Self defence, Power VS accuracy


PDA






Hunter2011
August 23, 2013, 03:02 AM
I do want to ask this question, despite the fact it may turn out to be a caliber war. Please no fighting:), just honest answers and opinions.

Lets say you have only two handguns. One 9mm and one .22 target pistol. We all know the 9mm has more than 400% the power of the .22. That is an undisputed fact and you can never asume that they are equaly effective.

With the 9mm you really must do your best to even hit a human sized target. So headshots and heart shots will only happen with a lucky shot. With your 22 target pistol, you can really bassically choose where the bullet must hit. Lets say you can handle the stress for arguments sake and will connect where you aim.
Which of the two is the better option for the person who does not want to buy a new 9mm that can actually shoot just about as accurate as the .22?

If you enjoyed reading about "Self defence, Power VS accuracy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
1SOW
August 23, 2013, 03:16 AM
The 9mm.
I have both and shot Bullseye fairly well with the 22LR target pistol I still have.
Everyone has to determine for themselves, what's the minimum calber they want for self defense. When you do that, buy a decent handgun and learn to shoot it. Some training is well worth the cost with whatever handgun you choose to go with.

Your post sounded as if you thought 9mm was much harder to shoot accurately at SD distances than .22. That's simply not the case with man-size targets at relatively short distances..

You asked. I replied based on my experiences. Others will too.

Comrade Mike
August 23, 2013, 03:21 AM
A hit with a .22 is better than a miss with anything else. That being said, I shoot my 9's just fine

Bobson
August 23, 2013, 03:26 AM
As said, and will be said again, a "perfect" shot with a .22 is better than a poor shot with a 9x19. That being said, I can't imagine a situation in which someone could have the ability to make a near-perfect hit with a 22 (even a "target" one), and struggle to hit a human sized target at all with a 9mm. Just doesn't make sense to me. I don't know of a single 9mm handgun in production that's so inaccurate, it would be a challenge to hit a human being at 10 yards because of the gun .

jim243
August 23, 2013, 03:33 AM
I shoot IDPA with the 9 mm, they do not allow the 22 LR. That said, it is not hard to be accurate with the 9 mm.

My choice.
Jim

Hunter2011
August 23, 2013, 03:51 AM
I have a Vector CP1. In my hands, not accurate at all. I just can't shoot it well. Yes, I can hit a human sized target, but with taking time and really trying to shoot accurate. I'm not really asking for myself as I will soon buy a Glock after saving up enough cash.
Will a .22 not penetrate ribs?
I once shot a skinned sheep. The meat was going to be given to a lion as the sheep was found dead, reason unknown. I used a .20 PCP airgun. 13.7 grains at 850 fps. I was amazed to see it went straight through both sides of the sheep, penetrating 2 ribs. Of course all the insides, wool and skin was removed allready. But if a airgun, and not a powerfull one at that, can penetrate 2 ribs of a sheep, will a .22 not do the same to human ribs that is in attacking mode?
I do know that even if it does penetrate it still won't stop the attacker in his tracks like a bigger caliber might do, but still.

BLB68
August 23, 2013, 04:49 AM
I'd suggest moving up to a larger .380 like the Walther PK380 or the Ruger LC380 and trying that before suggesting the hypothetical person use a .22 for SD.

But come down to it, hits with a .22 trump misses with a 9mm.

allaroundhunter
August 23, 2013, 05:02 AM
Hunter, the problem is that if you buy another 9mm you probably won't be any more accurate. I would say take the 9mm to an NRA basic pistol class so that you can learn to shoot it well.

Obviously, you can tell that my choice is not for the .22.

bds
August 23, 2013, 05:09 AM
With the 9mm you really must do your best to even hit a human sized target
Not true for all 9mm pistols.

I have a Vector CP1. In my hands, not accurate at all. I just can't shoot it well
No comment.

With your 22 target pistol, you can really basically choose where the bullet must hit.
You can do the same with some accurate 9mm pistols and deliberate practice. Match shooters do this all the time with 9mm/40S&W/45ACP pistols, even with stock pistols without any modification.

I will soon buy a Glock after saving up enough cash.
IMO, a good idea but save some more cash to buy enough ammunition for practice.

Tomac
August 23, 2013, 05:56 AM
Shot placement and sufficient penetration are paramount, all else is secondary. Under stress, fine motor control goes out the window so pinpoint accuracy will be impossible. Learn the 9.
Tomac

tarosean
August 23, 2013, 06:07 AM
With the 9mm you really must do your best to even hit a human sized target.
////////////////////

I have a Vector CP1. In my hands, not accurate at all. I just can't shoot it well.

It could be the gun itself. However what distances are you trying to hit these targets? Most SD situations happens from 0-10yrds. If you cannot hit a B27 from that range. Im not sure what advice I could give you over the internet.. If your located near me I would gladly take you out and show you some basics.

The Lone Haranguer
August 23, 2013, 07:41 AM
Why does it have to be "either-or?" Why can't you have both the power and the accuracy?

usp9
August 23, 2013, 08:05 AM
The question I'd ask is; "Why can't you shoot the 9mm?" What's the difference? If that problem can be solved then you have your answer. If you can't improve your 9mm performance, then perhaps you need to find a gun you can handle better. The Vector CP1 should be accurate enough. The gas system needs proper cleaning and care. Is the gun maintained well?

Hunter2011
August 23, 2013, 08:27 AM
Guys, the obvious answer is to get better training and to get a better gun. That was not the question. The question was is a .22 better than a 9mm if you are shooting much much more accurate with the .22? Obviously if you should both equally accurate then the 9mm wins hands down.
More practice and or training is a valid suggestion. But will it really help in my case? I'm making this statement as I feel I am a good shooter, why else then can I get it right with my .22? No training or practice will make me shoot my 9mm even remotely as accurate as my .22.

Lets say my wife said, NO MORE GUNS FOR YOU, in a shouting voice. Now if I can't shoot the 9mm accurately, aren't the .22 a better option then? Especially since training and practice will not dramatically increase my accuracy with this particular 9mm.

