Best combat handgun...
- Thread starter Waterfowler
- Start date
Didn't strike a nerve, just posting inaccurate unfounded "information" doesn't sit well with me. I am genuinely curious about your claims from your last post. The frame rails are adequate and provide minimal contact which allows debris to fall free. I have never seen a frame fracture at the rails but I have seen several G22 pistols shear rails right off. Modular is cool and I wouldn't doubt if Glock goes that route when the time comes. As it stands the modular style like that of the P320 is proving to be less than desirable as multiple frame swaps leaves the action loose and sloppy.
I'll keep that in mind, thanks Bob.
Competing against the "bottom feeder" polymer guns means nothing if the human using them can't shoot. The fact that no revolver shooter competes against those using autoloaders tells the tale. More rounds means you can shoot longer before reloading. It also means you can apply more rounds to a target/threat which is never a bad thing if you're in doubt of whether or not you hit your intended target. Like owlowl below points out, all those cliche sayings from ancient gun community folks are just sayings that have little and often zero credibility to back them up. I find it rather silly when you say you show the plastic guns what a "real gun looks and sounds like" by shooting your 1911. What makes it a "real" gun over any others and I can't recall a difference in muzzle report between any of the handgun calibres. Does report do anything productive?
Thanks for posting that!!
The incident occurred while tailing the suspects. The take down spot was not a pre planned location which makes placing a sharp shooter a bit of a problem.
I will be the Glock guy(again) on this one. The 320 is modelled after a Glock like all the other polymer striker fired guns. The difference is in the modular frame. Aside from that the 320 has a heavier trigger with no defined break/wall and a very non positive reset. The bore axis is slightly higher(trivial really) and the gun itself is wider, longer and heavier with more parts. By those simply criteria what does the 320 do better than a Glock?
Don't forget the SIG series of pistols, Beretta(served not overly proven), Glock 19/17 en mass, BHP, S&W 66/19, HK pistols of all sorts, I'm sure I'm missing a few more.
Gone through two wars where pistol tactics were non existent and handguns denoted rank more than being carried as an effective tool.
If I had a nickel for every time I heard my glock blowed up....... Followed by where can I buy a lower
Shoot garbage reloads and expect your gun to detonate. No pistol is made to accept reloads and/or compromised recycled brass. Shoot virgin factory ammo and the issues disappear.
- Location
- Next to Santa Claus. ᑯᒡᓗᒃᑐᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ
I'd pick the CZ 97B .45acp. Why? That's easy, because of all the pistols I've owned over the years, the 97B felt the best in my hands. If it doesn't feel totally comfortable, then it won't feel great to use long term.
Mumbles Marble Mouth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Lower Mainland
Do you mean combat pistol or a duty issue pistol? Because I guarantee any competition target pistol will out perform a duty issue pistol in combat.
Glock 21???? WTF who uses that?
Look, here's the thing, and this is going to sound a bit harsh, but for the vast majority of shooters, and that includes most of the people on this forum, a bat with a nail in it would be about as useful as gun. Simply put, most people, including enthusiasts, can't shoot worth a sh!t. Very very few people could even manage to use their chosen gun in a way that would be effective in any kind of situation outside of plinking. There are those who shoots tens of thousands of rounds a year, in proper, dedicated practice, and it's those people, along with people who've used guns in combat or in the line of duty, whose opinions have merit and I would trust when it comes to picking a gun. Keyboard commandos who read a couple issues of Guns and Ammo a year and spout decades old information on "Stopping Power", well, their opinion goes into the same circular basket as the junk mail I get.
Look, here's the thing, and this is going to sound a bit harsh, but for the vast majority of shooters, and that includes most of the people on this forum, a bat with a nail in it would be about as useful as gun. Simply put, most people, including enthusiasts, can't shoot worth a sh!t. Very very few people could even manage to use their chosen gun in a way that would be effective in any kind of situation outside of plinking. There are those who shoots tens of thousands of rounds a year, in proper, dedicated practice, and it's those people, along with people who've used guns in combat or in the line of duty, whose opinions have merit and I would trust when it comes to picking a gun. Keyboard commandos who read a couple issues of Guns and Ammo a year and spout decades old information on "Stopping Power", well, their opinion goes into the same circular basket as the junk mail I get.
Mumbles Marble Mouth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Lower Mainland
It wasn't a 9mm it was a .38 Special. That shoot out is what made the FBI learn that .38 revolvers are #### in combat.
