Is there sucha beast?

[Keith]

Apples and Oranges.

If you want to compare a .380 against a 9mm in a 4" barrel, the 9mm is going to win hands-down. That's a full sized gun and there would be no reason to chamber a gun that size in .380 - or perhaps it only makes sense to Europeans...

If you want to compare them in a true pocket pistol like a Colt Mustang (2.75" barrel), it begins to get a bit stickier.
I don't know of any 9mm with that short a barrel, but there are some just a tad longer. I don't think there is any great velocity advantage in 9mm from such a short barrel. I also think the increased muzzle flash, noise and recoil from such a small gun in 9mm would be enough to tilt you to a .380. Shoot such a gun at night and you're going to blind and half deaf after the first shot.
To further muddy the waters, there is high velocity .380 ammo designed for short barreled guns. There is nothing like that for 9mm which is designed to optimimum advantage in a longer barrel.

I've made the same argument against .357's in snubbies. It may be just fine at the range on a sunny day, but shoot that in the dark in an enclosed space and that fireball and noise is going to work against you. I think any premium .38 Special ammo would be a better choice in a snubbie. Shot placement means nothing if you can't see what you're shooting at.

I don't know any extensive source of ballistics data for short barreled auto's, but from what I've garnered there seems to be about a 100 fps advantage to the 9mm (vs .380) in barrels of 3" or so. That is with STANDARD ammo, not Cor-Bon or some other good .380 ammo optimized for high velocity. I don't think that's such a great trade-off.

If your goal is the ultimate in concealment, get a .380 or a 38 snubbie. If you want ballistics, get a 9mm (or .40, .45) in a larger gun.

The choice is yours, to be decided by your lifestyle, wardrobe, personal preferences, etc. I just think the ballistics argument begins to get a bit hollow when the barrels get that short.

Keith

 

[yesterdaysyouth]

"cough" "cough".... para carry... "cough"

 

[dude]

P7M8

 

[Triad]

The reason PPKs are so pretty is because they're blowback designs, which allows the barrel to go through the recoil spring. The .380 is pretty much at the outer limits in recoil for what a small marketable pistol can be.

Your choice for a blowback 9mm is pretty much limited to High Point, which takes ugly to a whole new dimension.

He doesn't want a blowback nine. He wants a nine that is the same size as a PPK and looks like it as well. I'd like to have one too.

 

[Blackhawk]

He doesn't want a blowback nine. He wants a nine that is the same size as a PPK and looks like it as well. I'd like to have one too.

I know.

He wants a locked breech 9 that looks like a particular blowback 9 -- specifically, pretty like a PPK.

Ain't no such critter.

And that's what I said plus why he's not going to find one.

 

[dev_null]

OK, so like Mick and Keith said, I can't always get what I want... would you trust your life to a .380? (And nevermind the "it's better than no gun at all," I realize that. )

I'm leaning towards the SIG 232, but haven't seen any reviews of them.

Keep in mind, btw, that I carry a fullsize .45 as my main carry gun, and have been thinking about the SA Ultra, but am looking for something I can slip into a pocket when I just want to pop over to the store or something...

-0-

 

[Poohgyrr]

As long as we're talking pistols the size of Sigs & HK's,
S&W 3913 is an excellent option. Extremely reliable and accurate. Very good pistols. This includes the 3914's and 908's as well.

 

[Blackhawk]

would you trust your life to a .380?

No, but I trust my life to my brain.

But as for tools of the noisy kind that brain might need, sure!

A .380 also beats a .32, and I often go out with a .32 as my only firearm.

Every little bit helps, and a .380 is a good choice for SD.

 

[Tamara]

Keith,

Betcha that, given the same ammo manufacturer and the closest bullet weights, 9mm has a ~200fps advantage over .380 no matter what length barrel you pick.

(FWIW, for those that like the ".357 has no advantage over the .38 in a snubby" argument, 125gr .357 hits the forcing cone as fast as .38 +P leaves the muzzle of a 4" gun... )

 

[Keith]

Tamara,

I don't think you're following me. Take a .357 snubbie and shoot it in the dark. You've just fired your first shot and now you're blind for the next 30 seconds because you've just set off a 12 inch fireball in front of your night-dilated pupils. Shot placement counts for more than ballistics and you've just thrown that out the window. Assaults generally happen in the dark, in places quite unlike a brightly lit, well ventilated shooting club. This is something that needs to be considered.

As for the 9mm getting 200 fps over a .380 in a 3" barrel with the same ammo ...perhaps. I think if you used a premium .380, you'd easily equal or surpass that, so it's a moot point. And you still have the issue of that fireball the 9mm is spitting when shot from a short barrel.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the .380 is a better defensive round than a 9mm. I'm saying that the .380 may be a better defensive round in a very SMALL pistol. If you want a true pocket pistol, or a snubbie revolver, these are issues that should be looked at.

Keith

 

[Kahr carrier]

Actually Detonics did make a 9MM called Pocket nine around the 80s it looked like a squared off PPKS.

 

[Jeff OTMG]

Yes, the original Pocket Nine was a Detonics, Colt stole the name. The Detonics was a blowback all stainless 9mm using many different stanless alloys, the primary design coming from Dr. Surkis, hope I spelled his name correctly.

 

[dev_null]

So, assuming a .380 (or, for that matter, a 9mm), anyone want to weigh in on the +P hardball vs JHP debate? Or is that a horse nobody wants to resurrect again?

-0-

 

[Blackhawk]

As far as I'm concerned, it's

1. Placement

2. Penetration

3. Expansion

In that order.

A .380 that's placed right will have enough penetration to move the issue into the expansion phase. That's questionable with a .32 and doubtful with a .25.

Placement is entirely up to you, but a more powerful round can make up for that somewhat.

Penetration is the rub. For relatively weak rounds, including 9mm Luger from very short barrels, where the energy can be <300 FPE, I think FMJ is a better choice. With a .380, <200 FPE is going to be nominal, and with a .32, you're looking at about 100 FPE.

Bottom line: FMJ for my mice.

 

[Keith]

I think hollowpoints are always the way to go. Heck, if it doesn't expand you're shooting hardball anyway, while if it does expand you've made a bigger hole! Can't see any downside to that.

Considering that handguns are not exactly elephant killers, and that abbreviating the barrel (no matter the caliber) will only make it less effective - all training should be done with head shots in mind.

Two quick ones to the chest, one to the head - evaluate and shoot again, if necessary. Repeat that in training enough times and it becomes habit.

Keith

 

[pogo2]

Ditto the STI LS9

I second the previous poster who suggested the STI LS9. You mentioned "thin" several times, and this gun is 0.765 inches thick across steel, and 1.065 inches thick across wood. I don't know of a thinner 9mm.

 

[Blackhawk]

I think hollowpoints are always the way to go. Heck, if it doesn't expand you're shooting hardball anyway, while if it does expand you've made a bigger hole! Can't see any downside to that.

Considering that handguns are not exactly elephant killers, and that abbreviating the barrel (no matter the caliber) will only make it less effective - all training should be done with head shots in mind.

I agree on the head shots. Practice them regularly.

The downside of a puny HP round that does expand is that while it makes a bigger hole, it may not be deep enough to stop the attacker. A smaller hole in a vital area is better than a bigger hole that doesn't quite get there.

 

[dev_null]

I agree on Mozambique drills (so to speak). Used to have an Iver Johnson pony pistol in .380. Unfortunately, it was wildly inaccurate and had too many FTFs, so I dumped it.

Pogo: That's really nice looking. However, if I'm going to carry a mini-1911, it'll probably be a SA Ultra in .45 acp.

Anyone have experience with the SIG P232, or know where I can find a review?

-0-

 

[seeker_two]

Walther P5C. I think they're still available...

 

[sw442642]

If you are looking for a pocket nine as a fighting instrument for someone who is trainied and
serious, then the Kahr is the way to go.

The original Moonie comments was irrelevant.

So time to grow up and stop the babble about 9mm vs 380.

If you want a pocket gun that isn't a Kahr and better than a 380 - get a J frame.

 

[Deuce]

I had a Sig P232. Fine gun. Never jammed ... even single-handed.

Problem was I've got large hands and the slide was always ever-so-slightly scrape the web of my hand. After about 20rds it would be worn raw. After it sat for a few years, I finally traded it in.

I've heard the PPK's are the same. However, the new S&W PPK's supposedly have been slightly altered to provide more clearance between the web and the slide. Also, for some reason, it seems to me I heard something about Sig doing something to the P232 and I guessed it might have been something similar. Keep in mind, when you check one out and pull the slide back, it seems like there's just enough clearance. But, shooting it is another story. Either rent one or try someone elses before buying one and make sure, if you do buy one, that it's of the newer design.

Another candidate for the ugly category is the new Kel-Tec .380 @ 7.2oz.

I have a Kahr P9 Covert which jams more than is acceptable. I'm guessing likely due to limp-wristing likely caused by the very small grip and my large hands. The Kahr's, if you can keep 'em from jamming, are very accurate in single-handed fast-fire. I won't carry the P9 Covert, but, I might look into a P40. I figure the longer grip might help avoid limp-wristing. But, I've heard of a lot of problems with the polymer Kahrs. And, nothing but good about the steel Kahrs. I rented a K40 but it's just too damn heavy for that size gun ... I'd just as soon carry a Glock.

Of course, the Kahr PM9 is supposed to be the ultimate pocket-rocket. I heard mixed reviews after people started buying 'em and with my P9 Covert problems, I figured I'd look elsewhere.

I think I might pick up one of those new Kel-Tec .380's when they come out. Ya never know when something like that might come in handy.

Good luck.

 

[Forseti]

Wait until after the Shot Show, and most companies release their new stuff. I think the show ends Feb 16th in Orlando.

In addition to the Rohrbaugh R-9, Taurus plans to update their Millenium line to the "Millenium Pro". Very attractive pricing on their current Millenium 9mm line will probably be carried over...

Let me tell you, that Titanium Millenium 9mm is VERY light. A bit more pricy than the Blued or stainless steel version.

So, wait one more month...

 

[Hand_Rifle_Guy]

Couple of stupid ideas...

CZ-52 with a 9mm barrel. Definite similarities in cosmetics to the PPK. Spring around the barrel. Thin as all get-out. Slick on the outside, pockets well. Single-action with decocker. Can run 7.62 x 25, a true .30 Magnum. Accurate. Cheap. Military heritage. A good gun, and a good buy. Dis-advantages: Full size service gun. (No way to shrink it, either.) Single-stack mags. Miniature sights. Funky grip angle.

They're REALLY cheap, like under $200, and they don't weigh that much.Cosmetic appearance like you might find desireable, this is what first got me interested in them when I discovered I couldn't afford a $1000 PPK. VERY thin, and with no protruding bits to catch stuff. Nice rounded edges everywhere, but sights that are more typical of a mil-spec 1911, which means very small, with no convenient aftermarket solution. 5" barrel, so not very small, but you would be surprised where they'll fit with comfort. The grip angle makes a lot of people shoot the ground twenty feet out the first time they try it. They're military surplus, so they've been through the wringer in testing, and found suitable. Lots of people are finding out about this gun, and liking it a lot. Worth a closer look, as back in the late eighties people were willing to pay as much as $1500 for a clean specimen.

