What caliber carbine: 9mm VS .40s&w VS 10mm VS .45acp


PDA






Alan Fud
September 7, 2006, 04:30 AM
For general self defense purposes with a handgun round, what carbine would you prefer?

http://www.olyarms.com/images/products/k9-full.jpg

Chambered in 9mm (http://www.olyarms.com/?rootView=browse&view=dtl&ids=K9)
.40s&w (http://www.olyarms.com/?rootView=browse&view=dtl&ids=K40)
10mm (http://www.olyarms.com/?rootView=browse&view=dtl&ids=K10)
.45acp (http://www.olyarms.com/?rootView=browse&view=dtl&ids=K45)

If you enjoyed reading about "What caliber carbine: 9mm VS .40s&w VS 10mm VS .45acp" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Silent Sam
September 7, 2006, 07:13 AM
460 Rowland...:)

Otherguy Overby
September 7, 2006, 09:22 AM
Yer list seems a bit short...

Where's .357 & .44 mag?

Lever-guns are carbines, too!

foghornl
September 7, 2006, 10:11 AM
I picked .45ACP

I have several .45ACP handguns, and really don't want to stock ANOTHER type of ammo.

Waiting for Hi-Point to finally sell their .45ACP carbine*** since Marlin no longer makes the "Camp Carbine".


***Said while installing asbestos bloomers :D :evil: :D :evil: :D :evil: While Hi-Point arms certainly are not the most AP {Aesthetically Pleasing} firearms out there, they do go BANG! on request.

Alan Fud
September 7, 2006, 10:43 AM
Yer list seems a bit short...

Where's .357 & .44 mag?

Lever-guns are carbines, too! I was looking at only those that came in the AR configuration and not all carbines.

Manedwolf
September 7, 2006, 10:54 AM
I picked 9mm. To me, the point of a carbine is better accuracy than a pistol, extended range compared to a pistol, and higher VELOCITY compared to a pistol.

For the latter especially, I don't see the point of 45. Great handgun round, but slow...what's the point of putting it in a carbine, really?

Lightweight 9mm rounds like the GECO BAT or Cor-Bon +P are rather swift out of a carbine, allowing for a much longer range and better accuracy at that range, (and more penetration, as in through windshields, car doors, etc) I'd think.

That, and significantly greater ammo capacity and less weight at the same time.

HorseSoldier
September 7, 2006, 11:07 AM
I'd personally say caliber is less important than commonality -- whatever pistol you also prefer to shoot, and, ideally, with whatever magazines your pistol uses.

grimjaw
September 7, 2006, 11:12 AM
.357 Sig should have been an option, but among the ones you listed, I'd say 9x19.

jmm

B.D. Turner
September 7, 2006, 11:32 AM
I picked the 9mm because the .44 magnum was not a choice. Having a Colt AR in 9mm and an IMI UZI in 9mm I can say the UZI will shoot rings around the Colt 9mm all day. The Norinco UZI clone was ok too but the stock stinks. HiPoint Carbine in 9mm is a great plinker too.

zamboxl
September 7, 2006, 11:45 AM
wow they offer 10mm nice.

Alan Fud
September 7, 2006, 11:57 AM
I picked the 9mm because the .44 magnum was not a choice
.357 Sig should have been an option, but among the ones you listed, I'd say 9x19.They presently don't offer a .44mag or 357 SIG in an AR configuration. If you follow the links, these are rifles that you can presently buy.

warriorsociologist
September 7, 2006, 11:57 AM
If I could get my hands on a H&K MP5-10, (10mm MP5), I'd never consider another 0-200m carbine. Since getting my hands on one is not likely, I have yet to fully convince myself that any of the others presents a justifiable (for me...mind you) advantage over a .223 K.I.S.S. M4-clone. I trained with MP5's in the Marine Corps (9mm of course) and they are very nice for close-quarters/room clearing....so I guess evey once in a while, I do get the hankering for a 9mm AR or MAC (what I could afford) just to do some cheap plinking. That said, what stops me is that for many of the roles I'd now need something smaller than my M4, I probably reach for my Glock 20 (15+1 rds of 10mm in a small package).

Anyway - that's my .02.

FWIW, if you are interested in finding "10mm discussions" on THR, I have a sticky here that links many of them together:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=2678679#post2678679

:)




***As for Oly's 10mm carbines....I have heard stories that they are less than reliable over the long haul. It could be just an internet gossip/rumor, but it does take a little tweaking & tweeking to get a 10mm carbine to feed light (.40 spec.) and full-power loads without suffering some sort of reliability issues. This rumor is one of the reasons I never got one (the other being magazine availability & overall mag reliability) and why I almost jumped on board with the Vector "MP5-10 clone" pre-buy. Anyway, I'd love to hear feedback from actual owners of 10mm OLy carbines on how theres' performs.

Brian Williams
September 7, 2006, 12:11 PM
I voted 9mm as in 9mmX32R, better known as a 357 mag.
I have often thought about making a 9mmX45, basically a 5.56 blown out to a straight case. Now that would be a hoot.

B.D. Turner
September 7, 2006, 12:13 PM
Alan Fud,
Who said it had to be on an AR platform????? The post said "For general self defense purposes with a handgun round, what carbine would you prefer?"

Harley Quinn
September 7, 2006, 12:45 PM
But I don't have one nor do I plan on getting one, I like my 30 carbine's.

Neat little shooters and fun to boot. I like the 5.7mm conversion I have.
I heard they can do the 10 mm also. Hmmm:what: I believe I have about 4 I could play with.:D
I have a 1905 Winchester 32-20 that was converted long ago into 30 Carbine, I did not do it, bought it pretty reasonable about 30 years ago.;)

The 30 carbine being a rifle round in the first place, fits me fine. If DE made a pistol for it I'd buy it. :D I have a Ruger single six in it, one of the first they made circa early 70's. Loud and you should see the flame in the evening, :neener: I like it, scares people even with earmuffs.:evil: Puts on quite a display. LOL

HQ :uhoh: Giving away to many secrets:p
Boy these smilies are great:D

BillinNH
September 7, 2006, 12:53 PM
Go to the SD caliber that you are the most confident with in a handgun. For me that's the 9mm. And I own carbines in 357, 44 and 45 as well as three in 9mm. It's a personal choice, they can all do the job, choose the one you are most confidant with.

Bill

Bigfoot
September 7, 2006, 01:45 PM
From the choices offered I'd go .40. From a carbine barrel it should be close to 10mm performance and a 10mm handgun with 200 gr XTPs is considered one of the best choices for deer-hog hunting and couger-bear protection.

The low pressure .45 doesn't gain as much from a longer barrel as the higher pressure .40 does.

Should I disclose that I shoot a .40 handgun? Bias? What bias?:evil:

Vitamin G
September 7, 2006, 03:07 PM
But if you'd pick a .40S&W because it would be almost equal to a 10mm with that length barrel, imagine what a 10mm could do ;)

warriorsociologist
September 7, 2006, 04:17 PM
Remember folks, in general, barrel length only helps if there is still burning powder to accellerate the bullet. Once the powder is burned up (all gas released), any "extra" barrel is just a source of friction & slows the bullet. Most pistol rounds have fast powders optimized for short barrels...but a big pistol-caliber case packed with slower powder can take advantage of some increase in barrel length. I read somewhere that anything over 11" or so didn't help with factory 10mm loads... Anyone else have any info on this?

Bigfoot
September 7, 2006, 04:22 PM
Doh! I didn't know they offered it in 10mm and I must have missed that in the original post.

Oh yeah, 10mm in a carbine. Now that would be a versitile gun.

bowfin
September 7, 2006, 04:47 PM
/*If I could get my hands on a H&K MP5-10, (10mm MP5), I'd never consider another 0-200m carbine.*/

Using some of that oldtime potent Norma ammunition, we had a blast ringing a 6" gong at 100 yards with my brother's S&W 1076 pistol, once elevation was figured out. I think an MP5 in 10mm would perform that same feat with boring regularity and little effort.

The FBI had some Thompson SMGs converted to 10mm when they were sold on that cartridge. Since the Thompson was also designed to accommodate the powerful but never produced .45 Remington-Thompson cartridge, it was a fairly simple procedure.

Myself
September 7, 2006, 04:53 PM
10mm

bowfin
September 7, 2006, 05:19 PM
By the way, ballistics on that .45 Remington-Thompson cartridge was a 250 grain bullet at 1,450 fps(!)

Alan Fud
September 7, 2006, 08:04 PM
Alan Fud,
Who said it had to be on an AR platform????? Uhh, my survey :D :o

spartacus2002
September 7, 2006, 11:47 PM
10mm firing loads from DoubleTap Ammunition.

taliv
September 7, 2006, 11:55 PM
if you want a 10mm carbine just so you can impress all your friends, then by all means, get a 10mm carbine, and we'll be duly impressed, because it is pretty cool.

however,

if you want a carbine to SHOOT, then get the 9mm or 45. i'm assuming anyone who has the money to shoot a 10mm carbine, would have already purchased both guns before asking :)

Squidward
September 8, 2006, 12:07 AM
Whatever happened to the widely spread rumor of a Glock Factory carbine. Someone needs to start that one again so I can get excited and let down once more.

rangerruck
September 8, 2006, 12:11 AM
the best are in 9mm , just look at the mp5.

