So few that were we to know their stories, their information would not really tell us anything. There are too many variables and too little data.
.380 FMJ For Self-Defense?
- Thread starter LookAtYou
- Start date
-
- Tags
- .380 fmj self defense
- Status
Ok, so in my personal opinion, at this point, this is how I classify it when it comes to defending against humans.
You Don't Even Need This Much/Ridiculously Effective:
.357 Mag JHP (Especially 3"+ barrels)
Super Devastating (Huge amount of One-Shot Stops, just vicious):
.40 S&W JHP
.45 ACP JHP in 5"+ Barrel (Full Expansion)
Reliably fully expanding 9mm JHP
Good/Very Solid:
.45 ACP no matter the barrel length
.40 S&W no matter the barrel length
.38 Spl SWC/WC
Decent/Can Be Considered Minimal:
.380
9mm no matter the barrel length (doesn't matter if it expands)
Can be considered iffy to many, but it's not like you're gonna walk through it (maybe lol):
Anything below .380 (.32, .25, .22)
You Don't Even Need This Much/Ridiculously Effective:
.357 Mag JHP (Especially 3"+ barrels)
Super Devastating (Huge amount of One-Shot Stops, just vicious):
.40 S&W JHP
.45 ACP JHP in 5"+ Barrel (Full Expansion)
Reliably fully expanding 9mm JHP
Good/Very Solid:
.45 ACP no matter the barrel length
.40 S&W no matter the barrel length
.38 Spl SWC/WC
Decent/Can Be Considered Minimal:
.380
9mm no matter the barrel length (doesn't matter if it expands)
Can be considered iffy to many, but it's not like you're gonna walk through it (maybe lol):
Anything below .380 (.32, .25, .22)
Last edited:
doubleh
Member
Quite true but it would be as accurate as shooting the things I mentioned. Too many variables unless the shot hits a very vital spot.
Would you consider the lung as very vital? Like the aorta, heart, etc. I feel the chest is hard to beat as the best spot to aim for in general as far as giving yourself the best chance to hit vitals (the brain is harder to hit since the head is small and very mobile).
Dudedog
Contributing Member
Ford and Chevy trucks (and others) work but there will always be a truck "wars"
A lot of it is I chose X so X must be better, because otherwise if Y was better and I chose X I would be wrong and that can't happen.
In general most #s tend to show on 2 legged threats not a lot of difference from 9mm up as far as pistols cals are concerned.
Other thoughts come to mind, since % of hits in gunfights vs shots fired are low there is a good argument for more rounds available.
Another thought is time to fire/quick second / 3rd shot.
Not choosing one way or the other but as an example say if you can get off 4 9mm rounds in the same time (given the same accuracy %) that you can 3 in .40 or .45 is 9mm better or not?
Lots of stuff out there but here is one sample.
https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power
(just one of many)
General thought seems to be .380 is border line 9mm up is enough.
Last edited:
fastbolt
Member
This is one of those perennial caliber topics that gets recycled often enough ... which doesn't mean that it's not worthy of discussion. It just gets the same "answers" every time.
The only reason I decided to own a .380ACP, after approx 25yrs of not using the caliber, is because of the increased choices of really diminutive ones, which would let me conceal it when I couldn't easily carry one of my 5-shot J-frames. For me, that meant picking up a couple of LCP's (carbon and stainless slides).
I look at the .380 as being at the bottom end of minimally adequate for personal defense.
In other words, I pocket holster one of my LCP's in situations where I consider the risk assessment to be so low that I don't expect to need to be armed.
Also, in hot weather where I'm not wearing enough cover garment to effectively conceal (in all activities and circumstances) a belt weapon, and my choice of pants has front pockets too short and tight to accommodate one of the J-frames. I spent too many years "dressing around" various off-duty weapon choices, and no longer feel like modifying my clothing choices so they're exclusively based around whatever retirement weapon I may choose to carry.
When I was still working, and the .380 was approved as the smallest, least potent off-duty/secondary caliber permitted, only JHP ammo was allowed for anything other than qual/range use. That's not necessarily the case for retirees, since we're no longer representing our former agencies nor invoking peace officer status, but the habit stuck with me. Yes, a properly deformed and expanded JHP can reduce potential penetration. And misses still miss the intended threat. However, a plugged JHP can also basically behave like Ball. Flip a mental coin.
I've tested my LCP's with an assortment of the available JHP loads to which I had access before and after my retirement, and confirmed they feed and function and are accurate when fired in my diminutive .380's, in my hands. I also made it a point to run them through the same qual courses-of-fire as I used for all of my other pistols and revolvers, which usually meant 3-11yds, 3-15yds or 3-25yds, depending on the qual scenarios. If I couldn't run them at least as well as I could my 5-shot snubs at those distances, I'd not have wanted to carry them.
