Is Less More?

[fastbolt]

...
For concealed carry, assuming pistols of similar size, reliability, accuracy, etc, would you rather carry a 380 with 8 rounds or a 9mm with 6?

Trick question?

Presuming same size of this pair of hypothetical pistols?

9mm w/6-rd mag over any .380 ACP, regardless of capacity.

Why?

Well, the only reason I picked up another .380 (after 25+ years since my last one) is because it's small enough to slip into some tighter/shorter pants pockets in which I can't carry one of my 5-shot J-frames.

I'd much rather have a 9mm than a .380 ... and I'd much rather have a 5-shot .38 Spl snub than my LCP (6-rd mag), if the J's would fit in all the same pockets as my LCP.

I tend to look at the .380's as being a compromise within a compromise. Handy? Yes. Useful? Yes. Better choices available? Obviously.

Now, I've seen and worked with some folks who found a largish .380 (think SIG P232) to be desirable over a similarly sized 9mm. Okay ... for them. It's going to be them having to controllably & effectively use it to save their life. I'll work with them to help them try to enhance their ability to potentially achieve that goal, even if I feel a better caliber/gun would be a better choice.

In the meantime, I'll continue to slip that diminutive 6-rd LCP into my smaller pockets at times, and looking at it as a compromise within a compromise.

And because I haven't yet found a 9mm pistol of the exact diminutive size as the LCP. Even if I did, however, then I'd have to consider it from the perspective of quality, demonstrated reliability and feasibility (cost, maintenance, etc), and - for my preference - something which has been evaluated and accepted within the LE field as a secondary/back & off-duty weapon.

 

[BLB68]

But that's not the question. The question was between a 6 round 9mm and 8 round .380. The rest is off topic. There are many other guns and options and many other personal preferences that are relevant *but* that's not the question or the poll/topic.

VooDoo

First, let me welcome you to the Internet. People don't always discuss things in a manner you will approve of. Get used to it.

Second, let me direct you to the next to the last line of my post, where I directly answer the original question.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

I find it amusing that in 9mm vs 40s&w threads, the MAIN argument against the 40 is that the performance is not THAT different, AND it's not worth giving up capacity. That they rather have the extra round or two instead of the negligible performance difference.

Now in this thread, it seems that the consensus has flip flopped. Leads me to believe that, being that 9mm is cheaper and more abundant thus people are accustomed to shooting it more often, there's a bias that exists for the 9mm. No matter what the question is, the rational favoring the 9mm will change for some.

I think the key point you're missing is that it's not just how rounds stack up relative to others. If you get 20 mpg and have to go 100 miles, if you have four gallons of gas you're gonna be walking, pure and simple. If your belt is "just a couple inches" too short, you can't get it buckled. If your metric wrench is 1mm too small it's completely useless to you.

There really does seem to be a minimum that will give you somewhat reliable performance. The standard that's most widely accepted is the one used by the FBI. With the .380 you sometimes get enough penetration and sometimes get some expansion, but rarely get both at the same time. That is why the round is considered marginal. If you win the lottery your bullet will get 12"-14" of penetration and expand. But that's uncommon with .380 loadings, with hundreds of test blocks shot.

On the other hand you have probably seen that the 9mm, .40 S&W, .357 Sig & .45 ACP all perform almost identically in gel tests. That doesn't mean they're death rays but they do reliably perform to the standards the designers set out to meet. That's why all those rounds are generally considered acceptable while the .380 ACP is widely considered marginal. At the very best levels of performance it doesn't reliably meet the minimum performance standards.

To answer the question posed by the OP, of the two options given I'd chose the 9mm.

 

[orionengnr]

false choice

would you rather carry a 380 with 8 rounds or a 9mm with 6

Considering the fact that the two cases have an identical diameter, I'm not sure where the original premise comes from...
A 6-round .380 would be the same size (grip length-wise) as a 6-shot 9mm.
And an 8-round of either will be the same as well.

So are you asking if I would rather carry a smaller 9mm or a larger 380?

I just can't seem to make sense of the question.

 

[David E]

Considering the fact that the two cases have an identical diameter, I'm not sure where the original premise comes from...
A 6-round .380 would be the same size (grip length-wise) as a 6-shot 9mm.
And an 8-round of either will be the same as well.

