[AZ Outlaws]

Okay... a lot has been written about the .380Auto round being used for self defense. The subject has been brought up more times than I would like, but after viewing HowardCohodas' thread that contained the LCP/Hornady Video using Hornady's 90 grain JHP/XTP ammunition, the question of the .380 being an adequate self defense round raised it's ugly head once again in my mind.

In the LCP/Hornady Video posted above, the Hornady .380 JHP/XTP penetrated ballistic gel only 9 inches. If I'm not mistaken, the FBI standard is 12 inches.

My opinion (for whatever it's worth) is that the .380 round is a "compromise" round, lending itself best for duty in a small concealable gun such as the LCP and other small pocket canons when it is impractable to carry a larger gun in 9mm or bigger.

What's your opinion of the .380 as a "primary" self defense round and what is the "minimum" self defense round you would like to use in a "small, easily concealable, all season" semi-auto pocket gun? My ideal pocket gun would be a LCP in 9mm, smaller and lighter than a PF9 or a PM9.


Note: One thing on posting to this thread... please, let's don't get into a "center mass, perfectly placed shot" and therefore "bullet size doesn't matter" discussion. I'd like to keep this as do you think the .380 is an adequate SD round because of it's penetration limitations.

 

[argyle]

I'd like to keep this as do you think the .380 is an adequate SD round.

In a word - "just" - just adequate. There is a pretty good writeup here comparing the differnt calibers for self defense - "Selection of best ammunition for a defensive handgun" http://www.internetarmory.com/handgunammo.htm The .380 gets a rating of "Good", with percentages of the mythical "One Shot Stops" ranging from 57-70%. This means that your odds are better than even of stopping the attack with a single well-placed shot that hits the assailant somewhere in a vital area. It compares favorably with the .38 spl from a 2" barrel, which is also rated "Good" and has OSS ratings in the 64-67% range. The same loads are better from a 4" barrel, which gets a "Very Good" rating, but we are clearly out of the concealable/carryable category.

9 mm gets a "Better" rating with scores of 79-91%, as does the .357 Sig with 86-89% (new caliber, limited ammo, few in use, small sample size.) The .357 mag, .40 cal, and .45 acp all get a rating of "Best", outperforming the .41 mag, and .44 special and mag.

As you said, the .380 is a compromise - it straddles the line between the biggest "small" gun/cal and the smallest "big" gun/cal.

The most important thing to remember about the FBI tests and standards is this line from the quote that Howard posted -

The FBI Ammunition Test Protocol is a series of practically oriented tests to measure a bullet's ability to meet these performance standards. The result is an assessment of a bullet's ability to inflict effective wounds after defeating various intervening obstacles commonly present in law enforcement shootings. The overall results of a test are thus indicative of that specific cartridge's suitability for the wide range of conditions in which law enforcement officers engage in shootings.

The typical SD scenario is quite different than the ones that the tests were designed for. There are less likely to be intervening obstacles, and the distances involved are probably shorter on the average. In a shootout with a BG utilizing cover, anyone armed with nothing more than 6-7 shot .380 is likely to come out on the losing end. The primary purpose of an SD gun is to neutralize an imminent threat or stop an attack that is either imminent or in progress. In these cases overpenetration is as much, if not more, of a concern as underpenetration. Just for curiousity's sake I put my back to a wall and measured how deep I was - less than 10". A straight-on shot of even a modestly powered load would shoot completely through me unless it hit bone. A round that expands reliably and creates a severe wound channel is probably a much better load for the purposes that guns like the LCP are meant to serve.

Howard's signature line says he carries a gun because he can't carry a cop. I think it is practical to say that some of us carry a .380 because we can't carry a sawed-off 12 ga. It's an arm that we can have with us at all time and in most places, and thus are much more likely to have with us when the unexpected need for it arises.

Personally, it's not my first choice for carrry, but it does come well ahead of "nothing."

 

[HowardCohodas]

I have started two threads to contain reference material from the FBI.

I hope these prove helpful in these discussions.

Synopsis Of The FBI Ammunition Test Protocol
http://elsiepeaforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=1370.0

FBI Report: Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness
http://elsiepeaforum.com/forum/index.php?topic=1371.0

 

[AZ Outlaws]

In a word - "just" - just adequate. There is a pretty good writeup here comparing the differnt calibers for self defense - "Selection of best ammunition for a defensive handgun" http://www.internetarmory.com/handgunammo.htm The .380 gets a rating of "Good", with percentages of the mythical "One Shot Stops" ranging from 57-70%. This means that your odds are better than even of stopping the attack with a single well-placed shot that hits the assailant somewhere in a vital area. It compares favorably with the .38 spl from a 2" barrel, which is also rated "Good" and has OSS ratings in the 64-67% range. The same loads are better from a 4" barrel, which gets a "Very Good" rating, but we are clearly out of the concealable/carryable category.

