CCW choices....357Mag. or 45acp?

[AK103K]

Suddenly those extra rounds don't make much difference do they.

So are you saying we really dont have a chance so why bother carrying the extra rounds, cause your done for before you start anyway? Sounds kind of defeatist to me.

I'm sensing that your still thinking of standing your ground and shooting, instead of moving off line, or through your opponent, etc., as you draw and shoot and continue to move and shoot while doing so.

Just because they can cover that ground doesnt mean I need to be waiting there to shoot them. The more you move, and practice shooting while moving, the better your chances. Also, who says you have to, or even want to, wait for them to make the first move? Better to be aggressive and put them behind the curve instead of the other way around.

Being realistic, and having done it, I know I'm not going to get hits with every shot, and if all I have is 5 rounds in the gun, and the scenario doesnt go like I planned, its probably not going to work out like it did in practice.

Likewise, suppose your opponent(s) get to you before you have the chance to make an effective shot.

I would hope your whole plan isnt just your gun, and that you've been keeping up on your grappling skills as well. I suppose because this is a "gun board", the answer to all the problems is a gun, which is far from the answer. Sometimes, your going to have to work at getting to shoot them.

Been staying up with your workouts? Getting close works both ways.

You run the risk of your full-sized auto being pushed out of battery and not firing.

With a revolver, you run the risk of them grabbing your gun and immobilizing it totally, so whats the difference? Revolvers have their weaknesses too, just like anything else.

Both of these situations seem far more likely to me than a prolonged gunfight with multiple attackers.

Regardless, you have to try to work out as many problems as you can and what might realistically occur. The evening news can give you a pretty good idea of what to expect when there is a shooting, knifing, beating, etc.. How many are usually just one on one? Most I see, are usually more than one.

Ar you really sure you can hit your target more than 5 or 6 times in the first place? Are you sure that you can draw your gun and even fire more than 5 or 6 rounds in 1.5 seconds?

Thats the whole point of having more than 5 or 6 rounds in the gun. Allowing for less than perfect shooting on your part, and still having rounds in the gun to continue to solve the problem. Your assuming one specific scenario here, what about the rest of them? This is all fluid and subject to change at any moment. As much as we'd like to, we cant force things into our pre conceived channels, we have to go with the flow and see where we end up.

Whether we realize it or not, most of us have a little different mentality when playing Airsoft, paintball, or lazer tag. In the back of our minds, we know it's just a game and thusly we're more willing to take risks in order to win. I'd be willing to bet that your opponents aren't so brave when real bullets rather than 6mm plastic BB's are flying at them.

While part of what your saying is true, you learn more from the experience than not doing it. Your way ahead of those who just go to the range and calmly stand still and shoot tiny little groups and think they are good shots. It also shows you that maybe your first move isnt to draw the gun, maybe you need to do something else to put yourself in a better position. Its all fluid and different every time, and your opponent is thinking and trying to do the same to you. You dont get that on a static range.

A static range will teach you the basics. Airsoft, Simunitions, ect, will teach you to fight. And thats what this is all about, isnt it? Fighting to win.

Likewise if you're basing your shooting skills on how quickly you can hit a nice static target that, in the back of your mind, you know isn't trying to kill you, you're not being realistic about your abilities.

Absolutely. But you also have to practice, and practicing shooting live ammo with the gun you use, while on the move, will teach you a lot more than just reinforcing "standing there" and shooting. If your lucky, in reality, your opponent is the one who stands there, and it will go a lot like your static practice. If not, your airsoft "games" will have prepared you for the next step.

 

[ckd]

Both nice beefy calibers. I have and shoot both, carry the 45acp for SD, 357 for the woods and trail.

Many have pointed out the variables, and like always, I say shoot a few probable selections in each caliber to fine tune your likes/dislikes.

The single biggest advantage to the 357 revolver is it's range of task specific ammo, including of course 38 special; the second is reliability, and the third speed loaders are cheaper than magazines (at the expense of only a few seconds when reloading).

I prefer most non-1911s (!) for 45 acp., Sig p220, S&W M&P, and the Glock 21sf, with the expception of the Sig, have more capacity, though a stock Colt commander is a favorite.

My favorite smaller 357s are the S&W 66-2 and the 649.

 

[Nnobby45]

Anything is possible, I suppose. However, once you splatter one attacker, the others will likely start thinking twice about what they are doing.

Unless you kill Bubba's brother (his real one) and he's more determined to murder you than when he started. In some social circles, a member is measured by his ability to hang in their and fight and not show cowardice.

