9mm vs .38 Special

[Gordon]

A friend of mine has a snub Ruger in 9mm . With 115 grain ammo it was getting about 950fps across my chrono. I can get that with 125 grain .38spl bullets in same length identical Ruger snub. In a 6 1/2 Ruger convertable 9mm loads do about what factory ballistics say they do in 5" pistol say 1220 for 124grain loads. Once again I can (almost) match that with +power .38spl loads 125grainbullets at 1150 with 19000psi versus 124 grains at 1220fps with 33000 psi. Let me run 33000 psi loads in .357 cases and NO CONTEST = 1400fps.

 

[Logistar]

Thanks Jim! I'll check out that link.

Logistar

 

[Clark]

The 38 sp case is capable of higher pressure than the 9mm case, as well as more capacity.

This makes the 38 sp potentially more powerful than the 9mm's greatest potential.

I have a 38 sp that kicks like a 44 mag with handloads.

 

[Rebeldon]

I don't really think it's going to matter a whole lot. Both rounds can pretty much kill a human intruder.

 

[WebHobbit]

A .22 is quite capable of killing but for SD you want stopping power -- a totally different scenario. But I agree these two calibers are pretty close.

 

[Handy]

There are only two terminal ballistic arguements to be made:

Velocity. For any given normal bullet weight, the 9mm will have more velocity than any +P .38 load. The reason doesn't matter much.

Bullet design. A revolver can utilize a larger initial HP cavity than a self loader. That can be an advantage IF the cartridge has enough velocity to impart adequate penetration to a really wide mouthed bullet.

The second one is up for grabs, but there are plenty of examples of the faster 9mm loads that don't get adequate penetration with their smaller HPs. That doesn't bode well for the even lower velocity .38.

In other words, who cares if the bullet mushrooms really well if it doesn't come with enough velocity to penetrate as well?

 

[winwun]

I suppose if someone did the chrony work they could come up with percentage figures showing the efficacy of the 9 over the 38 due to the 9 being fired from a closed system as opposed to the 38 loosing a lot out the front of the chamber. Basic data would be standard, bullet type, weight, powder type & weight, etc. Variables would be distance from the front of cylinder to barrel cone and fit of 9 chamber. Having fired both quite a bit, I would hazard a guess that the 9 would come out on top by around 20%.

 

[denfoote]

I have always thought of the 9mm as a metric .38spl.

That said, I have a Walther P99 under my pillow, with 17 rounds (16 in mag. 1 in chamber) of 115gr 9mm loaded into it. My wife has a Glock 26, under her's, with 18 rounds (17 in mag, 1 in chamber) of 115gr 9mm loaded into it.

When I have my Taurus 85 loaded up, I have 5 rounds of 125gr +P Gold Dots ready to do battle.

I am a firm believer in the "shoot until the threat goes away" theory. With the revolver, I only have 5 rounds until I have to reload!!

The math is quite clear. The cartridges are almost ballisticlly similar. More is better!!!

 

[Penforhire]

Denfoote, what a coincidence. My nightstand Gunvault has a P99 and a 686. This thread is excellent in posing one of my quandrys. Which weapon should I employ first? Many here would say use 357 Mag in the 686 and be done with it. But comparing +p 38 Spl to 9 mm, say Hydrashocks or SXT for both cases, is very relevant to me.

Funny how many people will gripe about the lower mag capacity of a revolver but still recommend getting the shotgun first. Yes, the buckshot is impressive but you don't get that many rounds (at least not in my 870 Express).

 

[jc2]

suppose if someone did the chrony work they could come up with percentage figures showing the efficacy of the 9 over the 38 due to the 9 being fired from a closed system as opposed to the 38 loosing a lot out the front of the chamber.

It doesn't really work out that way though you'd think so. From the figures I've seen posted for 9mm revolvers the loss is minimal to nonexistent. It just not as big of deal in real life as it seems it would be. Maybe (just speculating) the energy required to operate the slide cancels out the energy lost in the cylinder gap.

 

[DontShootMe]

Scary...

My wife has a Glock 26, under her's, with 18 rounds (17 in mag, 1 in chamber)

Under her pillow? just laying under there? What if she pulls the trigger in her sleep? Is it pointed at you?

 

[denfoote]

Pillow guns

Under her pillow? just laying under there? What if she pulls the trigger in her sleep? Is it pointed at you?

No offence, but you are from the Peoples Republic, right??

Many of us who enjoy living in freedom, trust our spouses with firearms. The BS you have been feed by the commies there, about getting shot by your loved one, is pure propaganda. Sure, she has a pistol under her pillow!! In fact, I gave the weapon to her and insisted she keep it there. BS like gunsafes are not required here in the gun freedom state of Arizona!! Having the weapon handy in an emergency just might provide you with the needed seconds to save your life!!

Let me tell you a little bit about this G26. It has had a trigger job done on it. It has about a 3lb trigger pull!!! Do I trust my wife?? You betcha!!

 

[Gordon]

Although a 9mm is without a doubt the more 'efficient' cartridge working at about twice the psi and with a 30% smaller case, it can't do what a 38spl can. For instance I have some old reloader study on heavy cast bullets in 9mm and they had trouble breaking 900fps with 158 grain bullets in 5" barreled guns. And feeding anything over 147grains seems very poor.I can get a 4" barreled 38.spl to go 1000fps with a 158grain cast bullet with less than 20,000 pound pressure (about like factory + power). So where is the 9mm advantage unless you like 125 grain or less bullets? Corbon makes a .38spl 125 grain load that does an honest 1100fps in a 4' barrel. My favorite hiking load in my Police positive special (83 vintage) uses a 173 grain hard cast flat point at 1050 from 4" barrel. At least it should as it does 1125fps in 6" guns. This load is a little too much for alloy snubs , although they seem to survive OK. 925fps from 2".

 

[surfinUSA]

I usually use 158 gr. 38+Ps rather than magnums. Lower noise, flash and recoil. The gun is easy to control and hit what you aim at.

The 9mm is also good, I use the federal 135 +P.

I look at this like Denfoote. No one shot stops in any caliber (sure they happen, but don't count on it). Keep shooting till your target is no longer a danger.

No doubt there are better rounds out the especially on paper. Someone will be happy to tell me how much better magnums are than the 38. But the +P is less likely to travel though wall and harm other family members (though it can happen). Plus the 38 +P fired in the house will not make me have to sacrafice my hearing to save my life neither will the 9mm.

I've seen what both of these rounds will do first hand. I'm satisfied that they will take care of business regardless of what the paper statistics say.

Thousands of people have been saved by both the 9mm and the 38 over the years. Maybe millions have been killed with them. Mike Irvin said it first, find the gun that you shoot best then go with it.

 

[ChristopherG]

Denfoote says:

"Sure, she has a pistol under her pillow!! In fact, I gave the weapon to her and insisted she keep it there. BS like gunsafes are not required here in the gun freedom state of Arizona!! Having the weapon handy in an emergency just might provide you with the needed seconds to save your life!!
Let me tell you a little bit about this G26. It has had a trigger job done on it. It has about a 3lb trigger pull!!! Do I trust my wife?? You betcha!!"

Well, I trust my wife, too, and I trust myself. And, I have a G17 with a 3.5 lb connector and polished components, and shoot it lots and lots, and like and trust it. But in my view, grabbing an unholstered Glock is like grabbing a rattlesnake; you had better grab it by the right part. Not something I'd want to do in my sleep, or just emerging out of it. So this is really one more reason, to return to the original topic/scenario, why a revolver (686, LSWCHP +Ps) is the first gun to come to hand in our bedroom (at least if the Glock is the auto of choice, which it is for me).

Here, let's see if I can turn what I'm trying to say into a controversial dogma (ahem): A revolver gives the best balance of safety, derived from the long and hard double action trigger pull, and instantaneous, no-brain functioning, and is thus the most suitable (hand)gun for defense in the range of disoriented and/or groggy situations conceivable in home defense.

There, it's not elegant, but dogma rarely is.

As for securing it: even my revolver is in a gunvault, but that's because there are children--our own and occasionally others--in the house. Were that not so, it'd be handier yet (bedside drawer, I suppose. I don't know how anyone sleeps with a gun under their pillow, anymore than I could sleep with a brick under there).

CG

 

[winwun]

JC-2, I don't know of but 2 9mm revolvers. One is the Ruger BH "convertible" that you must shoot .357 size bullets in to be anywhere near accurate, and the other is a little snubbie of dubious lineage. I wish someone made a 6" barrel 9 wheelgun with a barrel specific to the .355 bullet.

 

[WebHobbit]

About "One-Shot Stops":

Evan Marshall himself has stated many times in his books/articles that he DOES NOT recommend someone stop with one round. Common sense tactics call for you to shoot until the threat is no longer a threat. DUH.

He just limits instances of documented One Shot Stops as the only thing he records in his database since only that will actually help determine a rounds true effectiveness. It is a pretty narrowly defined type of shooting to make his database. He also only counts torso shots.

 

[surfinUSA]

Web hobbit,

The problem with Evan Marshall and the focus on one shot stops is that it leads the uninitiated to believe there is some magic bullet or caliber. Just get this caliber and everything will be cool (which of course it won't).

The reality is that any of the defensive rounds of 36 caliber or greater work. And none of them should be counted on for a one shot stop.

