Does caliber choice change?


PDA






TarDevil
December 21, 2012, 06:10 PM
If political winds DO effect a change in capacity, will it impact your caliber choice? We often discuss the merits of additional capacity of 9mm over various choices, so if limits are imposed would you be prone to move up in caliber? I REALLY don't want this to be yet one more caliber war and I totally buy into shot placement, accuracy, etc. And I love the affordability of 9mm, but I admit it would be tempting to go for a bigger hole with each trigger pull.

If you enjoyed reading about "Does caliber choice change?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
CookeMonster
December 21, 2012, 06:32 PM
It's why here in California, it was a no-brainer for me to choose .45 with a 10 round cap vs 9mm with a 10 round cap. Cost is offset by reloading.

barnetmill
December 21, 2012, 06:50 PM
The philosophy of your tactics changes with the capacity of the magazine. My current training with the glock is to with using trigger reset to rapidly start just about center point of mass to make zipper pattern towards the head. If it is only ten rounds that I can have I will switch to either .40, .357 sig, or +P .45 from nine and after a center to mass hit go for the head.

beeenbag
December 21, 2012, 06:57 PM
Yeah I believe I would stray from 9mm for any fullsize guns. I would still carry my g26 though. It is 10 rounds in a small package to start with.

otasan56
December 21, 2012, 07:07 PM
I expect my hi-cap mags for my G17 will be outlawed, so I will have to revert to carrying my Springfield Armory M1911A1 .45 ACP pistol. Nine shots of .45-caliber 255gr LSWCs will have to do.

Checkman
December 21, 2012, 08:05 PM
No. I'm sticking with the G19. I have many G19 and G17 mags so if the worst does happen I'll be able to stick with what I am carrying.

9mmepiphany
December 21, 2012, 09:08 PM
Here is CA, there was an initial move to larger calibers...it resurrected the 1911 market...but it didn't last.

Even though we still have a 10rd limit for new magazines, the 9mm lost very little ground and with the relaxing of CCW laws in the state, it is gaining ground again. You can make a much smaller 9mm CCW pistol than you can a .40 or .45...plus it is cheaper to practice and easier to become competent with it

rcmodel
December 21, 2012, 09:36 PM
No.

I have been well served for 50 years with 5 & 6 shot wheel-guns.
And single-stack auto's in .380, 9mm & .45 ACP holding 6 to 9 rounds.

I never put much stock in "Spray & Pray" in the first place.

If I miss with the first 3-4 rounds?
10-13 more misses will make no difference anyway, except my gun will get lighter and not make as good a club.

And it will take the police much longer to find up all the empties.
No reason me making their job any harder then it already is.

rc

Bongo Boy
December 21, 2012, 11:30 PM
I've never felt capacity is much of an issue and if I did I'd just continue practicing reloads and carry an extra magazine, I think. I do 6+1 or 7+1 when carrying the Kahr K40, or 8+1 when carrying the M&P 45c.

The thing I see happening with a magazine capacity restriction is I'll be upset for a while that the government takes actions to soothe the masses and not to achieve any real benefit for them--and certainly takes no action to measure the impact of anything it does.

481
December 21, 2012, 11:46 PM
Nope. I have my gear (and a lot of replacement gear, too) and I am sticking with it.

browningguy
December 22, 2012, 12:44 AM
Yes, I've been carrying high cap 9mm's recently, but during the 10 round max I carried BHP's in .40. I still have the BHP's but also added a S&W 1911 SC in .45 to the tool kit today. If it goes back to 10 round max in new pistols I would guess a lot of people would go to the larger calibers.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Smith1911SC.jpg

bigfatdave
December 22, 2012, 03:07 AM
there will be a point when rounds like Tokarev become popular for home defense

I'll leave "why" as an exercise for the student

The-Reaver
December 22, 2012, 08:01 AM
there will be a point when rounds like Tokarev become popular for home defense

I'll leave "why" as an exercise for the student

Easy answer. Same reason I stock Tokarev ammo now.

I think I'm just going to reside to carrying 454 casull or 500 Smith & Wesson. =)

Esoxchaser
December 22, 2012, 08:05 AM
I will just stay the course with my 9mm EMP or P938.

hentown
December 22, 2012, 08:33 AM
I'm going to watch my G17 mags carefully, if new legislation passes. I want to see my mags suddenly stop holding 17 rounds.

