Trying to understand caliber sizes
- Thread starter topspin43
- Start date
- Status
Baba Louie
New member
It's a Looooong story.
Try to do a search on the subject. In reality they're closer to a .36 caliber nowadays or .355"+/-. The length of case is different, they're rimmed differently, the .380 was developed by Browning (sometimes called a 9MM Browning) for small semi-autos, the .38 special comes from a lineage/history of starting w/ the .38 S&W that had .359 - .361" caliber heeled bullets (like .22 lr's of today) ..... aaaaarrrgghh
http://www.reloadbench.com/cartp.html
Click there for a brief history
Try to do a search on the subject. In reality they're closer to a .36 caliber nowadays or .355"+/-. The length of case is different, they're rimmed differently, the .380 was developed by Browning (sometimes called a 9MM Browning) for small semi-autos, the .38 special comes from a lineage/history of starting w/ the .38 S&W that had .359 - .361" caliber heeled bullets (like .22 lr's of today) ..... aaaaarrrgghh
http://www.reloadbench.com/cartp.html
Click there for a brief history
Please check our archives (under "Search" above) and you will find MANY highly instructive threads on this general topic. With this said, however, let me offer two overriding ideas:
1) Although caliber is defined as the diameter of the projectile (or the bullet), this is NOT always an exact measure (see #2 below) and there are many rounds in the same "caliber class". To illustrate, the .380 Automatic/9x17mm, the 9x19mm, the .38 Special, the .357 magnum, the .357 Sig are all in the "9mm class". However, their diameters' are NOT identical, with (for example) the .357 Sig and 9x19mm employing a .355 bullet and the .38 Special and .357 magnum utilizing a .357 projectile. As if this was not confusing enough, nomenclature also complicates this issue; to illustrate: (a) the 9mm Luger, 9mm Parabellum, and 9x19mm are all the same identical cartridge, but (b) the .357 Sig is not at all the same as the .357 magnum.
2) There are MANY reasons for this perplexity, but one of the most prominent is marketing. When Sig-Sauer began development of .357 Sig autoloaders -- which fires the same bullet as a 9x19mm, but at greater velocities approximating the BOTTOM RANGE of the .357 magnum's ballistics -- they wanted a compelling "marketing name" that would help sales and recognition. Therefore, they called it the ".357 Sig" -- even though it shoots a .355 diameter bullet -- because it tied this new round to the renowned and powerful .357 magnum.
It probably would be worth your time to review a reloading manual -- or even visit an on-line reloading site -- which will teach you a lot re bullet and cartridge sizes, what is similar, what is not, and it will also help clarify the "name game" that initially confuses all of us.
1) Although caliber is defined as the diameter of the projectile (or the bullet), this is NOT always an exact measure (see #2 below) and there are many rounds in the same "caliber class". To illustrate, the .380 Automatic/9x17mm, the 9x19mm, the .38 Special, the .357 magnum, the .357 Sig are all in the "9mm class". However, their diameters' are NOT identical, with (for example) the .357 Sig and 9x19mm employing a .355 bullet and the .38 Special and .357 magnum utilizing a .357 projectile. As if this was not confusing enough, nomenclature also complicates this issue; to illustrate: (a) the 9mm Luger, 9mm Parabellum, and 9x19mm are all the same identical cartridge, but (b) the .357 Sig is not at all the same as the .357 magnum.
2) There are MANY reasons for this perplexity, but one of the most prominent is marketing. When Sig-Sauer began development of .357 Sig autoloaders -- which fires the same bullet as a 9x19mm, but at greater velocities approximating the BOTTOM RANGE of the .357 magnum's ballistics -- they wanted a compelling "marketing name" that would help sales and recognition. Therefore, they called it the ".357 Sig" -- even though it shoots a .355 diameter bullet -- because it tied this new round to the renowned and powerful .357 magnum.
It probably would be worth your time to review a reloading manual -- or even visit an on-line reloading site -- which will teach you a lot re bullet and cartridge sizes, what is similar, what is not, and it will also help clarify the "name game" that initially confuses all of us.
No Name XII
New member
9mm lager? sounds tasty. New German Brew?
" the .380 was developed by Browning (sometimes called a 9MM Browning) for small semi-autos"
Actually, no, not correct. Need to do a bit more research before you post.
