Posted On:10/01/2009 2:23am
Style: Ex-Tomiki Aikido
I'm shopping for a CCW piece. My price range is about $550.00-600.00 tops.
I've become a pretty big fan of Rugers over the years, but found their P9X series to be a little bulky. I owned a SIG Sauer P6 for a while, but a 1911-style single stack mag (7+1) is pretty crappy. I traded it for a guitar.
I've been reading up on the new Ruger SR9. It's striker-fired, 17+1 capacity, and has a pretty slender profile. I picked one up and handled at the local gun shop and it seemed to fit my hand pretty well. The reversible backstrap is nice, and the sights are pretty high-vis. Unfortunately, they didn't have a rental piece for the range as yet. I've been putting feelers out in my local area for anybody that owns one so I could throw some lead through it.
Has anybody shot this thing? I hear it's stiff as all hell at first but gets smoother with use.
For comparison, here's what else I'm looking at for a CCW:
Taurus Millenium Pro
Steyr M Series (never going to find this one)
I was looking at a Walther, but the way their mag release works now makes me want to throw up.
Posted On:10/01/2009 2:57am
Style: BJJ / Kyokushinkai Karate
I am a fan of Ruger as well, only have experience with their revolvers though (my dad owns the Ruger Super Redhawk in .445 Casul(sp?)). They make good stuff but as I said, I've not shot their pistols.
The H&K USP is a damn fine gun. But it will be out of your price range, right? I've been shooting the USP Expert .45 (with a second barrel for 9mm, very nice concept: two guns in one ;)) and it's a damn fine gun.
Are you fixed on a certain calibre? If not, I'd say have a look at the CZ 75 in .40 S&W. A gun that is cheap and reliable. Proven itself for years in IPSC competitions.
Hope that helped :)
Posted On:10/01/2009 6:37am
Well, concealability is a major concern for me. I'm a smaller guy (5'6", 145) so a full-size .45 man-cannon is not going to be an option.
That said, I'm not really comfortable with carrying a .380. Sure, I understand a hit with a .380 is better than a miss, but I believe in carrying the largest caliber you can comfortably handle, conceal, and shoot reliably. Plus, permanent wound cavity/penetration estimates with a .380 are inferior to 9mm - end of story. Larger bullet, bigger hole and all that.
Economics are another issue here. Whatever I get needs to fire ammo cheap enough that I can stay proficient with it. It's hard as hell to find .380 and .40 where I am, and they're expensive to boot. 9mm, not so much.
The USP has gone down a few notches, since I was shown some new ones that have an awkward magazine release. I understand with time and training this can be overcome, but I'd rather not mess with it.
Posted On:10/01/2009 7:19am
Then go for a Glock in .40 S&W. Awesome handling, conceivability and with .40 you will have not problems...
I never spoke about .38... ;)
Really: Check out the CZ 75 in .40 S&W and the Glock 23. That Glock is a compact pistol with .40 S&W...
Posted On:10/01/2009 2:30pm
Style: Jiu-Jitsu, Muay Thai, H&K
If Prone hadn't mentioned the Glock 23 I would have. Glocks hands down beat everything you listed in terms of daily carry, hands down. Why? Here's a list of reasons:
LIGHT WEIGHT, Glock makes the Lightest Weight double stack handguns out there.
SMOOTH RECOIL, Glocks, despite their weight, recoil smoother than most pistols because of their thick, heavy slides.
HIGH CAP, Glock pretty much INTENTED high capacity.
SIMPLICITY, nothing is easier to field strip and clean. Nothing.
DURABILITY, Glocks have been submitted to tons of torture and can take more of it than anything else. As a CCW weapon, you'll never beat it up the way some people have, but it's good to know it'll keep chugging after thousands upon thousands of rounds.
RELIABILITY, yes, there's a difference, Glock pistols are extremely reliable. Even with bad ammo, you're not likely to get a malfunction.
SIGHT RADIUS, the sights on Glocks are at a better distance from each other than on most pistols, which means more accurate lining up of the sights when shooting.
GRIP ANGLE, this is actually the most highly hated thing about Glock pistols, but it is actually quite advantageous. It's got a similar angle to the Luger P-08. Some don't find it as comfortable, but it serves well in that it locks your wrist and grip up with the angle it forces you to hold it. That means less likelihood of limp wristing. Also, the Glock is known for being a very instinctive shooting weapon. I was personally shooting better with it than any other weapon I've owned after only about 100 rounds.
By the way, more than one of the pistols you mentioned up there is a ripoff of a Glock pistol. Without the Glock, the HK wouldn't exist (which is out of your price range, btw). The XD and Taurus Millenium Pro are both meant to compete with the Glock, but are also both heavier and less reliable. XD Koolade will tell you to get an XD because of the loaded chamber indicator, which Glocks now have as well, and their Cocking Status Indicator that you'll probably never use. Don't fall into it. The only advantage of the XD is it's smoother trigger, which isn't even that big an improvement since there are so many things you can do to the Glock trigger to personalize it anyway.
EDIT: BTW, the Glock 19 is the exact same gun as the Glock 23 except in 9mm. And if you want something Sub Compact instead, the Glock 26 is a 9mm Sub Compact, the 27 the same thing in .40.
Posted On:10/01/2009 3:43pm
Style: Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu
I like the CZ P01 for concealed carry, but I enjoy full metal frame weapons, even if they are pretty compact.
"No. Listen to me because I know what I'm talking about here." -- Hannibal
Posted On:10/01/2009 4:50pm
Ugh. I really don't like Glocks, for the grip angle issue you mentioned. I also have never gotten comfortable with the sights. I can't argue with their reliability, field stripping, or hi-cap though.
It's been a while since I shot one, though. I could give them another chance.
Right now, after reading some more testimonials i'm down to either the SR9, or the Glock 26-27. I'd be more inclined to go with the SR9 since it's more slender, but a slender frame is going to have its own set of cons. Also, the SR9 is Ruger's first striker-fired pistol, and they've already had to do one recall on it. Glock is one hell of a lot more established.
If I had my druthers, I'd carry my old duty M9 in a thigh holster. But, if we're talking about CCW, i should probably forget about things like decocking safeties and hammers.
Posted On:10/01/2009 5:14pm
I'm telling you, if you liked your beretta, try the CZ P01. It's 9mm (the P06 is 40S&W if you prefer that), has a capacity of 14+1, is slim, and even fits my gigantor hand. It's a compact, but shoots quite well for one. It also has a decocking lever, safety, etc.
It can easily be had for under 600 bucks, as well.
Posted On:10/01/2009 5:30pm
Interesting. Honestly, I'd never really even considered CZ pistols. May be worth checking out.
Posted On:10/01/2009 5:45pm
Me either, until I fired some of them. I'm getting a matched CZ-75 SP-01 and P01 with some custom engraving when I actually have time to shoot them.
Articles and Reviews
Tools and Info