Would a colt 1851 navy or a .380 auto be better at stopping a person?

Question

I've heard they're roughly equivalents in power, so would a .380 in FMJ be more effective or would the colt with a solid lead ball?

The .380 would probably penetrate more, but wouldn't the colts lead ball be better cause it would expend faster?

Answer 1

def the colt a .380 is  a poor round my freind was a cop and saw a guy hit in the head a it just broke the skin it didnt have the juice to break the skull

Answer 2

The .36 will be approx a 75 grain ball moving at a max of about 1000fps for approx 170 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle.  The .380 will be approx 95 grains moving at pretty much the same speed for approx 200-210 fps.  

The .36 ball will deform....but if it's hard lead as you suggested, very little.  The .380 won't expand at all.  So, since size is pretty much close to identical, the one carrying the most velocity/energy that translates to penetration will be the better round.

The .380 acp wins hands down.

Answer 3

I own both. I would trust the .380 any time, and I would not worry about head shots! Center mass until it clicks, if the guy is big! Share equally among attackers.

Answer 4

Either would work in the chest area.

Answer 5

They are pretty close. The 36 caliber 1851 Colt Navy would look much more dramatic. It would also be prone to more problems-misfire-jammed on a spent cap...

One point: you don't shoot hard cast in a Black Powder revolver. When you are seating the ball on the powder charge the seater shaves a slight ring off the soft lead ball to form a seal. Then you spit-patch to prevent chain fires.

Answer 6

Lead balls don't expand, at best they deform after they hit bone

Answer 7

Q: Would a colt 1851 navy or a .380 auto be better at stopping a person?  I've heard they're roughly equivalents in power, so would a .380 in FMJ be more effective or would the colt with a solid lead ball?

A: Roughly, but with the advent of modern gun powder (the Colt Navy is still a black powder job) and bullet design (hollow point ammo, Hydra Shok and Glasier bullets) the .380 Auto has the edge.  

Q: The .380 would probably penetrate more, but wouldn't the colts lead ball be better cause it would expend faster?

A: I've never fired the old Colt Navy but those mini-balls didn't move fast enough to expand much.  A ball tends to roll rather than spin when it meets resistance.  A bullet tends to spin which is why a modern hollow-point design works (the softer 'lip' of the bullet tends to deform as the cavity fills with the 'resisting matter').  If the revolver's mini-ball is too soft then it would meet with too much resistance tending to flatten upon impact resulting more in surface damage rather than internal damage.  Of course, the FMJ .380 Auto is not intended to expand at all and so it is only recommended for target practice rather than defensive purposes.  Still, I would rather defend myself with a quality, modern .380 automatic pistol than the old .36 caliber Colt Navy revolver.  I like the hi cap .380s like the Beretta Model 34 or the Browning version w/13 round magazines.  Proviso:  If you deplete all six rounds in the Colt or all 14 in the .380 and miss, or still fail to stop your attacker, the Navy Colt makes a better club than the diminutive .380 Auto!

H

Answer 8

Neither bullet is going to deform much before hitting bone. Penetration will be equivalent, perhaps with a slight edge to the Colt, and the old Navy revolver will give you a slightly higher muzzle velocity, too. It's a bit picky, but the 36 Navy is also close to 38 caliber, where the 380 is close to 36 (in the perversity of caliber names). People like Bill Hickock used them for a reason.

Answer 9

The colt revolver, using a hard cast round ball would penetrate better than the .380 would.