Kleanbore
August 23, 2013, 09:01 AM
With your 22 target pistol, you can really bassically choose where the bullet must hit..Really?

Do not confuse target shooting with grabbing your gun under adverse circumstances and shooting very, very quickly at a fast moving person before he causes you serious harm.

Sav .250
August 23, 2013, 09:09 AM
Close quartes as in self defense, I don`t think your doing much aiming. Plus your not shooting great distances.
The 22 cal has killed some folks but the 9mm is the much better choice.

Practice makes perfect!

Hanzo581
August 23, 2013, 09:10 AM
Wow, you guys are having a tough time keeping answers within the question of his post. He's asking a pretty basic question.

Would you take a lesser powerful gun (.22) you are more accurate with over a more powerful gun (9mm) you are less accurate with. He's not asking if you shoot your 9mm accurately or if you were a .22 bullseye shooter.

460Kodiak
August 23, 2013, 10:00 AM
I carry a .45 or a 357 depending on the day. I am proficient with both.

If I shot a .32 acp much more accurately, then I would carry that.

beatledog7
August 23, 2013, 10:05 AM
I'm trying to imagine a .22LR "target" pistol that would be concealable. I'd have to open carry mine on a sling of some kind; I have no holster for a scoped Buckmark.

Carl N. Brown
August 23, 2013, 10:34 AM
Power is useless if you miss (unless it scares an attacker or intruder into running away, but remember you missed: no warning shots allowed in most jurisdictions).

Accuracy is good for defense but accuracy with power is better.

Misses increase the potential of collateral damage to unintended targets.

I would work toward accuracy with power, 9mm or .38spl+P or better.

I have no illusions of replicating my target performance with my MarkII .22 Ruger pistol in a combat situation. I expect accuracy under stress to be like my scores in the black powder cartridge match pistol stages of rapid fire 6 shots in two minutes stationary target and three tries at 2 shots in two seconds on a turning target. Rapid score half the slowfire score, turner score a third to a sixth the slowfire score.

ku4hx
August 23, 2013, 11:06 AM
As far as "hit accuracy" is concerned, if it's that much of a real world problem, get a [legal] short barrel shotgun and stoke it with you're particular choice for defensive ammunition. Train to use it and be satisfied it's a good choice. If the only hand gun you can consistently and reliable shoot accurately is a .22LR then OK, for carry say, go with that. If that's still too much get a baseball bat and a big dog.

Protecting your self is just that ... protecting yourself. If you can't shoot well enough (for whatever reason) to use a traditional combat hand gun with combat accuracy, you're already handicapped. But, I've met very few people over the years who couldn't be trained to shoot a center fire hand gun well enough to be assured in their minds they could do what had to be done.

The old saying, "Where there's a will; there's a way" has great relevance. If the determination is there, learning is pretty much a certainly. Otherwise, get a bat & dog.

Double Naught Spy
August 23, 2013, 11:09 AM
Hunter2011, I sense some disparity in your statements. You are a good shooter, but can't shoot 9mm? Are you physically handicapped in some manner? 9mm is not a difficult round to shoot, even for less than good shooters.

If training and practice will not improve your shooting such that you can shoot 9mm accurate, then there is something wrong with you. It may just be a mental block, but there is no reason to believe that you are so good that practice and training won't help you to improve, yet you can't shoot 9mm very well.

Sell the Vector and get a better pistol. Even if you can shoot .22 better right now, .22 lr is not a good defensive cartridge, not just because of the small caliber and lack of power, but because of the less than reliable rimfire ignition system.

TarDevil
August 23, 2013, 12:07 PM
Wow, you guys are having a tough time keeping answers within the question of his post. He's asking a pretty basic question.

I think he's getting some sound responses. If the OP's question is purely hypothetical, then the discussion goes one way. If the OP genuinely wants a gun for protection, I'd pay attention to what everyone is saying.

9mm's aren't hard at all to shoot. I recently let a total newbie shoot my Ruger... after some pointers on grip, stance and sight picture, she knocked the center of the target out with her 2nd magazine from 7 yards. Her first time with a handgun of any type. Did the same thing to a gal last year who had only shot a .32 revolver (and not very well).

If the OP is struggling with a 9mm, some instruction would go a long way.

Skylerbone
August 23, 2013, 12:24 PM
My advice would be to send that 9mm back for repair if it is that inaccurate. If no satisfaction were received, sell it and buy two new 9mms.

My 9 yr. old son is getting minute of squirrel head good with a .22 lr but is scared silly of centerfire pistols. Plenty of people have a similar reaction, induced flinch, increased noise, increased recoil. More likely culprits than inaccurate gun.

ATLDave
August 23, 2013, 12:48 PM
Taking the shooters' relative skill as a fixed given, as the OP seems to want, this is a pretty simple problem:

1. A miss does nothing. If you cannot get hits at all with a certain gun, then that gun may as well not exist. Any gun that you cannot get any kind of hits with is a non-starter.
2. A shot PERFECTLY placed will have a high likelihood of success with anything that exceeds about 600fps. But perfect hits are hard to come by under stress, against a moving target, and with a target that is attacking you.
3. The differentiator, then, is not misses, nor is it PERFECT* hits. It's the "acceptable" hits. A 9mm that misses the aorta by 2" is likely to be more effective than a .22 that does the same.

That means that you have to compare the DEGREE of misses with the more-capable caliber, and the RELATIVE effectiveness for "acceptable" hits. To put it in USPSA terms, there's a reason that major and minor score 5 points on A's, but different points on C's. How many A's are you giving up by going to a more powerful caliber? And how many "points" are you losing on the C's and D's that you shoot with the smaller one?

The OP may not know either of these things. The board can help with the latter, if asked directly. ONLY the OP can know the former, but probably needs to actually test and measure himself to know, rather than just go with gut reactions.

P.S. I agree with those who say there's no reason for anyone to not be able to get reasonably accurate with a decent 9mm.

* Note that even "perfect" hits don't always work. Jim Cirillo wrote of having MULTIPLE .38spl rounds skip off the skull of his opponents in gunfights.

