[Hal]

title says it all.

I have an old .380 F.I.E. Wonderful gun (for a cheapo POS), 100% reliable w/any ammo - ball or JHP. It's a sentimental favorite, and destined to be a hand-me-down to my son one day. In regards to that, I'm not slamming the .380 ok?

All I'm asking, is for someone,,,anyone,,to give me one thing,,just one,,that the .380 does that a 9mm compact doesn't do better/cheaper/with less felt recoil....

[Oracle]

The .380 can be chambered in smaller and lighter firearms than the 9mm can, like the Kel-Tec P3AT. That's why it will likely to be around for quite a while, because people will continue to push the envelope with firearms designs, and, like Kel-Tec, make smaller and smaller firearms using older cartridges.

The Rohrbaugh may put the lie to this, but I do believe it is heavier than the Kel-Tec P3AT, and, at this point, it's still vaporware, I don't believe that any have shipped yet.

[Rogelio]

It can be used by civilians in countries like mine where we can not use 9mm.

It also allows for an easier manufacturing of pistols (blowback is easier than locked breech) so they are less expensive and allow more people to get armed.

Just my $0.02

[James Bondrock]

IMO, its niche nowadays is in the very small pocket autos, e.g., the Seecamp (recently introduced in .380, same external dimensions as the .32), the NAA Guardian, etc. The latest compact autos in 9mm and .40 are only a little bit larger, however. I do have one .380 myself, a Beretta 86, but this is a large gun for the cartridge, being the same height and length as a Glock 19. I bought it more as a curiosity because of its unusual design; it has a tip-up barrel and gives you the choice of carry with the hammer down in double action mode, with or without the ambidextrous thumb safety engaged, or "cocked and locked". It is a fun shooter, but I would rather rely on the above-mentioned Glock for self defense.

[jar]

To keep me supplied with ammo for my 230.

[BamBam]

Check out the weight and size of this mouse gun:

http://www.kel-tec.com/p3at_pistol.htm

Besides a Kel-Tec P-32, there's not much out there that is as easy to carry (no matter what it's chambered in).

[concerned citizen]

Because it can be chambered in guns like this..;)

[Keith]

The answer is quite obvious - there are no compact nines as small as some of the .380's.
And the "felt recoil" question is moot! That is about locked breeches, and there are .380's with a locked breech and low felt recoil.

Keith

[Byron]

I have a Browning 380 BDA. It allows my wife to use a better ccartridge than a 22LR. Health issues do not allow her to use a 9MM anymore. The Browning BDA reduces the reciol of the smaller 380's. Byron

[Blackhawk]

All I'm asking, is for someone,,,anyone,,to give me one thing,,just one,,that the .380 does that a 9mm compact doesn't do better/cheaper/with less felt recoil.... It's a matter of marketing intertia. As long as there are a bunch of .380 pistols out there, .380 ACP ammo will continue to be made. As long as there is .380 ACP ammo available, somebody will continue to sell .380 ACP pistols.

But I think what you're getting at is "why would anybody buy a .380 pistol when a .32 is equivalent with a few advantages and a 9mm MAK or Luger is superior with just a few size disadvantages?"

That's the question I'm rasslin' trying to justify a P-3AT as an intermediary between my P-32 and the upcoming Rohrbaugh. So far, it seems that there are a bunch of good .32 ACP factory ammo choices, but the .380 choices are limited. That makes sense from the perspective that most .380s are blowback designs, and therefore touchy about "off pressure" loads. JMO....

[Keith]

But I think what you're getting at is "why would anybody buy a .380 pistol when a .32 is equivalent with a few advantages and a 9mm MAK or Luger is superior with just a few size disadvantages?"

A .32 isn't equivalent to a .380. And a 9mm will not fit in your pocket - unless you're a Mr. Greenjeans with enormous pockets!

The .380 is popular because of CCW laws. No CCW - no reason for the .380 in todays world. It simply fills a tactical niche, period.

They are small enough to fit in a jeans pocket. The caliber is "sufficient". And (with a locked breech) they are comfortable to shoot accurately and quickly. Nothing else has those qualities. A .38 snubby comes closest, but that gun prints easier, kicks harder and (at least in the +P loadings) makes a fireball at the muzzle that may see you effectively blinded after the first shot in poor light.

Keith

[Blackhawk]

Well, Keith, I don't want to get into any religious arguments here, and that's all the "bigger hole is better" discussions end up being.

.380 ACP cartridge chambering seems to have something in common with .45 ACP, and that is a pressure ceiling that manufacturers just don't seem to want to exceed. That ends up with little attention being paid to improving the performance of factory loads. The .32 ACP is also originally a low pressure cartridge, but there are a plethora of "hotter" loads available seemingly because manufacturers seem willing to push the envelope.

If the .380 terminal ballistics ended up being midway between the hotter 9mm Luger and the hotter .32 ACP rounds, I'd be happy with them. But they're not. As I'm finding out, a hot .32 ACP load beats the snot out of a typical .380 load.

BTW, my P-11 fits in my jeans pocket just fine in a Kydex holster, but I greatly prefer a P-32/P-3AT sized pocket pistol because of their ease of draw. Even when wearing slacks with bigger pockets, I prefer the smaller pocket pistols because they're not so obtrusive even though the P-11 doesn't print. It's bulk is enough that I'm constantly aware of it. (Also, BTW, the Rohrbaugh R-9 is a full 9mm Luger in a package that's the same size as a P-32....)