R.W.Dale
September 8, 2006, 12:12 AM
Remember folks, in general, barrel length only helps if there is still burning powder to accellerate the bullet. Once the powder is burned up (all gas released), any "extra" barrel is just a source of friction & slows the bullet. Most pistol rounds have fast powders optimized for short barrels...but a big pistol-caliber case packed with slower powder can take advantage of some increase in barrel length. I read somewhere that anything over 11" or so didn't help with factory 10mm loads... Anyone else have any info on this?

HA HA HA! You're killing me where do you guys get this stuff.

FYI unless there's something wrong with yout ammo ALL of the powder is burned before the bullet even gets to the rifling. What drives a bullet down the barrel is the EXPANDING GASSES that are produced as a reslut of the combustion of the powder. IT would take a LONGGGGG barrel before you produced enough drag for the carbine to be slower than a handgun.

The biggest single factor in determining the velocity gain from a carbine VS handgun is the bore case ratio. In other words how much powder are you burnin relative to the hole the bullet is traveling down. Even when loaded with the fastest powders rounds like the .357 mag .44 or even .357 sig will gain impressive gains in velocity in a carbine. The oppisite it true with rounds like the .45 (gains nothing in a rifle) 9mm or even the 500S&W loaded with slow powders (yes I've tested this one) gain relitivly little in a rifle. Powder burnrate plays only a small role in the velocity gains

greg531mi
September 8, 2006, 12:26 AM
My twist on this subject, is why have a pistol caliber for a carbine?
There are great .30 rifle calibers out there, mainly the 7.62x39 and the 308.
Keep the pistol rounds for the pistol, if you want a carbine rifle, get a rifle caliber.
If you have close neighbors, like me, get a shotgun, with buckshot, for home defense....
I'm sorry, but I just think carbines with pistol calibers are inferior, in ballistic's and stopping power, compared to the 308,7.62x39, and even the 30-30!

10-Ring
September 8, 2006, 12:43 AM
I'm by far an expert in carbines, but I do play on in the web :D So, here goes...
From what I've heard & read, carbines function better calibered for heavier, hotter rounds and of the calibers you have listed, I'd think the 10mm would off you the functionality & accuracy you'll need to achieve a high level of performance.

marklbucla
September 8, 2006, 12:53 AM
I've got the 9mm, except it's the Oly PCR, not the K9.

I got it for the following reasons:

I've got other 9mms- stick with the same caliber.
9mm is the cheapest centerfire round.
Unmodified Sten mags are cheap, though you've gotta get yourself an expensive mag block.
It kicks the least.

9mm works just as well as the others for hitting steel and paper targets. Since my 870 does bedside duty, I have no need for anything bigger than a 9mm in my toys.

marklbucla
September 8, 2006, 12:55 AM
Silly me, but I forgot my GUNPORN!

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/9498/pa280031a6hb.jpg

Taken at the FOP Range in Alabama.

Harley Quinn
September 8, 2006, 03:47 AM
Better get some rifle reloaders speaking about faster and slower powders here.
Must be a reason for all those speeds of burning that I keep reading about.

HQ:)

possum
September 8, 2006, 06:39 PM
i voted 9mm for the simple fact that the ammo is cheaper to shoot therefore more rds can be put down range while at the range,and more rds equals more :) 's for me. and after some practice you'll be able to put every rd in a fgew inch circle, and you want need the extra ft. lb's from the other rds. Plus it will be the easiest to control, and put multiple rds on target especially with some good practice!

R.W.Dale
September 8, 2006, 07:05 PM
Better get some rifle reloaders speaking about faster and slower powders here.
Must be a reason for all those speeds of burning that I keep reading about.

"rifle reloaders" Kinda like me:what:

Yes there is a wide range of burnrates for smokless powders, But even with the slowest of them all of the powder is consumed in the first few inches worth of barrel. Thats why people who shoot handguns chambered for rifle cartriges still use rifle powders not handgun powders.

