data from before that concurred the .380 couldn't reliably break bone. That always stuck out for me.
 
While it's better than nothing I consider the 9mm to be a punybellum which then makes the 380 the punierbellum.
Real Americans pack a 38 Super.:rolleyes:
 
There's an easier, more direct way to calculate bullet energy...

Velocity * velocity * bullet weight in grains / 450400 (or 450240)

For the typical .45 ACP round...

850 * 850 * 230 / 450400 = 369 foot pounds energy


The divider, 450400 (which I got from a Sierra manual many many years ago) or 450240, may look like it would give a different result, but the difference is minuscule. In the case of the .45 round, it's about .35 foot pounds.
 
We're now well over 100 posts, nothing new pertaining to the question has been added since the first page, and we have now devolved to name calling. That's a sure indication that the discussion has gone past its logical conclusion.

Closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top