Would you rather conceal carry 5 rounds of .357 or 7 rounds of .380?

Status
Not open for further replies.
psyopspec said
What changed your mind?

Crackheads and tweaker zombies, mostly. People that barely even notice when they're shot and don't stop fighting until they bleed out. I carried a .380 PPK/S daily for 17 years and considered it to be 'enough' for most of that time. I'd been wanting to up the caliber of my carry gun for a couple of years toward the end of the PPK's reign as my EDC because of the increasing number of tweakers in the city. A large cougar stalking my wife at our house in the woods was the catalyst that got me to switch up to a .45. Eight years later there are even more tweakers and I wouldn't downsize my carry gun even if I sold the place in the woods.
 
@ Mr.510

Thanks for the additional insight. I'm always curious to hear how people arrive at the conclusions they do. I like having 10+ rounds on tap myself, but keep an LCP as a gun to carry when I can't carry a gun.
 
Between those two choices, I'd go with .380.

I've had my wrist rebuilt and I can't do .357 out of lightweight guns anymore. Even before the surgery, I didn't particularly like shooting .357 out of the steel J-frame I once had. I have trouble with extended sessions of .38s out of aluminum-framed revolvers. Heck, there are some handshakes that can almost bring me to tears. I function well otherwise. I had a good surgeon. But I don't want anything to undo what it took to correct this:
 

Attachments

  • xray.jpg
    xray.jpg
    34.7 KB · Views: 33
I chose the 5-shot .357 (Ruger LCR) and my wife chose the 6+1 .380 (SIG P238.) Good guns for pocket carry, but there are better choices for belt carry.
 
I'm not sure why you're carrying such a tiny .380. My EDC is a Browning .380 (the Bersa thunder is a clone), thats the same size as that revolver. But, I have 18 rounds of Buffalo Bore ammo in the gun and an extra mag with 20 more rounds. For me, the .380 is more accurate than a 9mm, and with 38 rounds available I don't worry about it's effectiveness. Remember, a handgun allows you to break contact with a bad guy(s) thats trying to hurt you!
 
I though the Brownings were basically Beretta 84s? The Bersa is a PP/PPK clone, with some additions (lock, mag disconnect).
 
I have to make this decision everyday which to carry my colt 38- 6 shot or my Beretta BDA 13 shot. More often I chose the 38 because it is so light and easy to carry.
 
Member


Join Date: May 18, 2008
Location: WA
Posts: 787
I though the Brownings were basically Beretta 84s? The Bersa is a PP/PPK clone, with some additions (lock, mag disconnect).

They are, although I think they look closer to the 85. But when was the last time you saw one for sale in a gun store? I use the Bersa as a comparison so I don't get blank looks. They are pretty close to the same size, DA/SA, hammer, beavertail, safety-decocker.
 
The Browning BDA was taken from the Beretta 84, it even has the PB stamped on it, the difference is it has a full shroud, safety decocker and holds 13+1.
 
Not .357 but rather .38 or .44 for me.

Among a couple others - our most common CC pistols are a Sig 230Sl for the .380, a Charter .44 and a Taurus 85.

Oddly, I can't really say that picking one over another has ever had anything to do with caliber or reloading for me.

As I often say, I don't anticipate running gunfights with cartel operatives or armor wearing Jihadists.

After reaching a certain tipping point - though acknowledging a nod to concealed carry in this case - this debate seldom stops before people start with highly unlikely scenarios in which nothing short of a battle carbine with all the bells and whistles will suffice.

So for me, considerations like snagging or controls manipulation trump caliber.


Todd.
 
You can laugh and call me a liar if you want but there are cases where .380 has failed to penetrate the breastbone of an adult male.

Between the two, .380 is not even a consideration for me.

The least capable gun I carry is a Ruger KLCR loaded with Corbon .357 DPX and it is a hideout/backup.
 
Last edited:
I'd take the 357.

If someone forces you to use deadly force to defend yourself, it's never a good idea to shoot him a little bit.
 
I would take 5 rounds of .357 out of a good revolver over 7 rounds of .380 any day. I don't carry spare ammo...unless I'm carrying a revolver, then I carry a speed strip, because it's just so easy I don't see why I wouldn't.
pistol.

But a good reliable revolver, that I've put through its paces...I have confidence that thing is going to work. And I have absolutely no hesitation trusting the terminal performance of .357 magnum. Or even a good 158gr LSWCHP +P, or the Speer 135gr +P Gold Dot.


Warp said It! I think .22 LR and .380 are O.K. defense guns, IF well-used, and that's all there is, but I'd rather have just a little more pizzaz in the effort, because one-shot stops are the exception. .357, .38 +P, 9mm.:)
 
You can laugh and call me a liar if you want but there are cases where .380 has failed to penetrate the breastbone of an adult male.
.380 is actually a pretty impressive penetrator, the only time it comes up short (under the FBI minimum) is when used with aggressively expanding rounds.

FMJ .380 should penetrate a couple inches short of 2 feet in soft tissue.

I'd be interested to see the details of shootings where a .380 bullet failed to penetrate the sternum. The sternum is generally less than 2/3 of an inch thick. A .380 bullet under normal circumstances should penetrate that easily with momentum and energy to spare.
 
I would be interested to know the circumstances of the case as well, although I wouldn't rule it out. People have survived crazy things and one guy might have had the invulnerable sternum for all we know but I just don't think that the average .380 round hitting the average man would struggle to penetrate.

At the end of the day I'm not trying to win a war here I'm trying to get home safe. How many men have a sternum that could withstand one or even two rounds, much less a large magazine? None.

I am not volunteering to stand in front of any test rounds, either.
 
I'm normally a proponent of more (good) rounds, over fewer, more powerful rounds.
But in the OP's scenario, I'd prefer the 5 rounds of .357 to a mere 7 rounds of .380.
But, I'd take 8-9 rounds of 9mm HST's or Gold Dots (as carried in a Shield or PPS) over those 5 rounds of 357's.
 
For me it is not so much about the rounds and their number as it is about the platform and the CONCEALED part of the question. I'll take 7 .380s in the TCP that carries in my pocket everyday/everywhere. A full sized .357 would beat that all over the place when it come to hitting at distance and a .357 snubby still trumps it in the shooting although to a lesser degree...... but I want what I WILL carry in my active job not what I could carry, sometimes, if I dress correctly.
 
I've carried a 3" barreled SP101 loaded with light .357 or .38+p for close to 5 years now. Conceals & shoots prefect for me. I'd recommend practicing with what you prefer instead of putting to much thought and worry into caliber choice.
 
You can laugh and call me a liar if you want but there are cases where .380 has failed to penetrate the breastbone of an adult male.

Nah, no point in name calling. But since this is the internet and skepticism tends to be a healthy thing, do you have a source you could point us to? Particularly if it includes the type of ammunition, as with FMJ .380 it's overpenetration that tends to be of concern?
 
My seven shot Colt Government 380 with 2 reloads is a LOT easier to conceal than my 6 shot Magnum Carry. Also easier to replace.

The gun itself isn't the problem it's the speed loaders that are a pain to conceal.

My 3 inch SP101 feels like it weighs twice as much as the 380 but packs as easily as the Colt. It's a good compromise in power and weight.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top