I'd prefer a 6+1 in a Sig to ANY revolver.

bc

BC, I know you are a big proponent of 9mm and shot placement, If you had to choose of the 3 calibers, what would you choose?

.45ACP.

I did not vote, as I really believe you're handicapping yourself by choosing one of those calibers. If you want my honest opinion, you'd be just as well served with a quality 9mm. It's cheaper to shoot, and recoils less so you'll have less tiring during your practice sessions (how often do you practice and how many rounds do you typically fire?).

You're right, I'm a huge proponent of the 9mm. I've seen too many examples of shooters who do not shoot well with their chosen .40, yet when given a 9mm improve dramatically with only a few rounds fired. I've also seen too many shooters who normally shoot 9mm develop flinching or recoil anticipation after only a few magazines of the heavier caliber. I think the 9mm's cost allows for more practice over the heavier calibers, which creates better shot placement, which makes more confident shooters. The 9mm is easier on the guns themselves, as a side benefit (your gun will last longer with less periodic maintenance).

While many would argue with me, and probably will, I do fire (and see fired) a LOT of rounds every year. If I thought there were something better out there, I'd choose it regardless of cost.

I really do not like the .40, that's pretty well known.

Honestly, I don't have enough trigger time behind a .357 to make a fair assessment of the caliber's recoil properties. I do know that it's LOUD when compared to it's contemporaries and that it does recoil more than other calibers. I've fired them a few times, but I don't count anything less than 500 rounds behind a caliber "experience".

bc

As I said above I have been hitting forum after forum and debate after debate of the battle between .357 sig and .40 S&W.

The conclusion that I have come to is the one I suspected and honestly feared.

While most people seem to agree the .357 sig has lighter recoil, that is the only unifomrity I saw in all the things I read all afternoon!

some say it penetrates better, some say no, .40 does, and you get an endless list of well it goes x amount of inches into the balistic gel and has this velocity and this weight and this powder and you have to have the +p rounds and........ its all being written by God knows who...

a lot of the stuff I read also had the 9mm argument as well, that the rounds are not so much better than the 9mm that they are worth the trade off - this argument seems to make a lot of sense to me, but then... I keep thinking back to take down power.

now I know shot placement is key, no two shootings are the same, so what do you do?

I keep thinking of a guy who I know, swears by the fact that he loves .40 cause he read somewhere that of all the LEO shootouts in the country, .40 put the BG down 96% of the time, beating .45 by about 5%.

Sure that may be true, but all that might mean is that the guys shooting .40 had better hit placement, whether by luck or training.

I don't get to practise much, maybe one to two hundred rounds per trip, and then trips are anywhere from one to three months apart.

I shoot very well with my Sig in .40. But BC, now you have me curious to see how well I would shoot it with a 9mm barrel, or even get a P239 with a 9mm barrel...


... my brain hurts...

This post has been edited by captainbarred: August 29th 2007 8:50 PM

I gotta agree with you.
I love my 45 kimber U CDP II.
But a 9 is so much easier to practice with. But being a reloader cost is negligible to me.
I have both and now carry both.
I'm comfortable with both and my abilities with either. I like the options of having both depending on the conditions.
For me it's easier to pick up bad habits when I shoot a 9mm.
Then I can transfer the corrections back to my 45. Or at least be more aware of them.

I went for the .40, I have several of them and like them awful well.

Here's how I see it:

Handguns suck. Period. I've said this before, I'll say it a thousand times again. Handguns suck. All of the standard service calibers, 9mm through .45ACP suck about equally. When you factor in all of the "facts" and all of the "knockdown power" and they are all about the same when it comes to actually stopping a threat.

The single most important element in shooting a human being is shot placement. Poor hits are poor hits, regardless of the caliber designation on the barrel.

I take the 9mm. While it sucks just as much as the other service calibers, I get more rounds in my magazine, light recoil, and cost effective training ammunition.

bc

If you like tearing arms off you should try some of these 58 caliber Minie balls

Well, as they are NRA certified instructors, who do you believe?

I would actually believe you over them cause I do know that you know your shit. Again, I was just going by what I was taught.

I'm a NRA certified instructor, too.

I'll be the first to say that many of the NRA's instructors shouldn't be. I applaud them for their willingness to do something for the shooting sports, but decry their lack of actual knowledge.

I understand your position. You were taught something, by someone in a position of authority....why wouldn't that "fact" be correct? I'm shaking my head at this whole thing, really.

The wealth of misinformation in the shooting world is truly scary.

bc

The promised link:

CLICKY

I knew I had it somewhere.

bc

I love that site!!!

It is true, but oh well right. Also, the person that taught this class has done ALOT with protecting Ohios firearms laws and CCW rights.

So thats why I was a firm believer in that.

A friend of mine posted this somewhere, and while he was quoting someone else, it's still very much true:



Questions of caliber often become moot, once people realize that any cartridge meeting the minimum standards for self defense will work. 9mm, .40, .45, .357, .44mag, all will do, if you will.

This post has been edited by Pepper: September 2nd 2007 4:15 AM

I like that, its simple and honest.

You fools are now making me look at the P239 in 9mm

lets face it, it will be a heck of a lot easier to conceal than any .45 and any 9m will have 10 rounds at least.

I was doing some draw and dry-fire drills with my P229 today and I am starting to like the idea of DAO.

The pull is 8lb. 2lb lighter than the SA/DA, but the consistent trigger pull takes out a big variable in the training...

You could do a hell of a lot worse (especially if the P239 in question has a DAK trigger).

bc

Why don't you buy one of each. Then you do not have to worry about it.

The sad part is how I could be convinced pretty easily to buy any sig on the market....

except the 1911s, they are nice, but...




AWAY FROM ME SATAN!!!!!