why all the rage in single stack 9mms?
- Thread starter TheDeej
- Start date
Kreyzhorse
New member
More capacity than a snub nose and easier to conceal (in my experience) than a larger gun, what isn't to like about a single stack 9mm?
I'll admit, I wasn't a fan of them until shooting and carrying my Walther PPS, but the gun conceals like a small gun and shoots like a full size. That alone explains why they are so popular.
I'll admit, I wasn't a fan of them until shooting and carrying my Walther PPS, but the gun conceals like a small gun and shoots like a full size. That alone explains why they are so popular.
orionengnr
New member
I carry a 1911 every day, but could never find a double-stack-anything comfortable.
I still own my Kahr PM9 (and P45), although I rarely carry either one any more. But I'm getting older and may one day lose my enthusiasm for carrying a 1911...
At that point, the P45 offers a smaller, lighter IWB .45acp, and the PM9 offers the perfect (IMHO) pocket pistol. Great options to have.
I still own my Kahr PM9 (and P45), although I rarely carry either one any more. But I'm getting older and may one day lose my enthusiasm for carrying a 1911...
At that point, the P45 offers a smaller, lighter IWB .45acp, and the PM9 offers the perfect (IMHO) pocket pistol. Great options to have.
Things that don't jive:
Paid more than asking (why unless you knew her)
Offered more, above retail, than paid for it a few hours earlier (instant sell unless emotionally attached to it)
Don't like shooting it (who likes shooting a sub compact 9mm for deep concealment)
Don't see the point of a low capacity 9mm (why buy in the first place)
Don't see any advantage over a revolver (why buy in the first place)
And still didn't sell it? (didn't mention a single positive in your post)
Sorry, but I would have sold something I did not like for a 45% profit immediately with no regrets especially when it was over retail so regret would have been a non-issue. I am sure others agree with that.
Where do you hang out that people just want to get rid of guns for way below market price? I mean so low that you pay more than they are asking?
A beretta nano is more than a small revolver in a smaller size.
Paid more than asking (why unless you knew her)
Offered more, above retail, than paid for it a few hours earlier (instant sell unless emotionally attached to it)
Don't like shooting it (who likes shooting a sub compact 9mm for deep concealment)
Don't see the point of a low capacity 9mm (why buy in the first place)
Don't see any advantage over a revolver (why buy in the first place)
And still didn't sell it? (didn't mention a single positive in your post)
Sorry, but I would have sold something I did not like for a 45% profit immediately with no regrets especially when it was over retail so regret would have been a non-issue. I am sure others agree with that.
Where do you hang out that people just want to get rid of guns for way below market price? I mean so low that you pay more than they are asking?
A beretta nano is more than a small revolver in a smaller size.
aarondhgraham
New member
It's just the pendulum swinging back again,,,
The era of popularity for double-stacks has run it's course,,,
Now it's time to fixate on something different,,,
That's what marketing does for us.
Give it a few years and we'll swing to something different.
Aarond
.
The era of popularity for double-stacks has run it's course,,,
Now it's time to fixate on something different,,,
That's what marketing does for us.
Give it a few years and we'll swing to something different.
Aarond
.
I'm not sure I'd credit marketing with controlling what is popular. They are making and marketing what is in demand. Applications for pistol permits are on a HUGE increase, half due to the political climate and the other half due to the rise in social unrest and upheaval around the world, and here (zombies, rioting, looting, poor economy, etc). Gun companies know it, and realize their current lineups in some cases, aren't big enough.
This means a sharply growing market of private citizens interested in purchasing a gun, but who aren't necessarily gun people.
The average citizen thinks they probably don't need more than a couple shots (because bad guys immediately fall down when shot, and work alone), and would like something comfortable and easy to shoot. The 9mm single stack perfectly fits in here. It's the perfect gun to be carried often, and shot little.
This means a sharply growing market of private citizens interested in purchasing a gun, but who aren't necessarily gun people.
