Greg, the X factor is size and weight. The .380 I am sure will be smaller and lighter. It’s like the Glock 42 to the 43. The 42 is easier to pocket carry there is just no 2 ways about it. I agree, 9mm is more potent but I hit a guy with 4 or 5 modern .380 rounds from a gun I was actually able to have with me then i think I will be good.
In short, if the guns are identical size and weight and one is in 9mm and the other in .380 then yes, go 9mm but I don’t think that will be the case in reality

quote:

Originally posted by SSAreGreat:

quote:

Originally posted by gc70:
Subcompact guns in 9mm typically have very stout recoil springs.

Some people, like my wife who has had reconstructive surgery on her hand, cannot rack a slide with heavy recoil springs (and please don't try to talk about technique if you do not understand actual physical impairments). Locked-breach .380 pistols have very light recoil springs. I can rack the slides on a couple of my wife's .380 pistols with my pinky finger.

As previously noted, the recoil of a locked-breach .380 is substantially less than the recoil of a 9mm pistol of similar size. I would be surprised if anyone could not shoot such a .380 faster and more accurately than a comparable 9mm.

Well said, lower recoil and easier racking are very important to many shooters for physical issues and comfort.

My wife found the EZ .380 to be the best choice for her, but also so did my elderly neighbor, who previously settled on a .22 because of hand strength issues. The EZ is big enough to get a full grip on it, which is a plus a lot of small .380s dont have, like the G42. This is a big advantage for him, and allowed him to step up from the .22 to a .380

quote:

Originally posted by longjohn:
Greg, the X factor is size and weight. The .380 I am sure will be smaller and lighter. It’s like the Glock 42 to the 43. The 42 is easier to pocket carry there is just no 2 ways about it. I agree, 9mm is more potent but I hit a guy with 4 or 5 modern .380 rounds from a gun I was actually able to have with me then i think I will be good.
In short, if the guns are identical size and weight and one is in 9mm and the other in .380 then yes, go 9mm but I don’t think that will be the case in reality

The size and weight thing make perfect sense. But if the .380 is smaller and lighter it's a different gun, not a 365 in .380 At least that's how I see it.

Note I pocket carry a .380 everywhere and frequently carry a 365 IWB. The 365 is just a bit too big for pocket carry in the pants I own.

quote:

Originally posted by GregY:
But if the .380 is smaller and lighter it's a different gun, not a 365 in .380 At least that's how I see it.

I think it depends. If it has the same grip frame and FCU but a different barrel and slide, isn't it essentially the same pistol? If you put a .40 conversion on your 9MM P320, isn't it still a P320?

Who can possibly know how SIG would name a 380 pistol, but consider this: The P228 (9mm) was developed as the first down-sized version of the P226. Then there was the P229 developed for the 40 S&W cartridge, then the 357 SIG. It was essentially the same size as the P228, but had a wider magwell in addition to the differences in the slide and locking insert. When they decided to produce another gun of that size in 9mm, but with a then-standard one piece stainless steel slide, what did they call it? “P229” despite the fact that it used the same magazines and was more akin to the P228 than the other P229s.

All that led to endless confusion about the 9mm P229 because people assumed it was as heavy as the 357/40 models and that their magazines were the same when neither was true. Finally, then, another version of the 9mm P229 was introduced that had the same size magazine well as the 357/40 model.

On the other hand, SIG has more commonly kept the same model number for similar guns chambered for different cartridges: There have been pistols all called the P220 that were chambered for 9mm Luger, 45 ACP, 10mm Auto, 38 Super and 7.65mm Luger. P226s are chambered for 9mm, 357 SIG, and 40 S&W, and I believe, another less common cartridge or two as well.

Got all that? I won’t predict what SIG would call a small, striker-fired 380 pistol, but “P365”? Why not? Keep in mind as well that the 365 part was no doubt influenced by what the number suggests about the gun’s suitability for every day carry. Or maybe they should name it the P380 just to really clarify what it is—or perhaps to get into a trademark fight with Kahr and/or to confuse us all even more.

P365 .380 was introduced at 2021 SHOT Show. It was supposed to launch this past spring, but SIG has been pushing it back. I heard one reason was due to lack of availability of 380ACP ammo.

Unless SIG has decided to change the name, it is P365 .380. It is the same size as the P365 9mm. The slide and recoil spring are lighter.

I spoke to someone at SIG, CS, and he stated that SIG has decided to put the p365 in .380 on the back burner for a while. In SIG company langugae does that statement mean the project is dead?

I had a thought... they might produce one in the new .30 federal caliber... to gain capacity?

quote:

Originally posted by SSAreGreat:
I spoke to someone at SIG, CS, and he stated that SIG has decided to put the p365 in .380 on the back burner for a while. In SIG company langugae does that statement mean the project is dead?

I'd say so. But what do I know? I'm still waiting for Beretta to make the Pico in .32.

Max Michel from SIG announced the P365 in .380 on Tom Gresham's Gun Talk on Sunday. Better late than never, I guess.