Gun selection advice needed

Gunshy · Post by **Gunshy** » 2003-12-11 04:48am

Recently, my father has been thinking about getting his CCW. While he's just thinking about it, he has decided to purchase a suitable carry gun. He's narrowed his choices down to two: a Sig-Sauer P245 (.45ACP) or a Glock 19 in 9mm. He's asked me for my advice, and I favor the Sig. IMO, these are the advantages it has over the Glock:

Caliber, accuracy, and reliability.
While that Glock has:
Cost, and greater capacity.
I also like the Sig's DA/SA vs Glock's Safe Action.

Anyway, I'd like some more opinions so I can have a better idea of what to suggest to my dad. Thanks for the help.
Oh, and here's some pics of the two.
Sig

http://home.t-online.de/home/cswimm/sig ... /sp245.JPG
Glockhttp://world.guns.ru/handguns/glock19.jpg

Post by **Beowulf** » 2003-12-11 04:53am

It should be noted that the Glock has a more consistant trigger pull than the SIG. And it's perfectly possible to get a .45 Glock. Caliber isn't the issue. As far as accuracy goes, both are accurate enough. I'd recommend that your dad go to a gun range a rent both of them, then compare how they handle.

And I must say it's slightly surprising that your dad is actually able to get a CCW, unless you live in the boonies somewhere.

Gunshy · Post by **Gunshy** » 2003-12-11 05:02am

Oh, we've fired both of them. And, I know most gunfights are almost at arms lenght, but I was much more accurate with the Sig than the Glock. As for the .45 Glocks go, my Dad didn't like the 36, and the 21 is too big for concealed carry. And, yeah, I know .45 vs. 9mm is really academic, but damn it, I like the .45.

As for the boonies...sort of. We live in Kern County, which has the highest number of CCWs issued in the state. Plus, my Dad's received death threats before, and is also a 20 Navy vet. So getting one shouldn't be too hard, that is, assuming he goes through the process. He might not, but he's definitely getting one of the two handguns.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2003-12-11 05:06am

The Glock 19 (my carry gun, btw) is just as, if not more, reliable than the SIG/Sauer. I've had mine for 12 years and the only 'repair' I've done is replacing the recoil spring after 6000 rounds.

Proper ammo selection and shot placement count for more than the difference between a .45 and a 9mm. Choose a good hollowpoint and practice frequently, and the 9mm will serve just as well in most instances.

Federal 9mm 124 grain Hydra Shoks and a couple of preban magazines are what I'd recommend to go with a G19.

Now if you've got your heart set on a DA/SA .45, track down a S&W 4506.

Cheaper and more reliable (Massad Ayoob once called it the most reliable .45 known to man) than any SIG .45, its only drawback is the steel frame. This makes for a heavier gun than an alloy framed .45 ACP.

Oh yeah, get the hell out of California and come back to the USA.

Gunshy · Post by **Gunshy** » 2003-12-11 05:26am

Is the 4506 a big gun? I could only find pics when I googled it. No specs, and it wasn't listed on the S&W site. And preban...what the fuck is a preban? Such words are banned in California. Still, 10+1 is better than 6+1 that the Sig holds. As for reliability, I'm only going on what we tested. 200 rounds with the Glock, and 2 misfires, versus 200 with the Sig and 0 misfires.

Oh yeah, get the hell out of California and come back to the USA.

LMAO! Yeah man, no shit. After college, I probably will though. Maybe a nice shall issue state like Montana or Washington.

Chardok · Post by **Chardok** » 2003-12-11 07:41am

Why not just get a Taurus 9mm..uses old Beretta presses, affordable, and, as I've mentioned before, being in the service has me absolutely sold on the trusty M9. just...just great, great sidearm.

Faram · Post by **Faram** » 2003-12-11 08:36am

If I could own a handgun legaly here I would get the Colt 1911.
There is an gun that has looks, durability and firepower

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-11 09:05am

Glocks don’t have external hammers, which makes them considerably less safe then any gun which does have one. As for reliability, it would seem both Glock and SIG have turned out a lot of bad batches, any claim one way or another on them is simply wrong. No definitive statement can be made on the matter.

If I could own a handgun legaly here I would get the Colt 1911.
There is an gun that has looks, durability and firepower

Its more then a little big for a shoulder holster though.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2003-12-11 01:42pm

Gunshy wrote:Is the 4506 a big gun? I could only find pics when I googled it. No specs, and it wasn't listed on the S&W site. And preban...what the fuck is a preban? Such words are banned in California. Still, 10+1 is better than 6+1 that the Sig holds. As for reliability, I'm only going on what we tested. 200 rounds with the Glock, and 2 misfires, versus 200 with the Sig and 0 misfires.

The 4506 is out of production but it's available on the used market. It's a full size steel frame .45. It's the gun Don Johnson carried in Miami Vice after he ditched the Bren Ten.

I believe it's also the gun Vic carries in The Shield.

As far as the Glock goes, what kind of ammo was being used?
I've had exactly 3 misfires in the last 12 years with my Glock, and they were due to poor quality reloaded ammo. It's a very reliable gun.

Don't get me wrong, the SIG's are good guns but I'd choose a compact hicap 9mm over a compact .45 auto.

Sr.mal · Post by **Sr.mal** » 2003-12-11 01:50pm

Gunshy wrote:Oh, we've fired both of them. And, I know most gunfights are almost at arms lenght, but I was much more accurate with the Sig than the Glock. As for the .45 Glocks go, my Dad didn't like the 36, and the 21 is too big for concealed carry. And, yeah, I know .45 vs. 9mm is really academic, but damn it, I like the .45.

As for the boonies...sort of. We live in Kern County, which has the highest number of CCWs issued in the state. Plus, my Dad's received death threats before, and is also a 20 Navy vet. So getting one shouldn't be too hard, that is, assuming he goes through the process. He might not, but he's definitely getting one of the two handguns.

No wonder, here in Kern county we are the Oaklahoma of California.

Zoink · Post by **Zoink** » 2003-12-11 02:15pm

How about a Springfield Armory XD-9 Sub-Compact with Federal Nyclad 124gr 9MM ammo?

Gunshy · Post by **Gunshy** » 2003-12-11 03:07pm

Chardok wrote:

Why not just get a Taurus 9mm

Their M9 clones are a little too big for my dad for concealed carry. Plus, I don't support a company that pursues that bullshit "Smart Gun" technology. Gee, let's make a gun someone will bet their life on even more prone to failure. Fuckers. Oh, and as for M9, versus 1911A1...don't let my Dad hear you say that.

Glocksman wrote:

As far as the Glock goes, what kind of ammo was being used?

Shitty range ammo. Came in plastic baggies. I don't remember the markings on the cartridges though. And yeah, you're probably right. I went last saturday with my mom, and our 1911A1 and S&W .38 were both having problems. You have to buy theirs unless you want to buy a gold membership.

Zoink wrote:

How about a Springfield Armory XD-9 Sub-Compact

You know, people I've talked to really rave about that gun (full size anyway), but I've yet to fire it. That's definitely an option I'll look into.

As for the Glock, sea skimmer addressed the main hangup my dad has on it. BTW, I really appreciate all the advice I've heard. Thanks.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-12-11 05:04pm

Between the Glock and the Sig, I would reccomend the Sig. I am not big on hammerless pistols.
If you are looking for another alternative I highly reccomend the H&K USP, It comes in 9mm, .40cal, and .45cal

I have a H&K USP .40cal and I love it, I also reccomend that you check out the Sig 2340 model, it has the polymer frame and comes in .40cal and .357sig which has been shown to perform almost 100% identical to the .357mag

The Cleric · Post by **The Cleric** » 2003-12-11 05:44pm

Glocks are famous for being nearly indestructable.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-11 05:49pm

StormTrooperTR889 wrote:Glocks are famous for being nearly indestructable.

I've heard firsthand of one literally blowing apart on the users hands. As I said above, both producers seem the have qaulity control problumes.

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-12-11 05:57pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
StormTrooperTR889 wrote:Glocks are famous for being nearly indestructable.
I've heard firsthand of one literally blowing apart on the users hands. As I said above, both producers seem the have qaulity control problumes.

I have never heard of any such thing. If that happened, it was almost certainly because the user did something stupid like putting really hot, overloaded handload cartridges into the gun, or something else equally stupid. Glock is a quality conscious manufacturer with a first rate product. In this age of product liability litigation, there is no way they would sell a gun that is liable to literally blow up in a user's hand in normal use.

YT300000 · Post by **YT300000** » 2003-12-11 09:40pm

Chardok wrote:Why not just get a Taurus 9mm..uses old Beretta presses, affordable, and, as I've mentioned before, being in the service has me absolutely sold on the trusty M9. just...just great, great sidearm.

