[KBintheSLC]

So I got to thinking... why is it that if you visit the revolver thread, most there will agree that a 5-round J-frame in .38 is "good enough" for CCW/self defense, but if you visit the autoloader section, many folks scoff at a 9mm loaded with double the amount of rounds?

Does a revolver somehow trick our minds into feeling like its more substantial? How is it that a J-frame loaded with less rounds of a weaker caliber could feel fine to one group of people, while the other group says things like "why would you use a 9mm when you can get a real caliber, like a .45"?

[Ed Ames]

It's bias in the people talking. Those biased towards "many round responses" go to the semi and scoff at the revolver. Those who think that's "spray and pray" scoff at the hi-cap semis and go to the revolver. Rarely do you get the same person saying they need 19+1 9mm and 5 .38sp...and those folks usually mean they need both.

[danfree]

Shot placement can do the job with one round, be it with a .38 or 9mm. Or even a .380 generally. Sometimes more is better, if you can't hit what you are aiming at or if you have multiple targets. Bigger isn't always better if one is not practiced with the firearm they intend to carry. If someone has problems with handling a .45, then a smaller caliber would be more beneficial to them. I suspect a lot of folks who claim to carry nothing less than a .45 may not even spend the time or money actually training with that firearm. I know some guys who can't hit a target with their .45 without careful aim from 20 feet. That is just a lack of practice and potentially dangerous.

[ijosef]

I have to have 5 rounds of .500 S&W Magnum or nothing!!! :D
No offense to the guy who posted his Smith & Wesson 500 XVR snubbie carry piece, which is way cool.

I wouldn't worry about it. People should carry whatever they're comfortable with. The old adages are true... any gun is better than no gun. A larger round with the appropriate ballistics generally has a better likelihood of stopping the threat. A couple of hits center mass with a .22LR is a lot better than a couple of misses with a .357 magnum.

Don't get caught up in the caliber/revolver/automatic debate. Carry whatever you have trained with and feel will serve you reliably if that fateful day ever comes.

[Jim K]

Why would the .38 Special be considered the "weaker" caliber compared to 9mmP?

Given the same bullet weight and velocity, there is no difference, but any round to be fired in a revolver can be a lot more flexible in bullet type, weight and velocity.

Jim

[Madcap_Magician]

Because the .38 Special doesn't reach the same velocities. Even out of a 2" barrel for each, a good 9mm is >200 fps faster than a good .38 Special.

[rcmodel]

While you are asking questions.

Why would someone with a 17 round 9mm want an extended mag that holds 25??

Now to me, that right there is a real puzzlement! :confused:

Course I always felt well armed with a six-gun, and a 7+1 round .45 ACP was a luxury.

rc

[hirundo82]

Why would someone with a 17 round 9mm want an extended mag that holds 25??

Now to me, that right there is a real puzzlement!
1: It's fun at the range
2: Practical for when the zombies rise
3: Because I can, and because Sarah Brady doesn't want me to have it

[KBintheSLC]

Why would the .38 Special be considered the "weaker" caliber compared to 9mmP?

Given the same bullet weight and velocity, there is no difference, but any round to be fired in a revolver can be a lot more flexible in bullet type, weight and velocity.

Jim

A quick look at the numbers indicates a slight advantage towards the 9mm... whether this matters in real life is arguable. The bullet weight may be the same, but the velocity is what makes the slight difference.

.38 - 125g +P JHP might do between 850-950 fps on average (J-Frame Snub)
9mm - 124g +P JHP is more like 1100-1200 fps on average (Glock 26)

9mm generally delivers between 75-125 extra ft/lbs of energy compared to a .38. The 9mm being a more modern caliber, is a higher pressure round. Even in an equally short barrel, it will drive a bullet of equal weight faster than a .38.

[doc540]

Doesn't matter to me since my superior coolness and between-the-eyes accuracy will prevail regardless whether I'm shooting a 9mm or .22 BBcap.

Well, that's before I wake up from the dream.

