In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
how small is to small for the 9mm
perfweapon33
Member Posts: 39 ✭✭
As most gun enthusiast including myself have seen a lot of gun manufacturers are going smaller and smaller with their 9mm's. I just saw that sig was introducing there p290 ( I think that is what it was ) It is pretty much the same size as the Kahr pm-9 ( about 5 1/2 " ).My question is how small can a 9mm be and still be reliable and safe to shoot. I have a rule of thumb that I follow ( personal preference ) I do not carry any weapon longer than 6" but I have always been a fan of the .380 and in that caliber with much less velocity than the 9mm I feel they are safe in the smaller hand gun size. Yea you can say the .380 is not powerful enough, but I would not want to be on the receiving end of my LCP, and on top of that a lot of off duty police officers carry the .380's , and with that said if it is good enough for them then I will take my chances. I just fear that a gun manufacturer will eventually make a 9mm to small and end up killing someone from malfunctions due to it's size. I mean seriously if you need to carry the 9mm or larger caliber than suck it up and except the weapon's uncomfortableness due to size and weight. I do own the Ruger SR9C and yes I have carried it just to see how it felt, but this gun is usually at home for the sole purpose of home protection and my Ruger LCP is in my pocket. There are plenty of 9mm pocket pistols that are reliable and safe that are just above the 6" length size including the Glock 26 / 27, Springfield xdsc 9 or .40 / Bersa thunder 9mm , CZ 2075 Rami, Smith and Wesson m&p compact 9 or .40, Ruger SR9C just to name a few and all these guns can be carried pretty easily. Or if you need to throw your gun in your pocket and carry it and pretty much forget it is even there than I would recommend that you re think your need for the more powerful caliber and go with a .380 or possibly even a .32 . ( in my opinion the .32 is the bare minimum caliber you would wont to carry to save your life, but their are some die hard .22 caliber fans out their that would argue with that statement all day long ) So here is my final thought, if you need a small handgun do not think you need a powerful caliber to get the job done a .380 with a lot of practice will save the day.
Comments
Please use paragraphs next time.
Thank you,
Grammar Nazi
I get carried away sometimes.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
NOWAY am i even gonna attempt to read that OP..I get headaches way too easy!
I just saw that sig was introducing there p290 ( I think that is what it was.) It is pretty much the same size as the Kahr pm-9 ( about 5 1/2 ".) My question is: how small can a 9mm be and still be reliable and safe to shoot?
I have a rule of thumb that I follow ( personal preference, ) I do not carry any weapon longer than 6", but I have always been a fan of the .380, and in that caliber, with much less velocity than the 9mm, I feel they are safe in the smaller hand gun size. Yea you can say the .380 is not powerful enough, but I would not want to be on the receiving end of my LCP. On top of that, a lot of off duty police officers carry the .380's.
With that said, if it is good enough for them, then I will take my chances. I just fear that a gun manufacturer will eventually make a 9mm too small and end up killing someone from malfunctions due to it's size. I mean seriously, if you need to carry the 9mm or larger caliber then suck it up and except the weapon's uncomfortableness due to size and weight.
I do own the Ruger SR9C, and, yes, I have carried it just to see how it felt. But this gun is usually at home for the sole purpose of home protection, and my Ruger LCP is in my pocket. There are plenty of 9mm pocket pistols that are reliable and safe that are just above the 6" length size, including the Glock 26 / 27, Springfield xdsc 9 or .40 / Bersa thunder 9mm , CZ 2075 Rami, Smith and Wesson m&p compact 9 or .40, Ruger SR9C just to name a few. All these guns can be carried pretty easily. Or if you need to throw your gun in your pocket and carry it and pretty much forget it is even there, then I would recommend that you re-think your need for the more powerful caliber and go with a .380 or possibly even a .32 . ( in my opinion the .32 is the bare minimum caliber you would want to carry to save your life. There are some die hard .22 caliber fans out their that would argue with that statement all day long.)
So here is my final thought, if you need a small handgun, do not think you need a powerful caliber to get the job done. A .380 with a lot of practice will save the day.
I took the liberty of helping.. hope that's ok.
You get an "A."
Signed,
Grammar Nazi
btw, your op is both damn near impossible to read due to formating. try paragraphs.
I have the Bersa Thunder CC(concealed carry model) and I carry Buffalo Bore hard cast ammo in it.
It produces 300 ft/lbs at the muzzle and that's damn near the same as standard 9mm ammo.
The .380s and .32s had done their jobs (and occassionally still do) when they were the top of the class back in the day.
I, myself, have no problems carrying a full size .45acp or the Beretta 92 or 96 all day long.
As for caliber I, myself, be happy with the .38 through .45acp and I don't advertize (too much) either. I'll talk about firearms but learned not to show and tell.
The slide throw length has to be longer than the overall round length for the gun to function. All else being equal, a bit longer is probably better than shorter, since it provides for more cycle time.