So, I basically have a choice of 3 different major maker .380 JHP's I may use to load my LCP magazines. Rem GS, Speer GDHP and W-W T-Series (although the T-Series is about used up, and I don't wish to make the drive to the distributor to buy any more at individual officer pricing). There are other brands/loads I've tested for function, but I don't commonly keep them in my ammo stock. Nor am I of the inclination to buy some hot-rodded specialty brand of .380 to try and bootstrap my LCP's into something they aren't. It's just a .380, after all. If I want to carry something else, I'll carry something else. I don't wish to try and Magnumize my LCP's.
Bottom line? Whenever the situation occurs where I choose to slip a LCP into my pocket, I keep in mind that it's still a priority to keep my head up and aware of the totality of the situation ... and that it's my skillset, use of tactics, experience and knowledge of the law that are going to absolutely be critical factors in any situation where I decide I'm forced to use a weapon.
The only reason I decided to own a .380ACP, after approx 25yrs of not using the caliber, is because of the increased choices of really diminutive ones, which would let me conceal it when I couldn't easily carry one of my 5-shot J-frames. For me, that meant picking up a couple of LCP's (carbon and stainless slides).
I look at the .380 as being at the bottom end of minimally adequate for personal defense.
In other words, I pocket holster one of my LCP's in situations where I consider the risk assessment to be so low that I don't expect to need to be armed.
Also, in hot weather where I'm not wearing enough cover garment to effectively conceal (in all activities and circumstances) a belt weapon, and my choice of pants has front pockets too short and tight to accommodate one of the J-frames. I spent too many years "dressing around" various off-duty weapon choices, and no longer feel like modifying my clothing choices so they're exclusively based around whatever retirement weapon I may choose to carry.
When I was still working, and the .380 was approved as the smallest, least potent off-duty/secondary caliber permitted, only JHP ammo was allowed for anything other than qual/range use. That's not necessarily the case for retirees, since we're no longer representing our former agencies nor invoking peace officer status, but the habit stuck with me. Yes, a properly deformed and expanded JHP can reduce potential penetration. And misses still miss the intended threat. However, a plugged JHP can also basically behave like Ball. Flip a mental coin.
I've tested my LCP's with an assortment of the available JHP loads to which I had access before and after my retirement, and confirmed they feed and function and are accurate when fired in my diminutive .380's, in my hands. I also made it a point to run them through the same qual courses-of-fire as I used for all of my other pistols and revolvers, which usually meant 3-11yds, 3-15yds or 3-25yds, depending on the qual scenarios. If I couldn't run them at least as well as I could my 5-shot snubs at those distances, I'd not have wanted to carry them.
So, I basically have a choice of 3 different major maker .380 JHP's I may use to load my LCP magazines. Rem GS, Speer GDHP and W-W T-Series (although the T-Series is about used up, and I don't wish to make the drive to the distributor to buy any more at individual officer pricing). There are other brands/loads I've tested for function, but I don't commonly keep them in my ammo stock. Nor am I of the inclination to buy some hot-rodded specialty brand of .380 to try and bootstrap my LCP's into something they aren't. It's just a .380, after all. If I want to carry something else, I'll carry something else. I don't wish to try and Magnumize my LCP's.
Bottom line? Whenever the situation occurs where I choose to slip a LCP into my pocket, I keep in mind that it's still a priority to keep my head up and aware of the totality of the situation ... and that it's my skillset, use of tactics, experience and knowledge of the law that are going to absolutely be critical factors in any situation where I decide I'm forced to use a weapon.
Last edited:
Very helpful, thanks.Ford and Chevy trucks (and others) work but there will always be a truck "wars"
A lot of it is I chose X so X must be better, because otherwise if Y was better and I chose X I would be wrong and that can't happen.
In general most #s tend to show on 2 legged threats not a lot of difference from 9mm up as far as pistols cals are concerned.
Other thoughts come to mind, since % of hits in gunfights vs shots fired are low there is a good argument for more rounds available.
Another thought is time to fire/quick second / 3rd shot.
Not choosing one way or they other but as an example say if you can get off 4 9mm rounds in the same time (given the same accuracy %) that you can 3 in .40 or .45 is 9mm better or not?
Lots of stuff out there but here is one sample.
https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power
(just one of many)
General thought seems to be .380 is border line 9mm up is enough.
Thanks a lot! I am the same regarding the fact of going to .380 due to it being ridiculously easy to conceal, yet still be shootable and have decent capacity (8+1 G42). I plan to a have 3 guns and that's it. A S&W M&P9 M2.0 3.6" Compact as my main carry choice. A G42 when the M&P is too big. And a LCP 2 .380 for the pocket as a back up.This is one of those perennial caliber topics that gets recycled often enough ... which doesn't mean that it's not worthy of discussion. It just gets the same "answers" every time.