I'm going to expand my investigation to compare the "Puncture Power" of a hot 9mm Luger round to a hot .32 ACP load from similarly short barreled mouse guns. My guess is that it will come out right where I wish the .380 would be -- between the optimal .32 ACP and the optimal 9mm Luger compact pistol (KT P-11, IMO). If so, the Rohrbaugh will be a winner as "what a .380 pocket pistol should be."

I've had two PPK .380s move through my safe, and they were equivalent to my P-32 in useful power and equivalent to my P-11 in size. IOW, all the disadvantages of a P-32 along with all the disadvantages of a P-11, but what I want is something closer to the power of a P-11 and the size of a P-32. Without comparing them side-by-side, it doesn't appear that the P-3AT or any other .380 is going to fill the bill. Simply put, that's why I'm excited about the Rohrbaugh. It smells like it will fit that bill.... :D

[Keith]

As I'm finding out, a hot .32 ACP load beats the snot out of a typical .380 load.

Well, you may be on to something. I'm unaware of any .32 loads that have more energy/power than a good .380 - But, I stand ready to be convinced.

A .380 is a pretty light pill - 95 or 100 grains... It's hard to imagine how a 60 grain .32 could beat that unless you had a dramatic increase in velocity. Maybe there is something out there that I'm unaware of.

Keith

[Keith]

Oh, I missed your point about size.

I don't know how big a P-3AT is either. I've never seen one and you have to "heft" a gun to see what's up - maybe slip it in your pocket and try it for size.

The PPK sized pistols are too big for pocket carry. I've owned several and I like them, but they are too big.

The Mustang Pocketlite is a true pocket pistol. It does fit in your pocket and they are easy and fun to shoot accurately. And that locked breech is a real big deal - you have to compare .380's of similar size with and without a locked breech to appreciate what that means. You can shoot a locked breech faster and much more accurately than you can a blowback.

And that's been a lot of the problem with the .380 over the years. The caliber was originally in a fairly large gun - the PP, etc. When they scaled them down for pocket carry, most of them stuck with that blowback operation and that fact makes a lot of them miserable to shoot - and difficult to shoot rapid and accurate groups. And let's face it, when you are shooting a marginal caliber you'd better be able to get a bunch of rounds out quickly and accurately!

Keith

[Blackhawk]

The P-3AT is the same size and weight as a P-32. Its bigger bore further disadvantages the gun's short barrel length, however. On paper and in the marketing world, it seems like the natural evolution of the P-32 class pocket pistol. My inquiries seem to be leading to "'taint necessarily so...."

No definitive conclusions yet, though.

[George Hill]

Fit into an NAA Guardian.

Oh, wait... I hear Glock is coming out with a new 9MM to fit in smaller framed guns... 9MMGAP.
You could use that instead!
:D

[Keith]

I don't know how big a P-32 is either...

Here's a link to a ballistics table for the .32 Silvertip.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/test_data/32acp/win32-60st-b3032.htm

Out of a 2.4" Tomcat, it gets 800 fps and 7" of penetration. Expansion was zero when fired through denim, but penetration doubled to 14". Not bad, really. Actually, better than I'd have thought...

And here is a link to some .380 data:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/ammo_data/380acp.htm

Penetration, velocity and expansion is better than the .32, but it's still no great mankiller!

Keith

[Blackhawk]

The problem with that data, Keith, is the barrel lengths. Shorten it to 2.7" as in a pocket pistol, any you'll see the velocity, and hence the FPE, go down considerably.

That's true for any cartridge for a barrel length shorter than optimum. Powder burned after the bullet leaves the muzzle is essentially wasted, and the optimum barrel length for most every pistol cartridge is longer than comes on the pistol.

Puncture Power and penetration are functions of the bullet cross sectional area, weight, and velocity. The smaller cross section bullet will use its kinetic energy (within the handgun envelope) more efficiently than a larger one. IOW, a .32 slug can often puncture better than a .38 one even though the .32 has less FPE. Terminal performance is a function of how much energy is left after the target is punctured. To illustrate, try slicing a tomato with a dull knife. Once you've brreached the skin, things are comparable to using a sharp knife, but what a difference in power required to puncture!

It's a common mistake to use ammo performance data taken during long barrel tests and apply it to your short barrel pistol. Apples and oranges.

Go to http://www.kel-tec.org for P-32 and P-3AT dimensions, but you'll have to get one in your hands to see what the specs translate to.

[Keith]

Yeah, I noted the differing barrel lengths. The shortest .380 tested had a 3" barrel, while the .32 was tested in a 2.4" barrel.

I was surprised at the penetration of the .32! Not too shabby - and much better than I'd have thought.

Still, I suspect the .380 would still outperform the .32 even with the same barrel lengths. It's a matter of weight - 60 grains vs 100 grains.

Keith

[jays357]

:neener: The .380 exists for one reason, the majority of the shooting public think it's milder than a 9mm and makes a perfect gun for carry or their wife/girlfriend. If they really know it was the anemic short brother to the 9mm parabellum it might just die out.

[Keith]

I note you are from IL, and therefore don't carry a concealed weapon.

I would probably think the same if I didn't carry, but I do. And when you do you find this issue about comfort, concealment and power comes up. We'd all like to pack a .45 all day, but it's a pain in the rear - literally! Some people are committed enough to make that work. Others (like me) look for a compromise that we can drop in our pockets and forget about.

And so; the endless .380/.32/.38 snubby debate continues...

