Carbine vs. Subgun for CQC: Issue #37


PDA






WheelMan
January 25, 2004, 02:21 PM
Alright all you operators, agents and tacticool types: given the choice between a 10mm subgun (say an H&K) or a short tube .223 which would you prefer and in what situations?

Don't forget that use can use real 10mm (like double tap) and not the usual factory ".40 +P"

If you enjoyed reading about "Carbine vs. Subgun for CQC: Issue #37" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
KW
January 25, 2004, 03:12 PM
I'd have to go with .223. The newer heavy hollowpoint rounds like the 75grn TAP and 77grn NATO OTM produce very impressive wound profiles - far beyond any pistol caliber hollowpoint. That and if you ever had to take a long shot your .223 carbine is probably going to be a much better platform to do it with.

The only situation I can imagine where the subgun would be better would be if you needed a really silent weapon. .223 will always give you a supersonic crack, while a subsonic pistol round wouldn't.

Hkmp5sd
January 25, 2004, 03:25 PM
with suppressor. Easier on the ears in indoor/CQB scenerios. More controllable on full-auto than the short barreled M4.
http://www.thearsenal.com/images/mp510a3_sm.jpg

WheelMan
January 25, 2004, 03:29 PM
hmmm... Hkmp5sd votes for the Hkmp5sd... suprise suprise :neener: :D

Hkmp5sd
January 25, 2004, 03:41 PM
:)

This is still my preference.
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=751842

Redlg155
January 25, 2004, 03:55 PM
Buzz Lightyear Armchair Commando reporting here!! :D

Initially I'd say the 10mm. Pistol calibers are great. A lot less muzzle flash which is a big advantage in low light situations. My 9mm AR has an almost zero flash at night. My .223 AR is definitely noticeable! You can also engage targets from a surprisingly long distance with a sub gun. Hitting a 100 meter man sized sihouette is no real challenge.

The difficulty comes if you are engaging bad guys wearing some sort of ballistic protection, whether it be a flak jacket or bullet proof vest. This is where the .223 will shine a bit better. The 10mm wouldn't be a very good choice.

Sooo...If I had to choose? I'd say one of the new DSA OAW 13" FALs.:D
http://www.dsarms.com/images/ewosw.jpg
It won't matter if you light up the room with muzzle blast or if folks are heavily armoured. There won't be much left when you are done anyway!

Good Shooting
Red

Black Snowman
January 25, 2004, 03:56 PM
I'll take the .223 for the better energy. The 10mm is a potent pistol round but it's still a pistol round. The .223 isn't the greatest for stopping power but better than the 10mm. Of course the 10mm will be coming out of a realatively long barrel and the .223 out of a realtively short barrel, but if there's a chance of armor involved my preference drops sqarely on the .223.

I don't go out seeking trouble but if I did, I'd personally want a P90 for CQC and a battle rifle like a FAL or AR-10 for longer range work. I have no practical experiance, just the opinions I've developed over the years as an armchair commando ;) I know in my current physical condition I'm not even going to be able to hoof all that junk a few miles much less engage in combat with it ;)

For home defense I chose a .223 bullpup, the M17S. I'm not going into harms way to engage terrorists but I felt 30 rounds of 55 gr HP .223 out of a 21.5" barrel should be enough to put down anyone, or even a small group of people, breaking into my suburban home.

The HP .223 shouldn't overpentrate and hurt neighbors or roomie and the short OAL of 30" means I can manuver through the tight spaces in my house. The normal disadvantages of the M17S like getting hot when burning through 100 rounds or so rapidly, slower magazine changes, and heavyish weight are pretty much non issues in home defense. For sighting I have a red dot for easy aquisition in the dark. The lack of a muzzel break means most of the flash and bang are going twards the assailant so they'll be getting the worst of it.

444
January 25, 2004, 04:48 PM
If I was going to be in that kind of situation and got to choose my weapon, I would look to the real life players in that arena for advice. They guys that are doing this type of thing today, on a daily basis. And, I would use what they do.
The Carbine.
I would take it over a sub-gun of any caliber, for any purose, any time.

MeekandMild
January 25, 2004, 05:03 PM
Well, it they were foolish enough to ever call me back up on active duty I'd have to tell them to issue me a handgun, cause I'm a noncombatant and I ain't gonna carry no heavy tricked out piece of hardware that might poke holes in my Nuclear Biological Chemical suit. :rolleyes:

Sarge
January 25, 2004, 05:15 PM
Either will do if shot well, just like a pump 12.

The important thing is that you don't pass up a long gun if one is available (can you spell M-I-A-M-I?), particularly if it offers a significant power delivery over a sidearm. If given a choice, take the one you shoot best and can run in the dark, if need be.

A 9 subgun can do this just fine, if the operator can plant a burst of 4-10 shots on the centerline of the body. Some of the old Uzis I've shot were accurate enough to hit a styrofoam coffee cup at 100 yards, on semi. But Uzi's are passe' these days.