[oneounceload]

So I got to thinking... why is it that if you visit the revolver thread, most there will agree that a 5-round J-frame in .38 is "good enough" for CCW/self defense, but if you visit the autoloader section, many folks scoff at a 9mm loaded with double the amount of rounds?

Does a revolver somehow trick our minds into feeling like its more substantial? How is it that a J-frame loaded with less rounds of a weaker caliber could feel fine to one group of people, while the other group says things like "why would you use a 9mm when you can get a real caliber, like a .45"?

because most folks who favor hi-cap 9mm's can't hit anything with their first 15 shots?
because you can get a snubbie in 9mm if you want?
because a snubbie in the hands of someone who can shoot is better than a hi-cap in the hands of someone who can't?

hmmmmmmmmmm

[armoredman]

I like carrying my 14 round P01 with two spare mags. I will also feel comfortable with my inheritance Smith Model 10 with two speedloaders.
Go figure. :)

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/P01andmodel10.jpg

[The Lone Haranguer]

I think the 9mm Luger is more efficient in a three-inch pistol barrel than .38 Spl. in a two-inch revolver barrel. (Remember that the pistol barrel includes the chamber, so the length of actual rifled bore is roughly equal.) I've seen published chronograph data showing 115-gr. 9mm moving at ~1050 fps and 124-gr. at ~990-1000 fps. The .38 Spl is much slower with the same bullet weights, again in the two-inch barrel. It can throw heavier bullets, but at the cost of recoil and blast. I much prefer my Kahr PM9 over any lightweight .38 snubnose revolver I've tried.

[ants]

...The phenomenon of internet gun debates conducted among participants who know little more than what they read on the internet.

I don't mean this is an insult to this thread or any of you. It is one response to the original post, which asked why folks praise one cartridge but bash another. So many of these contributors don't really know the difference. Very few, if any of us, have actually used a handgun to hunt medium size game. And fortunately very, very, very few of us will shoot another person (and I hope never).

So the knowledge we share with one another must be second hand by nature, culled mostly from gun magazines and the internet and the loud idiots talking at gun stores. I consider all of these sources to be difficult when it comes to separating truth from fiction.

[lions]

So I got to thinking... why is it that if you visit the revolver thread, most there will agree that a 5-round J-frame in .38 is "good enough" for CCW/self defense, but if you visit the autoloader section, many folks scoff at a 9mm loaded with double the amount of rounds?

I think the problem is that the 9mm is scoffed at from a "knockdown power" point of view and magazine capacity is often left out of the equation. The .38's capacity isn't scoffed at because 5 vs 6 in a revolver isn't nearly as drastic a change as looking at 5 in a j-frame vs 10 (or more) in an auto.

[Cosmoline]

Because there is no 9x19 like this:

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Handgun%20For%20Home%20Protection_files/image004.jpg

The Remington LSWCHP is the aurea mediocritas of handgun rounds.

[DougDubya]

The general idea among the people who scoff at the 9mm is because its bullets are "too light."

Generally, .38 Specials fired 158 grain rounds which had extra mass and little or no jacketing to retard deformation or fragmentation on impact. 115 grain ball (and to some minds at the time, JHP) didn't deform and didn't carry the mass and momentum that the 158 - 200 grain .38's did. These were generally .45 guys who loved their big, heavy 230 grain bullets, and didn't feel comfortable with "half weight" rounds which in their minds equated to "half the power."

[doberman]

I've often wondered the same.

9mm= .355cal
38spl= .357cal

Does a +P designation make a difference? I dunno. I've found some makes of ammo without the +P are pushing the same as others that do. Ahhh marketing.:D

Barrel length a factor, sure.

But in the grand scheme of personal self defense, I guess it all comes down to what you like and what is practical for the task.

IMO they are about as equal as it can get. (flame suit on)

I mean we're not talking 9mm vs .45ACP. :D *runs away*:D

[BHP FAN]

Well,I have had a 5 shot S&W snubby,and still have a .45 acp revolver.A buddy of mine has a .357 and a .44 mag auto loaders.go figure.

