First handgun: Ruger SP101 versus Glock 19

[tomrkba]

rskent,

Part of the requirement is something for critters. More powerful cartridges are typically chambered by revolvers. However, there are options, including very hot 10mm, 460 Rowland and so forth. If I were going to buy a carry gun that will also be used in the woods, I'd go with a rebarreled 10mm and some very hot hard cast ammo. 460 Rowland conversion kits are available for various guns, including the 1911, Glock 21 and XD 45.

The proper response for a "tactical critter gun" is a Magnum Research Desert Eagle chambered in 50 Action Express in gold tigerstripe.

 

[rskent]

Tomrkba
Let me get this straight, you think the OPs first handgun should be 50 AE ?

I just don't know how to respond to that. Have a great day my friend.

 

[tomrkba]

I guess you do not see the humor in trying to carry a giant 78 ounce gun (loaded) in an IWB holster...MUCH LESS a GOLD gun with high speed tactical camoflage stripes!

 

[Ed Ames]

For what you describe (in order of priority: range toy, camp gun, home defense and maybe concealed carry but you'd rather get a dedicated CC gun) my answer would be none of the above.

The Glock is a nice pistol. It is primarily designed as a SD sidearm. In other words, it's best for thr 3rd and 4th priority items on your list.

The sp101 is a high mass compact revolver. I'm honestly not sure what it was designed for but I suspect concealed carry on the moon or some other low gravity world. OK, it might be great in a 6-shot .32 flavor for somewhere in Europe where police are typically issued much smaller pistols more as a symbol than as a weapon. High quality gun, nice, but only so/so for your list.

Up until the current ammo shortage my "first handgun" advice was always .22lr because of the cheap practice factor (the money saved - in normal times - using cheap .22lr vs even 9mm can very quickly pay for a second handgun). Since there is an ammo shortage that is only barely clearing up, I'd instead suggest a GP100, 619, or similar service size revolver in .357 magnum.

They make a great range toy, with the advantage that it's easy to save your brass for future reloading.

They make fine camp guns. Better than all but the 10mm Glock.

They are fine, just fine, for home defense. Much better than a small gun like the SP101, and in the real world on par with a semi-auto in all but the most movie-scene-esq situations. The nod really goes to the Glock here but it was listed as priority 3.

They can be concealed carried, though I suspect a full size Glock is easier to carry. Neither is great and it was your lowest priority.

However, if you wait a few months your best choice will go back to being "start with a .22" ... not because it is the only handgun you need, but because it's fun and you can afford to shoot it a lot more.

 

[Mitlov]

Thanks for the post, Ed. You raise some very good points, and maybe I need to go back to the drawing board with what I'm going to get.

I'm hesitant to get a 22 simply because it's not suited to any of the uses besides practice.

Keeping in mind that fit and feel is subjective and I need to try before I buy, but getting some suggestions is still really useful because then I know what to try, what would you recommend to someone who was looking for a handgun with the following criteria?

(1) If a pistol instead of a revolver, single-stack for a thinner grip (my hands aren't that big);

(2) Ambidextrous slide release and ambidextrous design for any external safeties (I'm left-handed and my wife, who might need to use it in a pinch, is right-handed), though mag-release can be right-handed-only (that's the least important to me in terms of controls, so I can use that right-handed);

(3) Probably a round more powerful than 9mm for camping purposes, but affordability is good too.

On one hand, I'm now wary of revolvers since I had such a bad experience with the AirWeight (it kicked like a mule even with 38 special, and I couldn't hit the side of a barn with it thanks to the double-action trigger). But maybe I shouldn't discount a full-size revolver like the GP100 or 686 because of that? Obviously #3 on this list weighs in favor of a 357 revolver, even though the AirWeight has now made me wary of wheelguns. Or is there something I should be looking at in a semi-auto that'll give me a lighter-and-easier-to-control trigger? Or should I be looking at a 1911 given that I already know it fits my hand and I shoot well with it?

 

[tomrkba]

Ed Ames...you have it all wrong!

You're supposed to say:

Buy the pistol in 22 LR to learn on.

Buy the Glock in 9x19 at the same time so you can defend yourself.

He has to buy something in 44 Magnum soon because ammo is drying up and going fast.

The Desert Eagle is just amazing and everyone has to spend the $1,100 to have one, not to mention 1,000 rounds of the $2/shot ammo.

After that is accomplished, he has to get a custom 1911 from Ed Brown or Heirloom Precision because everyone knows they're going out of business soon and production 1911's never work.