Keith

[Gary A]

What's the old saying, "people like 1911s because it chambers the .45 acp and people like 9mm because it's chambered in Hi-Powers"...or something like that. As of yet there are few 9mm pistols that are the size of most .380 pistols. They may, in fact, supplant the .380 but right now I can see that many people would choose an all steel Sig 232 or Walther PPK/S over a smaller but just as heavy and striker-fired Kahr MK9, or the equivalent PM9 or P9 and especially over the polymer/aluminum/steel Kel-Tec P-11. Some folks would prefer an alloy 232 over the equally light Kel-Tec simply on the basis of perceived quality and reliability. Just a matter of taste, perceived quality, and relative power for the perceived need. The small Glocks are larger, thicker, and even a bit heavier than even a steel Sig 232. Some folks like hammer-fired guns and don't find a blowback .380 to be hard recoiling or hard to shoot. I have looked and looked and have yet found the small or micro 9 that pleases me to the extent that I really want one. I'm in a non-carry state but it doesn't stop me from having preferences. Sometimes, it is just the platform, e.g. I find few handguns as pleasing to own and shoot as my CZ83 which is simply a superb pistol and I'm just not so sure an 11-14 round .380 like the CZ and it's 3.8 inch barrel gives up much over a micro 9 with a 3 inch barrel holding 6 or 7 rounds. I agree the small 9 may one day completely eclipse the .380, but it has not done so yet, any more than the .32 has disappeared. Just MO. Oh, and fixed barrel blowback .380s are often darned accurate. And, lastly, as a postscript, anyone who finds the .380 outmoded should simply not buy one and if enough people feel that way it will die out. If folks like it for whatever reason ithe .380 will survive, both the cartridge and the pistols which chamber it. Pretty simple.

[Standing Wolf]

The .380 A.C.P. is still around because Walther P.P.K.s are so cute.

That said™, I hardly ever carry mine: just not enough caliber.

[Jim Watson]

My main justification for the continued existence of .380 is that my Colt .380 is paid for and the Kahr P9 down at the store is not.

[1911Tuner]

Much maligned as feeble, the scaled-down .45 ACP actually isn't
that bad. True, you would want something heavier to face down
a band of marauding gang-bangers...but how often do we have
that situation? The .380 was/is intended to be deployed as a
last-ditch, do or die means of saving old skinny...and this will
probably happen at arm's length or less. At powder-burning
ranges, 7 or 8 quick rounds of .380 ball in the groin area would be
a pretty effective deterrent, I would think.

The single best example of why the .380 should remain with us
was offered a few years ago by Beretta, with their neat little DA
tip-up barreled pistol...Cougar, I believe. That would allow the
folks with painful arthritis or limited hand strength to load the
pistol without having to struggle with the slide and/or lowering
the hammer on a hot chamber. The little pistol allows this segment
of our society to have a defensive pistol that's small, user-friendly,
and is roughly the equivalent of the standard .38 Special LRN
loading with more rounds available and less felt recoil than a
5-shot revolver. Throw in the fact that it's less bulky to boot,
and you have yourself a definite winner, even if it is limited
in power. I sure wouldn't want to corner a 90-pound, nervous lady
who had one in her hand. Nossir!

Since it IS a little weak, I would opt for ball ammo to fully utilize what
penetration is available, and depend on close-range, multiple hits in
a soft area to do the job. That's really what the cartridge was meant for.

I like the .380 ACP...It fills a niche that needs filling...especially in the
Cougar platform.

Just my 2% of a buck...

Tuner

[PCRCCW]

You guys that think the 32 will out class the .380 ballistically, Id sure like to see your data..the closest real comparison is the 32 and 380 Guardian..not the new 32 NAA Guardian chambering either. Another is the Keltec 32/380..same barrel length, breech style etc.

The 380 walks away with more than 1-1/2 times the energy from the same make/model bullet and gun/barrel length.

Im not defending it...but Im not gonna sit here and listen to stuff that has not bearing either. The Magsafe ammo and that "niche" ammo may be nice but Im comparing a +P JHP from a good maker. Hell if you listen to some makers they make .380 ammo that "Will kill a bear at 100 yds and turn it into a 44 magnum" or some hooopla.

Youve got to get the little 60 gr 32 ACP round "OVER 1200 FPS" to get equivalent ballistics to the .380 shot from the same NA Guardian. NAA did it with a wildcat load that is gonna be nice little caliber with Corbons help.

Many people cant shoot 9mm's, due to laws limiting power, size etc. The USA isnt the only place in the world where they shoot guns and many other countries limit their "civilian" or legally owned chamberings to much smaller rounds.
Or health reasons like previously stated...example my CZ83 Mak and .380's I have, I could triple tap better than any gun made after shooting my 45's and 40's. Its all about recoil and its a relative to the shooter at best.

Respectfully,
Shoot well................

[Peter M. Eick]

Why a 380?

1) Because there are times that 380 is enough and small enough to carry when a 9mm is not (like business suit type meetings).

2) If you are confident in your abilities with a 380 and not with a 9mm.

[Mike Irwin]

Unfortunately the best, bar none, pistol for .380 is no longer in production, and it's tough to find good copies...

The Remington 51...

[eldomatic]

1911Tuner, the .380 Beretta you refer to is the Cheetah, not Cougar.
The Cheetah 86FS is the varient with the tip-up barrel.
The Cougar comes in 9mm, .40, .357 and .45.

[Dorrin79]

.380 sticks around because of its propensity for small, light, concealable, inexpensive blowback autos.

