handgun?

Originally posted by Damocles

Originally posted by Grozny07
To go in another direction, I must say, I'm intrigued by Ruger's new SR-9.

was it ruger or smith and wesson that essentially rolled over like a dog for a treat when the govt was on them about changing their sales policies?

i know one of them did and it annoyed me at the time but i cant recall which company it was so i guess im over it lol.

All-two-both-of-them screw over the gun owners of the USA. Ruger went along and encourage the assault weapons ban with the 10 round mag. rule. Then S&W pulled a deal with the Clinton Adm. and then got a fast track to government contracts. I can't remember the details, sorry.

I did write to S&W and told them that they can't make a deal with the devil.

Roper

heh and people wonder why i prefer my firearms made in germany, or at least designed there hehe

HK's little slogan says it best "in a world of compromise, some dont"

Originally posted by Nailer
I have owned both .45 and 9mm and will take a .45 acp anyday over the 9mm. If you want stopping power the 45 has it

That is completely your choice, and a good one at that. However not everyone can handle a .45, and they do have a couple of disadvantages. For example a .45 pistol will be larger and have more recoil than a 9mm equivalent. This makes it harder to conceal and more difficult to make rapid follow up shots with. This is very important in a handgun shooting, as no pistol round can reliably knock down a human target with a single bullet. That is a simple fact.

The 1911 .45ACP can take severe punishment and still fire accurately. The original test for the military , buried the gun in mud for x amount of days and when they dug it up ,wiped it off and fired every round in the clip.

So what? This is entirely possible with many handguns available these days. The torture tests that many modern pistols are put through are staggering. Take a look at the Glock reliability test for the Australian Army. They were running over the pistol with trucks and all sorts, and the weapon still fired.

You keep advocating the 1911, but do you realy think that the single action pistol is best for concealed carry for most people? Single action carry requires considerably more training to carry concealed than a DA or DAO weapon. You can either carry it cocked with the safety on, hammer down on a loaded chamber or with an empty chamber. All of these require extra fine motor movements to bring the weapon into play - not easy in a high stress confrontation. You could carry the pistol made ready with the safety off, but this is not advisable with a light single action trigger.

many agencies /law enforcement/Government are slowly going back to the 45 ACP becuase of the accuracy and stopping power of the round.

Firing a .45 quickly and accurately generally requires more practice than a 9mm or .40. These agencies have plenty of time that they can dedicate to handgun practice. Joe Bloggs with wife, kids, mortgage and full-time job generally does not. I know that we all say "practice as much as possible", but when you have a house full of commitments, unfortunately handgun practice is limited to a few rounds in the range every few weeks if your lucky. This is far from ideal, but it is real life. Johny Cop has access to more range time and expert tuition than most of us.

Also law enforcement agencies tend to put the concealability factor further down the list than most of us. A .45 is larger than a 9mm of equal capacity.

The 9mm round is a high velocity round and does not have the impact force of the 45.

The "impact force" of a pistol round is puny. Isac Newton prooved this over 250 years ago. Don't take my word for it, take the FBIs' Ballistics labs' word.

Goddard amply proves the fallacy of "knock-down power" by calculating the heights (and resultant velocities) from which a one pound weight and a ten pound weight must be dropped to equal the momentum of 9mm and .45ACP projectiles at muzzle velocities, respectively. The results are revealing. In order to equal the impact of a 9mm bullet at its muzzle velocity, a one pound weight must be dropped from a height of 5.96 feet, achieving a velocity of 19.6 fps. To equal the impact of a .45ACP bullet, the one pound weight needs a velocity of 27.1 fps and must be dropped from a height of 11.4 feet. A ten pound weight equals the impact of a 9mm bullet when dropped from a height of 0.72 inches (velocity attained is 1.96 fps), and equals the impact of a .45 when dropped from 1.37 inches (achieving a velocity of 2.71 fps).

Link


I feel that I need to edit this after reading. I don't want to come across as anti - .45ACP. I'm not. I believe that it is an excellent defensive round, and that it offers several advantages over 9mm, the most useful of which being that it simply makes a bigger hole.

My point is that I would rather carry a 9mm or a .40. I know that I can fire a 9mm quickly, planting 3 accurate shots centre mass in under a second at 7 metres. From the holster I can do this under 2 seconds. This took a lot ot training. With a .45 it would take longer simply due to the recoil. If you can do this with a .45 then well done. Most people can't.

Carry what you can shoot well and carry safely. If that's a 1911 then so be it.

[edit on 15-12-2007 by PaddyInf]

reply to post by Damocles


First HK Pistol i would seriously consider is the new P30, every pistol before that has ergonomics that just dont fit me. But the P30 with its adjustable grip is just about perfect.

Another gun that might be good cor concealed carry is the Steyr A1, really slim grip and glock like safety. And the sights are good for fast shooting too.

I agree with just about everything PaddyInf posts about the .45 ACP. I own three pistols in .45ACP. Two automatics and one revolver. The revolver is very accurate..more so that the Autos and the Autos have been worked over making them more accurate than a standard Colt Government out of the box.

This .45 ACP revolver is a 5 shot with very nice trigger pull...but not really suited for concealed carry as it has a 6 inch barrel with compensator on the end of the barrel. It is however a very accurate shooting pistol but I dont recommend it for concealed carry.

It is preference and training. That to which one is accustomed.

I carry my .45 Government model concealed and ready with the safety on.

When I switch guns and carry my .357 magum revolver. ..this is not a issue. To me a revolver is simpler in operation than a automatic type pistol ..either double or single action capable. I use speed loaders.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Personally I find the recoil and blast of a .40 noticably less pleasant than a .45, the recoil of a .45 is quite tame (to me), which is to be expected because .45ACP is a low pressure round and the recoil impulse curve is much shallower than that of other major calibers.

.357SiG is by far the most intriguing (and unpleasant) round to shoot. The pressures generated are very high, and the sensation when shooting one indoors is that of being slapped on the forehead with each shot.

Police departments who have adopted this round have been seeing some dramatic results that they did not experience with either 9mm or the more powerful .40S&W loadings. This may be anecdotal, but one of the major Virginia PDs has even commented that the severity of injuries to extremeties (legs and arms) often causes immediate incapacitation. If I could afford the ammo in the volumes I would need it, and if I could handle the round to a level I would be comfortable with, all my guns would be chambered in .357SiG.

As it is, with the exception of my revered Springfield XD45 which I load with 185gr .45ACP +P (there's real recoil for you), I pretty much just go with hopped up 9mm loadings, of which there are none finer than 124gr +P Gold Dots and Winchester Ranger 127gr +P+.

As for choosing a platform from which to launch them, the single most important thing for someone making their first purchase is to find a gun that fits their hand. For example, for me personally, a Glock has an unnatural grip angle and an uncomfortable, blocky grip profile. Sig Sauers are just too big for me with the exception of the P232 and the P239. HK USP compacts fir me better than almost anything, and my new Beretta PX4 9mm G Model is a near perfect fit also.

Choose a size first and worry about manufacturer, caliber, and trigger group later, because if the gun doesn't fit your hand, you will never shoot it well.

Originally posted by Retseh
Personally I find the recoil and blast of a .40 noticably less pleasant than a .45, the recoil of a .45 is quite tame (to me), which is to be expected because .45ACP is a low pressure round and the recoil impulse curve is much shallower than that of other major calibers.

I've heard plenty of people state this about the .40 round. My experience of the .40 is limited, hence I advocate a 9mm. The .45 does recoil considerably more than the 9mm though, but it is more of a heavy push than the sharp snap of a 9mm.

As for choosing a platform from which to launch them, the single most important thing for someone making their first purchase is to find a gun that fits their hand. For example, for me personally, a Glock has an unnatural grip angle and an uncomfortable, blocky grip profile. Sig Sauers are just too big for me with the exception of the P232 and the P239. HK USP compacts fir me better than almost anything, and my new Beretta PX4 9mm G Model is a near perfect fit also.

Choose a size first and worry about manufacturer, caliber, and trigger group later, because if the gun doesn't fit your hand, you will never shoot it well.

Precisely. A few of the lads I worked with carried Glock 19s or 17s and they suited my grip angle nicely, more so than the Walther P5C I normally carried off-duty or the Browning we carry on ops. The Glock brought my hand nearer the bore (I shoot with the Weaver stance when I can and European grip - supporting hand index finger around the trigger guard), so I could control recoil more and fire faster. I've got quite big hands (strange considering I'm only 5'7" tall), so large grips are more natural for me. I also liked the 226, even though the angle was shallower than the Glock.

Everyones' hands are different, and the only way to find a shooter that fits your hand is to get hold of a few.

well even though its not my first choice, im likely getting a sig p228 in 9mm in the next few weeks. the sole determining factor is my buddy just got a sig dealership and im getting it for well below retail.

so, as its a quality handgun ill gladly get it though its not my USP lol

Originally posted by Damocles
well even though its not my first choice, im likely getting a sig p228 in 9mm in the next few weeks. the sole determining factor is my buddy just got a sig dealership and im getting it for well below retail.

so, as its a quality handgun ill gladly get it though its not my USP lol

Congratulations! I would consider the P228 (or 229) to be in my top 3 choices for a concealed handgun. Despite the mass of other options available the 228 is still one of the most useful and able compact carry weapons in the world. You won't be sold short by this.

reply to post by PaddyInf



well the concealability of it is secondary to me personally. i carried my full framed USP quite comfortably for years. but yeah, sigs in my top 3 as well, but my top preference for any handgun is the usp40. i was really unhappy when i had to sell mine (i always tell people guns are an investment. so long as you take care of them its easy to sell them when youre down on yer luck and need to eat)

if my buddy was getting an HK dealership agreement id so totally go for another usp40. sig p228 is my close second choice, and im going with the 9mm version just becuase it is less recoil than the 40 and i want one my wife can handle with ease as well. she's got small hands and wrists so until they fix me and i can rock climb again, and take her out so her wrists gain more strength, the 9mm is a good choice for me for right now.

given where we live and so forth normally i wouldnt even worry about owning a handgun, but in 3 weeks im going to go and finish building a prototype i started last christmas season (its a pain when you live 1500 miles from your brother who has a shop and all the tools you need lol) and the really paranoid part of me thinks that should the prototype work, a bit extra security wouldnt be a bad idea at all for now. (if it works im really going to piss opec off)

but im babbling. HK Sig then believe it or not beretta is my 3rd choice. used the M9 on my last duty assignment in the army and qual'd expert with it. im not a huge glock fan, i really like the external hammer and having a safety switch is a nice thing for me. i do know of a guy who had his glock in the small of his back, went to draw it and like a moron put his finger on the trigger and ended up adding a new hole in his rear. yeah sure you can do that with any DA pistol, but having the thumbswitch safety cuts the risk.

thats another reason i like the HK's and the Sigs, the switches are all on the lower frame and easy to reach with your thumb without changing your grip much if at all ( i have smallish hands so sometimes i need to adjust my grip slightly ) vs the beretta where the decocker/safety is on the slide. not a huge fan of that but its something i could live with if i got the right price on a 92.

id eventually like to get my wife a ppk or some other similar sized pistol, but i found that the recoil on them was just enough to make the size not worth the tradeoff. i could handle rapid firing with it but im not sure she could just yet

and lets face it, a full framed pistol is more of a visual deterrent to most people on teh wrong end of it. theres the perception that a smaller pistol isnt as dangerous so a fullframed pistol may negate the need to even fire it. (which is why a short barreled 12g is so nice, nothing else sounds like a gauge being pumped and thats usually all it takes lol. for that i like the winchester 1300 defender model )

just my thoughts.