The only reason I decided to own a .380ACP, after approx 25yrs of not using the caliber, is because of the increased choices of really diminutive ones, which would let me conceal it when I couldn't easily carry one of my 5-shot J-frames. For me, that meant picking up a couple of LCP's (carbon and stainless slides).
I look at the .380 as being at the bottom end of minimally adequate for personal defense.
In other words, I pocket holster one of my LCP's in situations where I consider the risk assessment to be so low that I don't expect to need to be armed.
Also, in hot weather where I'm not wearing enough cover garment to effectively conceal (in all activities and circumstances) a belt weapon, and my choice of pants has front pockets too short and tight to accommodate one of the J-frames. I spent too many years "dressing around" various off-duty weapon choices, and no longer feel like modifying my clothing choices so they're exclusively based around whatever retirement weapon I may choose to carry.
When I was still working, and the .380 was approved as the smallest, least potent off-duty/secondary caliber permitted, only JHP ammo was allowed for anything other than qual/range use. That's not the case for retirees, since we're no longer representing our former agencies nor invoking peace officer status, but the habit stuck with me. Yes, a properly deformed and expanded JHP can reduce potential penetration. And misses still miss the intended threat. However, a plugged JHP can also basically behave like Ball. Flip a mental coin.
I've tested my LCP's with an assortment of the available JHP loads to which I had access before and after my retirement, and confirmed they feed and function and are accurate when fired in my diminutive .380's, in my hands. I also made it a point to run them through the same qual courses-of-fire as I used for all of my other pistols and revolvers, which usually meant 3-11yds, 3-15yds or 3-25yds, depending on the qual scenarios. If I couldn't run them at least as well as I could my 5-shot snubs at those distances, I'd not have wanted to carry them.
So, I basically have a choice of 3 different major maker .380 JHP's I may use to load my LCP magazines. Rem GS, Speer GDHP and W-W T-Series (although the T-Series is about used up, and I don't wish to make the drive to the distributor to buy any more at individual officer pricing). There are other brands/loads I've tested for function, but I don't commonly keep them in my ammo stock. Nor am I of the inclination to buy some hot-rodded specialty brand of .380 to try and bootstrap my LCP's into something they aren't. It's just a .380, after all. If I want to carry something else, I'll carry something else. I don't wish to try and Magnumize my LCP's.
Bottom line? Whenever the situation occurs where I choose to slip a LCP into my pocket, I keep in mind that it's still a priority to keep my head up and aware of the totality of the situation ... and that it's my skillset, use of tactics, experience and knowledge of the law that are going to absolutely be critical factors in any situation where I decide I'm forced to use a weapon.
doubleh
Member
Of course but not as instantly vital as the heart or brain. I like nearly every one on here have no experience with gunfighting and certainly don't want any. If it came down to the nitty gritty I would try for a chest shot just because it's a larger target. How would I perform during a gunfight? I have no clue. and anyone that hasn't been in one is in the same boat as I. That's why I stay out of the "bullet performance" and "I would do this" threads except to point out that if you haven't done it you don't know what you will do.
Armored farmer
Member
If i recall correctly, that was Sig V-crown
I can understand that, except the way I think, I think it's wise to give it some thought regarding "Ok, if I actually have to use this thing, where am I gonna at least try to aim", instead of just saying "Meh, I'll see when I get there". Nah. Not with a firearm. Kinda the same principle with going to the range. Most people don't shoot anywhere near as good in a real situation then they do at the range, but that doesn't mean don't practice shooting just because you can't replicate a real life scenario 100%, ya know?
Everyone mentions how important shot placement is, so a while ago I did what seemed to simply make sense, pull up an anatomy photo, and thought "Where are the most vitals, and the best place to shoot to hit them". The chest became very apparent, as it's generally the widest part of the body, biggest target, AND has a lot of different vitals. Yea, the femoral artery is super dangerous, but the chances of missing is ridiculously high. It just makes sense to me where I wanna try to aim, or to at least put some thought into it.
Last edited:
No one in his right mind would choose a defensive load on the basis of how the projectiles move, topple, break, or penetrate various things--alone.
Those who know what they are doing RE: handgun wounding effectiveness have put a lot of effort into evaluating forensic medical data and the behavior of bullets penetrating barriers and ballistic gel. They have made assessments of what kind of performance is necessary to have a high likelihood of effecting timely physical stops when the hits are made in the right places at different entry angles.
The reasonableness of those assessments has been largely borne out by field experience.
The .380 is not one of the recommended defensive loads. It does not penetrate enough while reliably expanding enough.
