Concealed Carry recommendations

digdug18 wrote: Keep in mind if you use a 1911, for the most reliable operation your going to want to use standard ball ammo, otherwise you could have jamming problems.

Hogwash. My Colt Combat Government (made circa 1983) reliably feeds every bullet shape/type I've tried in it. That includes the Speer 200 grain "flying ashtray", 185 target JSWC, and dead-soft swaged lead SWC's - all noted for causing problems.

It's largely a matter of having a properly done feed ramp - which mine came with from the factory - and good magazines.

slantvaliant wrote:

digdug18 wrote: Keep in mind if you use a 1911, for the most reliable operation your going to want to use standard ball ammo, otherwise you could have jamming problems.

Hogwash. My Colt Combat Government (made circa 1983) reliably feeds every bullet shape/type I've tried in it. That includes the Speer 200 grain "flying ashtray", 185 target JSWC, and dead-soft swaged lead SWC's - all noted for causing problems. It's largely a matter of having a properly done feed ramp - which mine came with from the factory - and good magazines.

Agreed. I have 3 1911s and none of them have a problem feeding hollowpoints. Furthermore, using ball ammo in a CCW situation opens up the possibility of your bullet going right through your attacker without slowing down much and hitting an innocent bystander. Never forget that you're liable, legally and morally, for every round that leaves your barrel.

hmmm give me a model 36 s&w in 38spcl with a 2 1/2in barrel and im happy . Most events are over to fast to worry about round count anyways. Besides a lightweight revolver can be tossed in a front pocket and the general public would have no clue. To me hitting what you aim at is more important than getting wrapped up in caliber. I gave up on semi autos due to jams and i'v owned some pretty nice 1911comp guns. I wouldn't trust any of them with my life. Knock on wood i've never had a revolver jam on me and hopefully never will.

CCW is just a personal decision as tow vehicles. I am small person and full frame gun is not an option. I do have the classic .38 Chief Spc but find that the Ruger or Keltec .380 is a better option. Many more options to conceal.

f86sabjf wrote: hmmm give me a model 36 s&w in 38spcl with a 2 1/2in barrel and im happy . Most events are over to fast to worry about round count anyways. Besides a lightweight revolver can be tossed in a front pocket and the general public would have no clue. To me hitting what you aim at is more important than getting wrapped up in caliber.

2 1/2 inch barrels are for sissies.

air weight nice. I bobbed the hammer on my 36 for a no snag carry

USP compact for summer Para Ordinance P14 for winter.

Get the weapon you are most comfortable with in size, stopping power and concealability. It will do you no good if you leave it locked in the safe because it was too uncomfortable to carry. First rule of gunfighting, always have a gun.

maroon92 wrote: Don't carry unless you are prepared to use it. Don't pull it unless you are prepared to fire...

Don't be afraid to spin it on your finger when your at the bar talking smack .

There's a reason why the Berreta M9 (or 92) replaced the 1911. You can get it in .40 S&W but then its called a 96.

Kahr K40. Some of the best CC guns made. Single stack, DOA trigger that is as good as any S&W i have ever shot, all stainless steel construction.

These are very accurate guns, I own a CW9 which is the same size, but in 9mm and a polymer frame. Mine is very accurate and the shape of the gun fits my hand pretty well. I did add a hogue over-grip and that made it feel even better. The only bad thing about the K40 is it weighs more than its polymer bothers. I would recommend the CW40, same gun but it has a polymer frame but it weighs around 16oz unloaded and the slide is less than an inch thick. The CW9 holds 7+1 and the CW40 6+1

That is as thin and as light as it gets without getting into cubic dollars. Kahr is MADE IN THE USA if it matters and mine has NEVER had a miss-feed or miss-fire. They are very good quality guns and anyone who has handled one can attest to this.

The CW40 will run in the mid $400s new and the K40 is a little more.

If for some reason you felt like you needed a 45. they have a CW45 and a K45 as well.

This is a better carry solution that any comparable 1911 style gun in this price range.

JohnGalt wrote: That is as thin and as light as it gets without getting into cubic dollars. Kahr is MADE IN THE USA if it matters and mine has NEVER had a miss-feed or miss-fire. They are very good quality guns and anyone who has handled one can attest to this.

Counter points: of the 3 ex-Kahr owners I know, every one of them has sent their respective guns ( 2 CWs and PM40, IIRC) in for service, and never received a trustworthy product. All were eventually traded at great loss for another pistol.

For thinner, lighter, and frankly a steal price-wise, I bought a Kel-Tec PF-9. I sold it for it's little brother the P-3AT and occasionally regret the sale. Kel-Tec has had some teething problems in the past, but not from me, and the 3 Kahr owners who purchased PF-9s to replace them are more than happy with the switch. It's also not only MADE IN THE USA, but the company is actually OWNED IN THE USA, unlike the Moonie-owned Kahr.

That said, they sure are sexy looking.

RossD wrote: There's a reason why the Berreta M9 (or 92) replaced the 1911. You can get it in .40 S&W but then its called a 96.

I suspect that the reason the Beretta replaced the 1911 had more to do with money than anything else.

I had a Beretta 96 for a few years and it's one of the few handguns that I have sold (as was the Kahr PM9). I even made an attempt to shoot it in competition for a while, but it proved to be far less accurate and consistant for me than a borrowed, stock mid sized Glock 23.

Way harder to disassemble and clean, too.

