Is the CZ 805 Bren S1 Pistol good for home defense?

Is the CZ 805 Bren S1 Pistol good for home defense?

  • Yes

    Votes: 11 45.8%

  • No

    Votes: 13 54.2%
  • Total voters
    24
Status
Not open for further replies.
The penetrating power of the .223/5.56 round is substantially greater than most handgun rounds. I appreciate that these weapons are powerful and can hold many more rounds than typical handguns, but I tend to view them more as novelties than practical weapons when it comes to home defense.

If the home security alarm is blaring, or I hear things going bump in the night, I want a handgun on the bedside nightstand (or, in my case, in the half-opened drawer of that same nightstand) -- a weapon that would be easily brought into play with just one hand as I figure out what's going on, get myself oriented, make sure my spouse knows what's going on, etc., etc.

I'd argue that the extra penetrating power of what is basically a military weapon (with much higher velocity rounds) can also be a potential negative when used indoors, for if you must fire you can't be sure where and how far each round will go. Others in the house, neighbors, etc., could be more at risk than if you were using a typical center-fire handgun.

Perhaps others here will offer some convincing arguments FOR the use of this type weapon that I've ignored or overlooked...
 
223/5.56 actually penetrates LESS than most pistol rounds on average, due to its tendency to fragment. All the other arguments have their merits, but penetration is not a valid one.
 
Of course it is! It's about as good as any other gun for home defense if you get good at using it. If you hit your target it's as good as most anything else. It's a gun firing lead at 3000fps +/-. What part of getting hit by a piece of lead in the gut at 3000fps isn't going to make the BG stop and think breaking into your house maybe wasn't such a good ideal?

If this were the 1890's and someone was asking whether the .32 extra short used in the Chicago Palm Pistol is a good gun for home defense, there might be some debate to be had here. The stuff we have access to for "home defense" today is beyond effective.
 
Last edited:
Caliber wise fine.

Platform wise........
Unwieldy
Lots of muzzle flash
Loud
Hard to shoot accurately under stress
Heavy


Honesty I would rather have a handgun, straight stocked 18 inch shotgun, lever gun or AR15orothersubstitute.

I mean it's not shooting kittens of course but for me personally those types of pistol long arms are novelties.
 
I would rather have a regular handgun and I own Cz pistols. That gun would be harder to handle and it would be really loud indoors. Heck it would be really loud outdoors.
 
You also forgot 'expensive,' cslinger. There are many cheaper options for "unwieldy & impractical stockless SBR" on the market ;)

TCB
 
That's because EVERY GUN must have a purpose of course.

They can't say the purpose is for s$3ts and giggles. Which in my book is a perfectly valid reason. I mean I own a Ruger Charger. There is a gun with no other purpose then to sit my butt down and make noise and giggle.

Honestly by all accounts the Bren pistol and carbine are good examples of the breed. If you want one get one. Enjoy it. Have fun. You don't need a reason beyond that.

If you are very specifically looking for a "weapon" to use for defense I say skip the Bren Pistol. Get the Bren Carbine. (I still think there are a great many better choices but the carbine will at least bring with it lots of advantages and capabilities far and away over the pistol.)

Heck I think the Skorpian carbine would make a dandy little home defense gun.
Lighter
Cheaper
Less noise
Less flash
Easier to store
Quicker to swing
Easier to hold one handed if necessary
Still have lots of capacity (although my take on this is there is never a reason not to have more this should never be a primary consideration beyond 10 rounds or so. )
 
I have no idea why most votes are no.

It would make a great home defense weapon. The best is based on preference. It definitely has its drawbacks, loud with the short barrel, slightly more unwieldy without a stock.

People can debate handgun/shotgun/ semi-auto rifle all day as best, but the bottom line is they are all fairly adequate and all have their drawbacks. I personally prefer a semi auto rifle for some of the reasons mentioned above.

As far as it being a pistol, that is again a personal decision. It is close range but you still have to aim. I would recommend at the minimum a sling to push against to stabilize the gun. If you can become proficient shooting it that way then I say go for it.

This really isn't a debate on which is best. I think if he brought up a single shot .22 that more objection would be warranted but he asked if it is serviceable and I think that platform is more than adequate.
 
It's terrible for home defense.

It's horrifically expensive, unwieldy, heavy, hard to aim, and might even blow your eardrums out when used indoors.
 
BigBL87 said:
223/5.56 actually penetrates LESS than most pistol rounds on average, due to its tendency to fragment. All the other arguments have their merits, but penetration is not a valid one.
Click to expand...

I'll accept everyone's claim that .223/5.56 penetrates less than I thought, but a number of videos (two posted below) suggest that fragmentation and penetration is better for the rifle round than most claim. These videos DO support the claim that the .223/5.56 round DOES NOT super-penetrate (which was my concern).

The .223/5.56 round DOES do more damage early on, however, than a handgun (and since it's traveling at more than 2000 fps, likely to have more demaging effect on a human target. (If you found it necessary to shoot through a wall to hit someone on the other side, the .223/5.56 is likely to be a better stopper than many handgun rounds.)

Note: there's probably better loads for all of these tests and better comparisons than the ones compared in these videos, and a longer-barrel carbine will probably perform somewhat better than the shorter-barreled handgun version of the same basic weapon (that is the subject of this discussion).

Here's two videos easily found. The second video might suggest that shotguns rule (00 Buckshot.)

9mm vs 5.56 (through wall and water jugs and vests)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiAQT96j2ZY

The following video suggests something slightly different, but all weapons get the job done.

