Is 380 Just A Marginal Round?

[kokapelli]

Hence use the largest most powerful caliber you can control and conceal.

And watchfob size .380s are hard to shoot well. Small grips, small sights, poor triggers, and weak cartridge.

Deaf

Your just wrong because I carry a G42 which is hardly watch-fob size and it has excellent TruGlo sites and I shoot it much better than I do my PM9 with much faster follow up shots with the G42.

The whole idea of this thread was "is 380 marginal", not whether there are more powerful choices, or what you carry! Who cares what you carry. The 380 works better for me than my much harder recoiling PM9 and is much easier on my old joints, so I don't really care about what others carry just whether or not the 380 can get the job done?

 

[strambo]

The very best .380 defensive ammo on the market today is not "marginal", it is the "minimum". Defined as it penetrates 12" in ballistic gel and expands some amount. This has only come about in the last few years and only with a few loads. All other loads (older HP designs and ball) remain "marginal."

I'd also feel adequately armed with a G42 as well with the best of the .380 loads. All reports are that it is very shootable and easy to get fast/accurate hits with. Combined with ~12" penetration ~.4-.5" expansion, it is fine.

A Keltec P3AT with any but the top loads (ball that makes a pencil hole or HPs that only get 7-9" penetration), I'd call that marginal for sure. A tiny hard to shoot gun that doesn't perform well ballistically...which is probably representative of the combo that 90% of the CCW .380 carrying populace has.

Put another way: Is the .380 marginal? No, provided you are using the best available ammo along with a shootable gun you can get fast and accurate hits with.

 

[mavracer]

the very best .380 defensive ammo on the market today is not "marginal", it is the "minimum".

again do you know the definition of marginal:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:



from Merriam Webster
marginal: close to the lower limit of qualification, acceptability, or function : barely exceeding the minimum requirements

 

[strambo]

OK it's marginal then. /]thread

 

[Deaf Smith]

The whole idea of this thread was "is 380 marginal", not whether there are more powerful choices, or what you carry! Who cares what you carry. The 380 works better for me than my much harder recoiling PM9 and is much easier on my old joints, so I don't really care about what others carry just whether or not the 380 can get the job done?

kokapelli,

If the .380 is marginal, then having alternatives that are NOT marginal would be of some interest.

As for your Glock 42 note I have posted here on this thread to carry the 'largest caliber you can control and conceal'... well I guess with your 'old joints' it is the largest you can control and conceal, right?

So what's your problem?

Deaf

 

[Eb1]

It is like the neighbor who has a $3000 smoker on wheels that connects to a 2" ball on his 4x4 Ford that he never gets off road.
He tells me my 22" Weber can't smoke a roast worth eating. This weekend I smoked a port roast, and guess what? He he had to eat crow, and apologized for the crap he had been slinging my way because of my "little grill". I guess my Weber Grill is as marginal like the .380

 

[Phaedrus/69]

No, that's not a useful analogy at all. Webers have won a zillion comps and are the standard by which others are judged. Now, cooking for 100 your Weber would be marginal to too-small. There's no objective standard of performance for smokers, and the ability of one to do the job depends on how much product you need to produce at one time. His trailer and your Weber are exactly the same; the difference is size. It's like a fun size Snickers vs the King Size Snickers. Different amounts of the same thing.

Rounds of ammunition are more like motors. A very nice four banger will get you around town. In a race car it would marginal on a good day with enough boost. A bullet has to have a certain amount of mass and speed with a certain kind of construction to do the job it was created for. For many years the largest bear ever killed was shot by an Inuit girl with a .22 rifle. And not even a LR, it was a handful of .22 short! Would you consider a .22 Short to be adequate for Grizzly bear? I wouldn't! In my mind is isn't even marginal. It got the job done that day by pure dumb luck (she was hiding from the bear under a huge pile of brush and downed timber- she put a round up through the roof of his mouth while he roared at her).

