[FLA2760]

Hi
I am looking for a good BUG. I am looking at the Taurus 85 Ultralight .38 or the Bersa thunder .380. Which one would you choose? :confused:
My primary is a Glock27.

[Gator]

I'd choose a P3AT :)

[RTFM]

I hate when others throw in other options.... but here goes anyway.

S&W 642 .38 SP Centennial revolver (15 oz and no hammer DAO)

[sansone]

being both your models are inexpensive I think you have a better chance of getting a good one if you pic the revolver. less to go wrong, no FTF's

[1BLINDREF]

If I had to pick one of the two, I'd go with the Taurus.
+1 sanson

[browningguy]

I actualy had both at the same time , sold the taurus, still keep the Bersa for a BUG. I find the semi easier to carry because it's so narrow.

[lwrnc1963]

.38 hits harder, can be fired from pocket.

[horge]

The Thunder 380 as BUG will likely have the 7 round mag rather than the 9, for a smaller profile.
That's 7+1 pops. I seem to recall the ballistic and terminal effects difference between .38 and .380
is negligible, so I'd probably choose the Thunder.

I may be biased though :D

[obxned]

The difference between the .380 and .38 is small, the difference between 5 rounds and 7 is not so small. I like the Bursa, but love the P3AT!

[ArchAngelCD]

The .38 Revolver, the Bersa or even a Kel-Tec P-3AT or P-32 would all make a good BUG or even a primary gun too. I would pick the one you shoot the best because if you need to draw your BUG things have gone very wrong! You will need to be able to hit what you aim at under a lot of stress.

I carry a S&W M638 as my primary weapon and sometime I carry a Kel-Tec P-32 when you just have to have a very small gun LOL.

[bpisler]

The power differences between the 38pl and
the 380 can be quite large,for that reason i
would go with the 38 over the 380.

[Jeff Timm]

Can you get the Taurus in 9mm?

Geoff
Who thinks that would be ideal. :D

[TOADMAN]

Speer Gold Dot 38spl+P 135grn short barrel ammo or Remington 38spl+P 158 grn Lead Semi Wad Cutter Hollow Point (LSWCHP)...IMO, head and shoulders above the .380 for self defense...

[10-Ring]

I really like j-frames as BUGs, so I'd go w/ the Taurus option

[azredhawk44]

Instead of the Taurus 85, have you looked at the 605? Not sure what the price difference is between them, but "net rumor" has it that the 605 is Taurus's flagship snubby intended to compete with the sp101 and Smith642. It leaves the factory with the greatest amount of inspection and attention to detail out of any of their snubs.

Just Checked: The Taurus 85 and 605 blued with 2" barrels and standard hammers both have a listed MSRP of $391.

[bobbytm]

In this case,Taurus85UL could be my choice.

[gp911]

Taurus 85 is a nice reliable gun, and .38s can do the job.

Of course if you're reaching for your BUG it may already be too late, but at least you won't have to worry about a FTF...


gp911

[geekWithA.45]

I was in the market for a 9mm revo, until I hefted one...weight to performance ratio was out of whack.

For a BUG, I'd probably take an airweight j-frame over the bersa, and a P3AT over the airweight.

Incidentally, I consider the bersa a fine gun, good value for the money, and would have one myself but for the lack of ambisafety.

[Texas Colt]

Between the two, I would go with the Taurus. The Speer Short-Barrel Gold Dot HP is a great load for the 2" snub.

I personally have a Colt Cobra 38 snub (6 shots) and a Walther PPK 380. Both make great BUGs. Sometimes I carry both... the PPK in a belly band and the Colt in an ankle rig.

[sansone]

texans like multiple guns:D

[Texas Colt]

God Bless Texas!!!

[Whirlwind06]

being both your models are inexpensive I think you have a better chance of getting a good one if you pic the revolver. less to go wrong, no FTF's

Never understand this comment. Revolvers are like clocks seems like a cheap one can quickly become out of time. Looking at the inside of revolver looks like there is a lot that can go wrong.