9mm vs. 5.56 vs. shotgun (drywall penetration)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXOIQgfvVlE

g.willikers said:
Got to admit the intimidation factor is large.
Click to expand...

A lot of folks may not be as intimidated by a .223/5.56 handgun as they would by a shotgun, because they may not understand WHAT IT IS they are facing... Intimidation assumes you still haven't decided to pull the trigger and only works if the other person SEES the weapon (i.e., is close, you're in the light and both the weapon and you can be seen) -- conditions that put YOU at a possible disadvantage. If you've already fired it, some may be intimidated while by the flash and bang (shock and awe!), but others may be firing back.
 
Last edited:
Ammunition does matter in your selection. 00 Buck will penetrate a lot more than #1 Buck or #4.

Same goes with your 5.56 or .223 loading. I would choose something lightweight in either frangible or soft point. Preferably frangible.

5.56 or .223 still have plenty of power but if it breaks up upon hitting barriers, those fragments will have far less momentum. If you are talking on the other side of the room going through drywall, it wont lose a lot of energy, but if you are talking the round exiting your house, I would think that the 5.56 would be less damaging going through several barriers or dense barriers.

The only major objection I see would be due to the short barrel. You will get a lot of flash and bang. It could be disorienting at the minimum. You could permanently go deaf. Obviously everyone's threshold is different but that could be said of any gun. The db rating will be much higher than the other options.

Personally, I prefer to choose the best platform to stop the threat. That is decision #1 for me. Next is the potential to hurt an innocent bystander or family member. This is a double edged sword because I feel with a rifle I have the most accuracy potential and therefore limit a stray round. Damage potential is also high. A 5.56 losing momentum upon fragmentation makes me feel better too. However, a 5.56 after hitting a barrier can veer off course which makes me nervous. Always know your target and whats beyond. In addition, while I am of the mindset of choosing the best choice for my families safety, the loudness can also permanently impair them. A tough choice to make and why the hearing protection act needs to pass through and suppressors need to be more accepted.

At the end of the day, I manipulate a rifle the best, shoot it the best and have the best option for followup shots, ammunition capacity and threat stopping potential. There are downsides but staying alive is the highest priority. IMHO an SBR with a suppressor would be the best tool. Take my 2 cents for what they are worth. And that is only one man's opinion.

Is the Bren pistol the worst platform, no. Is it the best, not for me to say as it's a personal choice. But it is definitely not a poor contender.
 
ATN, here's my .02 worth on your question. Having searched many residences for bad guys, I believe I can relate to the subject. I'm not suggesting anyone search their house if something goes bump in the night, but can relate to being in dark, tight, cluttered, residential spaces, moving with a firearm. I could have been armed with a rifle or shotgun but was much more confident moving in tight spaces with a pistol. The last thing I'd want, for some of the same reasons others have mentioned, is a giant rifle caliber "pistol" thing. Not saying it wouldn't be fun, possibly impressive to friends and onlookers at the range,etc. Good for home defense though? Yes, good in the sense that it is at least a firearm. But optimum? Not so much IMHO. But hey, what do I know? I've never even played World of Warcraft;)
 
I've seen several of those penetration test videos.

Using light weight 55gr varmint based bullets, they begin breaking up in the first interior wall.

Now if you are leaning against the wall and someone shoots at you through it, you are likely in for a bad time, though maybe not as bad had there not been a wall... But if you are on the other side of the room, it seems there would be a significant reduction in potential lethality, as the fragments spread out and shead velocity.

From the reading and research I have done, 55-60gr varmint based bullets for concerns that misses will overly penetrate, at a loss in terminal performance on humans. (Still good, but can be less effective on very determined attackers, requiring several shots) 60-65gr loads optimized for medium game like deer are excellent stoppers, but penetrate walls very easily.

Most loads marketed for police and defense use, fall into one of these two concepts.


As far as using an AR pistol or similar concept... I am not a fan of them. I have shot them and do not find them fun. Even using a cheek weld, controllability is not very good. Better than a standard pistol, but not as good as a rifle.

I have a 16" AR ready to go for defense in my home. Used properly, it's not much harder to wield than a SBR.

I want a proper Bren 805 rifle, I hear a lot of good things, but I don't think the pistol version is going to be good for any practical use, for me anyway.
 
Last edited:
They are very large, unwieldy, and somewhat difficult to aim in their current configuration. I could see it being good for property defense if I owned a shop which I thought may be the target of multiple armed robbers where firepower might be a significant factor. For the house, there is probably better. If I wanted a CZ "not a long gun" long gun, I would recommend the Scorpion for that (particularly with a sling, angled grip, and some kind of cheek rest)

http://cz-usa.com/product/cz-scorpion-evo-3-s1-pistol/

Of course, that doesn't keep me from wanting an 805 SBR badly :D a configuration which I feel would be much more useful aside from the current legal standing of having too short a barrel
 
The other point, already mentioned, is the LOUDNESS of the .223/5.56!

In a home, even the best hearing protection might not be enough to keep your hearing from being badly (and permanently) damaged if it's fired indoors.

You may argue "better deaf than dead," but it doesn't have to be one or the other. (I now keep electronic muffs near my bed, for use with my 9mm or .45. I can let me hear better than the other guy, and protect my hearing, too!)
 
Walt, it seems you haven't enjoyed the "pleasure" of shooting rifles on indoor ranges. When I still lived in the Chicago Suburbs, I took my 16 inch barrel 308 FAL to and indoor range. Plugs and muffs with that one!

Had the gang bangers at the far end of the range wondering what the heck is that!

When... the hearing protection act passes - allowing us to buy suppressors on a 4473. That pistol would be a perfect host for a suppressor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top