[Fiv3r]

I frequently carry and shoot both:)
For me, it comes down to situation and what I feel like that day. If I want to pack light, and I don't feel like I need a huge amount of firepower I slip my .38 snubbie in my jacket pocket. If I am wearing something that won't cause it to print, I feel I might need the firepower, and want to deal with the extra weight I slip on my 17 round 9mm.

I can hit what I'm aiming at with either.

Generally, I leave the 5 shot snubbie loaded and at reach for my wife when I'm out of town. She's not a huge gun person, so having something that is "point and click" is a benefit for her. She also knows how to operate the shotgun should she need to. I find the semi auto 9mm has too many steps for her to handle in a fight or flight situation. Even with a round chambered, I would still keep the external safety on. So she'd have to get the gun, flip the safety, and fire while making sure she doesn't limp wrist and jam the gun or get bit by the slide.

For HD I obviously would go for my shotgun, but I certainly would not feel under gunned with a hi cap 9mm if I heard a bump in the night. The .38 is OK, but my 9mm tends to hit a little more accurately with its longer barrel.

[Revolver Ocelot]

ballistically speaking 9mm preforms better, however I think either one would be more the sufficient for self defense, I'd chose whatever you find yourself more comortable with

[MCgunner]

I carry either, or, depending on my mood. I like revolvers, but to me, a 9x19 in a revolver is goofy. It has to be beefy to put up with the pressure. The .38 works at lower pressures, can be had in affordable alloy guns that carry better. Why get a 25 ounce 9x19 revolver when I can get a 14 ounce 9x19 pocket auto?

The 9x19 is clearly ballistically superior to .38. My +P load puts up 410 ft lbs at the muzzle with a 115 grain JHP, this from a 3" barreled gun that's smaller than a J frame and with much less muzzle flash/bang than a .357 magnum snubby. That's pretty awesome way I see it, that much power and firepower carried in a pocket. The thing is amazingly accurate, too, 3.5" groups at 25 yards from the bench and I shoot it well.

I own 3 .38 revolvers and often carry the little Taurus UL. Carrying it today, in fact. .38 is plenty for self defense and I like revolvers a lot.

[Marlin 45 carbine]

you're gonna have arguments until blue in the face but fact is either one with good placement is a stopper. I ccw'ed a 5 shot .38 snub for years until I went to a Makarov for most times and a Berreta .32acp when lightly dressed.
I've shot all of 'em enough to know that I don't want to get hit with any of 'em.

[KBintheSLC]

I enjoyed all of the comments so far. I do own and carry both a small .38 revolver, and a sub-compact 9mm auto. So for me it is really a matter of preference based on attire, and location/activity. I personally believe that either will do, but the main issue on this thread is not to argue which is better. It is more to assess the phenomenon of why in the revolver world the .38 is good enough, but in the auto world many feel that the 9mm is lacking.

It is really a mystery to me.

[Guillermo]

Interestingly enough most folks I know think that 9mm is enough but 38 isn't.

Personally I carry both, a Kahr PM9 and a Colt Detective Special.

Although the energy levels are slightly less out of the 38 I am more comfortable carrying it as I shoot it much better.

The most powerful gun that you can shoot well and have with you is the best.

[RevolvingGarbage]

The first time I ever fired a handgun was when I was 15. I started with a full sized SA 1911 .45ACP. It was great, lots of push, very accurate, no snappyness. Next I went to a S&W 4 inch .357 revolver, shooting .38 special S&B JSP's. It certainly felt less "powerful" than the .45. but still wast snappy. The next gun I shot was a Springfield XD in 9mm. I did good with it, but from the moment I felt those tiny bullets in my hand as I was loading the magazine, to the last unpleasantly snappy shot out of the gun, I was certain in my mind that the power scale went:
#1 .45ACP
#2 .38 special
#3 9mm

I know better now, but it seems to me that the impression of firing the different guns in different calibers, and seeing and handling the rounds themselves gave me the idea that 9mm = weak.