2wheels
December 22, 2012, 10:26 AM
No, not really. Since I don't own any "hi cap" autoloaders to begin with, a ban on them wouldn't affect me at all.

miles1
December 22, 2012, 10:43 AM
Short answer............NO

smalls
December 22, 2012, 06:10 PM
I don't carry a gun with more than 10 rounds capacity anyway, and in 9mm. So no, I'm not switching to .45 because if any bans, or whatever.

TarDevil
December 22, 2012, 06:54 PM
My carry gun holds 10 but I also carry a.spare 17 round mag. Most likely I'd continue the same gun/caliber (9mm) for CC, even if my spare is limited to 10, but will keep a .45 on the night stand.

Crashbox
December 22, 2012, 07:15 PM
One of my main carry pieces is a SIG SP2022 .40 and I bought it when they were temporarily discontinued for import. At the time, I picked up about ten of the California ten-round magazines for it at an absolute bargain; I often use these for practice at the range. However, I also carry my Ruger SP101 .357 when I'm in wheelgun mode. The number of rounds to me is not anywhere near as important as shot placement, so I think I echo rcmodel in this regard.

powder
December 22, 2012, 08:22 PM
Only when my ammo stores run dry and the ammo taxes waged are possibly phenomenal.

I run a caliber for how a particular model shoots, not because of ballisitics or other gelatin BS evals.. Proof in point: the DW 5" fixed barrel .44 mag.. This boat anchor spits .44 SP like it's just a .22, and I have .44 SP reloads out the wazoo.

What's your big picture?

Plan2Live
December 22, 2012, 08:47 PM
The premise here seems to be that you don't already have spare mags. If that's the case then shame on you.

exbrit49
December 22, 2012, 11:36 PM
Well said RCModel! COuldnt have put it better! By the way I am an RC modeller too!!

TarDevil
December 23, 2012, 01:02 AM
The premise here seems to be that you don't already have spare mags.

Not sure how you came up with that premise. Has nothing to do with the original question, anyway.

mljdeckard
December 23, 2012, 02:39 AM
I certainly think it can be said that the '94 AWB re-ignited an interest in the 1911, because of its sub-ban capacity.

Inebriated
December 23, 2012, 04:41 AM
If a capacity limit came up, I'd most likely switch to 10-round mags in my 19, or just carry my 26. I shoot the 19 better, though, so it would be a tough choice to switch back to the 26. I'd likely only carry the 26 if what I'm wearing won't allow a 19.

olderguns
December 23, 2012, 06:42 AM
I'll still carry my g29 only problem is, i only have 4. 10round mags for it and they are all +2 extensions, what worries me is my 14 g20 mags,, that if anyone thinks they can Take them for nothing after me paying $29.99 each for them, they will have to be really persuasive...

19-3Ben
December 23, 2012, 09:11 AM
The premise here seems to be that you don't already have spare mags. If that's the case then shame on you.


I don't think that was part of a premise at all. It has to do with the fact that you can't have as many rounds in a gun or in the spare mags anyway, so would it make sense to carry mags that are already lower capacity but higher caliber?

In my mind, the answer is yes. I would go back to carrying something like my K40 rather than M&P when I do carry semis. However, I'm in the same boat as RCmodel. I'm perfectly happy with a little J frame.

C0untZer0
December 23, 2012, 02:00 PM
9mm is a very versatile caliber. 9mmepiphany pointed out why it will remain popular - concealed carry.

I just think if you look at what is available today in 9mm - The Khar PM9/CM9, MK9, Diamondback DB9, Kinber Solo, Rohrbaugh R9, Sig Sauer P290 and P938, Glock 26 - and other small nines, there is a huge selection, and the cartridge lends itself well to that role.

I think we've seen that semi-autos designed to fire .45 and a .40 S&W can only get so small and at some point they're not reliable. Also, just going on a bell curve, for most people a 9 is going to be easier to shoot than a 40 or 45in the same wieght and form factor. I think that is exacerbated the smaller the pistol gets.

jim243
December 23, 2012, 02:50 PM
Crazy idea, but not so crazy question. I have both 9 mm & 45 ACP, it would be easy enough to get 10 round mags for the 9's & mag changes are FAST. But, if I was to go with another handgun it would be a 45.

