Should the 380 be discouraged as a CCW ?

[bugsbunny45]

I think the people who visit a websites need to be able to talk about all the choices we have in CCW.
As long as people have choices we will never be able to decide whats really best for all people at all times.
A mouse gun in 380 beats a flash light each and every time in my book.

Give people information and let them make their case.

After reading the policy on the 380 as a ccw on that other website I decided not to join.
Guess what I carry most times a 380 So many of my post would be deleted....

[Excaliber]

Off the top of my head I believe the 90 and 95 grain .380 loads typically deliver around 200 to 205 ft-lbs of energy. The .38 Special typically delivers slightly less than that, with I believe exception of the 110 grain loads which provides around 225 ft-lbs of energy. Typical .380+p loads typically deliver around 230 ft-lbs, if memory serves while, the .38 special +p hits significantly harder somewhere closer to 350 ft-lbs. Now these are just off the top of my head and I would need to consult loading manuals or manufacturers data. All the values I mention should be calculated for the muzzle energy. Normally comparing energy between different calibers is pointless due to bullet diameter, however both cartridges use .35 caliber bullets (.380 is .355 and 38 special is .357) negating any real difference that bullet diameter would play. I do not have access to any loading manuals at the moment to refer to, but any quality loading manual should confirm the data and be more accurate than my memory.

Energy in foot-pounds is of primarily mathematical interest and has never been shown to correlate with wounding characteristics under field conditions. There are too many other factors involved. Caliber, velocity, bullet construction (and expansion or lack thereof), penetration in living tissue, and projectile integrity or fragmentation all come into play.

[G.A. Heath]

Off the top of my head I believe the 90 and 95 grain .380 loads typically deliver around 200 to 205 ft-lbs of energy. The .38 Special typically delivers slightly less than that, with I believe exception of the 110 grain loads which provides around 225 ft-lbs of energy. Typical .380+p loads typically deliver around 230 ft-lbs, if memory serves while, the .38 special +p hits significantly harder somewhere closer to 350 ft-lbs. Now these are just off the top of my head and I would need to consult loading manuals or manufacturers data. All the values I mention should be calculated for the muzzle energy. Normally comparing energy between different calibers is pointless due to bullet diameter, however both cartridges use .35 caliber bullets (.380 is .355 and 38 special is .357) negating any real difference that bullet diameter would play. I do not have access to any loading manuals at the moment to refer to, but any quality loading manual should confirm the data and be more accurate than my memory.

Energy in foot-pounds is of primarily mathematical interest has never been shown to correlate with wounding characteristics under field conditions. There are too many other factors involved. Caliber, velocity, bullet construction (and expansion or lack thereof), penetration in living tissue, and projectile integrity or fragmentation all come into play.

Energy does come into play as the energy transferred from the bullet to the target is what determines the amount of damage (Including how quickly it stops said target). Regarding the 38sp. Vs. .380 the Caliber doesn't matter as the difference is 2 thousandths of an inch. Velocity and bullet weight are what determine energy. Take two bullets of the same weight, but different velocities, the one with the greater velocity will have greater energy. Take a 90 grain 380 traveling at 1000fps, this combination will result in around 200 ft-lbf of energy. Take a 130 grain 38 special traveling at 800fps, you will see around 185 ft-lbf of energy. Both bullets will effectively make the same size hole, and have comparable energy. The 380 should penetrate deeper due to it having a significantly higher velocity. Now if we are using ball ammo or similar hollow points the 38 special will stop quicker in the target meaning that it does have a better transfer of energy and causes more shock. Unfortunately hydrostatic shock from a handgun is practically non-existent.

Both calibers are minimal calibers which have comparable ballistics until you get into +p loads, at that point the larger case of the 38 special lets it accept more powder and perform much better than the .380. in +p My point is that saying the 38 special is a better performer than the .380 doesn't hold water as both are nearly identical for ballistic purposes until you get into the +p loads.

Now I will readily admit that the 38 special has more bodies to its credit than the .380, but the 38 special has seen service as a duty firearm in many departments and the .380 has not really been popular until recently.