Desert Eagle .45/.50 calibre is what you want.

reply to post by blueyedevil666


LOL no thanks, i use a 4' walking stick to get around, one club in my hands is enough.

Originally posted by Damocles i do know of a guy who had his glock in the small of his back, went to draw it and like a moron put his finger on the trigger and ended up adding a new hole in his rear. yeah sure you can do that with any DA pistol, but having the thumbswitch safety cuts the risk.

This is why I would never carry "small of the back", as I have yet to see any practical draw stroke from that position that does not have you sweep your mid section as you bring the weapon to the ready position.

reply to post by Retseh


well, while i do see your point, i myself tend to carry in the smal of my back as well (no im not the guy who perforated himself with the glock lol) i find it just to be a little more discrete in social situations as its not obvious im carrying a pistol to begin with and as i rarely wear a jacket my shirt covers it more effectivly than it would on my hip.

yes, to draw from there requires a little more motion, but like any draw, its a matter of practicing it. if the extra half a second it takes me to draw my pistol compared to someone else pulling off their hip is the difference between a conversation with the police and a conversation with god, then i was most likely boned anyway.

Easy to carry.........S&W 340CT use .38SPL+P........Best IMHO if you can carry big gun Kimber TLE/II (NO RAIL) .....That or Springfield XD .45

i really like my XD .40 for concealed carry. because i prefer to roll locked and loaded and dont want to have to deal with safety switches when milliseconds count. simply holding the gun in the firing positon releases the safety. i also dont like the idea of the trigger only safety in say a glock because i fear of snagging the trigger in my daily activites and adding unwanted holes to my legs or feet.

I TO WOULD OPT FOR THE 1911- M1A. aND IF YOUR GOING TO BUY COLT MAKE SURE IT'S AT LEAST 12 YEARS OLD. tHEY DON'T MAKE THEM LIKE THEY USED TO. GO WITH A SPRINGFIELD ARMORY MIL SPEC 1911-M1A. IT IS AFFORDABLE AND I THINK YOUR BEST BANG FOR YOUR BUCK IN .45 IS THAT GUN.

S&W's old owners made a deal w the devil. The company has new owners w no connection to that.

Bill Ruger is dead; not going to hold what he did against the company now. ALL SR9s are being recalled for a safety problem. Details at Ruger's web page.

I was issued 38/357 revolvers and 9/45 autos when I worked for the US govt. Now that I am retired and in the private sector I stick w what I know. Bigger/faster is better but the nine/38 are fine if you know what you are doing. Some will do more w less. The 357 S&M and 45 are fine for trained, experienced shooters, but most shooters are neither. What you can actually do w what you have is more important than what you have can actually do.

Many good guns out there now that have a track record of reliability in service w folks who know what they are doing. HK, SIG, Glock, Walther, Beretta, FN, CZ. The S&W M&P and SA's XD are relatively new but look promising.

Get some quality instruction, then try before you buy. Hard to make a good choice if you don't know what you are doing.

Why in the world are you asking the people on this ridiculous conspiracy site if they know of a good handgun? You must've been a mongoloid in your former life... Hopefully if you do buy a handgun you'll cleanse the gene pool a little bit more. Yes, that does mean what you think it does. Idiot.

lately ive had to revisit this issue in my mind. i didnt end up getting the sig, but im giving REAL thought to going with a FN Five-Seven 5.7x28mm

yeah its a small light round but at 2100fps....

also with the recoil 30-40% less than that of a 9mm my wife would have no problem putting several rounds on target as well.

anyone have any actual hands on with this model? pro's/cons?

(and please no one give me an endless stream of "oh but its too small to stop anything" cuz we ALL know that its not the size that matters in the end)