Gun Appreciation Thread

Originally Posted by milosz

Click to expand...

I don't think the XD is a particularly bad gun - but I don't see what it offers that the Glock or M&P don't. Grip size/angle may run against the Glock for some people - but the M&P's grip angle (like the XD) mirrors the 1911 and is fairly small, and gives you a lower bore axis than the XD. Aftermarket support and factory parts availability goes strongly to the Glock/M&P. And in terms of reliability, it's not getting picked up by any major law enforcement agencies. Market segmentation in handguns is somewhat irrational IMO. At every price point there's a clear leader in functionality. For anyone to upset the big four (Glock, S&W, Sig, H&K) they need to offer a unique feature set or outstanding quality to price ratio, and no one I've seen does that.
You wouldn't consider Springfield to be one of the majors? From what I've seen, they seem to be second in terms of available accessories and following, when compared to Glock. BTW...I'm a former Glock owner, and S&W fanboy (though this has little to do with the actual discussion).

Springfield has the best stocking dealer program for shops and gun show dealers (ie small-timers) - that puts a lot of their budget 1911s and XDs on tables. But they've made fairly little impact on the 'hard use' market - both LEO and IDPA/IPSC (where it's not uncommon for hobbyists to put 20k rounds downrange a year)

Originally Posted by milosz

Click to expand...

Springfield has the best stocking dealer program for shops and gun show dealers (ie small-timers) - that puts a lot of their budget 1911s and XDs on tables. But they've made fairly little impact on the 'hard use' market - both LEO and IDPA/IPSC (where it's not uncommon for hobbyists to put 20k rounds downrange a year)
I wasn't aware SA wasn't popular amongst the LEO crowd. Of course Glock, would be no.1, with Sig, S&W and Beretta vying for no.2 and 3. SA does offer a pretty nice 1911 for the money....nothing like your Les Baer, but still a quality pistol.

I traded my mom a SLR for a Springfield 9mm 1911 that's quite nice. Roughly ten years old, all-black Novaks rather than the three-dots they're using now. I need to take it down and change the recoil spring (and sub out the full-length guide rod for a GI setup), but I keep forgetting to print out field stripping instructions for a FLGR 1911.

I keep telling myself I'll sell it to fund an Ed Brown or Nighthawk, but I never get around to doing so. Recoil is nonexistent, it's more accurate than I am out to 25 yards, and since it's stainless I don't even have to wipe down the exterior after a trip to the range.

It does have problems feeding JHPs, but I haven't bothered exploring the issue since it's not being used for defensive purposes.

I like their Mil-Spec .45 model, but I wish they offered it blued rather than just parkerized (or stainless). And I'm aesthetically offended that they sell a 4" Champion rather than 4.25" Commander.

I'm not really a fan of plastic pistols - I was put-off by the feel of the early Glocks, I guess, though it is also an aesthetic thing - I just like the feel/look/familiarity/practicality of stainless steel and alloys.

That said, I am mighty impressed with the little .40 Beretta PX4 Storm Sub Compact. If I were ever to start carrying an auto regularly, I think I would get one of these.

Practically, though - I know that the little Scandium J-Frame in .357 magnum will always be the winner for slipping into the pocket each morning. It sure isn't much to look at or fun to play with, but remains the best concealed carry handgun I have found.

Oh, and on the topic of 1911A1s: I'm not really big on these, though understand why some people really get into them. The closest I have ever seen to an affordable copy of the mil spec 1911s I used to see is the Chinese Norinco copy. Doesn't get much kudos around the place, but the one I saw was a beautiful piece of reverse-engineering.

I'm looking into .357 2" concealed hammer revolvers, such as the Taurus 651, etc. Something that is small, light-ish weight, and could be fired from a pocket in the worst case scenario. Does anyone have any recommendations? Obviously, I'd like to pay less if possible.

Originally Posted by j

Click to expand...

I'm looking into .357 2" concealed hammer revolvers, such as the Taurus 651, etc. Something that is small, light-ish weight, and could be fired from a pocket in the worst case scenario. Does anyone have any recommendations? Obviously, I'd like to pay less if possible.
S&W 340PD - nothing better in the class, though not the cheapest. I've carried mine in my pocket for 2 years now. BUT .... look into some of the ballistics before settling on firing .357mag from a 2" barrel. The velocity is not that much better than a .38 +P, though the kick and the fireball are a real hoot! You really need at least a 4" barrel to benefit from the .357mag load. Take a look at Speer's ballistic tables: Full power 357Mag 125gr load, 4 inch barrel-1450fps, 584ft-lbs Full power 38+P 125gr load, 4 inch barrel-945fps, 248ft-lbs The 357 has more than double the energy But now the ugly Short Barrel 357Mag 135gr load, 2 inch barrel-990fps, 294ft-lbs Short Barrel 38+P 135gr load, 2 inch barrel-860fps, 222ft-lbs The 357Mag has dropped down to with in 72ft-lbs of the 38+P The above numbers are with comparision to ammo developed specific for short barrels, regular 357Mag ammunition velocity (and therefore energy) can have even a greater drop off. But the 38 don't drop off as much because it 'more' efficiently burns off the powder in the short barrels, because it isn't a magnum with that extra charge. The 357Mag simply isn't efficient in the 1&7/8, 2&1/8, and even 2&1/2 inch barrles. If you look at any ammunition company's ballistic tables the test barrels for a 357Mag are always 4,6 or even 8 (Hornady) inches to achieve the quoted ballistics.

Originally Posted by JustinW

Click to expand...

S&W 340PD - nothing better in the class, though not the cheapest. I've carried mine in my pocket for 2 years now.

BUT .... look into some of the ballistics before settling on firing .357mag from a 2" barrel. The velocity is not that much better than a .38 +P, though the kick and the fireball are a real hoot! You really need at least a 4" barrel to benefit from the .357mag load.
I've seen some comparisons, you get a little more velocity, but the main reason would just be the capacity to shoot .357 if I ever wanted to. You can't go up in a .38 but you can go down in a .357.

Originally Posted by j

Click to expand...

I've seen some comparisons, you get a little more velocity, but the main reason would just be the capacity to shoot .357 if I ever wanted to. You can't go up in a .38 but you can go down in a .357.

Fair enough and agreed!

Originally Posted by j

Click to expand...

I've seen some comparisons, you get a little more velocity, but the main reason would just be the capacity to shoot .357 if I ever wanted to. You can't go up in a .38 but you can go down in a .357.

Justin has done a pretty good job of sharing about short-barrel revolvers, aside from the S&W's (great choice) or Taurus, you should also take a look at a used Ruger SP101.

I haven't really heard anything bad about the newer Taurus revolvers, they just tend to lack the history and following of a S&W or Ruger.

Originally Posted by j

Click to expand...

I'm looking into .357 2" concealed hammer revolvers, such as the Taurus 651, etc. Something that is small, light-ish weight, and could be fired from a pocket in the worst case scenario. Does anyone have any recommendations? Obviously, I'd like to pay less if possible.

Go Taurus, you won't be disappointed. Great warranty (customer service is great, but that's from word-of-mouth...). I've handled many of their newer semi auto's and they are splendid guns. Was seriously contemplating picking up a newer Rossi .357 revolver a while back, which is supposed to be made in Taurus' factories.

The only thing I have to ***** about is the locking mechanism. Supposed to be foolproof, but I don't trust that shizzle. You supposedly can remove most of it and Dremel a part to delete that feature...I don't want a safety on my gun.

SP101 is a bit larger than the other two choices - it's not as pocketable as a J-frame, which puts it in an odd position (if you have to carry IWB, perhaps a larger revolver is in order, or a small semi-auto, etc.).

Buffalo Bore makes a few options for short-barrel-optimized .357, if you go that route.

Originally Posted by milosz

Click to expand...

SP101 is a bit larger than the other two choices - it's not as pocketable as a J-frame, which puts it in an odd position (if you have to carry IWB, perhaps a larger revolver is in order, or a small semi-auto, etc.).

Buffalo Bore makes a few options for short-barrel-optimized .357, if you go that route.

To be honest, I can't think of any .357 as pocketable as a 340 J-frame. However for the money, I'm sure the Taurus isn't a bad choice. I've yet to examine the Taurus up close, but the beauty of a revolver lies in the fact that it's a uncomplicated yet dependable design.

Originally Posted by j

Click to expand...

I'm looking into .357 2" concealed hammer revolvers, such as the Taurus 651, etc. Something that is small, light-ish weight, and could be fired from a pocket in the worst case scenario. Does anyone have any recommendations? Obviously, I'd like to pay less if possible.
This is mine, S&W 642. I had the option of getting it in .357 and after firing it in .38, there's no way I'd want anything bigger in this light of a pistol. It's already hard enough to hit anything with something this small, and the recoil is significantly more than my 45. I got it pretty cheap as well. I have the receipt somewhere, but I wanna say it was in the low 400's.