best pistol caliber for carbine?

[Ironballs]

I am looking at the Mech-Tech Carbine Conversion Unit, and considering i can use my various glocks to shoot just about anything from the setup (*can only choose one), and so what caliber would be the most flexible/work the best for this setup.

I have a Glock 21 which with the CCU can be setup to shoot either .45 or 10mm

I have a Glock 34 which can be setup to shoot 9mm, .40S&W, or .357Sig.

the barrel on the unit itself is 16.25" wiht a 1in16" twist.

Sure the 9mm is the cheapest, the .45 would be the most fun (whatever that means),.. but i think the most benifit to be had from the longer barrel, would be to the .357sig (velocity would be awesome i would think), and to the 10mm, which has the widest variety of loadings (though i do not see myself reloading to take the most advantage of this)...

any thoughts from out there in THR land?

 

[MCgunner]

My favorite is .357 magnum for versatility, everything from rabbits and squirrels with light .38s to deer size game out to 100 yards. But, for pure power, consider the .44 magnum or .45 Colt.

Of course, these are for revolving pistols, but I have no interest in auto pistol calibers in long guns, pretty much useless. Anything I can do with one, I can do with a .22 long rifle. So, I'd guess as auto pistol calibers go, I prefer the .22 long rifle.

 

[priv8ter]

depends

Like MCgunner, my initial thought when I read your thread title was: .357...duh! But, with your choices:

You don't really say what you want to use it for...

If you were looking to have a fun-to-shoot plinker carbine, then I would choose the 9mm, just for the reason you mentioned: $

I tend to be a utilty type person though, and if I was going to get a carbine with the choices you have, then I would probably pick the 10mm, to put the biggest hurt possible down-range. Imagine showing up in deer camp with a 10mm converted glock.

greg

 

[nitesite]

I've gotta go with the .40S&W cartridge.

Readily available ammo everywhere. And I mean everywhere.
Several (dozen) inexpensive thru premium loadings offered to satisfy any budget.
100 rounds of WWB/S&B/etc costs only $1-3 more per hundred over 9mm.
You can't find 9mm bullets weighing over 147-gr. Well, not easily anyway.
I would imagine you could easily get up to 1300+ fps from some factory ammo.
If the chamber is fully supported then reloading is fairly uncomplicated.
Blazer non-reloadable ammo means not having to pick up brass.

 

[Srigs]

My favorite is 40S&W. My Hi Point carbine in 40 is a blast to shoot and matches my primary (non-Hi Point) handgun.

 

[Marshall]

.357 Mag.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

Not sure what your plans are for it.

If it's plinking then the 9mm since it's cheap. If you want something with more power then get the 10mm and buy the hottest ammo you can get (Double Tap comes to mind). With the longer barrel you should see some gain in velocity.

I also am with the other guys in .357, but that's not an option here.

 

[Ironballs]

plinking for sure, but 'you never know' situations have to be factored into the mix as well. But for 9mm, i dont know if their would be any advantage over my pistol... same for .45

so the basic quetion is, which of those given rounds would show the most benifit/difference from going to a longer bbl (from a short, say 5" pistol barrel)

 

[MCgunner]

I've seen articles on pistol caliber carbines and from what I remember, neither the 9 or the .45 shows much gain from a rifle. The main benefit is it's easier to shoot at longer ranges. That's why I'm not interested. You can't carry the thing concealed and I prefer a shotgun for long gun self defense and if I'm going to choose a rifle for self defense, it'll be my folding stock SKS in 7.62x39 or my Rossi M92 lever carbine in .357 magnum.

The magnum pistol calibers show GOOD gains in performance from a carbine. My little Rossi sports a 20" barrel. I notice Buffalo Bore loads claim almost .30-30 ballistics for the .357 from a carbine. Most I can get from a handload is about 1200 ft lbs, but that's good enough that it's tested deadly to 100 yards on a fairly decent buck with my 158 grain SWC handload. If it performs as published, that Buffalo Bore 180 grain load is amazing!

I wish I had some numbers to show you on the .45 and 9mm, but it's been a while since I read that article. I just remember there wasn't much more than a hundred foot lbs energy difference using the longer barrel. Now, that's understandable to me because the 9 and .45 use a quite fast burning pistol powder where the magnum revolver cartridges use almost rifle like slower powders that really benefit from the longer barrels. The same thing that makes the 9 really efficient out of a 3" compact gun is the same thing that makes it inefficient out of a 16" carbine.

The only use I'd have for such a gun is plinking and I can do that with much cheaper .22LR ammo (and do a lot). I have three .22 semi autos and a .22 bolt action to play with, all the plinking I need. My favorite plinker is a 10/22 with iron sights. I plink some with my Rossi using .38s loaded with 2.3 grains bullseye under a 105 grain cast SWC from a Lee mold. This thing is about as accurate as my 10/22, can put 'em into an inch at 25 yards, easily. And, casting a hundred rounds of those bullets doesn't use much lead and loading a hunrdred rounds doesn't use much powder. It pretty much duplicates what I can do with a .22, yet I can load it with a 158 grain gas checked SWC from another Lee mold over 14.5 grains of 2400 and go deer hunting with the same gun with just an elevation change on the rear sight. You simply can't get that kind of versatility from an auto pistol cartridge. If you wouldn't shoot it with the handgun (IE deer hunting), you can't use the rifle for it.

