Is the pistol-caliber carbine/sub-gun functionally obsolete?

justice06rr said:

Way more 5.56/223 here than 9mm. The only 9mm available are expensive JHP's. So for practice and range use, it is not reasonable.

For a 5.56 vs 9mm in a 16" Carbine, the 5.56 is the clear winner no matter what. The only advantage of the 9mm Carbine is probably less noise.

Click to expand...

Depending on the pistol caliber rifle, it may be possible to use cast lead bullets. A 9mm or .38 round only uses a few grains of powder, so you get a lot of rounds out of a pound. If you reload, I think you could make a pistol caliber carbine pretty competitive.

I haven't gotten set up for it, but I imagine my VZ61 in 32acp is an incredibly cheap date for a reloader

We weren't exactly swimming in 223 relative to 9mm a few years ago; only fools buy based on what's available currently (though I will likely end up chambering my 7.62x25 project gun in a "wildcat" based on 223-thickness brass rather than true x25 dimensions)

TCB

Obsolete or not, my pair of 9mm AR SBRs, a dueling tree steel plate target, two shooters and 1000 rounds of 9mm go bye-bye very fast with everyone grinning ear-to ear!

i hate to say it but, very few people liked the m16 or its ammo when it came out. but back in the day, EVERYONE was satisfied by the ol m3 grease gun and its short barrel in 45acp getting the job done, and the point across.

in pure fmj terms its a draw. however toss in a hollowpoint. 45acp WINS.

I saw a PS90 for $850 on slick guns the other day , with a 50 roung mag. That is a nice piece for not much more than a good pistol.

Being categorically one of the easiest to use defensively credible firearms around, pistol caliber carbines definitely have a place.

It's what I routinely recommend as the "entry level" home defense armament, as it provides formidable firepower and the fastest path to competence-at-arms.

Pistol bullets with some extra velocity at inside a building ranges? May be a specialist weapon in military or even law enforcement use with decreasing viability, but for home defense it will stop threats reliably and you can run them crazy fast (+/- specific design issues that may exist with particular weapon designs).

i hate to say it but, very few people liked the m16 or its ammo when it came out. but back in the day, EVERYONE was satisfied by the ol m3 grease gun and its short barrel in 45acp getting the job done, and the point across.

in pure fmj terms its a draw. however toss in a hollowpoint. 45acp WINS.

Click to expand...

Who are these very few people and how long ago are we talking about?

Geez welcome to the 21st century where we have better guns and ammo...

Bezoar said:

i hate to say it but, very few people liked the m16 or its ammo when it came out. but back in the day, EVERYONE was satisfied by the ol m3 grease gun and its short barrel in 45acp getting the job done, and the point across.

in pure fmj terms its a draw. however toss in a hollowpoint. 45acp WINS.

Click to expand...

You're saying that a 5.56 FMJ is equal to a .45 ACP FMJ, but a .45 ACP HP is better?

No, a 5.56 FMJ will cause a much more tissue damage than a .45 ACP HP. The only caveat would be if the 5.56 fails to fragment, then I can see the .45 ACP HP causing more trauma.

Light hypersonic rifle bullets behave completely differently in tissue than fat, slow pistol bullets and the wounding mechanism is different. I'll take a rifle chambering any day. A pistol carbine with light and RDS is still a solid HD choice though.

I have an M1 Carbine that I'm probably gonna throw a tiny RDS and light on, it's like a "tweener."

I think the main reason PC carbines aren't popular HD choices is other than the high point, they just cost too much.

In their original full auto form, Sub-machine guns work well for instant incapacitation of opponents, because an accurately delivered burst causes nearly instantaneous multiple bullet wounds which shut down numerous internal organs before the body can compensate. Much the same way a blast of large caliber buck-shot works.

In certain instances, the compact size, limited penetration and range, plus the ability for effective sound suppression make the true sub-gun the weapon of choice.

A longer semi-auto version looses the advantage of instant multiple hits and compact size.

-Compact Size: yes, also light weight. Even semi-autos with 16" barrels are substantially handier than an equivalent "rifle-rifle"
-Limited Penetration: not so much; they're worse than 223's (barring FMJ)
-Range: yes (b/c longer sight radius/more stable platform)
-Suppression: heck, yes (and even unsuppressed are much better than rifles)
-Capacity: big yes, compared to pistols (and some rifles)
-Retention: yes, compared to pistols (and old-school SMGs can be used as effective clubs)
-Cost: cheaper than any locked-breech, but our stupid open-bolt rules from the ATF mean expensive semi-auto FCGs must be used, which add complexity, cost, and require overall higher build quality than needed, thus negating this benefit in most cases (see Hi Point)

PDW cartridges give the above benefits with the addition of flat shooting for closer to rifle-like performance at 'battlefield' engagement distances over 100 yards. The current crop have slightly higher capacity, too, because they're little. Their rifle-like speed is more responsible for the armor defeating capability than anything about the cartridge/bullet themselves.

As far as effectiveness,
We have to remember the things shoot the same rounds as our favorite bet-my-life-upon pistols, and typically throw them a bit faster due to 16" barrel. In any case, what matters by far the most is getting round(s) on target, and a PCC gives you the accuracy of a shoulder-fired long arm, and the recovery times of a service pistol.

For the sake of argument, put aside caliber/ballistics, and the PCC's become far more competitive. I would then submit that all the cartridges available are similarly effective at interior distances (i.e. you have to hit pretty close to important stuff for a reliable stop, regardless). Everyone seems to think you'd need to practice multiple shot stops; my question is why would you ever practice single shot stops no matter what the chambering?

"Much the same way a blast of large caliber buck-shot works."
I suppose, except you can't "walk" buckshot onto a target, and at defense-distances (or even offensive clearing distances) buck-shot has the 'spread' of a slug (okay, maybe not that tight, but close). You also don't get nearly as many tries, in total, or per second.

TCB