Are Pistol Caliber Carbines relevant these days?
- Thread starter Panzercat
- Start date
- Status
Yes, they are relevant. They have a niche. They can do things that nothing else can.
But they only fill a niche, they aren't going to be an extremely popular thing that every gun enthusiast has an example of.
Currently this would be true for either of my parents. They have not yet applied for/received their handgun carry licenses, but in their state long gun carry is legal, open or concealed, without a license. Just one example. There are multiple states with laws like this.
But they only fill a niche, they aren't going to be an extremely popular thing that every gun enthusiast has an example of.
Currently this would be true for either of my parents. They have not yet applied for/received their handgun carry licenses, but in their state long gun carry is legal, open or concealed, without a license. Just one example. There are multiple states with laws like this.
Interesting, thanks. Undoubtedly living in a state with very permissive firearms laws makes it harder for me to see a time it would be done.
I'd still question the utility though. Would buying a sub2k would be a better solution than simply getting a permit. Admittedly it might be something that could be done in a shorter time frame than getting a permit if some immediate threat cropped up. However, it would be far from an ideal or particularly useful concealed carry option for lots of situations. The time it takes to get the gun out, fold it open, and slap the charging handle MP5 style to send the bolt home is well below my personal threshold for deploying a concealed carry weapon and getting a first round hit (if you are going to open carry then there is nothing of particular not to recommend the Sub2k save perhaps that it is light and relatively small but so are some other guns). I've played around with this a fair amount with some friends that also have sub 2ks. My experience was that deployment varied from slower than I'd like to absurdly slow depending on how the gun was being carried. Now I suppose it is better than nothing in a pinch. However, before I went out and bought one for that purpose, devised an acceptable concealed carry rig, practiced deploying the gun, etc, I would likely simply get a carry permit.
I do like the sub 2k for when I want to discreetly bring something more than a pistol along with me. Although since getting into SBRs the Sub2k doesn't hold as big a monopoly on that role. Of course the kel tec is MUCH less expensive than any of those SBRs and easier to acquire, but it is also a much less robust/well made gun too. When folded it is a good 9-10" shorter than any other non SBR rifle I'm aware of.
Not trying to be difficult, but again simply trying to see and think past my own shortsightedness. What, in terms of function, are some things they do that a rifle simply can't. I can't think of much, and not much that is particularly meaningful that I can do with a PCC that I can't do (and often do better) with a gun chambered in a rifle caliber. About all I'm coming up with is share ammo/mags with my pistol. Something might be said for cost of shooting as well.
I'd still question the utility though. Would buying a sub2k would be a better solution than simply getting a permit. Admittedly it might be something that could be done in a shorter time frame than getting a permit if some immediate threat cropped up. However, it would be far from an ideal or particularly useful concealed carry option for lots of situations. The time it takes to get the gun out, fold it open, and slap the charging handle MP5 style to send the bolt home is well below my personal threshold for deploying a concealed carry weapon and getting a first round hit (if you are going to open carry then there is nothing of particular not to recommend the Sub2k save perhaps that it is light and relatively small but so are some other guns). I've played around with this a fair amount with some friends that also have sub 2ks. My experience was that deployment varied from slower than I'd like to absurdly slow depending on how the gun was being carried. Now I suppose it is better than nothing in a pinch. However, before I went out and bought one for that purpose, devised an acceptable concealed carry rig, practiced deploying the gun, etc, I would likely simply get a carry permit.
I do like the sub 2k for when I want to discreetly bring something more than a pistol along with me. Although since getting into SBRs the Sub2k doesn't hold as big a monopoly on that role. Of course the kel tec is MUCH less expensive than any of those SBRs and easier to acquire, but it is also a much less robust/well made gun too. When folded it is a good 9-10" shorter than any other non SBR rifle I'm aware of.
Not trying to be difficult, but again simply trying to see and think past my own shortsightedness. What, in terms of function, are some things they do that a rifle simply can't. I can't think of much, and not much that is particularly meaningful that I can do with a PCC that I can't do (and often do better) with a gun chambered in a rifle caliber. About all I'm coming up with is share ammo/mags with my pistol. Something might be said for cost of shooting as well.
