New Sig P365 in .380. Why??

MistWolf said:

Now, if we can only get Sig to make a P365X RomeoZero in 22LR

Click to expand...

I would love a P320/P365 22 conversion. They did it for the 938 (briefly).

Trey Veston said:

Most .380 pistols will do nothing for people like her because they still have stiff controls, hard to load magazines, and slides that can't be racked. Making the P365 in .380 really doesn't do anything for most people with significant arthritis, like my mom. Assuming she can manipulate the controls of any .380 pistol sounds a bit arrogant on your part, don't you think?

Click to expand...

Your generalizations about .380 pistols apply more to older blowback and striker-fired designs than recent locked-breech, hammer-fired designs. The EZ you mentioned is a prime example of a more modern design specifically built around making the gun easier to operate. The EZ is hammer-fired because a hammer-fired gun can have a lighter recoil spring than a striker-fired gun, making the slide easier to rack. Attention to details resulted in magazines having tabs to make loading easier.

You are absolutely correct that simply chambering the P365 in .380 will not change the fundamental nature of the gun. It would still be a striker-fired gun and would require a heavier recoil spring to both return the slide to battery and tension the striker.

Garandimal said:

It stopped THAT pathetic crime.

Click to expand...

Which is my point, and the point of my chart.

He had a gun pointed at his head when he started to shoot.

Click to expand...

No he didn't, watch my video.

ANY criminal choosing to shoot back would have killed him... and then run off.

Click to expand...

Which has what do do with .380 vs. 9mm?

He was spraying bullets into a crowded room.

Click to expand...

No he wasn't, he was shooting at the perps.

A solid hit from a stopping round would have ended it.

Click to expand...

He did end it, with a .380.

Sure, because all armed criminals... especially those robbing Gun Stores, where Owners and employees are known to be armed... are planning to just run away.

Click to expand...

If they weren't stupid they'd be in a different line of work.

That's why they brought Two guns... so they would be balanced when they ran.

"Yeah... That's the ticket..."
GR

Click to expand...

The one DID run away, and I bet he had no idea what caliber was shooting at them.

Garandimal said:

...on Both ends of the bullet's path.

.380 ACP - is a minimum micro CCW/SD round.

Both expansion and penetration are more reliable in the 9mm, and more still in the .40 and .45 ACP.

While it is still useful - would need a reason to choose it.




GR

Click to expand...

Yet according to my chart, there is little difference between the four calibers in real world SD situations, as opposed to internet conversations about ballistics.

Trey Veston said:

Most .380 pistols will do nothing for people like her because they still have stiff controls, hard to load magazines, and slides that can't be racked. Making the P365 in .380 really doesn't do anything for most people with significant arthritis, like my mom. Assuming she can manipulate the controls of any .380 pistol sounds a bit arrogant on your part, don't you think?

Click to expand...

As someone who actually has very painful CMC arthritis in the thumb of my shooting hand, along with arthritis in my pinky finger, I know for a fact that this isn't true. I recently sold my Glock 26, the best carry pistol I've ever owned, because it had become too much for me to handle, both recoil and manipulation. The G42 I replaced it with is much easier to shoot, load, and rack. My LCP II kicks as hard as the 26 because it's so small (although the Hogue grip sleeve helps a lot), but it's very easy to load and rack.

The P365 being striker-fired, will require a heavier RSA than an equivalent hammer-fired gun, but we already know from the Guns & Ammo video with Phil Strader that the slide has been downsized and lightened, so it's reasonable to assume that the slide will be easier to rack than the 9mm.

Trey Veston said:

Heard that Sig has produced the P365 in .380 acp.

I have no idea why.

You gain no increase in capacity, no decrease in size, but get less effectiveness and increased cost of ammo with less availability.

I have no idea why anyone would want the P365 in .380.

Click to expand...

Well, why not, Smith sells plenty of their .380 E-Zs. People still buy Glock 42s. If there wasn't demand SIG wouldn't make it.

In the same gun, a .380 should recoil a lot less than a 9mm. Actually it would have less than half the free recoil energy, how that translates into felt can differ. And that seems like the only reason people would buy one.

You can find 380 loads that expand at least a bit and penetrate 12" or more in gelatin. So to play devil's advocate, apart from cost, why would you want 9mm? For more stopping power? But assuming they penetrate enough we are told handguns don't have stopping power and that fast and accurate hits are more important than whether it's a 9mm or a .45. Do you shoot better, faster, with P365 .380 or P365 9mm?

Scenario:

Your assailant is at ten yards and is wearing body armor.

Would you rather be shooting your p365 in 9mm or 380 now?

Head shots.

Paul7 said:

Yet according to my chart, there is little difference between the four calibers in real world SD situations, as opposed to internet conversations about ballistics.

Click to expand...

Fwiw I watched security cam footage on about a hundred gun fights, and what I saw was a whole lot of 9mm muzzles bouncing around and a whole lot of missing going on.

That pawn shop attempted robbery happened in my home state. In Georgia, if you are witnessed committing an on view forcible felony you’re open game. You can be executed in the spot. That’s the law. No fear of out of control social justice D.As.

pairof44sp said:

Scenario:

Your assailant is at ten yards and is wearing body armor.

Would you rather be shooting your p365 in 9mm or 380 now?

Head shots.

Click to expand...

If you have the presence of mind for aimed head shots it should be irrelevant, if you are spraying and praying towards the head area, not sure it matters much either.

I didn't much like my 9mm 365 for a few reasons (largely size and hand fit, which wouldn't matter for a .380 version) but accuracy wasn't one of them, I could get reasonably rapid headshots out to 15 no problem, pretty sure I clocked a slow fire 10 yard group at an inch or under, which is about all the better I am with anything.

So, performance, I'd say it'd be a wash. I guess for making sure to penetrate the skull the 9mm might be preferred, but I don't think it'd much matter.

But again, I'm not against the model, I love the more options vs fewer. Just be aware that Sig loves to introduce a ton of variants to their guns (all the nightmares and fastbacks and chopped this or that) and then pull them from the market with no support whenever they feel like it. Recall someone on here recently (I think) bemoaning the difficulty of finding springs for the P224, I had a similar issue with the P245 (which uses the also discontinued 239 spring).

pairof44sp said:

Scenario:

Your assailant is at ten yards and is wearing body armor.

Would you rather be shooting your p365 in 9mm or 380 now?

Head shots.

Click to expand...

The story from my previous post in this thread told of a perp being killed with one shot to the head from a .380. Remember the .380 is about as powerful as a .38 Special, just in a smaller cartridge, the .38 was used by police for decades. Do you think a head shot at 10 yards from a .38 wouldn't stop an attack? My Glock 42 is very shootable and accurate so 10 yards wouldn't be a big problem, although I think most SD instances are closer than that.

I think as our shooting population ages we will see more demand for softer recoiling guns, a lifetime of shooting can do that. Jeff Cooper had very bad arthritis at the end.

pairof44sp said:

Fwiw I watched security cam footage on about a hundred gun fights, and what I saw was a whole lot of 9mm muzzles bouncing around and a whole lot of missing going on.

Click to expand...

Maybe with an easier to control round there would have been less missing.

Trey Veston said:

9mm is heavy recoil??? Perhaps some would be better served with pepper spray if they think 9mm is heavy recoil.

Click to expand...

Recoil matters. Doesn't matter whether it is excessive or not. Every increase in recoil reduces your performance, even if only a small amount. A 44 magnum with full power loads (180 grain bullets at 1700+ ft per second) can be fired at a rate of 3 rds a second by a 165 pound man in a bill drill and keep all the rounds in the a zone. Now try that 44 on a field course where you can't always have a perfect stance and may have to shoot around a barricade, I promise you, you'll be lucky to keep them all in the d zone. There is a reason no one shoots major power factor in steel challenge. Recoil matters. Try convincing Rob Leatham (as good at controlling recoil as there is) to shoot a full power 45 instead of a 9mm at the uspsa production Nationals where you are scored minor regardless of the power factor of your rounds. 10 round limit in the gun, so no disparity in round count in the gun. Good luck. He'll never do it, because as good as he is ( multiple world championships), he knows it will adversely affect his performance. The slower you shoot, the less recoil affects you. If your shooting a round a second, recoil recovery is not a huge deal. The faster you go, the harder it will get. Jerry Miculek doesn't choose a 44 magnum when he is trying to impress with his rate of fire. Why, because he can fire 6 rounds a second with a 38 and only 4 rounds a second with a 44. If you think recoil doesn't matter, you aren't shooting fast enough. If you are in a gun fight, you will likely be shooting fast, whether you have practiced shooting fast or not. Size also matters, not everyone is Jerry Miculek with powerfully bear paws and fingers the size of sausages. There are folks out there that weigh 100 pounds. Also, there is more to defense than terminal ballistics. Israeli Mordechai Rahamim twice prevailed against and killed armed terrorists with a 22 automatic. Why? He put those little bullets rapidly where they needed to go. So I guess,IMHO, you'll have to just live with the fact that there are people who don't care that anything less than 9mm doesn't meet your level of macho.

