9mm kurz in pocket pistols make more sense than 9mmx19?


PDA






jhb
May 18, 2011, 12:03 PM
i know .380acp is very popular for pocket pistols and not so popular for those who want a larger more powerful cartridge. so i see the want by allot of people for a 9mm pocket pistol that actually fits into a standard pants pocket has gotten allot of traction lately.

there is no question the 9mmx19 is a far better round in a full size or even compact pistol, but when you move to a tiny pocket pistol...does the benefit actually work/make sense?

so it got me thinking and i was doing some light reading...and i saw some mention of the , .380 being designed for smaller pistols with sub 3" barrel lengths and blow back designs. so in a way the .380 round was designed for tiny pistols sort of i guess would be close to somewhat accurate.

so i am wondering does the 9mmx19 round make sense in a sub 3" barreled pocket pistol? thinking of the extra recoil in a 9x19 small lightweight pistol vs. the .380 and the ability to follow up with shots? will the short barrel really utilize the 9mmx19's extra charge/power and bullet weight and turn it into a far superior round for a very small pocket pistol? or is this more of one of those "people want it so we are going to make it" kind of things?

i'll be the first to admit i am a big 9mmx19 fan. while i carry a .32acp and a .380acp daily unless dressed to carry a 9mmx19...i am tempted to "upgrade" to a 9mmx19 pocket pistol, but then again is it really that much better in ballistics in a short barreled tiny pistol and the ability to get the most our of it in follow up shots, etc? i am not so sure........thanks in advance to your feedback/insight.

also to clarify i am not trying to start a .380 vs. 9mmx19 war thread. i like both rounds and own both. this is more me trying to get all the bias out of the way and look at it more logically, rather than the old "bigger is better" like i normally do.

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm kurz in pocket pistols make more sense than 9mmx19?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rcmodel
May 18, 2011, 12:20 PM
is it really that much better in ballistics in a short barreled tiny pistolThere really are no "tiny" 9mm pistols as tiny as the tiny .380 ACP's like the Kel-Tec P3AT, or Rugers copy of it.

And if there were, most people would find the recoil unpleasant enough to not shoot them very well.

There would also be the issue of reliability.
Many folks found the Kel-Tec P40 in .40 S&W too much of a good thing.
Kel-Tec discontinued it after so many warranty returns for functioning problems that were caused by inexperianced new shooters limp-wresting a perfectly functioning gun.

A 10 oz. 9mm would be the same can of worms for a manufacture.

rc

m2steven
May 18, 2011, 01:36 PM
I believe the key to self defense in terms of handguns is accuracy. Putting a first shot somewhere is tough enough, putting additional rounds becomes increasingly difficult as recoil goes up. My personal opinion is that a good 380 with something like Buffalo Bore (similar ballistics to 38 special) or Corbon ammo in a 380 will be easier to shoot follow up shots with. However, this is pistol dependent. My sig 238 is one of the easiest to shoot pistols I own, even with super hot ammo. So is the Kahr 380. My LCP is all over the place after the first shot.

In 9mm, my little Taurus Slim is a great pistol for followup shots. Other small 9mm's are somewhat of a handfull. For me anyway. If you're serious about
shooting defense, make sure you can handle post recoil aim and delivery.

I've seen films on tv and youtube where some shop owner and criminal get into a gunfight, each guy gets off 14 to 16 rounds and no one gets hit. Why?
Barrels not pointed at targets. First shots barely miss, next shots are anyones guess. You don't know what you'll do nor what will happen untiil you get there. Muscle memory from practice is the best 'ammo' you have.

FIVETWOSEVEN
May 18, 2011, 01:54 PM
I'd say this is pretty tiny.

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/R9.htm

Mayo
May 18, 2011, 06:40 PM
rcmodel---There really are no "tiny" 9mm pistols as tiny as the tiny .380 ACP's like the Kel-Tec P3AT

There is 1---Rohrbaugh R9.

gbelleh
May 18, 2011, 06:52 PM
Yes, the R9 is totally pocketable (one is in my pocket as I type this). I believe it is definitely ballistically superior to the .380, and no more difficult to carry. Recoil is stout, but not unmanageable. Accuracy at self defense distances is fine.

