zeroskillz
Member
Nice job! That obviously took alot of work to get together.
Bobo's pocket auto comparison chart
- Thread starter P95Carry
- Start date
- Status
CoRoMo
Member
I just want to thank Bobo for the work put into this chart. I looked it up several times while contemplating the ideal pocket pistol for CCW. I'm glad it was there as a resource tool, and I think I've made a good decision with the Kel-Tec I recently purchased. Great job!
SgtKnuckles
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2007
- Messages
- 63
Good Chart BoBo,... I like the Loaded wt's on the chart...<
)
)Bobo
Member
blackcharkie, zeroskillz, CoRoMo, and SgtKnuckles,
Thanks for the "thanks". Glad the chart helps.
Bobo
Thanks for the "thanks". Glad the chart helps.
Bobo
MichaelJ07
Member
Nice charts! Great work! Thanks! How's about the Bersa line of handguns? Are there any that fit your criteria?
Again, nice work and appreciated very much.
Again, nice work and appreciated very much.
Bobo
Member
MichaelJ07,
Thanks for the thanks!
Unfortunately, most of the Bersas come in just over the "Less than six inches in length" limit for the chart. I had to draw a line somewhere or the chart would grow tremendously and begin to have less meaning for true "Pocket Carry".
In fact, the Bersa CC is exactly six inches in length. Not really too bad for pocket carry, but just getting a bit large and heavy. Many people pocket carry Bersas and even much larger guns, but less commonly.
Bobo
Thanks for the thanks!
Unfortunately, most of the Bersas come in just over the "Less than six inches in length" limit for the chart. I had to draw a line somewhere or the chart would grow tremendously and begin to have less meaning for true "Pocket Carry".
In fact, the Bersa CC is exactly six inches in length. Not really too bad for pocket carry, but just getting a bit large and heavy. Many people pocket carry Bersas and even much larger guns, but less commonly.
Bobo
fiVe
Member
Wow! This chart is very helpful.
trackaddict88
Member
Bobo, I only wish I had read this sooner-Before the Glock 26. Guess I need another gun for summer anyway! Thanks!
Here is some interesting commentary from LWS
32ACP pistols were once used extensively by police and military in countries like Spain, Belgium, France, Finland, Germany and the USA. In WWII, American general grade officers were issued .32ACP Colt M1903 pistols for carry while a variety of pistols in .32ACP were standard fare among German soldiers. When Hitler committed suicide, it was a 7.65mm (.32ACP) PPK he chose. This now often frowned upon caliber had enough prestige to make it the preference of Ian Fleming’s James Bond, who like Hitler also favored the .32ACP PPK. As to stopping power, statistics show shot placement trumps caliber every time. It’s more conducive to good health to be shot in the foot with a .44 Magnum than in a vital zone with a .22 or .25.
There are those sold on ball ammo, claiming that ball ammunition provides better penetration while hollow points are inconsistent on expansion. Although ball does offer excellent penetration, the streamlined configuration of ball provides the smallest temporary wound cavity. Air passes over the bullet with minimal resistance and turbulence. Air is not trapped and compressed within a cup to be released on impact (hopefully with bullet expansion), as it is with hollow point ammunition, nor is it vigorously directed away from the bullet, as is the case with the outside concave surface of semi-wadcutters. Both of these round types are shown in FBI ammo tests to produce a much greater temporary wound cavity in ballistic gelatin than ball. Logically, the shock value of temporary organ displacement translates into greater stopping power. Sanow and Marshall, in their controversial study of actual shootings, have placed the 60 grain .32 Silvertip on equal par with 230 grain .45 FMJ ball for stopping power. On the face of it, the Marshall/Sanow results seem ridiculous. A .45 caliber hole produced by a 230 grain bullet would appear to be far more effective in stopping power than a puny 60 grain hollow point that may or may not expand to .45 caliber.
here is the link if anyone wants to read the article
http://www.seecamp.com/ammunition.htm
32ACP pistols were once used extensively by police and military in countries like Spain, Belgium, France, Finland, Germany and the USA. In WWII, American general grade officers were issued .32ACP Colt M1903 pistols for carry while a variety of pistols in .32ACP were standard fare among German soldiers. When Hitler committed suicide, it was a 7.65mm (.32ACP) PPK he chose. This now often frowned upon caliber had enough prestige to make it the preference of Ian Fleming’s James Bond, who like Hitler also favored the .32ACP PPK. As to stopping power, statistics show shot placement trumps caliber every time. It’s more conducive to good health to be shot in the foot with a .44 Magnum than in a vital zone with a .22 or .25.
There are those sold on ball ammo, claiming that ball ammunition provides better penetration while hollow points are inconsistent on expansion. Although ball does offer excellent penetration, the streamlined configuration of ball provides the smallest temporary wound cavity. Air passes over the bullet with minimal resistance and turbulence. Air is not trapped and compressed within a cup to be released on impact (hopefully with bullet expansion), as it is with hollow point ammunition, nor is it vigorously directed away from the bullet, as is the case with the outside concave surface of semi-wadcutters. Both of these round types are shown in FBI ammo tests to produce a much greater temporary wound cavity in ballistic gelatin than ball. Logically, the shock value of temporary organ displacement translates into greater stopping power. Sanow and Marshall, in their controversial study of actual shootings, have placed the 60 grain .32 Silvertip on equal par with 230 grain .45 FMJ ball for stopping power. On the face of it, the Marshall/Sanow results seem ridiculous. A .45 caliber hole produced by a 230 grain bullet would appear to be far more effective in stopping power than a puny 60 grain hollow point that may or may not expand to .45 caliber.
here is the link if anyone wants to read the article
http://www.seecamp.com/ammunition.htm
Pa.Bill
Member
Outstanding Reading ---wonderful Post
marshall3
Member
J Frame on chart
Yes, the chart at one time had a J-frame revolver, for comparison with the pistol sizes. However, the number of little pistols has been growing quickly these days, and BobO is busy revising the chart. A new one will come out ASAP.
Both Ruger and Kahr are adding little .380 pistols to their line up.
Yes, the chart at one time had a J-frame revolver, for comparison with the pistol sizes. However, the number of little pistols has been growing quickly these days, and BobO is busy revising the chart. A new one will come out ASAP.
Both Ruger and Kahr are adding little .380 pistols to their line up.
Bobo
Member
rj112275,
I removed it to make room for the new Ruger LCP.
I wondered at the time if I was doing this if anyone really cared about the J-frame comparison and was considering leaving it out permanently. A couple of people have asked for it back, so I will it put back in the next update.
I was trying to avoid making the chart too big so when it was printed on a standard (8-1/2 x 11) sheet of paper you could still read it easily. Due to all the new pocket guns soon to be in production I guess I'll just have to "bite the bullet" (pun intended) and grow the chart to accommodate them. When I do this I will add the J-frame back in again.
The new Taurus Slim and the Kahr .380 are supposed to be in production later this year. Once this happens I'll update the chart once more with these guns and add the J-frame back in also.
Bobo
I removed it to make room for the new Ruger LCP.
I wondered at the time if I was doing this if anyone really cared about the J-frame comparison and was considering leaving it out permanently. A couple of people have asked for it back, so I will it put back in the next update.
I was trying to avoid making the chart too big so when it was printed on a standard (8-1/2 x 11) sheet of paper you could still read it easily. Due to all the new pocket guns soon to be in production I guess I'll just have to "bite the bullet" (pun intended) and grow the chart to accommodate them. When I do this I will add the J-frame back in again.
The new Taurus Slim and the Kahr .380 are supposed to be in production later this year. Once this happens I'll update the chart once more with these guns and add the J-frame back in also.
Bobo
grampster
Member
How in the world have I missed this. Very good info. I've had two little Beretta Minx in .22 short. They were fun to plink with. That was years ago. I've got a Tomcat presently, but I don't like the trigger pull. Way too stiff and long on DA. Also the firing pin has a tendency to break. I think there is a P3AT in my future.