Even if you're right, and you likely are, most of the time isn't all the time.

.45 vs. .357 is largely a matter of revolver vs. semi-auto, a subject that's been argued over thru infinitum. Haven't heard any new arguments, either way, so far, though I'm not saying it isn't an interesting subject.

 

[Webleymkv]

Quote:
Suddenly those extra rounds don't make much difference do they.

So are you saying we really dont have a chance so why bother carrying the extra rounds, cause your done for before you start anyway? Sounds kind of defeatist to me.

You're taking my statement out of context. My point was that the extra rounds don't make much difference if you never get the chance to fire them which chances are you won't because you likely won't have time to. I'm not saying that there's no point in carrying but rather it's imperative to make the first few rounds count.

I'm sensing that your still thinking of standing your ground and shooting, instead of moving off line, or through your opponent, etc., as you draw and shoot and continue to move and shoot while doing so.

You're assuming that you'll have both the time and presence of mind to move and that your opponent won't redirect himself to intercept you.

Just because they can cover that ground doesnt mean I need to be waiting there to shoot them. The more you move, and practice shooting while moving, the better your chances. Also, who says you have to, or even want to, wait for them to make the first move? Better to be aggressive and put them behind the curve instead of the other way around.

The law says so. In most states you have to either be attacked or be able to demonstrate that you were in fear of imminent attack before deadly force is justified. Drawing your gun on someone who "looks sucspicious" will land you in jail for brandishing in most states. Of course a small, concealed-hammer revolver could be in your hand inside a coat pocket and still fire multiple times through that pocket should that be necessary. You are already at a disadvantage because you're only justified to defend rather than take the offensive. Also, you're assuming that you'll be able to move.Ssuppose you're in a confined area such as a narrow alley or hallway and don't have anywhere else to move to. As you like to say, you have to plan for the worst case scenario.

Being realistic, and having done it, I know I'm not going to get hits with every shot, and if all I have is 5 rounds in the gun, and the scenario doesnt go like I planned, its probably not going to work out like it did in practice.

You can't miss fast enough to win a gunfight. Counting on capacity to compensate for a lack of marksmanship doesn't seem like a great idea to me. To my way of thinking, if you can't hit your target with at least 17-20% of your shots, you've got bigger problems than the capacity of your gun.

Quote:
Likewise, suppose your opponent(s) get to you before you have the chance to make an effective shot.

I would hope your whole plan isnt just your gun, and that you've been keeping up on your grappling skills as well. I suppose because this is a "gun board", the answer to all the problems is a gun, which is far from the answer. Sometimes, your going to have to work at getting to shoot them.

Who's to say you're going to see your opponent coming? If he disables your arm/hand or tackles you to the ground before you realize what's going on, then you're already at a disadvantage. Wouldn't it be nice to have the firearm that's most likely to work under such less-than-ideal conditions?

Quote:
You run the risk of your full-sized auto being pushed out of battery and not firing.

With a revolver, you run the risk of them grabbing your gun and immobilizing it totally, so whats the difference? Revolvers have their weaknesses too, just like anything else.

But if they don't grab the cylinder, the revolver will still fire multiple times at point-blank range. The majority of major-caliber autos can be pushed out of battery both by your opponent purposely grabbing the slide and by you pushing it up against him.

Quote:
Both of these situations seem far more likely to me than a prolonged gunfight with multiple attackers.

Regardless, you have to try to work out as many problems as you can and what might realistically occur. The evening news can give you a pretty good idea of what to expect when there is a shooting, knifing, beating, etc.. How many are usually just one on one? Most I see, are usually more than one.

Well, you must live in a far more dangerous area than I do (southern Indiana) because most such news reports that I see involve only a single attacker. I agree that you must work out as many possible problems as you can, but I contend that no single gun can solve them all. What you must do then is decide which problems are more likely and pick the gun that adresses them. For me, that gun is a revolver.

Quote:
Ar you really sure you can hit your target more than 5 or 6 times in the first place? Are you sure that you can draw your gun and even fire more than 5 or 6 rounds in 1.5 seconds?

Thats the whole point of having more than 5 or 6 rounds in the gun. Allowing for less than perfect shooting on your part, and still having rounds in the gun to continue to solve the problem. Your assuming one specific scenario here, what about the rest of them? This is all fluid and subject to change at any moment. As much as we'd like to, we cant force things into our pre conceived channels, we have to go with the flow and see where we end up.

I'd be willing to bet that most of us can't draw our gun and fire 5-6 shots at all in 1.5 seconds, much less do it and hit anything. I had my younger brother time me drawing and dry firing at a picture on my wall. It took me 2.34 seconds to draw and dry fire twice and 3.07 seconds to draw and dry fire five times. This is of course just practice as you like to point out, and in the real world conditions could be far worse.

Quote:
Whether we realize it or not, most of us have a little different mentality when playing Airsoft, paintball, or lazer tag. In the back of our minds, we know it's just a game and thusly we're more willing to take risks in order to win. I'd be willing to bet that your opponents aren't so brave when real bullets rather than 6mm plastic BB's are flying at them.

While part of what your saying is true, you learn more from the experience than not doing it. Your way ahead of those who just go to the range and calmly stand still and shoot tiny little groups and think they are good shots. It also shows you that maybe your first move isnt to draw the gun, maybe you need to do something else to put yourself in a better position. Its all fluid and different every time, and your opponent is thinking and trying to do the same to you. You dont get that on a static range.

A static range will teach you the basics. Airsoft, Simunitions, ect, will teach you to fight. And thats what this is all about, isnt it? Fighting to win.

You're missing my point, while I agree that Airsoft and such isn't a bad idea and that target type shooting shouldn't be your sole training tool, Assuming that both you and your attacker(s) will behave the same in a real life-or-death situation the same as you would in a game of Airsoft is a dangerous fallacy.

Quote:
Likewise if you're basing your shooting skills on how quickly you can hit a nice static target that, in the back of your mind, you know isn't trying to kill you, you're not being realistic about your abilities.

Absolutely. But you also have to practice, and practicing shooting live ammo with the gun you use, while on the move, will teach you a lot more than just reinforcing "standing there" and shooting. If your lucky, in reality, your opponent is the one who stands there, and it will go a lot like your static practice. If not, your airsoft "games" will have prepared you for the next step.

Again, I never advocated standing statically at a range shooting paper targets as your sole training regimen. However, you must bear in mind that the goals and therefore tactics of Airsoft are different than those of a real gunfight. In airsoft, the goal is to win the game, thusly I'd be willing to bet that most people are willing to take a bit more risk with regards to cover and such in order to win the game. Afterall, if you step out in the open to get a shot at your opponent and get shot yourself, it's OK in Airsoft because it's just a game and in the back of your mind you know that. In a real gunfight, however, neither you nor your opponent will probably be willing to take such risks because if they don't work out well this time, you're dead. An attacker who wont retreat or take cover in Airsoft because he knows it's just a game and wants to win may not behave the same with real bullets when his own life is on the line.

 

[Woodrowmag]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOll_RK7z40&feature=related

4:20 into the video...357 seems pretty decent against multiple attackers.

 

[AK103K]

Webleymkv,

So this doesnt turn into a longer peeing match than it already is, if your comfortable with a 5 or 6 shot revolver, knock yourself out. Its your decision and choice, and your the one who has to live with it, not me.

I would highly suggest, that if you dont or havent already, you find someplace, or get some buddies together and get a couple of "good" gas airsoft guns, including one or two of the revolvers, and then do what your suggesting and see how things play out.

You get from the experience what you put into it, and it doesnt have to be a "game". I know I've learned more from FOF type practice than I have from shooting static targets that dont think and shoot back. It hasnt always been a pleasant experience either, and what you get hit with isnt always a "bullet" and you dont always stay on your feet and retain your gun. Some games can be more realistic than others.

Good luck to you, and keep working on those 1.5 second draws (they are from concealment, right?) and dumping all your ammo. Maybe we can then discuss whats next when things didnt turn out like "the plan".

357 seems pretty decent against multiple attackers.

Sounds like multiple "unarmed" attackers.

 

[Shane Tuttle]

I think 45acp provide more stopping power and you don't have to worry that the bullet will travel a long way and hurt some random bystanders.

This statement is quite dangerous to actually believe. It's irresponsible to think you don't have to worry about what's beyond your target. It's also irresponsible to think it won't travel far and hurt bystanders.

I ask for clarification of your statement if this isn't what you mean.

 

[Creature]

I suggest you pick the most reliable platform...the revolver. Then learn to shoot it well.

 

[AK103K]

As long as the gun is well made, one is just as reliable as the next for the most part.

I've had both fail, and when it happened, the auto was usually quickly back in action. The revolvers on the other hand, were usually out of action until disassembled or time was taken to determine why the gun would not work. The revolvers tend to be more fragile and subject to dirt malfunctions, especially from the reloading standpoint. You wouldnt think a speck of crap as small as a grain or two of powder could tie a gun up.

