Pistol cartridge rifle vs Rifle cartridge pistol

I think this subject covers more ground than the OP anticipated. What are we talking about here?

This:


Or this???

Bfh_auto said:

I live far from civilization. But I still completely agree with your thought process. If I want to slow a projectile down I'll do it with less powder. Not less barrel.
357 and 44 aren't extremely friendly in normal sized revolvers. The blast makes them impractical for defensive use. After firing my 357 indoors without hearing protection. I switched to a 40 S&W as a carry gun.
223 and 300 BO are as far up the RCP list I would go. That would have to be with a 10" barrel and a suppressor. Which puts you back to a carbine length firearm.

Click to expand...

If shooting indoors, or at shorter ranges, the .38special +p serrated hollow point, does the job, is slightly kinder to the ears, and will have you back on target faster. 125gn .357m are the next step up, however I found that, by the time you get to full noise 158gn .357m, in a pistol the noise, flash, and barrel flip make rapid followups almost impossible! Some people, who spend a lot of time shooting could probably do it, but as an average hack I cannot.
I will admit I enjoyed .44m long barreled revolvers, but only for mucking about, not as a carry firearm.
And yes, we are both on the same page, re reducing power of rounds, to suit the situation.

roscoe said:

'Pistols' shooting rifle rounds offend my inner engineer. It is a huge waste of the energy in a rifle round to shoot it from a short barrel, with unnecessary noise, flash, etc., and a significant loss of potential power. However, a .357 out of a rifle really maximizes the round, and there are some that approach 7.62x39 power levels. I find that kind of efficiency aesthetically pleasing.

So put this aesthete down for 'PCC'.

Click to expand...

Exactly... you are 'improving' performance, enhancing efficiency, with both an increase in velocity, and length of sighting plane! And it works!

I think that there should be two more categories:

• PCC - Pistol caliber carbines, and:
• CCP - Carbine caliber pistols

Most of the rifles mentioned above are actually carbines.
Most of the rifle caliber pistols mentioned above use rounds that were really designed for use in carbines.
-And, yes, it matters.

theotherwaldo said:

I think that there should be two more categories:

• PCC - Pistol caliber carbines, and:
• CCP - Carbine caliber pistols

Most of the rifles mentioned above are actually carbines.
Most of the rifle caliber pistols mentioned above use rounds that were really designed for use in carbines.
-And, yes, it matters.

Click to expand...

Why does it matter?

Pistol caliber carbines vs Pistol caliber rifles is getting a pretty fine and requires a pretty good definition of the two terms, Unfortunately both of those terms have had pretty fuzzy definitions that have change through out history and thus a fair bit of overlap between a rifle and carbine especially when it comes to barrel length. For example, a 20 inch barrel is a carbine in some eras and a rifle in others.

I would also be interested in a succinct definition of carbine caliber too. For example is 5.56x45mm a rifle or carbine cartridge?

mcb said:

Why does it matter?

Pistol caliber carbines vs Pistol caliber rifles is getting a pretty fine and requires a pretty good definition of the two terms, Unfortunately both of those terms have had pretty fuzzy definitions that have change through out history and thus a fair bit of overlap between a rifle and carbine especially when it comes to barrel length. For example, a 20 inch barrel is a carbine in some eras and a rifle in others.

I would also be interested in a succinct definition of carbine caliber too. For example is 5.56x45mm a rifle or carbine cartridge?

Click to expand...

That's my problem with the poll there's just way too much overlap and grey areas.

To me the pistol caliber in the rifle makes sense for fun, defensive use, or hunting in one of those places where "normal" rifle rounds are restricted. The rifle round in a handgun only makes sense to me for hunting, under circumstances/regs where it is a handgun only situation. No such thing exists here or anywhere I have ever lived, so I have no experience in the matter.

Poll should have had a choice for "neither" really.

I had an XP100 in .308 (won the thing, actually). As to Fish or Fowl, it was a platypus.
It really did not do anything well.
Wasn't big enough for long-range work.
Was too heavy to carry around.
THE LER scope was not as good as a "regular" scope at the same price.

WeekendReloader said:

All of the "Rifle Caliber Pistols" shown above are really just rifles with short barrels (only classified by law as pistols). They really aren't pistols, like a regular hand gun.

Click to expand...

That’s what I thought when I saw the thread title – revolvers chambered in rifle cartridges.

I don’t find either terribly interesting, but between the two I’d prefer a rifle caliber pistol.

Especially something like .300 BLK that can be loaded heavy subsonic if the flash and noise is too much.

Barbaroja said:

I’ve never been a big fan of AR platforms. However, for some reason I am drawn to an ar pistol in 300blk. These photos are not making it any easier for me.

Click to expand...

300 BLK with a 110 gr bullet can be compared with 30 Carbine performance. 30 Carbine can be loaded to 2K fps using 110 gr bullets and H-110. That might be the attraction. Light, compact, low noise, low recoil, and 200 yd capable. You just can't do that with a pistol cartridge. But maybe you don't want to, IDK.

If it weighs over 5 lbs I want a SBR or carbine. A brace doesn't make it a pistol except in the alternate universe where the ATF lives. That definition isn't going to survive much longer. Hide and watch.

