Florida Concealed Carry banner

.380 / 9mm... why?... like s 9mm singler stack... recommendations?

10K views 38 replies 31 participants last post by  45Freak 
#1 ·
I have had the same few guns in each of these for several years. I probably have run somewhere between 7,500 and 10,000 rounds through my 9mm (FS 92) and maybe 5,000 though one of the .380's (Makarov)*and less then 1,000 though the other (BDA .380).

Of course we know the .380 and the 9mm are very close in terms of length and load... (pretty close anyway).

Why does the .380 exist at all? I mean, the difference in frame size is so close that it seems like the same gun could simply be built for 9mm, and open up much wider ammo choices.

Asking as I am looking at a 'new' carry gun, and am surprised to find the limits on a truly compact 9mm. What I want is something like my Mak, but more refined in a 9mm single stack. (not a fan of the 9x19 Mak due to the increasing difficulty in sourcing ammo).

Open to suggestions as well as hearing the rest of the discussion.

* I know, I know... many feel this is a substandard gun. Mine never jams and I get very consistent groupings... this was my (pre-CCW) legal carry gun.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Why does the .380 exist at all? I mean, the difference in frame size is so close that it seems like the same gun could simply be built for 9mm, and open up much wider ammo choices.
I own and carry a LCP .380 and a Walther PPS 9m. The PPS is a single stack, but is more narrow than a Glock.

It would be my opinion that these two guns are very different not only in size, concealability, but in shooting as well.

The LCP bites. I'm sorry, but it bites. It has a longer trigger pull, smaller trigger guard cage (whatever you call that thing where the trigger is) and in my humble opinion is less accurate than my 9m. I can still put rounds in an area the size of my palm at 6 feet away, but I like shooting the 9m better. The LCP is easier to conceal, and I don't necessarily need a belt because I can hitch it to my pants or skirt waistband if I need to. I can conceal the .380 with dressier clothes when I don't always want to carry around the extra weight of the 9m rig. My two extra mags also fit into my cell phone carrier so I don't have to slip them into my pocket.

The 9m is my go to gun. I pretty much carry it everywhere, but it means that I must dress casual. It takes a holster and a sturdy, reliable belt to hold the rig close enough to conceal. The trigger pull is sweet with hardly any recoil. I personally think the .380 has more recoil.

There are days that I simply choose to carry the .380 because I want to not feel the bulk of a 9m rig. Maybe that is a girl thing because I certainly feel "thick" when I wear the 9m.

Hope this helps.
 
#3 ·
#6 ·
I've been eyeballing this pistol for some time now, and I wish I knew somebody that owned one, so I could ask them if I could shoot it. Most owner reviews, on other forums, seem to be favorable to it.
 
#4 ·
I won't make any suggestions as to a small 9mm. There are a slew of them out there and the one you pick will depend on what your personal requirements are. Decide what you are looking for in a 9mm and go from there.

As to your question about why does the 380acp exist, that I can answer. In 1903, Colt introduced the the 1903 Pocket Hammerless. It was a small [medium sized by today's standards], single action, straight blowback pistol chambered in 32acp. At the same time, Colt introduced the 1903 Pocket Hammer in 38acp [more powerful than the 380acp]. It was a lock breech pistol [necessary to handle the higher pressure of the 38acp cartridge], but the lock design was weak and the weapon was discontinued. Colt wanted to market the Hammerless in a larger caliber, but the straight blowback action precluded using either the 38acp or the 9mm parabellum. John Browning designed a short 38 caliber cartridge designed for use in the 1903 and in 1908 the Colt Hammerless was introduced chambered for the 380acp round. That round is just about the highest pressure round that can be used, safely, in a small pistol with a straight blowback action. Pistols chambered in this cartridge can be produced in a much smaller size than the original 1908 Hammerless, and many higher powered handguns, and the recoil is usually quite mild. For these reasons, it has remained popular in both Europe and the U.S.
 
#7 ·
I've been drooling over the SR9C too, but it's bigger than I want to carry. I'm looking at the Kel Tec PF9 (don't laugh, they're not that bad) or if I have more money than I know what do do with, possibly a Kahr PM9. The Kahr doesn't feel so good in my hands, despite the obvious top quality design and manufacturing. I don't like the Kel Tec P11 because it's fatter (double stack) and the trigger is atrocious.