The .380 is a Colt cartridge which is officially known as the .380 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol, hence "ACP"). It was designed for the 1903 Colt Pocket Auto which is also known as the 1908 Colt Pocket Auto in .380. The 1903 was first made in .32 ACP. Some wanted a larger caliber so in 1908 Colt rechambered the 1903 for their new cartridge, the .380 ACP.
Browning didn't chambered a .380 gun until their 1910 model which I believe actually didn't come out until 1912.
The .380 ACP was called the 9mm Browning Short by Browning when they came out with their gun. However, their gun was a couple of years after the 1908 Colt. Browning (FN actually) didn't want the Colt name on any of their guns so they called it the 9mm Browning Short.
Actually, no, not correct. Need to do a bit more research before you post.
The .380 is a Colt cartridge which is officially known as the .380 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol, hence "ACP"). It was designed for the 1903 Colt Pocket Auto which is also known as the 1908 Colt Pocket Auto in .380. The 1903 was first made in .32 ACP. Some wanted a larger caliber so in 1908 Colt rechambered the 1903 for their new cartridge, the .380 ACP.
Browning didn't chambered a .380 gun until their 1910 model which I believe actually didn't come out until 1912.
The .380 ACP was called the 9mm Browning Short by Browning when they came out with their gun. However, their gun was a couple of years after the 1908 Colt. Browning (FN actually) didn't want the Colt name on any of their guns so they called it the 9mm Browning Short.
When you see a designation like 5.56x45mm it's a pretty safe bet that the numbers (first is bullet diameter, second is cartridge case length) are reasonably accurate. Reasonably accurate, not exact.
Other than that, all bets are off.
Some of the disparities are due to marketing, some are to prevent confusion, some are due to outdated conventions.
You just have to memorize the ones that apply to your guns--there's no easy way.
You're better off assuming that caliber ISN'T the actual bullet diameter than assuming it is. I haven't done a hard study, but it's probably the case that more aren't than are. Even the 9mm isn't exactly 9mm--it's .355" while 9mm is actually .3543307..."
Other than that, all bets are off.
Some of the disparities are due to marketing, some are to prevent confusion, some are due to outdated conventions.
You just have to memorize the ones that apply to your guns--there's no easy way.
You're better off assuming that caliber ISN'T the actual bullet diameter than assuming it is. I haven't done a hard study, but it's probably the case that more aren't than are. Even the 9mm isn't exactly 9mm--it's .355" while 9mm is actually .3543307..."
Mike Irwin
Staff
ISP,
"Actually, no, not correct. Need to do a bit more research before you post."
With all due respect, you need to do a bit more research yourself.
Baba Louie is absolutely correct.
John Moses Browning was not just a firearms designer, he also had a very large hand in the design of many of the cartridges that went into his handgun designs.
One of these is the .380 ACP, known in Europe variously as the 9mm Browning Short, 9mm Corto, 9mm Kurz, or 9x17.
The "Browning" you are referring to as having brought out a .380 handgun in 1912 was not Browning at all -- that company didn't exist in 1912. In Europe, Fabrique Nationale d'Armes de Guerre, Herstal, Belgium, or FN as we know it today, was an independent company that contracted for JMB's services.
JMB's association with FN began when he contracted with them in 1897 to manufacture a semi-auto chambered in .32 ACP, nearly 4 years before Colt got into the act with their .32 ACP.
Colt and FN had an agreement -- they would both use JMB's services, Colt would stay out of Europe, and FN would stay out of the United States.
The Browning Arms company, the one that exists today? It didn't come into existance until nearly a year after JMB's death.
"Actually, no, not correct. Need to do a bit more research before you post."
With all due respect, you need to do a bit more research yourself.
Baba Louie is absolutely correct.
John Moses Browning was not just a firearms designer, he also had a very large hand in the design of many of the cartridges that went into his handgun designs.
One of these is the .380 ACP, known in Europe variously as the 9mm Browning Short, 9mm Corto, 9mm Kurz, or 9x17.
The "Browning" you are referring to as having brought out a .380 handgun in 1912 was not Browning at all -- that company didn't exist in 1912. In Europe, Fabrique Nationale d'Armes de Guerre, Herstal, Belgium, or FN as we know it today, was an independent company that contracted for JMB's services.
JMB's association with FN began when he contracted with them in 1897 to manufacture a semi-auto chambered in .32 ACP, nearly 4 years before Colt got into the act with their .32 ACP.
Colt and FN had an agreement -- they would both use JMB's services, Colt would stay out of Europe, and FN would stay out of the United States.
The Browning Arms company, the one that exists today? It didn't come into existance until nearly a year after JMB's death.
er, yeah, what Mike said. Plus, aren't discussion threads like this s'posed to be sorta like some guys (and gals!) talking about a subject that they really enjoy, have opinions about and with varying levels of knowledge...learning and having some fun in the give and take? I mean: "Actually, no, not correct. Need to do a bit more research before you post" is a bit, um, unfriendly isn't it. Generally, the subject gets a pretty good once-over, requiring--inviting one to read all the posts.
Re-read my post and see if some of my answers are either 1) what you're saying, or 2) aren't about the .380. Let's see:
"John Moses Browning was not just a firearms designer, he also had a very large hand in the design of many of the cartridges that went into his handgun designs."
That's hardly a new revelation, altho not germain to the discussion. The discussion is the .380 was not first called the .380 Browning Short as it was developed at least 4 years prior to FN coming out with a gun chambered for the .380. My response gave the correct info on how and when the .380 came about.
"One of these is the .380 ACP, known in Europe variously as the 9mm Browning Short, 9mm Corto, 9mm Kurz, or 9x17."
Re-read my post again. Is that not what I said? To refresh your memory "The .380 ACP was called the 9mm Browning Short by Browning "
"The "Browning" you are referring to as having brought out a .380 handgun in 1912 was not Browning at all -- that company didn't exist in 1912. In Europe, Fabrique Nationale d'Armes de Guerre, Herstal, Belgium, or FN as we know it today, was an independent company that contracted for JMB's services."
Gosh, that sure sounds familar. Where did I read that? Oh yeah "Browning (FN actually) didn't want the Colt name on any of their guns so they called it the 9mm Browning Short." Gee, I knew I'd seen that somewhere else. That's right, it was in my post. The "FN actually" part was included to give credit to FN.
"JMB's association with FN began when he contracted with them in 1897 to manufacture a semi-auto chambered in .32 ACP, nearly 4 years before Colt got into the act with their .32 ACP. "
Which is very nice, and correct, but the discussion wasn't the .32 ACP but the .380 ACP, which first came out in 1908 in the Colt Pocket Auto, in 1908. The .32 ACP pre-dated the .380 as you wrote, but my post wasn't anything about the .32 ACP except to refer to the 1903 which was chambered in .32 ACP as being the platform for which the first .380s were developed. It wasn't until FN came out with the 1910 that they stuck the name ".380 Browning Short" on the cartridge. Again, that was because they didn't want a round in their gun with the Colt name on it.
"John Moses Browning was not just a firearms designer, he also had a very large hand in the design of many of the cartridges that went into his handgun designs."
That's hardly a new revelation, altho not germain to the discussion. The discussion is the .380 was not first called the .380 Browning Short as it was developed at least 4 years prior to FN coming out with a gun chambered for the .380. My response gave the correct info on how and when the .380 came about.
"One of these is the .380 ACP, known in Europe variously as the 9mm Browning Short, 9mm Corto, 9mm Kurz, or 9x17."
Re-read my post again. Is that not what I said? To refresh your memory "The .380 ACP was called the 9mm Browning Short by Browning "
"The "Browning" you are referring to as having brought out a .380 handgun in 1912 was not Browning at all -- that company didn't exist in 1912. In Europe, Fabrique Nationale d'Armes de Guerre, Herstal, Belgium, or FN as we know it today, was an independent company that contracted for JMB's services."
Gosh, that sure sounds familar. Where did I read that? Oh yeah "Browning (FN actually) didn't want the Colt name on any of their guns so they called it the 9mm Browning Short." Gee, I knew I'd seen that somewhere else. That's right, it was in my post. The "FN actually" part was included to give credit to FN.
