.380 revolver

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cabela's had one on display that was labeled "itty bitty revolver." Had I seen it by itself, I would've called it slightly smaller than a .38 snub. Seeing it next to those guns, however, I'd call it noticibly smaller. Small enough to be considered more concealable than your standard .38 snub. Pocket size, even.
 
When considering concealment, the mild recoil of the .380 cartridge will allow going to less bulky stocks, similar to those offered on the first S&W Chief Special (pre-model 36). The whole package is about the same as Smith & Wesson's pre-war .38/32 Terrier that was built on that company's I-frame. In turn the well-known J-frame is a stretched I-frame. There is a noticeable difference.
 
Coupled with what Old Fuff just said, looking through the link that weregunner posted, here are comparative physical dimensions:

.380 mini: OAL: 5.95" wt: 15.5 oz. 1.75" bbl.
85UL: OAL: 6.5" wt: 17 oz. 2" bbl.

And another poster on weregunner's link mentioned that the cylinder of the .380 is 1/16" narrower than his Taurus 905 (9mm J-frame clone).

Perhaps this will help to provide some dimensional "visuals" until somebody is able to post side-by-side pics...


.
 
Gun dimensions are weird. Looking at those measurements, they don't sound all that different in size, but I'll bet they are. Look that the difference between the Kahr P380 and PM9. The measurements are very close, but the P380 is much smaller in person.
 
I've been eyeing that thing ever since the first rumors surfaced. While not my idea of a primary, it could be an excellent ankle holster BUG for the under 6-ft crowd. With a scaled down Alessi rig, and some of those buffalo bore big meplat hardcasts (that may or may not feed in a micro auto), it would beat a .22 mini in punch, and a 442 in bulk. Given that ankle carry is somewhat auto-unfriendly, this might be one of this little guy's main niches.
 
I think folks sometimes forget that those that need a SD handgun are not necessarily physically 100%.
Click to expand...

Amen brother!

As a former Commander of the local Disabled American Veterans, I can tell you from experience that there are LOTS of people, even if you can't outwardly see it, that have strength issues.

I, for one, CAN'T run, so as soon as my state started issuing CCW licenses, you can bet I was one of the first ones to send in my application.
(got it about 2 weeks later)

I have a S&W Model 38 in my pocket right now.
Ya, I know some will roll their eyes at a 38 spl. but I go to the range about once or twice a week.
I can hit what I aim at when no one's shooting back.

I fervently pray I never have to find out if I can hit what aim at when someone IS firing back.
 
Sort of like .357 and .38

Is there a reason you can't fire .380 out of an existing 9mm revolver? Aren't they the same dimensions other than length?

I'm NOT saying to do it, just wondering if you can and, if not, why?
 
I thought .380 and 9mm were close but not exactly the same diameter. I could be wrong though.
 
9x19 is a tapered case and has a significantly larger head size than 9x17. If you tried to fire a .380 in a 9x19 chamber, the case would at least swell if not burst. There would be a limit to how hot I'd load 'em, too, considering the lack of case strength. A mythical +P loading, pushing a 90 grainer over 1000 fps might work, but I'd have to experiment with loads. I really don't think there's lots to gain by all this, though. My main concern with .380 is the lack of bullet weight and penetration and the 115 grain stuff is all designed for 9x19 velocities. No way you're going to safely get there out of a .380 case.

Cabela's had one on display that was labeled "itty bitty revolver." Had I seen it by itself, I would've called it slightly smaller than a .38 snub. Seeing it next to those guns, however, I'd call it noticibly smaller. Small enough to be considered more concealable than your standard .38 snub. Pocket size, even.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I do carry a 2" 85UL in a pocket quite comfortably, just as easily as I carry my pocket 9. It's a round butt, but has the boot grip on it that it came with. If I were to get one, I don't think it'd be a primary carry considering I already have better choices that I carry every day, but quien sabe? I might just fall for the thing. LOL
 
Ah, I didn't think about the tapered case. I figured there probably was a reason, I just couldn't figure out what the difference was. Thanks, MCgunner.

I could see where the .380 snub might be fun and kind of cool, but I'd rather have the .38 special.
 
I tried .380 in my 940..., it's just a tad smaller that the moon clip didn't hold the unfired cartridge well, and some of the cases split...

But, the new 405 in .40 S&W is more interesting to me.
Click to expand...

YES! Finally, I would like to see this as well. I got my 940 to use issued ammo from my agency but in a revolver platform..., now that we use the .40 S&W I would like a five shot revolver in that cartridge for the same reason.

LD
 
What would be a very interesting revolver would be for S&W or taurus to resurrect the old I frame .32 S&W long and make it in .32 ACP. But also shorten the cylinder and maybe the frame. Lighten the springs as much as possible for people with strength issues.
 
Whatever is wrong in a .380 A.C.P. auto pistol is even WRONGER in a revolver chambered for the same cartridge.
 
Just goes to show that someone did not read the link for the Taurus m380. The case for it has been made by people here and in the link.
 
I have to hand it to Taurus for stirring the pot. I don't see myself getting a M380 but I do I applaud the effort. One problem with shortening the cylinder to much is getting your fingers near the cylinder gap :eek:
It's to bad there is not an easy way to make a .380 rimmed from a 38spl case.
For now I will cling to my S&W 36 and East German Makarov and hope for enough change so I can afford to by a new gun :(
 
Here's a thought, Taurus could make Magnum J frame sized 5 shot revolver with a .1875" shorter cylinder chambered in 9x23 Win. With moon clips you could shoot 9x23 or 9x19 or a reloader could trim .357 mag cases to .900" to make a rimmed 9x23

.38 spl, 9x23 AR(auto rim), 9x19 reloading 002.jpg
 
Last edited:
OK, I am not a gun writer but I did buy the .380 revolver that started this thread. It comes in stainless or blue and I got the blue. It is actually a nice even not too shiny black. My pistol has no imperfections in the finish. It comes with five 'star clips'. Maybe star not moon because they have five points?