See...I just spent $5,000+ of the OP's money and he got four amazing guns that do everything he could ever want, except pocket carry. He'll need to shop for that one on his own...

 

[antiquus]

For a camp gun, get the revolver as variety of ammo it shoots is useful out in the woods, including snake shot and loads useful for all kinds of varmints. An all steel 3" revolver is concealable, and very different from shooting an airweight. Airweight snubbies ARE carry only pieces, meant for reliable operation in self defense situations and light enough for constant concealed carry. Also understand the effective barrel length of a revolver is about 1" more than the same barrel length in an auto, they are not measured the same.

As for capacity, the old cop saying is you run out of time before you run out of bullets. Relate that to a charging bear and it becomes clear.

 

[Ed Ames]

I love the airweight but it's almost the definition of an expert's gun. Light weight, small grip, short sight radius, small fixed sights, narrow trigger...it all adds up to something you can shoot well, but most people never will. It really isn't representative of revolvers in general.

From what you have said, I would look at the S&W M&P .40 ... double stack but maybe OK. A walther PPS may also be an option, no ambi slide release but you can learn to work around that (insert magazine, pull back slide, let go). Ambi slide stop + small grip is going to limit the field. I don't personally need either of those features so I don't keep track of that corner of the market.

However, neither of those would be ideal woods guns compared to the same dollars spent on a full size .357 revolver.

Just for tomrkba:

The no-compromise option would be a custom 10mm 1911 with ambidextrous controls. You could start with a Delta Elite with ambi safety but I'm sure eith some research and a bit of cash you could get the ambi slide stop too.

 

[Deer_Freak]

It's real hard to have a concealed carry weapon that is going to be a lot of fun on the range. I own a Sp101 chambered in 357 mag. I do most of my range shooting with a dan wesson 15-2 with a 10" barrel or a Ruger blackhack with a 6.5" barrel. I take the last few shots with the SP 101 so that is the last sight picture in my mind.

Glocks are fine pistols. My issue with the glock is if someone tries to disarm me. I know that I will clench to maintain control of the weapon. When I clench my finger is going to slide down on the trigger. The idea of 4.5 lb being all there is between safety and glock leg doesn't tickle me. This is the main reason I traded my glock for an XD.

 

[Mitlov]

I have never heard of snakeshot before this, but reading up on it, it sounds great. My in-laws live in the middle of nowhere in eastern Oregon and there's a real rattlesnake problem there. My wife and kids are visiting them right now (I'm stuck at work so I didn't go this time) and they've run into three rattlesnakes in five days.

Knowing that the Airweight is not representative in any way of a larger revolver is good to know. I'm going to see if I can find a GP100 or 686 to try out somewhere. If I like it, I could get that, and then a dedicated conceal-carry semi-auto 9mm, and I'd have all my bases covered.

 

[jim243]

(3) Theoretically, if a bear or mountain lion were to take umbrage with something I'd said or done, would 9mm have any effect on them? (I know .357 would).

Out of a 2 1/2 inch barrel it would not be effective on a bear. Unless you are at bear eating human distance.

For two legged soft skin targets either will do, but for dangerous animals both will get you killed. If you are serious about using one for bears, I would suggest you go to the "Hunting" section of the forum and ask your question there, you will get much better advice there than here.

Jim

 

[tomrkba]

Ruger blackhack with a 6.5" barrel

Oooh...good idea. That's another $650 spent! Are you trying to corrupt the OP with a single action fetish?

 

[Mitlov]

Out of a 2 1/2 inch barrel it would not be effective on a bear. Unless you are at bear eating human distance.

For two legged soft skin targets either will do, but for dangerous animals both will get you killed. If you are serious about using one for bears, I would suggest you go to the "Hunting" section of the forum and ask your question there, you will get much better advice there than here.

Jim

Fair point. I'm much less concerned about bears than mountain lions. Assuming I'd now be looking at a full-size revolver, I'd likely be looking at about a 4.0"-4.2" barrel instead of something shorter.

 

[X-Rap]

It doesn't take much to kill a lion but you have to get the jump on them which is doubtful.

 

[Mitlov]

Another fair point.

 

[Kayaker 1960]

"Glocks are fine pistols. My issue with the glock is if someone tries to disarm me. I know that I will clench to maintain control of the weapon. When I clench my finger is going to slide down on the trigger. The idea of 4.5 lb being all there is between safety and glock leg doesn't tickle me. This is the main reason I traded my glock for an XD."

IMO I don't need a safety on my handgun. When not in use it rests in a holster designed to hold the gun securely and cover the trigger. If I should need to use it I don't have to think about disengaging a safety. Semi auto or revolver, drawing, shooting and re-holstering is the same.