As I said before, Tom Givens says it is marginal even with the best loads, and has some utility as a back-up gun.
doubleh
Member
I did say if forced into a defensive gunfight I would try for the chest as it the largest vital target. Read my post again and you will find I did so and could have saved the lecture. What I was pointing out is no one that hasn't been in that situation knows their capabilities. The best range shot in the world might just freeze or start shaking so badly they can't hit anywhere close to their opponent when it becomes life or death. I'm not saying to ignore your shooting skills, just that you might find yourself incapable of using them if it ever becomes necessary. Until first confronted with any life threatening situation no one really knows how they will respond.
Lol
If it happens, it won't matter a bit what the likelihood of occurrence had been believed to be beforehand.
ThomasT
Member
I just took my Taurus TCP to my FFL dealer to have it shipped to the new buyer. I have owned several small 380s and never keep them long. I don't think there is anything wrong with the round either. All I ever bought were FMJ rounds. Put where they need to go they should provide a good defense effect. When I was at the FFL I picked up my new LC9s that is the replacement for the Taurus. I haven't even looked at it very much yet but it is definitely bigger and heavier but drops right in my pocket.
I have around 450 rounds of 380 I am going to list on GB after the holidays. Some of it is the Winchester flat point. It worked fine in the Taurus but didn't feed as smoothly as round nose bullets. It sort of thump bumped its way in. I liked the round nose much better.
I have around 450 rounds of 380 I am going to list on GB after the holidays. Some of it is the Winchester flat point. It worked fine in the Taurus but didn't feed as smoothly as round nose bullets. It sort of thump bumped its way in. I liked the round nose much better.
Have you thought about the Glock 42? Very shootable (almost no recoil), can get 8+1 with a reliable Glock factory mag extension, super concealable, etc.
Pudge
Member
I've told this story before, but there was a shooting around the corner from where I lived. It was outside a bar and concerned drugs. One shooter had a high capacity 9mm, the other a .380. The guy with the .380 went to jail, the one with the 9mm went to the cemetery.
If you're better with a .380, don't handicap yourself because somebody told you you needed bigger or more bullets.
So, in that instance , penetration , and possibly, the expansion. of the .380 happened to suffice.
That's not surprising, but testing shows that it cannot reliably be expected to do so.
fastbolt
Member
Not saying it will.
I am saying, however, that after more than 3 decades of having carried a badge of one sort or another, I've acquired what I tend to think is a justified degree of confidence in making a risk assessment for myself, going around into areas and environments with which I've acquired a bit of experience.
Also, I tend to suspect that my "Well, this isn't good" radar is still working well enough to get me kick-started into and past the Observe/Orient part of the process. That's where a lot of folks lose traction, stumble and can't downshift into the right Decide step, let alone have confidence in their ability to produce the appropriate Act.
Not saying it's infallible (obviously), but it did help keep me from being caught between the 8-ball and a hard place for enough years, in enough bad places involving enough bad people.
Of course, another factor in all of this is having the wherewithal at your disposal to have learned how to, and that you can, utilize whatever it may be you're armed with at the moment, even if it's not an "optimal" choice for someone answering calls-for-service or going out looking to find and intervene in suspicious circumstances and on-view debacles. The odds of Trouble finding me is a bit less when I get to decide where I'm going to go, and I'm not further skewing the odds against me by actively going out to Look for Trouble (as a duty) or put myself in situations where it may be lurking.
If I thought I was likely going to get into a nasty traffic collision each and every time I drove a car, no matter where I drove, I'd not just use the lap/shoulder restraints, but would also wear a helmet and get out one of my sets of body armor (to mitigate so degree of blunt trauma). As it is, the belts (and SRS) will have to do for potential random events ... which is why I still have my J-frames and LCP's available for retirement CCW, as an alternative "minimum" that might hopefully suffice.
I understand and accept the potential consequences, and I've seen how all the various choices have worked out for others, as well.
Last edited:
Pudge
Member
Correct, and in the hands of one individual, the capacity and performance of the 9mm was insufficient for the incident.
barnetmill
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
- Messages
- 1,264
There are differences to what velocity the fmj is loaded by various brands. Hollow point loads are usually loaded to top permissible velocities. I still want the most velocity that is possible. If an arm is in the way, a little more velocity may still send it through the arm into the body.
We do not know what loads were used and therefore we cannot assess the performance of the weapon itself.
ThomasT
Member
I looked at the Glock 42s before I bought the TCP. Nice guns but at $450 IIRC I decided to pass. If I bought another 380 it would more likely be an LCPII. I looked at those the same time I looked at the Glocks.
Using this page from Handgun Hero there isn't any real difference between the Glock 42 and the new EC9s I just bought size wise. And I cast and reload for 9mm so ammo is easy and cheap. The Kahr P380 looks better to me than the Glock 42.
https://www.handgunhero.com/compare/glock-g42-vs-ruger-lc9s
Pudge
Member
The lack of that information does not prevent us from assessing the sufficiency of the performance of the. 380.
- Status