"JMB's association with FN began when he contracted with them in 1897 to manufacture a semi-auto chambered in .32 ACP, nearly 4 years before Colt got into the act with their .32 ACP. "
Which is very nice, and correct, but the discussion wasn't the .32 ACP but the .380 ACP, which first came out in 1908 in the Colt Pocket Auto, in 1908. The .32 ACP pre-dated the .380 as you wrote, but my post wasn't anything about the .32 ACP except to refer to the 1903 which was chambered in .32 ACP as being the platform for which the first .380s were developed. It wasn't until FN came out with the 1910 that they stuck the name ".380 Browning Short" on the cartridge. Again, that was because they didn't want a round in their gun with the Colt name on it.
Mike Irwin
Staff
This says it all, ISP.
"" the .380 was developed by Browning (sometimes called a 9MM Browning) for small semi-autos"
Actually, no, not correct. Need to do a bit more research before you post."
What is not correct about Baba Louie's statement?
You've taken him to task, and told him to research more, for a CORRECT statement.
Let's take a look at Baba Louie's statement...
1. The .380 was developed by John Moses Browning. Correct.
2. It is sometimes called the 9mm Browning. Correct
3. It was designed for small autos. Correct.
Anyone see ANY reason why ISP would say that Baba Louie's statement isn't correct, and that he needes to do more research?
I have reread your statement, especially this part...
"Browning didn't chambered a .380 gun until their 1910 model which I believe actually didn't come out until 1912.
The .380 ACP was called the 9mm Browning Short by Browning when they came out with their gun."
A small toss off "FN actually" doesn't mitigate the those two misleading statements.
Oh, the reason why FN adopted the metric designation for the handgun that they manufactured?
Not because they didn't want the Colt name on their cartridge.
They were following common, established European cartridge nomenclature practices by using a metric designation followed by the designer's or manufacturer's name.
I'm sure you've heard of others...
5mm Clement
7.63 Luger
7.92 Mauser
and so on.
"" the .380 was developed by Browning (sometimes called a 9MM Browning) for small semi-autos"
Actually, no, not correct. Need to do a bit more research before you post."
What is not correct about Baba Louie's statement?
You've taken him to task, and told him to research more, for a CORRECT statement.
Let's take a look at Baba Louie's statement...
1. The .380 was developed by John Moses Browning. Correct.
2. It is sometimes called the 9mm Browning. Correct
3. It was designed for small autos. Correct.
Anyone see ANY reason why ISP would say that Baba Louie's statement isn't correct, and that he needes to do more research?
I have reread your statement, especially this part...
"Browning didn't chambered a .380 gun until their 1910 model which I believe actually didn't come out until 1912.
The .380 ACP was called the 9mm Browning Short by Browning when they came out with their gun."
A small toss off "FN actually" doesn't mitigate the those two misleading statements.
Oh, the reason why FN adopted the metric designation for the handgun that they manufactured?
Not because they didn't want the Colt name on their cartridge.
They were following common, established European cartridge nomenclature practices by using a metric designation followed by the designer's or manufacturer's name.
I'm sure you've heard of others...
5mm Clement
7.63 Luger
7.92 Mauser
and so on.
A small toss off "FN actually" doesn't mitigate the those two misleading statements.
Sorry you don't appreciate the "small toss" of FN. However I didn't realize I was to write a dissertation on Colt, FN, and Browning, the relationship and business agreements that occurred. Had I known you or someone else was so particular I would have been glad to write at length of the relationship. However, my post was quite cryptic which gave to the short referral to the FN connection.
That's the problem with the internet lists. No one writes in detail. I don't. Very few do. If anyone does then no one reads it. So the replies are of short sentences, and limited duration.
"They were following common, established European cartridge nomenclature practices by using a metric designation followed by the designer's or manufacturer's name."
That is true too, but also that FN, as with a lot of manufacturers, did not want another companies name on their guns. Same as Glock does with the .40.
"I'm sure you've heard of others..."
A few. Even have a few articles published about some. You might have even read them.
Sorry you don't appreciate the "small toss" of FN. However I didn't realize I was to write a dissertation on Colt, FN, and Browning, the relationship and business agreements that occurred. Had I known you or someone else was so particular I would have been glad to write at length of the relationship. However, my post was quite cryptic which gave to the short referral to the FN connection.
That's the problem with the internet lists. No one writes in detail. I don't. Very few do. If anyone does then no one reads it. So the replies are of short sentences, and limited duration.