Before I had the R9, I carried a P-3AT in the same type of role (backup gun).

jhb
May 18, 2011, 06:59 PM
good thougths guys, thanks.

what about the new p290 sig pistol isn't that supposed to be around the p238 size which is easily pocket carried at least for me in khaki type office pants?

i haven't seen one in the metal, but the kimber solo isn't it supposed to be pretty tiny and pocket carry? maybe i'm misinterpreting how small these new 9mm's are?

Shadow 7D
May 18, 2011, 07:19 PM
I'll Second what RC says

I have a P40 I picked up
It chucks brass, about 20 feet straight up, actually hit my car parked behind the shooting stands, and that was by going OVER the cover.

I can shoot the gun, I can shoot it accurately
I cannot shoot more than two rounds rapidly without if jaming, not because of a malfunction, but rather because I end up breaking my wrist and limpwristing the gun.

I have heard similar with the Kahr poly-framed .40
Too MUCH, too small.
Oh, and that if feels like someone is beating your hand with a ballpeen hammer doesn't help.

gbelleh
May 18, 2011, 07:49 PM
The 290 is way bigger than the 238, the Solo is closer in size to the Kahr PM9 than a Kel-Tec P3AT.

KodiakBeer
May 18, 2011, 08:00 PM
If you go to "ballistics by the inch" you'll find there isn't much ballistic advantage to the 9mm over the .380 when you get down to barrels in the 2" or 3" range. Couple that with the fact that your follow-up shots are much slower and it doesn't make any sense.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/

If you want a pocket pistol, get a .380. If you want something larger, get a 9mm.

The same thing works in reverse - large .380's don't make much sense either...

Mayo
May 18, 2011, 09:37 PM
You might want to check yor own stats you quoted from the website. The R9 is a 3" barrel. Look at the 3" .380 vs 3" 9mm---not a slight difference---big difference.

451 Detonics
May 18, 2011, 11:04 PM
I carry a PF-9 for a pocket gun...works fine. Loaded with the CorBon 95gr DPX it averages 1300fps from the Kel Tec's 3.1 inch barrel and is pretty pleasant to shoot. CorBon 380 80 gr DPX (which is warm ammo) hits just 1050 in a 4 inch barrel. For myself I would much prefer the 9mm.

KodiakBeer
May 19, 2011, 03:25 AM
You might want to check yor own stats you quoted from the website. The R9 is a 3" barrel. Look at the 3" .380 vs 3" 9mm---not a slight difference---big difference.

Hottest Rohrbaugh 115 grain 9mm; 949 fps

Hottest 3" .380 90 grain; 1158 fps

MachIVshooter
May 19, 2011, 04:15 AM
I carry a PF-9 for a pocket gun...works fine.

The PF9 is a great gun, I love mine. Lightest 9mm out there, and plenty thin. That said, it's too big to be a pocket gun for most of us. The heavier but shorter Kahr PM9 is at the upper limit for pocket carry, IMO.

The Rorbaughs are neat, but they do seem to have the issues one can expect for such a tiny 9mm. And they're actually heavier than the PF9 (just as wide, too)

Jed Carter
May 19, 2011, 04:55 AM
You know you "can" carry a larger self defense weapon. I view the ultra compact pistols as something I take with me when I am not carrying a gun.

THplanes
May 19, 2011, 07:20 AM
Hottest Rohrbaugh 115 grain 9mm; 949 fps

Hottest 3" .380 90 grain; 1158 fps

Corbon 95 gr DPX, 1300 fps from a 3.1 inch barrel. It's a standard pressure round developed specifically for the R-9

Mayo
May 19, 2011, 08:27 AM
Hottest Rohrbaugh 115 grain 9mm; 949 fps

Hottest 3" .380 90 grain; 1158 fps


You are picking and choosing---not comparing apples to apples.:rolleyes:

Mayo
May 19, 2011, 08:28 AM
[QUOTE][Corbon 95 gr DPX, 1300 fps from a 3.1 inch barrel. It's a standard pressure round developed specifically for the R-9

/QUOTE]



+1

KodiakBeer
May 19, 2011, 12:16 PM
Corbon 95 gr DPX, 1300 fps from a 3.1 inch barrel. It's a standard pressure round developed specifically for the R-9

It's not tested on ballistics by the inch, so where are you getting your data?

