Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-20-2017, 05:49 PM
Backlighting's Avatar
Backlighting Backlighting is online now
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 676
Likes: 198
Liked 971 Times in 308 Posts
Default .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC

Here's Paul Harrell, who is quite knowledgeable, on the subject.
He makes some excellent points.
Reply With Quote
The Following 8 Users Like Post:
  #2  
Old 04-20-2017, 06:40 PM
Arik Arik is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Outside Philadelphia Pa
Posts: 14,439
Likes: 6,247
Liked 14,156 Times in 6,095 Posts
Default

Nothing new. Nothing is a 100% and everything is a trade off. However, for me, untill revolvers are made with big enough grips to comfortably hold and conceal they won't be a serious consideration for me. Just last week I did both semi auto and revolver side by side.

This is a condensed version

1) Gen 2 Glock 17. . Shooting Aguila ammo at 7 and 15 yards. First 5 shot group with one flyer. Second picture is from 15 yards.



2) G43 9mm. . Again, started at 7 The final target was at 12 yards. And a picture of the target at that distance. The last target picture is both boxes of ammo.



3) G23. Gen 4 First 5 rounds at 7 yards. Second 5 moved back to 10-12 yards. In the 3rd target I had moved all the way back and was trying to see where the POI/POA was..






4) 10-6 snub. shooting slow at 7 yards, in fact I never left the 7 yard line. Couldn't. Just look at the shot placements. Bummed and disgusted with that I moved to the 642.



5) 642. Not good either but not as bad as the 10.



6) The last one was the 13-2.





Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Last edited by Arik; 04-20-2017 at 06:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #3  
Old 04-20-2017, 07:01 PM
DevilDog72's Avatar
DevilDog72 DevilDog72 is offline
US Veteran
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mansfield,Texas
Posts: 835
Likes: 5,326
Liked 1,362 Times in 457 Posts
Default

I do not think anyone would survive a couple of rounds on any target....just my thinking
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #4  
Old 04-20-2017, 07:21 PM
Kiwi cop Kiwi cop is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Taranaki, New Zealand
Posts: 74
Likes: 95
Liked 134 Times in 42 Posts
Default

Given that most self defence shootings happen inside 7 yards, and the difference in sight radius between the semi's and revolvers, I'd not want to be on the receiving end of any of those barrels.

As a member of an "unarmed" police force (we do not carry openly routinely but have access to firearms) back in the mid 90's Ioften carried a 4" Model 10 under my duty jacket at night.

And no-one ever noticed it!

These days we have Glock 17's and rarely get a second look when carrying.

Last edited by Kiwi cop; 04-20-2017 at 07:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Like Post:
  #5  
Old 04-20-2017, 07:34 PM
Arik Arik is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Outside Philadelphia Pa
Posts: 14,439
Likes: 6,247
Liked 14,156 Times in 6,095 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwi cop View Post
Given that most self defence shootings happen inside 7 yards, and the difference in sight radius between the semi's and revolvers, I'd not want to be on the receiving end of any of those barrels.

As a member of an "unarmed" police force (we do not carry openly routinely but have access to firearms) back in the mid 90's Ioften carried a 4" Model 10 under my duty jacket at night.

And no-one ever noticed it!

These days we have Glock 17's and rarely get a second look when carrying.
I know it's a whole different topic but I read about the way NZ cops carry and it's definitely different and interesting

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-22-2017, 05:55 AM
Darkenfast Darkenfast is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Corvallis, Oregon
Posts: 329
Likes: 511
Liked 223 Times in 130 Posts
Default

I was generally a revolver guy, but gradually became a fan of the 9mm Parabellum. When I first was offered a Browning High Power some years ago, someone on this forum posted a picture for me of a High Power next to a three-inch barreled K-frame S&W. It was an interesting comparison. They are about the same weight, overall length and height, but the HP holds 13 rounds and has no cylinder bulge. Grips fit about any hand and the gun disappears inside a waistband. The barrel is long enough to get decent power out of the 9mm and most loads fall midway between .38 and .357 in power with low recoil and blast. Browning and Saive knew what they were doing. The only power advantage to the K-frame is with full .357 loads, which are rough on your ears and hands. The revolver is probably more mechanically accurate in SA fire, but most shooters will find the HP a better shooter in real-world scenarios. Some revolver shooters can run rings around the majority of auto shooters, but I believe most of us mortals will do better with an auto. I certainly wouldn't feel under-armed with any decent S&W revolver in .38 Special or .357 Magnum, but I think I'm better served with either my BHP or my Glock 17L for field use. The 17L, BTW, compares to a four-inch barreled revolver in the same way that the BHP compared to the three-incher, except that it weighs a lot less, and has the sight radius of a six-inch barreled wheelgun (and 17 rounds, to boot plus the performance advantage of a 9mm from a six-inch tube).
Just some food for thought, and your mileage may vary!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #7  
Old 04-22-2017, 04:23 PM
Backlighting's Avatar
Backlighting Backlighting is online now
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 676
Likes: 198
Liked 971 Times in 308 Posts
Default

