Why the 9mm, CZ, HK, autoloaders in general?

[USP45usp]

Guns are like cars, you have your favorite, then your next favorite, so on and so forth.

And as men (and some women), your goal is to collect them all .

I have about 50/50 when it comes to revolvers and semi-auto's. I have the 9mm in semi-auto, it cost less than a revolver in 9mm and I don't have to contend with moonclips (the price of the gun itself).

My first gun that I bought was a GP-141 (GP-100 series that is SS) and I could have bought a true US issue .45 1911 in the same store (damn the internet not being around, I would have bought both of them if I knew what I know now ).

I have a spot in my heart for both types. With my C&R, I've bought 3 semi's and one revolver, the reason is that the old Colts and S&W's on the C&R list are greatly expensive . But if they weren't, I would be buying up the revolvers as fast as I could like I am doing with the auto's.

If it's of value, my primary is the Kimber Pro-Carry in .45 and my BUG is a .44sp revolver.

I like, and trust, both and I own, and carry, both.

Wayne

 

[shotgunner427]

I agree with hkusp on this one.
we all love our firearms. not many of us have just one. Sure we may have our favorites, but we like each one in our collection just the same.
Just like ford v chevy, there will always be the 1911 v glock and wheelgun vs. auto. Its the pointless debate which makes this hobby fun.
FYI...currently looking for a nice wheelgun to fill the collection, preferably something in blued steel with .357 chambers.

 

[cje1980]

but there are 9mm loads that are in the range of 450-500ft-lb of muzzle energy.

There are .357Mag loads that are in the range of 700-750ft-lbs of energy. Lets face it the 9mm semi-auto pistol is not nearly as versatile as a .357Mag revolver. A .357 Mag can do it all, extreme match accuracy with .38spls. SD with both .38spl and monstrous .357 Mag loads. Want to go hunting no problem, how does a 180gr. HC bullet at 1300+fps sound. The 9mm will never be the same as a .357Mag. My two favorite centerfire calibers, however, are the .357 Mag and 9mm. If I could only have one handgun, make mine a .357 Mag. For a basic collection, you can't go wrong with a .357 Mag revolver, hi-cap 9mm pistol and .22LR rifle. You can own other pieces but those are the minimum basic requirements in my opinion.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

In my opinion, in most cases 8 rounds of 9mm is good enough for me for protection. This is why I carry a thin H&K P7PSP. It is 2 more shots then a 357 magnum, it is thinner, more compact and offers similar ballistics for the same physical sized gun. (you have to go to a 2" 357 mag snubby for the same size).

What's not to like?

 

[VirgilCaine]

I just like the way they look, feel, and operate. I Like the mill work and the overall design of the pistols I own. I have 2 wheelies and I dig them as well. For me it's not a "my pistol can beat up your revolver" thing. It's just what I like.

It's like fly fisherman and Bass anglers, they will never understand each other, but love what they do and have mutual respect.

Graveyards are full of folks who thought a 9mm couldn't kill them.

 

[Nanuk]

I have more revolvers than autos (counting handguns here). I like them all, they all have a place and a purpose. I have no use for 9mm. I have 3 .40 and one .45. I carry the .40 on duty as required by policy. It is ballistically similar to a .357 mag and superior to a 9mm and a 45 for power. Any medium to large caliber with a good projectile is going to work as well as any other handgun for stopping power on humans. Its all where you put the bullet. There has been an increasing number of incidents where the bad guys are en masse....These situations would seem to call for a weapon that can be fired fast and accurate while still possessing adequate stopping power. Any handgun is a poor replacement for a carbine or shotgun in a firefight. A handgun is a poor choice for an offensive weapon, however, I will carry my H&K USP/C, I trust it totally, never a malfunction of any kind in close to 10,000 rounds, and it carries 13 rounds of 155 GRN HP before I need to reload.

 

[WhyteP38]

While I prefer my .45 1911, I really like my CZ-75B BUG. It's more accurate than I am, holds 15 + 1, is as durable and reliable as a refrigerator, and with thinner grips it fits my hands really well. It's just an all-around pleasant, functioning, well-balanced, reliable pistol that performs as well in a self-defense role as others costing several times more. In short, it's a bargain.

I moved away from wheel guns decades ago, just like the military did. In fact, are there any militaries in the world worthy of the name that have wheelguns as their standard-issue sidearms?

 

[PaladinX13]

I moved away from wheel guns decades ago, just like the military did. In fact, are there any militaries in the world worthy of the name that have wheelguns as their standard-issue sidearms?

No, but that's hardly a reason to stop using a revolver... if we modelled our lives after the military then you'd be eating MREs, wearing the same clothes every day, bathing once a week if that, and severely limited in your opportunity for carnal relations. The needs of non-frontline troops (those typically issued sidearms) does not precisely mirror those of us living in civilization, though there is overlap no doubt.

 

[WhyteP38]

You can take any analogy too far because an analogy compares similarities, not 1-to-1 exact details. However, the military moved away from wheelguns for a variety of reasons; the reasons happen to be worth considering. If those reasons overlap your needs/concerns, as they do mine, you may want to heed them. If they don't, discard them. Use what works best for you.

Regardless, I would not want to be shot by either a wheelgun or an auto-loader.

Come to think of it, the only shot I ever want to take is a shot of scotch.

 

[HKGuns]

Go watch an IDPA shoot sometime and pay close attention to the time difference between reloading a revolver and an auto.

The pressure of time, not life, is enough to make 80% of experienced shooters fumble around reloading a revolver. A reload may not be necessary in a real life situation, however, I'd still rather be putting a lot of lead at my attacker very quickly than allow him time to walk up and smack me upside the head while I'm fumbling with a wheelgun reload.

 

[Jkwas]

Mostly cause good auto-loaders dont jam.

I used to be primarily a wheelgunner, but I've found for me, autoloaders are much easier to clean and maintain than revolvers. I find having to clean the cylinder in particular very annoying.

Plus one to both the above quotes. My autoloader has had no failures of any kind, while my revolver has bound up on several occasions.

Revolvers are old technology. I like them, but Autoloaders are a big improvement. Just like cartridge revolvers are a bit improvement over ball and cap and so forth. My next purchase for a serious Self Defense weapon will be a compact Auto. Eventually I would like a Ruger Blackhawk for target shooting.

 

[CypherNinja]

In my opinion, in most cases 8 rounds of 9mm is good enough for me for protection. This is why I carry a thin H&K P7PSP. It is 2 more shots then a 357 magnum, it is thinner, more compact and offers similar ballistics for the same physical sized gun. (you have to go to a 2" 357 mag snubby for the same size).

What's not to like?

The price.

But thats pretty much the only thing. And I want one BAAAAD.

 

[WhyteP38]

HKGuns said: "The pressure of time, not life, is enough to make 80% of experienced shooters fumble around reloading a revolver. A reload may not be necessary in a real life situation, however, I'd still rather be putting a lot of lead at my attacker very quickly than allow him time to walk up and smack me upside the head while I'm fumbling with a wheelgun reload."

Very good point. The last FBI statistics on civilian self-defense shootings that I read showed that typically 2-3 shots are fired in self-defense situations. However, that information was very old, and I understand the trend has been for attacks by multiple BGs. If I recall correctly, there's also a trend for the BGs to more frequently be under the influence of drugs during their crimes. With that in mind, I think the "2-3" shot scenario may no longer be valid.

Other things to consider: 1) I read an article about some guy on PCP who cut off his face in slices and fed them to his dog; a guy like that would not be intimidated by a victim displaying a gun, and might not even realize he's been shot. 2) I've read numerous "Armed Citizen" articles in AMERICA'S 1ST FREEDOM magazine about BGs taking 5 or more .45 shots and still going. Some of those guys were on drugs; some it wasn't stated if on drugs or not; most but not all eventually died; all lived long enough to take the defending shooter with them if the shooter hadn't managed to stay away until either the police arrived or the BG bled out.

Taking all the above into consideration, I'm under no illusions that my .45 is a 100% one-shot manstopper, and I want the option of throwing up a wall of lead if need be. Shot placement is always king, but I may need to tag a drugged-up BG multiple times before he slows down enough for my adrenaline-amped CNS to acquire a good headshot. Or I may need to fend off multiple attackers. For that reason, I practice magazine reloads while looking around a corner, in the dark, while moving, and combinations of the three. The one thing I never do is look while I reload. (Note: You also have to constantly remember never to muzzle-sweep yourself while reloading.) With a wheelgun, I'm not sure I could effectively carry that much ammo or perform my reloads as quickly as with an auto-loader.

 

[PaladinX13]

You can take any analogy too far because an analogy compares similarities, not 1-to-1 exact details. However, the military moved away from wheelguns for a variety of reasons; the reasons happen to be worth considering. If those reasons overlap your needs/concerns, as they do mine, you may want to heed them. If they don't, discard them. Use what works best for you.

True, but those reasons are valid on their own, not because the military decided on them, which is what you seem to imply below. Is there any reason to mention a lack of wheelguns in the military otherwise?

I moved away from wheel guns decades ago, just like the military did. In fact, are there any militaries in the world worthy of the name that have wheelguns as their standard-issue sidearms?

If the military validates the consideration then why use a .45ACP? The military's current issue weapon is 9mm... on top of that, which military? Even if you want to cite .45s being handed out in a few select cases, 9mm is vastly more popular world wide.

Thus the military's choices shouldn't dictate your choice of sidearm. Committees and boards pick military sidearms based on logistics, costs, and other considerations that affect their decision. Unless you spell out what considerations they took into account that are relevant you're simply infering military selected arms are superior.

At such a point those considerations stand on their own whether military or not.

 

[WhyteP38]

PaladinX13, you jumped to a conclusion that was not supported by my original post. I never said or implied that the military's choices should dictate one's personal choices. You're misreading my post. I implied there were legitimate reasons for choosing autoloaders over wheelguns, that the US military (and all others) with far greater abilities for researching these reasons all switched to autoloaders so it's worth considering, and that my reasons coincided with those of the military. Given the context, most of the other readers understood that implication as it was obvious; however, you erroneously extended *reasons* into adopting an entire lifestyle, which wasn't even close to the subject at hand or the context of the discussion.

