The "Ultra Type" cartridge was hot item soon after fall of the Berlin Wall when Makarov, CZ82 or one of the FEGs could be bought for about $150 and 9x18 ammo was very inexpensive. Once you handle and shoot the R9 pistol you will realize the .380 has nothing to offer. Folks, it's time to move on......
Popularity of the .380...
- Thread starter Hokkmike
- Start date
- Status
My Bersa Thunder will shoot Underwood 90 gr XTP +P at 1204 fps with the Chrony at 12 feet from the muzzle. I have zero issue with carrying a 9 shot .380 ACP.
I also do not have an issue carrying my Kel-Tec P32. It is super accurate for such a small gun, and I only carry solids. I can multiply, and .32 x 2 = .64, and that is what most 9mm and .380 will expand to.
I figure I can control the little accurate .32 ACP very well. It is light and is always there.. Same with the .380 ACP. Although not the lightest automatic I have due to shooting the UW .380 +P ammo, but the advantage of the XTP and the extra fps is worth it. Because it is lighter than a 9mm in recoil, and the pistol fits so well into my hand. Point shooting either of these pistols is second nature.
I'd carry my 1911 GI if I wanted a slipped disc in my back, but I don't. I can shoot it very well, also, but I have no desire to carry my 1911 .45 ACP other than in the console of the truck when I go on trips out of the county.
I hope everyone has a good day today. Get out and shoot
I also do not have an issue carrying my Kel-Tec P32. It is super accurate for such a small gun, and I only carry solids. I can multiply, and .32 x 2 = .64, and that is what most 9mm and .380 will expand to.
I figure I can control the little accurate .32 ACP very well. It is light and is always there.. Same with the .380 ACP. Although not the lightest automatic I have due to shooting the UW .380 +P ammo, but the advantage of the XTP and the extra fps is worth it. Because it is lighter than a 9mm in recoil, and the pistol fits so well into my hand. Point shooting either of these pistols is second nature.
I'd carry my 1911 GI if I wanted a slipped disc in my back, but I don't. I can shoot it very well, also, but I have no desire to carry my 1911 .45 ACP other than in the console of the truck when I go on trips out of the county.
I hope everyone has a good day today. Get out and shoot
Deaf Smith
Member
Only if you can hit very well with it.
Smaller the caliber the more accuracy, hence skill, is needed. Cooper wrote the reason for the .22 was the ability to practice to a very high level of skill.
Deaf
Within reason
DEAF,
I think the choice would be based on practical accuracy. The PPK has adequate sights, decent trigger (at least on my German made model) and a good for the small size grip design. I have shot it out to 25 yards and hit center mass without trouble.
I can do better with my WOODSMAN, HIGH STANDARD or BROWNING. All these guns are much larger, heavier and have 6 inch barrels. OK for home and the field, very poor for ccw. None of them have ammo as effective as the .32ACP.
Like everything else, the choice is a compromise.
Jim
DEAF,
I think the choice would be based on practical accuracy. The PPK has adequate sights, decent trigger (at least on my German made model) and a good for the small size grip design. I have shot it out to 25 yards and hit center mass without trouble.
I can do better with my WOODSMAN, HIGH STANDARD or BROWNING. All these guns are much larger, heavier and have 6 inch barrels. OK for home and the field, very poor for ccw. None of them have ammo as effective as the .32ACP.
Like everything else, the choice is a compromise.
Jim
ohiobuck74
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2014
- Messages
- 18
LC 380 for carrying here.. I also have 2 PT 1911's in 45 but the compact size and pretty good accuracy I usually carry the LC 380.
Deaf Smith
Member
PPK with a decent DA pull? I don't think that has ever been made. SA, ok, DA no. Although I do say of the PP series I prefer the .32 for reliability.
Chest shots at 25 yards? Yesterday at the local indoor range the manager let me shoot his IDPA Glock 23 in .40. Gave me 100 rounds to play with. I did 25 yard head shots in a 6 inch black bullseye with that .40, standing firing 2 handed. Now that is practical accuracy cause no Glock 23 is a target gun.