What's the difference between the Taurus clone and the Beretta 92?

And when I saw Taurus, I immediately thought Raging Bull. Imagine trying to use that as a concealled carry weapon.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-12-11 09:52pm

*9mm.. boo hiss*

From what I've seen and heard talking to law enforcement officers (and my own shooting experience), 9mm isn't the most desirable caliber for a self defense weapon. Dad has a Glock 22 in .40SW for his law enforcement issue weapon and a Glock 23 in .40 for his personal carry weapon, and from things I've seen, the .40 is a great compromise round. More stopping power than the somewhat lackluster 9mm, and allows for a slightly smaller weapon and larger storage than the .45 ACP horse-of-a-round. One round I've heard good things about is the 10mm, although I don't know alot about it. Glock has the Glock 29 compact in that caliber.

You'll also see many companies are making 1911 knockoffs in new calibers as well. The 1911 is a tried and true action, and a great choice if you want a 'thinner' gun.

Pick up a 'Handguns' or 'Guns and Ammo' magazine sometime and flip through them, as they usually have great articles on self defense guns, and are all around good magazines anyways.

Another thing you should note is how you'll be carrying your weapon. If you have a hip or frontal holster, a Glock isn't going to be the perfect choice because they are 'fat', however they are just fine if you have an over the shoulder rig or would be carrying it inside a coat or other large piece of clothing.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2003-12-11 10:32pm

Nathan F wrote:Pick up a 'Handguns' or 'Guns and Ammo' magazine sometime and flip through them, as they usually have great articles on self defense guns, and are all around good magazines anyways.

It's a decent place to start, but if the focus is strictly on self-defence then I know of no better place than the Defensive Firearms forum over at SDF. They are a wealth of info on shooting techniques, weapons concealment, drawing weapons, and tons of other stuff.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2003-12-12 02:35am

Perinquus wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote:
StormTrooperTR889 wrote:Glocks are famous for being nearly indestructable.
I've heard firsthand of one literally blowing apart on the users hands. As I said above, both producers seem the have qaulity control problumes.
I have never heard of any such thing. If that happened, it was almost certainly because the user did something stupid like putting really hot, overloaded handload cartridges into the gun, or something else equally stupid. Glock is a quality conscious manufacturer with a first rate product. In this age of product liability litigation, there is no way they would sell a gun that is liable to literally blow up in a user's hand in normal use.

The 9mm Parabellum Glocks are very reliable.

Other caliber Glocks have had an intermittent problem called kaBoom!

What causes a kB!?
Catastrophic failures may be caused by a variety of problems, but in general a Glock kB! is as a result of a case failure. The case failure occurs when pressure inside the cartridge increases to the point that it cannot be contained by the case and the material of the case fails, allowing hot gases to escape from the ruptured case web at damagingly high velocities. The resulting uncontained forces can blow the magazine out of the gun, destroy the locking block, cause the tip of the trigger to be snipped off, ruin the trigger bar, rupture the barrel, peel the forward edge of the slide at the ejection port up, and do other nasty things. In general, Glocks tend to contain case failures fairly well, but under some circumstances they can cause injury as well as damage to one's gun. At least one Federal LEO has been injured in a kB! involving a Glock 21 and a Winchester factory overcharge. Additionally, there is some evidence of there being another cause of a kB!... a barrel failure caused by improper metallurgy

While I'd shoot a .40 Glock, it'd be only with factory ammo or once fired brass reloads that I reloaded myself.

It happens in other guns as well.

Do kB!s occur in other guns or just in Glocks?
kB!s do, of course, occur in other guns, but no one appears to be keeping accurate statistics for most of them. Many 1911-style handguns have partially unsupported case mouths, and numerous case separations have occurred in these guns. Early .38 Super barrels were particularly susceptible, and the critical observer may have noticed the predilection among USPSA .38 Super competitors for full beards in an attempt to cloak the vestiages of what came to be known as "super face."

Respected firearms author Frank James, in 1994, documented a number of kB!s in HK USP .40 pistols, which do have fully supported chambers.

The closest I ever came to having a kaBoom was when I first started reloading ammo. The Lee 1000 press failed to rotate the shellplate once and I inadvertently dumped a double charge of Unique into a .45 ACP case.

At the time, my .45 was a Ruger P90.

When that round went off, it sounded like a cannon and felt like a .44 magnum. Everyone turned and looked in my direction.
The grain of the steel breechface was impressed on the case rim and the primer bulged back.

