.380 ACP the Red Haired Stepchild?

[Brubz]

There does not seem to be a lot of respect for the .380 acp caliber here on the forum.
Is it really that inferior to the .38 Special or for that matter to the 9mm as a SD caliber?
Lets assume all things equal like all are Hornady
Critical Defense.

 

[GRIZ22]

I've carried a 380 for years. Skeeter Skelton believed the 380 with fmj the equal of 38 spl with rnl. Whilst I haven't tested it in practice, when I carry a 380 that's what I carry.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

For deep concealment guns its fine, though there are many good 9mm pistols just a hair larger now.

 

[Antihero]

There does not seem to be a lot of respect for the .380 acp caliber here on the forum.
Is it really that inferior to the .38 Special or for that matter to the 9mm as a SD caliber?
Lets assume all things equal like all are Hornady
Critical Defense.

Yes it is.

To me .380 is a caliber of comprise, I'll use it if the platform is what I need but I usually won't seek it out. Stuff like a p3at makes the 380 a very valuable caliber but in a bigger gun, for me, no thanks.

But if you are recoil intolerant 380 is a good choice and vastly better than other alternatives.

I have a soft spot for 380 since it was the first gun I fired too, so remember that when you read my comments

 

[Archie]

I like .380 ACP in general. If placed right, the FMJ (the hollow-points are too light, don't always expand) does penetrate to the vitals. Not for my money any better than a proper .38 Special round.

It makes enough noise to scare off some (not dependable in my opinion). A clean miss works just as well as any other. I prefer a larger (including more powerful) caliber.

 

[toivo]

But if you are recoil intolerant 380 is a good choice and vastly better than other alternatives.

I would add that even if you aren't recoil intolerant, it can be easier to get pistol back on target if you don't have a lot of muzzle flip to overcome. Of course, the pistol's weight and design factor into that too.

The sweetest-shooting centerfire handguns I own are a SIG P238 HD in .380 and a Springfield Range Officer in 9mm, both all-steel guns. But both of them are too heavy to carry. My Beretta Pico .380 is just right for carry and manageable (although not fun) to shoot. But even if they could make a 9mm in that size and weight, I wouldn't want one. So yeah, compromises.

 

[generic sportsshooter]

people who have no respect for a certain caliber should ask someone who has been shot with that caliber how they think about the caliber.
fact is a lot of people underestimate handgun cartridges and base their opinion on:
- internet theories,
- the holy ballistic gel test,
- stories from some guys neighbor who's dad knew a guy who had a colleague who's mom had a stepson who knew a guy.
- law enforcement use (enternally on the hunt for that magic caliber that can stop a person with one shot no matter where he's shot).
- their own fear (what of the attacker has a bigger caliber than me...i need 700 nitro express..)

just talk to someone who got shot with a 380, or visit one of the many of graves of people who didnt survive.
they're buried next to the ones who catched a 22lr in the wrong spot.

whatever caliber you pick, make sure you can aim and hit the spot under stress...otherwise all calibers are useless.
back in the day i did a lot of stress testing with new shooters in the military...most couldnt hit anything under stress. and the more the recoil the worse the results were.
people can train on a shooting range all day but when it's life or death thats a whole other game.

 

[CDW4ME]

Hornady and Sig 380 perform okay in Lucky Gunner clear gel tests, but not so well in others found on youtube.
Here is an example using manufacturer testing:
https://winchesterle.com/-/media/Pr...gun-Bullet-Barrier-Testing-Protocol_2016.ashx
380 Ranger T series expands but penetrates less than 8 inches in gel or heavy clothed gel.
That is inferior performance compared to the Ranger 9mm loads in the same tests.

What does not (should not) constitute performance comparison between 380 versus whatever?
Lethality. That something is lethal (like the flu) doesn't automatically infer quickly incapacitating and quickly incapacitating is important for SD ammo.
"Wouldn't want to / Nobody volunteer to get shot by it" is not (or shouldn't be) a criteria used for selecting ammo.

Is 380 "better than nothing"? Sure it is; but, I try to not use "better than nothing" like it is a lofty goal.
What might help us select ammo with better ASAP potential? Desirable criteria are at least 12'' penetration and consistent expansion.
I have a LCP 380 and begrudgingly carry it when it is the "best I can do" holstered in gym shorts pocket; its loaded with Hydra Shok Deep.
I've seen testing from a LCP where the 380 Hydra-Shok deep penetrated 15-16'' and expanded to .49 in heavy clothed gel. (acceptable performance)

Why did I say "begrudgingly" about carrying 380? Because I'd rather have a Sig 365 in pocket but its too big/heavy for gym shorts; 380 in that case is "best I can do" .
Other than gym shorts pocket, I'm carrying at least 9mm.
Try to carry a handgun you would want to defend yourself with anywhere, everywhere.

 

[trackskippy]

I dont know that its the caliber as much as it is the types of guns most of them are chambered in.

"Most" 380's are smaller, blow back guns, that have increased felt recoil, and are not really all that pleasant to shoot, which doesn't add to the shootabilty of them, and also doesn't really help do anything to encourage the practice necessary to be proficient with them.

Small guns that have harsh recoil and handling characteristics are not the best choice for the sort of gun most seem to choose them for.

I realize that "some" of the 380's are locked breech these days, but, with the 9mm's being available in guns of similar size, and generally more shootable and effective performance-wise, why bother?

 

[N555]

380 is great for small guns. You get 6 to 8 shots in a gun that's thinner and usually lighter than a 38 snub.
Hollow points fired from a short barrel 380 are pretty well known for not expanding.

 

[dweis]

The disadvantage of 380 ACP is ballistics based. Compared to 9mm and larger calibers it is a weakling. However, it is still a lethal round. Recently, I switched from a 9mm Ruger Security 9 Compact to a Security 380 (Lite Rack). After dealing with arthritis in my hands for 20 years I finally had to change calibers to be able to rack the pistol and to handle the recoil. I have thoroughly tested the pistol, and for me it is a dream come true. My arthritis in no longer an impediment to shooting my EDC.

Knowing the switch would eventually be necessary I began researching 380 ACP ballistics and ballistics testing. As a result several things became clear to me. FMJ expansion was unreliable due to the lower velocities with the generally shorter barrels of 380s coupled with the inherent loss of power to to powder load. After deeper study I decided to load Underwood Extreme Defender as my self defense round. There is a good bit of testing videos (by folks who know what they are doing) on YouTube. The bullet did not over-penetrate like FMJ, and it achieved a wound cavity equal or larger than expanded JHP. Since the Extreme Defender bullet does not expand to achieve results similar to JHP in 380 it was my best choice.

it was not until I shot the gun on repeated range trips that I found the unexpected benefit for me (another everyone). I was more accurate with the 380 than 9mm, and I also could maintain that accuracy over a three round burst better. As a result, I feel secure with my 380 EDC choice.

 

[jar]

Performance-wise is unique to the individual.

At 80 years old I can still rack the slide and shoot even one of my 45acp semiautomatics pretty well.

Most days.

But some mornings my body says I should leave the Shield 9mm or the Shield 45acp home. Somedays my body says to leave even the 1911s or S&W 469 or other 9mms home.

I simply find it really really nigh impossible to rack the slide back if needed to clear a jam or slingshot a new round.

Arguing with my body just doesn't seem to work anymore.

Those days one of my 32acp or .380 easy rack pistols is quite honestly a far better self defense choice than any of the many semi-automatics that I just honestly could not count on that day. The new Ruger Security 380 or Walther CCP M2 380 or S&W 380EZ or Beretta 81 are what I carry those days.

But why not choose one of the very similar easy rack 9mm? Because the same issues I face those days with racking the pistol are present in recoil mitigation. I can simply shoot the 380s faster and more accurately than 9mm Luger.

What about one of my pistols? Even with reduced weight springs in the smaller revolvers trigger pull and recoil mitigation are a big issue on my increasing common bad days. The best of my revolvers in those instances is my nice old Highway Patrolman but that is still as heavy as it was many decades ago. My Detective Special is also manageable on those days and like today, is my choice in an IWB Marauder holster from Privateer. Honestly the additional three to nine rounds available in the lighter .380 pistols is a consideration.

 

[WisBorn]

I think there are many members that like the 380acp as a carry cartridge. The small LCP size handguns make it easy to carry. Yes it's not a power house, most feel that it is the minimum cartridge that is effective for carry.
Remember minimum doesn't mean ineffective.
I like the 38 special for its additional energy over the 380, but will carry a LCPII because of the compact size. The only advantage the 9mm has over the 38 special is capacity.