[Shoot Straight]

I think if we discourage anyone from carrying the weapon of their choice, we end up discouraging all. Following the slippery slope to its logical end, if we discourage smaller than the 9mm, then eventually the 9mm become the mouse gun. The 40 guys will then say to discourage the 9mm, and we end up with the 40 being the mouse gun. Then the 45 guys will make fun of the 40 (as if they did not already) and the 40 gets discouraged. Then the 50 guys end up making fun of the 45 guys and we end up with only one caliber.

What do you call 45 ACP?

44 Magnum set on stun.

[Excaliber]

Off the top of my head I believe the 90 and 95 grain .380 loads typically deliver around 200 to 205 ft-lbs of energy. The .38 Special typically delivers slightly less than that, with I believe exception of the 110 grain loads which provides around 225 ft-lbs of energy. Typical .380+p loads typically deliver around 230 ft-lbs, if memory serves while, the .38 special +p hits significantly harder somewhere closer to 350 ft-lbs. Now these are just off the top of my head and I would need to consult loading manuals or manufacturers data. All the values I mention should be calculated for the muzzle energy. Normally comparing energy between different calibers is pointless due to bullet diameter, however both cartridges use .35 caliber bullets (.380 is .355 and 38 special is .357) negating any real difference that bullet diameter would play. I do not have access to any loading manuals at the moment to refer to, but any quality loading manual should confirm the data and be more accurate than my memory.

Energy in foot-pounds is of primarily mathematical interest has never been shown to correlate with wounding characteristics under field conditions. There are too many other factors involved. Caliber, velocity, bullet construction (and expansion or lack thereof), penetration in living tissue, and projectile integrity or fragmentation all come into play.

Energy does come into play as the energy transferred from the bullet to the target is what determines the amount of damage (Including how quickly it stops said target). Regarding the 38sp. Vs. .380 the Caliber doesn't matter as the difference is 2 thousandths of an inch. Velocity and bullet weight are what determine energy. Take two bullets of the same weight, but different velocities, the one with the greater velocity will have greater energy. Take a 90 grain 380 traveling at 1000fps, this combination will result in around 200 ft-lbf of energy. Take a 130 grain 38 special traveling at 800fps, you will see around 185 ft-lbf of energy. Both bullets will effectively make the same size hole, and have comparable energy. The 380 should penetrate deeper due to it having a significantly higher velocity. Now if we are using ball ammo or similar hollow points the 38 special will stop quicker in the target meaning that it does have a better transfer of energy and causes more shock. Unfortunately hydrostatic shock from a handgun is practically non-existent.

Both calibers are minimal calibers which have comparable ballistics until you get into +p loads, at that point the larger case of the 38 special lets it accept more powder and perform much better than the .380. in +p My point is that saying the 38 special is a better performer than the .380 doesn't hold water as both are nearly identical for ballistic purposes until you get into the +p loads.

Now I will readily admit that the 38 special has more bodies to its credit than the .380, but the 38 special has seen service as a duty firearm in many departments and the .380 has not really been popular until recently.

Energy transfer as a major component of wounding effectiveness is a myth.

According to the FBI's landmark study "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness", energy transfer is not a major factor in the wounding characteristics of handgun ammunition. If it were, an officer whose ballistic vest stops an incoming round should be similarly wounded as one shot without a vest, because he absorbs the entire energy package as the vest stops the bullet.

Here's what the FBI concluded after all their research and testing (page 14):

"The critical wounding components for handgun ammunition, in order of importance, are penetration and permanent cavity."

Given adequate ammunition, shot placement is critically important. Unless a central nervous system element is hit, a bullet has to disrupt major organs and blood vessels ti achieve a stop by causing sufficient bleeding to shut down the brain from lack of oxygen. This takes time.

The same FBI report also notes that many of the "stops" achieved with handgun ammunition are in fact "psychological stops," where the target realizes he's been shot and stops his action or collapses at the thought that he's about to die.

The full FBI report summary is not terribly long, is well written, and makes a good read for anyone who wants to get an understanding of the realities involved in stopping people from doing what they're doing with handguns. It also addresses the energy transfer hypothesis and explains in detail why it doesn't match reality in the field.

[Ameer]

Here's what the FBI concluded after all their research and testing (page 14):

"The critical wounding components for handgun ammunition, in order of importance, are penetration and permanent cavity."

For the same diameter object, more energy should mean more penetration. (stab hard > stab weak)

For the same energy, a smaller diameter should mean more penetration. (ice pick > kubaton)

[G.A. Heath]

Let me clarify what I was trying to get across when describing the transfer of energy concept. The whole basis of using a firearm for self defense is the transfer of energy, When and where the energy is transferred is more important than how much is transferred overall. If all of the energy is transferred to a love handle rather than center of mass or before penetrating more than two inches then odds are the target will continue to be a threat. The operator of the weapon will determine where the energy transfer takes place (this is shot placement). But when comparing performance between two cartridges discharging nearly identical bullets then the amount of energy will help determine when that energy transfer takes place, this translates to penetration meaning more energy equals more penetration. However the difference between the two cartridges in standard loads is minimal, with the 380 in some cases being slightly better than the 38 special.

[Excaliber]

Here's what the FBI concluded after all their research and testing (page 14):

"The critical wounding components for handgun ammunition, in order of importance, are penetration and permanent cavity."

For the same diameter object, more energy should mean more penetration. (stab hard > stab weak)

For the same energy, a smaller diameter should mean more penetration. (ice pick > kubaton)

If you make the assumption of equal mass and identical shape, this should generally hold true. However, if you change those parameters, you can get much different results.

For example, given the same velocity, a lighter bullet will have less momentum and will thus lose velocity more quickly than a heavier bullet when it encounters resistance, thus delivering less penetration despite the same initial velocity and diameter.

[Beiruty]

Can we go with what FBI accept for their force? Others can still chose what they want. FBI guys do carry concealed most of the time, no? So, let us start with what FBI recommends.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I would never discourage anyone from carrying any gun/caliber combination they choose to carry. As many have said, it's a personal choice. I also strongly agree that shot placement is and always will be key to stopping a deadly threat. My only concern is that some people may make a decision to carry a small gun/caliber based upon erroneous information.

Carrying a self-defense sidearm is a trade-off in many ways. Every step we take toward greater concealment, is a step away from comfort and accessibility, and the converse is true. When we choose to carry a smaller gun instead of a larger one of the same caliber, we sacrifice power and possibly reliability. When we choose to carry a less powerful caliber we sacrifice power and stopping potential. When we choose to carry one extra magazine instead of two, we sacrifice firepower. But sometimes sacrifices are necessary and/or desirable. It's a personal decision, but make an educated decision.

Here is a test scenario:
You were at home sitting in front of the TV with a 45 ACP, a 9mm and a .380 ACP on the coffee table. You are thoroughly familiar with each of the three pistols, they are equally reliable in terms of function, and you shoot well with each one.

• Question 1: If a kick burglar comes through your front door, which pistol would you choose to fight with and why?
  Question 2: Absent compelling circumstances, why would your daily carry gun be different?

My wife is short (5') with short arms, but she carries a 45ACP every day. However, she absolutely will not carry a 5" Government Model or even a 4 1/4" Commander. She likes the 3" Kimber Ultra Carry with aluminum frame and the loss of muzzle velocity and potential reliability (no problems in 6 years and thousands of rounds) hasn't changed her mind. Also, she won't carry a second magazine, and the lack of firepower hasn't changed her mind either. It's her decision, she's made it and she'll live or die based upon that decision, if that terrible day comes (again).

Carry what you will, but make an informed decision. And don't think a small guy can't carry and conceal a big gun. I'm 5'9", 170 lbs. and I carry a 5" Government Model every day. It's just as easy with an IWB and an untucked shirt as it is when I'm wearing a suit and a belt holster.

We're going to have a Texas Firearms Coalition "CHL Fashion Show" when the Texas Legislative Session is over. I think folks will find it interesting and informative.

Chas.

[apostate]

For example, given the same velocity, a lighter bullet will have less momentum and will thus lose velocity more quickly than a heavier bullet when it encounters resistance, thus delivering less penetration despite the same initial velocity and diameter.

Given the same velocity, a lighter bullet has less kinetic energy. Thus, it appears energy is one factor, but not the only factor.

[LikesShinyThings]

I sometimes (maybe around 50% of the time?) carry a .380. Sure, I could get a 9mm in the same or smaller package, eg Ruger LC9. But, without having shot it, I'd be willing to guess it's going to kick like a mule (as I would feel it - for those of you who have shot it and think not, well, I'm VERY sensitive to recoil, so what you shrug off, me not so much, for forgive me). Which means I'm going to really dislike shooting it. Which means 1) I'm not going to practice with it much, making me less accurate, and 2) I'm much more likely to flinch when I go to pull the trigger. That's bad enough in target practice. Put it in an adrenaline-pumped crisis situation, and it's a recipe for lousy shot placement.

Combine that with the fact that I have a small frame, and you get the fact that concealing a larger gun is not easy, and a smaller version of a larger caliber is not going to be a good choice for me, and I come down to .380 is a VERY good option for me. Maybe it won't have the stopping power of a 9mm. But I'll take the .380 in my holster over anything else in the safe.

Just seems to me that stopping power isn't the only consideration.

[Texas_Tactical]

My EDC is a S&W .40. However if I'm going to the gym or say clothes shopping I'll carry a .380 due to all the activity I'll be doing. I understand that if I'm in a situation where I need to use a gun it will be fast and violent so carrying a smaller caliber is a calculated risk. If im at the Gym I'm not going to carry a gun that for the purpose of my wardrobe is big, heavy, and clunky to carry. In this instance I would much rather have a .380 than no gun.

We're going to have a Texas Firearms Coalition "CHL Fashion Show" when the Texas Legislative Session is over. I think folks will find it interesting and informative.

Interesting.

[gigag04]

Common sense (not as PBO sees it), situational awareness, decent skill, and a gun of most calibers will be just fine in many situations. Someone harping on someone for carrying a .380 has too much time on their hands. IMO commenting on a man's choice of weapon without being invited to do so seems meddlesome to me.

I'd like to know which forum and troll there for a post or two, but in reality, I couldn't care less. I carry a .45 for work, and often only a .380 when I'm off. Ive said it before, when the shooting starts, all of us will want a bigger, badder, faster, stronger weapon with more ammo, and a buddy or two beside us.

[XinTX]

I also strongly agree that shot placement is and always will be key to stopping a deadly threat.

Agree. Better a 380 that you can effectively put rounds on target than a 44 Mag that you can't control. If you can't hit the target, the caliber is irrelevant. The MUCH better half can 'shoot' my 45, but couldn't put more than one shot on target. She has tiny hands and it's too difficult for her to control. She is good with my 9mm, but can't fully operate it due to hand strength issues. But the little 380 she can use quite effectively.

Here is a test scenario:
You were at home sitting in front of the TV with a 45 ACP, a 9mm and a .380 ACP on the coffee table. You are thoroughly familiar with each of the three pistols, they are equally reliable in terms of function, and you shoot well with each one.

• Question 1: If a kick burglar comes through your front door, which pistol would you choose to fight with and why?
  Question 2: Absent compelling circumstances, why would your daily carry gun be different?

I'll take the 45 every time given that choice.

Carry what you will, but make an informed decision. And don't think a small guy can't carry and conceal a big gun. I'm 5'9", 170 lbs. and I carry a 5" Government Model every day. It's just as easy with an IWB and an untucked shirt as it is when I'm wearing a suit and a belt holster.

We're going to have a Texas Firearms Coalition "CHL Fashion Show" when the Texas Legislative Session is over. I think folks will find it interesting and informative.

Chas.

Love to actually 'see' some holster options that work. I have an el-cheapo IWB that works, but isn't great. Like to see how some work before buying one.