What are your primary considerations in gun selection for CCW?
- Thread starter Trunk Monkey
- Start date
- Status
Accuracy demands are not likely to be high, but the need for the gun itself is also a not-high likelihood. If one considers mass-shooting and quasi-mass-shooting/attempted-mass-shooting events as one reason to carry, think about how often those occur in relatively large rooms (movie theaters, retail stores, office hallways) or even outdoors (school and corporate campuses, parking lots).
If those kind of events are part of your calculus, then the accuracy requirements of a knife-point mugging are not the only ones to meet. Bullseye levels of accuracy are unlikely to be called for, but getting center-mass hits at 25 or 50+ yards may absolutely be critical.
rpenmanparker
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2018
- Messages
- 2,456
The commonly expressed notion that a gun is okay because it is more accurate than the shooter is fallacious. What you call accuracy (and I call precision) is reduced by the sum of the error in the gun and the error in the shooter. The two don’t act independently. More error in the gun means more error in the final result, the placement of the shot. A more accurate gun will result in a more accurate shot, period.
MTMilitiaman
Member
I live in a fairly gun-friendly state. Open carry is not only legal, but protected in MT. Additionally, one doesn't need a permit to carry concealed outside of city limits, the state is "shall issue," and there are to my knowledge, no laws concerning printing. Finally, there are no state laws limiting magazine capacity or other nonsense.
I am six and a half feet tall. I wear a size 15 shoe and my hands are proportionately the same size as my feet. I don't like sub-compacts or any handgun that doesn't allow me to get a full grip. I refuse to deal with the "tea cup grip," trying to maintain any standard of accuracy with my pinky hanging off in space. And when barrels get too short, it not only cuts down on sight radius, but also starts to feel dangerous. I caught myself just starting to apply trigger pressure to a 2 inch barreled .357 Magnum once with a digit hanging out in front of the muzzle. That's a mistake you only make once. I don't trust that under duress, grappling with an attacker or dodging bullets, that such a weapon would be as much a danger to myself as it would to my adversary.
With all this in mind, I gravitate to high capacity polymer framed autos that have a good firepower to weight ratio. I carry a Gen III Glock 20 10mm Auto. My list would look something like this:
1. Reliability (of course)
2. Shootability. A little subjective, but includes everything from size and ergonomics to sights and recoil impulse. Basically has to be big enough to shoot well.
3. Firepower. Again, subjective, but generally understood. Handguns are unreliable stoppers with a demonstrated history of inconsistent performance, and they are used under desperate circumstances. I want my handgun to have the capacity and the relative power to allow me to respond and end the confrontation or break contact and flee. Fifteen rounds of 10mm Auto is about as much firepower as one can discreetly carry and control under stress.
4. Weight. Arbitrary, I know, but it becomes a drag having an anchor attached at the hip. I use a good belt and holster, but realistically, we have to keep the weight of the handgun reasonable too. This is one reason I prefer polymer-- you can fit 15 rounds into a polymer framed handgun and still be under 2.5 pounds.
5. Ease of use/maintenance. Keep it simple. You're not going to want a complicated manual of arms when people are trying to kill you. Striker fired autos are very simple to employ, with minimal controls and a consistent, serviceable trigger. I generally favor popular models with readily available aftermarket support, and I like guns that are simple enough for me to take care of. A Glock is simple enough and popular enough to find holsters and accessories and for the user to fix or replace anything on it, so maintaining it in the long term is straightforward.
6. Trigger mechanism. I am avidly opposed to two distinctly different trigger pulls on one gun, and consider double action autos to be a solution in search of a problem. A crappy trigger is not a safe trigger. A long, heavy, gritty, crappy trigger only makes the pistol harder to employ effectively. I consider it the equivalent of removing power steering from your pickup and calling it safer. So I don't care what other features a pistol has, if it forces me to deal with a 12 pound trigger, I am not interested. I will look at DA/SA pistols only if they have an ambi safety that allows me to bypass the DA and carry it cocked and locked.
7. Size. Not a huge concern for me, but I am also not packing a Desert Eagle or AR pistol. There is an upper limit to the size it is practical to carry. Handguns are carried because they are discreet, so I need the handgun to be big enough to shoot, but also small enough to conceal on my wardrobe, which is typically cargo pants with an extra large t-shirt and a light jacket or hoodie.
8. Cost. I work for a living. I don't get to buy nearly the number of guns or ammo I would like because funds are tight. Realistically, I need to be able to afford the firearm and it's magazines and accessories. Another strong point for polymer is economy. You can get a lot of pistol for your money shopping polymer. Glocks provide reliable, lightweight, high-capacity portable firepower at a price that is attainable to most of us.