It looks like they used the same grip and trigger guard as their .38 snub-nose. From the recoil shield forward it is just smaller. Ends up being ~1/2" shorter. The pistol is very light, compact, and easy to carry. I had it in my pocket all day and it was not a problem. I even carried it in my shirt pocket for awhile just to see how it felt. I may have to get a pocket holster. I have tried this with .38s and they were too heavy. I also carried two loaded clips in my other pocket with no problems. I had been worried that the cartridges would fall out of the clip but they held all day for me. I used some Dynamite Nobel surplus, Remington, and Magtech for the test. I tried some Santa Barbara(sp) that I have around but they would not stay in the clips.

This little pistol is fun to shoot. I did not try bulls-eye targets because it is not that kind of gun. I shot silhouette at 15 feet. From low ready it is easy and natural to aquire target. Accuracy is more than acceptable. Recoil is sharp but not strong, it's a .380. If you've ever shot a blow-back operated semi-auto it is like that but with less impact. It may be because of the rubber grip. The hammer is bobbed and the action is double action only. I think we've covered all the possible pros and cons beyond this. Except that I wish, as shooters, you would stop disparaging the .380. This is an invention of John Moses Browning and until you've contributed 1/100 as much to arms as he did **** about the .380.
 
Last edited:
Yes, pics. Bonus points if you can post a pic of your new .380 next to a j frame .38: someone has to be the first to do this...
 
sidheshooter,

Ok, I'll bite. :D

Just a little history with me and Taurus here. I cannot stand the company, their normally crappy products, etc (I've owned 7 Taurus products and had problems QC issues with EACH of them). However, I was intrigued enough to take a look at this revolver and see what it offered. I purchased one and noticed immediately that there is something to this. 1. It balances well. 2. The cylinder is shorter than the standard J-Frame .38/.357/9MM pistol.

Here are some pictures:
J Frame / SP101 / M380 collection: Upper Left: S&W 640 chambered in .357 Magnum, Upper Right: Ruger SP101 chambered in 9MM, Lower Left: S&W 940 chambered in 9MM, Lower Right: Taurus M380 chambered in .380 ACP
I43750.jpg

This one is simply the Smith and Wesson 940 compared to the Taurus M380.
I43755.jpg

I've only put 15 rounds through it as that's all the .380 ACP ammo I had with me. Note, when looking to shoot a new handgun / revolver just check the range bag one more time to ensure that the correct ammo is there. :eek:

This little revolver has next to no recoil. It literally fires with the same amount of recoil as a .32 S&W Long cartridge and much less than the .38 SPL. The revolver also points fairly well, and I had no issues with extraction using the moonclips. In fact, with the short .380 ACP cases, extraction and reloading were a breeze. Contrast that with the 940, where felt recoil is between the .38 SPL and .357 Magnum, and the .380 revolver concept is suddenly looking pretty good. When compared to firing a .380 ACP pocket gun like the LCP, P3AT, the DB380 (all of which I have owned and carried) this little revolver was pleasant to fire compared to the autos which can be a handful. The trigger is typical DAO Taurus, nothing special there. I'd like to loosen it up a bit so we'll see.

At best, I think this is a niche product for those with recoil sensitivity and who have trouble racking a slide. It's also a step up from the .32 Revolver and auto for defense and fills a nice niche with a serviceable defensive round. I don't have access to a chronograph, which I am itching to try out for this gun to see what is potentially lost in velocity for the short barrel and cylinder gap combination of the snub nosed revolver. Then again, it's not like the autos are using long barrels, so I don't anticipate much.

Expectations so far: I am impressed by this little gun and intrigued at the possibilities for this combination. Taurus is onto something here. This would make a dandy backup gun in an ankle or pocket rig, or this could serve as a primary for those with arthritis or who otherwise have trouble racking a slide.
 
I'm not against any new firearm, though I may not be interested in them all either.

My question comes around the trigger pull. How heavy is it? Is it the typical 15lb DAO pull? If so, for those claiming this is a better alternative for someone with arthritis, does the heavy trigger still keep that argument alive? There are some fairly large and soft shooting .380 autoloaders available with fairly light trigger pulls. Certainly not the LCP, but others do exist. So if racking a slide is too difficult, is pulling a 15lb trigger every time the gun is to fire a better solution? If you want to start swapping springs you could just as easily swap recoil and mainsprings in an autoloader to make it easier to rack or shoot from DA.

I guess it's an answer I don't understand to a question I've never had to ask. I'm glad it's available as more is better, but it seems to have a drawback or two for the stated use purposes listed here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

deadeyedog270
  • Locked
Taurus 380acp revolver
Replies
8
Views
1K
Triggernosis
T
cluttonfred
  • Locked
Taurus 380 revolvers?
Replies
2
Views
363
fxvr5
fxvr5
T
  • Locked
Taurus 380 revolver
Replies
22
Views
2K
tinygnat219
T
D
  • Locked
Any info on the Taurus 9mm revolvers?
Replies
1
Views
781
dude
D
L
  • Locked
.380 auto rim?
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
walnut1704
W
Back
Top