herrwalther
Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 8,136
I think firearms have gotten much lighter in the last 40 years. I have a pocket .380 from the 70's and it weighs 22 oz unloaded. All due to all stainless steel frame and slide.
Are Handguns Getting Too Heavy?
- Thread starter Confederate
- Start date
- Status
InkEd
Member
I think age is catching up to you.
60 is not old but it's not 40 and definitely not 20.
60 is not old but it's not 40 and definitely not 20.
Godsgunman
Member
Too heavy? All I see is the contrary, guns getting to small and light. If you ask me these small lightweight guns don't help anyone except maybe with concealability whcih they are designed for. I like my revolvers steel along with my semis and have no issue with concealing either. I can shoot airweight snubs and tupperware light semis accurately enough, I just don't like shooting them as much. I personally like the taming effect a steel .357 revolver has over a lightweight scadmium or airweight revolver. Weights not an issue until its to light to shoot comfortably to get the needed practice in. To each his own, steel is what I prefer.
marv
Member
At 80 I've noticed my K frames and Security Six have gotten a bunch heavier. I've found that plastic is my friend.
Certaindeaf
member
AR-15's are getting too heavy. I think the "average" one weighs like twelve pounds now. lolz
I am going to have to say the opposite is true. Small guns have exploded and you have much more options than ever before (can still get the Beretta in 22 and 25). Light pocket guns are much more abundant and of better quality than ever before
InkEd
Member
I will agree with AR-15s getting to heavy from all the crap being bolt on them.
45_auto
Member
cosmoline said:
In reality, balance has been improved by ease of manufacturing, and with improved firepower has come additional grace.
cosmoline said:
That's because the balance point (center of gravity) is closer to your hand with the Redhawk, just like a loaded high-capacity plastic semi-auto (due to those improved manufacturing techniques) with all the weight in the grip. The weight has less leverage on your arm and wrist to cause "droop".
My Colt M4/LE6920 has very light Magpul furniture on it and no accessories. I can shoot accurately with just the iron back up sights which are also very light. The addition of a red dot or small scope wouldn't add much weight either.
AR-15's are getting heavier because people are CHOOSING to hang too much stuff off of them. The rifle itself is a light as ever.
Consideration needs to be given to "bulk", in handguns. The aforementioned Glock may only weigh 30oz, loaded, but every Glock I've handled, and owned, was bulky, especially the models which are "double stack". The same goes for any steel-framed semi-auto that is higher capacity (Beretta Model 92, e.g.).
With a revolver, even an N-frame S&W, I can put a different set of stocks on one, and it becomes eminently more comfortable. The original Giancalo Alves target stocks for N frames obviously were designed for a silver-back gorilla. However, I've found that Ahrend's stocks fit me perfectly, and make N frame .44 mags easier to control.
I own a Colt New Service Model of 1917, and a S&W Model of 1917, and the original stocks on both are horrible. However, I have put Pachmayr Presentation stocks on them, and they're comfortable to carry and shoot.
However, there's nothing on earth which make a Beretta 92 comfortable to shoot. The frame is just too wide.
With a revolver, even an N-frame S&W, I can put a different set of stocks on one, and it becomes eminently more comfortable. The original Giancalo Alves target stocks for N frames obviously were designed for a silver-back gorilla. However, I've found that Ahrend's stocks fit me perfectly, and make N frame .44 mags easier to control.
I own a Colt New Service Model of 1917, and a S&W Model of 1917, and the original stocks on both are horrible. However, I have put Pachmayr Presentation stocks on them, and they're comfortable to carry and shoot.
However, there's nothing on earth which make a Beretta 92 comfortable to shoot. The frame is just too wide.
Cosmoline
Member
I have not found that to be the case. Handling an OP or PPS, I immediately feel at home with the piece. It becomes an extension of the hand, and aims very naturally. Those folks spent a long time tuning the shape of the handgun in deference to the hand. The only problems I've run into have been that hand have gotten bigger, but a T grip fixes that issue.
hemiram
Member
Wow, it's really interesting how this subject, and so many others, divides gun people. I like heavy guns, the heavier, the better, to a certain point. I only currently have one single "plastic" gun, a Kel-Tec SUB2000, that takes Beretta 92 mags. How could anyone think a 92's grip is too wide? It's about perfect! A 1911's grip isn't wide enough, and it's too deep. Another nearly perfect grip is the CZ-75's. At this point, having had to sell most of my collection off, I only have one aluminum framed gun, a Beretta 84BB. If they made an all steel 84, I would have bought it. The only gun I have that's actually too heavy to lug around is my Dan Wesson 44.
mljdeckard
Member
Dunno. I sometimes carry a Para wide-frame 1911, it's about as massive as it gets.
I think our perception of guns weights is often very wrong and everyone has a different definition of perfect balance. Many "assume" some guns weigh more or less than others. Many companies advertise guns as "featherweight", "lightweight", etc., but when put on scales and weighed they are in fact heavier than most other companies standard weight guns.