I agree, you should learn to shoot a revolver, and shoot (and reload) it properly. Many, if not most I've seen, but especially younger shooters, dont know what that is. DA triggers are your friend. Once you learn to shoot one, you can pretty much shoot anything you pick up.

 

[Creature]

he revolvers on the other hand, were usually out of action until disassembled or time was taken to determine why the gun would not work. The revolvers tend to be more fragile and subject to dirt malfunctions, especially from the reloading standpoint. You wouldnt think a speck of crap as small as a grain or two of powder could tie a gun up.

What revolver was it that a speck of dirt caused it to be completely out of action??

 

[AK103K]

Ive personally had S&W's have the problem, and seen others at the range who did also. It tends to be more of a problem when using the wrong loads for the gun, and reloading the gun improperly, IE., dumping the empties "muzzle down". Crap gets under the extractor star and binds the gun up to the point you cant get the cylinder closed or if you do, you cant pull the trigger, or it becomes very difficult to pull the trigger due to the cylinder binding.

It takes a lot less than you would think to cause the problem too, and most dont have a clue as to why its happening.

Its usually a lot less of an issue if you dump the empties "muzzle up", as your supposed to with a normal side opening revolver reload. The crap stays in the cases as they fall free, instead of falling out under the extractor star.

 

[Playboypenguin]

I know I am a bit late to this thread...

My opinion is going to be based on necessity and not so much on personal preference. I much prefer a revolver, but a six shot revolver is a bit bulky for me to carry/conceal during my daily routine. Therefore, I would have to chose the compact semi-auto.

 

[deputy tom]

I like a small .45acp over a .357 mag snubby due to the former's lighter recoil,less noise and flatter shape making it easier for me to conceal.YMMV.tom.

 

[Creature]

Ive personally had S&W's have the problem, and seen others at the range who did also. It tends to be more of a problem when using the wrong loads for the gun, and reloading the gun improperly, IE., dumping the empties "muzzle down". Crap gets under the extractor star and binds the gun up to the point you cant get the cylinder closed or if you do, you cant pull the trigger, or it becomes very difficult to pull the trigger due to the cylinder binding.

I shoot revolvers a LOT and I have never had that happen to me. But I will keep it in mind...in fact, I am going to try to get my revolver to fail in this way tomorrow.

 

[Socrates]

Between these two choices, which one would you choose and why? This will be my personal CCW weapon.

.357Mag. revolver, 2" barrel and 6 shot cylinder.
OR
45acp compact semi-auto, 3" barrel and 6 shot magazine.

Your opinions and experiences are appreciated.

6 shot would be heavy enough to help with the .357 recoil. If it was me, and, I can carry that, I'd add an inch to the barrel.

As you can see from the following, there is a BIG difference between a 2" and 3" barrel. From
www.buffalobore.com

S&W mod. 340PD 1-7/8 inch barrel—1,015 fps (361 ft. lbs.)
S&W mod. 66 2-½-inch barrel—1,097 fps (422 ft. lbs.)
S&W mod. 65 3-inch barrel—1,172 fps (481 ft. lbs.)
S&W Mt. Gun 4-inch barrel—1,232 fps (532 ft. lbs.)
Colt Python 6-inch barrel—1,198 fps (503 ft. lbs.)

WARNING—shooting this ammo out of revolvers weighing less than 16 OZ. produces tremendous felt recoil. We recommend our +P 38 SPL ammo for revolvers that weigh less than 16 OZ., if you are recoil sensitive.

Item 19F/20—140gr. Sierra JHC bullet (jacketed hollow cavity) @ 1,150 fps from a 2.5 inch barreled S&W mod. 66. Designed to mushroom and penetrate deeply—roughly 12 to 14 inches in human tissue.

S&W mod. 340PD 1-7/8 inch barrel—1,088 fps (368 ft. lbs.)
S&W mod. 66 2.5 inch barrel—1,156 fps (415 ft. lbs.)
S&W mod. 65 3 inch barrel—1,246 fps (483 ft. lbs.)
S&W Mt. Gun 4 inch barrel—1,321 fps (542 ft. lbs.)
Colt Python 6 inch barrel—1,286 fps (514 ft. lbs.)

WARNING—shooting this ammo out of revolvers weighing less than 16 OZ produces tremendous felt recoil. We recommend our +P 38 SPL ammo for revolvers that weigh less than 16 OZ., if you are recoil sensitive.

