Gunboards Forums banner

9mm Makarov to .380 barrel

38K views 60 replies 21 participants last post by  dondone 
#1 ·
One of the milsurp vendors is advertising used, excellent condition .380 cal Makarov barrels to convert the 9mm Makarovs from 9x18mm Makarov to .380 cal ACP.
(Cheaper ammo, more variety.) There is a note that some minor fitting may be required. They are selling for $50 plus shipping.

Do you suppose this is something worth trying?
 
#34 ·
A locked breech pistol is not, of course, more simple to manufacture than a blowback. I read that to mean simple operate, meaning, both function the same per the operator.

A locked breech pistol can be made lighter than a blowback and that is one of the major reasons full power pistols are typically locked breech designs.
 
#35 ·
Simple vs simpler

Hey 9.3 X 57
Thanks for the comments, I didn't intend to disparage the Makarov, which I have never handled but thousands of people think they work well and I certainly accept that.

As far a simple to manufacture, one can agree that a blowback doesn't require a locking mechanism so it must be simpler to make, but the later generation of pistols mostly simply use a ramp to force the chamber into the ejection port, most of the blowback designs just pin the barrel in place, the total number of parts is the same. As you point out, the blowback design will be more accurate if the barrel is solidly mounted, but in most designs it isn't. In any case modern machinery can make either design much more accurate than one can expect to be able to shoot a pocket size pistol, My Llama is relatively crude in internal machining, however nicely finished outside, but easily shoots 4" groups at 25 ft.

The comments about Keltec basically proves my point about reliability, the Keltecs up to the current model were blowbacks, and suffered the real problem with light pistols and blowbacks, the light slide and heavy spring mean there is very little momentum, so small differences in friction betweem the case mouth and the chamber wall make a large difference in operation, the presence or absence of some oil or wax on the case means the difference between operating or stovepiping the fired case. Slightly oiling the cases by handling them works fine at the range, but not so well on a carry pistol which is expected to work "now", whenever that is.

The reveiws on the new Keltec, indicate a very high level of reliability, which Keltec makes a point of in advertising about the locked breech action. With the locked breech and short recoil barrel, the case does not have to move in the chamber before the pressure is gone and the case mouth springback has released it, so case friction isn't a factor, and a very much lighter spring is sufficient to absorb the recoil. It seems to have taken an unnecessarily long time for Keltec to get it right, but reportedly they have.
 
#37 ·
Keltecs

Sorry if I was confused about earlier Keltec offerings, I was relying on questionable sources. There is no question the P3AT is a locked breech, as is the Ruger LCS, I have read recent articles comparing the P3AT very favorably with the Ruger as far as feeding reliability. Being in California it is difficult to get possession of either. The information I had was that the P3AT is a relatively recent design, and that earlier designs from Keltec were blowbacks. Sorry if that is incorrect.

A friend has a Berreta .380 which is a blowback and is reliable, It also weighs about as much as a Colt Commander, and has a spring that is very hard for him to pull.
 
#38 ·
Just the way it is.

I recently purchased an IJ70-17A that
was made for the .380 ACP and from putting the
first 100 rounds through it-I can't see the need
for a bigger cartridge or more than the eight already
provided in the magazine? I would like to know how
old it is though as I can't find any date markings for
it on the FAQ of Makarov.com with the serial number of: B HE 1873 and B-West Imports of Tucson Ariz (the distributor) I don't think
is in buisness any more-so does anyone know how I can find out
just how old this pistol is?
 
#40 · (Edited)
Thank You Tom for the info and I think mine is just about that old
and it now has an owner(me) and his property to protect and I feel it will be
very qualified to do that-if the call ever comes? The only difficulty I've had
is reassembling the slide back onto the reciever as the recoil
spring sometimes takes on 'super human strength' to thwart an easy assembly
but, like sex and riding a bike-the more you do it-the better you get:p and so it
so it will be with this too?;) Happy Thankgiving to you and yours!!:)
 
#41 ·
380 ACP ammo shortage-a reason.