Thank's for the great chart Bobo.
Thank's for the great chart Bobo.
Northalius
Member
Very good chart, indeed!
Brace yourselves now, a Glock Kool Aid drinker is going to post his opinion:
I know you limited these pistols to 6" length and under, but man, I am still curious to see the Glock 26, 27, 33 and 39 (all same size, except the 39 is a tiny bit longer) sub compacts in there!
Yes, they're 6.29" in overall length (that's not much longer than 6"), but they're only 4.17" in height, which is actually shorter than some of the .40, 9mm and .45 pistols on your chart.
Glock 26 / 27 / 33 / 39: Length: 6.29" -- Height: 4.17" -- Width: 1.18"
Kahr PM45: Length: 5.97" -- Height: 4.5" -- Width: 1.01"
Glock 26 (9mm) capacity: 10+1
Glock 27 (.40) capacity: 9+1
Glock 33 (.357) capacity: 9+1
Glock 39 (.45) capacity: 6+1
Kahr PM45 (.45) capacity: 5+1
If you'll look at the comparison picture again, you'll also see quite a few of those guns with heights over 4.2 inches.
Just get a good pocket holster, and you'll be fine with a sub compact Glock! They're easy to ankle carry, as well.
Try one out! The Glock will be much more reliable and durable than all of these other mouse guns, too; Glocks can also fire +p and +p+ ammo!
Brace yourselves now, a Glock Kool Aid drinker
is going to post his opinion:I know you limited these pistols to 6" length and under, but man, I am still curious to see the Glock 26, 27, 33 and 39 (all same size, except the 39 is a tiny bit longer) sub compacts in there!
Yes, they're 6.29" in overall length (that's not much longer than 6"), but they're only 4.17" in height, which is actually shorter than some of the .40, 9mm and .45 pistols on your chart.
Glock 26 / 27 / 33 / 39: Length: 6.29" -- Height: 4.17" -- Width: 1.18"
Kahr PM45: Length: 5.97" -- Height: 4.5" -- Width: 1.01"
Glock 26 (9mm) capacity: 10+1
Glock 27 (.40) capacity: 9+1
Glock 33 (.357) capacity: 9+1
Glock 39 (.45) capacity: 6+1
Kahr PM45 (.45) capacity: 5+1
If you'll look at the comparison picture again, you'll also see quite a few of those guns with heights over 4.2 inches.
Just get a good pocket holster, and you'll be fine with a sub compact Glock! They're easy to ankle carry, as well.
Try one out! The Glock will be much more reliable and durable than all of these other mouse guns, too; Glocks can also fire +p and +p+ ammo!
marshall3
Member
GLOCK 26 still too heavy
The GLOCK 26/27 is a very fine firearm. But, by my personal experience, it is not a "pocket gun." It is more like a "pocket brick." True, the height is short, and that's good. But it is too long, too thick, and too heavy to carry in your pocket, unless you are a really big man with really big pockets.
The GLOCK 26/27 is a very fine firearm. But, by my personal experience, it is not a "pocket gun." It is more like a "pocket brick." True, the height is short, and that's good. But it is too long, too thick, and too heavy to carry in your pocket, unless you are a really big man with really big pockets.
Northalius
Member
If you look at my post again and see the length and width of the sub compact Glocks compared to the Kahr PM45... it's not much bigger.
6.29" compact to 5.97" isn't worth nitpicking over, since pockets can be up to 9" deep (mine are)!
The width of the two compared is even more pathetic to nitpick at! The 1.18" wide Glock sub compact, compared to 1.01" ? I mean, seriously, less than .18" is nothing.
A shirt covering this, and a good pocket holster, can easily do the job for the sub Glocks. People do it all the time.
The weight is nothing for me personally.
Some might consider only the .32's and smaller .380's to be true pocket guns; should they say the bigger 9mm, .40 and .45's on that chart aren't pocket guns then? Where as others will say they are! Then it's just a disagreement, because everyone is different, and people can get a little bigger clothing to fit a tiny bit bigger gun in their pocket.
Just my opinion.
I say put a Glock 26/27/33 up there, just for comparison, at least!
6.29" compact to 5.97" isn't worth nitpicking over, since pockets can be up to 9" deep (mine are)!
The width of the two compared is even more pathetic to nitpick at! The 1.18" wide Glock sub compact, compared to 1.01" ? I mean, seriously, less than .18" is nothing.
A shirt covering this, and a good pocket holster, can easily do the job for the sub Glocks. People do it all the time.
The weight is nothing for me personally.
Some might consider only the .32's and smaller .380's to be true pocket guns; should they say the bigger 9mm, .40 and .45's on that chart aren't pocket guns then? Where as others will say they are! Then it's just a disagreement, because everyone is different, and people can get a little bigger clothing to fit a tiny bit bigger gun in their pocket.
Just my opinion.
I say put a Glock 26/27/33 up there, just for comparison, at least!
Bobo
Member
Northalius,
I'll answer you by referrring you to these former posts in this same thread:
http://www.thehighroad.org./showthread.php?t=171820#10
http://www.thehighroad.org./showthread.php?t=171820#25
BTW, check out post #83 on this page.
I'll answer you by referrring you to these former posts in this same thread:
http://www.thehighroad.org./showthread.php?t=171820#10
http://www.thehighroad.org./showthread.php?t=171820#25
BTW, check out post #83 on this page.
Last edited:
Diamondback6
Member
Bob, if you expand it to a multiple-page chart, would you consider adding out-of-production models? It'd be interesting to see how the Colt Models M (.32/.380) and N (.25 vest-pocket), along with the "Baby Browning" and some other antiques measure up by comparison.
17poundr
Member
Good stuff, but...
Great chart! THANKS!
But... And there is always a but, if this width is an issue, then I think everybody should check out the STI gun site, where they have what they advertize as being the 'thinnest 1911 bodied gun in production', I seem to remember it holds about 6x.40s&w... Then there is the Springfield EMP... (pretty small).
And to be truthful even if we do not measure the Ruger that is under six inches, or exactly six inches, or the mini Beretta Storm, with a two inch barrel, which makes it one very small 9mm semi auto...
Let's be fair, those Para-ord warthogs, EMP's, Beretta's, CZrami and model 83s, Glock 26&27, and XD subcompact models are very, very, small with amazing capacity!!! The point something of an inch more that they have over the six inch mark, is way worth the 10+ ammount of 9mm parabellum (or less of larger calibers of ammo), that they tend to carry!
Who agrees? Still nice chart!!! Thanks!
Great chart!
THANKS!But... And there is always a but, if this width is an issue, then I think everybody should check out the STI gun site, where they have what they advertize as being the 'thinnest 1911 bodied gun in production', I seem to remember it holds about 6x.40s&w... Then there is the Springfield EMP... (pretty small).
And to be truthful even if we do not measure the Ruger that is under six inches, or exactly six inches, or the mini Beretta Storm, with a two inch barrel, which makes it one very small 9mm semi auto...
Let's be fair, those Para-ord warthogs, EMP's, Beretta's, CZrami and model 83s, Glock 26&27, and XD subcompact models are very, very, small with amazing capacity!!! The point something of an inch more that they have over the six inch mark, is way worth the 10+ ammount of 9mm parabellum (or less of larger calibers of ammo), that they tend to carry!
Who agrees? Still nice chart!!!
Thanks!
krs
Member
It's a wonderfully useful chart. Thank you very much for your work in compiling and publishing it out here for us all, Bobo. Every CCW licensee owes you a large debt of gratitude.
Why do so many people feel a need to defend THEIR choices if they don't fit onto the chart?
Carry whatever you want. Get a sweatshirt with a crosspocket, or a duckhunter's game jacket and say "Wait! Look! I can fit my XP-100 in my pocket so why isn't it on your chart?" I mean quit being so stupid please.
Tubby guns (Glock, P-11, P99, CZ83, blah,blah, blah) fit in pockets, but you can't get them out!
