G&R Tactical
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 45 of 45

Thread: Why did JMB / Colt develop .380 acp?

  1. #41
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,447
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ramairthree View Post
    When I look at the velocity and energy of most pistol cartridges from the cowboy era to the first half of the 20th century,
    There seems to have been much more tolerance of weaker rounds.

    I am not saying everybody used them, and there were not solid, hard hitting options.
    But the average expectations and threshold to tolerate seemed much lower.
    Sort of like how a little over 200 net horsepower was considered acceptable in a performance car from about 1975 to 1995.
    The 1851 and 1860 Colts were pretty weak. The 1851 Colt Navy .36 was about the same horsepower as a .380. Now the 44-40 and 45 Colt were substantial rounds even though they were loaded with black powder.
    From Dippoville and stumblin' but M4C number one Theocratic Tyrant, and oh so preachy!

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,431
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ramairthree View Post
    When I look at the velocity and energy of most pistol cartridges from the cowboy era to the first half of the 20th century,
    There seems to have been much more tolerance of weaker rounds.

    I am not saying everybody used them, and there were not solid, hard hitting options.
    But the average expectations and threshold to tolerate seemed much lower.
    Sort of like how a little over 200 net horsepower was considered acceptable in a performance car from about 1975 to 1995.
    True.

    Alot of it is advertising.

    Truth is for the vast majority of non-Police defense use outside the home one to three rounds of anything into the vitals of each aggressor gets the job done when all else has failed and shooting is neccessary. (Or surprise attack)

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,313
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by TomMcC View Post
    Now the 44-40 and 45 Colt were substantial rounds even though they were loaded with black powder.
    Hmm, black powder 45 Colt loadings 230-250g bullet at 750-850 fps. Pretty wimpy... we all know that won't stop anything based on the never ending "45 ACP is obsolete" debates. :-)

    Just hit me are still shooting (and depending on) cartridges with ballistics that were very common 145 years ago. (granted projectiles have come a long way).

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    873
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ramairthree View Post
    When I look at the velocity and energy of most pistol cartridges from the cowboy era to the first half of the 20th century,
    There seems to have been much more tolerance of weaker rounds.

    I am not saying everybody used them, and there were not solid, hard hitting options.
    But the average expectations and threshold to tolerate seemed much lower.
    Sort of like how a little over 200 net horsepower was considered acceptable in a performance car from about 1975 to 1995.
    That was more to do with the limitations of black powder than the bullet itself. Anything smaller than .44 propelled by BP wasn't a good choice. 30ish grains of BP behind a 230-255gr LFP, moving it between 800-1000fps, no one was complaining. I don't think I've read any complaints about the .455 Webley, either, which was usually even slower.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,431
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sundance435 View Post
    That was more to do with the limitations of black powder than the bullet itself. Anything smaller than .44 propelled by BP wasn't a good choice. 30ish grains of BP behind a 230-255gr LFP, moving it between 800-1000fps, no one was complaining. I don't think I've read any complaints about the .455 Webley, either, which was usually even slower.
    Could be. Could be the "Caliber excuse" as well. It goes like this:

    Person shot goes down fast:

    - 9mm = "see? Works fine".

    - Weaker than 9mm = "well, sometimes anything works".

    - .40 / .45 / .357 = "well of course he went down fast!"

    Now, person shot does NOT go down fast:

    - 9mm = "Pff...9mm sucks"

    - Less powerfull than 9mm = "well of course that puny cartridge didnt put him down"

    - .40 / .45 / .357 = "Well, he was just a tough nut and didnt want to quit! Needed rifle or shotgun to drop that guy".

    These calibers (.40, .357, .45) get a pass when they dont work. Or at least people then blame the bullet. I guess these days we can add 9mm to this list, too.

    I think the Ellifritz study is closest to the mark. Ergo weaker pistol calibers might average 15 % less effective and hot pistol calibers (.45 +p with late-model jhp's, .357 magnum, etc) might give a small bump in average effectiveness.

    Barrier penetration and long range use is another discussion.

    I dont think .380 in a blowback improved performance near enough to justify the extra recoil, wear on guns, or loss in capacity versus .32. I don't think it does in a pocket locked breach pistol .380 either.

    It the end its mindset, tactics, skill then gear that will save us.
    Last edited by Ron3; 06-12-19 at 08:06.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •