Modern. 380 rounds vs 9mm

Candle Power Forums

Help Support Candle Power:

@SCEMan
I'm curious. With a comped gun like that, if it was fired in relative darkness, would the muzzle flash be so great that you wouldn't be able to see for a second shot?
Good question. I don't recall shooting it in dark conditions, but I doubt it would distract any more than the muzzle flash does.
Here's a video of one of my fav pro handgunners back in the day shooting a similar comped 1911 .45 (with tracer rds.) in the dark.
Doesn't seem to bother Jeff at all!

 
Last edited:
The US military officially adopted the 9mm Beretta M9 pistol in 1985, replacing the .45 ACP M1911A1 as its standard sidearm. This transition was primarily driven by the need for standardization with NATO allies and the logistical advantages of the smaller, lighter 9mm cartridge, which allowed for higher magazine capacity.

IIRC in that 1986 shootout, the perps wore body armour. A 38 special wouldn't penetrate.

Under stress, one acts like he trains. After the shooting, one of the officers' pockets had a number of empty cartridges in it. When he trained, he emptied his gun and placed the spent cartridges into his pocket.

I suspect that the bulk of LEOs departments made the switch to 9mm for the same reason that the Army did. I don't think it had anything to do with the ability of the weaker sex being able to handle recoil of other rounds. I think it is a pretty widely accepted fact that women are often better shots than their male counter parts.
There were several factors involved with the military adoption of 9mmP as the NATO standard pistol round.

1. The 1911 .45ACP pistols in service were fairly worn out, and needed to be replaced.

2. The 9mmP has greater penetration on winter clothed persons, more typical in the ETO that we were preparing to fight in (Cold War era). The 9mmP would also penetrate the steel helmets that were in use at the time, whereas the .45 ACP would bounce off without penetrating.

3. Standardization Agreement with the NATO nations to adopt the 9mmP as the standard NATO service pistol chambering for logistics.

The .45 caliber was originally chosen by the USA as a result of the Thompson/LaGarde tests, as a replacement for the .38 Long Colt cartridge found insufficient in fighting the Moros in the Phillipines. That conflict found little need for penetration of heavy clothing.

Poppy is correct that the adoption by LE depts of the 9mmP did not have to do with female handling of recoil. What did happen was that the 10mm cartridge was the result of the FBI shootout, but female officers were not scoring well with it. I don't remember now whether it was due to recoil, or the size of the pistol grip. I suspect it was due to recoil, because the result was the adoption of the weaker .40 S&W (Smith & Wesson) which some disparagingly refer to as the .40 Short and Weak. Consequent development of the .9mmP to comply with FBI protocal created defense ammunition that had very similar ballistics in ballistic gelatin to the .40S&W, with lower recoil, resulting in faster follow-up shots and better marksmanship scores. The smaller cartridge also allowed greater pistol capacity. Statistics were derived showing that out of 10 shots fired, only one was effective on target. Therefore it was determined that more shots onboard was better than fewer. Consequently, there was a move by LE depts from the .40S&W to the 9mmP. This resulted in the benefits of lower ammunition costs by the departments, and greater ammunition carry capacity of officers.
 
+

What would you take for that 1911 and 100 rounds of your custom loads?

somewhat kidding, I know it's a keeper

add:
Most of my 10mm ammo is Fiocchi (180gr)
In my 5.25" barrel Springfield it'll do right near 1300fps,, bought those on sale years ago for $17.99 box/50
Traveled to two different cities to get it because the local store was bought out by,,, me

Have a few boxes of those in JHP also
Yeah I don't sell any of my custom guns anymore. Learned that the hard way, just like my classic muscle cars.
That 10mm SA is a nice setup! (y)
 
Good question. I don't recall shooting it in dark conditions, but I doubt it would distract any more than the muzzle flash does.
Here's a video of one of my fav pro handgunners back in the day shooting a similar comped 1911 .45 (with tracer rds.) in the dark.
Doesn't seem to bother Jeff at all!

View attachment 82300
Neat video. I suspect that he is firing with muscle memory, even if he could barely see the targets.

I don't own a comped gun, but was just curious.
My brother had a little 22 Beretta, that had terrible muzzle flash. That's what made me think that a comped gun may be as bad, or worse.
 