There really isn't a similarly priced pistol comparable to, say, a Bersa .380.

Now if Kahr PM9s were $250, you might be on to something.

There's also a controllability issue; sub-compact 9x19s tend to have a lot of muzzle flip and perceived recoil. 9x17 blowbacks don't, even at the same size/weight level.

[1911Tuner]

Ah yes! I knew it was some kinda big cat.:D

Thanks eldomatic! I'm afraid that I don't keep up with the Berettas
very close...:confused:

Cheers!
Tuner

[DonGlock26]

Because my P-232 is a "sexy" beast. Seriously, a fellow LEO went to a Speer demo with geletin shooting. He left with a new respect for 90gr Golddots. Expansion .60 penetration 9-10". Not bad for a .380ACP. MY P-232 holds 8rnds, weighs 16ozs., and is more accurate than I am. It's as reliable as my big Sigs,too and carries like a dream. It is the snubbie of autopistols IMHO. I hope to get a P-232SL with Sigsights and Hogue grips.

[1911Tuner]

If you can live with the size and hand-cycling isn't an issue, the Beretta
M-84 is a super little pistol. It's a double stack, but is also available
in a single stack...the M-85 I think. I've owned one of each in years past, and they were accurate and as reliable as a baseball bat. Fed anything
that I could throw at'em, and never missed a beat. The 13-round
double stack magazines are around, but a little pricey. Recoil in the
M-84 is such that you can pull the trigger as fast as your finger will move,
and keep the whole magazine in the 8-ring of a B-27 at 20 feet
with just a little practice. If I were in the market for a .380, and
size wasn't an issue, the M-84 would be my hands-down pick.
They're comparable in size to a Colt Officer's/Defender, but lighter
and much more svelte.

I have to agree with Don...Underestimating the .380 is a mistake.

Gonna try to buy mine back from my step-pappy. See what ya'll
started!:uhoh:

Tuner

[CZ52GUY]

I have a Browning 380 BDA. It allows my wife to use a better ccartridge than a 22LR. Health issues do not allow her to use a 9MM anymore. The Browning BDA reduces the reciol of the smaller 380's.

I'm in an identical situation...as well as my buddy has a Mak' in .380 that eats .380 ACP.

CZ52'

[Mannlicher]

Wish I could help. The only .380 I have owned was a Colt Pony Pocketlite. I carried it for a few years, but every single time that I felt there was even the remotest chance I would need it, I had this sinking feeling in the pit of my tum, that it was just not enough gun. I traded it in for a Browning HP .40, and have never regretted it.

[Alan Fud]

Posted by Byron: I have a Browning 380 BDA. It allows my wife to use a better ccartridge than a 22LR. Health issues do not allow her to use a 9MM anymore. The Browning BDA reduces the reciol of the smaller 380's. Byron You took the words right out of my mouth. While my wife doesn't have any health issues that affect her shooting ability, she is recoil sensative and a hit with a .380ACP is more effective than a miss with a 9mm ...
http://fud-files.netfirms.com/image/private/guns/f77.jpg
... Plus, fourteen rounds of .380ACP (above right next to a compact 9mm in about the same size) is nothing to laugh at either.

[partagas]

Hi, I've been lurking for a long time and much appreciate the knowledge I've picked up from this site.

I finally got my hands on a P-3AT a week ago (#42xx). I was in a local gun shop with my 18 yr old son who has talked me into looking at AR-15's and mentioned to the owner that I was still on his waiting list for the P-3AT's when he got some. He said You mean like this one here? and he pulled a small box from a larger one on the floor behind the counter. It was the only P-3AT from a shipment of otherwise only P-32s. I asked where I was on his list and he said you're here and they're not. $269 and it was mine. BTW I've been carrying a P-32 (#90xxx) for 6 months and have put about 400 rounds of S&B and Win white box through it with only a few light strike-no fires with the S&B. After some of the sad stories here and at KTOG I consider myself fortunate.

I took both the P-32 and new P-3AT to the range last Thursday and shot 50 UMC 32s from the P-32 (the first time I've tried these; lots of flash, even on a sunny day) and 25 win white box 32s. They all fed perfectly.

Of course I was much anticipating the P-3AT and it did not disappoint. I shot 50 win white box fmjs without any problem; the gun was straight from the box with no special prep. I then switched to S&B and shot 75 of those. The only problem from the entire session was one no-fire on the second shot but the mag had popped out 1/4 inch so no round chambered after the first shot. My fault for not inserting the mag all the way to latch fully.

The 3AT was noticably more powerfull than the 32, both in recoil and hitting power (I was shooting at metal knockdown targets mostly. I've got a scab on my right thumb knuckle from shooting so many rounds from these small guns in one session. My feeling is that it came from the 3AT mostly. I was impressed by the accuracy of both these guns. I was able to consistantly hit 3" to 5" metal targets from 7, 10, and then 15 yards.

After reading dozens if not hundreds of posts concerning .380 vs. .32, while my observations are only from shooting the two guns side by side, I'll be carrying the .380 once I get a good pocket holster for it. Seeing the way those steel targets danced from the .380 vs. te .32 is all I need. My range has some round 4" and 5" free-standing steel targets you can set on a table. With the attached base each one is pretty hefty. The .32s moved them a few inches or turn them but the .380s flipped them over pretty well and knocked a few off the table. That's not real scientific but it'll do for me.

That being said, I'm a big fan of these little guns since I've had the .32 in my front shorts or jeans pocket all last spring and summer and hardly knew it was there although I definately felt naked when it wasn't. And of course no one else would have a clue. As an aside, most people get a kick out of carrying at walmart for the first time which I can whole heartedly relate to, but my favorite is carrying in our local Wild Oats (a large health food supermarket) here in The Peoples Republic of Portland Maine when I go there 3 or 4 times a week to get a take out lunch (some of the best sandwiches and the best take out sushi in town). Not alot of carrying goin on in there.

Give the Kel-tecs a try if they fit your need; they seem to have got most of the early bugs out.

[rde]

Some people don't make their selection based strictly on the smallest package available in the most "powerful" caliber given that size. Other criteria and priorities come into play that are different than that.

Me personally, I am quite comfortable carrying my commercial Bulgarian (Arsenal) Makarov chambered in 380 that I bought new a few years back. All I could afford at the time and it turned out so well that even though I now have other more "main stream" hand guns it is what I continue to CCW. Rugged, reliable, very accurate, light recoil, and easy to CCW. Think a lot of people underestimate the 380. 9mm and larger are more efficient to be sure but IMHO the 380 can and will get the job done as long as (1)-it is reliable..(2)-the "shooter" can quickly put rounds on target accurately with consistency under a wide variety of conditions, positions, etc. Am constantly amazed at how badly I see the average person shooting at the range with their latest greatest wonder (insert make, model, caliber here). Including a lot of law enforcement. This alone makes me pretty comfortable carrying my "underpowered" 380. (Note: I said average..there are some good shooters out there to be sure).

[1911Tuner]

The BDA and the Beretta M-84 are essentially the same pistol, with a couple of differences. The BDA has a slide-mounted hammer drop safety,
and the M-84's is frame-mounted. My nod goes to the 84 for
the simple reason that the safety works the same as on a 1911.
Other than that, the differences are a non-issue other than lowering
the hammer on a hot chamber with the 84.

On the lack of stopping power of the .380...Used at the very short to powder-burning distances that the gun will most likely be used, a
small female can put rounds into an attacker so fast that he'll either
turn her loose or drop dead before she can empty the magazine.
My wife...5-3 and 115 pounds can empty an 84 into a B-27 in about
3 seconds with all but one round hitting somewhere within the 8-ring.
Distance was 3 feet and firing was done one-handed, DA first shot.
The flyer went into the groin area. Equals getting hit with a load and
a half of 000 Buckshot amidships...Any takers? (You should see what
14 rounds of hardball will do to a gelatin block at 5 feet.)

Good pistols. Caliber...No powerhouse, but not too shabby if the
ranges are short. Not one that a soldier or a cop would choose,
but for purely last-ditch, close range defensive purposes, up to
the task.

Just my nickel's worth...(Inflation)
Tuner

[PCRCCW]

M. Irwin says

"Unfortunately the best, bar none, pistol for .380 is no longer in production, and it's tough to find good copies...

The Remington 51..."


1927 was a bad year in that regard..............................:mad:

Shoot well.

[eldomatic]

1911Tuner said,
"The BDA has a slide-mounted hammer drop safety,
and the M-84's is frame-mounted. My nod goes to the 84 for
the simple reason that the safety works the same as on a 1911."

Good point, 1911Tuner.

I vote for the BDA380 for a reason similar to yours: the BDA 380's slide mounting safety/decocker works the same as the 92FS series and 8000 Cougar series Berettas. ;)

Same manual of arms as my other Beretta, so the BDA 380 makes a great back-up or substitute to the larger Berettas.

I'd also like to remind folks that the Browning BDA is manufactured by Beretta in Italy, is stamped with the PB logo and it accepts Beretta 84 10 and 13 round mags, so for all practical purposes the BDA 380 IS a Beretta.

[Futo Inu]

The Kel Tec P3AT! Fits in the pocket without screaming GUN (especially jeans pockets)!! Unlike ANY, and I do mean ANY 9x19 or 9x18. Other than that, I cannot justify its existence personally. But the KT is enough of a reason, to be sure.

[Keith]

I'm with you, Futo!

The .380 in a large package will certainly fill a niche for a few disabled or extremely recoil-sensitive individuals, but for most of us it's all about dropping a gun in the jeans pocket.
The .380 is simply the largest caliber that will fill the bill, and therefore the best choice for many people.

I honestly don't see any point to larger framed .380's for healthy individuals. I own a PPK clone and have had many other like sized pieces pass through my hands over the years. They're fun, but they don't make any sense for carry. If you want something that large, go with a nine or a .38 snubby.

Keith

[W Turner]

One thing that has not been mentioned in this debate (at least among the Kel-Tec) crowd is rimlock.

I had pretty much dismissed this until a few weeks ago. I had taken my wifes KT P32 out of her purse :banghead: , for cleaning. When I attempted to clear it for cleaning and lubrication. It extracted the chambered round fine, but the top round in the mag was locked up so completely that I had to drop the magazine and disassemble the mag in order to unload it. It would have been impossible to clear this malfunction any other way and would led to a level 4 malfunction if this gun had ever needed to be used. This is the main reason I purchased the P3AT as soon as I did. The "rimless" .380 is not susceptible to rimlock like the semi-rimmed .32 is. Any ballistic (which I do believe to be considerable) advantage is a bonus.

I realize that the KTs are the only pistols with this history, but they are tops in their niche to my way of thinking.....