Walkalong said:

Why make a P-365 in .380 when it can be had in 9MM? Simple answer, recoil. For some folks the 9MM version is going to be uncomfortable to shoot, while the .380 version will be in their comfort zone. Sig is smart, and the .380 P-365 will sell well.

Click to expand...

I'm not so sure P365 380 will sell. I hope it will. But remember the miserable failure of P290 380. I think in general the guns that are simply re-chambered tend to fail in the market, by virtue of not bringing any advantage to the table aside from the lower recoil. If you compare the Glock 42 and 43, the .380 model is significantly smaller in practice. I have a ton of places like pockets and compartments where G43 simply does not fit. The 380EZ is a quarter thinner than 9EZ. Lighter, too.

couldbeanyone said:

Recoil matters. Doesn't matter whether it is excessive or not. Every increase in recoil reduces your performance, even if only a small amount. A 44 magnum with full power loads (180 grain bullets at 1700+ ft per second) can be fired at a rate of 3 rds a second by a 165 pound man in a bill drill and keep all the rounds in the a zone. Now try that 44 on a field course where you can't always have a perfect stance and may have to shoot around a barricade, I promise you, you'll be lucky to keep them all in the d zone.

Click to expand...

And try it in the two way shooting range of a gunfight.

zaitcev said:

I'm not so sure P365 380 will sell. I hope it will. But remember the miserable failure of P290 380. I think in general the guns that are simply re-chambered tend to fail in the market, by virtue of not bringing any advantage to the table aside from the lower recoil. If you compare the Glock 42 and 43, the .380 model is significantly smaller in practice. I have a ton of places like pockets and compartments where G43 simply does not fit. The 380EZ is a quarter thinner than 9EZ. Lighter, too.

Click to expand...

Great point. If the .380 365 is a bit smaller it might actually interest me as a pocket gun. The 365 is just too big for me to want it as a pocket gun, and too small/thin for a belt gun.

For me anyway.

Sounds like a great gun for women. Most adult men will have no problems with the recoil from a 9mm in that sized handgun, but the women out there might very easily struggle with it. Also I imagine the slide should be a bit easier to retract over the 9mm variant, a further bonus for the ladies.

Pretty sure body armor is a game changer for any handgun. You better have a 5.7 (maybe?) or a rifle round. A .380 would do just as well as a 9mm for headshot, arms, under the arm, etc.

I agree .380s don’t sell as well, usually. But that’s typically because most gun buyers are men, and most men are easily fixated on the perceived lethality of their chosen caliber. We all want something that will put a golf-ball sized hole in the scumbag and not stop till the next county, or at least have the reputation for doing so. .380 has a reputation for being one step up from a mouse gun, much as 9mm did until just a few years ago.

zaitcev said:

But remember the miserable failure of P290 380. I think in general the guns that are simply re-chambered tend to fail in the market, by virtue of not bringing any advantage to the table aside from the lower recoil.

Click to expand...

The P290 .380 (I own the RS version), didn't fail because it was a re-chambered model. The 9mm failed as well, and the reason had a lot more to do with production problems and the DAO trigger that a lot of folks hated.

I thought we figured out that shot placement matters and caliber doesn't about a thousand posts ago.

zaitcev said:

I think in general the guns that are simply re-chambered tend to fail in the market, by virtue of not bringing any advantage to the table aside from the lower recoil.

Click to expand...

I can't see that this applies in all cases or circumstances.

1911's chambered in 9mm seem to be very popular. Sure, some purists will complain that 1911s are only supposed to be in 45, but 9mm versions have about 60% of the recoil of the 45, and that's a great appeal. And once folks shoot a 1911 in 38 Super, they tend to love them. Less recoil than a 45, but more power and more capacity.

Pistolay said:

The P290 .380 (I own the RS version), didn't fail because it was a re-chambered model. The 9mm failed as well, and the reason had a lot more to do with production problems and the DAO trigger that a lot of folks hated.

Click to expand...

The .380 version was discontinued before the 9mm version, by a couple of years.

fxvr5 said:

1911's chambered in 9mm seem to be very popular.

Click to expand...

But of course. If a re-chambering in .380 increased capacity by 20%, we'd see everything in .380 too, from Shield on. Apropos 9mm .380, nutnfancy made a video about S.A. EMP4 and the virtues of re-engineering the 1911 platform to take advantage of 9mm. But the result is rather expensive and patent-encumbered.