It was a combination of S&W semi autos and revolvers in the fight, all loaded with crap ammo. Funnily enough, it was .357 that ended the whole thing. The problem was crap ammo, not calibre, had any of the officers had current ammo, the fight would have ended much sooner.
I would also add the Tokarev TT to the list.
The Soviets liked the 7.63x25mm Mauser cartridge for its penetration and range. As a result, the Tokarev was designed to take a cartridge based on the Mauser round: the 7.62x25mm Tokarev round. In addition to Tokarev pistols, this round would also be used in the PPSh41 and PPS43 submachine guns.It is interesting that during WWII, the TT33 was very popular with the German troops who plundered it. They could fire 7.63x25mm Mauser ammunition in the TT33, and they found it offered excellent penetration through heavy Soviet winter clothing on the Western Front as the Luger 9mm failed to do so. As used in the German Army, it was designated the Pistole 615 (r) (”r” for Russian). In addition to being used by the Soviet Special armed forces. In one case, the TT was used in 200 m practise drilling !
Wow, who needed a rifle when these soldiers were shooting at those distances !!
The Soviets liked the 7.63x25mm Mauser cartridge for its penetration and range. As a result, the Tokarev was designed to take a cartridge based on the Mauser round: the 7.62x25mm Tokarev round. In addition to Tokarev pistols, this round would also be used in the PPSh41 and PPS43 submachine guns.It is interesting that during WWII, the TT33 was very popular with the German troops who plundered it. They could fire 7.63x25mm Mauser ammunition in the TT33, and they found it offered excellent penetration through heavy Soviet winter clothing on the Western Front as the Luger 9mm failed to do so. As used in the German Army, it was designated the Pistole 615 (r) (”r” for Russian). In addition to being used by the Soviet Special armed forces. In one case, the TT was used in 200 m practise drilling !
Wow, who needed a rifle when these soldiers were shooting at those distances !!
Last edited:
Doesnt take a navy seal to use a handgun if an intruder enters your home. People have done it in the USA for years including senior citizens and soccor moms who are not putting 1000s of rounds down range each year.
As far as a real combat situation i would agree with your statement and add ipsc shooters that have no real world combat experience to thay mix. Plinking is plinking. Paper doesnt shoot back even in ipsc competition.
So i would not try to break into anyones house on this forum and be ignorant enough to think that they couldnt hit me if they tried lol.
FBI stats of the gun fights their agents are in show that the matter is settled with very few rds at ranges as close as 7 yds. Firepower is not a factor.
It won't be for most situations other than a prolonged firefight in a war zone, for which there are more suitable weapons. Handguns are generally regarded as defensive and not offensive in application.
It won't be for most situations other than a prolonged firefight in a war zone, for which there are more suitable weapons. Handguns are generally regarded as defensive and not offensive in application.
If I had to take on hordes of marauding ground squirrels with an individual weapon, 5.7mm would be an excellent choice. For two-legged varmints, not so much.
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4338-Small-Caliber-PDW-s-FN-5-7-mm-HK-4-6-mm
5.7x28mm in a pistol is roughly equivalent to .22 Magnum in a rifle.
Look into some ballistics gel tests. I would venture to say that the damage is better than virtually any 9, 40 or 45. I won't mention it by name, but a maniac with a FiveseveN killed plenty of people in a mass shooting years ago in the US. The 5.7x28 isn't nearly as good as a real rifle round, but far better than slow expanding normal pistol ammo. People have been shot with the 5.7x28 and
lived, that is certain. But many people survive being shot with pistols. That's why we bring rifles to gunfights.
But at the end of the day, the key in any fight is shot placement. Simply put, the FiveseveN is incredibly easy to shoot accurately, and quickly due to the ammo characteristics and low recoil. A 22lr is a perfectly good weapon in the hands of a fine pistol shooter. Shoot a FiveseveN and tell me an easier non-rimfire pistol there is to shoot. I have not found one better.
Are we still talking about combat? That "fighting between armed forces" pastime, is it not?
In "combat" any pistol would be as good and as relevant as sabers right now. But if you take a trip on a memory lane there were millions of people killed by blades. There was a British 1912 pattern cavalry sword. Adopted in the army, for combat, in 1912. What you trying to discuss here is "if 1912 pattern is better for combat than 1897 pattern sword" while even in reality of WW1 combat its all about artillery and machine guns.