I think my tarus was a berreta 92 copy sure looked the same but sold it in the 90s
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
+

.380 w/ 3.75" barrel

90 gr (6 g) Buffalo JHP 1,025 ft/s (312 m/s) 210 ft⋅lbf (280 J)

95 gr (6 g) Federal FMJ 980 ft/s (300 m/s) 203 ft⋅lbf (275 J)

100 gr (6 g) Buffalo +P HC-FN 1,160 ft/s (350 m/s) 299 ft⋅lbf (405 J)

85 gr (6 g) Norma MHP 1,280 ft/s (390 m/s) 309 ft⋅lbf (419 J)

========================================================================
9mm w/ 4.65" barrel

7.45 g (115 gr) Federal FMJ 1,180 ft/s (360 m/s) 355 ft⋅lbf (481 J)

8.04 g (124 gr) Federal FMJ 1,150 ft/s (350 m/s) 364 ft⋅lbf (494 J)

8.04 g (124 gr) Norma ENVY FMJ 1,345 ft/s (410 m/s) 498 ft⋅lbf (675 J)

7.45 g (115 gr) Underwood JHP +P+ 1,400 ft/s (430 m/s) 501 ft⋅lbf (679 J)


Looked up the price of +P .380 ammo at well over a $1/round = about same energy as standard 9mm
raises the question of why not just have a sub compact 9mm pistol? (standard 9mm ammo is around $.24/round)

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
9mm S&W 3.6" barrel around $600
1752599818029.webp
 
Compared to a S&W BG 2.0,

- The M&P 9 is about a pound heavier/ more than twice as heavy.

- You can't really carry the M&P 9 in a pocket or in a ankle holster,

- The 9 is much more bulky/harder to conceal.

- The BG 2.0 is around $400 and you get a tritium front night sight.

+ the the newest version of the M&P 9 has switchable backstaps, a pic rail and is cut for optics.

1752604798690.png


BTW currently, you can get 9 mm blazer brass for around 24 cents/ round and 380 blazer brass for around 30. Premium defensive ammo is about the same for 9 and 380, both starting around 80 cents.
 
Last edited:
+

Started off by asking why I should consider a .380
That turned into looking at ammo, energy, what I'm gaining with a .380
Not sure what the smallest 9mm sub compact weighs or length, put the M&P9 M2.0 really for reference

I own a shedload of 9mm rounds, so I needed to ask myself these questions.

Thanks XXO for the breakdown
 
I'd like to see a ballistics comparison between these two.
+

Gunpowder used is roughly:
9mm = 5.3gr
.380 = 3.8gr

Bullet weight is a factor, .380 is around 15~20% less than 9mm

That's not giving ballistics, just the framework
 
Last edited:
+

Started off by asking why I should consider a .380
That turned into looking at ammo, energy, what I'm gaining with a .380
Not sure what the smallest 9mm sub compact weighs or length, put the M&P9 M2.0 really for reference

I own a shedload of 9mm rounds, so I needed to ask myself these questions.

Thanks XXO for the breakdown
the P365 is about the smallest comparable 9.


Still at least 6 oz heavier, a bit bulkier with snappier recoil. Costs more, but has a optics cut and a proprietary rail.
 
+

Gunpowder used is roughly:
9mm = 5.3gr
.380 = 3.8gr

Bullet weight is a factor, .380 is around 15~20% less than 9mm

That's not giving ballistics, just the framework
I guess what I was trying to determine if in similar barrel lengths how much difference would there be? Unless optimized for short barrels, a lot of powder goes unburned.
 
I guess what I was trying to determine if in similar barrel lengths how much difference would there be? Unless optimized for short barrels, a lot of powder goes unburned.
+

agreed,
I'd be very hard to find minimum barrel length to determine best powder usage, for any round.


adding graph:
Muzzle energy vs. barrel length
from practicaleschatology.blogspot.com

three takeaways,
- going from 3" to 5" .380 isn't a massive change
-17.5" barrel on my Hi-Point 10mn carbine would be right near 800lb/ft with my Fiocchi ammo, it's hotter than other 10mm ammo.
(never had a misfire with my Hi-Point)
- 357SIG still gets a wow with me, velocity really matters

1752626830293.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Something that really has to be factored in is age/disability. This issue is discussed a lot over on the S&W forum, and many, as they age, choose to switch to the .380ACP, due to its lighter weight and lower recoil. Your clothing and climate has a lot to do with what you carry, also. A 6" barrel N frame revolver is a lot easier to conceal under a parka, than a Speedo at the beach in FL or CA. That's an exaggeration, but you get the idea.
 
Yep, so does my 2.75" Model 66. Hard to believe that was a popular LAPD Detective carry gun.
Can you imagine a night time firefight with full .357 loads!?!
Back in the 1980's, I had a 4" barrel Ruger Security Six .357 Magnum. Fired that sucker at dusk, and it threw like a 3-4' flame out the barrel! That was back before they started putting flash retardant in civilian ammo.

I found out that Federal's LSWC .357 Magnum loads leaded the barrel something terrible. Went to JHPs after that. Much easier cleanup.
 
Back
Top