Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
CCW Opinions & Suggestions |
Post Reply | Page <1234> |
Author | |
BeltFed
Optics Retard Joined: February/12/2008 Location: Ky Status: Offline Points: 22287 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Just a thought, have you looked at a Ruger LCR in .327 Federal Magnum? You get 6 shots in a lite weight DA only revolver, the .327 Fed. Mag. is an impressive round.
|
|
Life's concerns should be about the 120lb pack your trying to get to the top of the mountain, and not the rock in your boot.
|
|
SVT_Tactical
MODERATOR Chief Sackscratch Joined: December/17/2009 Location: NorthCackalacky Status: Offline Points: 31233 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I got my 32H&R Mag S&W 432.... Still looking for a 332 to put away but you won't sell me one!
|
|
"Most folks are about as happy as they make their minds up to be" - Abraham Lincoln
|
|
BeltFed
Optics Retard Joined: February/12/2008 Location: Ky Status: Offline Points: 22287 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You're right
That's why I suggested the Ruger. |
|
Life's concerns should be about the 120lb pack your trying to get to the top of the mountain, and not the rock in your boot.
|
|
SEMO Shooter
Optics Apprentice Joined: January/06/2013 Location: SE Missouri Status: Offline Points: 199 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
CCW guns I have bought over the years.
Good things Not so good things Kahr PM9 light & small snappy recoil Kahr MK9 small & fairly light same size as PM9 just heavier Kimber Ultra Aegis II Shoots well none Sig P238 small & light 380ACP is a bit under powered Sig P938 small & light none S&W 640 small & fairly light 38 Special is a bit under powered I have carried the S&W 640. I really want more than 5 rounds and more stopping power than a short barrel 38 special. The 640 is fairly heavy for its size, and I would consider an air weight if a snubby revolver is the way I wanted to go. The PM9, P238, & P938 are all so small they are easy to conceal, and so light they are easy to carry. I have both OWB and IWB leather holsters. I carry the P938 a lot when I am wearing work clothes because it so small it doesn't print much. When I first got my PM9 it would fail to return to battery, even after 500 rounds. Kahr sent me a new barrel and recoil assembly and it worked great after that. I got a sweet deal on a used MK9. Didn't need it but the deal was too good to pass up. For carry I would choose the PM9 over the MK9 just because it is so light you can forget you have it on. I have good leather OWB & IWB holsters for them. I have carried my Ultra Aegis II a lot. I have a good leather IWB holster, so it carries well. I carry it a lot when I'm not working because I can wear clothing that works. I have a couple of compact 1911's that I have carried. With good holsters and proper dress they conceal well. I guess I'm fairly lucky as all of these guns performed reliably enough to be used for carry. |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I just can't get a warm and fuzzy over revolvers as a carry gun. First, even the smallest revolvers are way chunkier through the center than a semiauto due to the cylinder, and therefore, less comfy and concealable to carry. Second, you only get 5 or 6 shots max, which isn't very "size to firepower ratio" efficient. Third, reloading a revolver compared to simply dropping an empty mag and slamming a fresh mag in place is way too slow even in best case scenario should you need the extra shots. Fourth, unless you're Jerry Miculek, revolvers involve slower follow-up shots and have much higher bore axis. Fifth, the best semi-autos available today are no less reliable than revolvers. That hasn't always been the case, but it is today. Sixth, with today's bullet technology, 9mm, .40, and .45 are no less effective in actual real world terminal performance than any revolver round short of .44 mag class, with more rounds on tap, and better controllability.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
SVT_Tactical
MODERATOR Chief Sackscratch Joined: December/17/2009 Location: NorthCackalacky Status: Offline Points: 31233 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Still something to be said for revolvers like the j frames.... they typically can operate even when neglected for a long time. I've seen more than my fair share if pocket autos jam due to dust and grim build up from years of pocket carry and never being cleaned where similar condition j frames still fire. I'm not knocking of discounting your points... agree with all but I do love my j'frames and my ruger lcr at times. |
|
"Most folks are about as happy as they make their minds up to be" - Abraham Lincoln
|
|
Rancid Coolaid
MODERATOR Joined: January/19/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 9318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
