[leadcounsel]

Is 9x19mm more powerful and if so why?

The .38 is a larger cartridge with presumably more power, and the bullet is about the same size. Logic would dictate it's at least marginally more powerful...

[firesky101]

9x19 has the same pressure as a .357mag. .38 special has about half. The 9mm is just a more efficient cartridge. .38 can be loaded up to some silly power levels, but it will frag most handguns chambered for it.

[Walkalong]

Size doesn't always equate to power in the pistol caliber world. Some, like .38 Spl and .45 Colt, are loaded to low pressures, while other similar cases, like the .357 Mag and .44 Mag, are loaded to much higher pressures, thus being able to produce more velocity.

While the 9MM is a small case, it runs around 35,000 CUP (IIRC), and can produce, assuming a 125 Gr bullet, as much or more velocity than the .38 Spl running at less than half that pressure.

[1911Tuner]

.38 can be loaded up to some silly power levels, but it will frag most handguns chambered for it.

Um...Well, no. Not really, although enough proof-level .38 Special ammunition through a small or medium-framed revolver can eventually result in a catastrophic failure if the shooter ignores the warnings. It also depends on the powder burn rate used to achieve those velocity levels. A 158-grain bullet at a thousand fps with Bullseye is more potentially destructive than the same velocity by using 2400.

Back in the day, there was a critter called the .38-44 Heavy Duty cartridge. It consisted of a 158 grain lead SWC bullet loaded in a .38 Special case to some 1200 fps from a 5-inch barrel. The cartridge was meant to be fired in a large-framed revolver...better known as "A .38 on a .44 Frame." Hence the term .38-44. The warning was right there on the box of 38-44 headstamped ammunition.

The trouble came when people shot the stuff in medium-framed revolvers...the "K-Framed" Hand ejector models that eventually became the Model 10...and the practice carried over until the mid-70s when the ammunition was dropped from the lineup. Despite the red-lettered warning on the box to fire the ammunition only in large-framed revolvers...it was ignored, and medium-framed revolvers were rattled apart in short order.

I even knew one fool who shot it in a J-frame. His little revolver didn't last long. The frame stretched so much that the firing pin wouldn't reach the primers reliably. Headspace was off the scale, and he was lucky that it didn't let go. It wasn't repairable.

Another factor is bullet construction. Lead bullets don't place the frame under as much tensile stress as jacketed bullets...so the frames don't stretch as quickly.

[Hangingrock]

I have an S&W M640 38Spl with serial number prefix CEN and marked TESTED FOR +P+. Follow on production the wording was deleted because there was not an industry standard for +P+. The newer M640-1 is chambered for 357 Magnum. I believe that the newer series J frames are all (?) chambered for the 357Mag/38Spl.

I can’t speak to the durability of the older series J frames as most likely metallurgy and heat treatment specifications differ from current production.

I recall that my grandfather had several boxes of 38/44 ammunition and carried that in a large frame S&W later in life he switched to S&W M15 until retirement. I believe the 38/44 in part was developed to counter the Colt 38 Super used in law enforcement to counter body armor of the period. My grandfather had a Colt 1911 in 38 Super but recall him ever carrying it.

I’ve used Winchester +P+ in my S&W M640 with no adverse consequence other than it stings the hand on occasion.

[1911Tuner]

1. The Colt .38-44 Outdoorsman and the Smith .38-44 Heavy Duty were primarily intended to be used by...well...outdoorsmen.

2. .38-44 Ammunition is essentially loaded to present-day .357 Magnum pressures...far above any .38 +P+ offering. The old .38-44 ammo would be a way bad thing to do to any +P+ rated J-Frame.

3. It's not just pressure that wrecked'em. It was the recoil impulse and the tensile stresses on the frame...mostly at the top strap...that brought on the endshake that caused the excessive headspace.

[mdauben]

The .38 is a larger cartridge with presumably more power, and the bullet is about the samel size. Logic would dictate it's at least marginally more powerful...