9. Brand loyalty. I will admit it, I just don't like certain brands, for whatever reason. Mostly it has to do with a violation of a previous rule-- Beretta for example forces one to carry in DA mode and then places an unintuitive safety in the least sensible position, so I am not a fan of them.
10. "Second kind of cool." This is a Nutnfancy term, if you follow him on Youtube. Difficult to explain in depth, it pretty much means that the pistol appeals to me in some way that I acknowledge makes little sense, but which I can't ignore. Again, this usually has something to do with a previous rule-- like the Glock 20 being second kind of cool because it has industry leading firepower to weight ratio, and knowing this makes me feel like the baddest "dude" in the valley.
I am six and a half feet tall. I wear a size 15 shoe and my hands are proportionately the same size as my feet. I don't like sub-compacts or any handgun that doesn't allow me to get a full grip. I refuse to deal with the "tea cup grip," trying to maintain any standard of accuracy with my pinky hanging off in space. And when barrels get too short, it not only cuts down on sight radius, but also starts to feel dangerous. I caught myself just starting to apply trigger pressure to a 2 inch barreled .357 Magnum once with a digit hanging out in front of the muzzle. That's a mistake you only make once. I don't trust that under duress, grappling with an attacker or dodging bullets, that such a weapon would be as much a danger to myself as it would to my adversary.
With all this in mind, I gravitate to high capacity polymer framed autos that have a good firepower to weight ratio. I carry a Gen III Glock 20 10mm Auto. My list would look something like this:
1. Reliability (of course)
2. Shootability. A little subjective, but includes everything from size and ergonomics to sights and recoil impulse. Basically has to be big enough to shoot well.
3. Firepower. Again, subjective, but generally understood. Handguns are unreliable stoppers with a demonstrated history of inconsistent performance, and they are used under desperate circumstances. I want my handgun to have the capacity and the relative power to allow me to respond and end the confrontation or break contact and flee. Fifteen rounds of 10mm Auto is about as much firepower as one can discreetly carry and control under stress.
4. Weight. Arbitrary, I know, but it becomes a drag having an anchor attached at the hip. I use a good belt and holster, but realistically, we have to keep the weight of the handgun reasonable too. This is one reason I prefer polymer-- you can fit 15 rounds into a polymer framed handgun and still be under 2.5 pounds.
5. Ease of use/maintenance. Keep it simple. You're not going to want a complicated manual of arms when people are trying to kill you. Striker fired autos are very simple to employ, with minimal controls and a consistent, serviceable trigger. I generally favor popular models with readily available aftermarket support, and I like guns that are simple enough for me to take care of. A Glock is simple enough and popular enough to find holsters and accessories and for the user to fix or replace anything on it, so maintaining it in the long term is straightforward.
6. Trigger mechanism. I am avidly opposed to two distinctly different trigger pulls on one gun, and consider double action autos to be a solution in search of a problem. A crappy trigger is not a safe trigger. A long, heavy, gritty, crappy trigger only makes the pistol harder to employ effectively. I consider it the equivalent of removing power steering from your pickup and calling it safer. So I don't care what other features a pistol has, if it forces me to deal with a 12 pound trigger, I am not interested. I will look at DA/SA pistols only if they have an ambi safety that allows me to bypass the DA and carry it cocked and locked.
7. Size. Not a huge concern for me, but I am also not packing a Desert Eagle or AR pistol. There is an upper limit to the size it is practical to carry. Handguns are carried because they are discreet, so I need the handgun to be big enough to shoot, but also small enough to conceal on my wardrobe, which is typically cargo pants with an extra large t-shirt and a light jacket or hoodie.
8. Cost. I work for a living. I don't get to buy nearly the number of guns or ammo I would like because funds are tight. Realistically, I need to be able to afford the firearm and it's magazines and accessories. Another strong point for polymer is economy. You can get a lot of pistol for your money shopping polymer. Glocks provide reliable, lightweight, high-capacity portable firepower at a price that is attainable to most of us.
9. Brand loyalty. I will admit it, I just don't like certain brands, for whatever reason. Mostly it has to do with a violation of a previous rule-- Beretta for example forces one to carry in DA mode and then places an unintuitive safety in the least sensible position, so I am not a fan of them.
10. "Second kind of cool." This is a Nutnfancy term, if you follow him on Youtube. Difficult to explain in depth, it pretty much means that the pistol appeals to me in some way that I acknowledge makes little sense, but which I can't ignore. Again, this usually has something to do with a previous rule-- like the Glock 20 being second kind of cool because it has industry leading firepower to weight ratio, and knowing this makes me feel like the baddest "dude" in the valley.
ALL are first place considerations:
Fit
Ergonomics
Reliability
The above three items, lend themselves to confidence in what I, hopefully...never ever have to even think about using.....but if I do, the confidence in knowing that the tool is up for the job....as long as I have been maintaining the tool and practicing with it.
