38 Special vs 380 acp (wound balistics)

[Erich]

Did these rounds stop the aggressive act?

While I have certainly represented shooters in self-defense claims, "aggressive act"s by the shootees were not at issue in any of those shootings.

The .380 JHP rounds that failed to adequately penetrate also failed to stop the activities of the shootee.

 

[Old TexMex]

While I have certainly represented shooters in self-defense claims, "aggressive act"s by the shootees were not at issue in any of those shootings.

The .380 JHP rounds that failed to adequately penetrate also failed to stop the activities of the shootee.

So the results weren't from autopsy?

 

[Erich]

So the results weren't from autopsy?

ER doc (after subsequent shots and playing dead to escape yet more) and (the Hydra-Shoks) crime scene techs (after subsequent shots finished things)

 

[BE Mike]

I'm not sure what you mean by that. It acts like a flat point ball round with some extra temporary cavity.

"failed to penetrate adequately" = no

Erich did not specify whether the shootees chose to quit or not.

If you watched the video all the way through, you'd see that after shooting through a barrier, the hollow points didn't fair well and the fmj's over penetrated. Shooting through blue jean material was interesting. I'm with Eric as far as penetration being a big factor, but this is based upon my shooting deer with a 4" .357 mag. revolver. High velocity soft points of medium weight penetrated well, while hollow points sometimes failed to drive through to the vitals.

 

[shotgun693]

The heart of this continuous debate is that people do not want to be inconvenienced by carrying a gun. They especially do not want to carry a gun that is 'to big'. So, they drag up all sorts of arguments about super bullets and tests shooting anything from bags of marshmallows to premixed concrete. All this to have some sort of argument supporting carrying a little bitty gun that they hope will work and certainly will not wrinkle their nice shirt. Lot's of luck. My personal choice was to get used to carrying a gun I know will work rather than trying to get by with something less.

 

[Erich]

Rick_A wins the thread!

 

[Erich]

The question I am shocked nobody has asked, is which one is best for bears?

Rick_A wins the thread!

 

[petepeterson]

The heart of this continuous debate is that people do not want to be inconvenienced by carrying a gun. They especially do not want to carry a gun that is 'to big'. So, they drag up all sorts of arguments about super bullets and tests shooting anything from bags of marshmallows to premixed concrete. All this to have some sort of argument supporting carrying a little bitty gun that they hope will work and certainly will not wrinkle their nice shirt. Lot's of luck. My personal choice was to get used to carrying a gun I know will work rather than trying to get by with something less.

I try to carry the best possible handgun that I can effectively conceal at any given time when I'm outside my home. There are some (rare) occasions that a pocket .380 is that handgun. I don't haphazardly throw it in a pocket and go. It's something I practice with, and can make decent shots quickly with at 7 yds and in. It may not be what I prefer, but sometimes it's all I have, and it seems better than having nothing at all.

At home I cheat, and it's a .380 or .38 snub all the time. I have no excuse there, other than comfort.

 

[brucev]

When faced with a criminal threat, we do not need magic to resolve the matter. We need to be effective. It really doesn't matter what the round is that one uses. I've been shot at one time in my life when I surprised some twits doing a dope deal. They were not effective in shooting me because they couldn't get any hits, not because their choice of caliber was lacking. I've shot a lot of small to medium game with all sorts of rifles up to .30-06 at distances out to 180 yds. I've not ever had a single small game animal ever get up and walk away or even flop around a bit after being shot with a simply little .22 LR or a 12 ga. loaded with bird shot. I've shot a similar goodly number of deer. Angles of presentation have varied from the idea broadside shot to the less than ideal head on, quartering, raking and Texas heart shot. Not one of these animals ever got up and kept going. All were shot using plain Jane 150 gr. bullets except one on which I used 165 gr. handloads. I've tracked deer shot by other hunters who used rounds such as the .243 Winchester, .270 Winchester, 7mm Rem. Mag. Not one of those animals required tracking because of a inadequate round. Tracking was uniformly required because of poor shot placement. This year I've seen deer shot w/ .223/5.56mm AR-15's and bolt-action .22-250's. They all dropped dead. The extra horsepower of the .22-250 did not produce a deader deer. The deer died because the bullet was placed where it belonged to produce a good kill.

Is the .380 better than the .38 Special? Guess it all depends on if one can shoot. If one can shoot, then a .22 LR will work very well. If one cannot shoot, then the largest and most powerful caliber a keyboard can devise will not be effective. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.

 

[pittpa]

By far the largest group of experts I have seen in one thread. May we moveour collective knowledge on to 9mm vs 357 from short barrels?

 

[Erich]

By far the largest group of experts I have seen in one thread. May we moveour collective knowledge on to 9mm vs 357 from short barrels?

Being snide doesn't really make you feel better - you might reconsider it. I understand and am no saint: I often see threads I think are silly, and sometimes I can't resist a remark myself.

What I try to remember is that if this many people felt the topic was worth discussing, it really was worth the discussion to them. If it's something in which I don't want to participate, I need not. And if it's something where I feel people are just being grievously wrong or silly, I have the choice to either add my position to the conversation or (again) to simply ignore it.

Anyway, I understand where you're coming from (and, again, I've been there myself), but I think you made a mistake in deciding to voice it thusly.

 

[pittpa]

I'm sorry; the contradictions got to me.

 

[Erich]

I'm sorry; the contradictions got to me.

