Makarov vs. 38. Snub

Okay, so I've read a few articles and see that the Snubbie may have a slight edge in power over the Mak.

What would you prefer to carry?

So far I have the advantages of each as follows:

Mak:

Cheap ammo
More rounds
Dead reliable

Snub:

Reliable
cheap ammo
slight edge in power

Anyone else want to comment? Suggestions?

A Makarov will be flatter and for some folks, depending upon mode of carry, may be easier to conceal than a .38 snub. For most people, it will probably be easier to shoot accurately. If you need to use it at further than spitting distance this may be a factor.

IMO, the .38 Special does offer a worthwhile increase in "power" vs. 9x18mm Makarov. I prefer the FBI load, a 158 grain LSWCHP +P in .38 Special. In 9x18 I prefer ball, because I'd be concerned about insufficient penetration with a JHP in that caliber.

FWIW, I have a Mak and a couple of .38 snubbies. I've carried all three and feel well-armed with any of them, but my current favorite is my 2" S&W Model 15 .38, loaded with FBI loads. The Model 15 is a K-Frame so it's a bit bigger than most snubbies, but is still pretty easy to conceal. The sights, grip, and K-Frame action make rapid DA shooting a lot easier than with smaller guns.

If you look at the other advantages in revolver vs. mak. You can get .357 which is a much greater 'power' difference. The Mak to me is not as quick to shoot as a revolver and for Lefty-types that silly metal lanyard attachment is no fun.

For a purely defensive handgun that would be concealed, I would pick the revolver. Without starting the whole revolver vs. semi arguement again, I just like the overall reliability and simplicity of the revolver when I have one or two shots that I have to get off in a close up, life or death situation. In a combat situation, I can see where the higher capacity of the semi-auto would benefit the person carrying. The major advantage of the revolver is getting a second pull of the trigger is not dependent on whether the first bullet went bang or not. Also, the new +p .38 ammo has made it a pretty good defensive round.

correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a .357 Magnum round wasted in a 2 inch barrel?

If its a standard weight snubby, I'll take the Makarov. 9 rounds of 9x18 vs 5 of 38 spl. +p or .357 Mag. However if weight is an issue give me an S&W 642 with +p's.

Hello.

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Comparisonof9x18mmMakarovetc.htm

Best.

IMO, the .38 Special does offer a worthwhile increase in "power" vs. 9x18mm Makarov. I prefer the FBI load, a 158 grain LSWCHP +P in .38 Special. In 9x18 I prefer ball, because I'd be concerned about insufficient penetration with a JHP in that caliber.

Dave, we think alike. I carried an EG Mak for two years. I loaded it with ball just because I was concerned about penetration.

I now carry a 3" barreled Smith M-65. It's a .357, but my current carry load is 158 gr LSWCHP +P in .38 Special. I may upgrade to a .357 load after I try out some more Magnum loads, but right now I'm happy with this combo.

I switched from the Mak to the Smith for a couple reasons: The first was power. I liked the 8 shot capacity of the Mak, but I wasn't really thrilled with the 9x18mm round. I think of it as a hot .380 in my mind. I'm happier with the performance of the +P .38's.

The other reason I switched was because I wanted a gun I could safely carry WITHOUT using a manual safety. I want to be able to just draw and fire. The revolver allows me to do that. The Mak did not. The extra reliability of the revolver is another bonus, but my Mak was no slouch in that department either.

I picked the Mak as my first carry gun because, simply, it was the only gun I owned when I got my permit that was really suitable for carry. I still use it as a "spare" carry gun for when the Smith is down for cleaning or whatever and I'm still confident of my ability to use it.

I have a nickled Bulgarian Mak - neat gun. And I have a Taurus 605 snubby in .357. I never carry the Mak and nearly always carry the Taurus if I don't have a larger gun (and then sometimes it'll go BUG)

Why? - the Mak is so much less powerful and so much larger. Yep, larger... If I wanted to carry a gun that big, I'd go with my Astra A-75 in .40 SW, same capacity and size and nearly the same weight... Come to think of it I do carry my Astra at times, but never the Mak.

Course a higher capacity would make the Mak a little more desireable - wonder if we'll ever see some new shipments of the old 12 round Maks now that the magazine cap limitation has been lifted?