Semi automatic pistol caliber carbines still have a role in the defensive world. They're effective for defense and pest control. If you pick a widely used caliber then the ammunition choice can be customized to the specific situation you might need it for.
I don't think it is something that has been pressed any where near as far as it can go. What is needed is a PCC in a M1 Carbine formfactor with a matching pistol chambered in 10mm Auto. Something like that would give you a very serious PDW and and makes sharing ammo between two firearms easy.
It is also nice for places like Chicago where there are occasional random denials for trying to register a semi-auto. Also given supply line annoyances, it is nicer to stock as few as different types of cartridges as possible more so than usual.
It is also nice for places like Chicago where there are occasional random denials for trying to register a semi-auto. Also given supply line annoyances, it is nicer to stock as few as different types of cartridges as possible more so than usual.
Besides shooting the same slightly less expensive and far less effective ammo as a pistol I'm hard pressed to think of a shot a 9mm or 45 carbine could make that my blackout can't do.
On the other hand coming up with shortcomings of 9mm and 45 carbines is easy.
PorkChopsMmm
Member
mavracer -- I love the blackout round and have plans to build an AR in that caliber someday. But I think you are missing that some PCC's, not all, are smaller than regular rifles and carry easier. For example, my Rossi 92 lever carbine in 357 does not have a magazine hanging down from the balancing point of the receiver and is very easy to carry. I know, I have other ARs, and they are just harder to carry in the hand, more bulky, etc. because of having an external magazine and other things going-on on the receiver.
Sure, the external mag and larger round provide more firepower in both potency and quantity but that may not always be needed.
I built an AR for carrying around on my land. I figured it was light, short, and would make a great ranch rifle. I quickly started looking for something else when trying to press it into service. I don't need what the 223 or 300 BO can offer at the ranges I would be shooting (and my ears wouldn't want to take it) and I want to be able to carry the rifle easily. The 92 lever action gives me all of that in a handle package that feels like carrying a small stick -- a small stick that can shoot cat whisper loads or hot 357 loads that start touching 30-30 territory.
The above is specific for lever action PCC's. If we are talking Beretta Storms or the like than I think an AR is much more comparable, basically the same size, and both have an external mag, so it is a wash. In those cases, barring mag compatibility or caliber consolidation, I don't see much of a use for them.
Sure, the external mag and larger round provide more firepower in both potency and quantity but that may not always be needed.
I built an AR for carrying around on my land. I figured it was light, short, and would make a great ranch rifle. I quickly started looking for something else when trying to press it into service. I don't need what the 223 or 300 BO can offer at the ranges I would be shooting (and my ears wouldn't want to take it) and I want to be able to carry the rifle easily. The 92 lever action gives me all of that in a handle package that feels like carrying a small stick -- a small stick that can shoot cat whisper loads or hot 357 loads that start touching 30-30 territory.
The above is specific for lever action PCC's. If we are talking Beretta Storms or the like than I think an AR is much more comparable, basically the same size, and both have an external mag, so it is a wash. In those cases, barring mag compatibility or caliber consolidation, I don't see much of a use for them.
That's a pretty big advantage to a person who already has that less expensive pistol ammo. Especially if the carbine even takes the same magazines as the pistol. And especially when you carry both with you. Only one magazine with one round for both...a most efficient situation, that is.
MCgunner
Member
Mmm, ammo availablity in BFE? Just a thought. It's something all the .30-06 fanatics always seem to think is important. Being a handloader, I never really cared.
Vern Humphrey
Member
You're talking about the M3A1. They were standard issue to tankers, since they were short enough to be conveniently stowed -- a good example of adopting a piece of equipment whose sole virtue is that it's convenient when you're not using it.
When I was an adviser, I kept an M3A1 (obtained by trade) in my jeep. A couple of times, I shot it. I was not impressed.
I think you missed my first post. Magnum levers are very useful little guns, however just to play devils advocate I would point out that '94 Winchester and Marlin 336 actions have all the same handling atributes as a '92 does and chambered in 35 remington would be capable of shooting any bullet your 92 can. 10gr of unique with a 158gr cast LRN makes a nice light small game load in a 35.
You can load rifle rounds down to handgun velocities, doesn't work the other way around so well.
Warp I agreed with expense and common rounds, can you come with any thing else useful.
BTW a carbine chambered in 22 long rifle would be even less expensive though.
Vern Humphrey
Member
And that's the point. The typical rifle-cartridge carbine is just as light and handy as the typical pistol-cartridge carbine, and the rifle cartridge can do everything the pistol cartridge can do, but not vice-versa.
PorkChopsMmm
Member
I would argue with the Rossi 92 357 and Marlin 336 35 Remington comparison. The 92 weight is listed as a little over 5 lbs, the 336 weighs 7 lbs. That's a near 30% difference in weight. I agree the 35 Remington can offer much more punch than 357 -- but it is a rifle cartridge and is not compatible with a revolver, for example. There are reloading benefits but I think the weight and cartridge of the 35 Remington take it out of the PCC comparison.
With my needs I had the option of going 336 in 35 Remington and didn't want to because it is a large rifle that doesn't balance as well at the receiver, weighs more, and the cartridge would have too much recoil and muzzle blast if the barrel was cut down to 16".
With my needs I had the option of going 336 in 35 Remington and didn't want to because it is a large rifle that doesn't balance as well at the receiver, weighs more, and the cartridge would have too much recoil and muzzle blast if the barrel was cut down to 16".
Those are exceptionally useful things, and you neglected to mention ammunition compatibility, potential magazine compatibility, and magazine size.
BCRider
Member
Well it seems to be coming down to "it depends on...".
It depends on the user's intended variety of possible targets.
It depends on how far out you want to extend your ability to deal with varmints or targets.
It depends on how big a deal it is to be able to directly share ammo and/or magazines with handguns.
It depends on how much noise is tolerable in the intended places of use.
It depends on how much cost for ammo you can tolerate when shooting the gun for fun vs defense or varmint control.
Did I miss any?
All in all it's pretty clear that some of you see little or no need for PCC's and would rather have a compact rifle in a proper rifle caliber. Others think that they are just the right tool due to a variety of the "it depends on" factors leaning the other way for their situations.
It depends on the user's intended variety of possible targets.
It depends on how far out you want to extend your ability to deal with varmints or targets.
It depends on how big a deal it is to be able to directly share ammo and/or magazines with handguns.
It depends on how much noise is tolerable in the intended places of use.
It depends on how much cost for ammo you can tolerate when shooting the gun for fun vs defense or varmint control.
Did I miss any?
All in all it's pretty clear that some of you see little or no need for PCC's and would rather have a compact rifle in a proper rifle caliber. Others think that they are just the right tool due to a variety of the "it depends on" factors leaning the other way for their situations.
I can't think of a single "which firearm" question or topic that doesn't come down to "it depends".
The problem, as with most things, is that some people believe everybody else should come to the same conclusions and make the same decisions and buy the same items as themselves, and there is simply no other legitimate option or alternative.
The problem, as with most things, is that some people believe everybody else should come to the same conclusions and make the same decisions and buy the same items as themselves, and there is simply no other legitimate option or alternative.
BCRider
Member
Very true... very true...
Obviously no one single firearm can do every single thing and handle every cocneivable situation in an optimal manner.
I thought that was implied and understood.
Vern Humphrey
Member
True.
But note that people who have to be prepared to handle every conceivable situation at any time -- armies, for example -- tend to come down on the side of a rifle as the best choice.
Under this logic nobody should ever choose a shotgun for, well, anything.
And nobody should choose a handgun for, well, anything.
Or a .22lr.
Or a bolt action.
Or a lever action.
Or, or, or....you get the idea?
The fact is that different people in different circumstances have different uses for different firearms, and what works best for them in a given situation may not be what works best for somebody else.
And most people aren't going to be overly concerned with how effective their personal defensive firearm is at 300 yards. The odds of that ever being an issue are slim to none, anyway.
- Status