Osterkraut wrote:

JohnGalt wrote: That is as thin and as light as it gets without getting into cubic dollars. Kahr is MADE IN THE USA if it matters and mine has NEVER had a miss-feed or miss-fire. They are very good quality guns and anyone who has handled one can attest to this.

Counter points: of the 3 ex-Kahr owners I know, every one of them has sent their respective guns ( 2 CWs and PM40, IIRC) in for service, and never received a trustworthy product. All were eventually traded at great loss for another pistol. That said, they sure are sexy looking.

I guess their is one in every bunch. You and your friends seem to be catching a lot of the bad ones. Kahrs do have a recommended 200 round break in period. I know that they can be somewhat tricky before that period is up. That said i did not have that problem with mine. I did hear that some in the past were so tight that it took 500 rounds before they loosened up but that was rare. All i can tell you is that mine has been fantastic and they have a very good rep most places. If you want thin, light, and all steel they are about the only game in town.

RossD wrote: There's a reason why the Berreta M9 (or 92) replaced the 1911. You can get it in .40 S&W but then its called a 96.

Yup, politics. Reagan wanted to base US aircraft in Italy. Italy wanted a US contract in return. NATO was pressuring the US to adopt 9mm to standardize pistol ammo. You do the math, but it had nothing to do with the performance of the two pistols.

JohnGalt wrote: . Kahrs do have a recommended 200 round break in period. I know that they can be somewhat tricky before that period is up. That said i did not have that problem with mine. I did hear that some in the past were so tight that it took 500 rounds before they loosened up but that was rare.

I knew about that before I bought mine, and I think it's even mentioned in the owner's manual. I put a lot more rounds than that through mine, but I was never comfortable enough with its reliability to carry it very often.

slantvaliant wrote: It's largely a matter of having a properly done feed ramp - which mine came with from the factory - and good magazines.

I think magazines are the key. I have 6 different mags for my 1991A1 Compact, and for being at the range the cheapo 8-rd'ers are fine for putting bullets downrange but cause issues with feeding. The two nice 7 rd versions feed perfectly and the original 6rd mags are also flawless. I've run just about every type of ammo through mine and have had few misfeeds.

Will wrote:

Only problem is that the tiny stubby barrel creates massive recoil and offers no ballistic advantage to .357 compared to .38 special. That massive flame you see comes from all the gunpowder that's not being used to accelerate your bullet.

I carried one of these for a while in a professional capacity. In addition to being correct about the ballistic advantage (or lackthereof) and massive recoil, it also tended to night blind you if fired in the dark.

Still, major psychological impact from seeing a barrel with a hole that size come from "nowhere" when you pulled it out... as I discovered for myself when one was pulled on me one night...

Bill

Any exsperiance with Hi-Points, any one? Made in USA, lifetime warrenty, dirt cheap, sounds to good to be true

Can I piggy back on this old thread?

I'm looking for a carry:

• 9mm prefered (combination of size/power/cost of ammo) - though I'm not opposed to larger calibers if I can find a weapon easy to carry
• I want a 1911, but want something smaller than any of the 1911 clones I've seen - definitely prefer single action & like the idea of cocked n locked + grip safety
• Under 500, new or used.
• Don't care if polymer/zinc/steel/aluminum, size is more important than weight.
• Don't care where it's made

I did the class/qualification for my CHL this weekend. I have a Jimenez 9mm that I bought, but it won't be my carry, just needed to familiarize myself with a handgun. I've put about 250 rounds through it.

neon4891 wrote: Any exsperiance with Hi-Points, any one? Made in USA, lifetime warrenty, dirt cheap, sounds to good to be true

I talked my friend into buying the .40 from Hi-Point. It is bulky & ugly, but reliable.

There were some really small 1911's made in 9mm(name of the company escapes me at the moment), but those go for $$$$$.

Otherwise, I doubt you'll find the new EM9 line of miniturized 1911's in your pricerange. Personally, I'd buy a glock. But I can still get the LEO discount on those.....so in that regard, just look into used sig's and the others.

I will never recommend a hipoint or an xd to anyone.......bad experiences.

If you're wanting to go with a 9mm, it's really hard to beat the Glock 19. Yeah, blah blah blah plastic blah blah. I have a Gen 4 with 3000 rounds through it that has had absolutely no malfunctions at all.

I'd also look at the M&P Shield and Walther PPS.

For a more grassroots suggestion, check out the Bersa BP9 Concealed Carry.

I love my SIG P6. It meets almost NONE of your requirements. Single stack, single/double action, steel but not stainless, 9mm, NOT light, NOT slim. Hell of a good gun though.

I have a hard-on for the Walter P380. Quite possibly the best-feeling gun I've ever held, bar none. Nice and small too. Never got to shoot it, but holy berkeley did it feel good in the palm.

I'll +1 the Glock comments for reliability, durability, etc, even if they are made of recycled milk jugs.

In reply to rotard:

In over 4000rds between the 17 and 33 I had, I had 2 total FTF......one was a bad primer(wolf 9mm), the other was improperly crimped Speer .357 sig.....the bullet slid into the case and jammed the case while loading.

Hard to complain there. I treat them as investment pieces though.....buy low, pour rounds through them, sell for what I have in them within an hour.

John, you'd probably like my Sig P230 if you like the walthers....

I just bought a used stainless springfield 1911. I really like it. Price was 480 so should fit right in. Not quite as neat and my 1891 colt saa. But with the nickle on that and the stainless on my 1911 they look pretty cool when i wear one on each hip.

Chris