Walt Sherrill
August 23, 2013, 12:50 PM
The Vector CP1 was recalled, and there are darned few of them in the U.S... It's more a collector's gun now, at least here, than a self-defense gun (particularly given the "safety" issues that prompted it's recall. It look fancy and modern, but I've not read much about it that says it's superior in any other respect.

The idea with self-defense handgun use is to STOP the aggressor. While a .22 CAN stop an aggressor, it is likely to do so only with the most optimal of shot placements. And most self-defense situations may not give you the time to really place your shots well.

I don't think I'd even consider a .22 handgun for self defense if I had any other options. In some cases as .22 would certainly be better than a pointed stick, but I'm not sure that a pointed stick (ala Monty Python) if it's stout and sharp, or even a baseball bat, wouldn't able to inflict as much or more damage in closer quarter combat.

A 9mm is more likely to get an aggressor's attention, if he or she is up close and personal, and most self-defense situations tend to end up that way.

I would suggest selling the Vector and getting something like a .38 Special Revolver, or a Glock, or a CZ; even a surplus CZ-82 would be more effective than a .22 in nearly all situations. You might be able to work a trade, etc.

And then PRACTICE!!

JAshley73
August 23, 2013, 01:52 PM
For self defense? Why do you need surgical precision anyway? I'd gladly trade surgically-precise, tack-driving accuracy from a weaker round, for a boxer's punch to the center mass, every time for a real life self defense situations. Considering that a majority of self defense shooting occur at bad breath distance, I see little need for superb accuracy. I just want a center-mass hit. Better yet, a few of them.

I know he doesn't have much support on these forums, but Tactical Response's James Yeager make a good point I one of his YouTube videos. (I do not want this conversation to take a turn with Yeager-bashing...) He presents that there is a difference between lethality, and incapacitation, then references the 86' Miami Shootout. He mentions how one of the perpetrators was hit by a round tha nicked his Aorta - a fatal wound that would cause the suspect to bleed out, but slowly.

Then he concedes that yes, a .22lr round is capable of a lethal wound. And then drives home the point, that while the suspect is dying, HE IS BEATING YOU TO DEATH.

Is a hit with a .22 better than a miss with a 9mm? I guess, but in a real-world, real-time, live or die self defense scenario, I'm not so sure. I think there's no disputing that with 1-4 shots between a .22lr and a 9mm, the 9mm will be the better fight stopper.

Like others have suggested, if you cannot shoot a 9mm pistol with reasonable accuracy, at short distances typical of self defense situations, then training is the only real solution.

Hunter2011
August 23, 2013, 02:06 PM
Hunter2011, I sense some disparity in your statements. You are a good shooter, but can't shoot 9mm? Are you physically handicapped in some manner? 9mm is not a difficult round to shoot, even for less than good shooters.

If training and practice will not improve your shooting such that you can shoot 9mm accurate, then there is something wrong with you. It may just be a mental block, but there is no reason to believe that you are so good that practice and training won't help you to improve, yet you can't shoot 9mm very well.

Sell the Vector and get a better pistol. Even if you can shoot .22 better right now, .22 lr is not a good defensive cartridge, not just because of the small caliber and lack of power, but because of the less than reliable rimfire ignition system.

Am I handicapped? Do I sound retarded? Sorry I just had too, your statement made me laugh.
I can shoot a 9mm just fine. I shot with a G19 of a friend on the same session as with my Vector on the range. I can shoot very well with the G19. So the 9mm does not give me a mental block or scare me or hurt my handicapped hands:neener:. My Vector just are not a G19, point.

Hanzo581 in post 17 understood my question very well. Its a simple question.

Point is I keep on getting good suggestions and sound advice. But nobody answers my question.... I said lets say I can't get something else, why suggest a shotgun? I'm ''stuck'' with either the .22 or the 9mm. I don't talk about carrying it either, it will be used for home defense. So the question remains:)
What is better, a super accurate .22 or a crappy 9mm that might score a hit or two in non vital areas?

Hunter2011
August 23, 2013, 02:13 PM
For self defense? Why do you need surgical precision anyway? I'd gladly trade surgically-precise, tack-driving accuracy from a weaker round, for a boxer's punch to the center mass, every time for a real life self defense situations. Considering that a majority of self defense shooting occur at bad breath distance, I see little need for superb accuracy. I just want a center-mass hit. Better yet, a few of them.

I know he doesn't have much support on these forums, but Tactical Response's James Yeager make a good point I one of his YouTube videos. (I do not want this conversation to take a turn with Yeager-bashing...) He presents that there is a difference between lethality, and incapacitation, then references the 86' Miami Shootout. He mentions how one of the perpetrators was hit by a round tha nicked his Aorta - a fatal wound that would cause the suspect to bleed out, but slowly.

Then he concedes that yes, a .22lr round is capable of a lethal wound. And then drives home the point, that while the suspect is dying, HE IS BEATING YOU TO DEATH.

Is a hit with a .22 better than a miss with a 9mm? I guess, but in a real-world, real-time, live or die self defense scenario, I'm not so sure. I think there's no disputing that with 1-4 shots between a .22lr and a 9mm, the 9mm will be the better fight stopper.

Like others have suggested, if you cannot shoot a 9mm pistol with reasonable accuracy, at short distances typical of self defense situations, then training is the only real solution.
I get what you are saying and it makes sense. You don't need perfect shot placement. As long as you hit center mass. But then it must be with something better than .22. So 5 shots with a 9mm any where in the chest or stomach area is better than 5 shots with a .22 in the chest that can be covered by a golf ball?

Bobson
August 23, 2013, 02:15 PM
Hanzo understood my queetion well.

Wow, you guys are having a tough time keeping answers within the question of his post. He's asking a pretty basic question.

Would you take a lesser powerful gun (.22) you are more accurate with over a more powerful gun (9mm) you are less accurate with. He's not asking if you shoot your 9mm accurately or if you were a .22 bullseye shooter.
"More accurate" is too relative a term to answer the question. Personally, I would have to be a pretty damn awful shot with a 9 to choose a 22LR for SD/HD. The same goes for everyone else - its common sense. If the OP wants to be talked into using a 22 for defense, he came to the wrong place. Sell that Vector if its that bad (and it really sounds like it is, if minute-of-man is a struggle at SD ranges). That's downright abysmal. Any gun you shoot that poorly has to go.

