A Carbine in 9mm or .40? Are they Worth It?

incidentally -- i forgot to add that i have a sub2k in 9mm and i think it's great. i have one that accepts the glock-type mags (the most common variant), however i do not own a glock pistol. the mags are readily available and relatively cheap so although i don't get to enjoy mag compatibility with my pistol, it's still worthwhile in my book.

clearly the thing that sets the sub2k apart from the rest of your choices is its compactness and ability to fold. i ordered mine without ever actually holding one (they're basically impossible to find in shops around me), so when i picked it up at my ffl it was my first time to see it in person and actually hold it. i knew it was small and compact, but when they took it out of the box it still surprised me. it's light and tiny, but still manages to feel quite solid and sturdy.

these benefits don't come without a price, as you do have to trade off some comfort. it's a bit uncomfortable to get a good cheek weld and the bolt does come back with a bit of a whack that takes a bit to get used to -- it's not at all painful or 'bad', just different. it's also little awkward to work the bolt if you need to cycle it or lock it back. your first few rounds will no doubt feel weird as you find what position to hold and shoot, but after a mag or two you figure it out and get used to it. it does tend to maul the brass so if you're a reloader that might put you off.

when you have some 33rd mags loaded up the main downside is you'll be having so much fun that you'll go through a ton of ammo before you know it. not that that's a bad thing. also, if you go to a busy range, you'd be surprised how many people know about the sub2k and are interested, but never seen one since they're so rare in the stores -- you'll get comments and inquiries, which will no doubt lead to people wanting to shoot it, and them offering you to shoot what they've got. it's a good conversation starter as well as being just a ton of fun.

anyway, as you can tell i love mine -- it's great quality and for the price is an excellent value. if you've got the money, just get one, you won't be disappointed.

pezo said:

They seem like a good home defense alternative to the brute shotgun or the potentially hard er to steady and aim handgun. They also would not have the over penetrating issues as with a full powered rifle. Good for small stature people defending they,re home in urban-suburban areas.

Click to expand...

It's been well established here and on other firearms-related forums that anything that can kill a man will have to deal with overpenetration issues.

Regarding carbines in 9mm/.40 - I don't feel they're overly useful. Now the .357 Magnum in a carbine, now that gives some serious performance gains. But if it works for you, then great; I am kind of with everyone else regarding using a rifle caliber for carbines.

I'm a pistol cal carbine fan, though most of my experience with them is through lever action models.

I always looked at it from a hand loader's perspective. I can make .357 mag rounds for a lot cheaper than most rifle rounds.

As far as the semi-auto models go, I handled a ruger PC carbine in .40 s&w a while back, and it seemed pretty nifty. Light, short, could easily be fired one handed if need be. While it may not be any better than a shotgun or AR-15, I doubt it's any worse. I'm not sure it matters much what a person uses at inside the house distances (excepting rimfires, maybe). Generally speaking, longguns are easier to master than handguns, so that gives a pistol carbine one advantage over a handgun.

I hope Marlin soon chambers an 1894 in the .327 Fed. Coupled with the Ruger, 7 shot GP-100, most home defense needs would be taken care of.

I'm just looking forward to the MSAR Carbine that is supposed to come out shortly!

I've always said that if I could find a used Sub-2000 in .40 for a good price ($200 or less), I'd pick one up. That said, I freely admit there is really no practical use for it in my arsenal. Every one of my needs is pretty much met already.

I got to witness and shoot a brand new Sub2000 40S&W Glock mag version, 50 rounds of Win Ranger TC-FMJ. The 4th round caught on the barrel face and had to be re-fed, otherwise it functioned perfect. Recoil was not heavy but what there is hits with a sharp rap and as others have said the buttstock is not well shaped. Brass looks fine and the Ranger stuff burns real clean. The proud new owner is planning a change to the buttstock and dreaming about mounting a laser sight in the forearm.
Neat gun.

buttstock is not well shaped

Click to expand...

That buttstock is shaped perfectly!
... For folding

Chances are that after some real shooting (as in a couple hundred rounds) you won't see any more teething issues.
Mine happily eats Wolf, Brown Bear, WWB, or Federal cheapo stuff, as well as Gold Dots and whatever other old HP rounds were rattling around after being chambered too many times for my comfort. I wouldn't feed it anything special for target ammo, it eats the cheap stuff like candy.

This question comes up every 2 1/2 minutes. People tend to concentrate on the lack of firepower of a PCC, and downplay the advantages, which can be substantial.

A PCC:

1. Is much more concealable than most full on rifles
2. A little added power to the round.
3. Has a longer sight radius and/or allows you to use a scope
4. Magazine compatibility with your sidearm
5. Ammo compatibility with your sidearm

Item one tends to only apply to the Sub2k, but to me is a compelling argument; a PCC that can be stowed in a laptop or messenger bag and thus carried on your person beats an AR in the trunk of your car. Item two is to me the least compelling, because, at the end of the day, it's still a pistol round. But that's somewhat mitigated by 3; people tend to be more accurate, more easily, with a carbine than a pistol, which means shot placement is easier, allowing you (or an occassional shooter that you may want/need to arm) to get the most out of the round. And that feeds into 4 and 5, which are huge; if I've got a pistol and and AR and a couple of mags for both, and either weapon ends up out of the fight, the ammo for that gun is a nice paperweight. I've got a pistol and a Sub2k, I've got two weapons that will take all the ammunition and magazines on me. Ammo/mag compatibility is a huge advantage, because that gives you extra redundancy at your critical points. Yes, it's redundancy at the cost of power, but since a pistol caliber will handle the vast majority of SD situations if I do my bit, I don't think not having ultimate penetrating power will be an issue all that often. I think it's a reasonable kit if you have to travel super light, and/or be on foot someplace where an openly displayed gun would be an issue.

Although, as soon as someone invents a concealable .308 pistol that takes FAL mags, I'm all over that.

I'm a fan of PCCs. Even in SBR format, you get the increased stability that a rifle affords you, plus an increase in FPS and round count over a pistol. As mentioned, these carbines are usually lighter in weight, yet the recoil much less than a similar sized .223/5.56mm carbine. They are much cheaper to practice with, easier to train non-enthusiasts with, and when stocked with "go time" ammo, they are a formidable force.

I'm glad to have one in the stable.

Me too. I have the pocket version.

Classic!

I've been lusting hard after a .40cal AR-pattern carbine to be SBR'd in the future.

Accurate, cheap ammo, I can use it on my local "run-and-gun" pistol range, ammo and magazine commonality, whats not to like?

Here is one I ran across. It looks like it is based around the AR concept, but simplified. It is from a fairly new company, maybe 2 years old.

Retail price for their entry level rifle is under $660.00.

Glock-mag Sub2000 9mm- with folding scope mount no less. It's wicked fun at the range, and where else can you get a scoped rifle with 33 round mags that fits in a gym bag?