Did an army request it? Did JMB or Colt just think it would sell better than .32 acp? Was it to compete with another cartridge? Was it just because "bigger is better 'Merica and we can make a blowback work with fatter bullets than .32 acp?
The .380 ACP cartridge was derived from Browning’s earlier .38 ACP design, which was only marginally more powerful. The .380 ACP was designed to be truly rimless, with headspace on the case mouth instead of the rim for better accuracy.
Was that pushed in advertising? Did it pan out?
I think I read that .32 can head space on the rim or case mouth depending on the gun.
It would be neat to find some original advertising for it and the Colt. 1908 I think.
because little girls and small boys deserve guns too
Just looked it up and there are several online, but nothing about the rationale on .380 ACP.
The ads were about the pistols, either specs or virtues…safety, easy to carry, and one that I don’t exactly get in pointing out solid breech? Only thing coming to mind is a dig against Luger’s toggle lock.
The internet says JMB’s favorite pistol was his .32 pocket hammerless.
Your calling JMB a “small boy”. I’m gonna report you to the guys at 1911.com…
Yes, “rationale” is the word I should have used.
Who thought it would perform, or at least sell, better than .32 acp and why?
It seems clear the .38 acp and 9mm Browning (9x20 I think) were too powerful for a small blowback. .32 / 7.65 mm was really liked and popular. So why is there a .380?
Was it Colt, JMB, or Union-Metallic who first thought up the idea?
Maybe it was like the Russians? They apparently wanted to make the hottest cartridge they could for a smallish blowback pistol and so they developed 9x18 Mak. At least that’s my understanding.
There is a Forgotten Weapons episode on early automatic pistol/cartridge development and I am fairly sure .380 was mentioned, but not sure how much detail beyond stats.
My 2 guesses are
- no specific need/reason…some combo of early R&D in the first decade or so of auto pistols for technical reasons or casting out to see what would best separate consumers from their money.
Or
- as you mentioned, getting more oomph in a blowback and/or a 9mm simpler/lower cost competitor to Luger.
Look to the objective, which was to adapt a 1903 (in .32) to a rimless, larger caliber weapon.
The .32 was already a decade old, and cartridge development was moving fast. Colt had a little success with larger autos, but the pocket hammerless was a hot seller. They wanted to extend the product line, using the popular product to attract a different market segment. The .380 was designed to be the largest blowback rimless cartridge that could reliably function on the pocket hammerless platform. That’s why it exists.
It was not, however, always more popular than .32. That shift took a lot of time. There’s probably a variety of reasons for it. existing stock of weapons, Supply chain, manufacturing capacity, comfort, size of targets relative to today…
I was under the impression the Germans developed it to get around the Post WW1 sanctions on 9mm cartridges.
Bigger caliber than the .32 yet not so powerful it would work in a straight blowback pistol.
Good answers.
It would be neat to read it from the creators/ sellers.
Didnt they promote the “new” caliber at all?
Yes they did, but for Colt it was not as successful compared to the .32, or the 1911 later. the .32 cartridge was already established, and continued selling well for decades Alongside the .380.
Down the rabbit hole, I really like following up on posts like this.
Ultimately, .380 was just about the largest caliber that a small blowback pistol could operate.
I learned that the first use of the .380 was in the he Colt Model 1908 Pocket Hammerless which descended from the Colt Model 1903 Pocket Hammerless.
I came upon this fairly informative and easy to read piece while searching for info:
http://averagejoeshandgunreviews.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-post.html
[i]The Colt Model M pistols were produced by Colt from 1903 and 1908 respectively until 1947. The Pocket Hammerless is another design by firearms genius John M. Browning.
The story goes that he presented the design to Colt Management in 1899 and they weren’t interested as they were busy trying to produce a new larger caliber pistol which would win them another military contract.
Short sighted American firearms manufacturers made the mistake of passing on Browning designed on several occasions and when they did, Fabrique Nationale d’Armes de Guerre of Belguim was always ready to welcome one of John Browning’s new designs. While Colt toiled away on the military sidearm FN produced Browning’s self loading pocket pistol and the FN Model 100. In a relatively short period of time Colt found that their civilian sales in Europe were drying up as the market was in love with the FN-Browning pocket gun.
Colt also realized that American retailers were beginning to import this pistol in fairly large quantities. Colt quickly brokered a deal with Browning and FN to be able to produce the handgun for U.S. sales. On June 19, 1903 Colt began shipping out their new Model 1903 Pocket Hammerless in .32 ACP.
Five years later they also released the Model 1908 in .380 ACP and a smaller vest pocket version in .25 ACP. The Pocket Hammerless was vastly popular and by the time Colt ceased production after WWII they had manufactured over one million of these well-made pistols—that’s with the .32, .380, and .25 ACP.
By the end of WWII Colt’s the machinery that Colt used to make the Pocket Hammerless pistols was worn out and the staff that made them was retiring. These pistols required a fair amount of hand fitting and Colt felt the reinvestment in the equipment and personnel to make the model 1903 and 1908 would raise the cost of making the handgun beyond the reach of their customer base so they let it slip from their catalogue.[/i]
This article touches on the Browning/FN partnership:
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/12/23/fn-the-first-125-years/
John Moses Browning was instrumental in FN’s success, which is good because FN owns Browning now. It all started with what smells a little like industrial espionage. Hart O. Berg, FN’s sales manager of external affairs, was in the United States in 1897 finding out what he could about American bicycle technology when he was introduced to John Moses Browning. Browning had invented a blowback-operated semi-automatic pistol in what would come to be called .32 ACP. Berg had a modern plant looking for something to produce; Browning was squabbling with Winchester over royalties. Browning gave the little pistol to Berg, who took it back to Belgium. It fired 5,000 rounds without a stoppage. Browning was offered a contract, and his response is still in the FN Herstal archives.
Here is a nice video on the Colt 1908: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqeVaxpWTFY (he field strips it at about 4:30 - surprise, it’s not hammerless)
Very interesting thanks for that.
I’m of the opinion now that .380 acp Is the .40 S&W of blow-back operated pistols.
It seemed like a okay idea at the time but the original chambering is better in regards to weight, capacity, recoil control, and wear on the shooter and pistol.
The 32? Ok! When I think of guns I don’t think of wear on the shooter. My concern is wear on the one being shot
Recoil on a 380? Especially back when they were all steel!
Firing 100-300 rds from a 25 oz blowback .380 / 9x18 will beat your hands similar to firing that much from say, a Glock 27 .40.
It makes you want to train / shoot less that day because you hands hurt / are fatigued.
No it won’t. No it doesn’t
I’ve been shooting for at least 29 years.
I’ve put thousands of rounds through (each) Makarov’s, my Beretta m81, Bersa’s, and Glock 27’s.
I’ve only advised of my experience’s with these calibers. (.32, .380, 9x18, .40)