I recently discussed the shortage of .380 ACP ammo
with a recently retired policeman and was told, "...the
three eighty kills more people than any other round because
todays criminals favor it and some gun shops are pretty particulair
about who they sell it too and from the 'git go' if they don't
like your looks-you'll be told, "Sorry we're all out?"
and that's that?" What 'your looks' are he didn't detail
but, did mention age, race and tattoos and even
then, "...it's all up to where the shop selling the ammo is located and
how you are 'seen to be' by the clerk behind the counter?"

The retired officer spent all of his career on the mid atlantic coast
so what he told me might not apply to other areas nationally and I
hope I haven't 'kicked up a lot of sand' with this but, considering how
things are today-it does make sense? :cool:
 
#43 ·
If you watch documentary-style, true crime shows like "The First 48", you will see a lot of .380s used in crimes. Not because it's a particularly powerful handgun caliber, it's just easy to manufacture a zinc-framed blowback. So they're cheap and plentiful on the "secondary market".
 
G
#44 ·
Surprised no one referenced this:

GoldenLoki gel tests for both .380 ACP and the 9x18 Makarov.

http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/9x18/gel9x18.htm

http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/380acp/gel380acp.htm

The Makarov ammunition is all over the place, ranging from 194 FPE for an older CorBon loading at the low end up to 249 FPE for a Wolf FMJ. Expanding Point ammunition performed, at best to a penetration of 11.5", a mere half inch short of the magic 12". The best expanding round expanded to .671" and the least expanding round "only" expanded to .486". No rounds failed to expand. The FMJ penetrated a solid 21.9"

The .380 ACP ammunition also ranged far and wide, from 135 FPE to a high of 181 FPE. The best penetration by an Expanding Point round which actually expanded was 13.3", nearly a inch and a half past the magic 12". The best expanding round expanded to .645" with some ammunition failing to expand appreciably (or at all). The 380 FMJ far underperformed the Mak. FMJ, scoring only 17" for the best penetrator. This is important because some feel more comfortable using FMJ for both of these rounds than HPs for a variety of reasons.

Thus, for four major metrics:
FPE: Decision - Makarov
Penetration in JHP: Decision - .380
Reliable Expansion: Decision - Makarov
Penetration in FMJ: Decision - Makarov

Judging from these tests, the 9x18 Makarov is marginally more powerful/effective than the .380 ACP in 3 out of 4 respects.

This is the part where people argue endlessly over the applicability of FPE, the FBI Penetration Minimum to people not shooting through cover/concealment, how much difference a .35"-ish wound channel makes over a .6"-ish wound channel at pistol weights and velocities, and how much penetration is acceptable to trade for reliable expansion.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled holy war pitting what many consider two sub-par calibers against each other. (not me though. I happen to like 'em both.)

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 
#45 ·
lklawson: Barrel length matters. That .380 data from the goldenloki site was obtained using a Keltec P3AT, which has a shorter barrel than the Makarov used to obtain the 9x18 data that you reference.

The advantage grows slimmer when you factor this in.

I think they're both good calibers too. But, In my opinion, the only advantage that 9x18 Mak has currently is price.
 
G
#47 ·
lklawson: Barrel length matters. That .380 data from the goldenloki site was obtained using a Keltec P3AT, which has a shorter barrel than the Makarov used to obtain the 9x18 data that you reference.

The advantage grows slimmer when you factor this in.
Brassfetcher conducted similar tests with similar results.

I think they're both good calibers too. But, In my opinion, the only advantage that 9x18 Mak has currently is price.
I'm not arguing that it's a "significant" advantage, merely that the Makarov is a slightly hotter/more-powerful round, which is what has been called in to question.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 
#46 ·
Few comments:

Years ago, I worked in a gun shop just off the Detroit city line. Yes, we "profiled". I sleep well every night because of it.

Second, I've been shooting butcher stock with service pistols for many years now. I put little faith in them. Any of them in FMJ persuasion.

If I put the energy difference between a .380 and a 9mm Mak up my nose and blew hard, I'd barely dampen the handkerchief.

And a cheap Remington .22LR HP shot from a 6 inch Ruger MK2 does as much or more damage in varmints and eatin' sheep as does a 9mm Makarov w/ FMJ's {or a 9x19 NATO...or .45 ACP for that matter}. Except the 9mm penetrates deeper and the .45 makes in-theory-but-not-allways-in-practice a bigger hole..........
 