For such as the .22, 25, .32, 380 you need far more than chest shots at 25. It will be a close range affair were, like Cooper wrote, you can make eye socket hits, at least with the .22. Now maybe a PP in .22 for practice and the PPK in .32, and then practice a lot with that .22.
Like I keep saying, use the most powerful round you can control and conceal. If all you can hack is a .380, carry it. If the most powerful one is a 9mm, carry it. But bigger and more powerful is better, if you can control it.
Deaf
Last edited:
More to disagree about
DEAF,
We will have to agree to disagree again. I find it difficult to believe that anyone thinks a center mass hit with a .380ACP hollow point would not be effective and that I would have to make an "EYE SHOT". If you believe it, carry what you think works.
I believe that the .32ACP is less effective than the .380ACP, but much more effective with hollow points than a .22lr. At 25 yards, I will still shoot center mass as head shots are not the same as shooting at a target at 25 yards. If they opponent gets closer or is not moving, then a head shot is a possibility, but based on what I read, not likely.
As for what range I might have to shoot at, it will probably not be my decision. If I know what range I will be shooting at, then I know a gunfight is coming and I will be armed with something bigger than a PPK and a rifle or shotgun if possible or better yet, avoid the fight altogether.
Your experience with WALTHER'S is different than mine. Mine is a pre-war model and had a smoother trigger than my French made PP or any of the stainless PPK'S and PPK/S'S that I have tried.
Neither WALTHER could compete with my SIG 232 or BERETTA 84 for smoothness or accuracy, but then the PPK was a lot smaller. Both WALTHER'S had excellent construction quality and were very reliable.
The PPK however, was more comfortable to shoot due to a better, more rounded grip design and the smoother trigger. That the PPK shot smaller groups was proven over and over by me.
If you have only handled the INTERARMS PPK'S, I can understand your disbelief. When I bought mine, it was in the display case with a two stainless PPK'S. The INTERARMS had a gritty trigger that felt heavier, but may have been the same weight, the poor quality of the double action trigger pull made it difficult to tell.
The other stainless one was by S&W and had a MUCH BETTER TRIGGER than the INTERARMS gun. It also had the longer tang which some prefer, but I do not need. It was about 65% more expensive than the pre-war blue model I ended up buying.
That is nice that you can hit a head shot at 25 yards, but it is an apples to oranges comparison.
With my BERETTA 96, I would do it as well, but my BERETTA does not fit in my pocket. I am pretty sure the GLOCK 23 does not fit in your pocket any better than my GLOCK 19 did in mine.
Right now, I can find .22lr, .32ACP and .380ACP ammo without to much trouble, but when I bought the PPK, it was pretty much the only pocket gun ammo I could get at a reasonable price from WALMART. Rimfire and .380ACP ammo was either non-existent or vastly overpriced. Either buy .32ACP or wait for the next gunshow and hope for good prices. I went with the .32ACP so that I could get enough ammo to practice with.
One other thing, balance is always important. I used to be a COOPERITE and swore by my .45ACP COLT Commander, but experience and observation have changed my mind. I have carried a .40 S&W for 17 years and still prefer a 9m.m. to either the .40 or .45 as a range gun or for self defense.
For me, more rounds in the same size gun or a smaller gun overall with the same number of shots and faster shot recovery time between rounds are top requirements. The 9m.m. will always win on those grounds.
Jim
DEAF,
We will have to agree to disagree again. I find it difficult to believe that anyone thinks a center mass hit with a .380ACP hollow point would not be effective and that I would have to make an "EYE SHOT". If you believe it, carry what you think works.
I believe that the .32ACP is less effective than the .380ACP, but much more effective with hollow points than a .22lr. At 25 yards, I will still shoot center mass as head shots are not the same as shooting at a target at 25 yards. If they opponent gets closer or is not moving, then a head shot is a possibility, but based on what I read, not likely.
As for what range I might have to shoot at, it will probably not be my decision. If I know what range I will be shooting at, then I know a gunfight is coming and I will be armed with something bigger than a PPK and a rifle or shotgun if possible or better yet, avoid the fight altogether.
