.380 FMJ For Self-Defense?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I sometimes carry my Beretta 84F, loaded with hot Underwood XTP loads. I feel pretty well armed with the combination. The Beretta carries well, and points like a finger for me. It has proven very accurate at extended ranges, even.
Mine is Israeli surplus, and I bought as more of a bargain priced whim. After I shot it, I changed my tune, it just fit my hand perfectly, and worked. To think that some guy probably patrolled Jerusalem or Tel Aviv with it, but I should be afraid in Cleveland seems laughable.

West Park native, since moved away.
 
380 FMJ will provide sufficient penetration to do damage if it hits a critical spot. For example a 380, 38 special, or 9mm ball round through the pelvis bone will disable an attacker.
 
If its all you have, pack em.
I will say this though....

The DNR wont let us use non expanding bullets on animals- its illegal. Inhumane, although they can create mortal wounds, they lack the stopping power, lack energy transfer, and lack damage other than making a hole, a literal puncture wound through the target (No fmj can be used on deer) And thats typically out of a high powered rifle.... not a .380.

In war, we must use FMJ ammo. Why, because its less likely to kill, maim, or create excessive damage.....(and whatever other reasons, please feel free not to comment further on the reasons of the GC, not the issue here, and no killing is not our goal as self defenders either)

Law enforcement and Civilian CCW folks are encouraged to carry expanding hollow points, ones that penetrate the 16" or so mark, and expanding enough to get the 16 or so inches of penetration but not too much more than that.

Boxes of FMJ typically say key words like "Target" "Range" or "Training" on them.

Boxes of JHP typically say key words like "Personal Protection" "Defense" or "Law enforcement" etc. on the boxes.

Now, all of this taken into account, if you can fire your weapon competently with FMJs and are able to do your part like youd need to, youve got 99.95% the protection youd ever probably need, with the 100% mark being if your gun was loaded with quality hollow point ammo. Not bad.
 
Last edited:
The .380s that are super compact, the width of a deck of cards or so, and fit in the palm of your hand, have quite the place in the CCW world. If you are in Swim trunks and a man tank on vacation, and dont want to be printing.... I use a .25 acp Beretta Jetfire when I cannot carry my Kahr K9 or Glock 19 in a few rare circumstances. 380 would be a big step up in caliber, and in a package not much bigger than the saturday night special.
 
I'm with Palladan on this. FMJ pistol bullets were something we used until something better came along. Something better was pistol bullets that actually expanded on impact. For example, hollow points. You can use FMJ, and it's better than nothing; it's as good as it ever was. But you are kidding yourself if you think it is as good as a good expanding bullet. Those are what the cops use, and after all, they ought to know.

Also, flat points and semi-wadcutters and wadcutters were tried way back when, like before WWII. None of them made enough difference to get any real traction, except in the eyes of the people who designed them. People hoped they make a difference, but that was pretty much wishful thinking. There seems to be a lot of that when it comes to pistols.
 
First of all, a hit with a 22 RF trumps a miss with a 44 Magnum. Remember that when choosing a self defense cartridge.

We have a small horse farm and trap and dispose of a variety of undesirable critters that can have effect on our horses. I'm surprised of how difficult it is to kill the critters that I trap. The raccoons and opossums do not die easily even with head shot coup-de-gras. I hate to see an animal suffer.

While then "experts"say 380 ACP is a marginal self defense cartridge, a well placed hit will put a definite hurt in the bad guy regardless of what the "experts" say.

The best bet is to consider the carry requirements and keep the limitations of the cartridge/gun used in mind to optimize the success of the cartridge at hand.
 