Bottom line, if you could put an entire magazine into a basketball at 15 yards with your CP1, I would use that. If you can't, I would sell it - because you said any amount of training won't help. So get rid of it if you're so sure that its worthless to you.


So 5 shots with a 9mm any where in the chest or stomach area is better than 5 shots with a .22 in the chest that can be covered by a golf ball?

Five shots with a 9 into a basketball is better than five shots with a 22 into a penny, IMO. Anytime you're defending yourself, you're not going to have the time or ability to "shoot the bear in the eye," as the kids say.

Walt Sherrill
August 23, 2013, 04:33 PM
And, to add to the issues -- .22 ammos (and many .22 handguns) have a tendency toward unreliability. You'll experience many more misfires and related problems with .22 ammo than with 9mm ammo.

While it's true that .22 ammos can be quite lethal, it's most effective when fired from a rifle at reasonable distances. That extra barrel length is needed to get the maximum effect from the ammo. Even .22 Magnum, when shot from short barrels, doesn't have the kind of force that would make it a good self-defense ammo.


.

TarDevil
August 23, 2013, 04:58 PM
What is better, a super accurate .22 or a crappy 9mm that might score a hit or two in non vital areas?
My choice would be a heavy blunt object over a .22, even an accurate one.

jimbo555
August 23, 2013, 05:38 PM
I would find a nice 380 that is accurate and softer recoiling than a 9mm. Like a sig p238. Small accurate and easily concealed.

Cosmoline
August 23, 2013, 05:47 PM
With the 9mm you really must do your best to even hit a human sized target.

If we're talking the usual 10 yard range, then that pistol has some major defects, and shouldn't be shot at all.

tipoc
August 23, 2013, 06:12 PM
From Hunter2011:

Point is I keep on getting good suggestions and sound advice. But nobody answers my question.... I said lets say I can't get something else, why suggest a shotgun? I'm ''stuck'' with either the .22 or the 9mm. I don't talk about carrying it either, it will be used for home defense. So the question remains
What is better, a super accurate .22 or a crappy 9mm that might score a hit or two in non vital areas?

Use the .22. But I suspect that is the answer you expected and wanted. No other makes sense.

If you have 2 guns and shoot one well and the other you do not shoot well, then defend yourself with the one you shoot best and that you have most confidence that you can handle well...but keep the 9mm close by.

As soon as you can replace the Vektor. A good part of your troubles with the 9mm are likely due to that gun.

The 9mm is a very pleasant round to shoot and there are many accurate guns made for it. The Vector is not one from what I know. There is no reason a fella can't become as proficient with a 9mm as with a .22 if they are in good health have a good gun and their expectations are reasonable.

tipoc

Ogre One
August 23, 2013, 06:30 PM
I personally like my Taurus Judge which I keep loaded with three shells and two HP. Mine also has a small rail below which I mounted a laser. My family - wife, and son and daughter (both of which are just shy of 20) - know where it is and how to use it if need be. The laser is mainly for my wife because she says she personally does not like guns, but does know how to use one. All she has to do is follow the little red dot and at about 20 feet (nominal closing distance inside the house) it is spot on.

MarshallDodge
August 23, 2013, 06:45 PM
A good friend, who is a shooter and a cardiologist, recently recounted an emergency room story. They had a patient come to the emergency room that had been shoot with a 22LR and was bleeding internally. The staff was having a hard time figuring out where he was losing blood and finally discovered two tiny holes in his heart. A gifted surgeon was able to patch the holes and the patient lived to tell about the experience.

Years ago there was a documented story of guy that was shot through his aorta with a 45. Knowing he had been shot, he took off running, and made it over 100 yards before collapsing dead.

You want to stop something right now? Destroy the Central Nervous System, otherwise you are just making leaks. Choose something that penetrates well and will create as much damage as possible on its way through.

ETXhiker
August 23, 2013, 06:46 PM
Hunter2011, is the reason you can't get a better pistol for defense because you are in South Africa?

JTQ
August 23, 2013, 08:22 PM
You should pick the .22. You've convinced yourself you'll never shoot the 9MM well enough for your personal standards. Pick the .22 and take your chances.

Me, I'm never picking a .22 for a defensive handgun, unless it is the only thing I have. I'll take my chances with the 9MM.

460Kodiak
August 23, 2013, 08:33 PM
Quote:
With the 9mm you really must do your best to even hit a human sized target.

If we're talking the usual 10 yard range, then that pistol has some major defects, and shouldn't be shot at all.


yep

F-111 John
August 23, 2013, 08:33 PM
I wouldn't try to equate my shooting ability while calmly aiming at a paper target with my shooting ability while a crazy man is screaming obscenities at me and trying to do me harm.

Even if I did shoot the .22LR better than the 9mm at the range, I'd still rather carry the 9mm.

Deaf Smith
August 23, 2013, 08:38 PM
I do want to ask this question, despite the fact it may turn out to be a caliber war. Please no fighting:), just honest answers and opinions.

Lets say you have only two handguns. One 9mm and one .22 target pistol. We all know the 9mm has more than 400% the power of the .22. That is an undisputed fact and you can never asume that they are equaly effective.

With the 9mm you really must do your best to even hit a human sized target. So headshots and heart shots will only happen with a lucky shot. With your 22 target pistol, you can really bassically choose where the bullet must hit. Lets say you can handle the stress for arguments sake and will connect where you aim.
Which of the two is the better option for the person who does not want to buy a new 9mm that can actually shoot just about as accurate as the .22?
With the lack of .22 ammo now days for practice I'd pick the 9mm.

Deaf

Sam1911
August 23, 2013, 08:45 PM
The question seems so very flawed. This is not an either/or thing. I would not rely on a .22 for defensive purposes unless I had no other firearm choice.