2nd consideration: Caliber of 38, 9, 40, or 45
Fit
Ergonomics
Reliability
The above three items, lend themselves to confidence in what I, hopefully...never ever have to even think about using.....but if I do, the confidence in knowing that the tool is up for the job....as long as I have been maintaining the tool and practicing with it.
2nd consideration: Caliber of 38, 9, 40, or 45
huntsman
Member
I’m a bit surprised that reliability is #1 with so many, not because of it’s importantance but because I’ve never really had any issues with the semis I’ve fired.
Accuracy means hitting where you aim with a bullseye hold.
Accuracy means hitting where you aim with a bullseye hold.
Over a large sample size, yes. But if a shooter pulls the gun 5" left from the center at the moment of firing, but the sloppy fit and loose bore happen to send the bullet 5" right...
Corpral_Agarn
Member
1. Safe (DA/SA for me)
2. Reliable
3. Shootable (Easy of operation, ergos, trigger, no mechanical safeties)
4. Concealable (I can make a full size service pistol work if I need to)
5. Capacity (6+ is good by me. Usually 8+1)
Most of the time I am carrying a Sig P239
Sometimes a Model 10, Sig P226 or SAA
ETA:
I see accuracy mentioned in the thread but most reputable manufacturers are putting out guns that shoot better than I can.
2. Reliable
3. Shootable (Easy of operation, ergos, trigger, no mechanical safeties)
4. Concealable (I can make a full size service pistol work if I need to)
5. Capacity (6+ is good by me. Usually 8+1)
Most of the time I am carrying a Sig P239
Sometimes a Model 10, Sig P226 or SAA
ETA:
I see accuracy mentioned in the thread but most reputable manufacturers are putting out guns that shoot better than I can.
To me this means you get a Glock, M&P, H&K, etc. A quality gun that subsequently proves itself through practice. The Taurus and Remington pistols of the world need not apply. This will probably be less popular but I would personally also avoid a 1911 unless it was a high end one that proved itself with a lot of trigger time with carry ammo.
Corpral_Agarn
Member
^^ Wizard
But do you shoot cheap guns or carry a super tight tolerance target pistol?
Sure.
But do you shoot cheap guns or carry a super tight tolerance target pistol?
rpenmanparker
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2018
- Messages
- 2,456
I honestly think that no pistol can match a 1911 type, double stack magazine if desired. If 1911s had been correctly assessed, Glocks would never have even been invented.
LiveLife
Member
Whether defensive shooting or timed/pressured match shooting, holes on target matters and missed shots don't count regardless of caliber.
If you want a factory pistol that is more accurate than other factory pistols, just look at what pistols are popular and winning matches like IDPA/USPSA Production Division.
IDPA - https://www.ssusa.org/articles/2017/6/9/the-top-pistols-used-by-todays-idpa-shooters/
- Glock 30%
- S&W 21%
- Springfield Armory 12%
- STI 7%
- CZ 6%
- SIG Sauer 3%
- Wilson Combat 3%
- Walther 3%
USPSA Production Division - https://www.ssusa.org/articles/2017/6/27/top-handguns-for-uspsa/
- CZ 33%
- GLOCK 25%
- Tanfoglio 15%
- Springfield Armory 8%
- S&W 6%
- SIG Sauer 6%
Last edited:
Corpral_Agarn
Member
Well, sure.
But when I test a gun to minute-of-frying-pan at 240yrds, I figure that is accurate enough.
I think the people who say that (myself included) are more concerned with the shooter errors (and how to minimize them) than the mechanical errors in accuracy.
If you want to talk about what is winning the big matches, the 2018 Production nationals gave us this:
- Of the top 8 finishers, I believe 6 were using Tanfoglios (Stock 2's mostly). Top 4 are Tanfo', then a couple of guys that I think were using Sig P320's, and then more Tanfo. I think the #9 guy was shooting CZ, IDK after that. Sevigny and Vogel - the guys who often haul Glocks to the high places on the leaderboards - weren't in the match. There was a Walther PPQ in the top 16.
But I wholeheartedly agree with your post. Shooting USPSA and RO'ing a few thousand shooters has definitely altered my views about what "reliability" means, what "performance" looks like/constitutes, and which guns offer the best combination of those traits for most shooters who are spending at least some effort on their shooting. A lot of guns that people in the broader gun culture seem to revere aren't really of interest to me anymore, and some stuff that I wasn't interested in 6-7 years ago is now intensely interesting to me. I've got a bunch of discrete views that come from stuff I have seen in competition:
- I see a lot of guns that have reliability issues, but I also see a lot that do not; Glocks are generally reliable, but no more so than a wide swath of other guns.