Like I said, I've been there, amigo.

 

[FireMarc]

I've seen both prove to be fatal. The latest was a suicide with a 38 snub nose from the side. The round failed to penetrate the skull on the far side and left a judge. Fairly odd for a point blank self inflicted few.

I've seen most rounds both kill and not kill, like mentioned before shot placement is king. A single 25 to the heart is better than a 44 to the shoulder.

I'm in the current debate which to get right now. I want another small carry anywhere gun and the ones on my radar at a 380 or a 38 both are calibers I don't currently own. My ultra small gun that I carry even in gym shorts is a TCP 32 and its been perfect for that role and flawless functioning for me so I've considered the tcp 380 or a ruger lcp to fill that same role with a little more punch. Ive also seen 32s be effective for self defense so I don't feel helpless with it, hell ice even carried a small 22 on occasion. A gun is better than a knife.

 

[shouldazagged]

Just want to let you know that the "old" FBI Load is NOT the same as todays anemic one. The current Remington,Federal and Winchester versions are reduced 10 - 12 % and are about 100 - 120 fps slower than they were. I might suggest either using well stored older ammo or use the Buffalo Bore version which is excellent and better than the Big 3 ever were. This is not just my opinion, but my Chronograph tested results. Just want you to be aware.

I'm aware of that. I have only a little of the good older Remington stuff left, so I now carry the Buffalo Bore standard pressure 158gr. LSWCHP-GC, which is ballistically virtually identical to the old FBI load.

 

[amd6547]

It's funny to me that when I clicked on this thread, I had two handguns handy...one, a Beretta 84F 14shot 380 loaded with Underwood +P XTP's...and a Model 15-3 loaded with PDX1 +P's.

I was always rather indifferent to the 380acp, neither disdaining it nor praising it.
But, I am a Beretta fan, and when the Israeli surplus 84's showed up cheap, I bought one. I figured I'd shoot it a bit, and eventually use it for trade bait. However, when I shot it, I found I really like it. I shoot it well, it's reliable, and I've even reached out and hit the 10" steel plate at 80yds at my club.
Thus, while I have a high cap 9mm available, or a 357mag, I often find myself just sticking the 84F in my belt, where it carries very well. Besides, the riot gun has a tube full of #1 buck, and push come to shove, I'd rather have that in my hands than any handgun.

 

[STCM(SW)]

I don't feel under gunned with my M 638 or my PPK 380 clone at close range.
Did someone say placement of rounds counts more then size of the bullet?

 

[Lee's Landing Billy]

Good posts.

I've worked on many homicide cases in which .380s and snub .38 Specials were used. Here are some takeaways from those that I've reviewed:

• No person ever hit in the brain/spinal cord or heart/aorta in these cases with either a .38 Special or a .380 of any sort ever continued aggressive action beyond the moment of that hit. (BTW, spinal cord hits are incredibly rare and brain hits are rare - the reports of these are that the person went down like a light that was switched off. Heart/aorta hits are common and witness reports are that these result in an immediate cessation of aggressive action, but the person sometimes remained on his feet for up to a minute. Note that the brain and arms are above the heart/aorta, so they would be immediately affected by the loss of pressure delivering oxygenated blood, unlike the legs.)
• No .380 ball round in these cases ever failed to penetrate sufficiently to hit these aforementioned vitals. (One such ball round actually overpenetrated and likely hit another person, but that hit was to the first target's calf, so that's not particularly indicative of too much penetrative power in .380 ball.) Same with .38 Special ball, which will overpenetrate even from a snub and still have a lot of energy - might be worth considering at least LSWCs to minimize danger of overpenetration.
• In three shootings, .380 JHP rounds that were properly aimed to hit the aformentioned vitals failed to penetrate adequately to do so.
• In .38 Special snub performance, no hollowpoints in these cases were ever described as having opened beyond "moderate deformation" of the projectile. (None of these hollowpoint shooting cases involved "modern" JHPs, such as the Winchester PDX1 or Speer short barrel Gold Dot bullets.)

Tastes great/less filling - your choice.

cheers, erich (carrying a tiny Ruger LCP with Buffalo Bore's psychotic ".380 +P" 95-gr ball - good for just south of 1100 fps from that gun)

THIS is great info!!! Thanks so much!!! Placement and Penetration equals success.

 

[Erich]

THIS is great info!!! Thanks so much!!! Placement and Penetration equals success.

My pleasure to pass along the grim info - may you never need to use it.

 

[BB57]

A couple of qualifiers probably need to be mentioned.

First, .38 +P loads with modern hollow points like the 135 gr Gold Dot seem to do well in ballistic gel test as does the older moderately expanding 125 gr XTP when it's also loaded in a +P load. In essence, the +P load makes up the velocity loss that occurs when going from a 4" to a 2" barrel.

Second, .380 ACP hollow points have improved in general, but the 90 gr XTP is still a good choice and will both expand and acheive 12" penetration in ballistic gel when it's launched at 100-1050 fps.

But...that normally requires a barrel that is 3.5" long, and 3.9" is better. The current crop of micro and sub micro .380 ACPs are not going to be able to generate that kind of velocity, in particular as the .380 ACP takes a much more significant hit in a short barrel than does the 9mm Para.

I've been carrying a Kimber Micro this summer and the best I can do is about 980 fps with a 90 gr XTP in it's short 2.75" barrel. I still need to do some gel testing to see how well it performs at that velocity.