do you own and shoot a .380?

Bodyguard. Very reliable, my deep concealment choice right now.

I have several 380 ACP pistols and am comfortable they will provide adiauate protection for the size trade off.

My 1980 vintage Beretta M84 shoots anout anything Infeed to it but it is large for a 380 ACP with 13+1 magazine capacity. The M85 is the single stack version.

The Kel-Tec P3AT is a tiny pistol and recoil shows it. I fo not like shooting it due to the snappy recoil even though it is locked breech recoil.

I have s Colt Mustang anf it is a good picket pistol if you are comfortable with SA pustols with a manual safety.

Currently, my preference is SA/DA pistols. I have an S&W PPK that is reliable with FMJ ammunition. It is good for pocket carry with a pocket holster. It can get heavy at times. The S&W PPK does not shoot designer HP bullets well but I feel penetration of 380ACP ammunition is more important as expansion is hit or miss with hollow points.

Any way, choose your gun and find what it likes best to be reliable. Then, be happy.

I wish there was a target pistol in .380 though, like this:
https://waltherarms.com/gsp-32-expert-right-m/

Or maybe like a Ruger Mark IV 380. If Browning can make 1911-380 from 1911-22, why not?

Unfortunately, a blowback gun requires a heavier bolt in .380 than in .32, as Beretta found out when they re-chambered Model 81 and frames started peening. But it's still within realm of possible, I think.

In theory Grand Power ROXOR was imported in small numbers. It, and FN 1910/71, is probably the closest we'll ever get to the idea. The problem really is that competition rules generally do not allow .380 except in IDPA BUG division and GSSF. So, no manufacturer sees a market.

The FN 10/71. Hmmm... that rings a bell...

9mmepiphany said:

are generally more accurate

Click to expand...

Everything else in your post I agree with, but my personal experience is that .380 is just as accurate. The counterpoint to my experience is this. My .380’s are at the upper end when it comes to size and weight which mitigates felt recoil a good bit. In addition the my sample size is too small to come to a definitive conclusion.

I’m not much of a handgun maven though I own a few. I do have a thing for Colt .38 SPCL’s and .380’s that are larger than many 9x19’s. My next purchase will be a single stack Cheetah(85).

I'm down to just two 380 pistols. I have my Kel-Tec P3AT that I carry when I need for something small and discreet. The other is an older Llama IIIA that I occasionally shoot.

I had a mint Beretta Cheetah. Stupidly sold it (though I made money on the deal). Also got rid of a fine Makarov in .380 ACP.

Presently, the spousal unit and I possess exactly one pistol in .380, a superb SIG P-238 Extreme. Really nice little shooter that sees a lot of range time and gets carried as a back-up on occasion when a 1911 is the order of the day.

9mmepiphany said:

Part of the problem is that they now make 9mm pistols that are almost as small as .380 ones. They generally recoil less as they utilize a locked action, are generally more accurate and offer a wider selection of ammo (also less expensive)

Click to expand...

Regarding recoil, the vast majority of new .380 pistols created in the last couple of decades have been locked-breech designs.

• BLOWBACK: Bersa BP380, Grand Power CP380, RIA Baby Rock
• GAS DELAY: Walther CCP
• LOCKED BREECH: Beretta Pico, Browning 1911-380, Diamondback DB380, Glock 42, Kimber 380 Micro, Remington RM380, Ruger LC380, Ruger LCP line, S&W Bodyguard 380, S&W Shield EZ 380, SCCY CPX-3/4, Sig P238, Sig P250, Sig P290RS, Springfield 911, Taurus 638, Taurus 738, Taurus Spectrum, Walther PK380

I do not remember reading that .380ACP is inherently less accurate than 9mm or that the lockup on .380 pistols was inherently less consistent than 9mm, although references would be appreciated.

I think a locked-breech, rotary-barrel pistol chambered in .380 would be very cool.

9mm epiphany,

I will have to greatly disagree with your status about small 9m.m. pistols recoiling less than a .380ACP.
I have shot almost all of the small 9mm pistols like the GLOCK 43, KAHR, S&W and SPRINGFIELD ARMORY. They were all unpleasant to shoot and the RUGER LC9 was just awful! That has not been a problem with my GLOCK 42 .380ACP or the unlocked breech SIG 232 or BERETTA 84 or even the very small BROWNING /FN 1910 that I owned.

I have been shooting a SIG 365 for the past month and it has noticeably stronger recoil than any of the above .380ACP pistols, even when shooting generic fmj ammo, which is loaded lighter than similar weight jhp ammo in my experience.

For the past 4 years, I have carried a GLOCK 42 when off duty.
I have shot the BERETTA 84 and SIG 232. Both are great guns, but not nearly as concealable as the GLOCK 42, which I pocket carry.
The funny thing is that I can shoot the GLOCK 42 almost as well as the larger .380'S. It is an outstanding small gun. I find it just as reliable as all the other GLOCK pistols and easier to shoot than most small guns.

I carry WINCHESTER Defend ammo, part of the Train & Defend line. I have found it very reliable, accurate and it should expand, which very few .380 rounds will.

I have also used HORNADY Critical Defense in the past, but I think the WINCHESTER ammo will expand better.
The fact is that their are VERY FEW .380ACP rounds that will reliably expand. I do not count the +P type of rounds that some of the boutique makers sell. Yes, they have a better chance of expanding, but they also recoil more and in a gun as small the GLOCK 42, you need to balance your bullet effectiveness requirements against the poorer controllability caused by the increased recoil.

Jim

thunderbyrd said:

at some point, i plan to buy a browning 1911-380. i love the way that pistol looks and i think it would be ok for concealed carry. but i have no experience with that caliber. i've watched a bunch of videos of that gun, on some there's no problems and some others it don't feed so good.

so i wonder about anybody's experiences with .380 and what is the good ammo and what to avoid. i've got this notion in my head that autoloaders work better with ball ammo than with hollowpoints. i know the .380 isn't a real powerhouse round, but, hey, i'm a "shot placement" believer

any thoughts about .380 you'd care to share?

it's the 2d rung on my "Stairway to 1911".

Click to expand...

I own one, I think I had it out of the safe once about 10 years ago.

9mmepiphany said:

My smallest choices for CCW are the Kahr CW9 or the Springfield EMP...I load them with Speer 124gr Gold Dots

Click to expand...

That's kind of my thought... for the same size, I can carry a 9mm.

If you want to shoot a .380 as a range pistol... that's fine; as I mentioned, I like my Colt's Government .380... it's a great pistol... but for the size, I'll carry a 9mm.

Kahr CW9 on the L, Colt .380 on the R....

A 380 is a good carry gun and will meet the needs of 99.9% of people.

GRIZ22 said:

A 380 is a good carry gun and will meet the needs of 99.9% of people.

Click to expand...

"Meet the needs" seems vague.
"need" is sorta tough to discern, I've carried 25+ years and never "needed" a single bullet, but that has no bearing on my carry choice.
"need" shouldn't change with location, because "bad" people are mobile; whatever is "needed" in a "bad" area is therefore "needed" everywhere.
If a cross torso shot or forearm is factored, at least 12'' of penetration may be needed and larger holes (expanded bullet) is desirable too.
Therefore, ammo capable of at least 12'' penetration and consistent expansion may be "needed", desirable qualities for sure.
Few 380 loads are capable of meeting the desired combo of at least 12'' penetration and consistent expansion.
Several 9mm bullets available meet the desired criteria, HST for example; 9mm minimum for me, Glock 19 everywhere.
I must be part of the .1% (despite that I'm in hot FL and live in a "good area" ).

"a good carry gun" is vague, but very relative IME.
Why? Because often its more about what one is willing to carry than it is caliber.
Some will argue the merits of 380 (32 acp), cite statistics, even post rationalizations like "better than nothing" or "wouldn't want to get shot with it".
What they don't post is they are unwilling to untuck shirt, wear a holster on belt, dress for concealment, when they could.
They usually don't just say the most I'm willing to do is a pocket gun, they might say "its a good carry gun, or meets the needs".

Inapplicable to those actually limited by work attire.

I am constantly amazed at gun owners who feel the need to malign the choices other gun owners make. Maybe it makes people feel better about themselves to claim their decisions are superior to others' decisions.

Whatever ...

Get a gun you like, practice until you are proficient with it, and have it available when and where it may be needed.

I would rather have a 380 in my pocket versus anything bigger left at home. With the 380, ammo selection is important. I do not feel under-gunned when carrying a 380. No matter what you carry, practice is the key.

As far as perceived/felt recoil, there is a difference. I have shot the Sig P238 and the Sig P938 and there is a noticeable difference.

I bought my Beretta 84F largely because it was cheap Israeli surplus, and it was a pistol I wanted when I was young.
I didn’t foresee any serious use for it…figured it for a range gun. After all, I have a G26 I shoot well and find easy to carry.
But a few trips to the range kind of changed that. I found that the Beretta 84 ergonomics just magically fit my hand perfectly. It points like finger. It is more accurate than any 380 I’ve ever fired. I even hit the 10” steel plate at 80yds at the club. Of course, it’s 100% reliable. Easy carry in a nice Bianchi IWB clip on holster.
I load it with Underwood +P XTP’s, and feel pretty well armed with it.

CDW4ME said:

"Meet the needs" seems vague.
"need" is sorta tough to discern, I've carried 25+ years and never "needed" a single bullet, but that has no bearing on my carry choice.
"need" shouldn't change with location, because "bad" people are mobile; whatever is "needed" in a "bad" area is therefore "needed" everywhere.
If a cross torso shot or forearm is factored, at least 12'' of penetration may be needed and larger holes (expanded bullet) is desirable too.
Therefore, ammo capable of at least 12'' penetration and consistent expansion may be "needed", desirable qualities for sure.
Few 380 loads are capable of meeting the desired combo of at least 12'' penetration and consistent expansion.
Several 9mm bullets available meet the desired criteria, HST for example; 9mm minimum for me, Glock 19 everywhere.
I must be part of the .1% (despite that I'm in hot FL and live in a "good area" ).

"a good carry gun" is vague, but very relative IME.
Why? Because often its more about what one is willing to carry than it is caliber.
Some will argue the merits of 380 (32 acp), cite statistics, even post rationalizations like "better than nothing" or "wouldn't want to get shot with it".
What they don't post is they are unwilling to untuck shirt, wear a holster on belt, dress for concealment, when they could.
They usually don't just say the most I'm willing to do is a pocket gun, they might say "its a good carry gun, or meets the needs".

Inapplicable to those actually limited by work attire.

Click to expand...

Meet the needs is not vague. The purpose of carrying a firearm rests in its ability to inflict a serious wound on your opponent. A 380 will do that. A 9x19, 357 magnum, or 45 ACP will most likely do it better but a 380 will meet the need.

It's good to hear you've never "needed" a bullet.

Look at the Lucky Gunner ammo tests. They test 19 different 380 loads. 11 of them meet that 12" of penetration. Some do 20" or more. That's more than "a few". You need to do more research. Once you've put a 9mm entry wound and 9mm exit wound in a target (maybe bigger if you used a hollowpoint that worked) it really makes no difference if you made those wounds with a 380, 9x18, or 9x19. Does it?

Yes, bad people are everywhere. Concentrated in bad areas. Read the "Armed Citizen" in the American Rifleman. Most bad guys cave in when they are confronted with an armed citizen. No shots fired. The bad guys are not looking for a gunfight.

Yes, bad guys are everywhere. You might want to arm yourself against a Mumbai or Paris terrorist attack. If that were my choice my handgun would only be a backup to my AR. FWIW, I saw a stat you're more likely to be killed by lightning than a terrorist attack. Last week two people were killed by lightning near me. No one was killed by a terrorist.

I never said anything about pocket guns. I'm talking caliber. A Beretta 84 is far from a pocket gun. Being you brought the subject up I will agree most people who carry a Kel Tec or Ruger LCP are fooling themselves. What you carry is related to your skill level.

I see people satisfied with shooting 8" groups at 7 yds. I shoot 6" groups with my S&W BG 380 at 25 yds. About the same as a J frame 2".

I've been a LEO firearms and tactics instructor since 1976. Please don't try to patronize me with your 25 years of carrying. I've been carrying almost twice as long. I used to tell my trainees if you can consistently put a round in the eye socket you can get away with carrying a 22.

I have no issue carrying a full size service pistol concealed under a tshirt. However, a 380, you can shoot well is not a bad option.

I saw a video recently where the poster was promoting 22 and 25 as SD calibers. Most armed citizens need a "Get off of me" response. A 22 or 25 will do that. A 380 will do it better.

Kleanbore said:

Firearms chambered for the .380 Auto vary significantly. There are some that I would not consider "good carry guns".

What do you mean by that?

Click to expand...

I think I answered your questions I'm my response to CDW4ME.

I had a Colt model 1903/08 380ACP until the Clinton ammo drought, at which time I sold it. I haven't had a 380 since.

GRIZ22 said:

Meet the needs is not vague. The purpose of carrying a firearm r̶e̶s̶t̶s̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶i̶t̶s̶ ̶a̶b̶i̶l̶i̶t̶y̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶i̶n̶f̶l̶i̶c̶t̶ ̶a̶ ̶s̶e̶r̶i̶o̶u̶s̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶n̶d̶ ̶o̶n̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶r̶ ̶o̶p̶p̶o̶n̶e̶n̶t̶

I saw a video recently where the poster was promoting 22 and 25 as SD calibers. Most armed citizens need a "Get off of me" response. A 22 or 25 will do that. A 380 will do it better.

Click to expand...

The purpose of carrying is to stop attacker(s) ASAP hopefully before they can inflict serious or fatal injury.
I was a cop too, has no influence on my carry, nor was it counted in 25+ years.
"Meets the needs" is vague, and vague may be indicative that something relevant is omitted.
For example: one says a 380 "meets their needs".
They don't say they carry bigger than 380 when going to an area of greater anticipated threat, or that they are unwilling to carry bigger in a "good area".
Its usually more about preferred manner of dress than it is caliber but often some do not just say that.