#52 ·
Simple

.380 = 9 X17 = Worst
9mm Mak = 9 X 18 = Better
9mm Luger = 9 X19 = Best!
If you compare muzzle energy of various brands of 9x17 and 9x18, you'll find that the 9mm Mak is roughly 15 -25% more powerful.

Of course the 9x19 is considerably more powerful than either of those.
 
#51 ·
.380 ACP Crime status

While discussing the availability of .380 ACP in
high crime areas the retired policeman did mention that
the .380 is sometimes refered to (by criminals) as, "The baby nine"
or "Nine junior" but, went on to say that, "...they'll use anything
they can get their hands on and take down power and accuracy
are really minor items considering the very close range the weapon
will be used at during the majority of street and residential murders?"

I asked him what was his own prefered 'home defense' weapon and he
came right back with, " Twelve ga. automatic shotgun with buck and slug
over any sidearm any time or anywhere?":cool:
 
#53 ·
I don't think 9x18 is a quarter more powerful than .380 acp. That would mean that if a 9mm Mak is pushing a 95gr bullet at say, 1000 fps the comparable .380 load would be traveling 750fps. Any difference in power is much less than that. Ten percent at most.

Look at post #17 on the first page of the thread. I've used this exercise to demonstrate to people a number of times that, in some cases, .380 auto actually edges-out 9x18 in the power dept. Any difference between the two calibers is negligable.

And, as others have said, neither one is a 9mm Luger.
 
#54 ·
I don't think 9x18 is a quarter more powerful than .380 acp. That would mean that if a 9mm Mak is pushing a 95gr bullet at say, 1000 fps the comparable .380 load would be traveling 750fps. Any difference in power is much less than that. Ten percent at most.
Nonsense! Just do the math.

Some brands of 9x17 have more muzzle energy than others and the same applies to different brands of 9x18.
 
#57 ·
Ammo specs published by manufacturers are often obtained using "test barrels" of various lengths. I would rather rely on the data that's available on the web that was gathered by 3rd parties using firearms with known barrel lengths.

Take a look a the links I've posted. You will find that the majority of the time, .380 acp and 9x18 are well within 25% of each other when it comes to kinetic energy.
 
#59 ·
I take back the "ten percent at most" part of my comment. But I still believe that most of the time, any advantage in kinetic energy that 9x18 has will be within 25% of .380 acp. I think the numbers back this up if you calculate FPEs and percents based on data from pistols with the same length of barrel.

Whatever difference there may be in power between the two loads, it's probably not enough to warrant this much discussion. So I guess I'll leave it at that.
 
#60 ·
IJ-70 fault

My IJ-70 has a fault that I never
expected would happen? The rear
sight windage screw fell out and the
spring inside the sight has now pushed
the notch sight all the way to the right.
Vibration and recoil must have loosened
it and unthreaded it till it fell out?

After fruitless search for the screw in
the ankle high grass-I gave up and just
aim the weapon with the front sight at
the far left of the sight shield and it'll
work okay until I convert it into a fixed
sight by removing the windage spring, center
the notch on the slide's front sight bar
line and use two part epoxy to fix it-forever
but, leave the elevation adjustment intact.

The weapon isn't a target pistol and I wouldn't
have bought it if it was-so for 'homeland defense'
it'll still be okay for close up work-excuse me-defensive action:rolleyes:
 
#61 ·
Famous 9mm blowback pistols include the Campo Giro Model 1913 and 1913/1916, and Astra Model 1921 (aka 400), chambered for 9mm Largo; the 1903 Browning, 1907 Husqvarna, LeFrancais, and Webley & Scott Model 1909, chambered for 9mm Browning Long; the Glisenti and Brixia, and Model 1915 and 1923 Berettas, all chambered for the 9mm Glisenti cartridge; the Walther Model 6, Dreyse (Model 1915?) and the Astra Model 600, chambered for 9mm Parabellum; the Makarov, chambered for the 9.2x18.

Those are the well-known ones that come to mind; There are probably more obscure ones out there, too.

I haven't include the pot metal monstrosities in this list.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top