Jim

eldon519
December 23, 2012, 03:26 PM
I could still get ten 9mm rounds fired on target faster than ten .45 rounds, so no, it doesn't change anything. I think that is an important consideration for a situation where there may be multiple assailants, especially if they start moving, and I start missing. Speed is another important tradeoff with power which often gets forgotten.

captain awesome
December 23, 2012, 03:56 PM
1911's are already extremely popular right now, and for good reason.
I for one never felt much need to have a ton of rounds in my carry pistols. I already went big, I carry a 460 Rowland or a 44mag. That being said, I'll be damned before I give up the right to carry more than their arbitrary limit on mag capacity they want to set.

mj246
December 23, 2012, 04:10 PM
Since my SD gun of choice is my 5 shot 38 special revolver, I'd have to go with a no.

Bovice
December 23, 2012, 05:03 PM
If such a ban were in place, I wouldn't use my hi-cap pistols much. For a pistol I am ok with 7 or 8 round magazines. There's something classy about single stack pistols anyways!

I saw it mentioned above, that mag changes are fast. I agree. Even a moderately versed action pistol shooter can swap magazines in under 3 seconds. The idea behind the law is silly, anyone bent on violence toward the innocent is going to do it with whatever means are available. And it doesn't always have to be a gun. The Oklahoma city bombing was a homemade device, and look at the results. Absolute devastation. But yet 10 round mags make us safer.

Landric
December 23, 2012, 07:10 PM
Of the four guns in my regular carry rotation (S&W M&P45 4" .45 ACP, Beretta 84FS .380 ACP, Ruger SP101 DAO .357 Magnum, and S&W 642 Airweight .38 Special), only the Beretta would be effected by a "hi-capacity" ban. In that case I would probably replace the 84FS with the single stack 85FS and not change anything else.

oldbear
December 23, 2012, 09:16 PM
It will make no difference for me, and the other "old dogs" I hang with, all of us grew up with wheel guns, and learned that shot placement was generally the most important aspect of shooting. I'm sticking with my assorted .357 magnum revolvers. For most if not all civilian S/D needs I just don't see the need for the ultra high capacity magazines they just add weight and bulk as far as I'm concerned.

Happy Holidays All.

CDW4ME
December 23, 2012, 10:40 PM
I have "high capacity" (Glock 23) pistols as an option, but typically carry a subcompact that holds 10 rounds or less (Glock 27, 30 SF) or sometimes a full size 7 round 1911.
So, if they do restrict the sale of "high capacity" magazines (Again: I lived thru the 1st time) it won't affect me (again) for two reasons.
-I already have them (and did during the original assinine ban).
-I don't typically carry them anyway.

sleepyone
December 23, 2012, 11:41 PM
deleted. started a new thread.

Dnaltrop
December 24, 2012, 01:04 AM
I'll need a different BUG...

Perhaps a Second .45 Colt Blackhawk? Perhaps something with a DA trigger instead?

S&W Model 25? Super Redhawk? Nagant Obrez?

I'd make do, but the only standard capacity Semis in the collection are recent acquisitions, and I'm big enough to hide just about any Pistol I wish on my person comfortably.

MachIVshooter
December 24, 2012, 05:19 AM
I have basically 5 handguns that I carry. The two that are carried most often only hold 6+1 and 7+1. Only one of the five has >10 round capacity. So no, my carry choices really wouldn't be affected by a mag capacity limit.

22-rimfire
December 24, 2012, 11:15 PM
I expect that the 40 S&W will pick up some followers if the 10-round magazine limit becomes the law of the land again. But I don't see many people with 9mm's or 45's changing anything. Many already carry 10 round or less in their ccw guns.

doc2rn
December 25, 2012, 08:49 PM
I am in the same boat as rc and .22, I don't need a mag dump when shot placement is crucial. My six shooters work just fine for me too.

CountGlockulla
December 25, 2012, 10:08 PM
Not for me. There is not enough difference in terminal effect to make me switch from 9mm to .45.

golden
December 26, 2012, 02:38 PM
For pistols, I prefer a 9m.m. I would carry my 8 shot magazine SIG just as soon as my 15 shot magazine. I also have some 10 round mags in case I went back to CANADA and took my BERETTA 92.

In the end, they can pass laws, but fools can only accomplish foolishness.

Jim

Skribs
December 26, 2012, 03:05 PM
I believe capacity is a good thing. If you need 5 rounds then either a J-Frame or a G26 will do, but if you need 10 rounds a G26 is the only option. After seeing the analysis by another member on this forum based on hit rate, capacity, number of attackers, and number of hits needed to stop the BG, I've come to the conclusion that 10 is the minimum I'll carry, more if preferable.