For me the issue is crystal clear. I prefer the snubby to any semi-auto for the obvious reason there are no failures to feed... ever.

Last edited by Backlighting; 04-22-2017 at 04:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #8  
Old 04-22-2017, 05:05 PM
WCCPHD's Avatar
WCCPHD WCCPHD is offline
SWCA Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apex, NC
Posts: 821
Likes: 985
Liked 2,594 Times in 406 Posts
Default

Reading the posts above it seems to have come down to a debate between 38 revolvers and 9MM semi autos. I am a revolver guy and I also like the 9MM so I compromised.

Five shot J frame 940-1





Six shot K frame 547



Seven shot L frame 986



__________________
Bill
SWCA - 3128
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #9  
Old 04-22-2017, 07:36 PM
Fred_G Fred_G is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 295
Likes: 212
Liked 315 Times in 144 Posts
Default

Pretty dang good comparison of revolvers vs semi auto. I may not agree with it 100%, but very good video. It did make me cringe watching him put loaded guns in pockets without a holster.

Of course, I carry 38 Super...

Last edited by Fred_G; 04-22-2017 at 07:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-22-2017, 08:38 PM
STORMINORMAN STORMINORMAN is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 190
Likes: 21
Liked 50 Times in 38 Posts
Default

Don't forget Charter Arm's Pitbull in 9mm: it's actually available & REA$ONABLE..

Then there's the 40 S&W version Pitbull as well!

Cheers!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #11  
Old 04-25-2017, 07:13 AM
Brasky Brasky is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 516
Likes: 154
Liked 505 Times in 210 Posts
Default

I was told by a forum member on here that the cartridge that looks larger will always be more powerful and a better choice obviously in that theory 38 special should be at least 1.5x the power of 9

In all reality I will always choose 9mm over 38 unless I feel the need to put some mileage back on a revolver.

Federal HST puts 13-17" of penetration with amazing expansion in 9mm even with shorter barrels where 38 special seems to be a struggle to find a loading that has adequate penetration and consistent reliable expansion in a short barrel.

Don't get me wrong I am a fan of both
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #12  
Old 04-26-2017, 02:31 AM
Rock185's Avatar
Rock185 Rock185 is offline
US Veteran
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The Great Southwest
Posts: 620
Likes: 4,040
Liked 567 Times in 218 Posts
Thumbs up

I was unfamiliar with this gentleman, but enjoyed what I thought was a Down-to-Earth and intelligent discussion of the subject. His conclusions are consistent with my own humble experience. I agree too with that part about the auto being flatter, and perhaps a bit more comfortable to carry for some of us. I know velocity and energy are not the whole story, but admit I've always been interested in such things. I have sure learned to not try to predict what the results might be before actually chronographing this or that ammo through this or that gun. Some of the Federal ammo seems to be highly regarded for duty/SD use, etc. So, I recently chronographed some 9MM Federal HST 124 grain +P, Federal Hydra-Shok 38 Spcl. 129 grain +P and a few other JHP loads I happened to have on hand in a few pistols and revolvers. The 38 +P hydra-shok averaged 763 FPS in a S&W 642 with 2" barrel, the 9MM HST averaged 1195 FPS in a S&W 940 with 2" barrel. The real surprise for me was the 9MM HST in a 3" Ruger SP-101 revolver. It averaged 1291 FPS. My 5" barreled Dan Wesson semi-auto only averaged 1236 FPS with the same 9mm HST+P ammo. See why I've learned that I cannot predict till I actually test? As I said, I know energy and velocity are not everything, but I know which load I would prefer to carry....ymmv

Attached a gratuitous photo of some of those little 9s and 38s I've been known to carry in my post workin' for a livin' years
Attached Thumbnails
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC-img_6595-jpg  
__________________
NRA Life, COTEP 640
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-26-2017, 07:21 AM
scooter123 scooter123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Metro Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 6,036
Likes: 139
Liked 2,963 Times in 1,537 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Backlighting View Post
For me the issue is crystal clear. I prefer the snubby to any semi-auto for the obvious reason there are no failures to feed... ever.
I now carry with a Ruger LC9S Pro and in well over 1000 rounds downrange I have not had one single failure of any description. About the only thing that might be considered a "defect" is that the sights are regulated for 147 grain bullets so it does shoot low with the typical 115 grain range fodder. BTW, my carry ammo is Federal's excellent 147 grain HST with 7 in the magazine and one in the chamber. So I have 8 round of excellent SD ammo ready for immediate need and another 7 in a magazine holder behind my cell phone holder.

