[David4516]

With all the talk about Makarovs and weather or not they are decent for carry, I thought I'd start a poll. Who thinks the Mak is good enough, and who thinks it's too wimpy?

[P95Carry]

I haven't got a ''Mak'' yet.... maybe won't but .... I'd say that 9x18 is well OK and up there in ''useful'' category....... many will wish for more but i would not argue with a ''Mak'' owner!!:D

I seem to recollect that many here rate the ''Mak'' as a useful carry piece.

[Zundfolge]

I've always felt the 9x18 was adequate for self defense ... maybe not ideal, but adequate.

Then at the Colorado THR get together, Justin and I stood at the line burning through a couple magazines each of rapid fire from our Maks, trying to knock down some poppers (one fell quickly, but that doesn't count ... the wind took it down :p ). The Maks weren't as effective as most of the other guns that day (especially the .357 Maximum ;) ).

I still believe that shot placement is more important then caliber, and my Makarov is still my primary carry weapon, but thats only until I save up enough for something more powerful.

[Stephen A. Camp]

Hello. I voted "maybe." I really respect the Makarov pistol's reliability and surprising accuracy. It's caliber is at the lower end of what I personally feel comfortable with, BUT it remains an easy pistol to shoot well and I believe that placement is the primary determinant in "stopping" someone. Actually, it's been proven to my satisfaction that all handgun rounds commonly used for self-defense might fall into the "maybe" catagory, but it does seem logical that the more potent ones, less often. Assuming one gets good center hits head-on, I'd think the JHP's available in the caliber might do the trick. I do have doubts should there be an intermediate target like an arm being struck first.

That said, the Mak has some pretty nice things going for it:

1. Cost should not be prohibitive.

2. Reliability to the extreme

3. Lots of ammo at great prices so one can practice

4. More than adequately accurate

5. Easy to carry

6. Will last for years with lots of shooting

7. Spare parts and accessories are very inexpensive.

In the hands of a competent shooter and someone willing to shoot another person, I think a person can do a lot worse than a Makarov.

Best.

[denfoote]

Of course the Makarov is enough!! You would not want to get shot with one, would you??? :rolleyes:

[BHPshooter]

I think the least I'd be comfy with would be a .380 (aka 9x17), so I do believe 9mm Mak (aka 9x18) qualifies.

Good thread. ;)

Wes

[SnWnMe]

The gun itself is utterly reliable. Ammo is not exactly in the accepted specs for "street effectiveness" but I am not LEO. Chances are slim that I will ever fire a handgun in a self defense situation. And if my balloon ever goes up then I think I have the proper mindset and skills to do what needs to be done. I'll do it with a 9X18 if that's what I have at the moment.

[David4516]

Wow :what:

I didn't think that the results would be this overwhelming in favor of the Mak.

Most of you probably know how I voted, considering that about half of my posts go something like this: "I like Makarovs!"

[jar]

Actually, most of the discussion about the worth of the Makarov has been a monologue.

[Missouri Mule]

While I do like the Makarov and will very likely carry it , I would feel better if it was a .45acp!:neener:

[Dorrin79]

I would think that 9x18mak, especially fired from the extremley reliable, inexpensive, and accurate Makarov platform, would be a fine self-defense pistol.

that's not to say I wouldn't prefer a .45ACP. But I wouldn't feel undergunned with a Mak.

[BowStreetRunner]

once you go mak you never go back!
:D

[sarge48]

I carry my EG mak daily. I shoot a lot. Great gun no bobbles.:D

[PzGren]

The Makarov with good ammo and shooting should suffice, I however sold my EG Mak many years ago. The 9 Para is cheaper to shoot and easier to reload.

Will it stop somebody with a few rounds? I have seen two guys being shot with 9mm and .38 Specials and my wife called an ambulance for them. One was up, he had at least 5 hits in the torso- in shock, the other reclined. Both could actually have fought back had they been armed.

The .45 ACP is not really for those that are overly prepared.

[m39fan]

For CCW usuage, yes I feel that it is adequate given the phenominal accuracy of the Makarovs. (All bets are off with a PMK or other 9x18 handgun). Shot placement is paramount as proven by a self-defense shooting I helped investigate several years ago. The bad guy had been shot before, 5 times by an officer during a robbery, and lived to tell about it. Now he was out on the streets only to find out his ex-girlfriend hadn't waited for him while he was serving time. Boyfriend had called and shown up at her place of employment several times to threaten her so when he broke into the house she knew it was for keeps. One shot from a cheap RG .22 revolver (Rem 22LR 40gr. LRN) stopped him for good. Why was it so effective? A heavy-duty manstopper round? No. A tricked out, expensive, much appreciated weapon? No. The reason: even a 40gr. chunk of lead passing through the brain will ensure you are removed from the gene pool!

Before I get the big bore fans jumping down my neck let me say I said the 9x18 in the Makarov was ADEQUATE and then only for CCW usage. I would NOT want to carry one on duty. But realistically, how many permit holders ever have to do what we are called to do? Yes, maybe it won't penetrate a windshield/engine block/etc or remove an entire city block with each round, but the smaller calibers can be just as effective as our .40's & .45's IF YOU ARE EFEECTIVE! Smaller the gun/caliber, the more practice you should have.

That's the name of that tune.....