I've read that Ruger couldn't make a 9mm LCP because the frame is too small to absorb the pressure and recoil, but the PF9 is only a smidgen larger. I fully expect Ruger to come out with a 9mm copy of the PF9 (like the LCP is basically a copy of Kel Tec's P3AT). But Ruger's will be beautifully made and cost only a little more.

I've never had a problem with my LCP, it's been totally reliable and so easy to carry I'm spoiled. But I would rather carry 9mm.
 
#9 ·
I own a Kel-Tec P-11 and, the trigger notwithstanding, it fits really well in my hand. At the last gun show, here in Tampa, I had a chance to compare the PF-9 and the PT-709 side-by-side. The PF-9 was just TOO small for my hand to hold comfortably, while the PT-709 was noticeably better. Ruger LCP, Kel-Tec P3-AT, and the like are simply too small for me to use.
 
#8 ·
spend a little time looking around and youll find a large number of gun calibers you cant figure out...youre just comparing a couple of the popular ones...
 
#10 ·
Oh I know there are some goofy combinations... especially when you start looking at riffle cartridges. Ever fire a .257 Condor?

THe market drives some strange loads... the thing that gets me is why the .380 has survived over time like it has. Given the increase in performance the 9mm brings with the same bore, and a 2mm longer cartage it seems like it would have driven the .380 out over time.

THanks for the replies,
 
#11 ·
The .380 ACP cartridge was designed for early blowback pistols which lacked a barrel locking mechanism, due to the round's low breech pressure. Other names for .380 ACP include .380 Auto, .380 Short, 9mm Browning, 9mm Corto, 9mm Kurz or 9mm Short, and 9x17mm.

To answer you quotation as to “Why is it still around”.

1. Even with today’s technology, you can not make a 9mm pistol as small as the smallest .380 pistols.
2. The recoil is much lighter on a .380 (in a comparative size / weight pistol)
3. The .380 cal has been used for over 100 years. With modern defensive ammo, it beats any of the smaller calibers for close range defense, while keeping the “little pistol” size.
 
#13 ·
:thumsup great answer to OP's question!

If you want a small 9mm, there are not as many options as small (and smaller) .380s. My vote for a small 9mm is the Kahr PM9. Definitely not the cheapest, but well worth it, IMHO.
 
#33 ·
Wait a second........dont forget the 238's DAD........Colt Mustang..........:grin
 
#14 ·
I continue to read numerous articles on 380 cal firearms jamming. I'm sure lots of people have had no probllems but others have. I was about to buy a Sig P238 until I read several accounts of continuing jams. In all fairness I'm sure any firearms can jam but it sure looks like 380s get a good share. I don't know whether it ia firearm designs or the underpowered round. I suspect the culprit is 380 ammo. I have been carrying a Ruger LCR 38 revolver. I just piurchased a Kahr PM9 9mm. The Kahr is expensive but has function flawlessly. It is very accurate and for a little 9mm has very manageable recoil. This will be my new carry gun in a Nemesis pocket holster. Eight rounds versus five in the LCR plus ease of reloading with a magazine makes in my choice when I don't want to carry a heavier higher caliber pistol like my Glock 23.
 
#15 · (Edited)
This is my personal EDC Gun

CZ ALFA DEFENDER COMPACT 9MM.
13 rnd Mag Dbl Stack + all CZ 75 Mag's will fit.
Before


After, I took off the black finish since it was Stainless under the coating.

 
#21 ·
Just to further the question and because the OP mentions a Makarov.
What about the 9x18?

9mm Luger = 9x19
9mm Mak = 9x18
.380 = 9x17 or .380 Auto, .380 Short, 9mm Browning, 9mm Corto, 9mm Kurz or 9mm Short
 
#22 ·
IMHO, the 9x18 Makarov is a compromise. The Makarov pistol, while being well known for its reliability, is also well known for its inexpensiveness. It is a reliable, small-ish, pistol. However, for more money, you could get a similar sized (maybe even smaller), reliable 9x19 pistol. Or, you could go with the .380 and get an even smaller pistol. Currently, I do believe that there are more premium SD loadings in .380 than 9x18, therefore there would probably not be too many differences, ballisticly, between a premium .380 and the 9x18.

