# .32 vs .380



## falshman70 (Jul 13, 2006)

I think I want a Keltec for pocket carry in the summer. I want the smallest autoloader I can get and I'm torn between the P3AT in .380 or the (I think the Keltec designation is) P32. Ballistically, how much do you give up with the h.32 vs the .380?


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

What you give up is a lot in my book. Number one they are both for back up only. I carry the KT-3AT at all times but if I leave the house I have my old .45 on my hip. A good .380 hollow point will just do a better job if you was called on to use it. I know there is a lot of BG's wearing a dirt over coat from the .32 but I still consider it a very weak round. The guns are the same size and cost about the same so why not get the most bang for your buck. Good luck.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

I have both guns. The .380 recoils considerably more than the .32, which is its biggest downside, though it is hardly uncontrollable for an experienced shooter. The .32 just sort of pops along with very little recoil. The .32 holds an extra round, if that matters to you. The .380 is a tiny bit bigger, though you'll never notice while carrying it. Both of mine have shown excellent reliability, and I am confident with either in terms of functioning.

I do think the .380 is more effective, so that is the one I carry when I need a little-bitty gun. I was content with the .32 before the .380 came out, though, as long as I loaded with good JHP (I loaded Silvertip). I use Gold Dot in the .380, and it runs great.

Ballistically...the .380 is heavier and wider at about the same velocity as the .32. Either will require very good shot placement. I practice head shots regularly with mine, in addition to pairs and triples to COM.


----------



## Dave James (May 15, 2007)

I'm a little leery any more of primary carry in the 32/380 range,, both will work and have worked for years, the 32 a little better strange as it seems.

But in all honesty look at the Kahr Pm9 or the Kel-tec 9mm thats out now,

True the bullet is same, same for 9mm and 380 diameter wise, but the 9mm will throw the heavier slug a bit faster,and wound channels and such are better

If you go 32 then stay with the 32 Winchester Silver Tips Doc Roberts and his ilk tend to believe they work best, in 380 look at the Remington 105 grain


----------



## falshman70 (Jul 13, 2006)

Thanks for the input guys. I have a Kahr P9, but it really needs a holster. I found the PM9 was also a little too big for me to carry in my pocket, hence I went with the more comfortable shooting P9. I just find myself not carrying as much in hot weather and thought a pocket gun is better than no gun.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

falshman70 said:


> I just find myself not carrying as much in hot weather and thought a pocket gun is better than no gun.


Yes, as Mark Moritz said so well: "The First Rule of Gunfighting is: HAVE A GUN." I generally manage to have a Glock with me, even in the very hot AZ summers, but when I wear a suit or when I am in exercise clothing, the P3AT accompanies me.


----------



## Dave James (May 15, 2007)

fal, can't argue that !!!! But before going with the 32/380 take a look at the newer Kel-tec 9mm, its smaller than their P-11.

And if you need a pocket holster just to try throw a few bucks at an Uncle Mikes rig, I have used them for years here in the Tidewater area of VA. they hold up well, don't print in the pocket as long as your clothes savvy


----------



## falshman70 (Jul 13, 2006)

Yeah, I'm a Norfolk native, so I know hot and muggy.


----------



## PhilR. (Apr 25, 2007)

You mention that you want the smallest autoloader you can get, but then mention pistols that are not the smallest. For the smallest, you want a Seecamp, which come in both calibers. Just to warn you though, these are low-production numbers pistols that are not cheap, especially the highly sought-after .380. The .32 can run about $400, the .380 almost double that, with a wait to boot.

Since these are solid stainless steel, they do weigh more than the Keltecs, despite a much smaller footprint....

PhilR.


----------

