9mm vs .38 special

File: S&W 469.jpg (1MB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2688x1520px

>>31840489
If you want a heavy DA trigger buy a pic related

File: images(71).jpg (22KB, 393x375px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 393x375px

>>31840489
.38 has. Also as a bonus, you don't leave shells at the area you used it, for um... you know... reloading purposes.

>>31840504
I hate pistols alright, not just because of the trigger happy tendency, they're also mechanically more complicated to work with. And anyway, with double action, you can cock the hammer first to make the trigger lighter for the next shot.

>>31840505
But there's no 38 on that pic?

buy both. If you cant, your enemy's have already won.

>>31840489
9mm has more muzzle energy than .38spl, but then again it also has more than standard .45 ACP so make what you will of it.

File: colt25.jpg (109KB, 1200x839px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1200x839px

>>31840489
.25 ACP is the only answer

>>31840548
What enemy? I wouldn't care if they won baka. I'm not autistic. I just don't want to feel naked.

File: 13615134_10153677471462267_5087469276829654361_n.jpg (110KB, 737x960px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 737x960px

>>31840563
>saying baka
>2016
Seriously?

File: 399174_v1.gif (2MB, 350x264px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 350x264px

>>31840570
>>31840563
Clicked the wrong reaction image. Fuck it. You're getting some random ones because I am bored.

File: 1461904687635.jpg (436KB, 1000x1704px) Image search: [Google]

436KB, 1000x1704px

>>31840563

>>31840559
>9mm has more muzzle energy
even with less grain?

>>31840570
S M H actually. This is an autistic site.

>>31840527
>they're also mechanically more complicated to work with.
Not really.

>>31840489
What is this gun going to be used for? I ask because the answer as to which is better will change based on the intended purpose and size of the gun you're buying.

>>31840527
357 and 38 are the same result ballistics. 38 special goes in a 357

>>31840489
However i recommend buying a s&w 686 in 5 in barrel. Nice pistol and reliable.

>>31840489
Getting a .38 only revolver is kinda retarded if you´re not on a budget. There are several options for compact .357 revolvers.

Definitely get the 357 if you wanting 38's. Then you can always fire 38 from the same gun. Although if it's a cary gun I would carry with 357 mag and just target shoot with 38.

My friend has a 357 snub and it's a fucking pleasure all around after you get used to how rediculoiusly light the trigger is.

>>31840527
>mechanically more complicated

No their not
The internals of a revolver are way more complex

>>31841087
Securing drug dealing of course. [spoiler]For self defense dumbass.[/spoiler]

>>31841239
>>31841270
>>31841419
I want a much lighter gun (20's oz or less) that is VERY concealable and easy to clean, but not chambered for extra tiny caliber. That's why I'm considering a 38 special. Maybe a J-Frame with exposed hammer, like SW model 36. I actually want it in 6 barrels like the detective special, but they don't produce it anymore. Such a shame. Only 5 round guns are available these days.

>>31840869
>>31841519
I'm talking about the amount of moving parts.

>>31841556
A pistols moving parts are really simple to understand. The rigger group of a revolver on the other hand is crazy looking to me.

That being said if you want the revolver just get one mate.

>>31841556
In the simplest of semi auto pistols you have the slide, the trigger/trigger bar (one piece) and the hammer and hammer disconnect.

Don't even ask me to explain a "simple" revolver.

There's a million little hand fitted pieces.
The reliability myth comes from being able to use double action to fire a different round in the event of a misfire, something highly uncommon in the day in age.

>>31840489
As someone who has a revolver, 100% the semi-auto. But the bullets themselves are comparable.

The revolver can also fire .357 though, if you care about that.

>>31841668
>myth
No feed jams, no stovepipes, less moving parts, cycle to the next round on a light strike

If your ammo is reliable, a revolver is reliable. Not true for a semi (but just get a good semi and clean it and you'll be fine.)

The revolver's weakness lies elsewhere.

File: 327c357frntvw.jpg (68KB, 580x250px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 580x250px

>>31840489
Get this OP.

>>31841270
I have the 4in barrel of this. It's fucking amazing.

>>31841537
Look at the M206 from RIA. I'm pretty sure that one is 6 shot. Also, take a look at snub nose 357s since 357s come in 6 shot more often than 38sp.

>>31840579
115 gr at 1250fps is 400ftlbs (9mm)
250 gr at 830fps is 350ftlbs (.45)
130 gr at 900fps is 234ftlbs (.38)
Again this is just standard ball ammunition and depending on what you get and if it's +P your results will vary. They'll all do the job, but most common handgun cartridges are pretty similar in that they suck compared to rifles.

>>31842079
A revolver that has too much fouling will not rotate the cylinder and before you say something like that only happens to people that don't take care of their shit it can happen in a few hundred rounds

You also can have rounds jump crimp

The lock work is also difficult to fix in the field so if it gets dirty or anything you're fucking SOL

>>31841239
> implying 357 sig and 357 mag are the same thing

>>31840563
newfag

If you like shooting you'll probably regret getting a .38 eventually. It's really expensive, especially for a small round.

>>31841537
>I want a much lighter gun
light guns suck shit to shoot

i got an m&p sheild in 9mm, i wish it was in 380.

i want a small gun chambered in 380 insted of micro guns, desu baka senpai

>>31846792
he said .38 not .380

9mm and .38special are exactly the same, fire same size bullet, same weight and same energy.

so its what would you rather have more of in a small gun 5 rounds or 9.

File: images (2).jpg (7KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 300x168px

>>31841537
Rock island armory/armscor (same company) m206, it's a Colt detective special clone in 38 SPL, you can get it with or without hammer spur, it holds six rounds and is 21oz unloaded.

Get it from buds gun shop, it's About 250 bucks.

I'm very happy with mine, even with hammer it is very nice to carry, and the best part is it fits the Detective Special holsters and speed loaders

If you want a 0.380 consider the Browning BDA. It's small but not too small.

>>31841239
.38 spc can deliver 200-300 joules of energy from a 4 inch barrel.

.357 mag can deliver between 800-100 joules of energy out of a 4 inch barrel.

To imply that they share the same ballistics is very idiotic and shows either lack of expirience or simply incompetence

>>31842079
This nigger has obviously never had a revolver. You have one round that jumps crimp and you're fumbling like a tard to reload in sub-par conditions. Even quality ammo has the ability to do so. What would really suck is if the mechanism got locked on itself mid-pull and the weapon became useless in the fight if not broken out of your own desperation.

As far as servicing moving parts I have an EAA witness that you pop a pin out of, pull the slide off and the entire top end comes off. Not to mention the trigger mechanism drops out of the gun by pushing another pin. Have you ever seen under the grips of a revolver? It's like the dial work inside a time piece. That's why when revolvers were issued as military sidearms in WWII they fired what was in them, dropped them on the ground and looted semis if they could.

File: Segal 2.jpg (100KB, 480x721px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 480x721px

What were we talking about?

>>31840489
>Which one is better? I'd like to buy my first handgun. 9mm rounds are quite cheaper, but I like double action revolvers better due to the heavy trigger, reliability, simplicity, and concealability, therefore .38 would fit my taste better I guess. Gun aside, which one has better penetration and stopping power?

>>31840527
>I hate pistols alright, not just because of the trigger happy tendency, they're also mechanically more complicated to work with. And anyway, with double action, you can cock the hammer first to make the trigger lighter for the next shot.

>>31840579
>even with less grain?

>>31841537
>I want a much lighter gun (20's oz or less) that is VERY concealable and easy to clean, but not chambered for extra tiny caliber. That's why I'm considering a 38 special. Maybe a J-Frame with exposed hammer, like SW model 36. I actually want it in 6 barrels like the detective special, but they don't produce it anymore. Such a shame. Only 5 round guns are available these days.


Jesus Christ, you're a terrible troll.

>>31847592
What shit revolvers/ammo are you carrying that these are ever problems?

Get a good revolver and don't shoot shit ammo and you won't have either of these problems.

I think maybe you're just a retard

File: 1275939646.jpg (16KB, 366x266px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 366x266px

why not just get a 9mm revolver?

File: 1474130691371.jpg (134KB, 306x480px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 306x480px

Depends on your loadings.

But on going on numbers alone, .38 special has the potential to be only a bit shy of lower end .357 mag. Course if you're doing that, you may as well just buy a .357.

9x19 has the advantage of being a common auto caliber, which more often than not comes with a higher capacity.


both are proven man killers, so it's honestly irrelevant. What you should be looking for in a pistol is how it feels and how well you shoot with it. caliber being lower on the ladder of importance. though capacity is more important to some people.

>>31841513
Revolvers are simpler and jam less than semi automatics.

File: rhino_new.jpg (69KB, 900x559px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 900x559px

>>31849154
>Revolvers are simpler
not really, they're pretty damn complicated
they jam less because there's less parts exposed to outside interference, and bad ammo won't stop the next round from loading.
But when a revolver jams, you can't just tap-rack-bang your way through. It's probably a problem requiring a gunsmith.

>>31849188
They aren't so complicated. I've opened up a cap gun or two in my time and the mechanisim that turns the cylinder and cocks the hammer is pretty easy to understand. It's not like a semi auto, which has a hundred hair fine parts moving under high stress to eject and rechamber each bullet.

>>31840489

Given time you'll end up owning both anyway.

As for reliability, revolvers can screw up plenty.

But since it's your first and you're not getting a 22 as almost everyone would suggest just go with what you like.

Just get something fullsized. They're much easier and funner to shoot. If you get a revolver then save up the cash and get an actual S&W or Ruger. They hold their value very well and will outlast you. If you get a semi-auto then stay with the big names also.

Seriously the only way you can fuck up is getting a cheap gun right out the gate.

File: Pistol_Makarov_Disassembling_160.jpg (477KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

477KB, 1200x800px

>>31849265
>. It's not like a semi auto, which has a hundred hair fine parts moving under high stress
a semi has very little going on when you get right down to it. Less than a revolver, in fact- given you don't have to rotate a cylinder, but can instead rely on a spring driven mag. Stripped down to it's basics, there's like 4 essential moving parts.
We had revolvers until materials and chemistry advanced enough to give us the modern semi-auto. This isn't to say revolvers are bad, just that they are a rather antiquated solution to a problem we can solve more easily today

>>31840527

Revolvers still mess up from time to time. Just ask any serious long-time revolver shooter.

And when they do mess up you need to take it to a gunsmith because it's not always simple part swap. When a semi auto messes up like 99% of the time it's the ammo you're shooting or the magazine you're using.

Read this guys series of articles

http://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/semi-autos-vs-revolvers-wrong-question/

Long story short, revolvers aren't bad. But they ARE out dated and semi autos have an edge in almost every way unless you want to take out a grizzly bear or something.

>>31846812
Not quite, no.

>>31849188
>and bad ammo won't stop the next round from loading
Unless the bullet jumps the crimp, then you've got a brick in your hands.

>>31849360
I figure a H&K Mk.23, loaded with .45 Super pressure ammo, featuring Lehigh Extreme Penetrators (solid copper bullets which look like Phillip's Head screwdrivers), would reliably prevent you from going innaburr.

Or something similar in .460 Rowland

>>31849345
Fuck i really miss my bulgarian makarov. Its the only gun that's ever been 100.0% reliable. Even my s&w 64 had the cylinder lock up occasionally

>>31849154
What kind of fuddlore is this

Take apart a gp100, one of the easier revolvers to disassemble, and just look at the shit that goes towards the mechanism. The trigger pack alone is numerous components that would be terrible to disassemble in the field.

Revolvers (DA) use literal clockwork in order to time the cylinder with the hand with the hammer, semi autos on the other hand can be pretty simple like a Glock

File: RPB-Cobray-SM11-A1-Open-Bolt-2.jpg (1MB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1944px

>>31850825
If we want to get extreme, we can look at a MAC11 pistol from 1980, not counting the magazine, there is literally only one moving part when cycling (the bolt).

No separate firing-pin, no extractor or ejector, no hammer or striker, it's just the solid machined piece of steel, with a fixed firing-pin on the bolt-face, and all the trigger does is let the bolt go so it can be slammed forward under spring pressure.

>>31850857
Actually it does feature an ejector, but it's not strictly necessary for a blowback .380

>>31850825
To be fair, the trigger group is the only complex thing about it. But it's also very unlikely that these mechanisms will jam up under normal conditions. With a semi, just limp wristing it can jam the gun.

>>31850579
>implying this won't fuck up a semi-auto
Stop using bulgarian ammo

>>31840489

9mm semi-auto is better stopping power because you can shoot the robber 13 times instead of 6.

>>31850868

just hold it sideways if the ejector breaks

>>31850868

you need an ejector, you don't need an extractor on a blowback .380.

>>31840489
.38 super