Another stupid idea, take a look at the Astra 600, another full-size gun. Funky looks, you'll like it or hate it. Same grip angle issue as the CZ-52. Grip and magazine safeties. Full-length frame rails. Fixed barrel, BLOWBACK action, which makes for fine accuraccy, but STRENUOUS EFFORT when cocking, as it has a beefy recoil spring, and a STOUT hammer spring. The hammer is shrouded like a Colt 1903, and these guns have very few protrusions, which makes for a clean exterior, but not as thin as the CZ. They're very well built, with better sights than the CZ-52. Generally, they sell for about $200 in good condition. heavier than a CZ, but very robust construction. Sighting grooves on the slide and the grip angle, along with the profile when seen from above make this gun very easy to point-shoot or aim with your peripheral vision. Dis-advantages: Funky semi-Euro mag release, like a sideways heel-clip. HARD initial cocking. Sometimes gritty trigger. The mag safety, if you don't like 'em. Tricky takedown, unless you have a .50 A.E. cartridge case handy. The grip angle, which can make you shoot low until you get used to it. If you shoot it a bunch at one sitting, say 150 rounds plus, it'll tire you're hand out.

These guns are available pretty cheap for what they are. The Nazi's were impressed with them enough to order 40,000 of 'em during WW-II, although they got very few of them to actually use. Based on the Astra 400, which is chambered for the powerful 9 x 23 Largo, these guns are finely-detailed pieces of machinery that seem to be vastly under-rated. My personal sample has digested more than 500 rounds, and shows no additional wear since it's purchase for $189, and it was built in the forties! It has a nice trigger, although I've heard of others that didn't, and it's accurate enough to consistently pester a milk jug at 100 yards with ease. When the hammer's down, it's a bear to cock, as I can't do it with a standard thumb-and-forefinger pinch grip. I have to use a firm grip over the top of the slide, although once the hammer's cocked, it's quite reasonable. If you can find one, these are worth a closer look.

NOTE: Niether of these have been checked with hollow-point ammo by me. That's another reason these're stupid suggestions.

A less stupid suggestion, although not a full-power option, is the PA-63, and other variations in the FEG line, likike the PMK and the SMC. These are straight-up rip-offs of the PP or PPK, and are blow-backs chambered in the 9 x 18 Makarov cartridge. 9 x 18 compares to .380 closely, a lot like a .380 +p. Hot .380's equal it, and it doesn't really compare to full-power 9 x 19, but the guns have the neccessary cosmetic appearance, and are priced in a way that's hard to beat, usually around $150. All of them also come in a .380 version, although 9 x 18 hollowpoint ammo is becoming more available. The PA-63 has an aluminum frame, which makes for a light, easily concealed package that has a DA first shot, and a decocker. Searching about them on The Firing Line will conjure up a wealth of information about these if you're at all interested. They're pretty well built, especially for the price, and mine seems to work just fine.

None of these is really what you're looking for, but what you want doesn't really exist, so I offer these as cheap suggestions that may appeal to you from a non-conformist point of view. And al of them share the common virtue of being inexpensive guns that are all military surplus, which speaks well of them from a reliability standpoint.

Hmmm. There's also the Vector CP-1, but I can't relay any personal opinions. It's just a full-power, odd-looking, gas-delayed blowback 9mm that has a somewhat checkered reputation for reliability. Searches on The Firing Line will tell you more if you're curious.

 

[SodaPop]

Dev_null - I feel your pain.

I've been struggling with this issue over at www.thefiringrange.com for the last month. I've gone from Kahr to Sig 245/239, Para-ord-P12, Beretta 9000, Glock 26 ect.........

I just can't go below a 9mm for CCW. I've shot a few 32 and .380s that IMHO too harsh. I wish the Sig 239 was just another inch and a half shorter. Its still too big for IWB summer carry.

For someone on a budget I have a hard time spending $600 on a little gun when I'd rather get another 1911. I just feel naked carrying anything other than my Beretta 92FS or Colt 1991A1.

 

[Handy]

I was just recalling the Vector CP-1. This was a kind of elegant and spacing gas delayed blowback 10 rd. 9mm with a tapered nose and fixed barrel like a PPK. It was flat and designed to conceal. I don't know their current status as they were all recalled for a safety feature problem. If fixed, that may be the closest thing to what you describe, in terms of looks and function.

http://members.aol.com/gunsgoboom/cp1.html



P5 for a slim carry carry gun? LOL.