You CAN shoot a 9mm effectively. Period. My 11-year-old daughter can do it, safely and surely.

If you have a .22 and a 9mm, choosing to use the .22 because you just can't shoot the 9mm well is like cutting off your foot because your sock has a hole in it. Yeah...that's ONE solution, but not a GOOD one. There are better solutions. Seek training, learn to shoot well, in a defensive setting.

481
August 23, 2013, 08:53 PM
I do want to ask this question, despite the fact it may turn out to be a caliber war. Please no fighting:), just honest answers and opinions.

Lets say you have only two handguns. One 9mm and one .22 target pistol. We all know the 9mm has more than 400% the power of the .22. That is an undisputed fact and you can never asume that they are equaly effective.

The 9mm may have 4x the KE of a .22, but that is about all that can be said of the situation. Neither can be said to be more effective than the other because without knowing what they hit (or miss)...

With the 9mm you really must do your best to even hit a human sized target. So headshots and heart shots will only happen with a lucky shot. With your 22 target pistol, you can really bassically choose where the bullet must hit.

Your assumption that, "headshots and heart shots will only happen with a lucky shot" and "With your 22 target pistol, you can really bassically choose where the bullet must hit" is based upon what evidence? Is there some evidence that the 9mm cartirdge is inherently less accurate than the .22LR?

Lets say you can handle the stress for arguments sake and will connect where you aim.

That's a HUGE assumption and likely not true for a great many people.

Which of the two is the better option for the person who does not want to buy a new 9mm that can actually shoot just about as accurate as the .22?

Neither. The one that is "better" is the one that you have trained and become competent with to the point that you can at least make a decent account of yourself should you need to.

Simply put, your question begs for an "equipment" answer where a "training and mindset" answer serves better.

fatmanonabike
August 23, 2013, 09:03 PM
You can't miss well enough to make it count. Go with the .22 sometimes you just need to change their mind. OTOH, I think almost universally we like to see you shoot comfortably well with anything that has more power.

David E
August 23, 2013, 09:32 PM
I have a Vector CP1. In my hands, not accurate at all.

Try a different gun or educate/train your hands better.

I once shot a skinned sheep.

Wasn't it already dead? :D

But if a airgun, and not a powerfull one at that, can penetrate 2 ribs of a sheep, will a .22 not do the same to human ribs that is in attacking mode?

Sure, but you don't get the luxury of making body hits with a .22 if you're wanting to stop the aggressor right now.

I do know that even if it does penetrate it still won't stop the attacker in his tracks like a bigger caliber might do, but still.

"but still" what? You're answering your own questions in each post, you just don't realize it.

460Kodiak
August 24, 2013, 10:33 AM
Is your problem with 9mm just that you don't shoot your particular 9mm well or a problem with the cartridge itself?

Trunk Monkey
August 24, 2013, 10:48 AM
What is better, a super accurate .22 or a crappy 9mm that might score a hit or two in non vital areas?

The OP has asked a loaded question; given the conditions he imposed the only legitimate answer is the .22.

Having said that, I also understand why the OP seems annoyed. He asked a very specific question and he stated very specific parameters “I have two guns, one is a 9mm that doesn’t shoot well one is a .22 that shoots very well (paraphrase)” “I am not able to purchase another gun right now; I am stuck with only these two choices.” “Of the only two choices I have, which should I pick?”

He then gets two pages worth of “Buy another gun”. I’d be upset too.

OptimusPrime
August 24, 2013, 11:07 AM
Your question: what is better?
Answer: crappy 9mm > super-accurate .22

Not the answer you want to hear, but there it is.
Get better at shooting the 9mm.

Sam1911
August 24, 2013, 11:28 AM
He then gets two pages worth of “Buy another gun”. I’d be upset too.

And a few which were more appropriate: Get help, get training, and practice. Unless there's something physically wrong with the pistol, he CAN shoot it sufficiently well to close any perceived gap between it and the .22.

Jaymo
August 24, 2013, 11:34 AM
Didn't the Vektor CP1 have a recall that stated something to the effect of "do not fire the pistol under any circumstances"?

Kleanbore
August 24, 2013, 11:41 AM
Yes, there was a recall. Many were checked out and there should be inspection certificates.

As Sam says, unless it is defective, it should be sufficient for self defense.

SD is not target shooting. An 8 1/2 X 11 sheet at 5-7 yards is the kind of target a defender should be able to hit.

David E
August 24, 2013, 12:55 PM
The original post was based on false parameters (no stress with .22, but too stressed with 9mm) and gave two false choices.

He could improve his skill with the 9mm but seems adamantly opposed to that. But it's the smartest choice of what is currently available to him.

If the dilemma was between a .22 thats 100% reliable and a 9/40/45 that was only 95% reliable, I'd choose the .22 and would heavily practice "T-zone" shots.

TarDevil
August 24, 2013, 12:59 PM
He then gets two pages worth of “Buy another gun”. I’d be upset too.
This is difference between wise handgun use and knowing when to resort to something else. On the street, I might consider a .22... circumstances are different than a home invasion. In my home, I would feel much better defended with a ball bat than a .22.

Personally, I'm not going "OK" something I think is dangerous. And I'd rather upset someone than get them killed.

45_auto
August 24, 2013, 01:29 PM
With the 9mm you really must do your best to even hit a human sized target. So headshots and heart shots will only happen with a lucky shot. With your 22 target pistol, you can really bassically choose where the bullet must hit.

Sounds like somebody really needs to get a little training with their 9mm.

Hunter2011
August 24, 2013, 02:22 PM
Hi guys. I just want to make it clear. I am not annoyed or upset or anything like that with the answers I got. I just pointed out that the answers don't speak to my question. Sorry if I came across annoyed or something. That was not my intention.
Look... The best option is to get a new gun, like I said I can shoot the G19 I shot with well. So the problem can't be me or the fact that I can't handle a 9mm. Let me then rather accept there might be a problem with my 9mm. No training will solve that.