I had the smith at the range inspect my gun and he told me that I was lucky. If I'd been shooting a 1911, I would have been wearing the slide in my forehead.

The next day, I sold the Lee and bought a Dillon XL650.

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-12-12 02:43am

Glocksman wrote:
Perinquus wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote: I've heard firsthand of one literally blowing apart on the users hands. As I said above, both producers seem the have qaulity control problumes.
I have never heard of any such thing. If that happened, it was almost certainly because the user did something stupid like putting really hot, overloaded handload cartridges into the gun, or something else equally stupid. Glock is a quality conscious manufacturer with a first rate product. In this age of product liability litigation, there is no way they would sell a gun that is liable to literally blow up in a user's hand in normal use.

The 9mm Parabellum Glocks are very reliable.

Other caliber Glocks have had an intermittent problem called kaBoom!

What causes a kB!?
Catastrophic failures may be caused by a variety of problems, but in general a Glock kB! is as a result of a case failure. The case failure occurs when pressure inside the cartridge increases to the point that it cannot be contained by the case and the material of the case fails, allowing hot gases to escape from the ruptured case web at damagingly high velocities. The resulting uncontained forces can blow the magazine out of the gun, destroy the locking block, cause the tip of the trigger to be snipped off, ruin the trigger bar, rupture the barrel, peel the forward edge of the slide at the ejection port up, and do other nasty things. In general, Glocks tend to contain case failures fairly well, but under some circumstances they can cause injury as well as damage to one's gun. At least one Federal LEO has been injured in a kB! involving a Glock 21 and a Winchester factory overcharge. Additionally, there is some evidence of there being another cause of a kB!... a barrel failure caused by improper metallurgy
While I'd shoot a .40 Glock, it'd be only with factory ammo or once fired brass reloads that I reloaded myself.

It happens in other guns as well.
Do kB!s occur in other guns or just in Glocks?
kB!s do, of course, occur in other guns, but no one appears to be keeping accurate statistics for most of them. Many 1911-style handguns have partially unsupported case mouths, and numerous case separations have occurred in these guns. Early .38 Super barrels were particularly susceptible, and the critical observer may have noticed the predilection among USPSA .38 Super competitors for full beards in an attempt to cloak the vestiages of what came to be known as "super face."

Respected firearms author Frank James, in 1994, documented a number of kB!s in HK USP .40 pistols, which do have fully supported chambers.

All this is why you void your warranty on a Glock when you fire handloads through it. Modern factory ammo is of such a quality that case failure is virtually unheard of. Thus, if you shoot factory ammo, the quality of which you can be certain is high, you will not have this problem.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2003-12-12 02:46am

Thus, if you shoot factory ammo, the quality of which you can be certain is high, you will not have this problem.

Exactly.

I'd trust a Glock .45 or .40 with my life, but only with factory ammo, which is a good idea no matter what firearm or caliber you're using.

Hot handloads have their place, but not as self-defense ammo.

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-12-12 02:57am

Glocksman wrote:
Thus, if you shoot factory ammo, the quality of which you can be certain is high, you will not have this problem.
Exactly.

I'd trust a Glock .45 or .40 with my life, but only with factory ammo, which is a good idea no matter what firearm or caliber you're using.

Hot handloads have their place, but not as self-defense ammo.

Another problem with handloads for defense is that you open yourself up for litigation. An opposing lawyer will try to make you look like some Rambo wannabe who tried to load some super duper killer handload.

Gunshy · Post by **Gunshy** » 2003-12-12 05:11am

Death from the Sea wrote:

If you are looking for another alternative I highly reccomend the H&K USP

I've fired it in .45 and I was very impressed. Unbelievably accurate, soft shooting, and a high capacity magazine. An excellent pistol...except, when my dad fired it, he couldn't adjust to using his index finger to release the mag instead of his thumb. I caught on pretty quick, but that ruined it for him.

YT300000 wrote:

What's the difference between the Taurus clone and the Beretta 92?

About three hundred dollars

. Seriously though, I think the Taurus can be carried "cocked and locked" in addition to DA/SA, while the Beretta is DA/SA only.

As far as 10mm goes, I've heard that the hotter loads penetrate too much to be effective. And with the lighter loads, you might as well just shoot the .40. Right now though, I'm less sure of my stance. I'm pretty close to recommending the Glock, but I dunno... I guess, my dad and I will just have to make another trip to the range. Darn.