.380 vs 9mm for sd
This is a discussion on .380 vs 9mm for sd within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Let's also not forget that the FBI minimum depth is 12 inches.... AFTER penetrating obstacles such as windshield glass, car doors etc.
That is a ...
September 14th, 2012 06:16 PM
Let's also not forget that the FBI minimum depth is 12 inches.... AFTER penetrating obstacles such as windshield glass, car doors etc.
That is a LOT of penetration in my book.
I don't know many people who are 12 to 14 inches front to back. That would be sternum to spine in thickness.
September 14th, 2012 06:25 PM
i sort of fast forwarded through the posts, so apologies if i'm repeating what someone else has said.
one factor i didn't see mentioned is weight. other factors being similar, a heavier gun will transmit less perceived recoil to the shooter. therefore i would recommend a steel framed small 9mm, such as the Kahr K-9 or Mk-9. if the gun is going to be carried in a purse, the additional weight shouldn't be a factor (i'm guessing here, never having carried a purse myself). finding one for your wife to hold and shoot could be hard, though, as i hear that the polymer Kahrs outsell the all-steel ones by a substantial margin.
another good choice would be the Springfield Armory EMP in 9mm. though an alloy frame gun, it is larger than the Kahrs and should be easier to shoot than a smaller gun.
also recommended is the Sig 938 in 9mm. my main concern here is that it is a brand new release, and there may be bugs that still need to be worked out.
lastly, the Smith & Wesson Shield in 9mm. many positive posts on this site.
i would also recommend avoiding +P self defense loads and staying with standard pressure self defense loads such as Hornady Critical Defense.
and right after i posted this, i saw a post here on DC.com titled, "9mm Purse carry...Mk9 and K-9 compared to CM-9". you might check out this thread.
September 14th, 2012 09:17 PM
I would always pick the 9mm over the 380....its ok for James Bond....but not the average John Q Citizen...ammo is a concern if you are not a reloader.
"The great object is that every man be armed."
NRA Endowment Member
September 14th, 2012 09:19 PM
Actually I think the original Bond Walther PPK was a 22 caliber.
Sorry it was .32 caliber or 762.
September 14th, 2012 09:48 PM
I don't see how anyone can't find a 9mm that is suitable for EDC. My wife is just a wiggle over 5' tall and can carry a glock 19 fairly easily 75% of the time. The other 25% of the time she will carry the j frame. Seems like another very petite woman on this board carries a glock 19 or a full size 1911 fairly regularly too.
We rented a lcp for my wife to try out a while back, as she thought it was "cute". She ran 3 mags through it and informed me that I could finish off the box of ammo and return the gun to the counter while she shot her G19.
So while I won't be as bold as to question anyone for only having such a gun, I do maintain that almost anyone could carry a much more substantial gun with minimal changes to their lifestyle. But, to each his/her own.
sent via iCarry
September 14th, 2012 10:17 PM
I'll throw in my 2 cents...
The most important thing, which I saw y'all are going to the range soon to rent, is to have her not only hold but shoot what's SHE'S considering. I've held guns that felt great in my hand but I hated shooting them. You can make some suggestions, but it needs to be her choice 100% My biggest mistake with my first gun last year was not shooting it before I bought it. Less than a year later I sold it and was gun shopping. That time I wouldn't buy anything I couldn't shoot first. I researched, held a bunch, narrowed it down to what I wanted to rent, then shot those. Now I love my gun and want to hit the range all the time!
I've never shot a .380 so idk there - started with a 9 last year because I'd heard the rounds are cheaper (I don't know if that's actually true) and I figured I could justify hitting the range more often with less expensive ammo.
September 14th, 2012 11:38 PM
The 380 sucks. So does the 9mm. No, wait, they are OK. But the FBI says.......
The answer on which to carry is, of course, both. A 9 (SIG, Glock, M&P) on the belt and a 380 in my pocket, well.....
I don't worry too much.
September 15th, 2012 12:59 AM
yes. i am preparing myself to get, i believe the current word is, "flamed" for saying this: i don't think much of the FBI protocols for bullet performance when applied to citizen carriers. i'm old enough to remember that the FBI's history of choosing weapons and ammo for its agents has not been without problems. i give you the S&W 1076 and the 9mm, 147 grain subsonic as two examples. IMO, the bureau's emphasis on penetration is overdone. it has been said of army generals that they are always preparing to fight the last war. well, i believe the FBI is always trying to correct for its last ammunition failure. in this case the Mirales incident. i don't see myself realistically ever getting involved in a shooting, but when i envision such a situation, i REALLY can't see myself needing to shoot through glass, doors, sheetrock, etc. if such a need does arise, i will trust that my non-FBI compliant ammo will do a good enough job if i do my part. IMO, the disadvantage of FBI protocol ammo, such as a higher chance of over-penetration in a face-to-face confrontation, and the higher level of recoil to deal with, outweigh the potential benefits TO ME. there is a reason that Hornady makes Critical Defense for CWP's and Critical Duty to satisfy the FBI. the last time i looked, i was not an FBI agent.
Originally Posted by CharlesMorri
having said that, i have NO problem with those who choose to carry such loads. as i've said before on this site, a person should carry what THEY have confidence in, and can hit with.
September 15th, 2012 01:09 AM
yes, you are correct. but the original gun 007 carried in the first Fleming book (Dr. No) was a Beretta .25, and he was somewhat annoyed at "M" for making him change to the Walther.
Originally Posted by ericb327
i'm also old enough to have read this book fairly soon after it was released (in 1958).
September 15th, 2012 01:39 AM
You sir, are absolutely correct!
Originally Posted by sensei2
September 15th, 2012 01:40 AM
Bond was also told that the 7.65 caliber had a delivery like a brick through a glass pane, and the CIA swears by them!
Originally Posted by sensei2
September 15th, 2012 02:13 AM
here are a few slow mo vids of .380's and 9mm's shot into 20% ballistic gelatin. All tests done by the same company.
In a self defense situation, penetration is your friend. The 9mm is simply superior across the board.
These are not statistics from the FBI, and you can actually see the performance for youself with you own eyes.
Yes, bullets can do weird things, and yes shot placement is critical, but all things constant....I want the one that will reach vital organs consistently, not by accident.
SLOW MOTION 380ACP Speer 90gr Gold Dot impacting ballistic gelatin - YouTube
SLOW MOTION 380ACP Remington 102gr Golden Saber impacting ballistic gelatin - YouTube
SLOW MOTION 380ACP Buffalo Bore +P 90gr JHP impacting ballistic gelatin - YouTube
SLOW MOTION 9x19mm Luger Remington 147gr Golden Saber impacting ballistic gelatin - YouTube
9x19mm Luger Remington 124gr +P Golden Saber impacting 20% ballistic gelatin - YouTube
Give to them according to their deeds and according to the wickedness of their endeavors; give to them according to the work of their hands; render to them their deserts. Psalm 28:4
Search tags for this page
.380 vs 9mm
.380 vs 9mm ballistics
.380 vs 9mm stopping power
380 auto vs 9mm
380 stopping power vs 9mm
380 vs 9mm
380 vs 9mm ballistics
380 vs 9mm recoil
380 vs 9mm stopping power
9mm vs 380
9mm vs 380 ballistics
9mm vs 380 stopping power
Click on a term to search for related topics.