I mentioned wheelguns because that is the common denominator of the comparison and part of the subject at hand. Choice of lifestyle isn't. And I don't need to spell out what considerations were taken into account that are relevant because you are wrong, I'm not infering military-selected arms are superior. Again, it's a matter of examining research performed by entities with far greater resources than I have. It's a matter of applying that research and subsequent results to my personal situation rather than trying to recreate the data on my own.

Not all military units have the 9mm as their standard sidearm. I've heard reports that inside the US military there's a push to readopt the .45 ACP because of combat results in Iraq and Afghanistan. So the question of 9mm versus .45 ACP versus some other round is still in play. However, the US military switched over to autoloaders long ago, as did every other significant military force, for a variety of reasons that overlap civilian uses and needs. And those reasons must still be valid because no one anywhere is advocating that any military or military unit switch back to wheelguns. That question, at least for military forces, seems settled, which makes it something to at least consider if you're seeking a comprehensive and objective answer.

 

[MikeOrick]

I kinda know what he means... I am aware of very, very few shootings where six rounds were not enough to get the job done, but plenty where folks didn't get the job done w 6 rounds; there is a difference.

IIRC, NYPD has never had a gunfight where a revolver "jammed". They have had several where autos "jammed". They have had gunfights where officers were shot while reloading revolvers...

In 1990 (mostly revolvers) NYPD's hit ratio was about 19%. In 2000 (mostly autos) it was 9%. They fired twice as many rounds per gunfight/officer, got about the same number of hits. That's progress?

While I do think I am statistically more likely to get off 6 rounds through my GP100s than any of my autos w/o a problem, I also think my autos are more than reliable enough to bet my life on; I do it every day.

While I also think 6 rounds are more than enough to handle any problem I am likely to encounter, I don't mind having to reload less often, and/or reload faster and easier when I do, if/when Murphy shows up.

BTW, the US military's next handgun, the JCP/Joint Combat Pistol, will be a 45 ACP auto. All 645,000 of them.

 

[WhyteP38]

MikeOrick, interesting info. I wonder if some people with autoloaders tend to pray-and-spray, thinking if they got it, they might as well use it. Having started off in wheelguns, I try to make every shot count, but I can imagine if you're a new shooter and using an autoloader you might tend to get wasteful.

I still suspect that updated stats will show a growing trend toward multiple assailants, with a subsequent rise in shots fired in self-defense. It's an arms race of sorts. When people started off with fists, the BGs resorted to clubs. When people began to use clubs, the BGs resorted to swords, then swords versus flintlocks, etc. Now citizens have access to reliable +P hollow points and autoloaders, so the BGs are shifting to body armor and numbers.

 

[briang2ad]

Rev vs. auto

I can load 14-16 rounds in my CZ faster than any revolver as a "house gun" - not much training involved. Lining up my speedloader in my 357 was not as easy - particularly in the dark.

If I HAVE to, I can reload much faster, and will probably not have to as often.

I can conceal an auto easier in general if I want to. (Full size vs. full size, mid vs. mid, etc.).

I personally trust my PreB or Makarov (especially the Mak) in terms of reliability just as much as any revolver, given factory ammo. Most people who know their weapon will grab the one they trust and can rely on - auto or revolver.

While Bullrock has evidently had revolvers slide down concrete stairwells (or other mishaps) without problems in function, I would trust an autolader in this situation MUCH more readily than a revolver. Read the threads on N-frames which get out of time because of much firing... Now imagine the front edge of a revolver cylinder hitting ANY hard surface and then rotating freely past the forcing cone - NOT. This is one of the reasons the military went to autoloaders - ruggedness. The timing of an autoloader is protected inside the weapon away from normal hazards. In a revolver, the timing lock is subject to ANY drop which impinges on the cylinder.

I will grant that in a civilian situation, the difference is NOT as great and the ruggedness issue is not as big a deal. But, if I evacuate my family during a WMD event , etc, life becomes a little more like a military situation. I want ruggedness...and firepower... and reloadability.

 

[MikeOrick]

With NYPD revolvers avg number of shots was 4, w autos it is 7; reloads still not much of an issue w either.

Now ya are wondering, with a hit ratio of 19% of 4 shots and 9% of 7 shots per, that means an avg of less than one hit per (0.76 and 0.63) ... gotta remember there is often more than one officer shooting, and yes, sometimes there were no hits at all.

IIRC, in the Diallo shooting, four NYPD officers, all w autos (S&W, SIG, and Glock) fired 41 shots (4, 5, 16, and 16) w 19 hits, much better than avg... though that is not the best example of anything but how messed up things can get in a hurry.

 

[Nanuk]

When I carried a revolver on duty, and practiced on a regular basis, I could reload as fast as most guys that were carrying glocks. Its all about tecnique and familiarity with you equiptment. reloads in the dark are no problem if you are good with your equitment.