(I'd probably still not carry one, though I'd have to buy one - the 9x18 is marginal in it's power level for self defense as far as I'm concerned... But what a plinker it'd make!!)

The real trouble with the mak is that it just has plain bad sights. Any snuby will be easier to draw a bead on a target. If you spend $100+ for a sight up grade, I would say it would be hard to be the mak.

The other reason I switched was because I wanted a gun I could safely carry WITHOUT using a manual safety. I want to be able to just draw and fire. The revolver allows me to do that. The Mak did not. The extra reliability of the revolver is another bonus, but my Mak was no slouch in that department either.

They're both DA for the first shot so how can you say the Mak can't be carried safely w/o using the manual safety??? "Extra reliability" of the revolver??? I'd be very interested to see hard data showing a revolver is more reliable than the Mak.
Mak sights? Not target grade for sure (same for the snubby) but a touch of orange is all it takes to make them adequate for me for SD use. (I don't know about anyone else but I seriously doubt I'll be doing any precision aiming in a SD situation).
I carry the Mak for the thinner profile, excellent reliability & more shots than a snubby (plus it's easier for me to CCW a spare mag for the Mak than extra ammo for a snub). The Mak's not perfect nor is the 9x18 my first choice for a CCW piece but I don't feel underarmed when carrying it (shot placement & adequate penetration come first). Just my $.02 worth...
Tomac

Anyone read Massad Ayoob's comments about trying both the .380 and the .38 snub in a slaughterhouse? The .380 lacked penetration on head shots on pigs and the result was awful. The .38, with the lead HP load, went right through the tough hide and most of the way (or completely) through the brain.

The 9mm Mak is only slightly more potent than a .380.

This is mportant in humans, more so if one may be forced to use a small carry gun on other large mammals.

Steven Camp-

As ever, thank you for the link to your learned discussion of the matter. About 60% of the really useful data that I see on handguns on the Net originates with you. (Collecting info aside.)

Lone Star

The small .38 Special lightweight revolvers can be carried in alot more pockets alot more comfortably than a Mak can. And carrying IWB, most folks can cary much more potent handguns and still conceal them well.

Mak: Dead reliable. Snub: Reliable My Mak would jam. My snubs are at 100%.

Snubs are lighter or can be lighter. The Mak? Well its 25 oz, the weight of many smaller 1911's. You can get .38 snubs that weigh 11-12 oz.

If your looking at an anemic round like the 9x18, just go with a .380 in the kel Tec.

The small .38 Special lightweight revolvers can be carried in alot more pockets alot more comfortably than a Mak can. And carrying IWB, most folks can cary much more potent handguns and still conceal them well.That's exactly what I was thinking as I read through this thread.

My S&W 642 is a lot lighter and more comfortable than my Mak for pocket carry. Even if they were the same caliber, I'd grab the revolver every time over the Mak if I'm looking for something to drop into a pocket.

For IWB, I'm go with a 1911 every time over the Mak. Side by side, my 45ACP Colt CCO is only a hair larger and not really any wider than my Mak. With it's alloy frame, it's even lighter. Now, granted the CCO is four times the cost of a Bulgarian Mak (mine's an E. German though), but is it wise to choose a CCW based on cost?

but is it wise to choose a CCW based on cost? I'll chime in because someone will say it: "If I'm in a SD shooting, I'd rather give up a $100 to the cops than a $1000 gun." :rolleyes:

One place where the Mak shines is in cost. A couple of friends have Maks (limited budgets) and it's hard to beat a $150 reliable handgun with cheap ammo. Around here, decent .38s run closer to $300.

Between the Makarov and 38, I'll carry the Mak.

But I don't carry the Mak because for the same size and weight I can carry a 45 Kimber Ultra.

They're both DA for the first shot so how can you say the Mak can't be carried safely w/o using the manual safety???

My understanding of the Mak design is that the hammer is only completely blocked when the safety is engaged. There is no internal firing pin safety. With the safety ON, it's completely safe as the hammer can not hit the firing pin. With the safety OFF, there is a chance, albiet small, of an AD if dropped since the firing pin lacks an inertial safety. I would no more carry a "Off-safe" Mak then I would a pre-WWII Smith revolver with no hammer block.