NAA- if I want to carry something this heavy in my pocket, I will go with my SW 642 and 5 shots of .38 spl. If they would ever develop an alloy framed version at the price point of the 642, I am there with money in hand.

J frame in .38- not everyone has the hand strength to pull these triggers reliably and accurately, or to control the recoil well even with the lightest loads

Personally I feel that the best compromise would be a SW alloy framed revolver in .32 HR mag, but with a better ammo selection. I know that Taurus makes a LW snub in .32 HR, but the SW's are a little more compact and easier to find 'smiths for.

FWIW- I realize that rimlock is only an issue for hp ammunition in the P32. WIth fmj, I have recorded no malfs of any kind.
Mino

[Caliburn]

What's the general opinion on how best to feed a short bbl .380? Some favor FMJ but Keith's firearmstactical link only listed JHPs. I would think FMJ for penetration would be the way to go, since a shallow wound isn't likely to stop anyone no matter what it has expanded to.

[Keith]

That .380 data is showing 6 1/2 to 7 1/2 inches with various hollowpoints with good expansion. That's deep enough, I think, considering that they are making a big hole.
When they don't expand they are going something like eleven inches which in effect, is a FMJ.

I think you get the best of both worlds with a .380 hollowpoint. If it expands, great! If it doesn't, well not too bad either.

Keith

[Blackhawk]

Sounds good, Keith, but there's a critical data component missing that has to be considered before drawing any conclusions. If the pistol in your pocket is a P-3AT whose barrel is very short, the test data for a longer barreled .380 can be very deceiving.

The shooting system you're carrying consisting of gun and ammo has to be tested to determine the ballistic data because barrel length becomes more critical the shorter they get.

IMO, the gelatin tests are more deceiving with the lower total energy of mouse guns with regard to JHP versus FMJ bullets.

Odds are that any bullet you fire in a SD situation is going to encounter bone before it gets to something vital. Expansion is great once that vital area has been penetrated, but it works against you before that point.

[Keith]

a critical data component missing that has to be considered before drawing any conclusions. If the pistol in your pocket is a P-3AT whose barrel is very short...

I don't know anything about the P-3AT. My Mustangs barrel is 2 3/4" and some of the .380 data is from 3" barrelled weapons. I'm not going to quibble about a 1/4".
And I'm not going to shoot an attacker just once. He's going to have multiple seven inch deep, half an inch wide holes (or eleven inch deep, .355 holes if it doesn't expand...). And I will continue to place those holes until he falls down or goes away.

In most cases, I don't think even the best .380 is going to expand. The gelatin (flawed or not) reveals that much. When fired through even denim, they plug up and fail to expand - but penetrate eleven inches (from a 3" barrel), which is plenty!

We're getting into the fall now anyways, so I've got my aluminum compact .45 back in service. The .380 can go back on the shelf until tee shirt and jeans weather returns.

Keith

[Caliburn]

The P3AT barrel is 2.75 inches. The ones the firearmstactical data are based on are 3", 3.25, and 4" and there don't seem to be great differences in the energy of the bullet (without more data analysis than I care to do) so barrel length doesn't matter. It looks like the hollow points won't expand in anything thicker than jello anyway so they probably are no worse for penetration than ball.

According to Remington's website the .380 loads (around 95 grains) average 190 foot pounds at the muzzle at 950 fps. The .32 auto is also around 950 fps but at 71 grains is only 129 foot pounds. The .380 looks like a better choice to me for a mouse gun since it seems to penetrate well enough with ball or plugged HP.

For comparison a 9 mm is roughly 200 fps faster and about twice the energy at the muzzle, but in a much bigger gun.

Does anyone know what the energy is for something to put those in perspective? Like what's the foot pounds of a softball pitch?

[Freightman]

Cause I at the time am dow it one hand (long story) and my regular carry gun is a snubby 45 Colt quite a hand full for a injured hand. I will go back to a real gun when I heal but as foor now I own a small 380 and it is far better than spit balls.

[Leaky Waders]

1) out of my pistols it holds the most rounds per magazine...therefore I'm not fumbling for extra magazines etc if I ever need it.

2) i'm usually using it for travelling...if my truck hits a deer...my .380 will put it out of its misery...of course, if my truck hits a deer - the damn thing will get a free ride in the back to a processor.

3) i can shoot my .380 well - actually i can shoot most of my pistols pretty well - but the .380 is the 'funnest' of them all - probably because of less reloading of magazines = less thumb soreness.

4) the pistol just fits my hand good and is a natural pointer. it's also small enough for the dash.

5) the pistol model i own is reknown for its reliability.

6) hmmm this is where the revolver debate ends...the sixth round versus more in the .380...

7) extra round.

8) extra round.

9) extra round.

10) extra round...keep counting bad guy...

11) extra round.

12) extra round.

13) extra round.

14) possibly extra round if it is loaded w/ a full mag...do you feel lucky?

my two cents,

LW

[Roadrash]

My Kel Tec .32 is just like my American Express.....Don't leave home without it.

I was considering getting the P3AT but I now thinking about picking up a PT-111 Titanium 9 mm, for the winter months and for a little more penetration.

[Blackhawk]

Caliburn wrote:...so barrel length doesn't matter.Wow! That's a GIANT leap to a conclusion, but it's totally non-sequitur.

All you need to do to see for yourself what happens when the barrel length is truly at the minimum is to cook off a securely held round aimed at a target like a bunch of wet newspapers. Give it some distance so the excess powder doesn't destroy your target.