- People seem to be able to learn to manage striker and DA/SA triggers equally well, but the change-over period for someone making a switch is no joke.
- Similarly, external safety guns are no problem at all for shooters who are used to them (zero time lost, zero accidental failure-to-disengage, never seen a safety "malfunction" and tie up a gun), but watching someone coming from a "no safety" background struggle with their new 2011 race gun because they keep forgetting to grip the gun with their thumb on the safety is painful.
- Red-dots are surely the way of the future... but watching someone with a new dot draw little figure 8's in the air as they hunt for the dot is funny .
- Heavier guns shoot a little better, lighter guns manipulate a little faster, and people with exceptionally strong hands can override either of those factors. Etc., etc.
LiveLife
Member
Don't forget technique.
With proper grip/trigger technique, you can steady metal or polymer pistol so you can release the hammer/striker without moving the front sight as clearly demonstrated on this thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-help-me-speed-up.824618/page-4#post-10902444
Oh, obviously technique/skill is paramount. Just offering some observations about guns themselves from watching people use them in competition. But I would also say that, from those same observations, that someone who is a GM-level shooter could generally swap guns with a C-class shooter and absolutely mop the floor with them as long as the gun doesn't jam more than about once every 10 rounds!
Hangingrock
Member
S&W-Gen1-9 - 9c or Shield set up the same. Apex Duty/Carry triggering system, TruGlo-Pro night sights, carried in the same style Comp-Tac holster along with the same style magazine holder. Magzine capacities 17 - 12 & 8 rounds along with the same ammunition Federal-HST, Remington Gold Saber & Winchester Ranger dependent on availability.
Good Ol' Boy
Member
It's got to work and I've got to be able to shoot it, that's really it.
That's not where I started my journey but it's where I am now.
That's not where I started my journey but it's where I am now.
huntsman
Member
Neither, my comfort range is $400-600. Used or new so I’m a middle of the pack guy.
Nothing cheaper than Ruger.
Tallball
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,805
1. Reliability - If it malfunctions it's out of the rotation. Period.
2. Concealability - For its niche. Tiny, small, or medium. I'm just not going to carry my SBH, or even pretend that I'm going to carry it.
3. Caliber - 380acp or 32 H&R magnum minimum. I prefer 44/45, but am fine with 9mm/38 special. I will carry a micro 380 if I "really can't carry a gun". (The 32 is purely theoretical.)
4. Accuracy - It has to be accurate, FOR ME, at SD-type range. Most of my handguns are probably more accurate than I am. I need one that I can shoot well.
Tiny - LCPII
Small - LCR
Medium - various medium-framed 2" snubs, G43, G26
2. Concealability - For its niche. Tiny, small, or medium. I'm just not going to carry my SBH, or even pretend that I'm going to carry it.
3. Caliber - 380acp or 32 H&R magnum minimum. I prefer 44/45, but am fine with 9mm/38 special. I will carry a micro 380 if I "really can't carry a gun". (The 32 is purely theoretical.)
4. Accuracy - It has to be accurate, FOR ME, at SD-type range. Most of my handguns are probably more accurate than I am. I need one that I can shoot well.
Tiny - LCPII
Small - LCR
Medium - various medium-framed 2" snubs, G43, G26
cheygriz
member
I strongly disagree. IME,a 1911, or any other single action, is a poor choice for a defensive weapon.
There are good reasons most LE agencies do not allow them, and the world's military organizations dumped them.
OP
OP
Trunk Monkey
member
Then sooner or later you're going to eliminate every gun on the planet
Tallball
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,805
"Then sooner or later you're going to eliminate every gun on the planet."
Maybe. But right now I have seven in my carry rotation that have never malfunctioned. My Makarov isn't in the rotation, but I've owned it for 30 years and it has never once malfunctioned, after thousands of rounds. Almost none of my revolvers ever have.
Maybe. But right now I have seven in my carry rotation that have never malfunctioned. My Makarov isn't in the rotation, but I've owned it for 30 years and it has never once malfunctioned, after thousands of rounds. Almost none of my revolvers ever have.
OP
OP
Trunk Monkey
member
I forgot to mention reliability because most name manufacturers put out reasonable quality products. The only guns I've ever owned that weren't reliable were a couple of Llamas. Every S&W I ever owned was reliable. So was every CZ, Rock Island Armory and Glock. If any of those had proved not reliable of course it would have been removed from "the rotation".
Accuracy isn't on the list because I've found that the more I work on they fundamentals the less the inherent accuracy of the gun matters.
Accuracy isn't on the list because I've found that the more I work on they fundamentals the less the inherent accuracy of the gun matters.
- Status
Similar threads
