NRA magazine : 380 equals 38 spl?
- Thread starter HJHMD
- Start date
- Status
Jesse Heywood
Member
I did some comparisons back in the early 80s, when I purchased an AMT Backup 380. At the time, the only hi-performance round for the 380 that was available was the Silvertip. When I compared the silvertip to 38 spl RNL that the FBI had used (not +P) the 38 had a slight advantage. The big advantage for me was a gun that I could carry in a wallet holster or the pockets on my bibs. I couldn't do either with a revolver. And the main point was to have a gun.
I am now looking at compact 9s. Slightly bigger than the 380, but far more powerful.
I am now looking at compact 9s. Slightly bigger than the 380, but far more powerful.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Comparing the .380 ball round with the old .38 RNL, they're very close...on paper. Even in tests with ballistic gel, there isn't much difference.
But as our old friend Yogi noted:
"In theory...theory and practice are the same. In practice...they ain't."
Sometime in the fall of 1986, a fella I was acquainted with informed a guy that the next time he caught him sneakin' around with his underage daughter, he'd kill him. True to his word, he caught the amorous pair late one Saturday night...and he shot the kid with a Model 84 Beretta stoked with ball once amidships. The lad fell on the ground...clutching at his side and screamin' for his mother and God and an ambulance. "Joe" grabbed his daughter by the arm and took her home to wait for the cops.
Turns out the young Romeo wasn't hurt all that bad. The bullet penetrated his thick leather belt, broke the skin directly over the pelvis and stopped against the bone. He was home in time for breakfast.
The judge took pity on Joe because he had a daughter about the same age, and gave him weekends in jail for a couple years.
The kids are now happily married, and Joe is presently enjoying his new role as grandpa.
But as our old friend Yogi noted:
"In theory...theory and practice are the same. In practice...they ain't."
Sometime in the fall of 1986, a fella I was acquainted with informed a guy that the next time he caught him sneakin' around with his underage daughter, he'd kill him. True to his word, he caught the amorous pair late one Saturday night...and he shot the kid with a Model 84 Beretta stoked with ball once amidships. The lad fell on the ground...clutching at his side and screamin' for his mother and God and an ambulance. "Joe" grabbed his daughter by the arm and took her home to wait for the cops.
Turns out the young Romeo wasn't hurt all that bad. The bullet penetrated his thick leather belt, broke the skin directly over the pelvis and stopped against the bone. He was home in time for breakfast.
The judge took pity on Joe because he had a daughter about the same age, and gave him weekends in jail for a couple years.
The kids are now happily married, and Joe is presently enjoying his new role as grandpa.
Carl N. Brown
Member
Velocity at 10', penetration in ballistic gel, and expansion factor are what they are (to re-use a groaner cliche). By those standards, .380 and .38 spl from concealable pistols of similar size are roughly equal.
Bullet weight and momentum (weight x velocity) are also factors. Fire a .380 ACP and a .38 Spl at a heavy metal swinger target and see a visual demonstration of comparative impact.
Bullet weight and momentum (weight x velocity) are also factors. Fire a .380 ACP and a .38 Spl at a heavy metal swinger target and see a visual demonstration of comparative impact.
RickMD
Member
I currently own a Detective Special, S&W 36, Colt Mustang, and a Walther PPK. In the course of killing numerous fence posts, milk jugs, beer cans, and 2x4's I haven't been able to discern a dimes worth of difference between the 380's and the .38 Specials when fired from these short barreled belly guns. +P loads in the .38's do however give the advantage of unburnt powder, blinding muzzle flash, and impressive ear splitting report...
Both are quite snappy when fired in these compact handguns and I personally don't see the advantage of anything more potent if one is inclined to pack a handgun of this size. I find myself prone to carry the .380's more simply because they're a bit smaller and flatter. I feel the argument for the virtues of one over the other is fruitless and boils down to a matter of personal choice.
Both are quite snappy when fired in these compact handguns and I personally don't see the advantage of anything more potent if one is inclined to pack a handgun of this size. I find myself prone to carry the .380's more simply because they're a bit smaller and flatter. I feel the argument for the virtues of one over the other is fruitless and boils down to a matter of personal choice.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Another pelvis shot that didn't shatter the pelvis? LOL.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,236
I didn't see weight as a consideration in your post. Energy takes both speed and mass. A 158g bullet at the same speed as a 90g out of a 380 will have more energy.
That said IDPA has a minimum power factor that has to be met. 125 for 9mm classes and 105 for the class that 38s are used in. They lowered it from 125 as a lot of factory 38 won't make 125.
That said IDPA has a minimum power factor that has to be met. 125 for 9mm classes and 105 for the class that 38s are used in. They lowered it from 125 as a lot of factory 38 won't make 125.
R.W.Dale
Member
From a 3" 380 most 90g fmj loads I've chronied run in the mid 900 fps range
From a 2" revolver (wich is closer to 3.75" combined bbl length) 38 will be in the mid 700's for most loads with 158g bullets.
Factoring for this there's less than 20 ft lbs difference betwixt the two cartridges
I like 38 but I think a lot of folks have unrealistic expectations about its performance. They look at ballistics and gelatin tests given for 4"+ barrelled revolvers and think that translates directly to the 2" snubby everyone actually carries.
Where 38 wins here is being able to fire bullets that create larger wounds by virtue of their shape as with the various flavor of wadcutters.
Interesting story. If it were accompanied by an identical story involving the .38spl demonstrating that the terminal effect of the .38spl was noticeably greater, then it would support the idea that the two aren't similar in performance.
It does highlight the fact that handguns can be surprisingly ineffective. Fortunately so, in this case.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Sorry. Don't have one. I'd be willing the bet that a standard .38 Special 158 RNL would have done a bit better under the same circumstances, though...by virtue of its greater mass and sectional density.
Anybody with a thick "biker" belt, a layer of denim, and access to a hog's femur could probably prove it.
Roger that, and especially when light calibers are involved.
Snubbys make a lot of noise, shoot a flame out the front and kick, I carried 2 for 20 years, but the 380 walther did the same amount of damage. This from shooting at various sorts of things with both for many years. If you put them next to each other, it's hard to understand. But when you learn about the different preassures and powder types. It makes more sense.The 9mm with it's higher preassure loads is even more powerful, unless we are talking plus p's. They all start out about the same circumference, until the preassure makes the HP rounds open up more consisitantlly and with deeper penetration. They will all kill you at 7 yards or less with little difference.As mentioned pistol rounds are not like rifle rounds, they lack the energy to inflict that large wound cavity.
fastbolt
Member
I know a lot of folks who own & carry .380's. If they shoot them well, and especially if they shoot them better than they can a 5-shot snub, that's an important thing thing for them to consider.
I owned a .380 once. I've handled and shot some since, too.
The day they make a .380 that fires a 130gr, 135gr or 158gr hollowpoint that expands, I'll be ready to own another one.
I owned a .380 once. I've handled and shot some since, too.
The day they make a .380 that fires a 130gr, 135gr or 158gr hollowpoint that expands, I'll be ready to own another one.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
The .380 will never be the equal of the .38 Special except on paper...and paper ballistics don't tell the whole story.
Because nothing is everything and everything is something, bullet mass is an important consideration in its terminal performance. Bullet mass and momentum determine whether the bullet will reach the vitals...or not.
Velocity...Energy...even bullet expansion, are all variable while mass is constant.
Because the .380's case size and capacity pretty much limit the length/weight/mass of useable bullets, the only way to get the momentum up is to up the velocity, and sometimes velocity can work against us in reaching the vitals. A 95-grain hollowpoint bullet at 990 fps that expands may just barely make it. Bump the velocity up to increase its momentum, and it may not.
As per the unwritten part of Newton 3 dictates: "The harder the bullet hits the target, the harder the target hits the bullet. Impact works in both directions, and the bullet that expands perfectly at 990 fps impact may come unwrapped at 1100.
And, even it it stays together...because an object of a given mass decelerates more rapidly the higher the velocity when it meets a given outside force, AND...because the lower the mass at a given velocity, the more rapidly it decelerates when it meets a given outside force...you eventually reach a point of diminishing returns.
Comparing a 95-grain bullet and a 125-grain bullet at velocities that provide equal momentums, the 125 will penetrate deeper because of its greater mass and sectional density, all else assumed to be equal.
The .380 cartridge is capable with good placement and adequate penetration. The problem comes when the target to be penetrated is the 250-pound gorilla who spent the last 5 years pumping iron in the prison yard as opposed to the skinny tweaker whose vitals aren't nestled behind a thick, tough layer of muscle.
If the light, zippy bullet expands and stops in that layer, about all that will keep him from pressing on is fear...and while you can hope for that...counting on it is unwise.
Because nothing is everything and everything is something, bullet mass is an important consideration in its terminal performance. Bullet mass and momentum determine whether the bullet will reach the vitals...or not.
Velocity...Energy...even bullet expansion, are all variable while mass is constant.
Because the .380's case size and capacity pretty much limit the length/weight/mass of useable bullets, the only way to get the momentum up is to up the velocity, and sometimes velocity can work against us in reaching the vitals. A 95-grain hollowpoint bullet at 990 fps that expands may just barely make it. Bump the velocity up to increase its momentum, and it may not.
As per the unwritten part of Newton 3 dictates: "The harder the bullet hits the target, the harder the target hits the bullet. Impact works in both directions, and the bullet that expands perfectly at 990 fps impact may come unwrapped at 1100.
And, even it it stays together...because an object of a given mass decelerates more rapidly the higher the velocity when it meets a given outside force, AND...because the lower the mass at a given velocity, the more rapidly it decelerates when it meets a given outside force...you eventually reach a point of diminishing returns.
Comparing a 95-grain bullet and a 125-grain bullet at velocities that provide equal momentums, the 125 will penetrate deeper because of its greater mass and sectional density, all else assumed to be equal.
The .380 cartridge is capable with good placement and adequate penetration. The problem comes when the target to be penetrated is the 250-pound gorilla who spent the last 5 years pumping iron in the prison yard as opposed to the skinny tweaker whose vitals aren't nestled behind a thick, tough layer of muscle.
If the light, zippy bullet expands and stops in that layer, about all that will keep him from pressing on is fear...and while you can hope for that...counting on it is unwise.
IF you restrict .38spl to the lightest bullet weights in the caliber AND to standard pressure loads, then .380 is the equal of the .38spl, both on paper and in the real world. Clearly, if you have the same diameter & weight bullet going the same speed, it's tough to argue that there's something that causes one to perform significantly different from the other.
On the other hand, if one extends the comparison to include heavier bullets than the .380ACP can handle, or to include .38Spl +P, then they are not equals by any stretch. Not on paper and not in the real world.
Do you realize that you used "paper ballistics" to support your statement about paper ballistics not telling the whole story?
Last edited:
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
You're assuming too much, John...and the main assumption is that equal energy means equal performance. A common mistake. Energy is only part of the picture. And why restrict the .38 in order to stack the deck in favor of the smaller round? As long as you're restricting...why not restrict the .38 to the lightest bullet AND limit it to the .380's velocity ceiling with the heaviest bullet available? I can outrun a Corvette with a VW if I pull four plug cables from the Corvette's V8.
A couple of analogies that I've made before still apply.
If you're tasked with tearing down a brick wall, would you choose a framing hammer or a 10-pound sledge? While you may be able to swing the framing hammer fast enough to equal the energy of the sledge...or possibly exceed it...it's pretty clear which one will create the most structural damage to the wall per blow.
If you're facing a charging Grizzly...would you feel better about the potential outcome with a .45-70 firing a solid lead 405 grain bullet...or a .22-250 firing a 60-grain hollow point?
The conclusion is that in order to shut down an attacker, you have to destroy or disrupt something important, and the more complete the damage, the better the chances of shutting him down. If "Mongo the Mauler" is bearing down on you at 15 feet with a big stick in his hand, you want a through and through wound. Twice as many holes to bleed from and twice as many holes to let air into the thoracic cavity will shut him down faster than simple energy.
I'm thinking this ^
Chrono data:
Ruger LCP: Ranger T 95 gr. @ 876 fps / 162# KE
S&W 442 (Mag-Na-Ported) Winchester 110 Silvertip @ 821 fps / 165# KE
Yea, the 38 snub in my example loses some velocity due to porting, but it was not pleasant to shoot so it got ported.
Yea, a +P load would be hotter, about 200# KE
Even if the .38 KE was 200#, the 380 Ranger T produces 80% of that
The .38 has more KE and likely better penetration, but I typically chose the .380 as a pocket pistol; the .380 has two more rounds and is lighter.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
And "they" were still letting kinetic energy figures bring them to a conclusion.
Velocity. Energy. Momentum. All these things are variable, as is the target whenever we shoot for blood. The only constant is bullet mass. The smart/successful gambler never bets on the variable. He puts his money on the sure thing. The constant.
Even bullet expansion or the lack thereof is a variable. The only way to assure that the bullet performs the same way every time is to have one that doesn't do anything except penetrate the target. Then, the task is getting it to penetrate far enough to hit something important.
Certaindeaf
member
Buffalo Bore puts out a flat nose lead .380 load that goes, I think, 30" in ballistic gel.
I cast a Lee 105gr SWC and drive it pretty hard in that caliber. It cuts clean holes in paper and has worked very well on some few small game animals and varmints I've shot with it.. fox, rabbit etc
I cast a Lee 105gr SWC and drive it pretty hard in that caliber. It cuts clean holes in paper and has worked very well on some few small game animals and varmints I've shot with it.. fox, rabbit etc
481
Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,420
From what I've read, even bullet mass is a variable thanks to fragmentation/aggressive expansion.
Of the two bullet penetration models (one by C. Schwartz, the other by D. MacPherson) that I am aware of, a momentum-based approach seems to be the preferred method for arriving at their respective conclusions (penetration and wound cavity volume/mass).
Of course, there is no way to account for what is actually struck; that's up to the shooter and whatever his training affords him.
I think you're right.
Using the two models referenced above, the predicted penetration depths for the .380 and the .38 Special would be:
.380 95 gr. FMJ @ 950fps is:
Schwartz: 19.3"
MacPherson: 20.6"
.38 Spec 158 gr. LRN @ 750fps is:
Schwartz: 27.1"
MacPherson: 28.7"
The .38 Special 158 gr. LRN is certainly the greater penetrator of the two.
Last edited:
Interesting article, but I need to ask the author a number of questions for clarification before commenting on his research and why he chose the specific ammunition he did for the article.
For another comparitive gel publication, check Winchester's LE data;
http://winchesterle.com/ammotesting/Pages/testingtool.aspx
For another comparitive gel publication, check Winchester's LE data;
http://winchesterle.com/ammotesting/Pages/testingtool.aspx
Tcruse
Member
I like the Schwartz model, with over 700 data points it tweaks the MacPherson model even further resulting in more accurate, precise penetration/crush cavity computations.
I'm not sure how the author arrived at his above average terminal performance level choices, but the 45 auto 230gr JHPs didn't make the cut. Regardless, the RA45TP with its relatively high momentum penetrated through over a 1/2" of tough bone with these rather spectacular results;
http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=7484841&postcount=4
Unfortunately given the author's arbitrary requirement of 1000fps and 1.5x expansion, it would not qualify for his "above average terminal performance" criteria.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