Your experience with WALTHER'S is different than mine. Mine is a pre-war model and had a smoother trigger than my French made PP or any of the stainless PPK'S and PPK/S'S that I have tried.
Neither WALTHER could compete with my SIG 232 or BERETTA 84 for smoothness or accuracy, but then the PPK was a lot smaller. Both WALTHER'S had excellent construction quality and were very reliable.
The PPK however, was more comfortable to shoot due to a better, more rounded grip design and the smoother trigger. That the PPK shot smaller groups was proven over and over by me.
If you have only handled the INTERARMS PPK'S, I can understand your disbelief. When I bought mine, it was in the display case with a two stainless PPK'S. The INTERARMS had a gritty trigger that felt heavier, but may have been the same weight, the poor quality of the double action trigger pull made it difficult to tell.
The other stainless one was by S&W and had a MUCH BETTER TRIGGER than the INTERARMS gun. It also had the longer tang which some prefer, but I do not need. It was about 65% more expensive than the pre-war blue model I ended up buying.
That is nice that you can hit a head shot at 25 yards, but it is an apples to oranges comparison.
With my BERETTA 96, I would do it as well, but my BERETTA does not fit in my pocket. I am pretty sure the GLOCK 23 does not fit in your pocket any better than my GLOCK 19 did in mine.
Right now, I can find .22lr, .32ACP and .380ACP ammo without to much trouble, but when I bought the PPK, it was pretty much the only pocket gun ammo I could get at a reasonable price from WALMART. Rimfire and .380ACP ammo was either non-existent or vastly overpriced. Either buy .32ACP or wait for the next gunshow and hope for good prices. I went with the .32ACP so that I could get enough ammo to practice with.
One other thing, balance is always important. I used to be a COOPERITE and swore by my .45ACP COLT Commander, but experience and observation have changed my mind. I have carried a .40 S&W for 17 years and still prefer a 9m.m. to either the .40 or .45 as a range gun or for self defense.
For me, more rounds in the same size gun or a smaller gun overall with the same number of shots and faster shot recovery time between rounds are top requirements. The 9m.m. will always win on those grounds.
Jim
Deaf Smith
Member
Since there are plenty of cases where 9mm has failed I don't see how you think a .380, COM, would do better.
Deaf
Ironicaintit
Member
Aim for an eye socket? sure thats a great idea. but do that on a quickly moving hostile target, shooting offhand, hastily drawn, probably not using the sights, and chock full of adrenaline (goodbye fine motor skills!)
As im wandering through my backyard doing whatever, chipmunks randomly pop out of the woodpile. So of course i try to get them (they get in my cars and wreck stuff, i dont like them) I react, draw and fire as fast as i can, and even at less than 25ft, they are tough little bastards to hit. Theyre quick, and quite a bit bigger than an eyesocket. Its good practice...but i get them fewer than 10% of the time.
Push comes to shove, my first shots will be center of mass.
As im wandering through my backyard doing whatever, chipmunks randomly pop out of the woodpile. So of course i try to get them (they get in my cars and wreck stuff, i dont like them) I react, draw and fire as fast as i can, and even at less than 25ft, they are tough little bastards to hit. Theyre quick, and quite a bit bigger than an eyesocket. Its good practice...but i get them fewer than 10% of the time.
Push comes to shove, my first shots will be center of mass.
Cocked & Locked
Member
All one has to do is say to the bad guy, "Stop or I'll shoot you in the eye with my Colt Woodsman!"
When they stop, take aim and shoot their eye out.
Just remember to also carry BUG in .22
When they stop, take aim and shoot their eye out.
Just remember to also carry BUG in .22
Zendude
Member
Looks like you could poke their eye out with that Colt
2 things
DEAF,
That is strange since the FBI, the agency who claimed the 9m.m. was a failure is considering going back to it.
If you want to count the failure to stops by the U.S. military using ball ammo, you are again comparing apples to oranges.
I only advocate using expanding ammo. Non expanding ammo has no place in self defense.
I have heard of 9m.m. failures as well, but I know that EVERY OTHER handgun caliber has failed to stop as well. I would not use a .380ACP if I have the choice of something more powerful, but then you do not have that choice in many cases.
