Apropos of nothing in particular, why is everyone jumping all over 9mm Parabellum when an American chambering, .38 Super, was an IPSC fave for years, performs about the same as 9mm or a little better (closer to .40 S&W), and "should" be suitable for your wife and you both?
I'm no expert, I'm just asking. And yes, I understand Glock doesn't offer the .38 Super chambering.
There certainly seem to be a lot of offerings and re-configurations of the basic .38 lead ball, from .380/9mm "Kurz" to 9mm Largo and .357 Sig. Why all this historical fine-tuning of the same basic round?
Price.
I'm no expert, I'm just asking. And yes, I understand Glock doesn't offer the .38 Super chambering.
.38 Super is semi-rimmed as offered by some manufacturers, offering better odds of an eventual hangup at some point, depending on magazine configuration. Too, .38 Super as designed headspaced on the case rim rather than the case mouth, resulting in indifferent accuracy until *improved* loadings that headspaced on the mouth in target chambered barrels improved the picture.
Part of the attraction of the .38 Super was its ability to make the *major* power factor [impact on a precalibrated metal target] during IPSC competition, still usable in the preferred M1911 action, and offering more rounds per magazine in the Para-Ordnance widebody M1911s.
Through the 1960s and '70s, Colt M1911s in .38 Super were popular among some Secret Service personnel [particluarly after the shorter Commander versions were offered] until the hot 110-grain JHP loads for the alternate .357 revolvers came out. But a few old dinosaurs with that agency- my uncle among them- stuck with the .38 Super, and there were even some Secret Service SIGs issued in the .38 Super chambering...along with reminders to carefully inspect them for cracks in their aluminum frames after prolonged practice firings.