Therefore, I think the only advantage the 9x18 has going for it is the ability to get a decent, reliable, pistol in that chambering for very little money (used, or course). Just MHO and I could be wrong, because I am definitely no expert on the 9x18 or the Makarov pistol. I do know someone that has one, I shot it, it was reliable and accurate enough, but I would much prefer any of my small 9x19 or even .380s than that.
 
#23 ·
Depending on how I dress (or feel at the moment ) I carry an old aster .380 (was my Moms) or a pa63 1n 9x18 0r a Star in 9x19.The .380 is easy to carry iwb without a belt, the 9x18 is a bit heavier but still easy to conceal.it has a Lot more power than a 380. the 9x19 has to have a belt and is not as easy to conceal but has more power. I have as much trust in the9x18 as the luger to stop someone. while it does not have the same power, I feel it is sufficient. Other wise I would carry a .45,( as someone said ,) why shoot twice..... :thumsup
 
#24 ·
Nobody's mentioned it, but another big reason for the .380 is that you can use it in a reasonably light fixed-barrel (recoil) gun. There's a reason that nobody chambers, for example, a Bersa-type PPK knockoff in 9mm.

The concealable, fixed-barrel guns would be unmanageable in 9mm... they would have to have more mass in the slide to tame the recoil. Chamber a PPK in 9mm and shoot some +p rounds from it, and you'd have something that kicked harder than a PF9 and weighed twice as much.

I think that there's a misconception that the .380 kicks almost as hard as full-power 9mm because of the guns that people use it in. Everybody shoots a p3AT, a Bersa .380, and then a Glock 26. Think about it... the Keltec is drop-barrel, but weighs approximately 1/3 of a loaded G26, and the Bersa is a fixed-barrel. Shoot a Walther PK380 (looks like a P22, but has drop-barrel) next to a sub-20 oz 9mm, and you'll see what I mean.

I'm not a big .380 fan (frankly, I tend to prefer .32 if I have to carry a mousegun), but those are a couple of the reasons that the .380 is still a useful, common round.
 
#25 ·
I personally am a fan of the Walther PPS 9mm.
It is extemely thin and concealable. The slide rail is full length on one side giving it incredible accuracy.
I don't like the fact that the sights it comes with don't glow at all (but they can be switched out).
It is on the higher side of price, but so far for me it has also proven to be EXTREMELY reliable.

How does it compare to the SR9c? I've shot both... My brother in law has the Ruger. It is a nice carry weapon as well, it is also quite a bit thicker.
Accuracy was close but not quite as on with the SR9C when compared to the PPS
Trigger pull is much different as the PPS is a DA only where the SR9C has a spur and can be DA/SA
The SR9C is a double stack, not a single stack as was previously mentioned.

I often will choose pocket carry with the PPS and it does it nicely with deeper pockets.
LCP? I have't shot it, but it just didn't feel right, the trigger is very long as mentioned before...
Ammo is also quite expensive when you go 380...
 
#29 ·
Why does the .380 exist at all? I mean, the difference in frame size is so close that it seems like the same gun could simply be built for 9mm,
.380 exists because those pistols are considerably smaller than 9mm. pistols.
I thought I had the ideal carry gun in the Kahr PM-9, until I discovered the Sig 238. Even though the difference in measurements are slight (1/2" here and there) the feel in your hand is much smaller. It's a real pocket gun, and I haven't found one in 9mm that small. (Yeah, I know about the Rohrbaugh and it's small, but it's too expensive and a pain to shoot. IMO.)

Love it or hate it, the LCP changed carry forever.
 
#31 ·
Yes, the Sig P238 is smaller than the PM9, however the PM9 is a 9mm Luger versus a .380. I like the Sig P238 a lot, my wife has one. But I would only consider it as a BUG. I would much rather carry my PM9 as a primary EDC over the P238. However, the P238 is better than nothing at all if that's the choice...
 
#35 ·
i use both for carry, pf9 was my firrst carry gun, it is v light , small and v thin, but its finish quality is poor, but definately a great conceal gun. you cant even feel it on, and with owb, and a tshirt cant tell it is there. the 709 i just got, and thanks to your recommendation, i am getting a don hume owb for it.. cant wait. i love the look and quality of 709 but like the thiness and size of pf9, perfect gun for me would be the hybrid.. maybe someday.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top