If you go REALLY short, you don't have enough cycle time to get reliable extraction, ejection and reloading, and the gun will be prone to jamming. Also really short actions necessitate really stiff recoil springs (usually dual coil arrangements) which are hard to rack and tend to wear out relatively quickly.
On top of that, there is an ergonomic necessity that a gun has to be of a certain size before the typical human hand can reliably hang onto it. With something like a 9mm luger, which offers quite a bit of recoil in a small light gun, this is real factor.
I believe the smallest currently existing 9mm luger pistol is the Rohrbaugh, which was basically designed from the ground up to be the smallest possible 9mm luger gun that would function reliably and also be able to be held by a typical hand.
So that's probably about as small as these are going to get.
Kel-Tec PF-9 is just a "squidge" bigger than this. Kahr and Walther PPS in 9mm luger are both just a bit bigger yet, though all of these are basically similarly sized.
On .357 derringers, I don't know if you've ever shot one, but recoil on them is still pretty harsh and they're not all that small or light.
My personal take on the super-small 9mms is that like everything else, these are a compromise.
Personally, I'm generally willing to give up some power and capacity here for increased reliability, so I still think the .38 special +P snubnose is the gold standard when it comes to pocket pistols.
You're not quite up to 9mm luger ballistics, but you can partially make up for that using heavy 158 grain bullets.
Get a .380 that can handle a powerful load and you're set.
I have the Bersa Thunder CC(concealed carry model) and I carry Buffalo Bore hard cast ammo in it.
It produces 300 ft/lbs at the muzzle and that's damn near the same as standard 9mm ammo.
http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=127
Buffalo bore claims 1150 fps for its 100 grain bullet from a 3.5" PPK like gun.
That's not bad ballistics at all, though its probably about as hot as you are going to get in a .380.
As a worthwhile comparison, the cheapo Walmart Winchester "white box" 115 grain 9mm luger yields 1190-fps. That's really only about 15% more oomph than the hot-rodded .380s, though in fairness you are really talking about some of the weakest 9mms here.
I have to wonder how many rounds like this a typical .380 can take. I think you're going to have quite a bit of accelerated gun wear firing 9mm luger-like rounds through these blowback-type guns not intended to handle that sort of battering.
With hotter loads, 9mm can be quite a bit more powerful.
Compare to say the 1450(!) fps/ 460+ ft-lbs of energy you'll get from the same 100 grain 9mm bullet from a 9mm luger +P.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=530680
The perfect 9mm weapon for me would be a J frame S&W snub revolver in STEEL. Unfortunately these are no longer made[V]
I've never fired one, but supposedly the lockwork couldn't handle lots of 9mm loads, and the guns were subject to problems.
If you want a 9mm snubnose in steel, Taurus still has them. Its the model 905.
Charter arms has been "about" to release a new 9mm snubnose that doesn't require moon clips. . .for the last two years.
I have no idea if this will ever see the light of day or not, but if it does, and assuming the thing isn't a total catastrophe, I'd get one.
how small is to small for the 9mm
8mm
quote:Originally posted by swampgut
Get a .380 that can handle a powerful load and you're set.
I have the Bersa Thunder CC(concealed carry model) and I carry Buffalo Bore hard cast ammo in it.
It produces 300 ft/lbs at the muzzle and that's damn near the same as standard 9mm ammo.
http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=127
Buffalo bore claims 1150 fps for its 100 grain bullet from a 3.5" PPK like gun.
That's not bad ballistics at all, though its probably about as hot as you are going to get in a .380.
As a worthwhile comparison, the cheapo Walmart Winchester "white box" 115 grain 9mm luger yields 1190-fps. That's really only about 15% more oomph than the hot-rodded .380s, though in fairness you are really talking about some of the weakest 9mms here.
I have to wonder how many rounds like this a typical .380 can take. I think you're going to have quite a bit of accelerated gun wear firing 9mm luger-like rounds through these blowback-type guns not intended to handle that sort of battering.
With hotter loads, 9mm can be quite a bit more powerful.
Compare to say the 1450(!) fps/ 460+ ft-lbs of energy you'll get from the same 100 grain 9mm bullet from a 9mm luger +P.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=530680
Buffalo Bore makes some 9mm that will produce 500 ft/lbs.
http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=118
My Bersa seems pretty hardy.
I've only shot maybe 30 rounds of the BB ammo through it but it never complains.
On the other hand...the Hornady Critical Defense ammo caused some issues.
I tried mixing a mag with the BB and HCD once.
It would jam after firing an HCD when trying to cycle the BB round.
Further testing revealed that the HCD wouldn't even expand into naked water jugs reliably.
I got about 40% of the rounds fired to expand AT ALL.
The rest acted just like a FMJ....abeit with not much power.
HCD advertise that they produce 200 ft/lbs but I wouldn't trust those things.
They are expensive, weak FMJ's prettied up to be something they're not.
Buffalo Bore for me all day.
I agree that shooting a lot of them might not be good but once they are function tested you would only need to use them in self defense.