The .38 can handle somewhat heavier bullets (158 gr .38 versus 147 gr 9mm) but with roughly equivalent bullet weights (125 gr .38 versus 124 gr 9mm) the 9mm can have as much as 200+ FPS velocity advantage with resultant greater muzzle energy.

[DesertFox]

When reloading 38 Special and 9mm cast bullets, the load books show nearly identical measures of powder, which in turn gives nearly identical performance. Low pressure vs. high pressure rounds.

Many older cases (45-70) were designed to be loaded to capacity with black powder, hence the size of the case. Made measuring a non-issue. Once modern smokeless powders were invented, case capacities could also be reduced, hence cartridge capacity such as 9mm compared to 38 Special.

[Vern Humphrey]

My old Hodgedon handbook shows a +P load for the .38 Special that drives a 158-160 grain bullet to 1029 fps -- but that's from a 7" test barrel. I would expect about 100 to 150 fps less from a 4" barrel. That's still not a bad defensive load.

[481]

It's already a pretty complex question, but when you factor in the ability to handload, both rounds have very broad range of capability/power.

[firesky101]

Um...Well, no. Not really, although enough proof-level .38 Special ammunition through a small or medium-framed revolver can eventually result in a catastrophic failure if the shooter ignores the warnings. It also depends on the powder burn rate used to achieve those velocity levels. A 158-grain bullet at a thousand fps with Bullseye is more potentially destructive than the same velocity by using 2400.

Back in the day, there was a critter called the .38-44 Heavy Duty cartridge. It consisted of a 158 grain lead SWC bullet loaded in a .38 Special case to some 1200 fps from a 5-inch barrel. The cartridge was meant to be fired in a large-framed revolver...better known as "A .38 on a .44 Frame." Hence the term .38-44. The warning was right there on the box of 38-44 headstamped ammunition.

The trouble came when people shot the stuff in medium-framed revolvers...the "K-Framed" Hand ejector models that eventually became the Model 10...and the practice carried over until the mid-70s when the ammunition was dropped from the lineup. Despite the red-lettered warning on the box to fire the ammunition only in large-framed revolvers...it was ignored, and medium-framed revolvers were rattled apart in short order.

I even knew one fool who shot it in a J-frame. His little revolver didn't last long. The frame stretched so much that the firing pin wouldn't reach the primers reliably. Headspace was off the scale, and he was lucky that it didn't let go. It wasn't repairable.

Another factor is bullet construction. Lead bullets don't place the frame under as much tensile stress as jacketed bullets...so the frames don't stretch as quickly.
That was my point. The case capacity in a .38sp case is enough to do some nasty things to a lot of .38sp revolvers. Just like you can load up .44sp to some crazy power. I was pointing out that case capacity is not a measure of a cartridges power.

[1911Tuner]

The case capacity in a .38sp case is enough to do some nasty things to a lot of .38sp revolvers.

It can do some pretty nasty things to .357 revolvers, too...and without using all the capacity. It depends on which powder you use.

[firesky101]

this is true. After seeing what Clark can do with a .380, I would be interested in just what some .38 brass can take. I don't have anything I am willing to blow up to try though.

[1911Tuner]

.38 Special brass will stand up to pretty much any pressure that .357 Magnum brass will. The only difference is the length, and that was done mainly to prevent chambering it in medium-framed .38 Hand Ejector revolvers. The early .357 Magnum cartridges...back when they were real magnums...used small rifle primers.

[firesky101]

Per SAAMI

9x19 max pressure 35,000psi
9x19+p max pressure 38,500psi
.357mag max pressure 35,000psi
.38special max pressure 17,000psi
.38special +P max pressure 18,500psi

All pressure are listed as maximum average pressure allowed per SAAMI's testing protocol.

[murf]

walkalong,

the 9mm sammi pressure is 35,000 psi (pesio), or 33,000 c.u.p. (copper crusher). firesky101's numbers are correct for pesio pressures.

c.u.p. pressures, per sammi, are: 9mm - 33,000, 357 mag - 45,000, 38 spl - 17,000, 38 spl+p - 20,000.

sammi does not list a c.u.p. pressure for the 9mm+p.

murf

[OilyPablo]

Great thread. Many people ponder and ask the same thing. So often the discussion is 9mm vs. .357Sig vs. .40S&W with the poor .38 Special left out of it.

And it explains why the .38 Special is such a fine and easy plinking round.

[rcmodel]

They both make the same size hole through the vitals if you hit what you should hit.

If you don't, it doesn't make any differance anyway.

rc

[Okiegunner]

Probably my favorite handgun (and this sounds really archaic) of all time is the Smith Model 64.

Stainless and "stout" enough to handle the magnum loads. However, much as I like this pistol, IT IS NOT A .38!! It is a .357 revolver.

Wheel gun guys (me included) hate to admit that the rather anemic looking 9mm, have more bang behind them than the venerable.38.

I kinda hate even writing this post, as I do love the .38 so much.

However...facts are facts...

[chris in va]

I struggled with this owning my SP101. Couldn't hit a darn thing with 357's and 5 rounds of 38+p didn't make sense when a similar sized 9mm would carry 16 rounds.

[murf]

the only thing they have in common is bullet diameter.

murf

[OilyPablo]

the only thing they have in common is bullet diameter.

And even there they differ (a tiny) bit.

[Peter M. Eick]

Just as a comment, real 38/44 factory ammo will do right around 1100 to 1150 fps out of a 38/44 Heavy Duty or 38/44 Outdoorsman. It is darn close to what modern 357 Magnum ammo does out of a Python.

http://eickpm.com/picts/3844_casehead.jpg

The 38/44 is sort of a hobby of mine.

[MCgunner]

I have a .38 UL and a subcompact 9. I load the 9 to +P levels, 410 ft lbs out of a 3" barrel. My .38 +Ps are shy of 300 ft lbs, about 280 from a 2" barrel. As a defensive gun, the .38 partially makes up for the energy discrepancy with a heavier bullet which will give good penetration due to good momentum. I don't feel ill armed with either, but I do favor the 9 for carry for more than just horsepower reasons.

[1911Tuner]

It is darn close to what modern 357 Magnum ammo does out of a Python.

Yep...and if modern-day shooters should stumble onto some real .357 ammo, they'd be shocked when they pulled the trigger. Not the stuff you want to feed much of to a Model 19 or any other small to medium framed revolver unless they just hate the gun.

[mavracer]

Yep...and if modern-day shooters should stumble onto some real .357 ammo, they'd be shocked when they pulled the trigger. Not the stuff you want to feed much of to a Model 19 or any other small to medium framed revolver unless they just hate the gun.
Shooting 180gr Buffalo Bores out of a scandium framed snub, you'd have to hate your hand too. lol

[1911Tuner]

Shooting 180gr Buffalo Bores out of a scandium framed snub, you'd have to hate your hand too. lol

That, too.

The original loading can be closely duplicated with XX.X grains of 2400 and a 160-grain cast SWC. I load a little of it from time to time, and recently...just for giggles...I fired six rounds of it through my old 4-inch Model 13 with the original Magna stocks. I fired six rounds because I didn't want to fire seven. When the smoke cleared, I could've sworn that I heard the gun whimpering. Or, maybe it was my hand. Either way, it was singularly unpleasant for both of us.

[warhwkbb]

The 38SPCL gains some ground on the 9mm with heavier bullets. The large 38 case can hold more slower burning powder as opposed to the smaller 9mm that will run out of powder room with heavy bullets. So if you like heavy for caliber, 38's can be the equal of the 9mm. With lighter bullets (110-125gr) the 9mm is clearly superior.

<edit>Leadcounsel, you always seem to put up excellent questions for debate. You would make a good lawyer! And like any good lawyer, I doubt you ask questions you don't already know the answer to.

[1911Tuner]

With lighter bullets (110-125gr) the 9mm is clearly superior.

Depends. Look at what Cor-Bon has done with the .38 Super, and it doesn't have the case capacity of the .38 Special.

If you're willing to go with a large-framed revolver, you can handload a 110-125 grain bullet in the .38 Special case that hovers around the same pressure levels as that of the old .38-44 round...you can blow the 9mm away. Only trouble is, there aren't many large-framed .38 Special revolvers to be found these days. Most of the ones worth having have been snapped up by collectors.

[warhwkbb]

Depends. Look at what Cor-Bon has done with the .38 Super, and it doesn't have the case capacity of the .38 Special.

If you're willing to go with a large-framed revolver, you can handload a 110-125 grain bullet in the .38 Special case that hovers around the same pressure levels as that of the old .38-44 round...you can blow the 9mm away. Only trouble is, there aren't many large-framed .38 Special revolvers to be found these days. Most of the ones worth having have been snapped up by collectors.
I load 45 Colt cases to 30k psi to shoot in Ruger's, but then it's no longer a 45 Colt anymore is it? The OP is talking about 38spcl, not 38 Super or 38-44.

[1911Tuner]

I load 45 Colt cases to 30k psi to shoot in Ruger's, but then it's no longer a 45 Colt anymore is it? The OP is talking about 38spcl, not 38 Super or 38-44.

Sure it's a .45 Colt. It's just a hot-rodded .45 Colt...and so it goes with 9mm+P+ and .38-44. All were/are loaded to exceed SAAMI standard levels for the cartridges.

If you loaded .357 Magnum cases to proof-levels, they'd still be .357 Magnum, no?

[k_dawg]

People forget that the casing of the .38 Special was originally offered in black powder, even thou it was quickly offered in smokeless powder.

There really is no physical reason why you could not re-design the casing to be shorter and supply the same ballistics/performance with more modern metallurgy/design of the pistol.

However, you would run into the same basic issue with the .357 magnum. Someone will invariably decide to put the smaller/hotter round into an old .38. Something will blow up, someone will sue.

In the case of the .357, they made the case even longer so you could not physically put it in a .38 special. Except for the niche players, the mainstream revolver calibers have not changed much since the .44 magnum in '54.

[Vern Humphrey]

The 9mm has been loaded much "hotter" too, you know. tested in actual 5" barrels by the LEAA, the Glaser 9mm, in the early 70's, was 96 grs at 1850 fps, for 700+ ft lbs.
And there's a reason why they don't offer that loading any more.

[1911Tuner]

However, you would run into the same basic issue with the .357 magnum. Someone will invariably decide to put the smaller/hotter round into an old .38. Something will blow up, someone will sue.

While it's doubtful that an original .38-44 round or three would smithereen a K-Frame or even a J-Frame in good condition...a few more than that will sure bend'em a mite.

The .38-44 cartridge absolutely was .38 Special. It was headstamped .38-44 to warn that it should only be fired in large-framed revolvers. It would do precious little good to put the warning on the box and not mark the case as to its intended use. Beyond that, the manufacturers had no control, nor any further responsibility should the owner of a Victory Model or a Chief's Special decide to ignore it and load'em up.

And there's a reason why they don't offer that loading any more.

Probably several reasons, not the least of which is the old pistols chambered for it that that are still shootable. The same reasons that .38-44 was dropped and the .357 and .44 magnums have been neutered. The original .44 Magnum loading consisting of a gas-checked 240 grain LSWC was a gen-u-wine wrist-wringin' snot knocker that wrecked a good many Model 29s.

And, just FIY...Sturm, Ruger and Company has never given the green light to the "Ruger Only" data found in the loading manuals. Call'em and ask'em. They'll tell you NO in a Tennessee heartbeat.