Having shot the RUGER LC9, S&W Shield and KARH CW9, I will not shoot any of them again. I can shoot them, but I would not want to. I am trading away control for too much recoil. Comfort is rarely mentioned in handgun stopping power, but it is important. You must be able to practice with the ammo you are going to carry.
Lack of comfort was one of the reasons the .41 magnum died as an LEO round. It is a good round, but just out of the question for almost everyone to shoot 100 rounds at a session. Even using the WINCHESTER Silvertip, which had controllable recoil in my experience, it was just too much for self defense.
I cannot practice adequately if the recoil is above a certain lever. I also assume that I am not alone in this.
I really like to shoot the WALTHER P99 and shoot it well, but not the P99 Compact. Same gun, but a shorter grip and slightly less weight. Recoil is the difference.
It is the same with the GLOCK 19 which I carried on duty for years and the GLOCK 26 which I would not. My brother loves his GLOCK 26, but he is not me and I can only shoot what I find controllable and comfortable.
The .380ACP is an substitute with the advantage of smaller, more controllable pistols in lieu of stopping power. For some purposes, it is a worthwhile trade.
My former agency did not issue the 9m.m. when I started, we were revolver guys, back then. We issued the .357 magnum, but allowed private purchase and carry using agency issued ammo of the 9m.m. +P+ round, the .38 Super using Silvertip and .45ACP using hollow point ammo ( I think it was Silvertip as well, but never saw anyone with a .45ACP).
Failure to stop was not an issue with any of these loads. It had been a problem with the .38 Special, but the problem went away with the approved loads for the .357 and the semi-auto rounds. My agency got plenty of chances to see how the ammo worked as well, so if we had problems like we did with the .38 Special, it would have been known.
Jim
DEAF,
That is strange since the FBI, the agency who claimed the 9m.m. was a failure is considering going back to it.
If you want to count the failure to stops by the U.S. military using ball ammo, you are again comparing apples to oranges.
I only advocate using expanding ammo. Non expanding ammo has no place in self defense.
I have heard of 9m.m. failures as well, but I know that EVERY OTHER handgun caliber has failed to stop as well. I would not use a .380ACP if I have the choice of something more powerful, but then you do not have that choice in many cases.
Having shot the RUGER LC9, S&W Shield and KARH CW9, I will not shoot any of them again. I can shoot them, but I would not want to. I am trading away control for too much recoil. Comfort is rarely mentioned in handgun stopping power, but it is important. You must be able to practice with the ammo you are going to carry.
Lack of comfort was one of the reasons the .41 magnum died as an LEO round. It is a good round, but just out of the question for almost everyone to shoot 100 rounds at a session. Even using the WINCHESTER Silvertip, which had controllable recoil in my experience, it was just too much for self defense.
I cannot practice adequately if the recoil is above a certain lever. I also assume that I am not alone in this.
I really like to shoot the WALTHER P99 and shoot it well, but not the P99 Compact. Same gun, but a shorter grip and slightly less weight. Recoil is the difference.
It is the same with the GLOCK 19 which I carried on duty for years and the GLOCK 26 which I would not. My brother loves his GLOCK 26, but he is not me and I can only shoot what I find controllable and comfortable.
The .380ACP is an substitute with the advantage of smaller, more controllable pistols in lieu of stopping power. For some purposes, it is a worthwhile trade.
My former agency did not issue the 9m.m. when I started, we were revolver guys, back then. We issued the .357 magnum, but allowed private purchase and carry using agency issued ammo of the 9m.m. +P+ round, the .38 Super using Silvertip and .45ACP using hollow point ammo ( I think it was Silvertip as well, but never saw anyone with a .45ACP).
Failure to stop was not an issue with any of these loads. It had been a problem with the .38 Special, but the problem went away with the approved loads for the .357 and the semi-auto rounds. My agency got plenty of chances to see how the ammo worked as well, so if we had problems like we did with the .38 Special, it would have been known.
Jim
SleazyRider
Member
Oddball .380
Though they don't get a lot of love in these heah parts, my Sterling .380 has never missed a beat.