"They were following common, established European cartridge nomenclature practices by using a metric designation followed by the designer's or manufacturer's name."
That is true too, but also that FN, as with a lot of manufacturers, did not want another companies name on their guns. Same as Glock does with the .40.
"I'm sure you've heard of others..."
A few. Even have a few articles published about some. You might have even read them.
Baba Louie
New member
MUAAAHHH HAHAHA
ISP, I thank you for your advice, I'll go back to reading and researching even more arcania about firearms, history and other things I enjoy before I post about things I know not
topspin43, did you get any good advice about the differences between the two rounds? ...one being a revolver oriented design from the late 1800's, the other something for small semi-automatics as designed by Mr. Browning for Colt products he also designed (and sometimes called 9MM Browning or other things... too).
You can load up the .38 special to ++P (pushing the limit) and drive 158 gr. pellets or download to 80 something gr. wadcutters with hardly a pop... but the .380 acp usually drives around a 90 gr. around 800-900 fps
And as to why not? Because. Smokeless powder came along. .38 special w/ 3.5 grains more blackpowder had more pizazz than the .38 Long Colt. When Browning came upwith the .380 acp (sometimes called 9MM Browning) smokeless powder was the Bee's knees (or is it the Cat's pajama's? ... my research is lacking ).
Hope that help's confuse ya enough. Great learning all this nonsensical stuff, ain't it? Even gets people all fired up at times. I wonder why?
ISP, I thank you for your advice, I'll go back to reading and researching even more arcania about firearms, history and other things I enjoy before I post about things I know not
topspin43, did you get any good advice about the differences between the two rounds? ...one being a revolver oriented design from the late 1800's, the other something for small semi-automatics as designed by Mr. Browning for Colt products he also designed (and sometimes called 9MM Browning
or other things... too).You can load up the .38 special to ++P (pushing the limit) and drive 158 gr. pellets or download to 80 something gr. wadcutters with hardly a pop... but the .380 acp usually drives around a 90 gr. around 800-900 fps
And as to why not? Because. Smokeless powder came along. .38 special w/ 3.5 grains more blackpowder had more pizazz than the .38 Long Colt. When Browning came upwith the .380 acp (sometimes called 9MM Browning) smokeless powder was the Bee's knees (or is it the Cat's pajama's? ... my research is lacking
).Hope that help's confuse ya enough. Great learning all this nonsensical stuff, ain't it? Even gets people all fired up at times. I wonder why?
Information overload.
I'm impressed and humbled by your knowledge. Learned some and also learned that the more I learn, the more I DON'T KNOW.
But I am equally impressed by MI's 13,000+ posts! Holy S$#%
If he tells me to go to work early tomorrow, I'm taking a shower in the dark!
Glad I'm learning from the best.Thanks to all.
I'm impressed and humbled by your knowledge. Learned some and also learned that the more I learn, the more I DON'T KNOW.
But I am equally impressed by MI's 13,000+ posts! Holy S$#%
If he tells me to go to work early tomorrow, I'm taking a shower in the dark!
Glad I'm learning from the best.Thanks to all.
OK - NOT to stir the soup but because it is interesting...so WHO invented the .380 - JMB or Colt??? Or JMB FOR Colt? Or JMB for FN? or ???
EDIT: (I think the...confusion in this thread is between 'Browning' the man, and 'Browning' the eventual company associated with FN.)
Found this...
History:
John M Browning invented the .32 ACP cartridge in 1898, and built a
prototype pocket pistol for it.
John was unique; he was a master gunsmith, not an engineer. When he
built a prototype, it was a complete, finished, functional firearm.
The factory just tore it apart, made the drawings from its parts, and
went into production.
Hart O Berg was a wheeler-dealer with contacts at Fabrique Nationale
d'Armes de Guerre (FN) in Belgium. Visiting the US, he went to the
Colt factory, where he met John. Colt was producing the very first
Browning semi-automatic handguns. He told John that FN was a huge
factory (set up to make 100,000 M1887 rifles for the Belgian Army)
which had run out of work. John offered his pocket pistol, Hart took
it to FN, FN called it the Model 1899 (later the Model 1900), and thus
started the FN-Browning connection still active today.
(The prototype fired 500 cartridges with no stoppages in a
demonstration for the FN executive Board. They immediately bought the
design, which Colt had rejected as having no market potential.)