So are you asking if I would rather carry a smaller 9mm or a larger 380?

I just can't seem to make sense of the question.

I agree.

The premise is seriously flawed. If the .380 is the same size as the 9mm, they'll hold the same number of rounds.

A better matchup would've been between a 5-shot .38 or a 7-shot .380, but that's already been done.

 

[LiveLife]

... assuming pistols of similar size, reliability, accuracy ... 380 with 8 rounds or a 9mm with 6?

I'm asking regarding hypothetical weapons, not any specific brand, model, etc.

I think we are deviating from the OP.

The OP posted pistols of "similar size" and "accuracy" with the variables of 8 rounds of 380 vs 6 rounds of 9mm.

While many may argue the similarities of two cartridges' dimensions, differences would be the chamber pressures and terminal velocities/energies.

What factory 380 JHP matches the performance of 9mm +P JHP like Speer Gold Dot/Remington Golden Saber/Winchester PDX1? When the 9mm muzzle energy is about twice that of 380, can you explain how 8 rounds of 380 will give you the defensive advantage over 6 rounds of 9mm?

I think bullets of same diameter but more weight traveling faster will do more damage.

Speer Gold Dot: 380 90 gr 900 fps 196 ft/lbs - 9mm 124 gr 1220 fps 410 ft/lbs

Remington HD/GS: 380 102 gr 940 fps 200 ft/lbs - 9mm 124 gr 1180 fps 384 ft/lbs

Winchester PDX1: 380 95 gr 1000 fps 211 ft/lbs - 9mm 124 gr 1200 fps 396 ft/lbs

 

[snooperman]

bds, you are assuming that because the 9mm has more energy it will cause greater damage. That is not the whole story. Shot placement is far more important than energy per se. If I can get my 380 out faster and pop 2 quick shots to a vital area,, your energy theory does not really matter that much. In small "pocket" 9mm guns recoil can be a problem with quick follow-up shots. There is already ample evidence by actual shootings that the 380 with modern HP ammo can do the job quite effectively, and that pocket 9mm guns are not easy to shoot with one hand as the 380. Again , you are assuming much too much because the 9mm is more powerful. Snoop

 

[snooperman]

It is far more difficult for me to bring my Kahr PM9 into action from the pocket and shoot one handed than it is for me to do the same with multiple shots from my SIG P238 380. Both weigh the same and are about the same size.

 

[akarguy]

what a pointless argument especially since 9mm is now cheaper for a lot of good defense rounds and some target rounds than 380. Plus as some have pointed out there are plenty of sub/compact 9s that are the same size as most common 380s. unless someone's looking for a micro compact frame/mouse gun, 380 seems like its becoming obsolete these days. but even still, who's really going to shoot frequently let alone practice with such a small frame in a snappy 380 especially when platforms like the M&P SHIELD have figured out ways to manage the recoil so well with and fit 7+1 with larger 9mms and .40 rounds??

 

[kokapelli]

but even still, who's really going to shoot frequently let alone practice with such a small frame in a snappy 380 especially when platforms like the M&P SHIELD have figured out ways to manage the recoil so well with and fit 7+1 with larger 9mms and .40 rounds??

You obviously have not shot a P238 or a G42.

 

[snooperman]

Akarguy, , the OP asked about 2 guns the same size . Your analogy of a small pocket 380 ,like the 10 oz LCP, against a 20 oz Shield hardly fits his description or intent of his original post. The SIG P238 and PM9 does. Each person has to find for themselves what works best in a pocket gun. For most the 380 seems be the gun to carry on a daily basis. According to sales, the 380 is the choice for pocket carry by a wide margin, and for many good reasons. It is light in weight, easy to conceal with many types of clothing, easy to access, easy to shoot quickly with follow-up shots WITH ONE HAND, and can give adequate penetration for up-close encounters with proper ammo. Like Kokapelli said, you have not shot the SIG P238 or the Glock 42. The recoil of these two is much less than the equal weight PM9.

 

[LiveLife]

snooperman, I am not going to argue with you. But with all due respect, do consider that the OP did not limit us with your two pistols but "hypothetical weapons ... of similar size, reliability, accuracy". And I also agree with many that posted that since 380 and 9mm have similar cartridge diameters, the capacity should be the same of both 8 rounds.