Though they don't get a lot of love in these heah parts, my Sterling .380 has never missed a beat.
I carry solid FMJ in my Kel-Tec P32 as I don't want rim lock from shooting hollow points, and I don't think an expanded HP is as good as a solid from a .32 ACP from a 2 1/2" barrel. When bone and muscle are present the penetration of a .32 ACP HP isn't very much when shot from a short barrel.
I use HPs in my .380 ACP from Underwood as I get 1204 fps from my .380 using their 90 grain XTP, and from my experience I have yet to see an XTP open enough to shed its copper.
I have shot deer with a .32 H&R magnum @ 1200 fps XTP @ 15 yards and it traveled 9" in the deer's neck, and broke 2 vertebrae. I stopped in the skin on the other side. It wasn't a through and through, and I have the bullet to show the expansion of the 100 gr .32 XTP. It was perfect. Not even close to shedding the copper. It was a perfect mushroom even after breaking the bones.
I use HPs in my .380 ACP from Underwood as I get 1204 fps from my .380 using their 90 grain XTP, and from my experience I have yet to see an XTP open enough to shed its copper.
I have shot deer with a .32 H&R magnum @ 1200 fps XTP @ 15 yards and it traveled 9" in the deer's neck, and broke 2 vertebrae. I stopped in the skin on the other side. It wasn't a through and through, and I have the bullet to show the expansion of the 100 gr .32 XTP. It was perfect. Not even close to shedding the copper. It was a perfect mushroom even after breaking the bones.
Hollow points do not cause rimlock
EB1,
It is not the hollow point that causes rimlock, it is the semi-rimmed case that does that. This is not a problem with the .380ACP which is a later design.
Hollow points often have their own issues and I overcome most of them by using an ammo that will not catch on the feed ramp. I use COR BON Powerball for the feed reliability as well as the expansion in my .32ACP pistols.
I want expansion. FMJ in small calibers acts like an ice pick. I want more than an ice pick effect if possible.
I also use Powerball in my SIG P6 because if will not feed any hollow point ammo with 100% reliability. I have tried different brands and found that even REMINGTON hollow point will not feed 100% Powerball does feed 100% and will expand.
A Dutch cop I spoke with told me his agency issued the P6 and used GECO BAT ammo which like the Powerball ammo has a FMJ profile.
Jim
EB1,
It is not the hollow point that causes rimlock, it is the semi-rimmed case that does that. This is not a problem with the .380ACP which is a later design.
Hollow points often have their own issues and I overcome most of them by using an ammo that will not catch on the feed ramp. I use COR BON Powerball for the feed reliability as well as the expansion in my .32ACP pistols.
I want expansion. FMJ in small calibers acts like an ice pick. I want more than an ice pick effect if possible.
I also use Powerball in my SIG P6 because if will not feed any hollow point ammo with 100% reliability. I have tried different brands and found that even REMINGTON hollow point will not feed 100% Powerball does feed 100% and will expand.
A Dutch cop I spoke with told me his agency issued the P6 and used GECO BAT ammo which like the Powerball ammo has a FMJ profile.
Jim
The fmj in 32 prevents rim-lok because it is longer than hollow point ammo and can not shift around in the magazine.
KelTek has a spacer for their 32 cal magazines that prevents hollow point rounds from moving around and the spacer eliminates the problem.
That is why I shoot FMJ in the .32 ACP. In the handbook of the Kel-Tec they say even though they have the spacer to only shoot Winchester Silver Hollow Points or FMJ.
To me the .32 ACP will break bone better with FMJ and hit organs. That is what stops the threat. Also, 2 x .32, a though and through, equal .64 which is larger than the .32 ACP's maximum expansion. So a through and through is .64 caliber giving the chance to break bone, damage organs, and cause more blood loss which will stop the threat faster than a expanded .4x .32 ACP bullet that only traveled 6" into the threat, and did not break any bone or damage any organs, but everyone is has their own theory of what works best for them.