A .380 can get the job under the right circumstances but I think it's marginal- meaning the lowest I'd ever willingly go, and then I'd be nervous about it.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

Now that I think it about it the .380 wouldn't be marginal at all against Leprechauns! Happy St. Patrick's Day!

 

[skoro]

Sure hope your opponent lets you have that 'good shot placement' under adverse conditions while they try to end your life. Most altercations are in poor light with a lot of them with folks moving and hiding.

Obviously

Cause you see when people fight back.. they really do fight back. Ain't no square range on a pretty day.

Deaf

Your point?

 

[george burns]

I used it, it works, I use a 9 now. Will it work for you, it's a bullet, you decide.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Your point?

Fighting is highly fluid. Opponents fight back and it is much harder to make good hits than on a square range. And study of defensive use of weapons will show they happen usually in low light as well as unexpected circumstances and surroundings.

And, of course, one will be in a very different emotional state than on a nice gun range.

And that is why one does not count on 'good shot placement' as some kind of guaranteed thing.

Like I've posted, carry the most powerful handgun you can control and conceal... And practice often. No guarantees but that is best one can do.

Deaf

 

[jrdolall]

286 posts on this thread. Has anyone had an epiphany? Or are the same people arguing the same points ad nauseum?

 

[A Pause for the Coz]

Any one have any real world numbers? There are allot of .380's being carried as we speak. So I am sure there have been some SD encounters recorded.
I have not read very many if any reports of a perp being shot with a .380 and continuing the attack.
The only ones I find are 9mm being used by thugs against other thugs and they are hitting off target with cheap fmj loads.

I suspect its all subjective. I suspect if a thug attacks you he thinks your an easy target and gets the surprise of his life as a couple .380 XTP's pop his rib cage.

I dont know, this debate gets a little worn.. I carry a .380 and a 327 mag.
Because they are comfortable to carry and I feel I at least have a good chance at coming out on the winning side.
When I go into areas that I would classify as urban danger zones.
I readjust and carry a 45 acp.

I guess if you feel you must have the DRT option at all times 24- 7.
Go for it, But I have work to do and dont want my ribs poked all day while doing it.

 

[X-Rap]

I'd only add that the biggest proponents of the 380 being equal crowd are using guns that are large and heavy enough to easily be replaced by a superior 9 mm.
If I can carry a Bersa, G 42 or similar sized gun I'll carry a more adequate9.

 

[skoro]

Fighting is highly fluid. Opponents fight back and it is much harder to make good hits than on a square range. And study of defensive use of weapons will show they happen usually in low light as well as unexpected circumstances and surroundings.

And, of course, one will be in a very different emotional state than on a nice gun range.

And that is why one does not count on 'good shot placement' as some kind of guaranteed thing.

Like I've posted, carry the most powerful handgun you can control and conceal... And practice often. No guarantees but that is best one can do.

Deaf

Ohhhh kay...

Thanks for the tip.

 

[Eb1]

I understand the limitations of a .380, but I just don't see it marginal as a self-defense cartridge. Because in my mind anything you can fight back with that comes from a barrel of a gun is what you have, and I don't think that at 21 feet let's say that a 9mm from a 3" barrel is going to make that much of a difference.

I'll stop posting because I don't shoot a .380 from a plastic 2" barrel gun, but I'll not stop carrying it because I shoot it very well. Follow ups are easily within inches of each other, and comfort is great. Everyone be safe no matter what you choose to carry.

 

[kokapelli]

I'd only add that the biggest proponents of the 380 being equal crowd are using guns that are large and heavy enough to easily be replaced by a superior 9 mm.
If I can carry a Bersa, G 42 or similar sized gun I'll carry a more adequate9.

I don't think anyone is saying the 380 is equal and that's not what this thread is about anyway.

Why is it so hard for people to just answer the question, "is 380 just a marginal round"?

It seems that the Keyboard Commandos just can't stick with the point of this thread and just have to insert their carry choices rather than presenting factual information that will support or not support the effectiveness of the round.