If I had to pick between the two calibers, and I have handguns in both calibers, I'd choose 9mm just for the fact that factory ammo is so dirt cheap. I reload for both calibers, but it's nice to have the option of cheap factory ammo when you're lazy. Either caliber out of a carbine is adequate for short range self defense, just like the handguns. But, neither turns into a cannon with a longer barrel.

 

[Just_a_dude_with_a_gun]

10mm is expensive. .357sig is costly as well. Great things sometimes have great costs.

I would have to say .40 for the win/win, but 9mm is good and cheap.

I tend go through more volume with the carbines, so 9mm has squarely
established it's merit there. .40 being the "in between all of them" as far as power, availability, and affordability is what I would chose.

 

[lyricsdad]

Myself i would get a .357 henry, or marlin lever action (you can also shoot .38s through it). But I have been wanting to get a 9mm cx4 carbine from beretta. I would post this in the rifle forum.

 

[taliv]

you want the .45acp for several reasons

1. it's subsonic, so it works well with a can
2. mass
3. it's very cheap and safer to reload (much lower pressures) and wide variety of bullets available


i'm a big fan of pistol caliber carbines

 

[Brian Williams]

To shoot a lot with what you spec'ed, Mag-tech & Glock, 9mm
To be a workhorse and do the job with what you spec'ed, Mag-tech & glock, 45 acp

To do it my way, a Marlin 1894C and 357 handloaded with Lil' gun and 165 GR LSWCGC.

 

[Lou629]

I have a 9mm CX-4 by beretta and a .357/.38 lever gun by Rossi. Both are a lot of fun to shoot, and very accurate out to 100 yards or so with open sights. ( I can do better with the beretta, the sights on the thing are awesome right out of the box )

Given the price increases with ammo lately, i can shoot three 9mm rounds for the price of a single .357, and 2/1 over the .38 spl. If it's ever likely to come down to the cost of shooting for you, then the 9mm is the way to go, because those carbines, especially the auto-loaders, are also ammo-eaters when you're having a ton of fun!

 

[MCgunner]

I have a 9mm CX-4 by beretta and a .357/.38 lever gun by Rossi. Both are a lot of fun to shoot, and very accurate out to 100 yards or so with open sights. ( I can do better with the beretta, the sights on the thing are awesome right out of the box )

The buckhorn sight on my Rossi was really high when I got it, couldn't lower it enough. I had an aperture off an old bolt action single shot .22 I used to have that fit the dove tail slot. I unscrewed the disc out of it effectively making it a perfect ghost ring. To top it all off, it has a very repeatable elevation wheel that makes it easy to adjust for the load I'm shooting. The stock buckhorn is but a distant memory. With a good sight, that little rifle packs a whollop out at 100 yards and shoots about 4 moa with my 158 grain gas checked load and the aperture sight. Makes it easy to tag a deer right out to its maximum effective range of 100 yards.

If I hadn't had that sight, I'd have been looking into having a receiver peep, a Williams or Lyman or something, drilled/tapped/installed. That stock buckhorn was terrible. Friend of mine has a beautiful pre-64 94 Winchester .30-30 with a receiver sight and it's wonderful to shoot. I drool every time he breaks out that old rifle. It's easy to shoot 2 MOA with that sight and factory ammo. Who needs a scope?

 

[enfield]

My "pistol-caliber carbine" is a .44 mag Marlin 1894.

 

[KINGMAX]

.44 Magnum

I own a RUGER Deerfield Carbine, and A RUGER SuperHawk, both in .44 magnum. That is one of my hunting pair. All I need is just one type of ammo.

 

[Plink]

I think you'd get the most benefit from a 10mm in the longer barrel. The .357 Sig would probably push the bullets faster than their performance envelope and cause fragmentation. The 10mm would make a dang fine hunting gun also.

I have a 9mm carbine that I adore. It's one of my favorite plinking guns and it's cheap to shoot. With the right loads, it picks up a pretty good boost in velocity, and there's a lot of merit for self defense situations, but it's still too light to do much hunting with, though I have taken hogs with it.

 

[Ironballs]

i think .40 S&W wins it...

Again, I would think the 10mm and the .357sig would show the most promise from the longer bbl, due to the higher velocities/loadings, etc,... but taking price into account...(having just done my fare share of net pricing)...

9mm being the cheapest,... i find that the .40 is hardly much more money for ammo, and has a wide variety available as well. The jump to .45 and .357sig and 10mm is a much greater jump % wise (huge actually)... to the point that the .40 seems to be the best -bang for the buck- in this process...

Thanks all for the guidance.. mostly revolving around $$ and performance... and the compromises there-of.

 

[Oldnamvet]

I would love a .41 mag.

 

[MCgunner]

but taking price into account...(having just done my fare share of net pricing)...

Anyone who worries about the cost of ammo should consider reloading. I can reload about any cartridge minus the cost of brass for under $3 a box by casting the bullets. Of course, autochucker miff me off when I can't find the brass. LOL I can bring home more 9mm, .40, or .45 than I shoot, though, because of the folks that don't reload and leave the brass on the range, so I guess I shouldn't promote reloading so much.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Of your choices, the 10mm has both the most power to begin with and the most potential for improvement in a longer barrel, especially if loaded with slower burning powders. I have carbines in 9mm and .45 and have had .40, and there just isn't much gain going from 5" to 16". Even loading with slow powders, the most I've gained from those was a couple hundred FPS, usually less.

 

[1557]

For versatility,a 357 mag lever gun.Try Buffalo Bore loads. More downrange energy than the 30-30.