the allure of small guns, big calibers...

J

JERRYS.

New member
guns such as the once popular Glock 39 45gap, the Glock 27 .40, the Kahr PM45 or PM40, the Charter Arms Bulldog .44spl., the Taurus 445 .44spl. et cetera..... There are guns the same size that hold more bullets yet still in service calibers.... but people still gravitate towards these hand cannons-why?

I know my reasons, let's hear yours. :)
 
Last edited:
I have a S&W 696, three inch (.44 Special, L frame, 5 shot), that I like very much. I have owned a .44 Special N frame (M28 converted to .44 Spl.), six-shot 4 inch. at one time. the smaller M696 is noticeably handier and somewhat lighter without much noticeable change in handling characteristics.

I carry it only when in my own woods.

I like it better than the M28, but cannot really give a reason why other than it is very slightly easier to carry without giving up the big (but loaded very miild), bullet. The load was the same for both, a double-action shooting friendly, 6.5 Unique under a home-cast 245 grain Keith-type bullet.
 
Does my T/C Contender 10" 45-70 count?:D

But it probably doesn't match the reasoning of a larger, more powerful clambering in a small, easily concealable handgun.
That thinking isn't hard to follow if you have a CCW permit.
While not as small as some, my Springfield XD40 Sub Compact is on the edge of your intended point. Also, less than 40 caliber, but still a powerful round in a small handgun is my Kahr CM9.

Although I don't need it, A Charter Bulldog is high on my short list for this year.
 
I carry my Taurus M450 Titanium 45 Colt snobby. Punches a big hole yet light weight.
781701d1419618947-glimpse-my-little-collection-45-c-w-holster.jpg
 
peggysue, that's nice but why that over something in the same size with more bullets?
Click to expand...
Same size with more bullets is an oxymoron. The five shooters are always smaller (smaller cylinder, smaller frame, less weight than a full-size service gun.) Other than that, a person my opt to carry a gun that only shoots five (in regard to revolvers), because they do not anticipate needing more.

but people still gravitate towards these hand cannons-why?
Click to expand...
The obvious answer would be: Because they anticipate having to carry the gun way more than actually shoot it. And when they have to shoot it, it will likely be at very close range where a full-size service type gun's advantage of weight (for controllably) and longer sight-radius is unnecessary.
 
Last edited:
There are guns the same size that hold more bullets yet still in service calibers.... but people still gravitate towards these hand cannons-why?
Click to expand...
because people believe they have more "stopping power".
 
I bought a Charter Arms Bulldog back in the 1970s, still have it. I have often wondered why large bore revolvers went out of fashion, that big old hunk of lead was always a manstopper.
 
My way of thinking, is this time of year, people and critters both have more layers of protection from the weather. A 380. 38-357, 9mm or 40 hollow point can fill up with some of this excess material and basically become a FMJ, by starting out with a bigger bullet your not as concerned about expansion. Just my way of thinking. As I sit here at the keyboard my fingers are cramped and hurt, big cartridges are easier for some of use to handle. At the reloading press it's also easier for me to load 40+ over say my 32 mags. Besides big bores look good.
 
I don't know, but if people knew their shot to shot splits with this kind of caliber to gun size, they might rethink it.

Seriously, with my 380, I was shooting 5yd splits of like .35s. With my 5" 45, I was closer to .50s. I know I'll get better, but the point is your split time will go up with recoil and down with weight. . . .
 
Nathan, in a real world situation, that .15 of a second won't matter. if guy A shoots .15 of a second faster than guy B does, guy A will still get K5'ed. besides, that only applies to second or third shots, the first ones will be the same.
 
Jerry, if shot to shot times are not significant, maybe we should all carry 44 mags??

To your point, I'm not sure .35 to .5 is huge. . . .I was trying to show how this will extrapolate as you go from something like a Glock 19 9mm to a Kahr P45 or smaller. Just guessing that a guy with splits of .35 on the Glock would see splits like .6 - .7 on the small 45 Auto. At some point, you are just not getting enough lead on target!
 
I just don't want to get caught in a situation where I wished I had a .45.

If you can predict that your gunfight will occur face to face with a lightly clothed, thin skinned, drug free human with no barriers in between and both of you start shooting at the same time (maybe someone yells 'go'), then a .380 sounds great.

.45s help cover the unpredictable.
 
I don't like little big guns. Recoil is too brutal and yes, I'm older and am not a recoil junkie. Remember Mel Tappan! He paid for it when he got older.
 
Recoil is too brutal and yes, I'm older and am not a recoil junkie. Remember Mel Tappan! He paid for it when he got older.
Click to expand...

Mel's problem, if I remember the story right, was being wheelchair bound from a messed up foot (and getting obese as a consequence).
 
Nothing wrong with smaller guns in larger caliber, I've shot the XDS and I have a CM40. Recoil is more but I don't find it to be distracting, and the little Kahr is very pocketable, which is saying something since it's a .40 cal with six rounds in it and a spare mag or two close by. It's been reliable and accurate, so I can't really complain about that and really even from the 3" bbl it doesn't lose much velocity, most factory 180's still hover in the 950-975 fps range, 165's around the high 1000's to lower 1100's.

Granted it's not as small as an LCP or my CW380, but it's still very much small enough to pocket carry with ease. Very impressed with it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top