So far I have not seen one actual fact to support the possibility that 380 can not get the job done!

 

[A Pause for the Coz]

I agree.
If I have to pull my .380 its because all my other SD skills failed me.
My situational awareness failed me. And I am now with in 3 to 6 feet of a threat.
3 to 6 feet there is not a whole lot of difference between a 9mm and a .380.

If I have more than that. I saw it coming and I am out O there!!!
Not looking for a gun fight with a .380 I can tell you that much.

 

[strambo]

kokapelli
It seems that the Keyboard Commandos just can't stick with the point of this thread and just have to insert their carry choices rather than presenting factual information that will support or not support the effectiveness of the round.

So far I have not seen one actual fact to support the possibility that 380 can not get the job done!

So, you started this thread just to satisfy yourself about your carry choice, anyone who disagrees is a keyboard commando, and the standard of measure to prove your thesis wrong is an objective fact that proves a negative?

Looks like you have set the conditions for being 100% satisfied.

Plenty of ballistics data has been presented in the thread. These rounds (all of them in any caliber) are what they are and do what they do. The human body/anatomy is what it is and reacts to holes of various size and depth the way it reacts. Have an offensive mindset and fighting spirit (willingness to act w/o hesitation) and your survival odds are good with a sharp stick. Lack that, good luck with a howitzer.

 

[snooperman]

There is ample evidence from actual shootings that make the 380 adequate for conceal carry.

 

[Pyro]

I bought my first .380 a couple months ago.
I feel that it could stop somebody, sure wouldn't want to get shot by it.

 

[kokapelli]

So, you started this thread just to satisfy yourself about your carry choice, anyone who disagrees is a keyboard commando, and the standard of measure to prove your thesis wrong is an objective fact that proves a negative?

Looks like you have set the conditions for being 100% satisfied.

Plenty of ballistics data has been presented in the thread. These rounds (all of them in any caliber) are what they are and do what they do. The human body/anatomy is what it is and reacts to holes of various size and depth the way it reacts. Have an offensive mindset and fighting spirit (willingness to act w/o hesitation) and your survival odds are good with a sharp stick. Lack that, good luck with a howitzer.

Idahoskies posted this link with some interesting statistics comparing handgun caliber effectiveness.
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

If you can contribute some statistics to refute the information at that link instead of twisting my thoughts on the subject I might take you more seriously and yes, I do believe the 380 round compared to other handgun rounds is effective, but if you can show me otherwise I have an open mind.

 

[strambo]

What is there to take, or not take seriously, about what I've said? I have stated multiple times in this thread that I think a .380 in a shootable gun like a G42 with the best available ammo is just fine. Carry what you want, why do you need validation?

The ballistics data is out there and been posted here, I've done plenty of research, read the studies, and understand anatomy and the mechanism of wounding in handgun bullets. I even went to a course on anatomy and firearm terminal ballistics last fall. There is a demonstrable difference in the physical performance of the calibers. Whether that matters (and how much) in the real world will never be quantified on a scientific basis unless/until a brutal human ballistics experiment is conducted. That will never happen in the US and the brutal regimes who would do such a thing don't care, they are too busy executing their citizens via whatever method they choose.

The arguments you have been making and your debate tactics could be applied with equal success to any caliber starting with .22lr. It is impossible to prove with facts that the .22lr can not get the job done.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

3 to 6 feet there is not a whole lot of difference between a 9mm and a .380.

You're disabled at the side of the road changing a flat tire and a bad guy(s) stops to rob you because he believes you're vulnerable. If you have to shoot through automotive glass or sheet metal to defend yourself the difference in performance between 9mm and .380 will be realized.

 

[kBob]

re: real world numbers

Google "Marshall & Sanow .380 ACP".

or go to Handload.com and use their handy search/tables.

I especially like the notations on barrel length with 4" and under semi auto barrels in various calibers.

I am not a huge fan of M&S numbers, but there they are.

-kBob