Why do "saturday night" pistols have such a horrible reputation?

Originally posted by P-M-H
cheap lil guns easy to find ammo
prob easy to find the gun to, used of course
gov doesnt like them cuz they dont want to get capped by them

That's not true.

It's usually MUCH harder to find .25, .32, and .380 compared to your more common 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45ACP rounds. Other than their horrible ballistics, I'd be this is another reason why these kinds of guns aren't that popular.

reply to post by EyesWideShut

.40 s&w is the best overall round. a compromise between the two "military" rounds, 9mm and .45. it has been adopted by a lot of LE as their calibre of choice (essentially a shortened 10mm which was adopted for the fbi). it has basically the same ballistics (F=MxA) as the .45 but with near the extra capacity of the 9mm.

I think the whole idea is that the government forces people to spend at least $350 for a brand new .380 when low wage earners could spend $150 to $250 for a .25 which is almost as good as the "big one". Then add the license fees+ccw permit and that goes up even more.

In truth you could buy a used .25 lorcin for $50 and feel VERY secure. Just take it to a gun smith and have it checked and repaired. Looking at YouTube scares most people into thinking they always jam, or blow up in peoples faces, which is bs.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by crudos
If someone wants to trust their lives with .25 or .380 acp, then by all means. But excuse me if I won't be anywhere near you when the person you tried to shoot just gets even more p.o.'d at you with anemic rounds like that.

I bet hollow points of any caliber shot from 10 yards or less in the chest or head will leave you dead within a minute at most with just one round and with the second round you will be dead in seconds. WTF is the big deal if someone dies 5-10 seconds later?

They won't have a chance to shoot back no matter what. Maybe you want to be the guinea pig for us?

I think the issue is, the longer it takes for the person to die or pass out, the longer they have to return fire. They won't have a chance to shoot back no matter what? Well that's just not true. There are plenty of cases of people being shot and returning fire. Even WITH larger caliber rounds. I personally would want any advantage I could get.

These smaller rounds have much less energy in the round, and loose that energy faster. If you shoot someone wearing a heavy jacket from 20 feet with .25 hollow points, it is very unlikely the round will even expand at all.

There is a reason the US military switched from .38 revolvers to the .45 1911. They were shooting people multiple times with almost no effect with the .38. Doesn't happen so much with the .45

Now this is coming from someone who doesn't even like the .45s, but its still true that the small weak rounds are just a bad idea for self defense or combat. Unless you are a tiny weak person that can't shoot a larger caliber, there is no reason to not at least get a 9mm. There are plent of polymer framed subcompact 9mm pistols that are cheap, and offer a lot more power than .25s, 32s, and 380s.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by EyesWideShut

 

.40 s&w is the best overall round. a compromise between the two "military" rounds, 9mm and .45. it has been adopted by a lot of LE as their calibre of choice (essentially a shortened 10mm which was adopted for the fbi). it has basically the same ballistics (F=MxA) as the .45 but with near the extra capacity of the 9mm.

edit on 27-3-2011 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-3-2011 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)

The .357 sig has better performance than the .40 and less recoil than a .45 if that's the issue.

But my favorite pistol round is still the 10mm. Some people can't handle the recoil, but its performance makes a .45 look like a 9mm.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

I don't understand why you have to spend $350+ to get a new gun and almost ALL the advertising hype goes to the "man stoppers".

I think you just answered one of your questions. I don't trust anything below a 38spl+ for self defense. Yes you can kill anyone with anything, but when my life may be dependent on split seconds I don't want a round that's questionable, I want a "man stopper" and one that's not dependent on a head shot or major vital hit to stop someone. I would like a 380 for a when a "something's better than nothing" scenario, would I trust my life to a 25,32,380 No way. The S&W 642 38spl Airweght is one of my favorite carry guns, around 13 oz's and with the right load, plenty of power for a one shot stop. Personally I like the sub 40's and the 45's.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen

Originally posted by crudos
If someone wants to trust their lives with .25 or .380 acp, then by all means. But excuse me if I won't be anywhere near you when the person you tried to shoot just gets even more p.o.'d at you with anemic rounds like that.

A .380 acp can kill you (as we witnessed recently with the gal and the pink revolver that killed an intruder). And it was the calibre in 007s walther ppk.

A .380ACP is a much weaker cartridge than the .38 special that the revolver probable fired. And 007 is just a movie.

Like someone else said, there is no doubt it's possible to kill someone with smaller weaker rounds. But you can also kill someone with a pump bb gun if the planets align properly. I'd much rather not risk my life of the HOPE that a small round will do the trick, when there is a very simple solution to get a more powerful cartridge.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by EyesWideShut

 

.40 s&w is the best overall round. a compromise between the two "military" rounds, 9mm and .45. it has been adopted by a lot of LE as their calibre of choice (essentially a shortened 10mm which was adopted for the fbi). it has basically the same ballistics (F=MxA) as the .45 but with near the extra capacity of the 9mm.

edit on 27-3-2011 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-3-2011 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)

I dunno, I don't believe in a "best overall round" I think different rounds are good for different situations and different shooters , I was Issued a Glock 23 which is .40 and I've owned a Glock 21 in .45 , I shot the 21 better (they're both accurate enough , but follow up shots are quicker w/ the .45) & I shoot my PX4 in .45 MUCH better. Personally a .40 has a snappier recoil and the .45 is more of a push, I can get rounds on target faster with a .45. YMMV

and if I'm not mistaken

wasn't a .380 round, the round of choice
by James Bond 007 ??? a Walther PPK
if I'm not mistaken

isn't this a choice round for covert agents
who need concealment in a small package ??

Originally posted by DayKnightmare
Even if you get hit by a 22 YOU WILL GO DOWN.

So much false info in this thread.

Did you know about how Teddy Roosevelt was shot in the chest with a .32 and went on to continue his speech? And that's more power than a .22

If you think I'm making stuff up, here is proof:

www.historybuff.com...

Unless you penetrate the skull, or hit someones lungs or heart, these tiny rounds will NOT instantly take someone down. It just doesn't happen that way. They don't have the ballistics to cause massive internal damage. You need to shoot someone in the heart or brain to take them down quickly.

Originally posted by James1982
These smaller rounds have much less energy in the round, and loose that energy faster. If you shoot someone wearing a heavy jacket from 20 feet with .25 hollow points, it is very unlikely the round will even expand at all.

Sorry but this is baloney. If a .25acp hollow point can't penetrate a denim jacket at 20-30 feet then what can it penetrate? Of course you won't get the same penetration with a 9mm because the .25 exerts 65 pds/foot but still it will do enough damage to allow you a second shot which WILL kill him/her.

Its the same thing with shooting #8 birdshot out of a shotgun. First shot stuns and second kills.

Of course I WOULD prefer a 9mm anyday but since I am on a tight budget why should I have to shell out $550 when all is said and done?

Originally posted by boondock-saint
and if I'm not mistaken

wasn't a .380 round, the round of choice
by James Bond 007 ??? a Walther PPK
if I'm not mistaken

isn't this a choice round for covert agents
who need concealment in a small package ??

Yeah someone else mentioned 007.... like I said to them, it's just a movie. Just because James Bond is a badass and uses a .380 PPK doesn't mean you should risk your life using one.

If we are using movies to prove points, 007 now uses a 9mm Walther P99. So there ya go!

And the concealment issue isn't valid anymore. Now days there are tons of small and light 9mm pistols out there. Back when this wasn't the case, I could see a .380 being a reasonable choice. But today, I only ask "Why?" There is no advantage to this round, compared to a 9mm.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Sorry but this is baloney. If a .25acp hollow point can't penetrate a denim jacket at 20-30 feet then what can it penetrate?

You misunderstood. I didn't say it wouldn't penetrate the jacket. I said it would not EXPAND. Hollow points, even on larger calibers, are well known to have extremely unreliable expansion when going through heavy clothing. The tip gets clogged and they basically turn into regular ball ammo. Hollow points don't penetrate any better in the first place, but when you take away the advantage of expansion then it's just bad situation.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Well your choice of caliber is your choice remember someday you might actually have to use it to save your life the .25 and .32 are great for what they were intended for as a back up gun, last resort. While you could get lucky and possibly stop an attacker with one shot, your chances of winning the Mega-Millions might be near the same ratio. Also the .25 and .32 are almost entirely used in short barreled, compact and ultralight handguns the felt recoil is pretty darn close to a compact .380 and full size 9mm 4-5 inch barrel that can hit targets accurately at 50 yards and still have enough oomph to penetrate try doing that with your .25 or .32 cal 1.5 inch barrel that can't hit the broadside of a barn outside of 10 yards. Its a back up gun caliber and for that purpose it is great but if your going up against an attacker that has a gun my best advice to you is to run and run fast if thats all you got.

You must not know too much about guns if you think that lil pea shooter is more accurate than a 9mm or .45 acp more .45 acp pretty much sets the standard for accuracy in handgun competitions worldwide, and obviously if you think the recoil of a .45 is bad then you've probably never shot one, the recoil is actually very mild for a bullet that size and it has over 100 years of soldiers war stories raving about the combat effectiveness of the .45acp. And to all the people saying a .22 LR is all you need go racoon hunting and see how many rounds it takes to drop a raccoon with your .22 LR unless you can get a perfect kill shot that is able to penetrate the skull or penetrate deep enough to get to its heart your gonna need a lot more rounds than most people that have never raccoon hunted would expect.

reply to post by James1982
Ok fine everybody go out and buy a Taurus Judge and load it with flachette rounds. That would be cool too. All I was saying is at the ideal range an average person would be curled up on the ground after getting hit even with a .22lr.

reply to post by Aliensdoexist


Star for a great post!

The only reason I'm so interested in the record getting set straight is because this subject deals with people's lives. Like you said, it's the person's choice, but I would want that choice to be made based on real world facts and experiences, not theoretical "what if" scenarios.