Item 19G/20—125gr. Speer Unicore (Gold Dot) bullet @ 1,225 fps from a 2.5 inch S&W mod. 66 barrel. Designed to mushroom violently, yet hold together and penetrate deeply—roughly 12 to 14 inches in human tissue.

S&W mod. 340PD 1-7/8 inch barrel— 1,109 fps (341 ft. lbs.)
S&W mod. 66 2-½-inch barrels—1,225 fps (416 ft. lbs.)
S&W mod. 65 3-inch barrels— 1,322 fps (485 ft. lbs.)
S&W Mt. Gun 4-inch barrel— 1,445 fps (579 ft. lbs.)
Colt Python 6-inch barrel— 1,388 fps (535 ft. lbs.)

As for the .45 shortys, while I have had a reliable 3" UCII, Rich now has it, I'd rather have the better ballistics of either a 3.5" to 4.25" barrel, with an Officers length grip.

If I was going to get a 3", it would be a Colt. I've compared the different actions, and tolerances used in some of the short 3" barrel versions, and, the only one that seems to consistently get high reviews, is the Colt.
I think the reason for it is they use the same tolerances as the Commander and full sized guns, and don't alter anything else. In other words, the amount of forgiveness in the action is the same as the commander sized guns, in the CCO, and the Officer's model.

That said, my favorite is the Detonics. It's nice and heavy, and this makes the springs last longer, and, the slide seems to weigh almost as much as a full sized gun. It worked in 1980, and, I shot heck out of it then, do the same now. 3.5" barrel.

Orion pmed me about a good point: Depending on your size, none of the larger guns may work. If that's the case....

 

[shortwave]

For cc between the two the 45acp would be(sometimes is) my choice. My usual ccw is S&W 642 or 442 with +P 38 JHP.

 

[Webleymkv]

I've had both fail, and when it happened, the auto was usually quickly back in action. The revolvers on the other hand, were usually out of action until disassembled or time was taken to determine why the gun would not work.

That can happen with autos too. I once had my CZ-75 jam up so badly that it had to be disassembled to clear the problem. I made the mistake of shooting Silver Bear 145grn JHP and one out-of-spec (though not visibly so) round got stuck part way into the chamber and couldn't be extracted by retracting the slide. For safety's sake (I don't like trying to work on a gun with a cocked hammer and live round in the chamber) I had to disassemble the gun before carefully removing the offending round.

 

[AK103K]

Anything can have a problem, its usually the revolvers that lock up so tight your instantly out of the game unless you have a back up.

The autos are not usually as unforgiving and are usually quickly remedied with a TRB or RTRB.

The only auto I've owned that stopped working and would not function without a trip back to the factory was a Glock 17. It did the same thing twice, and is the main reason I dont have any Glocks today.


The two biggest issues I've had with revolvers have been the ejector rod backing out and not allowing the gun to be opened, and the bullets moving forward under recoil and tying up the cylinder. I've also had a squib drive the bullet into the forcing cone and lock the gun up. I've had the screw that holds the cylinder in place fall out, which caused the cylinder fall off the gun when I went to reload.

I've also had a couple of S&W 940's (two successive guns, one was the firsts replacement) lock up totally due to breakages, as well as a Model 29.

 

[T.A.Sharps]

The basic argument of reliability against semi autos is that they have more moving parts, and more moving parts equals more chances for something to fail. A revolver would be more reliable only because it has to rely on less things happening for the primer to be struck.

By all that logic I would think that the more reliable pistol would be a Colt SAA, where the hammer pin actually strikes the primer itself.

Just because it is a semi auto doesn't mean it is going to have some failure enough to worry about it. I would never rely on an unproven anything. But people bring up the argument "...would you want to risk it when your life depended on it..."

In my life both events, needing to shoot someone, and the possibility of a semi auto failure are both highly unlikely. I would never worry about a failure in my semi auto unless I have begun to have them more than a few times. Same would go for my revolver.

Under the same scope of concern you could worry about having the best primer, and the best powder that you reload for every week, just to make sure. Or you would have to get something with out a safety or grip safeties, because they could foul your shot if something is wrong with your grip.

The only time I would wonder at all if someone would be able to shoot me is if you gave them a cap'n'ball or flintlock and I was about 25 yrds away. I can see enough variables there to feel more confident. For a moment.

If you gave them a S&W or a Colt Model 70, (let alone the range of 7 yards) I would sh!t my pants and die just the same.

If you want the absolute fail safe, always reliable, weapon, where the only shortcomings are concealment and range, I would suggest....

 

[Deet]

.357 magnum 125gr JHP. It doesn't get much better than that.