Gun suggestions

[JohnRov]

As was asked before, what are you going to use these for? And as an aside, there are so many opinions in the firearms community as to what caliber is best, which manufacturer is best, etc, that you will have a headache trying to sort it all out. The best way to start is to find someone who shoots and try out as many firearms as you can. Take an NRA First Steps or Basic course (they have them for rifle, shotgun, and pistol) to learn the basics. Then make your own decision. Aside from the .22 being an adequate defensive round and the recommendation that you go for a custom 1911, all the advice in this thread is valid, even though there is a lot of differing opinions.

 

[globetrotter]

Cdm,

Have you thought about what your needs are, what you are looking to do? Re-reading your post, its clear hunting isn't your aim.

Before you buy a gun, or before you ask advice on a gun, think about what you are trying to find a solution for - example: you think that it is possible you will need to defend yourself from a small group of muggers on a train platform. That may indicate that speed of first shot is the most important issue, and accuracy less an issue. Or that carjacking is more a threat - that may indicate that concealability is less important but magazine size and range are important. Etc. Start off with that process. There are dozens of paremeters in choosing a weapon, and frankly you will be more likely to get advice based on what looks cool if you aren't clear what you need. A shotgun and a rifle are very very differnt, and would indicate very different threats and living situations. I would suggest that you figure out what you need the tools for, and then decide what tools you need.

Originally Posted by countdemoney

I'm in the market for two or three guns and would appreciate suggestions, especially from owners. Budget is $1k to $2k. In all probability, I will buy a handgun and then pick either the rifle or the shotgun, but not both.

1. Rifle - something in a common caliber with decent range and stopping power. Needs to have a clip, but doesn't need to be out of a John Woo film.

2. Pistol - looking for a common caliber here. Movies make me want a .45 desert eagle, but there's movies and then there's real life. No smaller than a .40/10mm.

3. Shotgun - 12gauge. Pump or semi-auto.

In my youth, I was very good with rifle and shotgun, but have never used a pistol.

Suggestions for where to look off SF would be appreciated. If anyone knows Jan's current title, I can also stop at the bookstore.

 

[FLMountainMan]

My two cents' worth - I am a really low maintenance guy, hate cleaning, so I own a couple of GLOCKs and a Remington 870 XCS. The XCS means they are damn near indestructible and need minimal maintenance, it's similar to the Marine Magnum line. Like others have mentioned, it depends on what you need them for, and the differences, at some points, are minimal. So glad the anti-gun crowd hasn't submarined this thread yet. Thank you.

 

[Mauby]

I'll suggest something a little uncool for a pistol. Since you're just starting out, you might want to go with a revolver-type handgun by a reliable brand, such as Colt. Yeah, I know they're ugly when compared to a nice Glock or HK pistol, but they're quite reliable, inexpensive and easy to use/load for beginners. If you're buying one for home protection keep in mind it "only" holds 6 rounds. Of course, if you need alot more than 6 shots, you're probably in a situation where you're f*cked anyway.

 

[suited]

Originally Posted by Ludeykrus

'Most' people voted Obama; that obviously makes it right.... Hop on any gun forum and see what THEY say. Also, check at any gun shop. Taurus is making extraordinary guns at an extraordinary price. They also have a full lifetime warranty on every gun they make. Don't taint his decision with opinion, back it up with fact. EDIT - And to back my own post with fact: I owned a Taurus .357 Magnum revolver, and my buddy carries a Millenium .45. I've also shot the PT1911, which has had great reviews from everyone.
I post on several gun forums, thank you. Taurus has a notoriously bad reputation when it comes to most of their autos. It makes absolutely zero sense to purchase a Taurus auto when you could buy a Glock, H&K or Sig.

 

[JohnRov]

Originally Posted by suited

I post on several gun forums, thank you. Taurus has a notoriously bad reputation when it comes to most of their autos.

It makes absolutely zero sense to purchase a Taurus auto when you could buy a Glock, H&K or Sig.

I have to agree. While the gun rags give the Taurus autos good reviews, I've never seen a bad review from them on anything whose manufacturer is lining their pockets with advertising revenue.

 

[Spilotro]

I have also heard some scary stories regard Taurus autos, particularly the PT111. Kimber also has a nasty reputation as of late, and having owned one of their recent handguns, I can only validate this; it wouldn't chamber a round unless you fed it directly into the chamber, and wouldn't extract. I tried this with many different types of ammo, with the same results.

I'm still going to give my most solemn promise that any handgun (or long gun, for that matter) made by H&K is going to be absolutely flawless, in every department. While I appreciate Glock for what it is, the trigger is the weakest link with them; I believe it is best to learn with a single action (or at least SA/DA, as the H&K USP and Beretta M9 has) trigger, as it will help prevent you from adopting bad trigger pull habits.

Want a very safe/reliable/accurate/interesting handgun? Check out the P7; there are some good german police refurbs on the market right now, and some can be had for under $600. One of the greats

 

[leonuk]

R15 , 1911 and Remington 870, (Ruger 10/22?!)

 

[milosz]

Rifle - two options

1. an AR-15 (any brand will do, I like the S&W ARs, but Bushmaster/DPMS/etc. are fine)
The .223 round is designed to tumble, creating a large wound cavity. It's more than adequate for any self-defense needs and anyone who suggests otherwise is clueless.

2. a lever-action rifle (think The Rifleman) in .30-30. Slightly less intimidating, fairly fool-proof, doesn't scare other people (ie visitors, family) as much as a Black Rifle. But it'll get the job done.

Pistol - anything plastic and reliable. I own a set of Glocks in 9mm (17,19,26) as well as an XD9, two S&W M&Ps and a Walther PPS. They're all fine. The M&P9 feels best in the hand, but the trigger break is a bit squishy. I've really come to appreciate the crisp, somewhat heavy break in my Glock 19.

1911s in .45 are another fine choice, but you've got to spend a bit more for all the bells and whistles, and .45ACP practice ammo costs about twice as much as 9mm.

.40 S&W is a pointless round, IMHO. Expensive to shoot, more difficult to control than either .45ACP or 9mm, and with no appreciable benefit over 9mm defensive ammo.

Shotgun - 2 and a half options, plus one suggestion:
1. Any 18-20"-barreled self-defense shotgun from Remington or Mossberg. Picking between them is splitting hairs - they're both basic, reliable and cheap. To go even cheaper, Mossberg has a budget brand (Maverick) that produces the same basic shotgun for about a bill less. I've never shot one, but all reports are that it's just as good.

2. An 18-20" double-barreled coach gun. Several different makers, they're completely reliable and, again, less intimidating to non-gun folk than Black Shotguns.

As far as shotties go, 20ga is perfectly effective (compared to 12ga) and easier on your shoulder.


My shopping list, if I were to start over with a three-gun shopping list, based on gun show prices:
Smith and Wesson M&P15 - ~$925
Glock 19 - ~$525
Mossberg 500SP in 20ga - ~$325

 

[milosz]

As far as Taurus and other budget brands go - there are quality-control problems. I've experienced them, friends and family have experienced them, etc.. Sometimes you get the perfect pistol, sometimes not so much.

But the savings on buying a Taurus over a Glock/XD/S&W are so small, I don't see the point in rolling the dice.

 

[globetrotter]

Originally Posted by milosz

Rifle - two options

1. an AR-15 (any brand will do, I like the S&W ARs, but Bushmaster/DPMS/etc. are fine)
The .223 round is designed to tumble, creating a large wound cavity. It's more than adequate for any self-defense needs and anyone who suggests otherwise is clueless.

2. a lever-action rifle (think The Rifleman) in .30-30. Slightly less intimidating, fairly fool-proof, doesn't scare other people (ie visitors, family) as much as a Black Rifle. But it'll get the job done.

Pistol - anything plastic and reliable. I own a set of Glocks in 9mm (17,19,26) as well as an XD9, two S&W M&Ps and a Walther PPS. They're all fine. The M&P9 feels best in the hand, but the trigger break is a bit squishy. I've really come to appreciate the crisp, somewhat heavy break in my Glock 19.

1911s in .45 are another fine choice, but you've got to spend a bit more for all the bells and whistles, and .45ACP practice ammo costs about twice as much as 9mm.

.40 S&W is a pointless round, IMHO. Expensive to shoot, more difficult to control than either .45ACP or 9mm, and with no appreciable benefit over 9mm defensive ammo.

Shotgun - 2 and a half options, plus one suggestion:
1. Any 18-20"-barreled self-defense shotgun from Remington or Mossberg. Picking between them is splitting hairs - they're both basic, reliable and cheap. To go even cheaper, Mossberg has a budget brand (Maverick) that produces the same basic shotgun for about a bill less. I've never shot one, but all reports are that it's just as good.

2. An 18-20" double-barreled coach gun. Several different makers, they're completely reliable and, again, less intimidating to non-gun folk than Black Shotguns.

As far as shotties go, 20ga is perfectly effective (compared to 12ga) and easier on your shoulder.


My shopping list, if I were to start over with a three-gun shopping list, based on gun show prices:
Smith and Wesson M&P15 - ~$925
Glock 19 - ~$525
Mossberg 500SP in 20ga - ~$325



excellent post, although I would still like to understand what CDM is trying to achieve

 

[suited]

Originally Posted by milosz

Rifle - two options The .223 round is designed to tumble, creating a large wound cavity. It's more than adequate for any self-defense needs and anyone who suggests otherwise is clueless.
There are many "experts" who would disagree significantly with that statement. In a survival situation, I'd take an AK 47 over any .223 rifle. This is all you need to see...
IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.

 

[milosz]

The advantages of an AK-47 have absolutely nothing to do with the caliber of the weapon (in fact, the Russkies and Chinese have switched to a round almost identical to the .223 in the current-issue assault rifle).

An AK can "run for years" without cleaning, rub some dirt on it, blah blah blah. All true. I like my AK. But finding a quality one can be a task - what you see at gun shows are Eastern Bloc (Romanian WASR) pieces of crap. If you're willing to order online or hunt, you can find a good, reasonably accurate, functional AK. But that takes work.

Whereas every damn AR you see in the store or gun show (Olympia Arms excepted) is quality. Once you get past the basic $700 model, you're paying for luxuries. Sure, you've got to clean it regularly, but if you're incapable of doing that you probably shouldn't own a gun anyway.

As far as "survival situations," post-apocalyptic fantasies are pointless to consider.

 

[suited]

Originally Posted by milosz

The advantages of an AK-47 have absolutely nothing to do with the caliber of the weapon (in fact, the Russkies and Chinese have switched to a round almost identical to the .223 in the current-issue assault rifle).

An AK can "run for years" without cleaning, rub some dirt on it, blah blah blah. All true. I like my AK. But finding a quality one can be a task - what you see at gun shows are Eastern Bloc (Romanian WASR) pieces of crap. If you're willing to order online or hunt, you can find a good, reasonably accurate, functional AK. But that takes work.

Whereas every damn AR you see in the store or gun show (Olympia Arms excepted) is quality. Once you get past the basic $700 model, you're paying for luxuries. Sure, you've got to clean it regularly, but if you're incapable of doing that you probably shouldn't own a gun anyway.

As far as "survival situations," post-apocalyptic fantasies are pointless to consider.

If you aren't considering using the rifle for defense, there's no point in even buying it in the first place, unless you plan on shooting it several times per week.

The caliber of the round has a lot to do with it. It's a much heavier round, can penetrate barriers and go through concrete to hit a target, the .223 can't.

I would rather buy an HK 91 than any .223. I'm just not a fan of the round.

 

[milosz]

Defense does not equal bullshit survivalist fantasia. My two ARs are primarily range toys, but they're more than suitable for home defense if necessary - if I didn't have a shotgun for that purpose. If I were the type to go out wilderness/semi-wilderness camping for long stretches, I'd happily keep one in the truck.

You realize that a "heavier round capable of penetrating concrete" (which is arguable for the 7.62x39 anyway) is far less ideal for personal defense than a high-speed round that either fragments/expands or tumbles, right?

The idea in shooting a living thing is to cause the largest, deepest wound cavity possible (balanced with accuracy, recoil, etc..). You don't want your shot punching through a target with minimal damage because the bullet did not deform.

Further, the .223 is excellent for a suburban environment because it's less likely to penetrate exterior walls than other rifle rounds. In a hypothetical gunfight, you'll be lucky if your hit percentage is 20% - chances are, it will be lower. Those errant rounds have to go somewhere.

You'd rather buy an HK91 - a ridiculously overpriced collectors' piece - for what reason? The 7.62 NATO is available in a wide variety of easily obtained rifles (though they may not have been featured in The Kingdom and Die Hard...) like the DSArms FAL, a variety of .308 AR platforms, etc.. And I'm not sure you've ever fired a .308 at an indoor range, but I really can't think of a worse choice for home defense (and I'm assuming here that the needs of the original poster are home/self defense - maybe even a 3-gun competition simulating home defense). If you like being blinded, completely deaf for several minutes and putting your misses into your neighbor's house, it's a great choice.


Maybe it's just bigotry on my part, but it seems like H&K fanboys never have quite as much experience with or knowledge of firearms as they'd like to think.