[DawgFvr]

I own both...the S&W 642 and the P38T. I use both in Mika pocket holsters for quick presentation. I must admit, the P38T is easier to carry and easier for follow up ammo clip loads. I use it in my tight jeans and "go-to-church" clothes. I am also much more accurate with the P38T. It is a bear to shoot though...very tiny and quite snappy...and I have small hands. It actually hurts after a few clips. Having said this, I prefer the 642, however, one needs much more practice with the J frame...at least I do. I load up Corbon DPX in both and feel confident with both. Something about a wheel gun though...it will always go bang every time you pull the trigger. The little .380 auto needs constant cleaning...after every 50 rounds minimum! Change springs after every 500 rounds. If it is jacket weather, I carry the PT145...just a bit larger, albeit much heavier with the 10 + 1 .45 ACP rounds. It too works well in a Mika pocket holster...much more accurate that the two above and definitely more lethal. If I had to just own one....hmmm, I am partial to the 642. It just feels good...in spite of the fact that I can only hit my target consistently at 15 feet or less.

[P. Plainsman]

I own both guns you asked about -- Taurus 85UL and Bersa Thunder. Each is a good value.

I pocket carry, using a pocket holster. I like the Taurus better for that method. It is lighter than the Bersa and its rounded shape is less conspicuous in a pocket.

Also, you can use .38 Special +P ammo in the Taurus. I practice mostly with std. pressure .38 Special but include 5-10 rounds of +P carry ammo in each practice session.

While there's some quality .380 ammo out there (I like Cor-Bon JHP; want to try Cor-Bon DPX), I do not share Horge's view that:

the ballistic and terminal effects difference between .38 and .380
is negligible
There's stuff in .38 Special +P I'd definitely rather deploy than a .380, like the Speer 135 grain "Short Barrel" Gold Dot and the Remington 158 grain pure lead semiwadcutter +P hollowpoint (Rem. Item No. R38S12). Good penetration, good expansion, and heavier bullets than any .380, with more radical hollowpoint shapes than could feed easily in a semi-automatic. Lots of older LEOs sing the praises of the 158 grain lead +P hollowpoint's stopping power. 158 grains of readily expanding bullet at 800 fps from a snubby can be expected.

On the other hand, in my experience the Bersa is easier to shoot accurately at speed. It is a reliable little pistol. Mine has fired 500 rounds and only jammed once (a failure to feed with factory FMJ -- racking the slide cleared it). The Bersa is also more fun to plink with. New shooters I've taken to the range have liked it.

Interestingly, I find the Taurus at least equal in intrinsic mechanical accuracy. I can cock the Taurus's hammer, aim carefully, and make surprising hits on smallish targets out to around 20 yards.

Both good guns.

[Michigunner]

I've had a 642, P3AT, R9S, PM9, Bersa 380, and others.

In my view, why take a chance with a small auto?

My choice is the 642 with Gold Dot Short Barrel 38 Special +P.

It can always be with you and you can expect it will operate properly, without having to apply maintenance day and night.

It just works. No excuses.

Bill

[Deaf Smith]

I suggest each of you get a 5 shot J frame and a plain single stack .380 (Bersa will do fine.) In low light fire the weapons empty at a IDPA/IPSC target with a dark shirt at, oh, 5 yards. Do this once two handed, and once one handed. Shoot fast. Use DA for the revolver and SA/DA action for the .380. Compare hits, not only number but placment of those hits.

Do not be supprised if the .380 way way outshoots the .38 snub under those conditions.

Now I carry a 340PD centennial with real .357 magnums in it, and I'm quite good with it.. but I can say from much experience that the .380 auto is a much easier weapon to get good hits with.

So think about this. Unless you have a spare J frame that you dedicat to practice (like I have) and you shoot it each week with realistic shooting exercises (like I do) then I suggest a hard look at a good .380.