Colt, intrigued by the 1900's success, asked John for a pocket pistol.
He gave them the 1903 Colt in .32 ACP. Later, they wanted a stronger
cartridge, os he invented the .380 ACP cartridge and designed the 1908
(a minor variant of the 1903) for them. .380 ACP 1908s can be
converted to .32 ACP by swapping in a .32 barrel and magazine, but the
reverse does not work. Rim dimensions for the two cartridges are the
same; the .32 is semi-rimmed, and the .380 has a rebated rim but is
fatter overall.
John then designed the Model 1910 for FN, making it capable of
accepting either a .32 or a .380 barrel, and using magazines capable of
handling either cartridge. FN called the cartridges the 7.65mm and 9mm
Browning.
EDIT: (I think the...confusion in this thread is between 'Browning' the man, and 'Browning' the eventual company associated with FN.)
Found this...
History:
John M Browning invented the .32 ACP cartridge in 1898, and built a
prototype pocket pistol for it.
John was unique; he was a master gunsmith, not an engineer. When he
built a prototype, it was a complete, finished, functional firearm.
The factory just tore it apart, made the drawings from its parts, and
went into production.
Hart O Berg was a wheeler-dealer with contacts at Fabrique Nationale
d'Armes de Guerre (FN) in Belgium. Visiting the US, he went to the
Colt factory, where he met John. Colt was producing the very first
Browning semi-automatic handguns. He told John that FN was a huge
factory (set up to make 100,000 M1887 rifles for the Belgian Army)
which had run out of work. John offered his pocket pistol, Hart took
it to FN, FN called it the Model 1899 (later the Model 1900), and thus
started the FN-Browning connection still active today.
(The prototype fired 500 cartridges with no stoppages in a
demonstration for the FN executive Board. They immediately bought the
design, which Colt had rejected as having no market potential.)
Colt, intrigued by the 1900's success, asked John for a pocket pistol.
He gave them the 1903 Colt in .32 ACP. Later, they wanted a stronger
cartridge, os he invented the .380 ACP cartridge and designed the 1908
(a minor variant of the 1903) for them. .380 ACP 1908s can be
converted to .32 ACP by swapping in a .32 barrel and magazine, but the
reverse does not work. Rim dimensions for the two cartridges are the
same; the .32 is semi-rimmed, and the .380 has a rebated rim but is
fatter overall.
John then designed the Model 1910 for FN, making it capable of
accepting either a .32 or a .380 barrel, and using magazines capable of
handling either cartridge. FN called the cartridges the 7.65mm and 9mm
Browning.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"Sorry you don't appreciate the "small toss" of FN. However I didn't realize I was to write a dissertation on Colt, FN, and Browning..."
Since you're wanting Baba Louis to "do a little more research before he posts," maybe you should take that statement to heart and be a bit clearer with your writing?
One need not write a dissertation to construct a simple sentence that's both concise and accurate.
I'm still waiting, though, to hear just what was so wrong about Baba Louie's statement.
"Even have a few articles published about some. You might have even read them."
Do tell. Where?
You can find my work published in the January 1991 through August 1994 issues of American Rifleman magazine.
Shield,
Browning designed the following cartridges (using the nomenclature most familiar to Americans): .25 ACP, .32 ACP., .38 ACP, .380 ACP, 9mm Browning Long, 9.8mm ACP, and .45 ACP.
He laid down the concepts/rough dimensions for the cartridges and let the ballisticians work out the details.
Since you're wanting Baba Louis to "do a little more research before he posts," maybe you should take that statement to heart and be a bit clearer with your writing?
One need not write a dissertation to construct a simple sentence that's both concise and accurate.
I'm still waiting, though, to hear just what was so wrong about Baba Louie's statement.
"Even have a few articles published about some. You might have even read them."
Do tell. Where?
You can find my work published in the January 1991 through August 1994 issues of American Rifleman magazine.
Shield,
Browning designed the following cartridges (using the nomenclature most familiar to Americans): .25 ACP, .32 ACP., .38 ACP, .380 ACP, 9mm Browning Long, 9.8mm ACP, and .45 ACP.
He laid down the concepts/rough dimensions for the cartridges and let the ballisticians work out the details.
- Status