Bikewer
August 24, 2013, 02:44 PM
I point out all the time that the superb accuracy you've developed on the range may vanish in an actual combat situation.
In addition to the sheer stress of combat, your opponent may be moving, hiding, in poor light, whatever.
All that business of "shot placement is everything" may become moot....You may have to take what you can get.

That's why I favor more potent calibers. A peripheral hit with a big bullet is more likely to be disabling than a peripheral hit with a little one.

tarosean
August 24, 2013, 02:58 PM
The current American Handgunner Sep/Oct 2013 has an article about SD caliber choices with a chart from military & LEO encounters..


http://fmgpublications.ipaperus.com/FMGPublications/AmericanHandgunner/AHSO13/

tuj
August 24, 2013, 03:10 PM
If you shoot ISSF rapid fire at a competitive level, then use your target .22

But since you don't, learn to shoot the 9 controlled and quickly.

sheephearder
August 24, 2013, 03:15 PM
For my wife a 22 S&W 422 is the best chose. She can and will practice with it and shoots it well enough for close quarters defense but will not shoot any larger calibers. For me any thing from 38/9mm up is OK, and if a 22lr is all I have it is OK too. :)

Trunk Monkey
August 24, 2013, 03:35 PM
Some guns are just bad and all the practice in the world won’t help them.

The first handgun I ever owned was a S&W model 910 which was supposed to be a more affordable version of the 5904 and one of the ways they brought the price down was to switch a lot of the steel parts, including the sights, on the 5904 with plastic parts.

Long story short no matter how much I practiced with that particular pistol I couldn’t hit a horse in the ass while sitting in the saddle.

At the time I was too new to handguns to realize that I probably could have done some upgrading to the gun and ended up with a nice little shooter and I ended up giving it away.

So maybe if the OP can’t get a new gun he can possibly make some adjustments to the one he has at a lower price?


Question for the OP, are you unable or unwilling to look into a new firearm?

9mmepiphany
August 24, 2013, 04:26 PM
Maybe I've just been lucky. I've shot both a Vektor CP-1 (1 mag) and a S&W 910 (couple of mags) and I found them both pretty enjoyable and certainly accurate enough (2-3" @ 7 yards) for a first time experience.

But I do understand what you guys are talking about, as I've found that I just can't shoot a Browning Hi-Power to save my life (I've owned 3 different ones and shot about a half dozen more).

I really regret not buying the Vektor when I had the chance...watching them in BSG only made it worst. If the OP were local, I'd trade him his choice of a Glock 22 or Beretta 96 for it

the_skunk
August 24, 2013, 05:46 PM
Most self defense shootouts will happen close. As far a 22, maybe if I was going 'Toe to toe' with a 12 pound toothless cat, then I would choose a 22. The simple fact is that the 22 has a 15% dud rate, and recycle the slide badly. I paid $350 for a Ruger pistol (Mark 3 - 22/45) and it's a POS.

The other guns (9mm) runs dependable ammo, so if the gun is good - that's my choice. John Browning made the Baby Browning pocket pistol in 25 acp, just because the 22 was useless.

If I were starting from scratch - a Seecamp 32 ($425) would be my concealed choice. Others would be a CZ-83, Colt 1903, Walther PPK - dependable guns are much cheaper in the long run.

Trunk Monkey
August 24, 2013, 06:27 PM
Maybe I've just been lucky. I've shot both a Vektor CP-1 (1 mag) and a S&W 910 (couple of mags) and I found them both pretty enjoyable and certainly accurate enough (2-3" @ 7 yards) for a first time experience.

In my case I think it was that gun because no one that tried it could hit the broad side of a barn with it.

That particular pistol almost turned me off 3rd Gen Smiths though and I thought long and hard before I purchased the 6906 that restored my faith in them. (although I'd probably pass on another 910)

Now I don’t carry anything but.

TarDevil
August 24, 2013, 06:32 PM
Look... The best option is to get a new gun, like I said I can shoot the G19 I shot with well. So the problem can't be me or the fact that I can't handle a 9mm. Let me then rather accept there might be a problem with my 9mm. No training will solve that.

Good on you!

readyeddy
August 24, 2013, 07:25 PM
The question is precise in its parameters. If it's very difficult to hit a human sized target with a given 9mm but precise hits are doable with a target 22, and you don't want to buy another 9mm (indicating that the given 9mm is not accurate), then what do you do?

Given the parameters of the question, you should use the 22. Hits are what count, misses just make noise.

To go beyond the question, you should sell the inaccurate 9mm and get a decent 9mm or similar gun.

40-82
August 24, 2013, 08:18 PM
If I understand the spirit of your question, it comes down to this scenario: you have the choice between a very small super lightweight, relatively powerful gun in 9mm, some of them weigh less than 20 ozs. and have short barrels and rudimentary sights. You want to compare the effectiveness of the lightweight carry gun with a heavy target 22. Accuracy trumps power. I've hit 800 pounds steers with a 22 short from a Ruger Single-Six in the brain pan that made them go down like they were hit by a freight train. I've also seen relatively small things soak up very large bullets without enough obvious or immediate effect to make a quick stop. So unless you're talking grappling distance I would always choose the target 22 over the belly gun type. Under the stress of an emergency you're not likely to perform with target grade accuracy even with a heavy weight 22,but it might make the difference between a hit and a complete miss. I can see the choice coming up in some kind of unplanned emergency situation, but if you have the chance to prepare why not choose a target grade 9mm and have the best of both?

Sam1911
August 24, 2013, 08:45 PM
The old maxim is "3 shots, 3 yards, 3 seconds.". While not exactly provable as the definitive average for violent encounters, it is close enough to illustrate why "target grade" guns are irrelevant to self defense.

On the contrary, weighty bullets that expand to a goodly diameter when they strike soft tissue are a very good idea. Accuracy is nice, of course. But at three yards, I'll take the more powerful option every single time.

9mmepiphany
August 24, 2013, 09:00 PM
I guess the hurdle I'm having a hard time getting over is how inaccurate the OP is saying the CP-1 is.