An M4 is a decent enough weapon, muzzle blast/flash aside.

KLR
January 25, 2004, 05:31 PM
It would depend. If the team members were equipped with active hearing protection like Peltor ear muffs - the M-4 with a flash suppressor and CQB ammo like the Hornaday TAP round. No first hand experience with TAP, but I would assume it uses a lower flash powder.

If no hearing protection - the carbine.

I have recently replaced my 870 (lighted forend, trijicon front post, ring rear sight) with a Beretta Storm as the house long gun. Yes, a hit from a 12 gauge will be a lot more decisive at close range than a 9mm hit, but I can put the 9mm exactly where I want it at room distances. Under similar circumstances, a 12 gauge will put out a 4-6 inch pattern. Plus, as I have said in other forums, my wife can easily use the Storm while she would have a lot of trouble with the 870.

STEVE M
January 25, 2004, 06:45 PM
I'd take the 223 M4. If I had to have a smaller caliber I could add a 9MM

upper:D

355sigfan
January 25, 2004, 06:46 PM
223 all the way. The 10mm is a pistol round it lakes the stopping power afforded by a good 223 softpoint. The 223 is also safer as far as overpenetration concerns go. The 10mm subgun would have an advantage on windshields unless the 223 was used with a bonded softpoint. But overall the 223 beats any other weapon system for general cqb work.
Pat

355sigfan
January 25, 2004, 06:48 PM
The damage to your hearing would be the last thing on your mind in a real shooting. At least thats how I feel. Besides one or 2 shots with the 223 is probably better for your hearing than the 4 to 10 you might have to take with the pistol caliber carbine.

The problem with the MPDSD is that it takes standard velocity 9mm rounds and makes them subsonic. It takes subsonic rounds and makes them even slower. It hits like a 380. No thanks. If I need a suppressed subgun give me a standard MP5 with a gemtech and 147 grain ranger t ammo.
Pat

DMK
January 25, 2004, 07:06 PM
Close quarters, I'd take the subgun. Anywhere past 25 yards, I'd switch to semi-auto. From 50 yards and out, I'd go with the little AR (as far as it's efective, anyway). If I had to choose one of those two guns to go into harms way and didn't know the situation, I'd go with the AR carbine.

Feanaro
January 26, 2004, 02:46 AM
My preference goes to the MP5/10. Easier to control and less muzzle flash. Armor might be a problem but I probably wouldn't last long in a real military clash anyways.

seeker_two
January 26, 2004, 11:55 AM
I'll take the M-4 Shortie. I've always thought that the 5.56x45 NATO was a great subgun caliber....

...but a lousy battle rifle caliber. :p

Onslaught
January 26, 2004, 12:39 PM
When you say "short tube AR", I assume you mean 11.5" or shorter... The M4 that's being mentioned frequently has a 14.5" barrel. Of course, those choosing the AR would probably still choose the AR, even in "shorty" mode.

Me personally, I'd take the 10mm. I'd prefer the lighter weapon, the shorter OAL (shorter receiver, unless it's a 10mm AR) as well as the other reasons mentioned. 10mm ain't a round to sneeze at by ANYONE's measure. Sure, it's a pistol caliber, but it's a pistol caliber that reaches .44 Magnum performance from the longer sub-gun barrels.

Besides, the 10mm sub gun is more accurate and stops bad guys better than even the M4 Carbine!



when I'm playing Rainbow 6
:D

Kenneth Lew
January 26, 2004, 01:43 PM
The problem with the MPDSD is that it takes standard velocity 9mm rounds and makes them subsonic. It takes subsonic rounds and makes them even slower. It hits like a 380. No thanks. If I need a suppressed subgun give me a standard MP5 with a gemtech and 147 grain ranger t ammo.
Pat

Shooting subsonic rounds in a MP5SD is not necessary due to the ported barrel.

Anyway if the bad guy is still standing after a burst from the SD, just fire another burst in the center of mass. Its not too hard.

Kenneth Lew

355sigfan
January 26, 2004, 01:56 PM
Shooting subsonic rounds in a MP5SD is not necessary due to the ported barrel.
END

I understand that. Thats what I said it takes standard velocity ammo and makes it sub sonic. So you have a 124 grain bullet traveling at less than 1000 fps for a whooping 275 foot pounds. I would rather have a regular MP5 firing subsoniz 147 grain ammo at 1000 for 326 foot pounds. Neither is that great but I will take the heavier slug at the same slow speed over the lighter one. I would take a M4 over either. There are plenty of shootings where the MP5SD had less than the desired effect.
Pat

Hkmp5sd
January 26, 2004, 02:38 PM
when I'm playing Rainbow 6
Yes, but in Counter Strike, the suppressed M4 was the ultimate! :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Carbine vs. Subgun for CQC: Issue #37" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!