Think of it in automotive terms, During the power stroke on an engines cylinder the fuel isn't being burnt the entire time that the piston is travelling downward, But rather it's the expanding gasses that is generated when the air fuel mixture is ignited that drives the piston. All of the "burning is completed while the piston very close to TDC

Ammunition works bacically the same way The burning doesn't drive the bullet down the barrel but rather the PRESSURE generated by the high volume of gasses that were generated after the powder ignites

taliv
September 8, 2006, 08:15 PM
i'm not at all an expert on this, but i've heard unburned powder can build up in suppressors on short-barreled rifles. i couldn't quite make out what rslivers was saying in the very entertaining video he posted recently, but that might be an example of it.

in any case, why would we need flash suppressors if something wasn't still burning as it exited the barrel?

R.W.Dale
September 8, 2006, 09:12 PM
in any case, why would we need flash suppressors if something wasn't still burning as it exited the barrel?

Of course we all know that FIRE is the only source of light mankind has yet discovered:cool:

jerkface11
September 8, 2006, 09:35 PM
In the current issue of handloader Barsness has an article called "Much Ado About Nothing" which discusses among other things how long it takes a powder charge to burn. He sites Homer Powley as a source and says that 99.5% of the powder is burned right in front of the cartridge. With "right in front of" meaning an inch for a shotgun shell and 3 inches for a magnum rifle cartridge with a "slow" powder.

As for needing a flash suppressor it isn't because the powder is still burning. It's because the gas is HOT.

taliv
September 8, 2006, 11:21 PM
would be curious to hear what you guys think is responsible for the flame at the end of the can in this video

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=219303

rsilvers claims it's unburned powder building up in the can, unless i'm mistaken. i don't think "hot gasses" would cause a flame like that, but i could be wrong. it's more like a lit match.

R.W.Dale
September 8, 2006, 11:28 PM
unless i'm mistaken. i don't think "hot gasses" would cause a flame like that,

Why not? the flames on a camp fire are nothing more than hot gas coming from the combustion of the wood below.

Now you can end up with a situation where slow rifle powders do not ignite properly when the pressure required to fully combust the powder for whatever reason isn't there.

Glockfan.45
September 8, 2006, 11:42 PM
I chose the 10mm as its the most powerful load shown here. I never understood the point of a pistol caliber carbine. You have the bulk of a rifle without the power of a rirle round. Why not just get a rifle, or a pistol?

marklbucla
September 8, 2006, 11:50 PM
Because ammo is a fraction of the cost.

Not all firearms are tools. Some can just be toys.

taliv
September 9, 2006, 12:05 AM
Now you can end up with a situation where slow rifle powders do not ignite properly when the pressure required to fully combust the powder for whatever reason isn't there.

what could cause that lower pressure?

R.W.Dale
September 9, 2006, 02:29 AM
what could cause that lower pressure?

All sorts of things.

Using a powder too slow for the case volume bore ratio. Not using a magnum primer to light off heavy charges of slow powders. Undercharging cases and or using a load that is too weak. Not using a heavy crimp with certian handgun powders....
Just to name a few.

jerkface11
September 9, 2006, 09:21 AM
would be curious to hear what you guys think is responsible for the flame at the end of the can in this video

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=219303

rsilvers claims it's unburned powder building up in the can, unless i'm mistaken. i don't think "hot gasses" would cause a flame like that, but i could be wrong. it's more like a lit match.

Maybe oil or solvent built up in the suppressor i'm on dial up so i can't see the video though. Or sense it's a suppressor and it's main job is to slow down the gasses it's always possible that hot gasses were trapped in it and were slowly escaping.

kieran
September 10, 2006, 04:40 PM
I have often thought about making a 9mmX45, basically a 5.56 blown out to a straight case. Now that would be a hoot.

with a heavy, blunt bullet and a compressed load of h110/n110? yes please.

someone suggest it to Alexander Arms. get them to call it the 357 Beowulf ;)

ndh87
September 10, 2006, 05:16 PM
i picked the 10mm just because it is a fairly powerful round that would provide plenty of knowck down out of a carbine platform. On the note of lever guns being carbines too, i'd have to go with my marlin 1894 SS chambered for .44 mag :D

GigaBuist
September 11, 2006, 01:28 AM
Why, oh why, can we not get a good carbine chambered in 7.62x25mm? That sounds like a heck of a lot of fun, and might be fairly useful, too.