1. It has a fixed polygonal barrel and a SAO trigger
2. It uses the same delayed blowback system as the H&K P7
3. It has a low bore axis
4. The recall had nothing to do with accuracy, but with the drop safety
5. It was better built than the Heritage Stealth/Wilson ADP

I'm just confused :confused:

Double Naught Spy
August 25, 2013, 12:56 AM
It comes down to the fact that the OP already has the answer. He wants validation of his choice to rely on the .22 for SD because it is apparently the only gun he has that works in a manner he believes to be sufficient for his needs. That is what he believes despite suggestions and statements to the contrary, then by golly that is what he should use for SD. After all, he wields it with surgical precision. He expressed absolutely no interest in trying to better himself with the superior caliber Vector and so he never will.

mokin
August 25, 2013, 01:20 AM
If you can pick your shot placement with the .22 then go for it! If you wife says "NO MORE GUNS FOR YOU!" then buy a shot timer and add some stress to your range sessions. Set up several silhouette targets and try shooting from cover. See how you do when you add multiple targets and magazine changes to the equation. Have fun! And, by all means don't occasionally try the same drill with the 9mm.

tarosean
August 25, 2013, 01:29 AM
buy a shot timer and add some stress to your range sessions.

excellent idea... Ive seen too many "good" shooters fall to pieces when under the timer.

mljdeckard
August 25, 2013, 01:51 AM
The OPs premise is flawed in that, you can no more assume you will get a CNS hit with a .22 than you can with any other gun. Very few shooters are good enough to consistently get hits that good at ten yards if they can take their time on stationary targets. Bad guys don't stand still OR wait for you.

Add to this the VERY low odds that a frontal hit with a .22 will actually penetrate FAR ENOUGH to hit the spine. You can try to say, "well, I'm good enough to shoot them in the eye/temple." Maybe you are. (Though I would like to see it.) But the skull is a bad place to shoot people at all. It has curves, angles, and layers. It is also not static in its location, it moves when it is hit, which means that there are any number of things that can happen that will prevent the bullet from penetrating to the brain. And hitting the brain doesn't guarantee motor function will cease either.

This is why I roll my eyes a little bit at the "it's all about shot placement" idea. I still say three 9mms in the ten ring is better than ten .22s in the ten ring. Of course you want to get the best hits you can, but it's not EVERYTHING. I teach my students to get as many in the eight ring as fast as possible, I think that's more real world effective than trying for precision when someone is trying to kill you.

Hunter2011
August 25, 2013, 01:53 AM
I guess the hurdle I'm having a hard time getting over is how inaccurate the OP is saying the CP-1 is.

1. It has a fixed polygonal barrel and a SAO trigger
2. It uses the same delayed blowback system as the H&K P7
3. It has a low bore axis
4. The recall had nothing to do with accuracy, but with the drop safety
5. It was better built than the Heritage Stealth/Wilson ADP

I'm just confused :confused:
I'm just as confused as you.
A shorter barrel don't mean less accuracy, but it seems the short sight radius and crappy fixed sights are just not working for me.
Like I said, I'm currently saving up for a Glock. I just can't really make my mind up between a G34 or a G21. If Glock made a .45 in the size of the G34 I would have stopped looking.

Let me explain further for those that will care to read all my babble. I did not only asked this question for myself. There are other people in my situation that are even worse off. My father is one. He bought a .38 snubby for SD. We went to an indoor shooting range to practice with it. At 10 meters only 1 of the 5 shots could hit the human sized target. The rest were close, basically shaving the outlines of the target, but are still misses. Then we shot with my Vector. Much better results were achieved. And that with all 13 round that struck the target. Then when we shot with my .22 pistol, the difference was just amazing to my father. Now he is also a firm believer that bigger is better, and it is. But what is power without control?
In South Africa you must renew you SD license every 5 years. He is not interested to do it for the 38 again, too much trouble etc. I then told him just join the club I'm at, get yourself a nice .22 revolver or pistol and use it in an emergency. Then you only have to renew every 10 years and you get the much needed practice. He is a very good shooter, he got almost top scores in comps he shot in his youth. He just can't get the .38 to shoot good enough. He just don't want to trust a .22 with his life. But what use is the .38 if he can't hit with it? I truly believe that he will be better armed with my .22 pistol than with his .38 Special that only connects with 1 out of 5 shots. And that is in single action mode and really trying hard to shoot a group.
He won't consider a 9mm or bigger to shoot with at the club as ammo is too expensive. So the .22 will be the only option. I just need to convince him. I don't want him to be unarmed, but he just believes a .22 is worthless. I don't think it is worthless.

460Kodiak
August 25, 2013, 03:19 AM
Round and Around. This has to be the most confusing thread I've ever read through.

I think the bottom line is that if the .22 works for you, then use it. Buy a larger caliber gun that you can shoot just as well as your .22 just as soon as you can. Sell the 9mm you have now to help fund a gun you shoot better. Look at .45 maybe?

Good luck!

onthehunt
August 25, 2013, 08:17 AM
If you are extremely accurate with a .22 under duress then go for it..

David E
August 25, 2013, 10:29 AM
I'm currently saving up for a Glock. I just can't really make my mind up between a G34 or a G21.

Split the difference with a Glock 35. If .40 caliber isn't an option, then get the 34. Based on your posts, you'll be better served with a 9mm

Then we shot with my Vector. Much better results were achieved. And that with all 13 round that struck the target.

Sell Vektor to Dad, buy a Glock for you.

But what is power without control? He just don't want to trust a .22 with his life.

If a .22 is the biggest caliber that can be "controlled," then that's the best option. For defense, a semi-auto is better than a revolver.

Tho not ideal, t's hardly worthless, especially if the other choice is nothing at all.

Walt Sherrill
August 25, 2013, 10:44 AM
He won't consider a 9mm or bigger to shoot with at the club as ammo is too expensive. So the .22 will be the only option. I just need to convince him. I don't want him to be unarmed, but he just believes a .22 is worthless. I don't think it is worthless.

Is 9mm really that much more costly than .38 Special? If cost wasn't a problem with .38, why is it an issue with 9mm? (Or .32, or .380, or 9x18?)

