CCW: Full Sized Vs Sub Compact

Status
Not open for further replies.
I personally thought CCWing chopped down "sub-compacts" like XD-SC, G26/27, etc is kinda dumb. Sure theres half an inch chopped off the barrel and grip, but the darn things are still downright bulky and fat. I guess what I'm trying to say here is that IMO if you are going to carry a "sub-compact" you might as well put up w/ the full size version like an XD service or G19,23. From personal experience with all these weapons, I don't find the sub-compacts any more comfortable to carry than the full-size versions due to the fact that they are STILL fat and heavy.

Now a TRUE sub-compact carry weapon like a Kahr, Kel-tec, etc is a completely different story. They are SIGNIFICANTLY lighter and thinner, and make carrying a weapon a total joy instead of a burden.
 
pogo2 mentioned weight, and I agree, and want to add balance to the equation. I used to have a Les Baer Concept 1911, (I do not recall which exact one in the Concept series) which was Commander-sized, with the aluminum alloy frame. Offhand, one hand or two, I was not very accurate with it; far less accurate than with a 5"-barreled all-steel 1911. I could hunker down on a sandbag rest, and shoot amazingly tiny groups, so the intrinsic accuracy was there. I ended up trading that lightweight Baer 1911, and later ended up with my present Les Baer Thunder Ranch, which is VERY accurate offhand. The 2-dot tritium rear sight is not the best for me, and I should improve once I replace that rear sight with a plain black Novak or MMC that uses the Novak cut in the slide. I did my best offhand 1911 shooting in my life with a Kimber Stainless Gold Match, with its copy of a Bomar rear sight, though I got rid of the that Kimber due to horrendous functioning problems. It would be interesting to try a full-sized 1911 with a light alloy frame, to get lighter weight while still having the balance less centered in the grip area.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top