 

[12Bravo20]

When anyone gives me trouble about carrying a 380 or micro 9mm my replay is always "A 380 in your pocket is always better than a 45ACP left at home". The 380ACP/9mm Kurtz was used successfully by military and police for a long time in Europe. No it is not the best but one could carry worse too.

It is important to practice and train regularly no matter what you choose to carry or in what caliber.

 

[Tallball]

I carry an LCP when it would be very difficult to carry something else. The caliber is fine if I do my job correctly. I have larger 380's also, and they're fun to shoot.

I also own a micro 9. The LCP is WAY smaller. It's not possible to carry a micro 9 in a shirt pocket, which is normally where I carry my LCP.

 

[doubleh]

Having played around with the 380 some I will offer one piece of advise. Do not go with one of the blow back operated ones unless you are tough. Nasty little critters in every way and there is a huge improvement with the delayed actions ones. I also know that it makes the same swinging steel targets move less than a 9mm does but the sharp stick thing comes to mind when this is discussed. Go with as much as you are able or want to handle, your choice.

 

[hso]

Is it really that inferior to the .38 Special or for that matter to the 9mm as a SD caliber?

Yes, if you focus solely on ballistics.

But, there are credible studies that suggest that .380 and larger calibers are nearly equal in stopping an attack once the first round is fired. It has to do with the assailant breaking off the attack.

 

[bannockburn]

One of the most enlightening things that happened to me was when I went from shooting straight blowback .380s, like the Walther PP and PPK/s, to delayed blowback semi-autos like the Colt Mustang and SIG P238. What a world of difference in felt recoil and maintaining control of the gun itself, even though it was so small and lightweight.

And while I have added a couple of micro 9mm.s to my EDC rotation, I still have a warm spot for a .380 (especially with adding a new Ruger LCP MAX), into the mix of things!

 

[someguy2800]

380 really struggles to do well under the FBI test standards so I think a lot of people dismiss it out of hand just because of that. Personally for me the small 9mm single and double stack pistols on the market have taken over whatever need I would have for a small 380 so its just not worth having to keep another type of ammo on hand and then get that brass mixed in with my 9mm brass on my range, so no 380's for me. I keep thinking about an LCP max and then I remember what a pain it is to sort 380 from 9mm

 

[DR505]

I had a Beretta Model 84 that was fun to shoot and held a lot of ammo, but not the best for concealed carry as it was not much smaller than a service pistol.

 

[WYO]

Hornady and Sig 380 perform okay in Lucky Gunner clear gel tests, but not so well in others found on youtube.
Here is an example using manufacturer testing:
https://winchesterle.com/-/media/Pr...gun-Bullet-Barrier-Testing-Protocol_2016.ashx
380 Ranger T series expands but penetrates less than 8 inches in gel or heavy clothed gel.
That is inferior performance compared to the Ranger 9mm loads in the same tests.

What does not (should not) constitute performance comparison between 380 versus whatever?
Lethality. That something is lethal (like the flu) doesn't automatically infer quickly incapacitating and quickly incapacitating is important for SD ammo.
"Wouldn't want to / Nobody volunteer to get shot by it" is not (or shouldn't be) a criteria used for selecting ammo.

Is 380 "better than nothing"? Sure it is; but, I try to not use "better than nothing" like it is a lofty goal.
What might help us select ammo with better ASAP potential? Desirable criteria are at least 12'' penetration and consistent expansion.
I have a LCP 380 and begrudgingly carry it when it is the "best I can do" holstered in gym shorts pocket; its loaded with Hydra Shok Deep.
I've seen testing from a LCP where the 380 Hydra-Shok deep penetrated 15-16'' and expanded to .49 in heavy clothed gel. (acceptable performance)

Why did I say "begrudgingly" about carrying 380? Because I'd rather have a Sig 365 in pocket but its too big/heavy for gym shorts; 380 in that case is "best I can do" .
Other than gym shorts pocket, I'm carrying at least 9mm.
Try to carry a handgun you would want to defend yourself with anywhere, everywhere.