On the other end of the spectrum, look at the data from a 9mm rifle and you'll see that the FPE is less than that from a shorter barrel. That's because the sweet spot for barrel length and any round is a function is when the expanding gas pressure falls to where the bullet is no longer being accelerated. If rifling is still ahead of the bullet, it will slow down.

That's also why a severely downloaded round (as in primer only -- no powder) is liable to leave the bullet stuck in the barrel.

[Gunner45]

Because I love my Colt Mustang Pockelite! I just grab it when I grab my car keys as I head out the door. I haven't come across a 9mm compact that I can hide in my front jeans pocket. I can hide my Mustang there.

And at 12.5 oz empty, you all most forget you have it with you. As far as the performance of the .380, well the Corbon 90 grainers and the Golden Saber 102's that we fired through two layers of denim covering a block of 10% balictic gel mushroomed perfectly.

Gunner45

[Kentucky Rifle]

I've got my Colt Mustang Pocketlite in a shark skin beltslide holster right now. I've replaced the recoil spring with a one-piece, one pound heavier Wolff. Plus, I've got a SM&A titanium guide rod installed instead of the stock black plastic rod. Unbeliveably light guide rod. The pistol is so light that I don't even have to use a gun belt. Just a wide belt. Nice. And, as always, stoked with RBCD Ammuniton. (It was my testing in this very Mustang that convinced me that RBCD ammunition was the way to go. I had to blow away a corned beef brisket, but it was worth it just to see what RBCD did. :) )

KR

[King]

As noted by a couple of others, I think the benefit of the .380 is related to the expectation that the firearms that they go into offer a level of concealabilty not generally found with a lot of the larger calibers including the 9mm. For me that's important on a day to day carry basis.

It also occurs to me also that the folks who frequent this forum are probably a different kind of animal than the average conceal carry licensee walking the street. From what I can tell, a lot of CHL's end up (after a time) leaving their hardware at home or in the glove box of their car because their carry gun is too large or too heavy or inconvenient to carry.

In many ways, a smaller .380 might fill the bill nicely. Underpowered? Maybe so. But, I'm pretty certain that I don't want to get hit by one and I'm pretty certain that they'll turn out the lights if it comes right down to it. A .380 in the hand beats a 1911 setting at home in the night stand.

Carry a .380? Think bullet placement.....

My humble opinion of course and is worth exactly what you paid for it.

[SirVette]

Accuracy
The fixed barrel blowback .380 design allows a very accurate pistol that is small & has enough power.

:cool:

[David4516]

Because .380 ACP (and 9mm Makarov, it's big brother) has several good points:

1: It fills the gap between .32 and 9mm Luger

2: Control. In compact and sub-compact pistols, the .380 is much more controlable

3: There are alot of AWSOME .380 and 9mm Mak pistols out there that are reliable and cheap.

4: Pistols in this caliber keep getting smaller and smaller, and as they do so the caliber will gain popularity.

[Gary A]

I don't quite understand why if the advent of small-frame, five shot .357s has not rendered the small-frame .38 snubby obsolete, why the advent of very small 9mm's would automatically obsolete quality and proven .380s. Personally, I would rather have a proven Sig P230/232 than either of the polymer/aluminum lower-priced small 9s that get a lot of press. It's simply a better handgun, IMO. The Glock 26 is very nice, although thick as a brick. The Kahr series are impressive but that is only one maker and I can't see one brand obsoleting a class. The steel Kahrs are heavy. The polymer Kahrs are still having problems reported from time to time on the web. Some don't like striker-fired weapons with light triggers. The Rohrbaugh looks to be a niche item, if it is ever seen. The Rami may never be imported. Steel Kahrs, Smith 39xx series, Sig 239s, all very nice pistols but larger than even largish .380s, at least in weight, if not always in dimensions. I really like the small 9s but can certainly see instances where someone would choose the .380 based on those factors and on the perceived need and level of threat and whether the pistol was "enough gun" for its intended purpose. And, like has been said, the same downsizing technology that has produced small 9s is now producing even smaller .380s. Lastly, some pistols are so well executed that they are worth owning whether or not they are used for defense, e.g. the CZ83, the Sig P232. I even have an Interarms PPK that has been flawless and very accurate from day one. The "obsolete" SAA Colt .45 is as popular today as ever, maybe more so. Anyway, as long as people buy them, they will be built and sold. The marketplace decides in the end. These discussions are really kinda funny. IF someone decides to carry a weapon and they do it "right", no one is ever going to know a) if they are carrying or b) what they are carrying, so the discussion is moot.

[Keith]

I don't quite understand why if the advent of small-frame, five shot .357s has not rendered the small-frame .38 snubby obsolete, why the advent of very small 9mm's would automatically obsolete quality and proven .380s.

There really is a point where power becomes a drawback in small guns.

When you get down to a 2 or 3 inch barrel, how much of that powder is turning into bullet velocity, and how much is turning into muzzle flash? How much extra velocity do you really get and is that extra power worth the loss of night vision at a critical moment?

Bullet placement really does trump caliber. When you shoot a gun at night (you do realize that most self defense shootings happen at night, right?) you don't want an enormous muzzle flash blinding you so your second, third and fourth shots go astray.

If you are going to carry a powerful cartridge in a small handgun, you had better shoot that gun in the dark and see if you can deal with that - see if you can still see your target after the first shot...

We had this discussion on another thread a while back and some people claimed they had shot their miniature hand cannons in the dark and had no loss of night vision. I had my doubts about that and even challenged people to try it and post their results. I had no takers.
People prefer to practice their self defense shooting in wholly unrealistic settings - on well lit ranges with their buddies...

