Nine rounds of .380 vs five rounds of .38

[JTHunter]

M-Cameron said:

I have a .380....I have .38/ .357....and I pretty much consider myself a "revolver guy"..

But when it comes time to carry, I choose the .380s almost every time......you have a smaller/ lighter package....with nearly 2x the capacity, and faster reload....shooting a cartridge that has nearly the same Muzzle energy as a .38 special.

I also have both but the .357 has a 4" barrel, so - -.
The .380 is also an exposed hammer DA 7 + 1 that I've had for about 40 years. I also reload for that .380 with the charge of Win. 231 being just below "max".

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

I pocket carry a Makarov in .380 often so I think it's obvious where I stand. .380 and standard load .38 specials are pretty close to each other so I'd prefer 4 more rounds.

 

[HB]

Cooldill
Member


Join Date: November 19, 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 2,662
Well I bought the Bersa because I've heard they recoil less than similar sized 9mm handguns. I was thinking faster follow up shots. I've seen some gel tests and there are some .380 ACP loads thag do expand reliably and still penetrate over 12" in denim covered gel, though the expansion isn't as much as a 9 mil round.

I want a bersa for the same reason as well, I can shoot my dad's Kahr well but not quickly. In a pocket I still want a 38 over 380 but belt guns are another discussion for me. All comes down to what you can shoot the best.

 

[bannockburn]

I don't have any .380s with 8+ round capacity so it's not so much a question of increased firepower but what particular gun I feel like using at the time.As such, in a .380 I much prefer something smaller like my SIG P238 or Colt Mustang. More often than not it's like which do I feel like carrying at that time. Usually it's one of the two .380s but there still are times when I go with my S&W Model 638.

 

[CajunBass]

I used to have a Browning BDA 380. Man that was a pretty gun. Good shooter and reliable as the sunrise.

But I'm a revolver guy at heart. If I ever find myself in a situation where I really need a gun, and five or six shots of 38 Special won't get me out of it...well, I was already having a bad day.

 

[Tallball]

The 380 might be more "logical", but I was raised with revolvers and feel more comfortable with one.

 

[Zendude]

My carry gun dilemma is the same. The caliber difference is not really relevant to me. My Bersa has not been trouble free, which makes my revolver sound better. However, i can shoot the Bersa very accurately compared to shooting my revolver in double action mode. Also, the Bersa (CC model) is less bulky when carrying IWB. So, i am still trying to figure it all out.

 

[Robert101]

Like most, I started with a revolver too. But over the years I have shot many more rounds from my semi-autos. I feel much more confident in the semi-auto platform than revolvers now. I'll take the 380 any day over the venerable 38 cal. wheel gun. I'm apart of that Browning DBA crowd too.

 

[Gun Master]

I have three semi's that I trust implicitly (none of which is a .380) . I do own two .380's, Bersa & Colt.

I trust all of my revolvers, most of which are of the .38 Special variety.

 

[jrdolall]

I wonder how many interviews are available with private citizens that had actual gun battles with criminals. We can talk about penetration, accuracy and blah blah for eternity but what happens when actual people (not highly trained people) get into an actual gunfight. Adrenaline is a funny thing. Every bit of your training, knowledge and skill will probably go right out the door if bullets are zinging past your head.

I went with 380 because of capacity. Revolvers are generally more reliable which is a big plus for the 38. I just feel like I will NEED those extra rounds if I ever get into a situation. The poll asked for our opinion on the two so I didn't take into account reloads.

 

[Z1900]

Either would work. Which is more comfortable to carry?

 

[Tex62]

I own both, and live in a low threat environment. The Bersa is a great gun. I upgraded the grips and have three 8 round mags for it. I shot it very well. The 642 is bone stock and I shoot it well enough. It is so easy to carry, it goes everywhere. The Bersa has sharper edges and is just not near as easy to carry. The Bersa has been relegated to home defense and car duty.

 

[tomrkba]

Revolvers are generally more reliable which is a big plus for the 38.

I disagree and this is outdated information that is propagated as part of "Gun Mythology". Revolvers are susceptible to a different problems. We have plenty of documented cases of semi-autos going ridiculously long times with minimal maintenance.

 

[Deaf Smith]

I disagree and this is outdated information that is propagated as part of "Gun Mythology". Revolvers are susceptible to a different problems. We have plenty of documented cases of semi-autos going ridiculously long times with minimal maintenance.

Well yes, SOME semi-autos do go very long without cleaning..

But to small .380s do that?

Deaf

 

[Zendude]

Also, if i am in a gunfight, i might not be able to get a rock solid grip and shooting stance, which could cause limp wrist jams in a lightweight semiautomatic.

 

[Bobson]

Nine versus five?

380.

Heck, I'd take five rounds of .380 over five rounds of .38, as long as those five rounds were in a quality pistol. Maybe even four rounds of .380.

 

[rcmodel]

My head is going to be sleeping on a SIG P-232 .380 ACP tonight.

And I have 10 or so .38, .357, .44, .45 revolvers.
And many more 9mm, .40, and .45 pistols I could chose from.

rc

 

[BSA1]

Revolvers are generally more reliable which is a big plus for the 38.

I disagree and this is outdated information that is propagated as part of "Gun Mythology". Revolvers are susceptible to a different problems. We have plenty of documented cases of semi-autos going ridiculously long times with minimal maintenance.

I disagree with your disagreement and raise your disagree by three more.

1. Semi-automatics are sensitive to bullet style and weight.

A .357 magnum revolver can fire anything from 38 Special 148 gr. full wadcutter pushing 650 fps to full power magnum loads shooting heavy bullets at 1,200+ fps. The revolver will shoot any type of bullet such as soft lead full wadcutters, semi-wadcutters, soft points, hollow points and speciality bullets.

2. Semi-automatic ammunition is restricted much more limited power range for reliable functioning than revolvers.

Using a 357 magnum revolver we can use butterball target loads to Oh My Gosh! If we want real horsepower we can use the .500.

3. Semi-automatics are more sensitive to improper shooting techniques such as improper grip.

A revolver if you can pull the trigger it will keep firing. (Holding onto though may be another issue but it will fire).

Semi-autos of course have advantages over revolvers. However the survey results show the half of respondents prefer the little J Frame over a .380.

I'm not sure a survey comparing a 9mm the same size as a J-frame revolver will yield different results. 9mm come into their own with higher ammunition capacity and the attendant advantages that comes with shooting a larger frame gun.

 

[Gun Master]

Well stated, BSA1 !

 

[pezo]

I love these threads. .38 wheel gun. All the way. Just practice trigger pull and quick speedloader/strip reloads. Carry an effective bullet style. With a revolver that's easy.

 

[Bobson]

I disagree with your disagreement and raise your disagree by three more.

1. Semi-automatics are sensitive to bullet style and weight.

The first "point" you make is the exact archaic line that's been refuted time and again. Well played.

2. Semi-automatic ammunition is restricted much more limited power range for reliable functioning than revolvers.

Using a 357 magnum revolver we can use butterball target loads to Oh My Gosh! If we want real horsepower we can use the .500.

Okay, so a pistol can't reliably handle loads with half-charges of powder. This literally could not be more irrelevant to this thread. Wrap it up by talking about a .500 revolver... that's an entirely different gun! :banghead: I could make the same argument by telling the OP to go buy a Desert Eagle in .50 AE.

3. Semi-automatics are more sensitive to improper shooting techniques such as improper grip.

Okay, I'll give you that. Guess we'll need to learn to shoot properly enough to cycle the gun. That's three to five minutes well spent.

Carry an effective bullet style. With a revolver that's easy.

What?? With what pistol is it difficult? Which pistol from a reputable company will choke up on any of the numerous premium JHPs?

 

[AK103K]

1. Semi-automatics are sensitive to bullet style and weight.

Yea, maybe. Then again, maybe not.

Then again, some revolvers are sensitive in the same respect. The S&W model 19 as an example.

2. Semi-automatic ammunition is restricted much more limited power range for reliable functioning than revolvers.

I dont agree here. I routinely shoot +P+ 9mm out of my Glocks, and have never had any function issues because of it.

It would be interesting to see a little test, of two random, current, and realistic guns (i.e., normal carry examples) , one auto, one revolver, and shoot caliber extreme ammo (+P+, etc) until one fails. Which do you think will prevail?



I have a pretty good idea as to the answer. I have a Glock 17 that as of 9.5.15, has 88,000 rounds through it, without any stoppages that werent ammo related failures, or intentionally set up stoppages. No parts have yet broken.

Ive replaced RSA's twice a year, and have replaced extractors twice, although, it seems now, neither were in fact an issue, and it was worn out brass that was the issue. I actually replaced the second with the one it replaced, and its been fine. I tossed the original, so I couldnt prove it for sure.

Ive had a number of revolvers that didnt hold up for the first 1000 rounds.

3. Semi-automatics are more sensitive to improper shooting techniques such as improper grip.

Meh. Again, maybe. Then again, if youre shooting revolvers with the same improper techniques/grips, even if the gun does continue to work, youre not likely going to be hitting anything with any regularity, if at all.


I shoot a lot more auto than I do revolver, and I shoot a fair amount of revolver each year. Usually 5000+ rounds anyway. I shoot at least 6 times that out of my autos.

Over the years, Ive had more malfunctions with revolvers than I have the autos, and 99% of the revolver malfunctions, were DRT malfunctions. The gun was out of action at that point.

99% of the auto malfunctions are fixed almost immediately, with a TRB.

About the only plus I can see with a revolver, "might" be shooting through a pocket, but even then, its not a guarantee that it will work with all revolvers, nor is it a guarantee that it will fail, with all autos, so its basically a draw.

Pretty much everything else revolvers are supposed to be better at, are a reach at best.

 

[Deaf Smith]

AK,

A Glock ain't no small J size revolver.

Don't compare apples and oranges. The thread IS about .380 .vs. 5 shot .38s.

S&W 19 sensitive to bullet weight? Just how is that?


And as for limp wrist syndrome, how would you know they would miss? Do you even know what limp wrist means? In ain't Pee Wee Herman shooting.

Deaf

 

[BSA1]

Bobson,

I'll call your bet.

1. Bullet and weight is very important especially in the self-defense role.

The .380 bullet weight is 90 - 95 grains.

The 38 Special is 90 - 160 grains.

Due to the design of semi-autos they have to use a bullet with a round or pointed nose.

The revolver has no restrictions on bullet style. This is a big plus for other uses. A 158 gr. lead semi-wadcutter is great for deep penetration such as with a large or heavily clothed attacker and varmint control where over penetration isn't a concern but breaking bones such as the shoulders are.

2. The velocity or power range is more limited in a semi-auto. In small guns like these faster is usually better to ensure good bullet expansion with JHP's. Blowback semi-autos have a limited range of power (velocity) simply due to their design.

I am using Hornady Critical Defense 125 gr. +P FTX in my EDC snubby. I know from watching balllestic gel tests and my own personal tests that out of the 2" barrel it will expand consistently while meeting FBI testing standard.

With the .380 it is more of a either/or choice. JHP for maximizing wound channel but less penetration or FMJ to ensure reaching the vitals.

I consider both guns to be equal in carry & concealment because no one is built alike.

The main advantage to the Bersa is the four? (I thought the Bersa Thunder is 7 + 1) additional rounds.

 

[AK103K]

A Glock ain't no small J size revolver.

Actually, they arent all that different. I have a couple of each. I rarely carry the 642's anymore. I have a 26 on me pretty much daily, and carry it in the same spot I carried the J frame (Smart Carry, and occasionally ankle).

Don't compare apples and oranges. The thread IS about .380 .vs. 5 shot .38s.

I have multiples of them all, and the 26 is in the same size category as many of them, and is a 9mm after all, just like the 9mm Kurz. Just a tad hotter.

S&W 19 sensitive to bullet weight? Just how is that?

Its pretty well known that a steady diet of hot, 125 grain JHP's tends to tear up the 19's. Id say thats a sensitivity to ammo, wouldnt you?

And as for limp wrist syndrome, how would you know they would miss? Do you even know what limp wrist means? In ain't Pee Wee Herman shooting.

What makes you think they wouldnt?

If you dont use a proper grip/tecnique with any of them, revolver or auto, your results are not likely to be good.

I shoot a good bit of hot .38's out of 2" J frames, and .357mags, out of a 2" 19, and out of a few other .38/.357 S&W's. Without proper tecnique, they can be a handful, and especially the Airweights. Even the larger guns need to be held and shot properly if you want any kind of repeatable and positive result.

I fully understand what "limp wrist" syndrome is, and the wrist has nothing to do with it. yes, its more of an issue with the autos and function, but its not doing the revolver shooter any good either, and they certainly are not going to be shooting the gun properly or effectively, if thats how they shoot.