I want one.

warriorsociologist
September 11, 2006, 10:53 AM
krochus,
I am not sure what you thought I meant, but my point was a longer barrel isn't always going to give you more velocity (given the same ammunition) as some seem to believe. If your powder is fully spent then there is no longer any gas pressure building up (and FWIW, "burning" = "combustion") Also, no, in all instances except for small cases with fast powders, the powder continues to burn in the ever-increasing (in size) chamber provided by the barrel/bullet seal as the bullet begins to accellerate and the case (usually expanded against that chamber at this time) to build what becomes the final pressure created before the bullet exits the barrel or some if bled off through a gas port. If you are using too fast or too little of a poder for a given bullet weight, caliber, composition, and barrel length, you will experience a peak pressure at a time that is "too early". 99.99% of folks could care less about this, but it is why some loads perform better (and yes, in extereme cases faster) from shorter barrels than longer barrels. This is also why it pays to work up oads specific to your gun / bullet choise (esp. when shooting wildcats or from custom tubes). I am sure someone with more time on there hands can post links to places you can read more on this - but most good reloading manuals have a section in the beginning explaining this basic process.

In short, if your powder is spent (e.g., no more pressure increase) and your bullet has not yet exited the barrel, the remaining major force affecting your bullet is friction. I agree with your basic "size of pressure chamber" analogy, but I think it's also plain to see that that was what I was getting at too. As a "fellow rifle reloader" I am fairly certain that you can agree that to achieve the most efficent match of bullet weight, composition, case capacity (to account for manuf. differences), powder charge & type, you do need to consider the action type (closed system or autoloader - esp. if gas-driven) and barrel length (and sometimes barrel characteristics such as rifling type / barrel material). Of course most of this will just provide theoretical maximums, but sometimes - esp when moving from short pistol-length barrels to longer (10-16+ inch) barrels, a basic application of physics helps.

PS, there is also such a think as starting a counter-point with a little decorum instead of
starting out with a written version of ---> " :neener: "

jerkface11
September 11, 2006, 06:00 PM
In short, if your powder is spent (e.g., no more pressure increase) and your bullet has not yet exited the barrel, the remaining major force affecting your bullet is friction. I agree with your basic "size of pressure chamber" analogy, but I think it's also plain to see that that was what I was getting at too. As a "fellow rifle reloader" I am fairly certain that you can agree that to achieve the most efficent match of bullet weight, composition, case capacity (to account for manuf. differences), powder charge & type, you do need to consider the action type (closed system or autoloader - esp. if gas-driven) and barrel length (and sometimes barrel characteristics such as rifling type / barrel material). Of course most of this will just provide theoretical maximums, but sometimes - esp when moving from short pistol-length barrels to longer (10-16+ inch) barrels, a basic application of physics helps.

Wow what's your source for that? You seem to be assuming that the gasses stop expanding when the powder stops burning. That is of course wrong. Modern pressure testing equipment (piezo electric) shows that the pressure peaks when the bullet is just a couple of inches down the barrel of a rifle and that it drops after that.

If your powder is still burning when the bullet is at the end of the barrel then you're using too slow of a powder and you aren't getting the most out of it. Since the gasses will continue to expand after the powder is done burning.

Seancass
September 11, 2006, 07:46 PM
i wouldnt have guessed the 10mm would be fairing so well.

anyway, i said 9mm cuz its cheap and you've got a lot of rounds there to make up for any lack of stopping power you may be worried about. plus its cheap so you can shoot tons more.

Hazzard
September 11, 2006, 09:00 PM
I went with 10mm. As a reloader, 10mm wouldn't cost much more and would provide superior firepower IMO.

I would have to agree that the flame seen at the barrel is typically hot gas, not unburned powder. However, I've also left the range with my arms speckled by unburned powder many times (usually with unique or clays). But that was after firing "light" IDPA loads which may not have allowed complete burn due to lower pressure.

s&w 24
September 12, 2006, 02:17 AM
10 mm would be flat out nasty in a cabine

warriorsociologist
September 12, 2006, 11:28 AM
The reason that pressure drops after a few inches (this is my understanding of the process mind you) is because the "chamber" created by the bullet seal, the barrel, and the case is getting larger (once the powder is burned, the chemical reaction that produces the pressure is over - the peak occurs at about the moment this occurs). Pressure drops after this because the gasses are confined in an increasingly larger "container" as the bullet travels down the barrel (ever-increasing volume of the "container" + the same volume of gas = lower pressure). Of course a certain length of barrel is needed to gain the optimum pressure and to stabilize the bullet.

Of course what I have just written is purposefully over simplified, but this seems to be consistent with what I have read / reasoned on the subject. In short, choosing a powder with the right burn rate should theoretically allow you to gain the highest safe pressure given the barrel length chosen and other factors that I mentioned before. In a way, you can notice some 'evidence" for this when you take mild .38 spec. loads and fire them from successively longer barrels. The efficiency of the round is dependent on certain parameters. For example, my mild paper-punching handloads show significant velocity gains when I move them from a 2" to a 4" or 6" barrel. The rate of increase is about the same, but not only are both fired from revolvers (vented "containers) but the same rate of "gain per inch" is nowhere to be had from my Marlin carbine.