So let's "hypothetically" say that Glock makes an 8 round single stack 9mm that will shoot +P ammunition accurately and fast with a smooth pre-cocked modified DAO Glock trigger, a weapon that will allow you to shoot equally well or better than your 380, how will you answer the OP then?

As to 380 vs 9mm +P ballistics, I will let others answer that as you don't seem to think 200 vs 400 ft/lbs of energy is significant.

BTW, just look at the responses to the poll. It is now 24 vs 100. I think that says a lot about what the majority of THR members say about the OP's question.

 

[snooperman]

If Glock made a 9mm the same size as and weight of their 380 G42 and I could shoot it as well as my 380 I would carry it , with no reservations. You are correct that more people have voted for the 9mm over the 380, but based on their responses I do not think they have shot both guns of the same size or weight by trial. Most of the responses are about more power from the 9mm, which to me is not the most important aspect of a carry gun for up-close encounters. If you were talking about house guns then I would agree. But my 380 P238 SIG , weighs the same as the PM9 and is about the same dimensions. Based on my experiences with these 2 guns, I can shoot the 380 with far more accuracy with shot placement and quicker follow-up shots than I can the equal size 9mm. Each person has decide what is best for them , there is no "one size fits all" in this discussion. Regardless of how many people voted for the 9mm , the fact remains more people carry the 380 ACP on a daily basis and it is used more frequently in self defense than is the 9mm. These facts have been takened from actual shootings. More people are shot by small caliber guns than big caliber guns because that is what they carry.

 

[LiveLife]

OK snooperman, I will just post this as I don't think you will get off your Sig P238/Kahr PM9 soapbox.

The OP posted "hypothetical" 380/9mm pistols of same size, reliability and accuracy so since we cannot shoot the hypothetical pistols, we could only speculate about what would be better. Since 380 and 9mm cartridge diameters are the same, OP's premise is flawed as both 380 and 9mm would carry the same 8 rounds. So the discussion will be reduced down to the terminal effects of 380 vs 9mm bullets on target.

I already posted the average factory 380 JHP muzzle energy of 200 ft/lbs compared to 400 ft/lbs for 9mm +P but you are choosing to ignore that fact and remaining on your soapbox claiming just because you are able to shoot Sig P238 faster and better than Kahr PM9 that the OP did not even mention. Remember "hypothetical" pistols?

As to Sig P238 and Kahr PM9 shootability, you are wrong in comparing the shootability of SAO trigger vs DAO trigger and I do not think that is a fair comparison. If you shot 380 with DAO trigger compared to 9mm DAO trigger pistol, I would say that would be more fair comparison but the OP posted the pistols are "hypothetical" with same accuracy so I am not sure if we would be able to find two pistols with those characteristics and this thread discussion will remain hypothetical.

I will not respond to your future posts so I will let you have the final word but please do respond to these questions:

1. What is your response to 200 ft/lbs vs 400 ft/lbs muzzle energy given the same magazine capacity?
2. Is there a difference between SAO and DAO trigger in shootability of pistols?
3. If you were shooting DAO 380 pistol like Ruger LCP, would your response be different?

Thank you and peace.

 

[kokapelli]

Handgun bullet energy has long ago been proven irrelevant.

Read this....
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs3.htm

 

[LiveLife]

kokapelli, OP 's premise was not whether 380 and 9mm bullets would stop an attacker (they won't in most cases, not right away) but rather which was better.

 

[snooperman]

1. 200 ft/lbs is plenty good enough if the shot is placed in a vital spot . A 400 ft/lb energy will not do the job if the shot is not placed in a vital spot. Shooting someone with a 45 ACP will not stop the attacker any faster than a 380 if the shot is not placed properly. Research of actual shootings show this to be true. Energy per se is misleadind for up-close encounters. Accuracy and shot placement wins the fight. 2. It does not matter whether one uses a gun that is single or double action, what matters is the proficiency of the shooter with his pistol or revolver. 3. My response to the LCP would be the same as my last response. It does not matter whether it is a 380 DAO LCP or my SAO SIG P238, what matters is the proficiiecy of the shooter with gun that he carries.