(I may have this backward. It's possible that there is a firing pin safety and no hammer block. Either way though, the system was designed to work only when the manual safety is ON. With the safety OFF, the internal safety mechanism is also disengaged)

"Extra reliability" of the revolver??? I'd be very interested to see hard data showing a revolver is more reliable than the Mak.

I'll give you data. It's a data point of "1", but since it happened to me I found it especially relevant in my assessment of the reliability of the Makarov:

My East German Makarov was 100% reliable for about 4 or 5 years. No jams that I remember. No failures to fire. No misfeeds. Nothing. I could see why the design has such a good reputation.

Then, a couple years ago I started having failures to fire. The first time or two I attributed it to the ammo. Then it started happening more frequently and with different ammo. I did some research and found out that the "safety detent spring" could become fatigued or misshapen to the point that the safety would engage under recoil. This explained why the failures to fire usually (always? can't remember for sure) occurred on the second or third shots.

Externally, the safety lever would appear to be in the "Fire" position, but the internal mechanism would engage and keep the hammer from hitting the firing pin. It would either block it completely or absorb enough of the impact so that there was not enough energy to pop the primer.

The good news is the fix was easy. You remove the safety and slightly bend the safety detent spring back into position. I did this and the gun now runs 100% again. The bad news is that made the safety stiffer and harder to disengage or reengage. That slowed down my first shot out of the holster.

The guys over at the Mak forum on Gunboards were able to diagnose my problem and give me the info on the fix quickly. Evidently, while there aren't many failure modes for the Makarov, this is one of the few and is fairly well known among that community. I'll probably replace that safety detent spring eventually in the hope that the safety will once again be easier to engage and disengage. For now, the rebent spring works OK.

I'm still a big fan of the Mak. It's a very rugged, reliable, accurate and well designed pistol. It is, however, a mechnical device and no such device is perfect. I still use my EG as a "spare" carry pistol for when the M-65 is down for cleaning or whatever. (Yes, revolvers can fail too, but so far the M-65 hasn't.)

I'll chime in because someone will say it: "If I'm in a SD shooting, I'd rather give up a $100 to the cops than a $1000 gun."

Sigh. Are you saying that you'd rather shoot someone with a cheap handgun because you don't want one of your thousand-dollar pistols in the evidence chain custody of the cops and the court for two or three years?

If I'm in a self-defense shooting, I want to be using the gun that I know is accurate, that I know is stone reliable, and that I shoot the best ... If my $2500 1911 saves my life, or the life of a loved one, I'll gladly give it up forever.

I do, however, use a Mak for a truck gun (it's always in there), and the puny sights notwithstanding, it's a devilishly accurate piece (and it always goes bang).

But -- if I'm not carrying a 1911, my always gun is one of my Airweight S&W J-frames ... I'll sacrifice number of rounds on tap for ease of carry, imperviousness to environmental conditions and yes, power (the Speer Gold Dot 135 gr GDHPs have a decided edge over any 9mm Mak or .380 round).

Sigh. Are you saying that you'd rather shoot someone with a cheap handgun because you don't want one of your thousand-dollar pistols in the evidence chain custody of the cops and the court for two or three years? HA! You bit!! I'm not saying that. But someone surely will. Go search the threads for this same subject, and there are lots of guys who say the same thing. I just wanted to say it first. But no, I don't care if they take my gun. I figure I won't feel much like shooting after something like that.

The Mak is safe to carry with the hammer down on a chambered round. It has a rebounding hammer design that doesn't allow the hammer to touch the firing pin unless the trigger is fully to the rear.

The Mak is safe to carry with the hammer down on a chambered round. It has a rebounding hammer design that doesn't allow the hammer to touch the firing pin unless the trigger is fully to the rear.

Yes, it does. But, my understanding is that only is actually engaged when the safety is engaged. I'll see if I can dig up the reference where I got this from. It is always possible that I am wrong.

Maks are safe to carry safety off round chambered. Try pushing as hard as you can on that hammer, it ain't getting anywhere near that firing pin unless you pull the trigger. I have a Falco IWB holster I'm toting mine around in, round chambered, safety off. If I didn't trust the Mak, it wouldn't be anywhere near my precious hide!