My mild .38 loads that I just described are optimized for a 4" revolver. I try to get a complete burn in that amount of barrel. When I fire them in shorter barrels, I get lower velocity (of course) and I can find unburnt powder in the barrel. This is especially true for my 10mm loads optimized for my 6.5" S&W 610 when fired from my Glock 29 (complete burn in 610, unburnt powder remaining in G29). Anyway, of course even these same .38 loads certainly get a velocity boost when fired from my carbine, but this seems to be due to the fact that the extra time they get the "push" from these gases more than compensates for the extra friction...but (here's the rub), the friction does take its toll....(continued below): ;)

Again, I reason that the "gain per inch" in velocity from the carbine is much lower that what one sees when comparing 2, 4, and 6 inch revolvers (again, using my mild loads) since the amount of gas produced in the first 4" or so is from the complete burn cycle and the remaining barrel serves only to provide more time for this every-weakening, but still present "push" to accellerate the bullet & also "some" friction/drag (working against the accelleration, but not overcoming it). IF HOWEVER I were to instead change my .38 spec recipe (which I have done on more than a few occasions) to a slower powder for instance, this would allow the burn to continue though say the first 6-10 or more inches of barrel. More pressure would be produced (bigger push down the length of the barrel with less "extra" barrel at the end) and higher velocity gains would result....but, these new loads would likely not work as nicely in say my 4" revolver because doing so would result in lots of flash/flame out the end of the barrel and more (unburnt) powder speckling on my close-range targets.

That all said, I am more than happy to hear other theories - it's just that this is how I understand it to work. Did I explain myself more clearly this time?

***edited to catch *some* (though probably not all) typos. :)

CornCod
September 12, 2006, 05:59 PM
.45 would be great and 7.62X25 Tokarev would be very good indeed. In view of my financial situation, however, I am just going to have to stick with 9mm.

warriorsociologist
September 13, 2006, 10:29 AM
Yep, I have been kicking around the idea on getting a TC Contender carbine barrel made in that caliber. I shoot pins oce in a while with my little CZ52 and it's fine (thin) sights and flat trajectory really help it shine. A fun tme can be had dropping pins as fast as the guys using high dollar pistols in the next lane over when you're holding a $80 mil-surp. :cool:

geekWithA.45
September 13, 2006, 11:30 AM
If I could only have one gun from the list, I'd have to go for maximum oomph, 10mm.

9mm is a reasonable choice out of a carbine, and the ammo is dirt cheap for practice and plinkin'.

Personally, I _have_ a .45acp carbine, for ammo compatibility, which mostly lives in my trunk. (It's the gun I have that's legal in all the various jurisdictions I operate in)

At the end of the day, though, if I have my druthers, and I'm gonna be lugging a long gun around, I'm going with an _actual_ rifle, in either .308 or 5.56

Okiecruffler
November 13, 2006, 01:24 PM
I voted 45, just cause I like big holes. And for the record I'm one of those guys who shoot a rifle caliber in a handgun, and I load with alot of "pistol" powders.

vynx
November 13, 2006, 04:51 PM
I voted .45 because I have one - the marlin camp carbine that uses 1911 mag's - and its a nice handling carbine. I wish it didn't have the plastic mag well tho.

I held the Ruger PC4 in .40 and it didn't feel as good in my hands - heavier and just different than the Marlin.

I have heard that the .45 acp doesn't get anything extra from the longer barrel - would it help if one used .45 acp +P?

Everyone loved them in the old Thompson Machine Guns? Why aren't they as good in a Marlin camp carbine?

Also, if you reload .45acp couldn't you make a carbine load that would be better ina 16" barrel?

MachIVshooter
November 13, 2006, 05:07 PM
10mm has the most to begin with, and stands to gain more than the others.