How is it you and I often disagree by a fair bit? I respect your recommendations, your knowledge, and your opinions, but I find we often diverge in thought and opinion. A few random thoughts, in no particular order. 1. My go-to micro is a Glock 42 (to change in the near future.) It holds 6, I think, just like a 38 revolver. I carry it usually with no backup mags, and I carry it when my only other option is to carry no fire arm. Obviously, the is spare ammo close by, but for its purpose, I find the 2 (revolver and auto) equal in this regard. 2. The "function in almost any environment and condition" is a big deal for small guns that collect lots of dust and grime. With very short recoil strokes, micros are very prone to failure due to dirty slides. Revolvers have far less tendency to experience this issue. 3. I find myself less concerned about caliber now than I once did. Fights are most often concluded by multiple rounds on target, and even 3 rounds of 380 on target would probably get it done; hell, 3 rounds of 22 mag would probably end most target engagements. With that, 38+P isn't ideal, but 6 rounds of 9mm isn't either. On this, micros and revolvers are a dead heat, I'd say, at least as I would carry either. 4. I am still a huge fan of carrying as large a firearm as I possibly can for the given circumstances. Good holsters make large guns comfortable and small guns almost completely unnoticeable, definitely to observer and quite often to the wearer. I almost never "need" to run a micro, but do so for convenience sake most times. Then again, I have been considering gun need in my wardrobe for quite awhile, so I move my clothes around my gun by habit now, rather than my gun around my clothes. 5. For anything small and anything worn under layers of clothes, weapon maintenance is of paramount importance. Avoid CLP-like lubes that love to attract function-killing grit. 6. Last but not least, US Law Shield. If you don't know what it is or who they are, investigate thoroughly. This is a CCW thread, and this is something you should consider very thoughtfully. (I do not work or for them - or anyone else of a similar nature - but am a firm believer that anyone that owns a gun for defensive purposes should think long and hard about what happens after they pull the trigger.) |
|
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn. Equality is something you whine about not being given. |
|
Dogger
Optics Jedi Master Joined: January/02/2007 Location: Ontario, Canada Status: Offline Points: 8915 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Strength lies in differences, not in similarities.
Stephen Covey
|
|
God save the Empire!
|
|
BeltFed
Optics Retard Joined: February/12/2008 Location: Ky Status: Offline Points: 22287 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
First, the 125Gr. JHP .357 Magnum is still king of 1 shot stops in gun fights, and you can't get that power in an auto smaller than a 1911. You can get it in a J-frame revolver or Ruger LCR, (not that I would want to shoot one). Second, our local trauma room surgeon says the .380 FMJ is one of the nastiest and most effective rounds since it likes to bounce around in the torso. Third, shot placement is more important than bullet size, and pocket pistols are meant for bad breath distances, so shot placement shouldn't be that hard. Fourth, my primary pocket pistol is a hammerless revolver, and more than likely my first few shots are going to leave a hole in my jacket pocket, and you can't count on firing an auto more than once from your pocket. When it's cool enough to wear a jacket, a pocket hammerless revolver in the strong hand pocket is a good idea. Your hand is almost always on the revolver, and even if your packing a primary pistol, it's quicker to get rounds off with the pocket pistol than trying to draw a pistol hid under layers of clothes. Living in an area where street robberies were common taught me this.
|
|
Life's concerns should be about the 120lb pack your trying to get to the top of the mountain, and not the rock in your boot.
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
RC,
Respectfully and in fairness, you took what I said out of context a bit and added rebuttals to points I never made. Yes a micro semiauto in many cases has the same capacity as a revolver. My point is when you use all rounds you have onboard, the semiauto is back in bidness way more quickly with a handy dandy quick mag dump and refresh. Try same with a wheelgun. Hollywood is the only place where you get a dress rehearsal and choreographed gunfight, knowing exactly how many shots you will need beforehand. There is literally an infinite number of possibilities that could warrant more than 6 shots that you can never know beforehand. Most human beings, no matter our prowess at the range, will ever know how well we will be able to shoot in a stressful life threatening situation with tunnel vision, loss of motor skills, adrenaline pumping, accelerated heart rate, a moving aggressive, determined adversary involved...unless and until it actually happens. I personally would rather not intentionally place impediments on my ability to reengage after firing 6 shots if I have other options that don’t involve other serious downsides. The point about size : shot count efficiency involves THE most important dimensional metric in concealabiity: thickness. Revolvers are always thicker than semiautos of equivalent capacity and terminal performance. Thickness is way more critical than length or height, and revolvers will usually be taller height wise as well. They damn sure won’t sit as low in your grip, so bore axis will almost always be higher, which translates to slower follow-up shots for most people not named Jerry Miculek. Those aren’t even debatable points. I don’t buy the reliability argument, even as it pertains to micro guns, provided you select a semiauto micro with a reputation for reliability to begin with. I’ve personally had more incidents of revolvers getting locked up when grit got trapped between cylinder and frame than I’ve had