I'll also note my previous carry choice was a 40 caliber Sig Sauer P239 and that particular pistol now has over 5000 rounds down range without one single failure.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-26-2017, 08:29 AM
Old cop Old cop is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,554
Likes: 659
Liked 5,498 Times in 1,821 Posts
Default

High capacity auto loaders make sense for LEOs & military but for me,as a retiree, much too large & heavy for EDC. I'm headed out to the valor awards for my former agency and wearing a suit & tie means carrying my LCP w/a spare mag. For my daily mode of jeans & tee shirts, the M&P340 w/a spare speedstrip seems to work fine.
__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #15  
Old 04-27-2017, 12:55 AM
Blue357 Blue357 is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 9
Likes: 19
Liked 11 Times in 6 Posts
Default

I prefer the 38 special between the two because my 38 special revolver is a 357 in a 686p. Now that I'm getting my CHL I'm going with a j frame for conceal carry. I like being able to exchange rounds between the two. Easier to stock ammo and I like the versatility. I like this video because it does a good job of demonstrating what I have found to be true for me with practice. I'm more accurate with the revolver after taking the time to get used to the platform, and I don't feel like I'm giving anything up to my semi autos for civilian self defense. I believe the revolver to be more reliable especially when considering the potential for muzzle contact that would jam an auto. Both are great choices, and simply a personal choice but I don't think that a revolver gives up anything to an auto for the everyday Joe.

Last edited by Blue357; 04-27-2017 at 01:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-27-2017, 06:03 AM
gsn gsn is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

The video is fundamentally flawed in that a 9mm snub revolver was not included AND the 7 yd distance, according to the articles I have read, is the result of FBI studies for -law enforcement- shootings not civilian.

The .38/.357 was developed over a hundred years ago as a black powder round BUT this cartridge has dispatched many many thousands of people who very much deserved to be done away with-it is after all called the great .38 or with regard to the .357, the 'cowboy cannon' BUT the 9mm snub is far more efficient. After all doesn't a shorter cartridge a longer barrel make?

Bottom line; either the great .38 or the fine 9 is all any civilian needs for concealed carry self defense-or as my wife will often say; 'semi's are for people who don't know how to shoot' and I think truer words have never been spoken-remember this is in the realm of the armed civilian.

But for those who feel the need to carry a blast master 4000-go for it and I support your decision (however misguided it is-insert winky face here)
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-27-2017, 07:15 AM
Brasky Brasky is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 516
Likes: 154
Liked 505 Times in 210 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Backlighting View Post
For me the issue is crystal clear. I prefer the snubby to any semi-auto for the obvious reason there are no failures to feed... ever.
No failures to feed ever? Do you pay attention on this forum?

I see a lot of complaints of cylinder binding which is essentially the same thing
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #18  
Old 04-27-2017, 07:23 AM
Skeptic 9c's Avatar
Skeptic 9c Skeptic 9c is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Northern Florida
Posts: 1,379
Likes: 2,395
Liked 5,138 Times in 812 Posts
Default

A comparison, I'll see how it xlates from Excel to postie:

Mfg Round Bullet Type Bullet Wt. Muzzle Vel Engery
Buffalo Bore .380 Standard 90 gr JHP 90 1025 210
Hornady .38 Spec 125 gr XTP 125 900 225
Remington .38 Spec 125 gr Golden Sabre 125 975 264
Buffalo Bore .380 +P 90 gr JHP 90 1200 288
Federal .38 Super 115 gr JHP 115 1130 326
Hornady 9mm Luger 124 gr XTP 124 1110 339
Remington 9mm Luger 124 gr Golden Sabre 124 1125 349
Federal 9mm Luger 115 gr JHP 115 1180 356
Hornady 357 Sig 115 gr FTX 115 1235 389
Remington .357 Magnum 125 gr Golden Sabre 125 1220 413
Remington .38 Super 130 gr FMC 130 1215 426
Buffalo Bore .38 Super +P 124 gr JHP 124 1350 502
Remington 357 Sig 125 gr Express JHP 125 1350 506
Federal 357 Sig 125 gr JHP 125 1350 506
Buffalo Bore .38 Super +P 115 gr JHP 115 1450 537
Federal .357 Magnum 125 gr JHP 125 1440 575
Hornady .357 Magnum 125 gr XTP 125 1500 624
Buffalo Bore .357 Magnum 125gr Barnes XPB 125 1650 755

We will see how it posts.
Geoff
Who hasn't tried this in a long while.