The average citizen thinks they probably don't need more than a couple shots (because bad guys immediately fall down when shot, and work alone), and would like something comfortable and easy to shoot. The 9mm single stack perfectly fits in here. It's the perfect gun to be carried often, and shot little.
ScotchMan,
I agree with most of your post. My quibble is with, "easy to shoot".
In my experience, the LC9 and PF-9 were both very easy to conceal, and comfortable to carry. The PF-9 was uncomfortable to shoot, and both of them were hard to be accurate with.
I think that it is more than fair to say that a lot of people expect the single stack subs to get the job done in defensive situations. No argument, there.
I agree with most of your post. My quibble is with, "easy to shoot".
In my experience, the LC9 and PF-9 were both very easy to conceal, and comfortable to carry. The PF-9 was uncomfortable to shoot, and both of them were hard to be accurate with.
I think that it is more than fair to say that a lot of people expect the single stack subs to get the job done in defensive situations. No argument, there.
aarondhgraham
New member
My take is their marketing is creating the demand,,,
Or at least a larger demand for a thing.
Marketing convinced a lot of people that they were under-gunned if they didn't have at least 16+1 capacity,,,
Before that most folk were perfectly happy carrying their 1911's or six-shooters,,,
But marketing of the Wonder-Nines changed what was the norm,,,
Firepower became the new standard of necessity.
Now people are the targets of marketing the concealability of single-stacks,,,
Which is the exact opposite of what was marketed to us before.
It isn't any big deal,,,
Some recognize it and some don't believe in it,,,
But those folk in advertising have been getting real good at this over the years.
Aarond
.
Dragline45
New member
Now why do I like single stack 9mm's? I live in a very gun unfriendly state, not many people here carry and the sight of a gun is enough to cause a commotion. I like to have my guns concealed to the point where you wont even see printing which is why I carry a J frame, I do plan on getting a m&P shield eventually though. Also I don't like to alter my style of dress just so I can carry a larger gun. If I want to wear shorts and a t-shirt, I can walk around all day with a J frame or slim single stack auto comfortably without printing. I don't even use holsters since I find they add too much bulk, all my pants and shorts have pockets sewn into them at the 4-5 o'clock position IWB.
Marketing may not control what is popular, but it most def drives it. Marketing folks see a rise in concealed carry licenses across the country, they see the need for slim concealable pistols, and they monopolized on it.
Marketing may not control what is popular, but it most def drives it. Marketing folks see a rise in concealed carry licenses across the country, they see the need for slim concealable pistols, and they monopolized on it.
Last edited:
I used to own a Walther P5, a single column 9mm automatic, which I traded in on a Walther P99, a double column 9mm automatic. According to the data published on Earl's (CarlWalther.com) website, a P5 is 1.3 inches thick at most while a P99 is 1.14 inches thick. So just having a double column magazine does not necessarily result in a thicker handgun. Of course, there's more to it than that.
My CZ P-01, on the other hand, is listed as 1.38 inches wide on the CZ-USA website. I might add here that while the other dimensions (length and "height") are about the same, it is heavier as well as being a little "squarer" but when loaded and in the holster, I can't really tell the difference five mintues later.
My CZ P-01, on the other hand, is listed as 1.38 inches wide on the CZ-USA website. I might add here that while the other dimensions (length and "height") are about the same, it is heavier as well as being a little "squarer" but when loaded and in the holster, I can't really tell the difference five mintues later.
Last edited:
I would say that even that was driven by demand. Technology had evolved to where people could carry 16+1 in a form factor not that different than the 1911 or revolver. People "needed" it because there was no reason not to take it. I also think crime trends have been consistently moving towards violent crimes being committed in groups, by more organized criminals, and away from the lone mugger in the dark alleyway.