115grfmj
November 13, 2006, 05:10 PM
.357 magnum (.44mags great too)

geronimo13
November 13, 2006, 06:29 PM
In reading on the keltec sub2k carbine @ K.T.O.G. it seems the 16" barrel adds quite a bit to the velocity of a pistol round. The energy increases are close to 50% see http://www.ktog.org/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=102;action=display;num=1161039214
. There are other chono's of .40 cal showing quite and increase in MV in different threads. The longer barrel makes for quieter shots also. There is a video (utube) of a guy shooting the Keltec 9mm carbine knocking down steel targets that a .45 pistol wont, demonstrating the increased energy coming from the carbine. The biggest advantage is in having a similar round to your pistol. The carbine is much more accurate and stopping power is more than sufficient out to 150 yards. For $3 bills a Keltec sub2k in 9mm would be my vote. The

NordicG3K
November 13, 2006, 09:04 PM
If there's no problem with ammo supply (like being in a foreign country, or somethin') then the 10mm Auto is the only way to go.

http://www.bren-ten.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/oly10mm_final-upgrade.jpg

http://nordicg3k.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/coharie-arms_10plus-5.jpg

The Deer Hunter
November 13, 2006, 09:21 PM
Why not get an M4 in .223?

better than 9mm

Spencer
November 13, 2006, 09:48 PM
10mm.

TeachMe
November 13, 2006, 11:50 PM
I voted 9mm for relatively cheap, readily available ammo. Should allow more practice so that you can put the shots where you want them, which is the #1 goal.

nemoaz
November 23, 2006, 05:24 AM
Never seen the use in those pistol caliber carbines in an AR or bigger platform.

Husker1911
November 23, 2006, 05:45 AM
Now, if someone would just manufacture a carbine utilizing Glock 20 magazines......................

Nematocyst
November 23, 2006, 05:58 AM
I've got handguns in 9mm & .38.

But for "carbine",
I'll take .30-30.

Dr. Dickie
November 23, 2006, 06:22 AM
For SD, I gotta go with the 10mm (just a silly millimeter longer!).
Course, if you include availability and cost, then probably .45, then 9mm--.45 cause that is the caliber of every pistol I own and then 9mm cause everyone says it is so cheap.

Nhsport
November 23, 2006, 09:27 AM
If your only goal is SD just stick to .223 . The pistol cal AR carbines as far as I know are all blow back and the hefty bolt weights required to make them function actually recoil more than the .223 gas operated guns . It's not like the recoil is painful or anything but from the standpoint of sight bounce and fast follow up shots the 223 wins hands down.
In a SD situation the .223 will take out a threat faster and there is some argument that the high speed .223 bullet will actually be safer in a urban situation as it tends to fragment upon strikeing objects vs the heavier pistol rounds punching through several walls and strikeing your next door neighbor.
For me the pistol cal carbine is something to shoot at indoor ranges that don't allow rifle rounds and the 9mm with it's cheep ammo fills my needs to a tee.
For slightly different uses I enjoy my marlin 44mag lever gun and somewhwre down the line I will need a lever gun in 38/357

HGUNHNTR
November 23, 2006, 09:36 AM
10mm why go smaller, and who cares about a few dollars more per box. You don't have to have a gun, you WANT one. And for Fun and personal protection why not have the hottest performer of the bunch. Firearms for protection are not the place to start bargain shopping.

1911 guy
November 23, 2006, 10:06 AM
If forced to choose from the list, I'd go with the .40 S&W. It's a higher pressure round and would benefit the most from the longer barrel to deliver that pressure (pressure plus barrel {usually} = velocity) downrange.

Personally, I'd go looking for a rifle cartridge in the smallest package rather than a pistol cartridge in the largest package.

MCgunner
November 23, 2006, 10:49 AM
In a carbine, go with the power, 10mm. You could even hunt with it. I have a .357 lever carbine. Think of the 10 as a semi-auto .357.

loandr.
November 23, 2006, 10:57 AM
This Combo has worked for me for yrs. in .40! Cheap, accurate, Glock reliable, Compatable ammo ,mags (G22 hicaps)and acc.'s(M6)etc...all fits in a handy breifcase to boot ;-) EZ call for I.

LD

jem375
November 23, 2006, 11:34 AM
Why bother with a handgun caliber carbine?..just get an ar15 and forget the plinkers. All they are good for is plinking anyway..........

loandr.
November 23, 2006, 11:43 AM
the day i find a sidearm in .223 that take the same mags as that AR I very well just might ! But till then? Happy T-Day by the way!...In general Im a BIG bore kind of guy though SOOO since it is a pistol cal. carbine thread by title...otherwise .44Mag/.44 Spl's for I as well!. Same concept diff. format:)

Tomac
November 23, 2006, 01:54 PM
You left out the PS90 in 5.7x28...:scrutiny:
Tomac
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Tomac/ResizeofCompletedPS90001-1.jpg

loandr.
November 23, 2006, 02:00 PM
actually had it in my original post but edited it out due to the lack of interchangle mags :-):neener:

MachIVshooter
November 23, 2006, 05:28 PM
For SD, I gotta go with the 10mm (just a silly millimeter longer!).