Everyone assumes any rifle or shotgun with a synthetic stock is lighter than a gun with a wood stock. Not true, most factroy synthetic stocks are the same weight and very often heavier than wood. You don't get lightweight synthetics until you hit the $600 price range.
Most folks assume a N frame Smith is a lot heavier than an L frame. With 4" barrels they are about 1 oz heavier, with longer barrels the L frame guns are heavier than N frames.
Picking up a set of postal scales to accurately weigh guns, scopes, accessories was one of the best purchases I made. Weights listed in catalogs and on companies websites are often incorrect and many, many guns will fool you. I often see people on the internet recommend gun "A" vs gun "B" because gun "B" is too heavy, or too light. My postal scales have proven the opposite to be true in many cases.
Everyone assumes any rifle or shotgun with a synthetic stock is lighter than a gun with a wood stock. Not true, most factroy synthetic stocks are the same weight and very often heavier than wood. You don't get lightweight synthetics until you hit the $600 price range.
Most folks assume a N frame Smith is a lot heavier than an L frame. With 4" barrels they are about 1 oz heavier, with longer barrels the L frame guns are heavier than N frames.
Picking up a set of postal scales to accurately weigh guns, scopes, accessories was one of the best purchases I made. Weights listed in catalogs and on companies websites are often incorrect and many, many guns will fool you. I often see people on the internet recommend gun "A" vs gun "B" because gun "B" is too heavy, or too light. My postal scales have proven the opposite to be true in many cases.
JRs12Valve
Member
mljdeckard
Member
If it held 15 shots I might consider it.
wally
Member
I don't know, with guns like the S&W SC360 weighing in at 13.5 oz fully loaded with 5 158gr .357 magnum rounds, I might ask if maybe they are getting too light for the power level.
Are handguns getting heavier? Compared to what?
Ye olde (1847) Colt Walker, 4.5 lbs.
Ye almost as olde 1848 Colt Dragoon, 4.25 lbs.
Ye still pretty durn olde Colt 1860 Army, ~2.7 lbs (43 oz).
And I had a friend tell me the 1860 was too long and heavy.
So no, I don't think handguns are generally getting heavier. I think the trend is (generally) lighter.
Ye olde (1847) Colt Walker, 4.5 lbs.
Ye almost as olde 1848 Colt Dragoon, 4.25 lbs.
Ye still pretty durn olde Colt 1860 Army, ~2.7 lbs (43 oz).
And I had a friend tell me the 1860 was too long and heavy.
So no, I don't think handguns are generally getting heavier. I think the trend is (generally) lighter.
In an effort to lighten up I recently acquired a light S&W snubnose .357. This weekend I took it to the mountains on a camping trip and shot it for the first time with real manly +P 158 grainers. The result, in two words - HOLY MOLY! I am a longtime shooter and a one-time powerlifter, but lost feeling in my hand in less than one cylinderful. Never again. I now know why the ultralight .357s are virtually unusable in real life. I'll swallow my pride and get a heavier model next time.
Richard
Richard
aka108
Member
When you get old small arms get heavier. So does a sheet of sheetrock and the 40 lb bag of dog food feel like 80lbs. When I first went into the military I was issued a M1 Garand. Never thought it was heavy. Now 50+ years later I wondered how I carried the thing around all day. So far as handguns go I still like the heft of a all steel piece. Everything almost on the market seems like it was made by Mattel. Can't get into plastic.
Just my opinion, but I believe that handguns have become so light that many people are "surprised" when they pick up an old school all steel gun. We now live in a world where people are unwilling to have to manually roll down their car window or adjust the seat position or roll up a garage door without having an electric motor do the work. Or mow their lawn without sitting on a tractor. Or open a can of beans without an electric can opener. Yes, I know it becomes harder when you age, I am 60 and I still haven't bought an electric garage opener. I still fix my own cars and climb up on the roof and clean the gutters. And carry an all steel S&W revolver. We are becoming mentally and physically like children.
We are becoming mentally and physically like children.
MTMilitiaman
Member
I think it is exactly the opposite. With 49 states allowing for some sort of concealed carry by private citizens, handgun manufactures are pumping out ultra-tiny mouseguns at record levels. These days, I visit the gun counter and I can't even get my ring and/or pinky fingers on the grips of half the guns in the case.
Even among duty sized guns, the use of polymer and alloy is never been more popular. My Glock 20 has twice the capacity of my grandpa's 1911 but weighs less loaded than the 1911 does unloaded. It's thicker and blockier, but definately not "bigger."
Even among duty sized guns, the use of polymer and alloy is never been more popular. My Glock 20 has twice the capacity of my grandpa's 1911 but weighs less loaded than the 1911 does unloaded. It's thicker and blockier, but definately not "bigger."
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
I stopped after the first shot.
I'd carry hot .38's in that one. I really like the tried and proven 158 grain LSWCHP +P, but I'm looking at the Gold Dot Short barrel load as a possible alternative.
I have a 642 and 442 (pre-lock) and can't justify $700+ to save 3 oz, but if I bought a 342, it'd never see a magnum.
- Status
Similar threads