Thanks, kokapelli for explaing why the .32 ACP has a rim-lok issue. I have seen it happen with a lot of different .32 ACP HP at the range, and I for one choose eliminate that problem by using FMJ in the .32 ACP
Another thing is the .32 ACP tumbles when it hits its target changing the bullets path, and cause a larger permanent cavity. You don't see this in gel tests, but I am confident that the FMJ will break bone, tumble, and also exit. Making the .32 ACP a more effective defense cartridge than standard HPs in this caliber. Again, this is my opinion that I have choose by doing much research on this caliber before choosing it for an EDC. I do carry the .380 ACP, but l do carry the XTP HP in .380 ACP due to my experience with this round, as well as the velocities I get from the .380 ACP ammo that I choose to use in my EDC Bersa Thunder 'Combat Model' with Glock sights and awesome finger cut grips that fit and feel good in my hands. The model Bersa I carry is an 8+1 capacity pistol. If I knew now how good of a shooter my Bersa is I would have probably bought the double stack version, but I could not get the hand grips I wanted. Saying all of that, I am happy with the .380 ACP and .32 ACP as an EDC. For home defense I use a 20 gauge shotgun and a XD9 16+1 147 grain +P+ that uses a bonded Gold Dot, and on the wife's side of the bed is a Rossi M720 fixed sight .44 Special loaded with 240 grain MCB Smasher over a loading of Ramshot True Blue.
To me the .32 ACP will break bone better with FMJ and hit organs. That is what stops the threat. Also, 2 x .32, a though and through, equal .64 which is larger than the .32 ACP's maximum expansion. So a through and through is .64 caliber giving the chance to break bone, damage organs, and cause more blood loss which will stop the threat faster than a expanded .4x .32 ACP bullet that only traveled 6" into the threat, and did not break any bone or damage any organs, but everyone is has their own theory of what works best for them.
Thanks, kokapelli for explaing why the .32 ACP has a rim-lok issue. I have seen it happen with a lot of different .32 ACP HP at the range, and I for one choose eliminate that problem by using FMJ in the .32 ACP
Another thing is the .32 ACP tumbles when it hits its target changing the bullets path, and cause a larger permanent cavity. You don't see this in gel tests, but I am confident that the FMJ will break bone, tumble, and also exit. Making the .32 ACP a more effective defense cartridge than standard HPs in this caliber. Again, this is my opinion that I have choose by doing much research on this caliber before choosing it for an EDC. I do carry the .380 ACP, but l do carry the XTP HP in .380 ACP due to my experience with this round, as well as the velocities I get from the .380 ACP ammo that I choose to use in my EDC Bersa Thunder 'Combat Model' with Glock sights and awesome finger cut grips that fit and feel good in my hands. The model Bersa I carry is an 8+1 capacity pistol. If I knew now how good of a shooter my Bersa is I would have probably bought the double stack version, but I could not get the hand grips I wanted. Saying all of that, I am happy with the .380 ACP and .32 ACP as an EDC. For home defense I use a 20 gauge shotgun and a XD9 16+1 147 grain +P+ that uses a bonded Gold Dot, and on the wife's side of the bed is a Rossi M720 fixed sight .44 Special loaded with 240 grain MCB Smasher over a loading of Ramshot True Blue.
Gun Master
Member
I use FMJ in all my auto-loading handguns.
No "hangie upie" with smooth and round. Nothing to snag on.
Works for me.
No "hangie upie" with smooth and round. Nothing to snag on.
Works for me.
ragtop
Member
I feel the same really love my sigp232
Magnuumpwr
Member
As anyone can see, 380's are not popular around my house!! Nah, my wife just has a thing for 380's!
LMAO!!!!!
On a more serious note, no collection can be complete without at lease one 380! I have several 380's, my favorite and the one gun that's ALWAYS with me is my Ruger LCP, never leave home without it! the others are a Bersa Thunder 380 Plus, a Beretta 84, a Colt Government model 380, and a CZ82. Others that have since been sold or traded for other firearms but were all still exceptional pistols were the Taurus PT58HC, Walther PK380, and a SIG P230. Now if I could only find an original Colt Pony pocket lite without having to spend an arm and a leg for it!!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