issues with GOOD semiautos, but that’s just been my experience. Do just a smidge of preventive maintenance on your self defense weapon, and don’t trust any weapon that hasn’t sufficiently proven its reliability to you before you decide to carry it, and the comparison is moot to begin with. Caliber chosen is way over-rated. It’s the bullet that does the work, and good bullet selection is far more important than what is stamped on the case head. With today’s bullet designs, all pistol calibers suck to an equal degree compared to long guns. We don’t live in the 1970s anymore. There really is no significant difference in effectiveness, barrier penetration, wound channel size, flesh penetration depth, or stop % between the major defensive pistol calibers given the use of the better JHP bullet designs being used in each. TX Law Shield - agree totally. Which is why I’m a card-carrying member. BF, the old .357/125 legend as the gold standard in defensive pistol caliber effectiveness had a kernel of truth to it in the 1970s-80s. It simply isn’t true today, and extensive FBI testing has proven it out. Today, there is no statistically significant difference in actual, real world bad guy engagement results between it and a good 9mm load anymore, and that even holds true despite the fact there is way more 9mm data points to draw from. And 9mm is more size-efficient and being rimless, works in guns that don’t require a bulbous wheel smack dab in the center of the piece. I love revolvers. Single action revolvers. In big boomers. For hunting. |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
tahqua
MODERATOR Have You Driven A Ford Lately? Joined: March/27/2006 Location: Michigan, USA Status: Offline Points: 9042 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Colt Agent with factory installed hammer shroud works for me. One shot more than the Smith and shoots from a coat pocket too!
|
|
Doug
|
|
coyote95
Optics Master Joined: January/24/2009 Location: michigan Status: Offline Points: 1196 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
My two cents. Walther pps with 8rd clip and dao j frame. plane and simple
|
|
"Life is like riding a bicycle . To keep balance you must keep moving" Albert Einstein
|
|
Rancid Coolaid
MODERATOR Joined: January/19/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 9318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ted, the first sentence was to you. The rest, as stated, were random thoughts based on the thread, not based specifically on your statements. On round count, we agree; however, as stated, there are times when no gun works great, and in those cases "small" gun works way better than "no" gun. And in those cases, I usually don't have extra ammo around, so how fast it reloads isn't relevant. I'm not selling a reliability argument, your experiences do not mirror mine - which is no problem for me - and I am simply relaying my experiences. That said, since switching to a graphite-based lube and away from a CLP-like lube, the stuff that sticks to my concealed weapon is much less gritty. I've had a few small frames lock up due to junk, it is usually a failure to go into battery rather than a FTE, so the gun has gone boom at that point. I too think the 357 argument is a bit dated, especially since all or most of that data was generated using the older 4" and 6" barrels, compared to the current crop of 2.5-2.5" barrels. We are all here to help (I think), and we have different experiences and opinions, no harm in sharing.
|
|
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn. Equality is something you whine about not being given. |
|
tahqua
MODERATOR Have You Driven A Ford Lately? Joined: March/27/2006 Location: Michigan, USA Status: Offline Points: 9042 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
My brothers two cents are close to mine. Though, when stepping up from the snubby it is the G19 in an Alessi IWB. There is no discomfort or back issues with that set up at all.
|
|
Doug
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Understand, RC. It's all good.
Back to the reliability issue, I look at it this way... Regardless of what I choose to carry as a CCW, reputation be damned, I'm never gonna just buy something, load it to capacity fresh from the factory box, and start carrying it. I'm gonna shoot the hell out of it before I trust it as a CCW. On this, I doubt anyone will disagree. That being said, it matters not one whit to me if every other copy of that brand and model pistol owned by every other owner I've ever talked to is failing to do something it's designed to do in epic fashion. If the very thing I hold in my hand goes "bang" every single time I want it to, doesn't go "bang" when I don't want it to, guides bullets where I want them to go within reasonable limits, it's passed the reliability test and I can move on to other considerations. I've never had much trouble finding a decent semiauto pistol that passed the reliability test. Therefore, theoretical discussions about revolvers as a subcategory of firearms being less prone to failure are meaningless, since I'm testing an actual, single item currently in my hands to determine its own set of virtues, and it either works dependably or it doesn't. If it doesn't, I won't be carrying it in the first place.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Since the Ruger LCR was specifically mentioned, here is a comparison that illustrates why I have difficulty justifying a revolver as a CCW.
