For those who will go no lower than 9mm...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
422
I have a question for you. Why is the lowest caliber you chose 9mm? Why not .380? I have seen tests of both and the 380 may not penetrate as much as the 9mm but in a self defense situation isn't that a bit better? Over penetration is a real danger to others and I think the 10" or so of penetration from the .380 is better than the >12" of 9mm. And if were talking FMJ then they cause the exact same damage and will both still over penetrate, but the .380 has much less energy coming out the other end than the 9mm.

Watch these three vids and then comment. Both .380 and 9mm are shot into the exact same block in the exact same conditions in the exact same gun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV5G1J1SaTE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGI6jyWwjyY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUfabyIAl8w
 
The problem is that the .380 rarely expands as well as the 9mm, even in smaller guns. The expansion creates a larger wound channel which is more likely to incapacitate a threat.
 
12 inches of penetration is a minimum requirement, not a maximum. I think people worry way too much about overpenetration.
 
This is an argument that will have no clear winner. I see both sides to this and, in fairness, I own and have carried everything from a .380 up to a .45ACP and .357.

I, personally, have adopted the policy of carrying for the situation and clothing. For me, this does not always lend itself to the highest caliber. For work, I do carry a 9MM most of the time but, in cases where I need to pocket carry etc, I use either a .380 or a .38 special. In the backwoods, I carry a .357 or a .44 since I can open carry in that situation.

While I would much rather go into a hostile situation with a .45 or at least a 9mm, I would rather have a .380 in my pocket than a .45 sitting in my safe at home.
 
The argument is primarily asking "Why is the 9mm the smallest you will go" I am not saying the 380 is superior, but wondering as to why people seem to think that the difference in pocket size 9mm and 380 is worth the extra recoil.
 
The argument is primarily asking "Why is the 9mm the smallest you will go" I am not saying the 380 is superior, but wondering as to why people seem to think that the difference in pocket size 9mm and 380 is worth the extra recoil.

What small 9mm an .380s have you shot? The only .380 that I would say has an appreciable smaller amount of felt recoil than a comparably sized 9mm is the Sig P238... And even then, the P938 is quite a soft shooter in a similarly sized package.
 
Because the .380 auto usually only gives you around 200ft/lbs of energy. The 9MM gives you 300-400 ft/lbs of energy. To me, that's a big deal.

http://www.black-hills.com/handgun_calibers.php

Penetration is a big deal. You've got to get the bullet to penetrate through enough "stuff" to hit something that matters. I'd rather have more penetration than less.
 
With modern firearms sizes and weights being close in a 9mm, .40 s&w or even a .45 acp as same firearm as a .380 acp some might find the .380 underrated. I do agree to the advantage of less recoil in the smaller firearms, but also feel I need to try carrying the most gun I can at any given time.
 
I read a bunch of stuff (use your Google-Fu) and the 9mm is just better - faster and heavier bullets with reliable expansion under varying degrees of adverse conditions. The ballistics are plain math, but I read up to try to get a better handle on actual effectiveness. All roads pointed to the 9.

Although I will say having several choices of 9mm's you can actually pocket carry was a factor. I'll echo the sentiment that just about anything that goes bang is better than that RPG you left at home. I did a lot of homework on pocket carry options. What I found is most .380's are not the same size as the "pocket 9's"; most are smaller. Not in a good way if you're talking recoil. They're typically a couple ounces lighter with a noticeably thinner grip. Try an LCP with Buffalo Bore fodder and a Kahr PM/ CM9 with a decent +P or 147gr. std. pressure load...

I can only think of one pocket-size .380 that's the same size as its 9mm stable mate: the LC9 & LC380. Finally, almost any blowback .380 will make you long for that 16oz. 9mm.

Funnel
 
Sometimes, 9mm pistols have less recoil than similar sized .380ACP. For instance a SIG P232 .380 has a lot more felt recoil and muzzle rise then an M&P Shield 9mm, ( at least in my hands ). Most tilting barrel designs should have less felt recoil than a similar sized delayed blow back pistol. Many of your pocketable .380s have (at least in my experience) horrible DAO type triggers. Inside 7 yards not really much of an issue, outside that it may be better to run away. Inside 7 yards if I shoot at a man sized target with a 9mm I can hit center of mass no matter how fast I pull the trigger. 147gr subsonic 9mm vs 90gr .380ACP, your choice, .380 can get the job done, but it is the bare minimum I would carry. If I can carry at least a 9mm like the M&P or a G26 I would not consider a smaller .380, except as a backup.
 
Why worry about caliber at all? When it comes to most things, people have (or are taught) preconceived notions. The fact is, pretty much any gun is effective in the hands of a proficient shooter. That begs the question, what exactly is proficiency? I come across really pathetic, licensed drivers every day. They passed the test and they have the state's approval.

I shoot what I shoot because I want to. I'm reasonably good at it because I work at it. I trust my life to those guns that best suit me and my personal mission and which have the qualities I deem sufficient and/or most appropriate.

Choosing a low power round to protect your hide is a bit like taking a cross country ride on a motorcycle. You can make that thousand mile ride on a Moped, but your Gold Wing will get the job done too and enhance the trip in so many ways.

As for YouTube, well ... YouTube is great for music, movie trailers, the truth about UFOs and such. But YouTube is not a source, for me, for reputable advice concerning life preserving activities.
 