[RoostRider]

You will find some people who think anything is lacking... That being understood... everything is lacking, in some way or another...

I have carried many kinds of handguns for many years.... I did what most do.... started out big (S&W 686 .357 mag.) and worked my way down (snubbie 38)... lol...

I think my logic went like this....

If I'm going to carry, I should carry something really powerful.... why not?

Darn this thing is big, heavy and cumbersome....

Hmmmm, I can't conceal that thing today... I'll just go unarmed... (repeat often)

There must be something better to carry....

Hey, here's a much lighter, much smaller 9mm with TONS of ammo in it.... that should be as good...

Darn this thing is big, heavy and cumbersome....

I can't conceal that thing today... I guess I'll just go unarmed (repeat less often)

There must be something better....

This little .38 should do the trick....

Darn this thing is big, heavy and... you get the idea.... lol

I know I'm making compromises when I choose a 5 shot .38 snubbie to put in my belt... but I am also making compromises when I choose to lug around a Stainless 686... in my way of thinking, I make bigger and more substantial compromises with the 686, less so with the 9mm, and even less so with the .38...

The thing is, I actually don't mind carrying the .38 most of the time... most times that I don't have it on me, it's because I didn't realize I forgot to put it on (not very often, but it has happened)... I actually do mind carrying a high cap auto pretty often (I always know it's there)... I really mind being saddled down with a brick on my side and I can't even take off my overshirt for fear of someone saying "WHAT THE HELL IS THAT FOR??!!??"

The truth is that you have to play the game of diminishing returns....

In civilian life, the odds of needing a gun at all are slim, but have occurred in my life and the lives of many.

The odds of needing a really BIG gun, or one that holds large amounts of ammo are drastically slimmer... as in, I don't know anyone who has ever needed that.... ever...

You gotta make some compromises, and only you can decide what they should be... cause you are the one who has to live with them....

[zt77]

9mm is not "more modern" than .38 special.
I don't understand how this can be a debate at all.
9mm pressures are much higher than .38 special.
.38 special can be just about as fast as 9mm with similar weights and still be able to use heavier weights. I know I have killed small deer with both. They were dead with both cartridges and they still are today.
what's to fuss about? it's like saying ".308 vs 30-06"
revolver vs auto is personal preference.

as to the op...I've often wondered that myself. I figure those that like autos take advantage of their capabilities and get bigger/more effective bullets. with revolvers that kind of means more bulk. I understand more can be better. and bigger is certainly better. but I like revolvers and I like .38's. 5 is good and .38 lswchp is good.

[ArchAngelCD]

Why is the 9mm assumed to be "better" just because it usually delivers more velocity. Velocity isn't everything and as a matter of fact, the added velocity is usually what many complain about with the 9mm. that's where it gets it's bad rep of over-penetration. Most people would not argue the .45 auto is a great man-stopper yet the velocity generated by a .45 Auto is often less than that of the .38 Special yet no one says the .45 Auto is a bad SD round.

The .38 Special has been around for a very long time and will continue to be around for a long time to come. Why? Because it works... I would choose the .38 Special over a 9mm every time. If I want more velocity I'll carry a .357 Magnum. (which is the more modern .38 Special)

[zt77]

having been shot with a .45 acp in the pelvic bone, I will be the first to argue it's ball loading is a poor "man stopper" as well as whatever "knockdown power" it has. it simply went straight through, didn't even spin me around like some people seem to think it does. heck, the hole wasn't even .45" big.....that is my take on all pistol rounds, they are only effective, and they are all just about equal terminal performance wise (though bigger is more reliably effective), with high quality hollow points going at whatever speed the particular bullet was designed to go.

[KBintheSLC]

the added velocity is usually what many complain about with the 9mm. that's where it gets it's bad rep of over-penetration.