Thanks for posting that link. That is the first manufacturer I have seen that had the guts to post .380 results across the entire 6-test FBI protocol used for duty calibers. Most manufacturers pawn off the bare gel and cloth covered gel tests because they know their ammo generally will do poorly against the barriers, so they go for pictures of pretty mushrooms. Winchester appears to have wanted the ammo to perform across the entire spectrum, and this is what they got. As for me, I think the Underwood standard pressure 68 grain XD would likely perform better across the entire spectrum but with very little expansion. In contrast to marketing hype, expansion gets a much lower priority than expansion in the FBI Protocol point allocation. The foremost priority is for the bullet to penetrate to something important and break it.



I have not been able to get any hollow point, Critical Defense, or soft lead core FMJ to get completely through the sheet metal. Also, when I shoot the jugs with no barriers, the XD round got into the 4th jug, which is the same as a 9mm 124 grain Hornady Custom XTP and only 1 more jug than a standard pressure Speer 9mm 124 grain Gold Dot when the 9mms are fired out of a Sig P365 XL. Edited to add: Also, I shot two 9mm 124 Gold Dots at the same array as the above video. One fired out of a Sig P365 stopped sticking out of the back of jug 2 and one fired out of a Sig P365 XL exited the back of the 4th jug and was not recovered.

Although a .380 is more of a backup or occasional pocket carry gun for me, it is no joke with the right ammo. I also can fire it much faster with better accuracy than the 9mm version of the same gun. It also weighs 4 ounces less than the 9mm version when both are loaded with 10.

 

[Pistolay]

Just in the past 2 months we've seen the Security .380, Glock 28, and now the Girsan MC 14T hitting the American market, joining a growing list of larger than pocket sized .380s. They're obviously selling, and thanks to an aging population and more women getting into guns, will likely continue to do so. If you don't like the caliber, that's cool. If you don't understand why it's growing, you need to get out more.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Unfortunately, the Lucky Gunner tests used Clear Ballistics gelatin.

Terminal performance data obtained in Clear Gelatin is untrustworthy and should be ignored. Test results vary unpredictably from block to block.

A paper (Ballistic Gelatin Comparisons) published on the Hornady Law Enforcement website reports:

Given that these blocks failed FBI standards for calibration each time, it’s unsurprising that the bullets we fired into them penetrated more deeply than they did in 10% calibrated gelatin. However, the amount of that extra penetration was a little surprising. We were not prepared for bullets to penetrate an average of more than 6” deeper into the clear synthetic gelatin than the organic gelatin, in the heavy clothing test, for example.​

Conclusions:

The clear synthetic gelatin currently does not appear to be a suitable substitute for
FBI-standard, 10% calibrated organic gelatin if the bullets will be measured and evaluated according to FBI performance standards. Because the bullets we tested behaved so differently in the clear synthetic gelatin versus the 10% calibrated organic gelatin, it’s not appropriate to use the FBI standards ‒ which were designed to be applied to 10% calibrated organic gelatin – to measure bullet performance in the clear synthetic product...

...There is no apparent “conversion” between data derived from 10% organic gelatin and the current version of the clear synthetic. Unfortunately, our limited test doesn’t indicate a conversion “shortcut” is likely. It would be convenient if we could develop a conversion factor that would equate the organic gelatin and clear synthetic gelatin, but our data indicate that bullet performance is too variable in these mediums to develop a universal “rule of thumb.” ​

 

[herrwalther]

I dropped 380 guns out of my carry rotation about 5 years ago. I compared the 380 guns I had at the time (4 or 5 of them) to the smallest 9mm I have, my PPS M1. In every side by side comparison I had 5+1 or 6+1 380ACP handguns compared to a 6/7/8+1 9mm depending on which magazine I used. The PPS is considered a big pocket 9mm and it is only slightly bigger than the common pocket 380 guns that were all the rage. I dropped 380 for handguns that were an inch taller and longer on average, but got a much better caliber in exchange. If I ever have the need for something smaller, I may go back to 380 but I don't see that happening.

 

[roscoe]

You can't get a 9mm in the size of an LCP or Kel Tec P3AT. The numbers don't communicate how different they are in size - an inch on a 3.5" high and 5" long pistol is 30% taller and 20% longer. For a true deep-concealment pistol that can literally sit comfortable in your front pocket, .380 is it. I carry my LCP all the time. If I felt the need to carry a 9mm I would (and sometimes do), but rarely.

I use 100 grain flat-front hardcast loads from Underwood and I am confident they will zing right on in through clothing, bone, and flesh.