Last edited:
All handguns are relatively poor "stoppers" regardless of caliber or bullet used. Shot placement and sufficient penetration are paramount, all else is secondary.
With that being said, sufficient penetration from the .380 is reliably achieved only w/FMJ whereas w/the 9mm you can have both sufficient penetration and expansion.
Would I feel under-armed w/a .380 loaded w/FMJ? No.
However, I prefer at least 9mm (YMMV).
Tomac
 
Why not .380? I have seen tests of both and the 380 may not penetrate as much as the 9mm but in a self defense situation isn't that a bit better? Over penetration is a real danger to others and I think the 10" or so of penetration from the .380 is better than the >12" of 9mm.

So, with that logic, a .32 ACP that only penetrates 8" is better than the 10" of the .380 ACP? When your life is on the line, the only "real danger" is to you. A bullet that does not penetrate is a failure. Personally, I will not accept failure.

Don
 
The 9mm is the smallest common caliber that brings the right mix of velocity and mass to penetrate to FBI standards, while also getting substantial expansion. There are also quite a few firearms chambered in 9mm that are very easy to carry and conceal.

I have no reason to go to a lesser round.
 
There just is no reason to shoot anything smaller than a 9mm round in this day and age, "for self defense". Only force of habit , hobbyists, collectors, enthusiasts, or unfamiliarity with why these other calibers are even used as much as they are.
They were at one time the available ammunition for the smallest handguns made at different times in history. If there would have been a more powerful gun in a compact size, the masses would have used that.
When the 32 and 380 were hot, "up until the year 2000 "around", there were no small 9mm guns made. After the 32 seacamp, which proves that people wanted a small gun that had more stopping power, as guys are still waiting for guns the ordered 15 years ago, "lol". The next one was the 380, Seacamp,kel tek and LCP , the LCP was still the hottest selling ccw gun, last year, "every gun manufacturer out there jumped in." They all went to the mini 380's, then came the mini 9's, and many went to a 9mm, ,why? you ask, because it did the same thing as the last 2 big improvements, it allowed you to carry a larger bullet than the 380. Now we went into 45 land, with the XDS. That will be the end all carry caliber, "for now".
When you can shrink down a 45 and make it a carry gun size, you just hit the big bulls eye. it's not an opinion it's a trend, and a logical progression. As folks learn about guns, they want a gun that will dispatch an aggressor to the promised land with as little pause as possible. Now we can waste time arguing about it forever, but the big 3 calibers are finally here in a compact enough package for just about anyone to carry.
So having a Mak, or a snubby, or a Colt 1903, while still capable of killing anyone if used properly, are not optimum, they have a coolness factor and are fun to shoot, but we have improved upon them, as personal protection, as we will improve upon these. My XDS, or Kahr, can go any place I go, why carry something less efficient. As a range toy I can see it, or as a plinker or collectable,or just a possession, if you are going out with the family, take a bigger caliber, it will stop bad guys faster, especially since they are marginal to begin with when compared to a long gun.
This is just my thought and opinion, I am sure there are good arguments that can be made that differ. But we see the trend towards better ammo and larger caliber, mini guns. That cannot be contested. It may have hit it's peak because of the control factor with hi powered ammo.
It will be interesting to see the next big case when someone uses a 45 loaded with powerball ammo on a bad guy, or a "Taurus judge" using shotgun shells. The press should have a field day with it.
It's amazing that we don't actually see more of these types of defensive shootings using say a saiga drum fed 12 gauge. Maybe it's safer than they tell us.
 
12 inches of penetration is a minimum requirement, not a maximum. I think people worry way too much about overpenetration.

That standard was set for LE to also take into account the possibility of shooting through barriers and windshields.
 
improperlyaged said:
Over penetration is a real danger to others

You may find the FBI's thoughts on over-penetration enlightening. See page 7.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf

FBI 10mm Notes said:
The fear of over-penetration is a misconception, which was created back when law enforcement was trying to overcome misinformed public resistance to the use of hollowpoint ammunition. In the process, we began to believe it ourselves. First, our lawyers are unaware of any sucessful legal action resulting from the injury of a bystander due to a round over-penetrating the subject. We are aware of numerous incidents of Agents/officers being killed because their round did not penetrate enough (Grogan and Dove, for example). Further, if you examine shooting statistics you will see that officers hit the subject somewhere around 20-30% of the time. Thus 70-80% of shots fired never hit their intended target, and nobody ever worries about them – only the ones that might “over-penetrate” the bad guy. Third, as our testing shows, even the most frangible bullets designed specifically for shallow penetration will plug up when striking wood or wallboard and then penetrate like full metal jacket ammunition. We are aware of successful legal actions where an innocent party has been struck by a shot passing through a wall, but as we have proven, ALL of them will do that.
 
Last edited:
I have a question for you. Why is the lowest caliber you chose 9mm? Why not .380?
Good 9mm JHPs will reliably both expand and still meet the penetration requirements of the FBI protocol. On the other hand, .380 JHP cannot reliably do both and .380 JHP will often over penetrate in gel tests.

Certainly, .380 is far better than nothing, but with the current proliferation of subcompact "pocket" 9mm pistols, there is less and less reason to chose the .380 instead.
 
I subscribe to the "biggest caliber that I can fit in my pocket and barely notice that I am carrying" school of thought. Right now I am just under 9mm NATO.

I hope to never find out that what I carry is too small, but it is better than a bigger gun/round left at home.

Jim
 
I would rather err on the side of caution, which in the 9 mm P v. 9 MM Kurz puts me in the Para camp. I'd rather have too much penetration rather than too little. Any energy a bullet has after exiting a body (I don't plan on missing) is going to be residual and poses little threat. I have carried a .380 and even a .32, but have pretty much decided an S&W CS9 is as concealable as anything smaller. I don't go lower.
I'm not a ballistician or a handgun expert, but I know exactly what works for me and gives me comfort. Others have different thresholds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top