I think that this notion came from the use of FMJ or antique JHP designs which suffered from gross overpenetration. Generally speaking, with modern expanding ammo, more velocity does not equate more penetration. Actually, if you compared two JHP bullets of the same weight, one moving at 900 fps, the other at 1100 fps, the faster bullet would penetrate less than the slower one. The reason is that the faster bullet will expand faster and more violently than the slow one. Its sectional density and friction will increase faster, therefore slowing the bullet faster.

I would not be surprised if my .38 penetrated a bit deeper than my 9mm using expanding ammo.

[Nicodemus38]

its easier to get ammunition in 38spcl that performs at lower recoil levels then you can with a 9mm. the whole semi auto platform is designed to operate at very particular pressure/recoil levels. to little and its a single shot.

[ArchAngelCD]

KBintheSLC,
I agree with your post. Just as the 9mm has gotten a bad rep because of ball ammo and older style bullets so did the .38 Special because of poor bullet design of older ammo. With the newly designed bullets the .38 Special will reliably expand and penetrate well even at the "lower" velocities associated with a short barrel revolver. The 9mm has also benefited from modern designed bullets as does most handgun calibers.

[Deanimator]

I'm no fan of light, fast handgun bullets for self-defense, so the 9x19mm has no advantage over the .38 Special for me, apart from greater ammunition capacity of 9mm handguns.

I carry both interchangeably, 158gr. LSWC-HPs in the .38/.357s and 147gr. JHP in the 9mms.

[Pilot]

9mm is not "more modern" than .38 special.


Yes it is. .38 Spl was a BLACK POWDER cartridge. That's why the case size/volume is so compatively large. 9MM was NEVER a black powder cartridge.

I am comfortable with both cartridges, but bottom line 9MM is ballistically superior.

[BushyGuy]

the .38 ,.357 and the .44 mag are obsolete, they are no match for a gang of looters in a disaster , they are normally hunting handguns, in a SHTF scenario i would choose a 9mm due to accuracy and more bullet capacity.

Bullet capacity is very important cuz its very easy to miss a moving threat or a threat that is shooting back. i am always strapped with a high capacity 9mm, i aint worried about shot placement i dont have that problem i am worried about shooting thru barriers the threat is hiding behind then shot placement or more knockdown power.

[KBintheSLC]

With the newly designed bullets the .38 Special will reliably expand and penetrate well even at the "lower" velocities associated with a short barrel revolver. The 9mm has also benefited from modern designed bullets as does most handgun calibers.

I agree... modern ammo has done wonders for both cartridges. Though I gotta admit, I have a thing for a good old fashioned 158g soft cast LSWCHP.

9mm is not "more modern" than .38 special.
I don't understand how this can be a debate at all.

Well... you are sort of right. The 9mm and the 38 were developed within about a year of each other... turn of the century 1901-02. However, the 38 was designed around the antiquated black powder propellant and revolver designs that were already well established at the time, where the 9mm was made for smokeless powder and the newfangled autoloading pistols.

That being said... I'll take one of each.

[NMGonzo]

Sleepy bedside = revolver

Daytime = both!

[1911Tuner]

the .38 Special doesn't reach the same velocities. Even out of a 2" barrel for each, a good 9mm is >200 fps faster than a good .38 Special.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why all this obsession over bullet speed. I know a few who take it to extremes and get in a knot over 50 fps. FIFTY FEET PER SECOND.
Hell...There's half that much variation between rounds in the same lot.

As to that...I haven't seen a 9mm yet that'll launch a 160 grain bullet at 800 fps. A 2-inch .38 Special revolver will do that with the 158 grain +P SWCHP.

[jfh]

When the 147-gr. 9mmP rounds first came out, I started diddlying with heavier bullets in the 9mmP cases in reloading. I chrono'd them--and, as 1911Tuner points out, none of them would run as fast a well-loaded 38 Spl with a 158 gr. bullet. (IIRC, I was even down to compressed loads of 231 with the 38 Super bullets:eek:) I did quit this foolishness, of course, and I quit reloading 9mmP because the case size / dexterity issues drove me nuts.