Harley Quinn
May 19, 2011, 02:23 PM
Mayo mentions,
You are picking and choosing---not comparing apples to apples.
****
Of course, one is a 380, the other a 9mm:D

Mayo
May 19, 2011, 05:04 PM
Directly from CorBon

The 95 gr standard pressure DPX load in 9mm was designed for use in the smallest compact 9mm pistol. It actually mimics the performance of the 115 gr +P load fired from a full sized gun when the 95 gr load is fired from a compact 9mm. If you shoot the 115 gr +P 9mm DPX load from a gun with a 4-4.5" barrel into ballistic gelatin, it would give you 15-16" penetration with a recovered diameter of @ .60" The same results would be obtained using the 95 gr load in a 9mm pistol with a 3" barrel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THplanes
May 19, 2011, 09:28 PM
As Mayo has already said, it's from Corbon. If you will check Corbons velocity claim for other loads with the ballistic by the inch's real gun tests of the same loads, you will see they are very close. Therefore I'm comfortable with using the Corbon site data for this load.

One-Time
May 19, 2011, 09:37 PM
I personally wont carry a .380, its an anemic cartridge, not saying it cant kill, but I wont carry less than 9mm or .38 Special, and I dont even like those. Im looking at a .40 cal pocket piece, it wont be real fun to shoot but I have faith in calibers that begin w/ .4

MachIVshooter
May 19, 2011, 09:43 PM
The 95 gr standard pressure DPX load in 9mm was designed for use in the smallest compact 9mm pistol. It actually mimics the performance of the 115 gr +P load fired from a full sized gun when the 95 gr load is fired from a compact 9mm. If you shoot the 115 gr +P 9mm DPX load from a gun with a 4-4.5" barrel into ballistic gelatin, it would give you 15-16" penetration with a recovered diameter of @ .60" The same results would be obtained using the 95 gr load in a 9mm pistol with a 3" barrel.

"And next month, we'll be offering our perpetual motion machine"

I'm sorry, but a standard pressure 95 gr. load with identical performance to a 115 gr. +P load? At 1,300 FPS, their load develops 356 ft/lbs. Most 115 gr. +P loads are 400-500 ft/lbs. So supposedly this lighter bullet (less momentum) with less energy (reduced ability to do work) can perform "just as good"? I'm waving the B.S. flag until I see it in person

As an aside, I played with a lot of 88, 90, 95, 100gr. bullets in 9mm, with velocities from 1,200 to 1,650 FPS. Sierra, Speer, Barnes, Remington, Hornady, Magtech. Not one of them got 16" of penetration, most of them came apart. I would not use these for defense. I even consider 115's too light. 124 and 147 in a 9mm.

And on yet another note, 102 gr. Golden Sabre handloads as fired from my P3AT acheived 1020 FPS for 235 ft/lbs. They penetrated deeper in clay than the 115 gr. 9mm loads. Both expanded, but the .380 exited the 12" block. The 9mm load did not. Once again, 115's are too light.

Dean1818
May 19, 2011, 09:56 PM
I have never been impressed with the penetration and expansion numbers on the 380

I DONT want to get shot with one, but ....... would feel undergunned

I dont want to limit myself to such a small cartridge especially since there are so many great 9mm options

I also HATED shooting the small 380's...... horrible triggers in what I shot


I am VERY impressed with the 9mm Corbon DPX 115 grain product.

For me, it performed much better than other popular brands almost 3/4 inch expansion and 15 inches penetration.

I did testing with wet newspaper packed in milk jugs with 4 layers of denim

THplanes
May 19, 2011, 10:34 PM
"And next month, we'll be offering our perpetual motion machine"

I'm sorry, but a standard pressure 95 gr. load with identical performance to a 115 gr. +P load? At 1,300 FPS, their load develops 356 ft/lbs. Most 115 gr. +P loads are 400-500 ft/lbs. So supposedly this lighter bullet (less momentum) with less energy (reduced ability to do work) can perform "just as good"? I'm waving the B.S. flag until I see it in person

You have to understand how the standard DPX gets penetration that's deeper than a standard bullet of the same weight. I opens slower. Most bullets in bare gell are fully expanded in and inch or two. DPX is more like 4 inch's. They could achieve the same penetration with the 95 gr by designing it to open even slower and or to a smaller diameter.