This is one of the big reasons for going 9mm. If I were limited to 10 rounds, I might pick a .45 instead of a 9 for my full-size gun, but stay with a 9 in compact. The other option would be to switch to the .50 GI Glock, just to say "yeah, they want to ban these dangerous guns, so got a legal .50 cal pistol just to stick it to em".

I'm a younger gun owner without a lot of disposable income to spend on parts and ammo; I've been more trying to find a gun/holster combo that really works for me. I don't have a stockpile of "high capacity" magazines that will last 10 years into another AWB.

BigJimP
December 26, 2012, 03:17 PM
No, capacity won't make any difference to me....its all about shot placement ...and capacity is irrelevent to me whether its a 9mm, .40S&W or a .45 acp in a semi-auto.

My primary carry guns now are all 5" 1911's ...and while I have them in 9mm, .40S&W and .45 acp.....the .45 acp with 8 +1 rds has been, and will always be, my primary defense weapon.....but once in a while, I will carry a
5" 1911 in 9mm and its 10 +1 rds ....and either one is just fine.

While I understand the academic discussion of high capacity handguns....to me, guns with the high capacity mags tend to lend themselves to more of a "spray and pray" mentality ...vs effective fire on target.

Effecitive fire on target....out of a holster - and 100% on target with double taps...and some reload drills .../ to a drill competency level of 2 - 3 seconds, practiced from 9 Ft - 30 Ft once a week or so, will make all of this capacity issue inmaterial in my opinion.

Derek Zeanah
December 26, 2012, 03:22 PM
Nope. I carry a 1911, and prefer the ergonomics of the single stack. What I've got on my hip right now won't be affected if the AWB is re-enacted.

Rexster
December 26, 2012, 03:26 PM
I tend to carry .357 Magnum and .38 revolvers, and a .45 ACP 1911. I am mandated to carry .40 while at work, in my primary duty pistol, but generally dislike the concept of fat-butt pistols with double-column magazines. My P229 will probably be retired to the safe when I retire.

I did recently acquire a 9mm G17, when it looked like my chief would allow 9mm as an alternative duty pistol cartridge, but that idea was shelved indefinitely. Prompted by the recent troubles, I did acquire some extra magazines (at normal prices) before they ran out.

PabloJ
December 27, 2012, 12:02 PM
If political winds DO effect a change in capacity, will it impact your caliber choice? We often discuss the merits of additional capacity of 9mm over various choices, so if limits are imposed would you be prone to move up in caliber? I REALLY don't want this to be yet one more caliber war and I totally buy into shot placement, accuracy, etc. And I love the affordability of 9mm, but I admit it would be tempting to go for a bigger hole with each trigger pull.
Yes. My latest buy is five shot 9mm revolver. I'm returning unused 15rd pistol magazines so I can get Crimson grips and nice holster for it. You see, not everyone has "lost" their mind. Cognac is good, people are crazzzzy.

petepeterson
December 27, 2012, 04:16 PM
This whole thread is based on a revival of the 10-rd ban...what if it's eight? Or five? A call to your congressman relaying his consituents views is always a good idea.

U-235
December 27, 2012, 05:46 PM
Out of the several guns I carry three have a capacity of less than 10. The one I carry most often is a S&W 642, so no caliber changes for me.

BigJimP
December 27, 2012, 08:31 PM
If the pass it ...and it drops to 5 rounds, I still don't care...

....my decision will still be to stay with a 1911..../ and probably 2 extra mags....but I still have no problem with carrying a 1911 in 9mm, even if its 5 rounds...or 10 rds...or whatever.../ but I'm still in the .45 acp category for my preference anyway.

TarDevil
December 27, 2012, 10:47 PM
This whole thread is based on a revival of the 10-rd ban...what if it's eight? Or five? A call to your congressman relaying his consituents views is always a good idea.
Nothing in my original post mentioned quantity limits. This is just about the effects, if any, of caliber choice with reduced capacity limits.
But your suggestion is noteworthy.

otasan56
December 29, 2012, 10:23 AM
Nope. I carry a 1911, and prefer the ergonomics of the single stack. What I've got on my hip right now won't be affected if the AWB is re-enacted.
Good for you sir. I'll be carrying my SA M1911A1 .45 soon.

If you enjoyed reading about "Does caliber choice change?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!