My .380 experience is limited to the Glock 42, the Sig-Sauer P230, the Beretta 1934, the Walther PP, PPK and PPK/S (the PPK/S being a licensed copy made by Ranger, in the US, in the 1980s, the others being post WWII “German” Walther, meaning manufactured in France by Manhurin and then proofed by Walther in Germany).
The PPK/S was problematic until a gunsmith worked it over. It’s a good shooter now. No problems with the other Walthers. But, as these are truly vintage “fun guns”, I did not use hollow point ammo (which I’d be leery of anyway, given the poor penetration of many .380 JHPs).
The Walthers all tend to hammer bite, and I don’t have large, meaty hands.
The Beretta runs like a charm. That open slide design, I suspect, helps. Still no JHPs tried. It’s single action and I wouldn’t care to carry it cocked and locked, given the design of the safety. But, it’s a damn reliable gun and handles well.
The Sig was reliable, and with that one, I did shoot JHP as well as ball. No problems. Lightweight. Great balance and pointing characteristics. A bit large, though, given some of the options today in sub compact 9mm pistols. Like the Walthers, it has an elegance about it.
The Glock runs fine with ball, both before and after a parts upgrade by Glock. Not so with Remington Golden Saber, even after that upgrade. Will have to try another bullet design. Maybe I’ll try Hornady next. The Golden Saber performed very poorly in FBI tests, so I would never use it anyway, as a defensive load. Ball penetrates, but, of course, doesn’t expand and so the wound track is small.
The 42 is easy to shoot rapidly and accurately and, being striker fired, doesn’t bite! Recoil seems mild, too. And, I like that I can add night sights. A airweight J frame Smith isn’t much bigger, or heavier, and a good .38 Special is always better than a .380, provided one can shoot it accurately and quickly...and reload quickly. Hits with a .380 are better then misses with a .38, if you’re fighting for your life. J frames are difficult to master, but, they WORK.
With the best available load that works reliably, I think a .380 pistol like the 42 has a limited place as a carry option, when nothing larger is truly feasible, and preferably when you really don’t think you’ll need it, but want, well, SOMETHING, in case your threat assessment was wrong. The 42 is light, flat and handy...and the sights are usable.
However, one must understand the very real shortcomings of the cartridge and not minimize them to rationalize convenience.
Even with good shot placement, .380 rounds simply may not be able to perform in a way that would maximize their potential to force incapacitation on an attacker as rapidly as possible. They may take effect eventually, but eventually can be a lifetime in a gunfight for real.
In short, the 42, like the other pistols I’ve mentioned, is a decent “better than nothing” gun. Its limitations are a function of the cartridge’s terminal ballistics issues. As a pistol, the 42 a nifty little shooter, and I’m glad to have mine.