.380s in blow back guns have pretty snappy recoil , an LCP really wallops you , enough to make a difference in repeat accurate shots for me, I recently gave my LCP to a son to go with his S&W .40 he is trained on for a back up. I carry (again ) my Walther PPS .40 which is almost twice as heavy and only a little bigger than the LCP , it still fits in a Mika Pocket holster with the shorter 6 round magazine. The PPS .40 kicks pretty good too, but less for me than an LCP with hotter ammo and I shoot much more accurately with it. I do still have a few .380s and would carry them if needed. My French Model C MAB .380 has grip and lever safeties so I feel safe with its single action stricker fir and at 17 .oz of all steel is a better shooter for me than the LCP. Same with the Walther PP .380 , which is about the same size as my original Remington Model 51 which I also feel safe with in condition one and is very soft shooting. The Mauser HSC Super holds 13 rounds and has a big grip and is not a pocket pistol but has a little longer barrel and shoots very accurately and fast and can be safely carried fully loaded. I had a Colt Mustang Pocket Lite and although it was a little ammo picky it was light shooting and only weighed a few onces more than the LCP but about half the recoil. But the cocked and locked action with no grip safety was not a pocket pistol either. Another son claimed it years back.
In .380 the Remington Short barrel defense load works well in the longer barrel guns, as does the Federal Micro defense load and the XTP and the Gold dot. The old Geco silver FMJ loads were the hottest and best functoion in any thing I tried them in. In the older guns my now meager supply of them is in those . In the other I really like the 102 grain Remington short barrel defensive load. It has good penetration , a good feeding profile in most anything and they seem to go close to 10" or so in gel tests when they expand to 1/2" and more when they don't.(mostly in the shorter barreled guns like the LCP) . .380 is very similar to .38 S&W ammo in short barrel guns, a known killer for 150 years. .
 
In the Lucky Gunner tests the .380 round that had the best and most consistent penetration was the 88 grain - Remington HTP. Average penetration was 16.9" The most shallow penetrating bullet penetrated 15.9" and the deepest penetrating bullet was 17.4"

All 5 bullets had the exact same level of expansion. :)

https://www.luckygunner.com/380-auto-88-gr-jhp-remington-htp-500-rounds#geltest

I guess the non-expanding hollow-point acts like a reverse parachute, creating drag and slowing down the bullet - I don't know, but very consistent and very good penetration from the Remington HTPs.

index.php


People have asked before "how are they better than FMJ ?" If you have no problem with a bullet zipping out the back of your assailant then the 88 grain - Remington HTP isn't better. If you don't want the bullet leaving the assailent then the 88 grain - Remington HTP is better.
 
Last edited:
It's just an impossible question to answer . an elephant may be killed with a single 22lr and a racoon may take 10 rounds of 45 to be quickly killed. Too many variables , angle, clothing, exact shot placement, your targets individual anatomy, ECT. On and on. The best you can do is the best you can do. You already got your answer, yep 380 will most certainly disable an attacker. How long will it take? How longs a piece of string...
I know this isn't about another caliber war but might be interesting to show this again, well, looking at the title, I guess it is..NOT brought down from the mountain top on a stone tablet..just another interesting 'study' about caliber effectiveness.
https://sofrep.com/gear/the-best-handgun-caliber-a-real-world-study/
.380s in blow back guns have pretty snappy recoil , an LCP really wallops you

Pretty sure the LCP is a locked breech type, not blowback but weighs just 11 Oz or so..I had one, didn't like shooting it at all..
 
IMO/IME most of the time when people are defending a pocket 380 (or 32) its not just about the caliber.
It is about being able to have "better than nothing" in a pocket, minimal carry effort; its about attire.
If limited by work attire that is understandable.
If they could carry something bigger but do not want to make the effort of bigger than a pocket gun look for "good area" or "risk assessment".
In their rationalization of carrying "better than nothing" when they could do better than that, criminals & psychos are conveniently immobile.
They anticipate having to leave the "good area" to encounter "bad" people and if they do they are carrying bigger/more than that pocket 380.
So if sombeody(s) try to kill them in "good area" a 380 will suffice, but elsewhere a 9mm (for example) or more is preferred. (Illogical)
My risk assessment is I assess that if I have to defend myself against a threat (risk) I want something more than 380 regardless of location.
I can dress as I choose, which is for concealment, and have no trouble concealing a 1911 or Glock 19/23 under a loose untucked shirt.
If limited by work attire and a pocket 380 is the best you can do you have my sympathy, I've been there.
Otherwise, anything 380 can do in its best loads, 9mm in its best loads can do better, .... More ASAP potential is worth the effort. :thumbup:
 