[Vern Humphrey]

Probably several reasons, not the least of which is the old pistols chambered for it that that are still shootable. The same reasons that .38-44 was dropped and the .357 and .44 magnums have been neutered. The original .44 Magnum loading consisting of a gas-checked 240 grain LSWC was a gen-u-wine wrist-wringin' snot knocker that wrecked a good many Model 29s.
In this case, it wasn't as effective as it was cracked up to be -- as Fackler said when they showed him a side of beef shot with it and asked him how long a man could live with such a wound -- "About three days. And the cause of death would peritontitis."

And, just FIY...Sturm, Ruger and Company has never given the green light to the "Ruger Only" data found in the loading manuals. Call'em and ask'em. They'll tell you NO in a Tennessee heartbeat
Yup -- and Hodgdon strongly advised me not to use my favorite load in my Colt New Service -- 12.5 grains of HS 6 behind a 255 grain cast bullet.

[1911Tuner]

In this case, it wasn't as effective as it was cracked up to be -- as Fackler said when they showed him a side of beef shot with it and asked him how long a man could live with such a wound -- "About three days. And the cause of death would peritontitis."

Yup. The LSWC in the original .44 Magnum offering was hard. It had a higher antimony content than run-of-the-mill lead bullets, including the one used in the .357 loading. Its main claim to fame was penetration and trajectory...and beating up Model 29s.

Of course, it should be remembered that neither the .44 nor the .357's original intent was for antipersonnel use. They were meant to be used against large, possibly dangerous animals.

[Peter M. Eick]

I might argue the anti-personnel issue. Consider the first Registered Magnum went to the FBI and the advertisements from the mid to late 30's talking about the Registered Magnums as being able to stop fleeing criminals. There are some really nice pictures online of those old advertisements but since I don't have any of my own, I hate to link to them.

I believe (just doing it from memory) that about a third of the Registered Magnums went to PD departments and FBI folks.

Mine went to a Detroit PD officer.

http://eickpm.com/picts/reg_box.jpg

[Peter M. Eick]

Just to post some real ammo results....


To quote from a prior posting:

This is real 1940’s vintage 38/44 ammo. It says “.38-44 S.&W. Special” 158 grn Lead bullet. The box says “r266” as the version of the load an it specifically says “specially adapted for the .38-44 Smith and Wesson Special”.

http://eickpm.com/picts/3844_r266.jpg
This is the 38/44 ammo that was chrono-ed.

6.5” 1198+ 1057- 141e 1121m 82s
5.0” 1131+ 1002- 129e 1079m 71s
4.0” 1069+ 739- 330e 1010m 103s (one bad round)

I had a bunch of misfires so I was barely able to get my 12 rounds for testing of each. That is why I was stuck with the one bad round on the 4”. I just ran out of decent ammo otherwise I would have voided the round and shot another one. So do I believe that original 38/44 ammo would have done about 1175 fps out of a 6.5” and 1150 fps out of a 5”? Yes. The degradation of the ammo in the last 70 years could explain my results running a bit slow compared to expectations. We are certainly not far outside the range of belief on the commercial of that vintage. Given the number of duds I had in the box, it would be quite believable that 1175 and 1150 are the targets.


The point I would make is I can toss a 158 38 special slug a lot faster with a 38 special then I can with a 9mm. Simple ballistics back me up on that. I have more powder space to work with in a 38 special then a 9mm so I can throw the same slug faster at lower pressures in 38 special. (A ton of assumptions are built into that summary though....)

[MagnumDweeb]

Can we please just admit the 9mm outperforms the .38 special given today's offerings. Yes there is the .38/44 but it's gone for today's purposes. I like the .38 special personally. It's soft shooting, easy to control, and accurate as all get out with the right loadings in a 158 grain SWC or many other offerings.

The .38 special was used for a lot of years by law enforcement, and only really got replaced by 9mm because the of the pistols' offerings in high capacity. The .38 special was originally designed to be a black powder cartridge and not perform much better than the "cowboy" loads of its time. It predates the year 1900 and so many other calibers came out around that time. Yes could .38 specials be built tougher to handle a steady diet of 158 grain JHP doing 1100 fps out of a 4" barrel on a K frame. More than likely but we aren't going to see it done because of all the old vintage revolvers out there and the ammo made to utilize the newly made revolvers could be put in the older revolvers, and then lawsuits might abound.

So enjoy your soft shooting .38 specials pushing a 158 grain round at 825fps to 850 fps, it did the job for many years and will still do it for many more. If you want to push the velocity limits of your 9mm, go ahead but it's not a magnum even if you get a 115 grain JHP doing 1300 fps (it's basically a 7.62 Tokarev with a tad more weight and circumference).

At the end of the day, can you hit what you are aiming at.

[mavracer]

Can we please just admit the 9mm outperforms the .38 special given today's offerings.
If you can show definative proof that any 9mm actually outperforms the old 38+p FBI load day in and day out I would.

[warhwkbb]

If you can show definative proof that any 9mm actually outperforms the old 38+p FBI load day in and day out I would.
Manufacturer: Fiocchi 9APE
Item: 54481
UPC: 762344001654

This subsonic Full Metal Jacket Bullet in 9mm Parabellum from Fiocchi Pistol Shooting Dynamics in 158 Grain is a great choice for your suppressed firearms. 50 Round Box.

The philosophy behind the Pistol Shooting Dynamics line is very simple: focus on the achievement of the ideal synergy between shooter, firearm and ammunition. Fiocchi keeps developing and improving its pistol and revolver cartridge products. This line has been an over twenty five year favorite of our shooters in the USA; it encompasses Lead Round Nose, Full Metal jacket, Jacketed Hollow Point, Full Metal Jacketed Hollow Point and Jacketed Soft Point bullet configurations in all of the most popular calibers. Just take a look at the ballistic charts and you will notice that in terms of performance, Fiocchi's Pistol Shooting Dynamics line takes no back seat to any other manufacturer.

Muzzle velocity: 940 fps.
Velocity at 50 yards: 893 fps.
Muzzle energy: 309 ft/lbs.
Energy at 50 yards: 279 ft/lbs. Barrel length not specified!!!


Buffalo Bore
Technical Information
Caliber: 38 Spl +P
Bullet Weight: 158 Grains
Bullet Style: Lead Semi-Wadcutter Hollow Point Gas Check
Case Type: Brass

Ballistics Information:
Muzzle Velocity: 1000 fps
Muzzle Energy: 351 ft. lbs. Barrel length not specified!!!

Unfortunately, without independent chronograph results, these numbers are speculative. I would like to think that a +P 158g 38Spcl is fully the equal of the 147g 9mm out of a 4" non vented test barrel.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but to answer the OP's question, the 9mm is ballistically superior to the 38spcl in lower bullet weights, and the 38 makes up ground and may even be superior to the 9mm with heavier bullets using SAAMI spec ammunition.

[Vern Humphrey]

I think Hodgdon was more concerned about the effect on the pistol than on a vest.

[1911Tuner]

Anytime you want to see superior performance in the real world, just shoot some possums, coons, chucks, and such with both the CorBon 100 gr 9mm and the 158 gr plus P .38 lhp. You'll quickly see that I am correct.

I'll see your possums, coons, and chucks and raise ya one tweaked 6'5-inch 300-pound Mongo who spent the last 5 years pumpin' iron in the prison yard.

("Mongo" is the guy that Officer Friendly hit 6 times amidships with a .357 Magnum, and responded by taking Officer Friendly's gun away and pistol-whipping him with it.)

[336A]

Someone asked of a independent ammo test of the Buffalo Bore .38 SPL +P 158gr LSWCHP? Here is one with some extras thrown in http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/144598-some-38-special-chronograph-tests.html

[1911Tuner]

with factory 158 gr jhp's, 1200 fps, and I don't believe your bs story about anyone doing that after a GOOD 357 hit, either.