Thanks for posting that. I have it saved in my favorites, but I had forgotten all about it.

And thanks to you Howard, for posting up that FBI information.

 

[ragu1macrider]

Well...I think it's better than pokin somebody in the eye with a sharp stick.
I would rather have a pocket 380 than nothing at all.
The caliber has been greatly improve over the last few years.

 

[AZ Outlaws]

Well...I think it's better than pokin somebody in the eye with a sharp stick.
I would rather have a pocket 380 than nothing at all.
The caliber has been greatly improve over the last few years.

Anything would be better than a sharp stick, even the lowly .22LR. However, the question was:

"What's your opinion of the .380 as a "primary" self defense round and what is the "minimum" self defense round you would like to use in a "small, easily concealable, all season" semi-auto pocket gun?

My answer was a LCP9... smaller than the PF9 or PM9.

 

[argyle]

the question was:

"What's your opinion of the .380 as a "primary" self defense round and what is the "minimum" self defense round you would like to use in a "small, easily concealable, all season" semi-auto pocket gun?

My answer was a LCP9... smaller than the PF9 or PM9.

I think there is a threshold in there which causes big problems when crossed. Somewhere I ran across a great table of the ME (Muzzle Energy or Mechanical Energy) of various loads. The .380s were all around ~ 200 ft lbs, 9mms ~ 350-500 ft lbs. I don't think the small light frame of the LCP would hold up very long to the higher energies of the 9mm load and that you would literally shoot it to pieces before long. It seems that many different manufacturers are having problems with their .40 cal lines trying to build them on the same frames as their 9mms. The slightly hotter .40s seem to over-stress the guns and cause serious reliability problems. Even some heavy steel frame guns won't hold up to a steady diet of .357s and have to be fed mostly .38s with the occasional heavier load.

And, just about everyone I ever heard talk about Kel Tec and LCP size guns says the recoil is right at the edge of controllability/comfort. Shoot a load that is around twice as heavy and I think it would lose a lot of utility due to inability to control it and how unpleasant it would be to shoot very much.

I think the PM9 probably already occupies the sweet spot for about how small and light you can go with 9mm and still have a viable firearm for regular use. Go too far and you are in the territory of the Bond Arms .45/.410 derringers - so nasty to shoot the only time you would use them is to save your life.

 

[HowardCohodas]

the question was:

"What's your opinion of the .380 as a "primary" self defense round and what is the "minimum" self defense round you would like to use in a "small, easily concealable, all season" semi-auto pocket gun?

My answer was a LCP9... smaller than the PF9 or PM9.

I think there is a threshold in there which causes big problems when crossed.

Exactly! The laws of physics cannot be overcome. I think we are already operating at the limits of the laws of physics and the performance of materials. Like you, I will be amazed if a 9mm can be made in the LCP form factor.

 

[AZ Outlaws]

I think the PM9 probably already occupies the sweet spot for about how small and light you can go with 9mm and still have a viable firearm for regular use. Go too far and you are in the territory of the Bond Arms .45/.410 derringers - so nasty to shoot the only time you would use them is to save your life.

You are most likely 100% correct. But, we can still "hope" for something a little smaller than the PM9. I used the term LCP9 in passing and realize a 9mm in LCP size to be unrealistic. Sorry for any confusion as to what I was thinking, but failed on putting it down in writting....

 

[argyle]

I think the PM9 probably already occupies the sweet spot for about how small and light you can go with 9mm and still have a viable firearm for regular use. Go too far and you are in the territory of the Bond Arms .45/.410 derringers - so nasty to shoot the only time you would use them is to save your life.

You are most likely 100% correct. But, we can still "hope" for something a little smaller than the PM9. I used the term LCP9 in passing and realize a 9mm in LCP size to be unrealistic. Sorry for any confusion as to what I was thinking, but failed on putting it down in writting....

I think I got your meaning, and that we are just BS'ing anyway. Have you shot a PM9 yet? I haven't put any really heavy loads like BB through it yet, but based on shooting plain old WWB I think the heaviest 9mm loads would be pushing the envelope.