At the other extreme, I just built some 125-gr. LTC -10% cowboy loads for new shoot acclimation--and the powder amount (4.1 gr.) in that case was equally silly--but they did shoot reliably, at about 575 fps from a 2" barrel.

AFAICT, poster #2 has it right--it is poster bias. I also have parsed my carry needs a bit, and I now am satisfied with the notion that if I can't get the defense done with five, or use it to get to safety, I am in deeper than I can get out, and 15+1, or whatever, ain't gonna do it for me.

Of course, about the most dangerous location I am in are Target parking lots in Suburbia, these days, and I am not in bars....

Jim H.

[Cosmoline]

.38 Spl was a BLACK POWDER cartridge.

Sort of. Since it came out during the transitional period of the late 1890's, it was introduced with black but quickly switched to smokeless. Unlike, say, a .45 Colt, .44-40, .45-70, etc. etc., it is not a cartridge with a dual black/smokeless history, other than the very earliest production. It *can* be loaded with black, but it rose to prominence and was made famous as a SMOKELESS cartridge. That extra capacity can be used to turn it into, you guessed it, a .357 Magnum. Leaving the 9x19 in the dust behind it.

BOTH the .38 Special and the 9x19 were very modern, very revolutionary cartridges. The S&W Hand Ejector that was the special's introductory platform was absolutely cutting-edge technology, just like the Luger.

the .38 ,.357 and the .44 mag are obsolete, they are no match for a gang of looters in a disaster

Against a gang of looters shooting back? Neither is any handgun, sillywood movies aside. You'd need a rifle. Or even better a machine gun in a trench with supporting crew.

Bullet capacity is very important cuz its very easy to miss a moving threat or a threat that is shooting back.

As has been shown in countless encounters over the past few decades, having more rounds at your disposal doesn't improve accuracy. Many times cops and criminals alike have emptied high caps under your theory and hit nothing but blue sky. Plus the occasional bystander.

[The_Shootist]

As somebody noted above the difference is on paper pretty minimal in the ft/lbs or fps category. I'm just wondering if a well placed shot to a bad guy in self defense is going going to cause him to open his eyes wider and think "Gee its a good thing I got hit with a .38 at 800 fps vs a 9mm at 1100 fps."

[smoketheresfire]

The problem is your chances of making that "well placed hit" are not as high as you think. At the range I make well placed hits all day long. In a hyper adrenalized self defense scenario, your chances go way down. THAT is where capacity comes in. In my line of work (urban paramedic/firefighter) I see people shot on a semi regular basis, often by cops with lots of training. Can tell you that clips are emptied with 2-3 hits being a good result. But if you are cool enough to make your 5 shots count, more power to you. I'll take a auto all day long.

[jfh]

smoketheresfire: Your comments about hits by cops make sense--e.g., it's in 'the literature' that cops are typically not 'accurate'--and your explanation is likewise plausible.

However, the scenario for police--armed intervention in crime--is noticably different from civilian carry--self-defense shooting only, and only under limited circumstances. Thinking back over the various incidents, were there any of those that were strictly SD shooting? SD shooting not between two criminals, or whoever? Was there any difference in 'results' in those shootings?

Jim H.

[Cosmoline]

In a hyper adrenalized self defense scenario, your chances go way down. THAT is where capacity comes in.

But it's precisely the concept of capacity that leads to rapid fire and a lot of misses. With only six you have to actually aim, thus increasing your chance of a hit. Before the days of the highcap (which weren't that long ago), LEO's seemed quite capable of nailing bad guys with only a few rounds.

[ArchAngelCD]

In many cases high cap=spray&pray=many misses.
In many cases a good man with a revolver will hit what he shoots at.

If you really think you need a lot of ammo because even with "extensive" training it's hard to hit a moving target then you need to do different training. (IMO of course) Train well under pressure and you will fall back on your training.