It's all a little silly! If you want to know how your gun/cartridge combo is going to work, you had better try it in the dark under the conditions you'll need it. It may be that with your particular light sensitivity, a straight armed stance (gun well away from face) and a particular load, your .357 snubbie (or whatever) will work out just fine for you in the dark.

But it's better to find out in advance...

Keith

[jercamp45]

1. Some people cannot have larger rounds.
2. some people cannot handle larger rounds
3. gun makers keep making guns in it
4. ammo makers keep making rounds for it
5. people keep buying it
6. gun makers keep making smaller guns for it

The aforementioned pocket light Mustang is a sweet .380. And hides better than my airweight Jay frame, which is a .38 by the way. I would rather have the controlability on my second round than deal with the extra recoil of the magnum round.

The Beretta and Sig .380 are nice too, though a bit large. But we all have to make our choice as to what we will rely on. The 380 is not my choice, I have only owned a few(AMT Backup 20 years ago, steel Mustang, if Colt introduced the Pocketlite 'Stang, I would add one for special purpose duty) but decided the Jay way the way to go for deep conceal/BUG for me.
My LW Officer's in a Milt Sparks VM2H is most comforting and can be (and is) carried 95 percent of the time. Anything less is for extreme concealment/BUG.
Jercamp45

[Haycreek]

MAKE MINE A CZ 83
A fixed barrel, 3.8 inches long. As accurate as a good 1911, but light recoil and the fastest triple tap [on the bullseye] of any of my center fire pistolas.
Indeed a very good handgun.

[M58]

Now that I have a Kahr PM9, I see no reason to own a .380!

[w00dg0blin]

The reason I believe the 380 will stick around is--shot placement.

A 380 to the brain pan will have the same results of a 45, 9mm, or even a 22 for that matter.

Shot placement. It doesn't get any easier than that.

[SirVette]

M58

Many of us see no reason to support the moonies & their false "teaching" in any way!
This is a 380 topic.

[Marko Kloos]

If you only buy guns from people whose theology you don't consider "false", then your choices will be mighty limited. I know I wouldn't be able to do business with any gun shop in this town if I had a policy of not supporting Christians.

Personally, I don't care whether they worship the Great Pumpkin, as long as they make a decent product for a decent price.

But hey, that's your prerogative. it's a free country. Just check and make sure that the gun brands in your safe are made by theologically compatible folks...

[M58]

Christians are Pagans.
And thought police.:neener:


(P.S. Marko was too nice.)
(But I really like his Sig line.)
Signed: J.A.P.

[Mad Man]

Many of us see no reason to support the moonies & their fase "teaching" in any way!


Should those of us who aren't Mormon give up our 1911s and Hi-Powers?

[tiberius]

Many of us see no reason to support the moonies & their fase "teaching" in any way!
Gimme a friggin break. :barf:

Who was it that said something like "Whoever thinks they are on the only path up the mountian, isn't even on the mountain?"..... Seiously, what's the real quote here?

[AZ Heat]

What does being Mormon have to do with anything? Did I miss something? That flew right over my head.

[tiberius]

JMB was a member of the Church of Latter Day Saints

[AZ Heat]

I'm LDS (Mormon) too but still don't get it. Oh well.
Back to the subject... I've also heard that the Winchester silvertip .32ACP is very comparable to .380ACP. Is there truth to this or is it bull? I carry the Seecamp as my backup and when I can't carry my .45 1911. I know they've been talking about coming out with a Seecamp .380 for years but who knows.

[tiberius]

but still don't get it. Oh well.

I don't get why anyone would be concerned about this either, I was just clueing you in on the reference.

[mini14jac]

John Moses Browning, designer of many great guns was a Mormon.
I love his guns, but I go to a different church.
I still go to the movies, but I don't agree with the politics, (or spiritual beliefs) of most of the people making them.
I drive a Japanese truck, but don't agree with a lot of things that make up Japanese society.

SirVette,
If you can get by with only supporting the people who agee with you in 100% of everything that's great.
It's not very practical for most of us.
And I believe the topic is, "Why is the .380 still around when there are other choices, and other calibers that may do the job."

To get back on topic:
I love my Kahr PM9. I think it is very close to a Colt .380 in size, but the aluminum guns are lighter.
It is smaller and lighter than many .380 guns.
I carry in a front pocket, and in most pants, the Kahr works great.
When, for whatever reason, the PM9 is too bulky, the Keltec .380 just disappears in the same pocket.

As far as shooting in the dark, my range closes at sundown, and most indoor ranges don't allow shooting with the lights off.
(It's not very safe.)
It's not easy or practical for most of us to practice like that.
But, the next time I'm in the woods after dark, I'll give it a try.

I've also heard that the Winchester silvertip .32ACP is very comparable to .380ACP. Is there truth to this or is it bull?

AZ Heat,
I think this comes from the M&S "One shot stop" data, but I think you have to take their stats with a grain of salt.
I do think the performance of the two is very close.
I chose to go with the .380 because of the bigger bullet.

Now that cooler weather is here, I really want to start carrying my S&W .45.
I do believe that bigger is better.

[New_comer]

Justify the .380's continued existence - please- I can only think of one thing: 'coz there's still a LOT of guns chambered in it. ;)

[Gary A]

There are now approximately 75 responses to this thread. That alone should be an indication of why the .380 continues to survive. There is an interest in the marketplace.