As an aside, I played with a lot of 88, 90, 95, 100gr. bullets in 9mm, with velocities from 1,200 to 1,650 FPS. Sierra, Speer, Barnes, Remington, Hornady, Magtech. Not one of them got 16" of penetration, most of them came apart. I would not use these for defense. I even consider 115's too light. 124 and 147 in a 9mm.

Those bullets are not designed for those velocities. Energy and speed are not what get you penetration anyway. Momentum, expansion characteristics and expanded diameter are what control penetration. Higher velocity can cause a bullet to open faster or fragment giving less penetration. The bullet must be designed for the velocity it's being used at. Not to mention, if you're using clay for these test, it's not a very good tissue simulant.

And on yet another note, 102 gr. Golden Saber handloads as fired from my P3AT achieved 1020 FPS for 235 ft/lbs. They penetrated deeper in clay than the 115 gr. 9mm loads. Both expanded, but the .380 exited the 12" block. The 9mm load did not. Once again, 115's are too light.

I'm with you on the Golden Saber for the .380. The factory loading will not expand reliable out of a P3AT. Hand-load them to over 1000 fps and they work well, its what I use. I'll still take a well designed 115 9mm over the .380 any day.

MachIVshooter
May 19, 2011, 10:48 PM
You have to understand how the standard DPX gets penetration that's deeper than a standard bullet of the same weight. I opens slower. Most bullets in bare gell are fully expanded in and inch or two. DPX is more like 4 inch's. They could achieve the same penetration with the 95 gr by designing it to open even slower and or to a smaller diameter.

I'm not arguing that it won't work better than a bullet of the same weight. I'm saying that I don't believe it'll perform better than the heavier XPB/Tac-XP.

Those bullets are not designed for those velocities. Energy and speed are not what get you penetration anyway. Momentum, expansion characteristics and expanded diameter are what control penetration. Higher velocity can cause a bullet to open faster or fragment giving less penetration. The bullet must be designed for the velocity it's being used at. Not to mention, if you're using clay for these test, it's not a very good tissue simulant.

Believe me, I understand how it works. And that's exactly why I'm skeptical of their claims. It's a Barnes Tac-XP bullet, and I haven't been able to find any velocity charts for it. But under 100 gr. .355" bullets have always been intended for the .380 and velocities in the sub-1,100 FPS range. Barnes lists these under 9x19 for application, so perhaps they really are meant for those higher velocities. But I'm still gonna have to see it to believe it.

THplanes
May 19, 2011, 11:19 PM
/ But under 100 gr. .355" bullets have always been intended for the .380 and in the sub-1,100 FPS range. Barnes lists these under 9x19 for application, so perhaps they really are meant for those higher velocities. But I'm still gonna have to see it to believe it.

Check out the Rohrbaugh forums. This was developed specifically for the R-9.It is a bullet that Corbon and Barnes developed for the R-9. Despite this a lot of people are having feed problems with the round. I don't believe it will outperform the 115 gr X bullet either. It's meant as a low recoil round that will still give good penetration. They have to give up some diameter or make it open very slow.

Dr_B
June 7, 2011, 07:32 PM
I recently picked up an LC9 and have been carrying it most of the time. I have to admit it is a very nice carrying gun. Very comfortable.

I was carrying the Sig P238 before that. I changed to the P238 from the Ruger LCP because of the trigger. I'm finding the trigger on the LC9 to basically be a larger version of the LCP. I am also constantly annoyed by all the safeties on the LC9. I just don't think they are necessary.

Now, I shoot the LC9 well at the range. I can hit 8-inch steel plates with it at 25 yards. But if I were in a panic I don't think follow-up shots would be accurate at all... because of the trigger. It's like the gun was designed to NOT be fired. The P238 has a very nice trigger and I am accurate with it.

Also, and maybe people can comment on this, I am seeing a lot of people putting down the .380 cartridge as too weak. I suspect that is partly because the new smaller 9mm's like the PF9 and LC9 are coming on the market and there is a fad happening. I'm not convinced the .380 is insufficient for me. I don't live in a high-crime area and I'm not an LEO.

Overall, I'm thinking of ditching the LC9 and going back to the .380.

If you enjoyed reading about "9mm kurz in pocket pistols make more sense than 9mmx19?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!