Pistol is semi-effective last ditch self defense weapon appropriate against few not that determent preferably unarmed foes at the range between 2 to 30 meters at best. For that whatever pistol you can carry and use is as good as any. Hell, 1883 Reichsrevolver can handle 90% of that.
Let me put it this way - in your lifetime, unless you are with a police force, well even if you are... In your lifetime it will never be a question of ANY handgun failing or any other handgun being potentially superior to whatever you had in hand, such that it would decide between win or lose in a fight. Most likely you'll be unarmed, drunk, and hit you head on a sidewalk after being sucker punched. Combat pistols yeah right.
In "combat" any pistol would be as good and as relevant as sabers right now. But if you take a trip on a memory lane there were millions of people killed by blades. There was a British 1912 pattern cavalry sword. Adopted in the army, for combat, in 1912. What you trying to discuss here is "if 1912 pattern is better for combat than 1897 pattern sword" while even in reality of WW1 combat its all about artillery and machine guns.
Pistol is semi-effective last ditch self defense weapon appropriate against few not that determent preferably unarmed foes at the range between 2 to 30 meters at best. For that whatever pistol you can carry and use is as good as any. Hell, 1883 Reichsrevolver can handle 90% of that.
Let me put it this way - in your lifetime, unless you are with a police force, well even if you are... In your lifetime it will never be a question of ANY handgun failing or any other handgun being potentially superior to whatever you had in hand, such that it would decide between win or lose in a fight. Most likely you'll be unarmed, drunk, and hit you head on a sidewalk after being sucker punched. Combat pistols yeah right.
Last edited:
AP projectiles can be made for 9mm (eg. the Russian 7N21), but a rifle is the real solution to the armour problem.
The author of the post I linked is Dr. Gary Roberts, who is perhaps the world's foremost subject matter expert on wound ballistics. I don't think you will find anyone more qualified to weigh in on the subject than him.
Gelatin tests by wound ballistics professionals indicate inferior performance to standard service pistol calibres, even when the latter is loaded with FMJ projectiles. The SS190 AP round typically penetrates about 10"-13" in bare gelatin, yawing once with no deformation. The cross-sectional area of the sideways 5.7mm bullet is still less than that of 9mm FMJ. 5.7x28mm does not have enough KE for temporary cavitation to play a significant factor. Civilian loads with varmint-type bullets will expand and/or fragment, but will not provide adequate penetration (12"-18" is optimal).
If you are referring to the Ft. Hood shooting, a large majority of those shot survived (13 dead and 32 wounded). I would not consider this as making a good case for the 5.7x28mm.
As far as shot placement goes, at some point, perfect shot placement is just not going to make up for inadequate terminal performance. If 5.7mm is not appropriate to take into a fight, that goes doubly for .22 rimfire.
Go back and read Cooper's law of applied firepower. You obviously didn't get it the first time.
My remark re: the 1911 looking and sounding like a "real gun" was said tongue-in-cheek, but a little too subtle for you.
"No revolver shooter competes against those using autoloaders"? Really? You don't get out much do you? I do it regularly as I enjoy the challenge, and it sure isn't for a want of semi-autos. Especially in IDPA where no course of fire can exceed 18 rounds to make it "revolver friendly". Semi-autos with 10 round mags have no real advantage if you practice your revolver reloads.
IDPA International tells us that 65% of US CCW users prefer revolvers for self defence for a variety of reasons, firepower not being one of the considerations.
In any shooting situation, real or simulated, "shooting longer and applying more rounds to a target" (i.e. 'spray & pray') will not be effective. The people I know who are active in CAS, IDPA and IPSC can vouch for that.
Few if any are delusional to the point of thinking they are "gunfighters". We find those people to be unsettling. As for relevance, IDPA being predicated on the US concealed carry laws tops the list. You must appear to be unarmed under appropriate clothing for the season. We have a heated indoor range (temperature several degrees below room temp) and we wear seasonal clothing like ski jackets, car coats, etc. In summer, vests and windbreakers.
I served for 12 years and did a lot of shooting beyond annual certification with the C1, C2 9mm Sterling SMG and Inglis 9mm. I saw a lot of rounds fired down range quickly, some of them actually hitting the target. Kind of like a blind dog finding the occasional bone.
I'm curious about your shooting background. Care to share ..... ?
Last edited:
