.38 SPL vs. 9mm

[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!!!
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!

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.

 

[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]

It is very curious to me...

...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:



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.

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. *runs away*

 

[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.