It would be awful if someone chose a .32 for self defense, when they had the opportunity to get a 9mm, because they read this thread and though "oh well people are saying a .32 is plenty powerful"

.32 and .25 are horrible self defense rounds. A .380 is better, but not by much. A +P+ .38 revolver far better still. Considering you can get subcompact 9mms in the $200 range, It just seems dangerously irresponsible to suggest or advocate anything weaker. As you pointed out too, recoil isn't much more extreme with a 9mm compared to the smaller rounds.

Someone in this thread also mentioned how the .223 tumbles causing more damage. First of all, that has nothing to do with .22 rimfires. Second of all, the .223 is not designed to tumble, take any lighter round and push it at a high velocity, and it will tumble inside a target. The .223 is nothing magical, and even if it was, its magic would not relate to 22 rimfires at all.

Originally posted by DayKnightmare
reply to post by James1982

 

Ok fine everybody go out and buy a Taurus Judge and load it with flachette rounds. That would be cool too. All I was saying is at the ideal range an average person would be curled up on the ground after getting hit even with a .22lr.

Hit where, though?

Like I said before, unless you score a critical hit, it's a huge guessing game as far as if you are going to incapacitate someone. The average person on an average day might fall down crying because they got shot with a .22, but a home intruder who is hyped up on adrenaline and god knows what else? No doubt they would feel it, but I wouldn't put my money on them being curled up on the ground.

Haven't you ever heard news stories about intruders being shot, and then RUNNING AWAY? It's not like the movies where a getting shot means you instantly get dropped. Unless you damage the heart, lungs, or brain, the only way someone is going to get stopped with a bulled is by bleeding to death, or sheer amount of pain from a horrible would cavity. Things a .22, .25. and .32 won't do, or at least not quickly.

Originally posted by DayKnightmare
reply to post by James1982

 

All I was saying is at the ideal range an average person would be curled up on the ground after getting hit even with a .22lr.

Dear Mr. Badguy,

Please stop at an appropriate range so my .22 can hurt you bad. Also please don't wear a heavy winter coat. And please could you paint a target on your forehead, so when I get flustered, I remember where I need to shoot you. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. All the best.

Vic Tim

reply to post by Aliensdoexist


Accuracy has a lot more to do with barrel length than anything else but I am pretty sure you will get better accuracy from small pistol rounds than with large pistol rounds. At least that is what I read and heard!

While most .25acp "velvet" pistols are supposedly for deep undercover missions and good backup, some manufacturers sell up to 3 inch barrel versions such as the cobra phoenix. And guess what? It sells for $120 brand new. I can also get a used lorcin for $30 25acp and $50 for a used cobra .32acp For someone who is on a tight budget it makes little difference if its "one shot-one kill" or "two shots-one kill" Aiming is everything regardless of caliber.......

Originally posted by James1982
reply to post by Aliensdoexist

 

Star for a great post!

The only reason I'm so interested in the record getting set straight is because this subject deals with people's lives. Like you said, it's the person's choice, but I would want that choice to be made based on real world facts and experiences, not theoretical "what if" scenarios.

It would be awful if someone chose a .32 for self defense, when they had the opportunity to get a 9mm, because they read this thread and though "oh well people are saying a .32 is plenty powerful"

.32 and .25 are horrible self defense rounds. A .380 is better, but not by much. A +P+ .38 revolver far better still. Considering you can get subcompact 9mms in the $200 range, It just seems dangerously irresponsible to suggest or advocate anything weaker. As you pointed out too, recoil isn't much more extreme with a 9mm compared to the smaller rounds.

Someone in this thread also mentioned how the .223 tumbles causing more damage. First of all, that has nothing to do with .22 rimfires. Second of all, the .223 is not designed to tumble, take any lighter round and push it at a high velocity, and it will tumble inside a target. The .223 is nothing magical, and even if it was, its magic would not relate to 22 rimfires at all.

Yeah the biggest part of gun talk that always amazes me is just how much crap people can be fed and they gobble that crap up and believe it. For any handgun used for personal defense anything under .38cal needs to be forgotten about. I always tell people to use the largest round that you can accurately fire and for most women and smaller men the .38 and 9mm fit that bill. Anything less will most likely not have the effect the defender is expecting. Lots of people are mis-informed and/or believe what they see in movies and video games.

Your right about the .223, it wasn't designed to tumble its just what happens to light bullets at high velocity .22-250, .204 ruger, all do the same thing and the only reason the military went to that round was because a soldier could carry more ammo thus sending more ammo towards enemy and if the soldier could get 1 round into the enemy and injure them that would take 2 other soldiers out of the front line to care for that injured soldier. They certainly didn't chose the 5.56 (.223) for its stopping power while its deadly to coyotes and small game it is nowhere near as effective against a 200lb human. I am by no means a firearms expert but I have been around guns my whole life and shoot handguns on a regular basis and also long range rifle target shooting, hunted mainly when I was younger.