Why do so many people feel a need to defend THEIR choices if they don't fit onto the chart?
Carry whatever you want. Get a sweatshirt with a crosspocket, or a duckhunter's game jacket and say "Wait! Look! I can fit my XP-100 in my pocket so why isn't it on your chart?" I mean quit being so stupid please.
Tubby guns (Glock, P-11, P99, CZ83, blah,blah, blah) fit in pockets, but you can't get them out!
17poundr
Member
Sorry if I came across as trying to 'push an envelope' of my liking...
I would say, that whatever the person carrying the gun is comfortable with. With the ability to shoot true with the gun.
Then it is for him/her, the best (pocket, under jeans holster, ancle holster, armpit holster, fanny pack, lady's purce, you name it)consealead carry gun!!!
I guess I came across faulted in my previous try to make this very point.
Personally, I have only got to try a CZ Rami... (or the short version of the CZ-75, I cannot remember which).
And the Makarov-9x18mm. Which I considered to be a pretty compact gun... I dont know how it's classified though... (Does anybody know if the Makarov does fit into the parameters given by bobo)?
I think that it might but the lip that protects the shooters hand from the recoil of the slide makes it too long... (please let me know of the correct terminology, as I dont know the correct names for gun parts. I dont know these in English, as all of my Gun shooting Experience has taken place in Finland, and once at a range in Latvia. Thus making my vocabulary for guns all in Finnish, sorry).
I just came upon the thought that the Makarov would be a pretty good consealed carry gun. It's small, reliable, and has more punch to it than the 9x17mm round that some compacts have as their ammo...
Do you think my way of seeing this is a, 'not really'? Or is there some idea there???
After all, as far as I understand the small compact gun, is something that will be used from close range, so great accuracy isnt a huge parameter to worry about. Having said that, probably regurlar exercise in quick draw, and double taps would be good to do... (I seem to remember that the Makarov had a very agreeable recoil and I didnt notice what kind of trigger it had, which in my case is a good thing)!
And if the 9x17mm is considered ok, then the makarov's 9x18 shurely will be good too...
By the way, does anybody know of expanding (HP or JHP i guess), bullets for the 9x18mm?
All that I ever saw were FMJ's...
I put some pics of Makarov's from various Eastern European countries, as you see, it's quite an attractive gun, once you get past the 'cold war hangover', as I call it...
Also, I found one quality holster for the Makarov (it holds about five other guns too, check it out! http://www.opticsplanet.net/bianchi-100-professional-holster-plain-tan-right-hand-19230.html )
I would say, that whatever the person carrying the gun is comfortable with. With the ability to shoot true with the gun.
Then it is for him/her, the best (pocket, under jeans holster, ancle holster, armpit holster, fanny pack, lady's purce, you name it)consealead carry gun!!!
I guess I came across faulted in my previous try to make this very point.
Personally, I have only got to try a CZ Rami... (or the short version of the CZ-75, I cannot remember which).
And the Makarov-9x18mm. Which I considered to be a pretty compact gun... I dont know how it's classified though... (Does anybody know if the Makarov does fit into the parameters given by bobo)?
I think that it might but the lip that protects the shooters hand from the recoil of the slide makes it too long... (please let me know of the correct terminology, as I dont know the correct names for gun parts. I dont know these in English, as all of my Gun shooting Experience has taken place in Finland, and once at a range in Latvia. Thus making my vocabulary for guns all in Finnish, sorry).
I just came upon the thought that the Makarov would be a pretty good consealed carry gun. It's small, reliable, and has more punch to it than the 9x17mm round that some compacts have as their ammo...
Do you think my way of seeing this is a, 'not really'? Or is there some idea there???
After all, as far as I understand the small compact gun, is something that will be used from close range, so great accuracy isnt a huge parameter to worry about. Having said that, probably regurlar exercise in quick draw, and double taps would be good to do... (I seem to remember that the Makarov had a very agreeable recoil and I didnt notice what kind of trigger it had, which in my case is a good thing)!