I am not saying that advertising doesn't drive a lot of what we buy, in the gun world and elsewhere. But I think at least in this case, they are picking up on real world trends, not creating demand out of thin air to sell more guns. When they get us to buy something that doesn't improve efficiency with no downside, or correlate to a real world demand somewhere, then I'll agree. (The .40 S&W might qualify
)Yeah, I guess I meant easy to operate, not easy to shoot well. As in, minimal safeties, decockers, etc. It seems to me most of the single stack 9mms are DAO or striker-fired, although there are exceptions. They are certainly not as easy to shoot well as full-sized guns in most cases.
Yup concealment is everything driving the CC market, and SS allow a much thinner carry piece IMHO. While I'm probably not going to a 9 single stack, I may consider a 45.
But for me the quest is mostly over until someone can shrink a 9 down to my LCPs size and make it affordable.
That being said my next single stack is going to be 220 sized.
But for me the quest is mostly over until someone can shrink a 9 down to my LCPs size and make it affordable.
That being said my next single stack is going to be 220 sized.
ScotchMan, not arguing with you, since you said "most cases."
I'd just like to point out one of the exceptions you could make would be the PPS 9mm. I haven't shot the .40, but the 9mm variant is very easy to shoot - both in terms of accuracy and recoil. The only reasons I don't use one for IDPA are capacity (losing 2 rounds per mag vs the other guys in the division would add reload time) and the magazine design - I'm not sure how the polymer, hooked bases would react to repeated drops onto concrete.
But in terms of shooting, I'd be equally happy with it as with any of my full-size guns.
I'd just like to point out one of the exceptions you could make would be the PPS 9mm. I haven't shot the .40, but the 9mm variant is very easy to shoot - both in terms of accuracy and recoil. The only reasons I don't use one for IDPA are capacity (losing 2 rounds per mag vs the other guys in the division would add reload time) and the magazine design - I'm not sure how the polymer, hooked bases would react to repeated drops onto concrete.
But in terms of shooting, I'd be equally happy with it as with any of my full-size guns.
My single stack 9mm experience is limited tomy Shield 9mm. However what appeals to me about the small single stack 9mm's is concealability vs power vs control. I can fire my Shield 9mm very fast and accureatly. Much more so then pistols of similar size chambered in .40 or .45 or even .357 snubbies. For the micro compact guns in the single stack Shield class I think 9mm is the best compromise for the size/weight to power ratio. One of the biggest upsides to a 9mm is of course its high capacity double stack magazines but when the guns start shrinking in my opinion an even bigger upside to the 9mm is its controlability in a small single stack platform.
I once owned a Colt Officer's ACP, probably about 20 years ago. It was of course a .45 ACP and I wished they had made it in 9mm. Now they have one in 9mm that's pretty close and I almost bought one. Cost was the reason I didn't. But that was my idea of a (nearly) perfect pistol, although to be honest, the sights would take getting used to.
The Colt I had was a lightweight model and although it was a perfect size, it was a handful to shoot. It didn't hurt, mind you, nor did it have a particularly excessive blast (unlike a .357) but you had to hold one when you shot it. It would really jump around. In comparision, a Colt lightweight Commander exhibited none of those faults and was almost pleasant to shoot.
An even better smallish single-stack 9mm was the Star BKM. It had an alloy frame and there was a steel frame model called the BM. I had a new BKM that was supposedly one of the last that Interarms had in stock. I literally shot it to pieces, although it never failed and nothing broke. That was the gun I wish Colt had made.
The Colt I had was a lightweight model and although it was a perfect size, it was a handful to shoot. It didn't hurt, mind you, nor did it have a particularly excessive blast (unlike a .357) but you had to hold one when you shot it. It would really jump around. In comparision, a Colt lightweight Commander exhibited none of those faults and was almost pleasant to shoot.
An even better smallish single-stack 9mm was the Star BKM. It had an alloy frame and there was a steel frame model called the BM. I had a new BKM that was supposedly one of the last that Interarms had in stock. I literally shot it to pieces, although it never failed and nothing broke. That was the gun I wish Colt had made.