DocGKR - Your .380 vs 38 SPL article

[nalesq]

Another non-ballistic factor to consider is that you probably get with the .38 snubby v a small .380 better reliability shooting from awkward positions and imperfect limpwristy grips like the kind you might find yourself using in an super close range or even entangled fight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[willie]

A con for the 380 is lower reliability of the lcp size pistols. Mine works, but the first one I bought did not. Seldom do I carry only it. I think that Shield size pistols are displacing many lcp type 380s. I shoot mine frequently and like it. However, as a student of the hobby for decades, I am most aware of the 380's limitations. Maybe carrying an lcp 380 because I like it is not a good reason.

[PNWTO]

The biggest reliability change I saw with the petite .380s was when I gave up on expanding projectiles for them. Even then, in my limited scope, I would really only suggest taking a look at the Kahr (yes, Kahr) and the G42. I know the LCPs have a good following but I give any Ruger products without cylinders a wide pass.

As for earlier comments, I would like to think that the Lehigh projectiles in .380 gain some penetration-path equivalency (?) when compared with .38 wadcutters and whatnot. Just my wild-ass guess.

[Cool Breeze]

Just throwing another factor in... When researching this topic long ago... You may also need to factor how you are carrying it. When researching pocket carry on this forum, a vast majority of people found the rounded form factor of the snubby much easier to extract from a pocket than a small semi.

Which then goes into the other perennial question... More bullets but slower access or faster access to less bullets.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

[JAD]

Incidentally, jogging is one of my highest risk activities, and I try to always carry a service pistol; certainly I always carry a 9.

[Velo Dog]

https://www.lehighdefense.com/produc...ant=1066236304

Note: Due to the design of the feed-ramp of the Kahr p380 and cw380 we would not recommend the use of our XP ammunition with these handguns. Some users have reported intermittent feed problems with the p238 as well.

For Kahr owners we would like to suggest our 380 Controlled Fracturing Ammunition. The 380 CF's were tested in a p380 and they are reliable.

PRODUCT DISCLAIMER

Due to the unique design of our XP bullets we advise all customers to purchase one box of ammunition to confirm the ammo will cycle in your handgun.

We have tested the ammo in several of the top selling 380’s and our findings have been recorded on several videos located on our YouTube Channel and documented on our website. However, all handguns produced do have minor differences and these differences may or may not affect the performance of your handgun with our 380 XP Ammo.

The 380 Auto handguns listed below cycled our ammunition without failure:

GLOCK 42 – SECOND GENERATION

SIG 232

SMITH AND WESSON BODY GUARD

KELTEC

RUGER LCP

AMT 380

We did experience problems chambering the first round in the KAHR P380 and CW380. Once the first round was chambered the handguns performed without failure.

[JodyH]

I'm currently at around 300 rounds of Lehigh Penetrators in my Kahr CW380 with zero issues.
But I always use the slide release lever to feed the first round from an otherwise empty magazine and then insert my full mag.
I don't carry a spare mag for it and I don't think i've ever shot it from anything but 6+1.
Kahr's are notorious for poor hand feeding no matter the bullet profile.

[Totem Polar]

GLOCK 42 – SECOND GENERATION

Waaaaaay OT, but, I love this. Everyone and their dog knows that G did a subtle redesign of the 42 except for, based on all evidence, Glock. Still cracks me up.

Apologies for the drift; carry on.

[peterb]

Like most things in shooting, there is no right answer. Only a right for me answer.

I've seen a couple of smaller/weaker novices struggle with a J-frame but do reasonably well with a G42. Since they'll probably be "a box a couple of times a year" shooters and aren't willing to carry anything bigger, a gun that makes it easier for them to hit what they're aiming at seems like a reasonable choice even if the ballistics are marginal.

[Duelist]

I've seen a couple of smaller/weaker novices struggle with a J-frame but do reasonably well with a G42. Since they'll probably be "a box a couple of times a year" shooters and aren't willing to carry anything bigger, a gun that makes it easier for them to hit what they're aiming at seems like a reasonable choice even if the ballistics are marginal.

I agree. And here's a further thought on that: if all I'm willing to actually shoot through my 642 are powderpuff loads that aren't any more powerful in any real measurable way than a .380, what am I giving up using a G42 instead?