[flatrock]

The CCW law goes into effect in Ohio in a little over a month.

I think my P3AT will work well when I can't conceal a larger gun, but I'm looking for something with a little more stopping power than a .380 ACP.

The Khars are out of my price range. I haven't discounted the P11, but I think I'd like something in .40 S/W.

I'm sure everyone has their favorites, but would appreciate some feedback on a few different guns.

Springfield Armory XD Sub Compact
Glock 27
SW99 Compact
Taurus Millenium / Millenium Pro
Any others you might want to suggest.

 

[Flyer]

Glock.
Flyer

 

[G33InMyPocket]

The Taurus Millenniums are nice guns if you are on a tighter budget. Wife has the 40 and nephew has the 45. At least 400 rounds through each without a problem. If ya got the extra cash...Glock.

 

[Harlequin]

Had a PT145 and now carry a Glock 30. Not that I didn't like the Taurus, because I did, but spend a little more and get a Glock. Not necessarily the .45, but a Glock. Get one that's been around for awhile and avoid the fancy calibers like 10mm and .45GAP. Stick with the tried and true. Unless the AW ban sunsets get a subcompact, as your limited to 10 rounds anyway. Even if the AW ban expires, there are extensions that will adapt high caps to the subcompacts. The only reason I see to get a larger gun for concealment is if you need an accessory rail. Small, reliable, powerful. What more could you want?

Other than free?

 

[Flyer]

I was gonna recommend the G-30.
Sizewise, weightwise, and powerwise.... it's one of the very best sidearms available in the universe.
Flyer

 

[flatrock]

The thing I like about the XD is the accessory rail. I guess I need to check with some friends and see if anyone has one of them I can try out. There's a range in Cincinnati that has the Glock 27 and 30 as range rental guns, so I can try out those with an hour drive.

From what I've heard the Taurus sounds like a good gun, but not necessisarily a great gun. There's just nothing about it that seems to make it stand out.

The SW99 seems a bit expensive.

 

[flyandscuba]

How about a KT P-40? I know where there is one available that has been nickle plated by Jack, has the factory night sights, two mags and some other goodies. The guy wants $225 -- not sure if he's willing to negotiate. Send me a PM if interested and I'll forward his contact info to you.

You can buy with confidence from him as I bought a like new HC P-40 from him last year.

 

[Midiman]

Re:

The thing I like about the XD is the accessory rail.

Most Gen 3 Glocks have a rail.

 

[Harlequin]

Subcompact models (like the G30) don't though. Bummer.

 

[marlin336]

The thing I like about the XD is the accessory rail.

This would not a an issue for me in a CCW.

I have handled (not fired) the XD, Glock, Kahr, Taurus and Keltec compacts and subcompacts. I found most to be a little top heavy for my taste (I didn't like the balance). The Glock and Keltec were the best pointers for me but I liked the P-11 a little better.

I would recommend at least handling as many of the top contenders as possible. Shoot them if you can.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Flyer]

I would HATE a forerail on my G-30.
Not as sleek... and what in the Sam Hill would I want to mount anything on it for? It's already got Novak night sights... that's how I aim a pistol.
Flyer

 

[DDGator]

How about a snub-nose S&W j-frame in .38 or .357 Mag.?

Great guns for pocket carry or IWB or Smart Carry, or.... etc.

 

[flatrock]

I've never had either a light or a laser sight on a gun. I just figured it would be nice to have the option so I could see if they were something I wanted.

I can see the advantages of having a light attached to your gun in some situations. I'm also considering night sights which would allow me to aim better in the dark. However, they don't allow me to see and verify my target better.

Since I'm already bringing up subject on which people have strong opinions, I may as well ask this question too.

Why would I want to go with .45 instead of .40?

The .45 provides considerably more power, but I remember seeing studies years ago where that energy wasn't necessisarily transferred into the target. In those tests .45 slugs often overpenetrated and the pullets didn't always expand well in the target before passing through.

Of course that was a number of years ago, and more sutdies may have disproved this since then.

With a .45 I'm going to feel more recoil and have less ammo capacity. The ammo also seems to be considerably more expensive. Unless there's a compelling reason to go with a .45 I'm thinking the .40 makes more sense for me.

 

[Flyer]

Nope, you're likely going to feel LESS recoil with the .45.
The .40 cartridge is a pretty good kicker... most felt recoil is measurable by the max pressure generated, and the .40 is a high-pressure round. So's the 9mm... the .45 is a pussycat in comparison.
Couple the excellent controllability of the .45 with the still-superior larger bullet diameter... and you've got the best self-defense autopistol cartridge there is.
The .40 is good, don't get me wrong... but it's never generated one shot stops in the 95% range like the .45 has.
Flyer

 

[flatrock]

Ok. Now I'm really starting to over analyze things.

I can understand why a lower pressure cartridge would produce less recoil, even while providing more overall power. It can do so because it's the sharp burst of power from the high pressure that causesthe gun to jump in your hand.

If the .45 is lower pressure, does that mean that when the poder ignites it burns slower, and the expansion of the gas from the explosion is slower? If that's the case, does it mean that the .45 loses a greater percentage of it's punch in a shorter barrel than a higher pressure cartridge would?

I just did a search on one shot stops and saw a rate of 96% for the .45, and 94% for the .40. The sample sizes were pretty small, so I'm sure the margin of error is pretty large. The more I lread, the more I think I'm going to be making my decision by shooting a variety of quality guns and buying what I'm most comfortable shooting.

 

[Flyer]

First:
Most of the .40 loads that give that rate of stopping power are very hot Leo loads... 150 grainers at 1200 fps or so. The only equivalent for civilians are the Cor-Bon loads, and they have a very nasty kick and would be virtually uncontrollable in a smaller gun.
The .45 offers that level of stopping power in it's standard loadings... therefore it's ammo is both available, and feels the same while shooting as Winchester white box.
Secondly... it's not really the ft. lbs. of power we're talking, here... it's the frontal area that provides the edge in stopping power. It the hotter loadings the .40 S&W actually is more powerful than the .45.
A shorter barrel, therefore, has less effect on the .45 because it's not dependent on it's velocity for stopping effect nearly as much as the .40.
Flyer

 

[SgtB]

CZ RAMI in .9mm or .40 cal. CZ's are very addictive. I now have 7 and want one of the RAMI's bad.

 

[flatrock]

I think I need a raise so I can collect them all and give them all an extended test run. :lol:

I'm glad my wife doesn't read these boards or she'd be cancelling my credit card about now. :twisted:

edit: Actually it's more likely I'll have to wait to buy another gun until after she gets a new carry gun for herself. Her little Beretta 21 just isn't going to cut it, and she hasn't gotten comfortable with how my P3AT jumps in her hands yet.

 

[tater77]

Like I've said before, make sure you get to shoot before you buy. Just got my hard-chromed P-40 and I love it. First time to the range and I was grouping 6" at 25yds. Best $220 I ever spent.

 

[Midiman]

Re:

Like I've said before, make sure you get to shoot before you buy.

While probably preferable, it's not always possible. There isn't a range that rents guns anywhere within hundreds of miles of here. Every gun I have ever purchased has been sight unseen, ordered through my local dealer... after extensive research on the net. I have not been disappointed yet.... but with the exception of 2 Kel-Tecs, I have stayed away from inexpensive guns.