 

[snooperman]

bds, it has been shown repeatedly that a 22 caliber or 32 caliber head shot will stop an attacker rather quickly. Up-close encounters may afford that opportunity , and if people practice it and use it , it can stop an attacker regardless of his size and mental state. I have killed many animals on my farm with small caliber shots to the head that are much bigger than humans. I have shot thousands of varmints with 22 caliber head shots around this place over the past 60 years and I have not seen any get up and run away either. They may not all die quickly but they are down and out. I have shot many wild boar in the head with a 38 sp revolver and they go down. They have eaten their last meal in my potato patch. So , do I buy into your caliber energy argument ?Not completely. There are too many variables for that.

 

[Scarpia]

For concealed carry, assuming pistols of similar size, reliability, accuracy, etc, would you rather carry a 380 with 8 rounds or a 9mm with 6?

If this question was posted as "If you could carry the Sig P238 in 380 or the Sig P928 in 9mm, which would you choose?", I'd take the P938 because the 9mm has more stopping power versus the 380.

I call out these guns as they are close to "size, reliability, accuracy" as any pair in 380 and 9mm. The one round difference is not relevant in a realistic self defense scenario. I acquired my P238 before the P938 was available otherwise I would clearly opt for the 9mm if I was shopping today.

 

[C0untZer0]

I think the poll is settling this question.

 

[LiveLife]

Here's another hypothetical - If I only got to stab a mountain lion 8 times in the same torso area in defense of the attack, which would be better? A 4" blade or 8" blade?

Chances are, 8 stabs may not stop the mountain lion in its tracks but I would "feel" better using the longer blade.

The OP did not ask whether 8 rounds of 380 or 9mm would stop the attacker but rather which we would prefer. Between 200 ft/lbs vs 400 ft/lbs when other factors are similar in pistol size, reliability and accuracy, I would prefer the 400 ft/lbs 9mm +P rounds.

As others posted, I think the poll results reflect THR members' general preference but you are entitled to your opinion.

 

[kokapelli]

Here's another hypothetical - If I only got to stab a mountain lion 8 times in the same torso area in defense of the attack, which would be better? A 4" blade or 8" blade?

Chances are, 8 stabs may not stop the mountain lion in its tracks but I would "feel" better using the longer blade.

The OP did not ask whether 8 rounds of 380 or 9mm would stop the attacker but rather which we would prefer. Between 200 ft/lbs vs 400 ft/lbs when other factors are similar in pistol size, reliability and accuracy, I would prefer the 400 ft/lbs 9mm +P rounds.

As others posted, I think the poll results reflect THR members' general preference but you are entitled to your opinion.

Why?

 

[LiveLife]

Why not?

OP did not ask for scientific test results, only our opinions on a scenario with hypothetical weapons.

... I thought I'd post a poll and get your opinions on the following scenario ... hypothetical weapons ... Curious to hear your opinions. Thanks.

 

[kokapelli]

Just curious about your rational.

 

[fastbolt]

This isn't that hard of a question to consider and answer, folks.

Let's go a little different direction ...

Both the .380 & 9mm pistols in question are full-size, meaning duty/service size weapons, with the .380 having a slight edge in capacity. Think 12 rounds of .380 versus 9 rounds of 9mm.

Does anyone really think a "full-size" .380, with slightly more ammo capacity than a similarly sized 9mm, would be selected as a dedicated duty weapon by LE agencies or the military, simply because of more capacity in a similarly sized weapon?

I own a 3913, and I've owned a Beretta M84. Both are roughly the same size, and the Beretta .380 held a few more rounds. There's no way I'd consider carrying a .380 the same size as a 9mm just because it held a few more rounds of a less capable caliber.

My LCP is a compromise useful to me only because of its really diminutive size, while still chambered in a marginally effective defensive caliber. Even so, I wouldn't trade it for a LCP-sized .32 that held more rounds than the LCP. Nor would I willingly choose to carry a similarly sized .22LR that held more rounds than the LCP.

Different folks seem to have a different baseline of what they consider an acceptable caliber, and some may choose to lower their own bar a bit regarding caliber if they can substitute potential caliber effectiveness with an edge in capacity with a lesser defensive caliber.

Well, life is often about choices, and the potential consequences of those choices, isn't it?