And if the 9x17mm is considered ok, then the makarov's 9x18 shurely will be good too...
By the way, does anybody know of expanding (HP or JHP i guess), bullets for the 9x18mm?
All that I ever saw were FMJ's...
I put some pics of Makarov's from various Eastern European countries, as you see, it's quite an attractive gun, once you get past the 'cold war hangover', as I call it...
Also, I found one quality holster for the Makarov (it holds about five other guns too, check it out! http://www.opticsplanet.net/bianchi-100-professional-holster-plain-tan-right-hand-19230.html )
Attachments
Thanks for all your hard work on this. I too notice the j frame is gone, and I see you stated you removed it to fit in Ruger's new 380
I don't think most folks are printing this out, I think you are doing your project a disservice by removing guns to maintain a 1 sheet 'easy print' format. I am sure the vast majority of us pull it up on-line. Along that same line of thinking, ever consider leaviing one version in 'life size' rather than scaling it down? Scaling it to fit a page makes great sense if you were going to have this printed in a magazine, but internet age and all, leave it big
If anyhing, why not make page 1 and page 2 one for 'really small' and one for 'regular small' of course, have some crossover, the biggest 3 or so on page 1 should be included on page 2
I can definately understand you setting a size based requirement for what handguns to include, and I know that the Walther PPK is bigger than your size critera allows, but people might not realize that is why that or whatever their favorite pocket pistol is, is being left off. I'd suggest either shortening up the website links (remove the space between them, or don't bother titling them just have a list of websites) or just removing them all together (I think most of us rather than carefully typing out the exact address would just google it) and include a list of "famous pocket pistols over size limit" then rather than people wondering "why didn't he include X" would say "Wow I didn't realize that X is bigger than ALL of these other guns!"
I don't think most folks are printing this out, I think you are doing your project a disservice by removing guns to maintain a 1 sheet 'easy print' format. I am sure the vast majority of us pull it up on-line. Along that same line of thinking, ever consider leaviing one version in 'life size' rather than scaling it down? Scaling it to fit a page makes great sense if you were going to have this printed in a magazine, but internet age and all, leave it big
If anyhing, why not make page 1 and page 2 one for 'really small' and one for 'regular small' of course, have some crossover, the biggest 3 or so on page 1 should be included on page 2
I can definately understand you setting a size based requirement for what handguns to include, and I know that the Walther PPK is bigger than your size critera allows, but people might not realize that is why that or whatever their favorite pocket pistol is, is being left off. I'd suggest either shortening up the website links (remove the space between them, or don't bother titling them just have a list of websites) or just removing them all together (I think most of us rather than carefully typing out the exact address would just google it) and include a list of "famous pocket pistols over size limit" then rather than people wondering "why didn't he include X" would say "Wow I didn't realize that X is bigger than ALL of these other guns!"
17poundr
Member
an after question....
I do not wish to seem impudent, but have you measured the glock - 26, or the Beretta storm 9mm compact ? The latter has the shortest barrel I seem to have heard of in semi autos,,,?
Then there is the Springfield EMP, which bragged that never has a 1911 frame been so small... Just a thought?
You what I think is a bit weird, is that not a lot of guns with strickers made it, and I would always want to have that option, I am not a fan of DAO guns... Well if they are smithed to my requriements maybe...
Thanks anyway! great chart! I would love to see it extended to include the above mentioned, and some of the warthogs, and kimber's compact models... Also cz RAMI... and so the list goes on...
I do not wish to seem impudent, but have you measured the glock - 26, or the Beretta storm 9mm compact ? The latter has the shortest barrel I seem to have heard of in semi autos,,,?
Then there is the Springfield EMP, which bragged that never has a 1911 frame been so small... Just a thought?
You what I think is a bit weird, is that not a lot of guns with strickers made it, and I would always want to have that option, I am not a fan of DAO guns... Well if they are smithed to my requriements maybe...
Thanks anyway! great chart! I would love to see it extended to include the above mentioned, and some of the warthogs, and kimber's compact models... Also cz RAMI... and so the list goes on...
- Status