-Most of the "Rifle caliber pistol" loads that I've seen so far in this discussion have been either loads that were designed for carbines and pistols or reduced power sub-sonic loads.
That's why I suggested the other categories.

jdc1244 said:

That’s what I thought when I saw the thread title – revolvers chambered in rifle cartridges.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with what you guys are saying but a long cylinder BFR in 30-30 or 45-70 don't exactly meet the legal definition of "held in one hand" and I would argue that a braced 8" AR is easier to shoot that way.
I'm still not sure 300 Blackout qualifies as a rifle round as J D Jones originally developed the 300 Whisper in a Contender and without splitting hairs 300 Blackout and 357 Magnum are ballistic twins.
I had a Contender and while they're great guns I lost interest, and the long cylinder BFRs are unwieldy to me I prefer to get my hand cannon power the old fashioned way and launch 400+ grain boolets from a normalish size revolver 5.25" 475/480 BFR.


Which is way more powerful than my rifle??? caliber pistol 8" 300 Blackout

As to PCC I love magnum revolver cartridges in lever guns and my 16" Rossi '92 44 Mag with a 300gr XTP would be IMHO a better choice than a 5.56 or 7.62x39 for toothy game.

A PCC auto chambered in 9mm 40 or 45 would be a solid choice for the one long gun for home defense for the non-reloader that just shoots enough to maintain proficiency on a budget. Once you start reloading, shooting a lot or removing budget constraints a braced 300 blackout AR is IMHO a way better defensive weapon.
I done blown the budget constraints out of the water and double stamped my 12.5" 5.56 AR SBR.

And if I want cheap practice I have a nearly identical 22 LR AR same optic and Larue trigger with a 16" barrel an faux suppressor/linear comp.

For the record my SBR is technically a pistol is I stick my Magpul BTR brace on it.

sarduy said:

Hello THR,

i just want to know what’s the general consensus. When it comes to those options, which one would you choose and why.

personally i like Rifle Cartridge Pistols because no matter what, they have more power than a pcc/pcr of the same size.

Click to expand...

I think a rifle caliber pistol of any size to be unpleasant at best, unmanageable at worst.

Hokkmike said:

I think a rifle caliber pistol of any size to be unpleasant at best, unmanageable at worst.

Click to expand...

Come now, a full auto 12 inch 308 is concussive fun and doubles as a short range flame thrower.

I do agree, most rifle cartridges in barrel much short than 20-inch don't do a lot for me. The exception being 300 AAC Blackout. I am really having fun with and using my 300 BO braced AR's (5-inch and 9-inch) a lot and enjoying them. Though I think a good argument can be made 300 BO is not a "real" rifle cartridge but a carbine cartridge is such a definition can be made/accepted.

That said pistol caliber rifles really only interest me in lever guns. I would rather have my 300 BO than a 9/40/45 caliber AR pistol/SBR.

Hokkmike said:

I think a rifle caliber pistol of any size to be unpleasant at best, unmanageable at worst.

Click to expand...

Like @mcb said the 300 BO isn't bad especially with a linear compensator or blast can of some nature. My 12.5" 5.56 is definitely unpleasant without the suppressor the 2 chamber griffin paladin brake is very effective for recoil the gun doesn't seem to move at all but that could just be a side effect of the concussion.

mcb said:

I would also be interested in a succinct definition of carbine caliber too. For example is 5.56x45mm a rifle or carbine cartridge?

Click to expand...

Not sure there technically is such a thing as 'carbine cartridge'. When the 30-carbine was developed it was categorized as a centerfire light rifle round, which honestly is the same general name used for any centerfire small arms ammunition up to 50 caliber used in long arms. Given carbines are reduced size rifles I think it falls into different without a difference status.

One maximizes the speed with the powder used, and one does the opposite.

I suspect, but cannot prove, that 5 shots of a substantial rifle cartridge in a pistol less than three pounds will result in a naked-eye visible flinch.

Unless your surname is Bunyan. Paul, that is.

I only own one and got it around 1966. Pictured in the foreground is my Ruger 44 Magnum carbine which I hunted West Virginia with for many years.



I complimented it with my S&W Model 29. Beyond that old rifle I have no real desire to own anything else in either family.

Ron

I no longer hunt deer, elk etc, so most of my "deer" rifles were sold to purchase a couple of Henry's. A .357 Classic and a .45 Colt. Pretty much just for desert plinking.
And this they do nicely.

I wouldn't say "no matter what"
A Heiser 223 produces 240 ft bls of energy vs my Marlin 1894 at 1600 ft lbs.
My 9mm 16" AR produces around 540 ft lbs., but that doesn't compare to a IMI/IWI BFR in 45-70 running 1800 ft lbs.

Ultimately, you really need to exclude rifle based pistols and S & W X frames to make this count.

The Marlin 1894 is considered a conventional rifle.
The Super Blackhawk 30 M1C is considered a conventional Pistol.
A .308 auto with no stock and a 15.99" barrel may be a pistol, but at that point, why not just go rifle?
In thought exercise, someone made a .600 Nitro Express pistol (Midway didn't invent the term) with about 7600 ft lbs energy. About 3X my .308 rifle. For anyone who reads the reference, they use US LBS with several decimal points, and at first, it looks like they got the weight off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfeifer_Zeliska_.600_Nitro_Express_revolver

webrx said:

I chose rifle caliber pistol since the .22 Long Rifle was originally designed for rifles and I shoot lots of it in pistols.

Click to expand...

I didn't think of that one. You got me.

Archie said:

I didn't think of that one. You got me.

Click to expand...

Same here.

Ron

Backpack Banshee: 40 S&W 30 rds in one ragged 2" hole at 25 yds. Good power out to 100. No recoil, very quick.
Technically this is a pistol caliber pistol.

Did I mention very quick ?