.32 vs .380 & etc...

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bob79

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
586
Location
USA
Okay, I have a Seecamp .32 and love the size/gun all around. I don't even want to get into the discussion about "you can carry a larger gun & better caliber". I agree its much better to have 9mm or .38+P, I don't debate that at all, but for me to carry all the time, its gotta be real small.

Now I considered trading up my .32 Seecamp for a .380 model (I know its expensive $750), but it seems from what I have read the .32 and .380 performance is very similar. Comparing energy, penetration, & expansion. Opinions on .32/.380 comparison?

I have talked to Larry Seecamp and he said you can try other ammo, and I have shot Cor Bon flawlessly, along with Silver Tip, and Gold Dot. Looking on the Golden Loki website gel tests it looks like the Fiocchi, Hornady, and Hydra Shoks penetrate better though. I still can't shoot FMJ (too large, even if I could risk of rim lock goes up), so am I splitting hairs, or would you suggest I use something that penetrates better or stick with the Cor Bons?

I won't buy a Kel-Tec (no offense, just don't like plastic), the Guardian .380 would be great except its way too heavy:( and the Rohrbaugh is really costly, and is still larger than KT's, Seecamp, and NAA.

All opinions, personal experiences, & any info on data resources is greatly appreciated!
 
Recognizing that a .32 is on the thin side for a defense round, and that bigger is mostly better at the low end, if your Seecamp is reliable and digests what you feed it, I don't see a real upside to trading up and losing a known quantity in the process.
 
Hiya bob.

Glad to see your .32 got fixed. :)

Seriously; I'd leave well enough alone. The difference between .32 and .380 is rather marginal, IMO.

It's not as if we're talking the difference between 9mm and .45. :D :D :D

I personally don't think its worth the money and effort to "upgrade" (if it really is much of an upgrade) to the .380.

Where you think you gonna find a .380 Seecamp anyway? :scrutiny:

You know something I don't? Those things are pretty rare, from what I hear.

No, the only gun I'd consider trading my Seecamp for would be the Rohrbaugh 9mm, but its so much bigger than the Seecamp that again, I'd probably stick with my Seecamp.

I love this little thing. :)

But hey, if it really bugs you that much, go for it, or else you won't be truly happy.

You shouldn't have a hard time getting rid of your Seecamp either.
 
The 380 is only marginally better stopper than the 32
66% Best for 32acp (Silvertip - 151 actual shootings)
71% Best for 380 (CorBon 90gr JHP - 138 actual shootings)
Just for comparison
67% Best for 38 +P from 2" barrel (3 different loads - 288 actual shootings)
62% Best for 45acp in FMJ "hardball"(3 different loads - 575 actual shootings)

The 380 in Seecamp or NAA is considerably heavier, marginally larger, and much more recoil than the 32 from either of those makers. I have thought about getting a P3AT since it is considerally lighter than the Seecamp or NAA 32's, but that only magnifies the recoil problem.

The only thing significantly better than the 32acp that will still fit in a pocket is a 9mm or 40s&w or 357sig, but those are considerably larger and heavier than the 32.

That is why I am sticking with my 32 Guardian since I can deliver more rounds on target faster from a smaller package than any gun/round combination in 380 or 38 special.

I do carry a AMT Backup in 40s&w on a belt pouch occasionally. It fits in my front pocket, but it is simply too heavy to carry that way comfortably. I could do it though, if the need arose.
 
Just my 2 cents but since you are thinking of stepping up in power but think
the Rohrbaugh 9mm is too expensive, consider the Kahr PM9. Less expensive,
very lightweight, accurate, excellent workmanship and a company that will stand behind the product. While it is larger than the Seecamp, I belive it is lighter, holds more rounds and it's 9mm.
Just my opinion.

JimL3
 
Thanks

Rolltide-That is good info, where did you find those stats?

It really brings into perspective the actual difference in .32 vs .380, which is there really isn't that much of it. Now I understand why so may people say that the .380 is such a wimpy round (when its right there w/ .32). I used to think ".380, just a short 9mm, its gotta pretty good".

Dr Jones- Wild Alaska says hes getting in the .380 any time and they will be $750. I agree though, I LOVE MY SEECAMP. The size is just perfect, and all metal is great too, w/ such a low weight (mine was 13.4 ozs fully loaded). Going back to the recoil issue, I think that is important when Larry told me it was about 40% increase, I guess I didn't realize how big a jump that really is. I do have some Hornady and Hydrashoks on the way to try in my Seecamp, about 100 rounds each coming. I'll hafta see how they run reliability wise. According to Golden Loki the Hornady and Hydrashok penetrate further, but aren't as hot as the Cor Bon (out of KT P-32). Maybe Cor Bon in summer, and others in winter?

