Steelers252006
New member
Very, very nice choices, gentleman!!
If you could have one of each and only one
- Thread starter Steelers252006
- Start date
lambertsteeth
New member
Smith mod 57 .41 mag.- Great power, modest recoil.
Sig 229 in 40 cal.- Good capacity, comfy shooter, great reliabilty, good size for ccw.
Sig 229 in 40 cal.- Good capacity, comfy shooter, great reliabilty, good size for ccw.
I agree with the post that identifies Rural Carry versus Urban Carry.
However, I would go one farther: Urban Open Carry vs Urban Concealed Carry.
I am in California, so mag limits are in effect.
Urban Open Carry:
Semi-Auto: M&P .45 full sized- as it gives 10+1 rounds of .45 where I want it, when I want it. I love 1911s, but they have 8 rounds instead.
Revolver: Ruger GP100 4" barrel- able to fire full-buffalo bore type hot loads if I need to shoot an engine block or through a door when on the mean streets.
Urban concealed carry:
Semi-Auto: Toss-up between M&P 9c [I don't shoot .40S&W well at all] and a commander-length barreled 1911. I have the M&P9c and a Kimber Compact II, for example. I shoot 9mm better, especially with my left/off hand [due to an accident and long-term weakness in my left wrist], than .45, so I could hit what I was aiming at. Love the balance/feel of both, and they conceal pretty good on me.
Revolver: probably the Ruger LCR, as it has a VERY nice DAO trigger out of the box and would fit in pocket or inside waste-band pretty well.
Rural open carry:
Semi-Auto: Hmmmm. I'd really probably go back to the M&P .45 FS, but that is because 10mm is too much for my left wrist while I can do .45 for a magazine worth, if needed. Again, I LIKE a LOT of other pistols, but 10 rounds of .45acp in +P is a pretty good package.
Revolver: .44Mag version, probably a Ruger SuperRedHawk with 7.5 barrel, but that would be difficult to pull out in an emergency. I just like the ability to handle hi pressure .44mag loads for longer than a S&W 629 or 29. Would prefer a barrel around 5.5" instead though, so might go RedHawk, or a 5" 629 instead.
I agree. There are TOO many great designs.
And the selections may change if I were in another state and could carry a Glock 17 with a 20 round magazine, for example.
However, I would go one farther: Urban Open Carry vs Urban Concealed Carry.
I am in California, so mag limits are in effect.
Urban Open Carry:
Semi-Auto: M&P .45 full sized- as it gives 10+1 rounds of .45 where I want it, when I want it. I love 1911s, but they have 8 rounds instead.
Revolver: Ruger GP100 4" barrel- able to fire full-buffalo bore type hot loads if I need to shoot an engine block or through a door when on the mean streets.
Urban concealed carry:
Semi-Auto: Toss-up between M&P 9c [I don't shoot .40S&W well at all] and a commander-length barreled 1911. I have the M&P9c and a Kimber Compact II, for example. I shoot 9mm better, especially with my left/off hand [due to an accident and long-term weakness in my left wrist], than .45, so I could hit what I was aiming at. Love the balance/feel of both, and they conceal pretty good on me.
Revolver: probably the Ruger LCR, as it has a VERY nice DAO trigger out of the box and would fit in pocket or inside waste-band pretty well.
Rural open carry:
Semi-Auto: Hmmmm. I'd really probably go back to the M&P .45 FS, but that is because 10mm is too much for my left wrist while I can do .45 for a magazine worth, if needed. Again, I LIKE a LOT of other pistols, but 10 rounds of .45acp in +P is a pretty good package.
Revolver: .44Mag version, probably a Ruger SuperRedHawk with 7.5 barrel, but that would be difficult to pull out in an emergency. I just like the ability to handle hi pressure .44mag loads for longer than a S&W 629 or 29. Would prefer a barrel around 5.5" instead though, so might go RedHawk, or a 5" 629 instead.
I agree. There are TOO many great designs.
And the selections may change if I were in another state and could carry a Glock 17 with a 20 round magazine, for example.
moose_nukelz
New member
Glock 19 and a Smith & Wesson 686 with a 6 inch barrel
Sharpsdressed Man
Moderator
I find writers and producers choices for gun in the movies interesting, and often more sound than many would give credit over. I used to laugh at Ian Fleming's choice of the Beretta .25 in the early Bond books, until I shot several, and had one print a fist sized group at 32 yards. Same with Boothroyd's later suggestion that Bond be armed with a Walther PPk .32; still not yet a "mans gun". Shooting a Walther PPk and hitting a guy (paper silhouette) in the head more times than not at 50 yards make me a believer. It was just insane. Along comes Indiana Jones, with a relic of a revolver, even for the time period the movies were set in. He also packed a Browning Hi Power, seen in the first movie. Well, the Browning had just come on the scene in 1935-36, and few could have been in private hands then, but it had to be quite an innovation at the time. I have procured a nice S&W Hand Ejector, that started out as a British .455, sold to them in 1915-1916, while Britain was at war. My gun had previously been rechambered to .45 Colt; which was fine with me. I had the barrel shortened to 4", as was the Raiders gun, and lo and behold, it it also an elegant handling and accurate defensive arm. It just LOOKS old and decrepit. I could easily be made to do with a vintage Browning Hi Power, and this old S&W 2nd Model Hand Ejector. They both are finely accurate, easy handling, solid as rocks, and deadly in skilled hands. A bit of the old Hollywood, but based on sound choices for their day, and I can and have stood them up against many modern self defense choices from the modern lot, and they are not lacking.
[/IMG]
[/IMG]