Sigh, the system pulled duplicate spaces blowing the alignments.

Last edited by Skeptic 9c; 04-27-2017 at 07:25 AM. Reason: Neatness
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-27-2017, 07:30 AM
Arik Arik is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Outside Philadelphia Pa
Posts: 14,439
Likes: 6,247
Liked 14,156 Times in 6,095 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptic 9c View Post
A comparison, I'll see how it xlates from Excel to postie:

Mfg RoundBullet TypeBullet Wt.Muzzle VelEngery
Buffalo Bore .380 Standard90 gr JHP 901025210
Hornady .38 Spec125 gr XTP 125900225
Remington.38 Spec125 gr Golden Sabre 125975264
Buffalo Bore.380 +P90 gr JHP 901200288
Federal.38 Super115 gr JHP 1151130326
Hornady9mm Luger 124 gr XTP 1241110339
Remington9mm Luger 124 gr Golden Sabre1241125349
Federal9mm Luger 115 gr JHP 1151180356
Hornady357 Sig 115 gr FTX 1151235389
Remington.357 Magnum125 gr Golden Sabre1251220413
Remington.38 Super130 gr FMC 1301215426
Buffalo Bore.38 Super +P124 gr JHP1241350502
Remington357 Sig 125 gr Express JHP 1251350506
Federal357 Sig 125 gr JHP 1251350506
Buffalo Bore.38 Super +P115 gr JHP1151450537
Federal.357 Magnum125 gr JHP 1251440575
Hornady.357 Magnum125 gr XTP 1251500624
Buffalo Bore .357 Magnum125gr Barnes XPB1251650755

We will see how it posts.
Geoff
Who hasn't tried this in a long while.

Sigh, the system pulled duplicate spaces blowing the alignments.
Yeah I've tried posting like that with several things and it never aligns properly

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-29-2017, 11:04 AM
BE Mike's Avatar
BE Mike BE Mike is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,652
Likes: 387
Liked 875 Times in 406 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arik View Post
Nothing new. Nothing is a 100% and everything is a trade off. However, for me, untill revolvers are made with big enough grips to comfortably hold and conceal they won't be a serious consideration for me. Just last week I did both semi auto and revolver side by side.
I've been known to be blunt, so here goes. These comparisons are valuable for you, but meaningless for anyone else. This really is a test of your skill with each type of handgun, not a true comparison of .38 SPL vs. 9mm.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-29-2017, 11:22 AM
Arik Arik is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Outside Philadelphia Pa
Posts: 14,439
Likes: 6,247
Liked 14,156 Times in 6,095 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BE Mike View Post
I've been known to be blunt, so here goes. These comparisons are valuable for you, but meaningless for anyone else. This really is a test of your skill with each type of handgun, not a true comparison of .38 SPL vs. 9mm.
Just like the comparisons for the guy in the video are only valuable to him. He can shoot 38 better. It's his skill with each type of handgun. In other words...it's meaningless to anyone else

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-29-2017, 04:28 PM
basbol130's Avatar
basbol130 basbol130 is offline
Member
.38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC .38 Spl. vs 9mm for CC  
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default wow

[quote=scooter123;139570251]I now carry with a Ruger LC9S Pro and in well over 1000 rounds downrange I have not had one single failure of any description. About the only thing that might be considered a "defect" is that the sights are regulated for 147 grain bullets so it does shoot low with the typical 115 grain range fodder. BTW, my carry ammo is Federal's excellent 147 grain HST with 7 in the magazine and one in the chamber. So I have 8 round of excellent SD ammo ready for immediate need and another 7 in a magazine holder behind my cell phone holder.

I'll also note my previous carry choice was a 40 caliber Sig Sauer P239 and that particular pistol now has over 5000 rounds down range without one single failure.

Last edited by basbol130; 04-29-2017 at 04:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:21 AM.


S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)