Now, if you really want firepower in a tiny package, here is just the ticket for you - .357 mag derringer, and it even holds 4 rounds!!!

http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Firearms/Single-Shot-Pistols/COP_357.htm

 

[AZ Outlaws]

I think I got your meaning, and that we are just BS'ing anyway. Have you shot a PM9 yet? I haven't put any really heavy loads like BB through it yet, but based on shooting plain old WWB I think the heaviest 9mm loads would be pushing the envelope.

Now, if you really want firepower in a tiny package, here is just the ticket for you - .357 mag derringer, and it even holds 4 rounds!!!

LOL... Nope, not BS'ing at all. I haven't shot a PM9, only the Kel-Tec PF9. Both are a tad too big and heavy to pocket carry in athletic type shorts and t-shirts, which is what I wear about 90% of the time (Mar~Nov) here in Phoenix.

As for the heavy loads, I'm happy with the plain Jane GS and DPX rounds. I'm not looking at BB or 4 shot .357 rounds. I was looking at a Bulldog Pug in .44 SPL at one time but have canned that idea... at least for summer pocket carry. Winter may be a different story if i can convience my bride that I need a 6th hand gun. I already own the following and it's getting hard to justify anymore....

 

[argyle]

I haven't shot a PM9, only the Kel-Tec PF9. Both are a tad too big and heavy to pocket carry in athletic type shorts and t-shirts, which is what I wear about 90% of the time (Mar~Nov) here in Phoenix.

Well, if the PF9 is too heavy, I don't know of one any lighter - the Rohrbach R9 is 12.8 oz to the PF9's 12.7 - empty weight. Both are less than 3.5 oz more than the LCP. Even if you may not like the hot ammo like BB, you'll probably get close to 9mm performance out of your LCP with it. To me, the PM9 is very light, but I am used to revolvers and I'm new to small autos.

(If I showed pics of my collection, folks here would probably start classifying me as some sort of "gun nut." I have no problem at all justifying another gun... and another... and another... and another. They are far cheaper than wives, anyway. ;D )

 

[Stiofan]

I have no problem with the .380 for SD and never have had a problem with it. I understand this is a gun forum and people like to engineer these discussions down to minute details, but frankly the .380 has been used for decades successfully, especially in Europe with only FMJ rounds, and I have no problem with it. I use Rem Golden Saber 105gr HPs, I think most modern HPs would work just fine.

By all means if you don't think it will kill at SD distance, don't use it. This topic has been beaten to death I'm afraid, and one more thread isn't going to revolutionize anyone thinking on the subject. Just my opinion.

 

[ragu1macrider]

Well...I think it's better than pokin somebody in the eye with a sharp stick.
I would rather have a pocket 380 than nothing at all.
The caliber has been greatly improve over the last few years.

Anything would be better than a sharp stick, even the lowly .22LR. However, the question was:

"What's your opinion of the .380 as a "primary" self defense round and what is the "minimum" self defense round you would like to use in a "small, easily concealable, all season" semi-auto pocket gun?

My answer was a LCP9... smaller than the PF9 or PM9.

I think I answered tht question quite well:

I would rather have a pocket 380 than nothing at all.

What's the difference what make or model?

 

[Snubbie K]

The LCP is my minimum for concealed carry. Anything lighter than .380 is a candidate for having a mace device serve better. (Dead serious here!)

I have shot a PM9. It's function/controlability was not a problem for me with decent loads. It simply did not serve a useful niche for me beyond what my snubbie could fill.

Even the Rohrbaugh is just enough bigger than the LCP to cause me to select the LCP over it. (Money was "a" factor but not the deciding factor.)

A full 9mm the size of the LCP would be untrustworthy and would not hold up over time IMO.

Therefore, the LCP is the perfect size/caliber minimum for it's main intended purpose. The perfect carry weapon where one could or would carry something larger? NO! But close to perfect for the niche for which I intend it to be used.

Everything is a compromise of some kind in concealed carry. When compromise leads to minimal size and adequate power - the LCP rises to the top of the heap IMO.

A couple of others are "in the hunt" (.380 Kahr/P3AT etc.) LCP wins because of value/quality IMO.

 

[AZ Outlaws]

This topic has been beaten to death I'm afraid, and one more thread isn't going to revolutionize anyone thinking on the subject. Just my opinion.

That's exactly what I said in my opening post at the top of this page. After watching the Hornady video, I asked what people thought was the "minimum" and their "prefered" SD round. I am in no way trying to as you say, "revolutionize anyone [sic] thinking on the subject".

Without being a smart a$$, I'll ask you to realize just about any topic you can think of has been beat to death in one way or another. So, skip over this topic if you're not interested, but don't start bashing me for asking people's opinions on what caliber they prefer for SD. Thank you....

Well...I think it's better than pokin somebody in the eye with a sharp stick.
I would rather have a pocket 380 than nothing at all.
The caliber has been greatly improve over the last few years.

Anything would be better than a sharp stick, even the lowly .22LR. However, the question was:

"What's your opinion of the .380 as a "primary" self defense round and what is the "minimum" self defense round you would like to use in a "small, easily concealable, all season" semi-auto pocket gun?

My answer was a LCP9... smaller than the PF9 or PM9.

I think I answered tht question quite well:

I would rather have a pocket 380 than nothing at all.

What's the difference what make or model?

Okay... you would rather have the .380 than nothing at all. So, am I to assume there is no "minimum" caliber you would consider as I asked in my question above?

And to answer your question, "what's the difference what make or model?" If you re-read my post, I was refering to the fact that I would prefer something in 9mm, which was a little smaller than a PF9 or a PM9 as my "primary" SD handgun caliber. That's were make and model came into the converstion....

 

[kraigster414]

I don't believe anyone is bashing anyone here. It's all good. Bottom line with the .380 we are still dealing with the minimum in terms of an effective defense round but we are seeing of late advances in .380 ballistics. The Buffalo Bore .380 was a quantum leap in terms of what a .380 can do, the Hornady Critical Defense is another promising addition and there will be others to follow. There is still a lot of untapped discussion to be had and further refinement of what we already know to be true is interesting/useful as well. How far into the weeds anyone wants to get with this is a personal decision. Suffice to say, the .380 will never replicate a .45 ACP but when gun size and weight is factored in, the LCP, Kahr .380 etc. definately warrant consideration for personal defense and rounds like the BB and Hornady, ditto for the Golden Saber and Corbon DPX are bridging the gap beween what was a marginal caliber and and an acceptable defense round.

 

[MNBud]

Yes I believe 380 is an adequate self defense caliber. What do I believe is the minimum, well that would be a 22caliber. I will challenge anyone here to shoot themselves with a 22 caliber and come on here and tell us that it didn't hurt or I didn't even feel it. As the poster stated originally don't do it COM, just pick something like your foot or bicep.

 

[Snubbie K]

Yes I believe 380 is an adequate self defense caliber. What do I believe is the minimum, well that would be a 22caliber. I will challenge anyone here to shoot themselves with a 22 caliber and come on here and tell us that it didn't hurt or I didn't even feel it. As the poster stated originally don't do it COM, just pick something like your foot or bicep.

I posted this story separately. But I think it is appropriate to post it here as well. I hope that's OK. I just seems to fit in this discussion.


TRUE STORY:

I was a paramedic in the Portland, Oregon Fire Bureau for over 30 years.

One night we responded to a possible shooting.

When we got there we found a man sitting in a chair with the phone in his lap.

His eyes were black and blue and there was blood on his face. I thought at first that he had been assaulted by someone.

Upon further examination, I discovered a large bumpy swelling at the base of his skull at the hairline. It looked very much like there was a small hive of bees or something just under the skin -the little bumps stood out so much.

He then began to answer questions and this is what I determined:

He had decided to commit suicide. He had shot himself in the head with his .22 revolver. He shot himself 18 times after reloading twice.

What was later determined was that the .22 would not penetrate his skull. The bullets simply followed the path of his skull just under the hairline, up and over the top, and all of them had finally lodged at the base of his skull.

He told us that the .22 had not been doing the job - so he decided to go for something more potent.

He got his .380 automatic and shot himself again in the head. (I never did hear whether the .380 managed to penetrate his skull.)

He told me that the .380 hurt so much that he decided to call 911.

This not the customary soaked phone book penetration test. But I thought it provided some real life street data for our consideration.

Real life proof that the LCP is more than adequate to stop an assault dead in it's tracks.

 

[geod]

In my sig P 230 I carry Magsafe ammo .380 ACP 52 gr. +P+ Max load, 1720 fps / 342 ft # made for the sig p 230. this has the same energy as the BLACK TALON 45 at the muzzle. This makes a .380 FIT for stopping power . DO NOT USE IN INEXPENSIVE GUNS .