I had a Kahr PM9, it was just a little too large for me to carry all the time. It shot nice, some feeding issues, but a good gun. I just cant see spending $900 for the Rohrbaugh, especially now since I'm used to the Seecamp. If I spent the $$$ for a Rohrbaugh, and didn't carry it because I felt it was too big I'd be :fire: :banghead: :cuss:
 
Rohrbaugh to big?? Not for me...I have carried the "pattern" version that Eric sent me...Carries like a dream...Hopefully this Christmas I will have one of the real ones to play with...

.380 trumps the .32 all day long..

9mm trumps the 380...I can deal with it being slightly bigger to get the better stopping power of the 9mm...

just my .02 peso's
 
I do think the R9 is a nice little pistol, no doubt. The major problem is the price, with size being a close 2nd. I'm not saying its huge or anything, just compared with the Seecamp, there is a good size difference. Example, my friend had out his Tomcat .32 the other day, and it just seemed so much bigger, where I was thinking "man I wouldn't want to carry that".

I do agree that the .380 is slightly better than the .32, but to say that it "trumps" it I don't agree. Maybe its just the word "trump", but to me that word used that way means it blows it away.

From all the reading I've done it doesn't appear that there is hardly that much difference in the 2 rounds. Now when you jump up to a .38+P or standard 9mm the difference is apparent. When looking at ammo performance it seems pretty much that "bigger is better" holds true 90% of the time. Just my opinion.

The 9mm is a better round, but its not worth it to me to pay $500+ more for the R9. And I know that since its larger I won't carry it 100% of the time like I've done with the Seecamp. Besides like all of us here already know, SHOT PLACEMENT IS BY FAR #1. I know a guy who shot someone 5 times with 9mm, hit him once in the torso (and that wasn't a good placement either), and the other rounds hit the limbs. The guy continued to fight with no effect. Do you think he would have still been fighting with a .22 to the face or neck???
 
The folks that get shot with .32s and .380s and survive, I'm willing to bet to a person, could not tell you which caliber they were shot with when they were shot.
 
Bob...IF that's your real name!!

Have you looked at a Rorhbaugh?? It and the P3At are not that far apart in size...However you are correct that it is on the pricey side...how about a Kahr mk9?? Good little pistol and is size efficent (sp?)

OR..how about going to the Naa .380?? Good little pistol but on the heavy side..

KT P3at...Good gun, but some dont trust it..<~~I have 3!! :D
 
.32 vs .380 is a lot like Buger King fries vs MickeyD fries for being an example of meal.

If either are golden brown (shot placement), they taste good (get the job done). Both have an unfortunate tendancy to be limp and greasy however (not too much in the stopping power arena). They are handy to find though, with MickeyD (.380) being the more common and generally having a better reputation for being prepared the right way (better but arbitrary worth).

My opinion is I'd rather have a burger (9mm) or better yet, a nice strip steak (.45),,,then again,,,maybe a fillet (.44Rem Mag)

:D
YMMV.

*Can ya tell I started a diet?
 
Natedog,
M&S did not publish any statistics, only reported historical facts. What those facts mean is hotly debated. I think the lesson learned from these facts is not that the 32 is superior to the 45, (although that has proved true in a few percent of actual shooting cases) but that JHP, even in the lowly 32, is superior to FMJ, even in the mighty 45, even if only by a few percentage points. It seems that the evidence from real shootings points out that the trauma caused from JHP rounds is a major contributing factor to fight stopping. FMJ's seem to "pencil" their way through with very little tissue disruption and associated trauma. FMJ's are poor performers across all calibers. It seems that across all calibers 32 and up FMJ's stopping numbers tend to stay in the 50 something to 60 something range. Not exactly awe inspiring an any caliber. These type trends would be impossible to fake if all cases are evaluated on the same basis, as M&S did. This does tend to lend credibility to M&S numbers in general.

I have read accounts of a person employed to trap and dispatch problem black bears for a large timber company. In dispatching around 100 black bears with a 44 Magnum handgun, he experimented with different rounds. He used everything from heavy solids to JHP's. These bears usually had one leg in a trap and were pulling at the end of the chain exhibiting EXTREME aggression towards the person with the gun at the time they were shot. The heavy solids seemed to have little or no immediate effect on the aggression of the bear (unless there was a CNS shot of course) even though penetration was often "through and through" with major organs being hit. However, almost universally, when a bear was hit by a single 240gr JHP it recoiled in pain, started biting at the wound or rolling on the ground, and lost focus on the shooter. Based on this vast experience, this person, who is now a professional hunting guide, carries only 240gr to 260gr JHP's in his 44mag when in black bear country.

I said all that to point out the solids and FMJ's even in very potent calibers are very poor performers in immediately stopping aggresion, although it seems considerably more effective in humans (60%) than on bears (0%), as would be expected. Also, the pain caused from JHP expansion and tissue disruption is enough to make even a 300lb, adrenaline pumped bear backup and think twice.

I think this is an extremely powerful argument for JHP's over FMJ's in any caliber in any protection situation. M&S numbers seem to be very valid in pointing up this trend in humans.

Hal,
I don't know if I followed your entire analogy completely, but it sure made me hungry. I think I am going off my diet. THANKS A LOT !!!!!! (It sure didn't take much to send me off my diet did it?)

Best Regards,
(getting fatter and happier, at least for today thanks to Hal)
Roll Tide
 
Last edited:
Azrael-I have seen the photo comparisons posted w/ the Rohrbaugh. And yes its very small for a 9mm, very close in size to the P-3AT. Maybe when they come down in price I will get one, but its still about 5-6 ozs heavier fully loaded than the Seecamp. Its also 1/2 "taller", 1 inch longer, & slightly thicker. Now I understand that those dimensions are only marginally larger for a superior round, but conveinance (#1 for me), and price are ruling it out. If the R9 was in the $500-650 range I may be more swayed. I fugure w/ time I can't lose, I get to see how the gun performs and evolves, and eventually it will come down in price. ALSO I would have bought a NAA .380, but the darn thing is a brick! Come on, almost 19 ozs unloaded! Fully loaded its gotta be about 22 ozs, that just too heavy (55% more, if my math is right)!!! I just can't bring myself to trust a plastic pistol, other than larger glocks, and H&K.

Hal-good analogy buddy:D It did make sense though.

As far as performance between the 2 rounds, its tough to find good information. But I do agree that the .380 is better, but not by very much. The information that I did find that was more reliable does tend to show they are fairly close. Like comparing what manufacturers show for performance:
.32 .380
Silver tip 970/125 1000/189
Cor Bon 1050/150 1050/220
Fiocchi 1200/205 1000/205

And if you look at the expansion comarisons of the two in JHP, they are fairly close. Yes, there is more energy for the .380 which is good, and it is still a larger diameter. But I just don't see the difference between these 2 calibers as being that impressive. Both are considered by many to be weak anyways, but a .32 or .380 is better than no gun. Besides no one here who carries this caliber is stopping any bank robberies, its a last ditch caliber. The bad guy is in your face and you can't run, and he won't back down. And they confrontations are going to be very close (10 feet, prob less), and if you practice at all, hopefully you can get one head/neck shot in there.

AND, there aren't too many options for something small here. The KT .380, the NAA .380 are about the only real small ones I can think of.
 
Rolltide,

Not to hound you but:

"I have read accounts of a person employed to trap and dispatch problem black bears for a large timber company. In dispatching around 100 black bears with a 44 Magnum handgun, he experimented with different rounds. He used everything from heavy solids to JHP's. These bears usually had one leg in a trap and were pulling at the end of the chain exhibiting EXTREME aggression towards the person with the gun at the time they were shot. The heavy solids seemed to have little or no immediate effect on the aggression of the bear (unless there was a CNS shot of course) even though penetration was often "through and through" with major organs being hit. However, almost universally, when a bear was hit by a single 240gr JHP it recoiled in pain, started biting at the wound or rolling on the ground, and lost focus on the shooter. Based on this vast experience, this person, who is now a professional hunting guide, carries only 240gr to 260gr JHP's in his 44mag when in black bear country."

I find it hard to accept the word and integrity of a person who used trapped bears as a device to test the effectiveness of various handgun rounds instead of opting for a more potent rifle or shotgun to be more humane especially considering it was his job. It wasn't like he was out enjoying the wilderness and happened to come across a bear. His job was to kill the bears. That means using the right tool for the job. A .44 and some testing is not the right way to do that job.
 
MJRW,
Well, bless your heart. I trust the man myself. He has been mauled by a bear once and as a professional hunter has put himself at considerable personal risk following up wounded dangerous game to make sure they were humanely dispatched and not a danger to anyone else. The whole point of experimenting with different rounds was to find out which was quickest and most humane. Magnum handguns are indeed tools that must be used on occasion by those in professional wildlife management, and in those desperate moments, having found the right ammo can save lives. I believe the animals were still dispatched in a humane fashion, and life saving information was gained, but as you clearly illustrate, opinions vary.

Best Regards,
Roll Tide
 
Last edited:
I agree with the majority here:
You've got a gun that you carry, and it works.
Leave well enough alone.

I upgraded from a P32 to a P3AT, but the difference is marginal.

I've read that J.M. Browning was asked to produce a larger caliber "pocket gun", so he produced the .380. But, he still carried the .32.
Don't know if that's true or not.

The thing I've noticed:
The bigger the gun, the more likely it is to be left in the car, or at home.
I'd rather have a puny caliber in my pocket, than a howitzer in my front yard.
 
.32 for my felon repellant

Mini14jac, et al

I prefer the .32 in a 1903, from another thread it's 1910 vintage, but *not* a backup

I had heard the J M Browning story as well and fully understand,

firing 6 or 7 .380 (9mm corto, whatever) is about like firing a single 12ga load of buckshot

I prefer some penetration

plus, the 1903 and 24 doses of felon repellant doesn't create any bumps or bulges on my carcass 8-P

ja it's only 60 or so grains but it's hollowpoint and fires to the same point of aim as the training round (71 gr fmj)

the 03 fits my hand like a glove and with the orig typeI slide it is more accurate but the type III slide it is a bit more reliable. the type I kept trying to toss the barrel bushing along with the bullets. I can only guess that is why the later versions lost the bushing.

enjoying a comfortable carry, thank you J M Browning,

r
 
32 vs. 380

This was a hot topic in the 1920's and 30's. The Italian Army and the Italian Navy had a major dispute over the two calibers in the same gun, a blowback Beretta.
They both did extensive testing and came to different conclusions. The Army said the 380 was better and the Navy said the 32 was better. The Navy points out that the 32 jams less (tapered case vs. straightwall case) has greater mag capacity and is more accurate. The Army points out the larger bore diameter.
In the end the Navy used 32s and the Army used 380s and Italy lost the war anyway.
My opinion is that the 32 has the advantage when you are shooting mouseguns due to mag capacity and accuracy. Think of multiple assailants and the loss of sure hits in combat. The big problem with mouseguns is hitting the target, neither caliber will flatten the BG.
 
firing 6 or 7 .380 (9mm corto, whatever) is about like firing a single 12ga load of buckshot
Click to expand...


:scrutiny:


Uh.... :scrutiny: well......

00 buck pellets are about .38 in diameter, but a .380 has nowhere near the velocity of a 12 ga blast.
 
buckshot second try

quote:

Drjones


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
firing 6 or 7 .380 (9mm corto, whatever) is about like firing a single 12ga load of buckshot
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------







Uh.... well......

00 buck pellets are about .38 in diameter, but a .380 has nowhere near the velocity of a 12 ga blast.


Doc,

I should have said,

If I want to wack the target with a shotgun I would use a shotgun, if only for improved sight radius and higher pH (probability Hit)

r
 
Yeah, I can't see losing money on a 32 to get an equilavent 380... I just can't see that there would be much of a difference between them in the smallest possible applications as long as there were no issues with rimlock on the 32.

Now, if the two guns were the same price and I didn't have either, I'd probably have to go with the 380 unless recoil would be a problem due to health or injury. At 7 feet, you should be able to hit equally well with them during rapid fire.

Basically, I'd keep the 32 and use the best ammo that was reliable in it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Pocket .32 help needed
Replies
21
Views
901
flyby
F
C
  • Locked
.32 v. .380?
2 3
Replies
60
Views
4K
Sean O'Brian
S
3
  • Locked
Cabales sales manger and Seecamp 32 used
Replies
11
Views
1K
oneounceload
O
P
  • Locked
.32 acp vs. .380 acp penetration (FMJ)
Replies
16
Views
5K
Jon Coppenbarger
J
B
  • Locked
.32 ammo question/opinions?
Replies
13
Views
1K
Majic
M
Back
Top