The LCR is a neat little revolver, no doubt. It's the smallest revolver I can think of that is chambered in serious self defense cartridges (the little micro rimfire revolvers are of course much smaller than any semi-auto, but they are chambered in rimfire rounds). Compare an LCR to a Kahr MK9, for example. The LCR is 4.5" tall, 6.5" long, 1.28" wide (very narrow by revolver standards), weighs 17 oz empty, has a 1.87" barrel, and holds either 5 or 6 rounds, depending on chambering. The Kahr MK9 with extended magazine is 4.5" tall, 5.3" long, a shade over 1" wide (it's 0.9" through most of its width, but the grip and slide release adds width), weighs 22 oz empty, has a 3" barrel, and holds 8 rounds (7+1) in carry config. So, with equally effective cartridge terminal performance, the Kahr is the same height, 1.2" shorter, and about 1/4" thinner, with an inch longer barrel. Yes, it will be around 5 oz heavier, but it is all stainless steel and it's easier to conceal. Yet it offers 2 extra shots onboard, sits deeper in your grip with bore centerline much closer to the web of your thumb, has much faster follow-up shot capability due to less muzzle rise, and it reloads much faster if you're carrying an extra mag. The LCR is indeed lighter, but in what other way would it be the better CCW option? This of course assumes one has already settled the reliability question of their chosen firearm. Go up in size and the size to firepower efficiency discrepancy between semiautos and revolvers become even more lopsided in favor of the former. So other than the fact it doesn't have a magazine that can accidentally drop free from the gun, what advantage does a revolver really offer as a CCW? I just don't get it.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
supertool73
Optics God Superstool Joined: January/03/2008 Status: Offline Points: 11814 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
For some racking the slide of a small framed auto is very difficult. So the small revolver has an advantage there.
|
|
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.
"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own." |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
True, but my arthritic 80 year old mother in law with small frail hands always had difficulty racking any semi-auto slide. She was so convinced of this, that when she was looking to get her CC permit, she had basically written off SAs and resigned herself to buying a small revolver. In spite of her continual insistence that she just "couldn't rack pistol slides" - and that was that, period, full stop - in 5 minutes time, I was able to teach her a technique that had her racking the slide of the S&W Shield she eventually bought, each and every time she tried...to her utter astonishment.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
supertool73
Optics God Superstool Joined: January/03/2008 Status: Offline Points: 11814 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yes, racking it once or twice may be no big deal. But having to rack it hundreds of times for a class is another matter. I have seen folks have to quit multi day pistol classes (both men and women, yes the dudes were sissys) because they were not able to continually rack the slides of their compact pistols. If we are truly talking about fighting how we train then having a gun that you are not able to rack the slide through a multi day class then revo may be a good option to consider. There are a few reasons for wanting to use a revo, you may not agree with them and that's fine. But that doesn't mean they don't have their place and have folks have good reasons for wanting to use them. Your 80 yr old MOL will not take a 4 day pistol class so her needs were met. But a 30 year old small statured gal (or dude) with very small and weak hands who wants to learn how to run a weapon well and is not capable or running a slide over and over 100s of times in a 4 or 5 day class a revo is worth consideration. Plus I have taken classes with folks who can run a small revo pretty dang quick. The malfunction clearances are really simple too, you just pull the trigger again. |
|
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.
"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own." |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Good point, especially on clearing misfire malfunctions. Variety is the spice of life, eh?
I do believe revolvers have a place, and I do understand some people have their own valid reasons for using them. I just don't happen to understand their appeal as a CCW for the majority of people who shoot a fair amount, which I believe defines most reading this thread. For that audience, it's my earnest opinion their disadvantages way outweigh their advantages given today's product offerings. The second word in this thread title is "opinions," after all.
I would argue those same people with really weak hands will find actually controlling a revolver more difficult due to much higher bore axis/more mass above their grip, which kinda offsets the slide racking thing a little. In my MOL's case, she isn't able to shoot anything of any design in the volume required for a 4 day class anyway, since gripping anything tightly, whether a firearm or a spoon, for that many repetitions will aggravate her arthritis, especially with the repeated vibrations of firing added to the equation. After about 4 magazines worth of shooting, she has to take a break because she can't physically grip anything anymore from hand fatigue and arthritis pain. |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Post Reply | Page <1234> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |