Popularity of the .380

[wanneroo]

Search for the Military Arms Channel video of testing of the Xtreme Penetrator bullet. Impressive for a .380. I certainly trust it.

Myself, I wouldn't. People put too much stock in ballistic gel testing. People are not made of ballistic gelatin however but rather bone, cartilage and various layers of flesh and muscle and are usually covered in clothes as well. Talk to any surgeon that has dealt with gun shot wounds. Bullets do unpredictable things and especially with a weak cartridge like the 380, it's a roll of the dice.

[Hodgie]

Myself, I wouldn't. People put too much stock in ballistic gel testing. People are not made of ballistic gelatin however but rather bone, cartilage and various layers of flesh and muscle and are usually covered in clothes as well. Talk to any surgeon that has dealt with gun shot wounds. Bullets do unpredictable things and especially with a weak cartridge like the 380, it's a roll of the dice.

Well since that's pretty much the base line for all modern ballistics testing its what we have to go on for all calibers. Some of the better choices mentioned in .380 are almost hitting 9mm specs coming out of pocket sized pistols, so close that the difference is neglegable. I'm sure surgeons have seen under penetration from many calibers as well as dead bodies from .380 and .22lr.

[Hodgie]

I think this thread went the direction I expected, very few positives and lots of negatives. About the only argument people can make for it is that can be used in smaller more concealable pistols, but that's about it.

Once again I think you are over reaching in order to get your preferred end result/opinion which is fine for you but not necessarily the truth.

[scruff]

Well since that's pretty much the base line for all modern ballistics testing its what we have to go on for all calibers. Some of the better choices mentioned in .380 are almost hitting 9mm specs coming out of pocket sized pistols, so close that the difference is neglegable. I'm sure surgeons have seen under penetration from many calibers as well as dead bodies from .380 and .22lr.

Since youre making the comparison, do you mean the best .380 rounds are comparable to the best 9mm rounds, or to a low-performance 9mm round? Without any links to data, we have to assume the latter, in which case they're not equal after all.

[Hodgie]

I am comparing to other popularly used SD ammunition some of which I think is crap like Golden saber but there are tons of people on this site that swear by it out of 2.5"-3" barrels. Shooting the Bull.com has extensive testing all performed to FBI standards on most brands of popular SD ammunition in all calibers.

A consistent 12-13" of penetration throuh 3 layers of ballistic grade denim along with proper expansion through organic gel are excellent real world results. The data is there all anyone has to do is google it for themselves.

To me the bigger gig on .380 pistols are the quality of the over all pistol and not so much the choice of performance of the ammunition these days.

[Hodgie]

Late note:
If I am rembering correctly Speer Gold Dot 9mm which is a common high quality duty round showed lack luster performance when tested out of a 3" barrel. I will find the link and see if the comparison is close later. Speer was my primary carry load and now it's HST 124gr standard because of this test.

[jeffk3630]

I traded my pocket gun a Beretta bobcat for a S&W shield in 9 mm. I did this because of all the hype of needing more power for self defense. I know now this was a mistake. I need a holster for the S&W shield so I carry it less. I miss that grab and go pocket carry. The S&W shield is a nice pistol it's slim and great for ccw but it is a little large for pocket carry. I am now looking at getting another pocket gun in 32ACP or 380 ACP .

[Hokkmike]

As the OP I am pretty well satisfied with the positive direction of the answers. I think there is a lot of good discussion about the pros and cons of the 380 cartridge. I thank you all very much for your input.

[wanneroo]

Well since that's pretty much the base line for all modern ballistics testing its what we have to go on for all calibers. Some of the better choices mentioned in .380 are almost hitting 9mm specs coming out of pocket sized pistols, so close that the difference is neglegable. I'm sure surgeons have seen under penetration from many calibers as well as dead bodies from .380 and .22lr.

No doubt, I remember a family friend that worked on a child that took a BB in the heart and died. Ballistic gel, yes, it gives you a standard data point of what it will do flying through gelatin, but I think people overly rely on it and take it as the gospel.

[wanneroo]

Once again I think you are over reaching in order to get your preferred end result/opinion which is fine for you but not necessarily the truth.

How so? Other than making the case for deep concealment, where else are you going to go with it in regards to 380? There is no data to support it out performing a 9mm or above. Even a weakly loaded 9mm will match or supersede a top of the line 380 round.

I don't have my reloading manuals handy but I'm guessing a 95g .355 JHP is going to run at 950fps out of a .380 and a 147g .355 JHP is going to run about 1050fps out of a 9mm or a 124g JHP will run 1100fps+ out of a 9mm. There is no contest between the two in weight or speed.