People should focus on getting a gun thats reliable, that they can hit with and practice gradually building up speed to continuous rapid on target fire.

As I said in my earlier post and as you said, common sense would dictate that you keep firing on target until that target is no longer a threat. However, you rarely read a post on those lines. You can read a hundred posts on "I carry _____ because its better than ____ and I know it will stop the BG in one shot" or something similar.

 

[WebHobbit]

No argument there....but there is often a VAST difference between one style/weight of hollow-point and another as far as effectiveness goes. For instance in 9 mm the 147 weight is quite the failure as compared to the much faster 115 grain. It would be ludicrus to choose a round that is fully 20% less likely to do the job (with a good torso shot) when recoil betweent the two is pretty equal. I use the stats for the purposes of choosing X weight/brand/style over Y weight/brand/style nothing more nothing less.

Interestingly in .38 the heavier 158 grain LSWCHP tends to be more effective than the lower weight bullets (until you get into the Corbon +p+ 110 which is REALLY a Magnum stuffed into a .38 case and is way over-pressure - I've seen the deformed FIRED cases!). This is in sharp contrast to the 9mm where the lower weight bullets are clearly superior. The reason? The 9mm's obvious velocity leads. The FBI load for the .38, with it's soft lead allows the .38+p's mild velocity to open it up.

 

[surfinUSA]

The 147 gr was tragic. We were issued that for I think two years. Thank god that one went away. But that was another one that was supposed to work based on its paper analysis. IIRC its lower velocity was supposed to control expansion for deeper pentration.

In 9mm they now issue the Federal 135 gr +P tactical. Which is supposed to be hotter than the Hydrashock and does not have the bump inside the hollow points. Results have been good and Federal tactical rounds are now issued for 40 and 45 also. The truth is that the Hydrashocks worked pretty good too when they were issued.

 

[WebHobbit]

I tested some 129 grain .38+p Hydrashocks from a 2inch Centennial that worked pretty good.

I fired this into a home-made water box (lined up 1 gallon bags filled with water):

 

[jc2]

winwun -

There have been several quality dedicated 9x19 revolvers made throughout the years. S&W made the 942--a two-inch stainless steel "Centennial," and full-size K-frame (fairly hard to find). Ruger has also offered (and maybe still does) the SP-101 in 9x19 and, again comparativiely hard to find, a Security Six style full-size revolver. The SP-101 is a particularly sweet little 9mm revolver.

The Ruger Covertible is definitely not the only choice (with judicious 9x19 handloads it will make the 357 Sig look like an also-ran).

 

[jc2]

WebHobbit -

It would be ludicrus to choose a round that is fully 20% less likely to do the job (with a good torso shot) when recoil betweent the two is pretty equal. I use the stats for the purposes of choosing X weight/brand/style over Y weight/brand/style nothing more nothing less.

The problem use of S&M even as you describe is ludicrous. Their stats (and I use that term very loosely) do not even give you the information you evidently are attempting to derive from it--S&M's "data" is at best misleading, and more accurately totally deceptive.

An example of how S&M works:

They have 100 samples of Cartridge A. Of the 100 samples, 70 fail to meet S&M's rather nebulous "criteria." Of the remaining 30 samples 27 were unobstructed thoracic cavity hits that resulted in "one shot stops" by S&M. No other "torso" hits (S&M criteria) resulted in stops. According to S&M, Cartridge A is 90% effective.

They have 100 samples of Cartridge B. Of the 100 samples, 50 do not meet S&M "criteria." Of the remaining 50 samples, 27 were unobstructed thoracic hits and resulted in "one shot stops." In addition to the 27 unobstructed thoracic cavity hits, there were 13 other "torso" hits that also resulted in "one shot stops." According to S&M, Cartridge B is is 80% effective.

Which one, Cartridge A or Cartridge B, was really the most effective on the "street?" Cartridge A with 27 unobstructed thoracic cavity hits rated 90% by S&M; or Cartridge B with 27 unobstructed thoracic cavity hits and 13 peripheral hits resulting in a "stop") rated 80% by S&M?

Folks, that's how S&M work.

When you look at the raw data (which of course S&M won't let you see), I see that in reality on the street Cartridge A, which they rate a 90%, really worked only about 27% of the time, and Cartridge B, which they rate at 80%, really worked about 40% of the time.

Which would you rather have--the one S&M rated highest, or the one that worked the best?

 

[DontShootMe]

denfoote

I agree with what ChristopherG said...

It's not about trusting your wife, it's about what humans do while sleeping. But then again, whatever floats your boat.

 

[WebHobbit]

jc2 - I think you are over-simplifying. I'd go into some detail but I don't want to totally derail this thread. Perhaps I should start a new one?


Here we go:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21184