[Deanimator]

the .38 ,.357 and the .44 mag are obsolete, they are no match for a gang of looters in a disaster
I own a Garand, an AR-15 and two sniper rifles for that kind of situation. ANY handgun (other than a Schnellfeuer or a Stechkin) would NOT be my first choice.

[smoketheresfire]

smoketheresfire: Your comments about hits by cops make sense--e.g., it's in 'the literature' that cops are typically not 'accurate'--and your explanation is likewise plausible.

However, the scenario for police--armed intervention in crime--is noticably different from civilian carry--self-defense shooting only, and only under limited circumstances. Thinking back over the various incidents, were there any of those that were strictly SD shooting? SD shooting not between two criminals, or whoever? Was there any difference in 'results' in those shootings?

Jim H.
Only been to one SD shooting and that was w a shotgun and wouldn't apply. Most have been criminal to criminal type and a few leo shootings sprinkled in. But as you say civilian carry is different, however it also depends on where you live. If you live in small town america, your chances of getting robbed by a group of thugs is much smaller than it would be if you lived in the city. Especially if you live in the part of the city that I do. Obviously you have to taylor your gun to your needs.

With regards to ArchAngels comments, I agree with you for the most part but most people who carry have never and will never train on anything other than a stationary piece of paper.

[KBintheSLC]

Funny how this whole thread inevitably evolved into a pretty standard .38 vs 9mm thread even though that isn't really what its about. Still hoping to address the anomaly in the OP.

[smoketheresfire]

Sorry dude. Just...so..hard...not...to...get...sucked in. Didn't mean to get off topic. I actually think your original question is a good one but I have no clue as to the answer.

[DeepSouth]

So I got to thinking... why is it that if you visit the revolver thread, most there will agree that a 5-round J-frame in .38 is "good enough" for CCW/self defense, but if you visit the autoloader section, many folks scoff at a 9mm loaded with double the amount of rounds?

Most people (including myself) seem to 'defend' what ever caliber they use/like the most. For instance I would tell you neither is sufficient, get a .45acp or a 44spl.

The most common CC Revolver is a 38spl, so when you go to the revolver forum most people there will tell you a 38 is fine, of course that is what you'll hear that is what most of them carry.

Then you go to the auto forum where there are "many folks" that wouldn't carry a 9mm because a .45 or a .40 is superior.(IMO) So they tell you what they think...IE a 9mm is entirely to small, regardless of round count.

[KBintheSLC]

I have to agree that folks tend to boast the caliber/gun that they carry. Imagine if you said "I carry a _____ in ___ caliber, but I really don't recommend it." It makes sense to carry what you like, and what meets your needs. I just thought it was interesting how very different the revolver folks are from the auto folks.

Gotta admit... I like em both for very different reasons.

[tprice]

I think it's an argument over what you can fit in the package and fire comfortably.

Most J-frame revolvers that can fire 357 are just as not capable of rapid-fire with accuracy with the full-house magnum load when compared to the same gun loaded with a 38, or a 38 +p.

In the auto world, there are many models that offer 9mm, 40 cal, or 357 cal chamberings in the exact same frame and size, like Glock and Springfield. In my experience, shooting a 9, 40 or 357 in a Glock small-frame does increase the recoil a bit, but is more manageable to do faster follow-ups than if I tried the same in a 357 loaded j-frame. I've tried it, and it does take a bit longer for me to get the front sight on the revolver back on target when compared to the same shot with a subcompact 40 cal.

That said, I think there is minimal difference in the FMJ version of the 9mm or the 38 cal if bullet weight is the same. When you think that you can put different shapped bullets in the 38 (like the aforementioned LSWCHP) you do seem to get an advantage at energy expenditure at point of impact.

In the end, I carry a Colt Agent loaded with 38 cal wadcutters and feel well armed as a non-LEO citizen. I also carry a Sig in 9mm from time to time, and a steel L-frame 357 magnum. But I feel prepared with any of those three for social situations.

Off the pavement, though...the 357 does have the advantage by far.