The Mak passed California's infamous "drop test", I don't think we have to worry about the Mak going off accidentally if dropped in Condition 2 (rd chambered, hammer down, safety off).
Tomac

distinguished gentleman from Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania. Having said that...depending on the season and method of carry, I'd go with my Makarov when not wearing a jacket...and with my S&W Model 13 3 inch in .357 when I can cover it... :evil:

I have 2 S&W model 66's and a GP100 which I load with the Federal Personal Defense 357 Mag 130 JHP's or Winchester 38+P's....definitely nothing to sneeze at for SD and a lot of difference in the 2 calibers........

Someone suggested a smaller 380 Kel-tec, but I think a better comparison would be the kel-tec p11. It is roughly the same size as a Mak, and lighter when fully loaded (mine weighs around 20 ounces with 11 rounds) It also beats both the mak and the snub in capacity and flat beats the 9/18 in power. With +p it even beats the .38 snub in power. And finaly, the cost. It is only a little more expensive than a mak and alot cheaper than most .38 snubs, with the exception of the Charter arms.

I Know, sometimes they need a little massaging form the factory, but after about a 30min "fluff and buff" after my first outing, mine has been perfectly reliable.

Caveat: I dont own a true makarov, but I have a 9x18 FEG pa-63 (my second) that I enjoy, and actually did carry for about a year before I got the Kel-tec.

I have seen Kel-Tecs jam, and a dealer in my area, though he will sell them to people, always tries to warn them off of it first. He doubles as a smith and is a reputable guy. So Kel-Tec, though I like the idea, is a poor execution for a defensive pistol.

Quote:
---------------------------
correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a .357 Magnum round wasted in a 2 inch barrel?
---------------------------

No. In another thread, comparing the .38 Special +P and the 9mm, I posted comparable figures for these two round, plus the .357, the revolver data being adjusted for a 4" barrel equivallent (barrel plus chamber, or about 2 1/2" barrel.)

The .357 will generate about 710 ft lbs with a hot 125 grain load, compared with 350 - 370 ft lbs for the 9mm and .38 Special +P.

I particularly like the Ruger SP 101 with the 3 1/16" barrel -- I bought one for my daughter's carry gun, and shot it extensively before turning it over to her.

So let me get this right. A .357 snub 125gr. will generate 710lbs of energy out of a 2 1/2 inch barrel?

Quote:
--------------------------
So let me get this right. A .357 snub 125gr. will generate 710lbs of energy out of a 2 1/2 inch barrel?
--------------------------

With a max load of H110, I was able to get right at 1600 fps from my daughter's SP 101.

(1/2* 125 grains * 1600^2)/(7000 gr lbs * 32.2) = 709.849 ft lbs.

Did you load your own? I'm a factory ammo kind of guy. ;)

Quote:
--------------------------
Did you load your own? I'm a factory ammo kind of guy.
--------------------------

These were handloads, but not exceeding published and tested data.

I am well aware of the controversy over factory versus handloads for defense -- but so far as I know, no one has ever cited a case, civil or criminal, where handloads were a factor.

Oh...I'm not worried about liability....I'm just too lazy to load my own. I work WAAAYYYY too much to load. I'm lucky to get to the range once a week.

Try a Lee handpress kit -- you can keep everything you need in a tool box,and load quite a bit of ammo with that little tool.

distinguished gentleman from Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania.

:confused:

You're going to give me a swelled head. :)

Given a choice between these two, I would choose the Makarov (if IWB was an option). I prefer to have 9 rounds than 5. However, if carrying in a pocket, I'd pick the .38.


Russian Makarov & Taurus 85UL

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=22564&stc=1

Wow....I didn't realize how close in size those are to each other. Maybe I should snag one of each.

Mak with max load handloaded Gold Dots or 100-gr Sierra TournamentMaster FMJ bullets...flatter and easier to carry. Whatever you use, you should keep in practice with it so you can draw and fire without having to think about it or worry about the sights...double taps are sweet with a Mak. :evil:

I'll take the Mak, simply for capacity and concealability.

Of course, on the other hand a .38 snub can be concealed in a pocket - while the mak is flatter for IWB carry (my method of choice) it is a little big/heavy for pocket carry.

.38 is significantly more powerful (with the right loads) but 9x18 shouldn't be scoffed at - it's like a hot .380, and while a 9x19 or .45 is certainly more comforting, the 9x18 will get the job done, if you do your part - and the Mak is a surprisingly accurate platform.