If you've a mind to, and you're diligent, you can find several accounts of people taking multiple, fatal hits with all sorts of calibers...and killing the people who shot them before they collapsed and died. It happens all the time.

I read one in an old law enforcement digest in which a guy took a full load of buckshot in the chest...spun and ran, and took another one in the back...and still had to be physically subdued after being shot 2-3 times by another cop with a .38 revolver. He died en route to the ER...but that would have been little comfort had he killed somebody before the blood failed his brain...and he was fully capable for an additional two minutes after the first load of buckshot hit him.

When we're talking portable handguns, there is no magic bullet and there is no Hammer of Thor. If "Mongo" corners you, what you want is a caliber that will shoot through him without blowing up on a rib or being deflected and never reaching the vitals. No guarantee, understand...only the best odds.

[IMTHDUKE]

1911Tuner,

Being the simple guy that I am, I was expecting to get a more definitive opinion out of this discussion. I don't understand all the tech talk of ballistics, re loading, etc. I don't re load because I don't want to pick up brass and I don't have time to do the re loading, so I suck it up and buy factory ammo.

So, in your humble, but very accurate opinion...Which of these rds would I want to be shooting, all factors equal, if I had to defend my life from an attacker? 9mm, 9mm+p, 38, 38+p.

[MIL-DOT]

I'm no big numbers/ballistics guy either, but I thought it pretty obvious in this thread that the 9 mil was acknowledged to be superior to the .38's, and not only because of the round itself, but because of at least twice the ammo capacity of the pistol.

[IMTHDUKE]

Ok....sounds about what I was thinking.

[1911Tuner]

Which of these rds would I want to be shooting, all factors equal, if I had to defend my life from an attacker? 9mm, 9mm+p, 38, 38+p.

I've always been in the mass/momentum/sectional density corner. Like I alluded to...If Mongo has me on-screen...I want to shoot through him. In one side and out the other.

[C0untZer0]

I think you have to look at what a bullet does in gelatin. The Speer 147gr Gold Dot performs differently than a Winchester Ranger "T" 147gr - RA9T.

The Fedral HST 147gr JHP out of a 4" barrel penetrates to about 13¼" and expands to around .66" (denim test)

Some people think if they make the bullet go faster it will penetrate deeper and expand more.

The Federal HST +P 147gr - the exact same bullet fired from the same barrel at higher velocity penetrates to only 11¼" although it expands to around .70"

[mavracer]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but to answer the OP's question, the 9mm is ballistically superior to the 38spcl in lower bullet weights, and the 38 makes up ground and may even be superior to the 9mm with heavier bullets using SAAMI spec ammunition.
Still doesn't prove that light and fast is any better than heavy and slow. until then my answer to this:
So, in your humble, but very accurate opinion...Which of these rds would I want to be shooting, all factors equal, if I had to defend my life from an attacker? 9mm, 9mm+p, 38, 38+p.
Is whichever is closest

[336A]

Instead of worrying about which is more powerful than the other you should try to figure out which fills the intended purpose best. There are lots of good firearms and ammo out there for both. I'm partial to the .38 SPL because I'm a handloader. For me this makes the .38 SPL the clear winner, it can handle bullet weights from 110gr all the way up to 200gr.

If I so desired or needed more terminal performance than what I can make myself or buy at the store, I can always purchase Buffalo Bore ammo. I'm in the momentum club as well, and stick with the 158gr bullet weight which the the cartridge was orinally intended for.

[deputy tom]

quote...Probably my favorite handgun (and this sounds really archaic) of all time is the Smith Model 64.

Stainless and "stout" enough to handle the magnum loads. However, much as I like this pistol, IT IS NOT A .38!! It is a .357 revolver.

Wheel gun guys (me included) hate to admit that the rather anemic looking 9mm, have more bang behind them than the venerable.38.

I kinda hate even writing this post, as I do love the .38 so much.

However...facts are facts... end quote.

Sorry but the 64 is a .38 spl. The 65 is a .357 mag. tom.