It appears that both you and your father want an easy answer for which no easy answer is available.

I truly believe that he will be better armed with my .22 pistol than with his .38 Special that only connects with 1 out of 5 shots. And that is in single action mode and really trying hard to shoot a group.

Better armed in what respect? Better able to punch holes in a paper target, or better able to protect himself against unexpected attacks, which are typically much closer? Here in the U.S., being attacked by dogs (Rottweilers, Pitt Bulls, German Shepherds) is arguably a greater threat than being attacked by humans -- although there is risk of both if you live in certain locales.

A .22 could be effective against either class of antagonist (human or canine) IF you had plenty of warning and are free to calmly sight and fire your weapon. But a human and a dog can travel 25-30 feet in just a few seconds. To further complicate matters, I don't think a .22 would have much effect on an aggravated Pitt Bull unless you got really lucky with a shot through an eye socket. Moving targets are hard to hit, even if you're an accomplished .22 shooter...

At our IDPA club, we demonstrated this at one of our IDPA matches several year ago, when we had a balloon mounted in the middle of an IDPA target, filling the center-mass circle; we had a target mover pulling the target across the rear of the indoor range.

A surprising number of folks, some of them quite accomplished shooters, simply couldn't pop the balloon. Success in hitting the balloon seemed more the result of "spray and pray" than the result of well-placed shots.

The problem, and it's a big one, is that most dog attacks and most human attacks don't come with a lot of warning, and tend to be UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL by the time a victim can bring a weapon to bear. With a dog attack, you may be on your back with a dog attached to your body before you can even fire your weapon. Human attackers aren't likely to give you much warning, either.

I would argue that in that case, even a poorly shot .38 revolver or a Vector might be the better weapon of choice. Most guns used in self-defense situation aren't used at pistol-range distances.

If ammo is too expensive to practice with -- a cited deterrent to changing to something other than .22 -- your father has valued his life in a most flippant manner. If .38 special wasn't a cost limitation, maybe he needs to look at a DAO revolver, or having a gunsmith work on the .38's action so that it's more easily used. (A gunsmith can do wonders with triggers on some guns.)

I'm currently saving up for a Glock. I just can't really make my mind up between a G34 or a G21.

Sell your father your Vector (he shoots it better than you), and get the Glock 34 or 35 -- depending on the availability of ammo. I loved a 34, had a 35, and now have a 23 and 38. The 38 is my favorite... but .45 GAP may be hard to get where you live.

Skylerbone
August 25, 2013, 11:50 AM
Now is when we finally discover that the real culprit is either trigger control, sights or a mental block. None of those require a caliber change and all are fixable.

From the bit I've read about South Africa, my understanding is that multiple assailants is a more likely scenario than a lone individual. If 4 .22 lrs. were the equivalent of 1 9mm, something we know to be false, the average .22 won't have enough capacity for addressing multiple attackers. Knowing the situation compels you to use a larger caliber, work on which ever element of your Vector that needs attention.

skoro
August 25, 2013, 12:02 PM
My take:

More power is desirable.

More accuracy is decisive.

hovercat
August 25, 2013, 01:18 PM
Accuracy is #1.
Daughter's favorite is a .357 with very light handloads. Accuracy and something she will practice with trump power IMO.
Son likes his 9mm.
Wife likes .380
I use the same light handloads my daughter does. I like the speed I can place 6 rounds accurately.

Hunter2011
August 25, 2013, 01:31 PM
Is 9mm really that much more costly than .38 Special? If cost wasn't a problem with .38, why is it an issue with 9mm? (Or .32, or .380, or 9x18?)

He does not shoot his .38 special regularly or at a club, as he is not a member yet. So the price of the .38 special ammo is no issue. But it and any centerfire ammo will be too costly if he ever joins a club and has to shoot a lot. My father has much more money than me, but he prefers not to spend:)

45_auto
August 25, 2013, 01:36 PM
Sounds like he needs to decide whether his life is worth the cost of learning to shoot centerfire ammo.

If he thinks that it's too expensive, then stick with the .22.

Walt Sherrill
August 25, 2013, 03:50 PM
If centerfire ammo is too expensive -- if one has to shoot a lot (but I don't know why someone has to shoot a lot!) -- your father's best course of action is to become an alchemist, and turn lead into gold. There's no other more-realistic solution.

You've asked a question, and you've put such limits on the possible answers that you seem to leave yourself (or him) only one option, and are seeking our approval: you seem convinced that your father must keep and use the .22 given his attitude and his budget.

As others have noted, a .22 is better than nothing, but so is a pointed stick. Unhappily, using the .22 satisfies your father's budget concerns but meets few other requirements.

Using a .22 because it's what your father shoots best is a specious course of action, at best. It is an intellectually satisfying alternative in that it puts the debate to rest, but it does virtually NOTHING to address the question of how your father may best defend himself.

If you're (or he is) determined to use a .22, the best question might be "which .22 is best for a self-defense situation. I can tell you, the longer the barrel, the better... and maybe a .22 magnum. If its for home defense, a .22 magnum rifle may be a better choice than a handgun. A shotgun might be even better.

The other option -- and I mentioned it in my last response -- is having a gunsmith work on the revolver, so that it fires with less effort. A S&W revolver, for example, can be tuned so that trigger pull weight and smoothness can be improved. I suspect his gun can also be improved.

Or, have the same gunsmith work on the Vector, and let your Father use it...

.

David E
August 25, 2013, 08:42 PM
Accuracy is #1.

No, it's not.

Daughter's favorite is a .357 with very light handloads. Accuracy and something she will practice with trump power IMO.

Agreed, but I bet she could handle more power than "very light handloads."

I use the same light handloads my daughter does. I like the speed I can place 6 rounds accurately.

Which is how fast compared to how fast with full power loads?

The smaller you go in caliber and power the more accurate you need to be.

Which is easier, hitting a bouncing basketball at 3-5 yds with a full power.38/.357/9mm or hitting a tennis ball with a .22 or .357 with "very light handloads" that's moving faster at the same distance?

If you enjoyed reading about "Self defence, Power VS accuracy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!