:scrutiny:

1mm WIDER, 6mm longer.

Glamdring
November 24, 2006, 03:01 AM
For an AR platform I would go with 5.56, why use a weaker cartridge?

10mm only one of the calibers you listed that might have an advantage from carbine over 5.56, and that would only be for hunting things like white tail.

grendelbane
November 25, 2006, 01:23 PM
I voted .45, because I have a CavOly .45 ACP carbine which has proven itself reliable and accurate. If I couldn't use the Cavalry Arms MKII lower, or one of the wider well grease gun lowers, I would vote 9mm. This is strictly based on magazines. The grease gun mags work well, but are becoming more expensive. The Colt 9mm mags work well, but are already expensive, (though it seems they might be coming down a little.)

The .40 and the 10mm are handicapped by the lack of good magazines. (Though I understand some people have modified gg mags for both cartridges. I will modify most anything else, but I try to avoid modifying magazines, if I can.)

My experience is that carbine barrels do not slow down bullets from pistol cartridges. Not saying that it has never happened, but I do think that it is a "black swan" event. I admit to almost no experience comparing 16" barrels to 10" barrels, but the one time I did, the carbine still proved superior. In other cases, all carbine barrels out performed pistol barrels with the same cartridges. I still don't have enough samples to mean anything to a statistician, but I am confident that 16" barrels provide higher velocities than 5" barrels.

For those of you who think that the .45 does not improve as much with the longer barrel as the 9mm, I suggest that you look at the kinetic energy increase, rather than the velocity increase. Looked at that way, they come much closer together. Which leads to another point. If you use expanding bullets, you should consider the heaviest holllow points available, regardless of caliber. The velocity increase can cause the lighter bullets to over expand, and under penetrate. That is another reason why I like the .45ACP. It gets that 230 grain up fast enough that it performs well, both expanding and penetrating. At least that has been the case in my semi-scientific experiments.:)

JeepDriver
November 25, 2006, 10:03 PM
9mm SBR

http://www.fototime.com/AC50EB0833EC4B1/standard.jpg

obm
November 25, 2006, 10:41 PM
nm

wildburp
December 16, 2006, 07:38 AM
see now why you wanted isolate 10mm stuff - remember reading about it some years back, and thought, "now, that's hot", but have not seen much since. Metric or English horse shoes, 10 mm or S&W 40 - confusion reigns, at least for me, a .45 Colt fan. But the public will never find out in these secret forums. Don't lock out controversial strings, but rather remind everyone about the importance of inteligent discourse. Warn offenders, develope punishment gradients for repeaters, up to and including banishment, but please do make us chase all over the internet for information because of "bickering". Argument is essential for education - let's just be polite about it.

wb

warriorsociologist
December 16, 2006, 11:05 PM
Yep. :cool:

10-Ring
December 16, 2006, 11:57 PM
Instinctively, my thoughts go to the 10mm. But the idea of a 9mm carbine would be fun :o

gezzer
December 18, 2006, 12:38 AM
Same as my carry gun, 9MM

earlytom
January 11, 2011, 11:22 PM
.40 S&W

It is good sometimes to revive threads...

35 cents ea. delivered to the house (Winchester JHP 180 gr). Higher Pressure thus more V out the 16 in. spout. $305.00 + 15.00 (for a 33 rnd clip) for a 4lb Carbine that folds in half and fits in a tool box, under my truck seat, or in my laptop case. Oh yeah and not only is it more accurate at all distances but the clips are interchangeable with my $1,200 Glock (Cuz I had to customize it so it didn't suck).

.223 IMO is not worth my money (Whole different thread). Give me a .308 carbine any flavor any time. Crap it won't fit in my backpack though. Damn it weighs 14lbs... Does this .308 SA pistol make my [bottom] look fat?

Nuff said?

Joel Lehman
January 11, 2011, 11:46 PM
I voted for 45ACP. My HP4595 carbine gives about 200 fps more than my Glock 21 with the same load.

Furncliff
January 11, 2011, 11:49 PM
I have a 4595 waiting for me to pick up at my FFL. Looking forward to testing it .

bigfatdave
January 11, 2011, 11:57 PM
Thread from 2006? Really?
The correct answer is Tokarev, by the way. Tokarev was the only correct answer, all others are wrong

If you enjoyed reading about "What caliber carbine: 9mm VS .40s&w VS 10mm VS .45acp" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!