The lack of that information does not prevent us from assessing the sufficiency of the performance of the. 380.
But no one in his right mind would conclude from that incident that .380 performance is not marginal.
 
No, but penstration and expansion data do so very well.

Penetration and expansion data describe performance in a given media which allows us to predict the bullet's performance in tissue, but the scenario dictates whether such performance will be sufficient.
 
One thing to remember about the Lucky Gunner 380 tests are they were done with the longer 3.25" barrel of the Glock 42. Even with that barrel they just barely made it and when you drop down to a 2.75" LCP or similar 380, the performance of the HPs will most likely suffer a bit.

I've always thought my LCP Custom with the slip on Hogue grip was pretty easy to control and shoot accurately. I really appreciate the better sights.+
*-
 
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.

''Marginal'' is a good characterization of the .380's performance.

I'd agree with Givens.

I've always considered .380s to be a ''what I carry when I can't carry a gun'' sort of option especially when faced with the need to carry in a risky NPE.
 
I like to read these "whatever bullet in whatever caliber" threads but have to wonder about one thing. Just how many responders in these posts have actual experience in seeing what any bullet in any caliber does to a human. I know I will probably get hammered on but that's really the only way to tell. Shoot gelatin, vegetables, bottle of water or soda, meat from the store, whatever, and you will get some idea of the capabilites but it isn't a living, breathing, human. which is what we are usually discussing in a self defense situation. Police and military that have stood up against bad people are excused.

I really don't think that is the only way to tell, although I have seen what a .380 can do to a person and I know other authoritative sources who have relayed their first hand experience about same.

For those who don't discount jello, meat and bone tests, I have decided to carry 90 grain Xtreme Penetrators in a Glock 42 because they penetrate barriers and, contrary to the name, do not over-penetrate in .380 caliber. They also are more likely to act like a wadcutter than a FMJ ball round. I also "tested" Gold Dots and found great expansion but shallow penetration when barriers are encountered. If you want to watch those tests, they are here. Turn the volume off if you don't like wind noise. Apologies to those who have seen these before.



 
Last edited:
except for one thread on lehigh ed non hollow points, no one talks about other non hollow points that also leave a substantial wound track like the ars and g9 bullets. All these penetrate better than hollow points and leave do leave larger wound caviities than fmj's.. I also use lehigh ed in 32acp. BestAll
 
It seems the available data, whether it is video, reported, or anecdotal is all over the place. Lucky Gunner, for example, along with other sources shows Hydra-Shok over-penetrating and under-expanding. CraigC, on the other hand, reports “textbook expansion”. Going on the assumption that all these contradictory reports on Hydra-Shok (and other loads) are accurate, it seems clear that different results would indicate inconsistent results over many tests. One round that consistently seems to show reliable expansion but slightly less penetration than desired is Speer’s Gold Dot. All this brings me back to FMJ flat nose which seems to get usually around 17-18 inches of penetration with a pretty fair chance of tumbling. Even there, some sources say flat nose is more likely to tumble and others say round nose is more likely to tumble. One would think the answer would be cut and dried, but it is not. Until I can get enough Gold Dot to test for myself, I’ll stick with Winchester Q4206, which I know feeds and penetrates but has largely spent its energy IF it over-penetrates. At least, that’s where my thinking is at the moment.
 
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
Glock 42 is prob the most shootable .380. Kahr P380 is snappier and the EC9S is snappy too since its a 9mm in such a light and small gun. Worth the price, it's like $400 now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top