Big Guns vs. Small Guns

GEM

Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Apr 11, 2004
Messages
11,780
Location
WNY
One of the best known trainers, Karl Rehn, has an article on big guns vs. small guns. He has been testing them in classes with shooters of various abilities for years. This is a summary piece:


Some conclusions: For skilled shooters the difference on big vs. small semis isn't that great but it is for less skilled. On revolvers vs. small semis:

What About Small Revolvers?

Snub nosed pistols vs subcompact


Snub-nosed revolvers are easy to carry but harder to shoot for those used to shorter, lighter semi-automatic triggers. Those that chose a smaller gun that was the subcompact version of their bigger gun, or very similar to it, shot their smaller guns better. Only 32 percent of the snub shooters shot scores over 80 with both guns, compared to 64 percent of the subcompact shooters achieving the same feat.
Karl knows guns and training, so this is the real deal. Sadly, he's found that most concealed types never train beyond some trivial state requirement.
 
I looked over that article; there was a three second time limit for each draw and fire, but is this realistic? I've read the Armed Citizen section in the NRA magazine and the True Stories section in the USCCA magazine for a number of years and can't recall any encounters where a 'quick draw' was the deciding factor. It seems to me access to a firearm and willingness to use it were more important factors.
 
I looked over that article; there was a three second time limit for each draw and fire, but is this realistic? I've read the Armed Citizen section in the NRA magazine and the True Stories section in the USCCA magazine for a number of years and can't recall any encounters where a 'quick draw' was the deciding factor. It seems to me access to a firearm and willingness to use it were more important factors.
Three second seems quite generous, to me. That is definitely not “quick draw” speed.
 
I looked over that article; there was a three second time limit for each draw and fire, but is this realistic? I've read the Armed Citizen section in the NRA magazine and the True Stories section in the USCCA magazine for a number of years and can't recall any encounters where a 'quick draw' was the deciding factor. It seems to me access to a firearm and willingness to use it were more important factors.
Any drill needs to have some sort of standard, and that’s what the author chose
Also, 3 seconds is not blazing fast at all
If I ever have to draw/use my gun in self defense, I want it out and going as close to 0 seconds as humanly possible, definitely not as close to 3
 
With my instructor hat on, on the very rare opportunity to work with a potential student before the first gun purchase, I talk about the big versus small issue, emphasizing the trade-offs of comfortable carry and ease of accurate shooting. I had not even considered trying to convince them to buy two guns. Gun folks, like those who haunt THR, are likely to say, heck yeah, I DO need both. Newbies who have already bought their first gun because there was a mugging in their neighborhood are hard enough to get to take a basic safety class, much less dive into the costs of multiple guns, proper storage fro both, and regular training.
Rehn has good information, but how can we use that knowledge?
 
Valid points, but I'm sure most of us already agree on the shootability of big vs. small guns.
That said, I'm in the, "just have a gun of any size" camp instead of being unarmed.

I personally split the difference and mostly carry mid size or compact handguns.
 
I looked over that article; there was a three second time limit for each draw and fire, but is this realistic? I've read the Armed Citizen section in the NRA magazine and the True Stories section in the USCCA magazine for a number of years and can't recall any encounters where a 'quick draw' was the deciding factor. It seems to me access to a firearm and willingness to use it were more important factors.
Since these exercises are based on defensive shooting training, 3 seconds is a long time to meet an immediate threat. It might be quick enough, but your situational awareness better be ahead of the curve. Every time I've stepped to the line for an IDPA round, I have to remind myself that the target isn't going to be shooting back regardless of the scenario. Three seconds is enough there, but who knows how much or how little time you'll have elsewhere. You need to plan on as little as possible and train for that.
 
My oldest grandson was well under 2 seconds when he took his concealed carry class that is a requirement in NM. he said his instructor told him he was the fastest he had ever had in any of his classes. Of course most of us don't come equipped with super fast reflexes. We used to go to the range together and it was hard to believe how fast he could draw his little hellcat and put five shots on target. 2024 was a rangeless year for me but I would bet he can still do it. When better weather arrives I will find out as I am somewhat mobile again and chomping at the bit wanting to go shoot something. Paper, steel, coke bottles or cans, or even caliche rocks will do just fine.
 
From my reading of it, the three seconds was to complete the course of fire. Not the entire 20 rounds, but each "string".
Not the time from concealment to first round fired.
"Some strings start from a partial draw: hand on holstered gun, support hand at chest level lifting concealment garment."
Honestly, kind of poorly-written and somewhat sparse on details.
 
In a perfect world, yes. I’d prefer a full size 1911. On my right hip. All the time.

In the imperfect world I live in. That’s not happening.

After carrying full sized guns, and all the other crap for 35 years, my back and hips have suggested, I no longer do that.

My messed up shoulder doesn’t like going up far enough to clear that old Milt Sparks Roadrunner I carried off duty a long time ago.

Having to wear a substantial cover garment all the time is not comfortable in the high desert when it’s 114. (But it’s a dry heat…So is an oven)

So the biggest gun I carry is an Sig P239 in 9mm or 357 SIG. whenever I wander into Vegas. Travel out to big cities. I suppose that would qualify as a mid sized gun.

My normal carry, in town, is Kimber K6xs.

All carried appendix. Because I can conceal it under a T shirt. And, draw it quite fast. And, not hurt my back. The centerline weight seems optimal for me.

I’ve got a great little Sig P365. Shoot it very well. If I can get past the fact that there’s a cocked pistol pointed at my femoral artery, I’d carry it more often. But, I can’t. I’ll stick with DAK or DA.

Just saying. Yeah. Bigger guns shoot more better. But, that’s not the whole equation.
 
Back
Top