 

[X-Rap]

Glocks are fine pistols. My issue with the glock is if someone tries to disarm me. I know that I will clench to maintain control of the weapon. When I clench my finger is going to slide down on the trigger. The idea of 4.5 lb being all there is between safety and glock leg doesn't tickle me. This is the main reason I traded my glock for an XD.

Then you'd be a prime candidate for a pistol with a magazine disconnect? Or maybe an internal lock? Imbedded chip?

 

[Ed Ames]

"... My issue with the glock is if someone tries to disarm me. I know that I will clench to maintain control of the weapon. When I clench my finger is going to slide down on the trigger. The idea of 4.5 lb being all there is between safety and glock leg doesn't tickle me.

I am not entirely understanding this.

"Glock leg" comes from holstering with something inside the trigger guard.

Are you anticipating an opponent forcibly holstering your gun while you try to draw? That could be valid but it really indicates the need for a faster draw more than anything else.

If the pistol is in a holster, clench away and unless your fingers are strong enough to pierce leather/plastic it won't go off. If it's not in it's holster, why point it at your leg? Point it at the person trying to disarm you. If you are concerned about the transition, speed up the draw and be careful when re-holstering.

 

[doc2rn]

There are so many fine platforms out there in 9mm & .45 acp kimber, colt, S&W, Ruger,FN, that you would be hard pressed to try them all. I prefer a BHP or FN in 9mm and a Colt Python in .357. Ruger makes a fine product, but I just cant stand combat tupperware, sorry Glock.

 

[vamo]

At the end of the day shoot what you're most comfortable with. Most animals will flee at even the noise of a gun. And most humans will back off just seeing one. It sounds like you liked the 1911, not my preference and 45 ammo is a bit pricey, but its more than enough gun for self defense against 2 and 4 legged predators.

 

[Mitlov]

At the end of the day shoot what you're most comfortable with. Most animals will flee at even the noise of a gun. And most humans will back off just seeing one. It sounds like you liked the 1911, not my preference and 45 ammo is a bit pricey, but its more than enough gun for self defense against 2 and 4 legged predators.

I loved shooting the 1911, but like you said, it's not a great objective fit for anything I'm looking for, so I'm hesitant to say "that's the one for me." Ammo is expensive for routine practice; it can't load the variety of rounds (including snakeshot) that a full-size revolver can for camping and outdoors use; it's more complex than I'd want for home defense (particularly given that my wife really wants something simple for that purpose); and it's too heavy for conceal carry.

I'm leaning toward either getting a Ruger GP100 or S&W 686 for recreational shooting (cheap .38 ammo and a long barrel and heavy frame), outdoors use (either snakeshot or high-powered 357 depending on the situation), and home defense, and then getting a compact 9mm for conceal carry (the Springfield XDS looks tempting, but I need to find one to try out).

EDIT: And after reading through some hunting threads, I realized the real things I need to be worried about in the countryside are rattlesnakes and meth-heads, not bears or mountain lions. Mountain lions have killed three people in the last twelve years...I didn't realize just how statistically inconsequential they are.

 

[X-Rap]

I wouldn't get all tangled up in that snake shot thing. IMO a #2 shovel with a long handle is the best tool to have in your truck in snake country.
Most snake encounters will let you back off or else you've stepped in the middle of their business and they have nailed you.
I've shot some but never with shot from a hand gun so I'm not one that is convinced of its usefulness.

 

[Ed Ames]

I'm generally apposed to shooting snakes...I think it is rarely the safest option and snakes are rarely the worst animals to have around...even the venomous kinds are usually better than the rodents they feed on.

A family member who disagreed with me and was quite the snake shooter kept a Beretta .25acp from the 1950s or 1960s in his pocket ("condition one" ) and killed a number of snakes with it. I think the gun was way more dangerous than all the snakes he ever shot but it wasn't what killed him so - shrug.

If you like the feel of the 1911, get one. They are available in 9mm and .40 as well as the traditional .45. Just be aware that you need to practice with them, frequently, or they can (not will, but can) get you in trouble in a high-stress situation. That's just the reality of anything with a manual safety. Of course you aren't going to have the options of a .357 in terms of different loadings in one gun but it's a great platform that can do anything...including concealed carry.

 

[grimjaw]

I realized the real things I need to be worried about in the countryside are rattlesnakes and meth-heads

I can't speak to the meth-heads, but I have run across the occasional timber rattlesnake in the Ozarks.



A large, heavy rock is enough to deter or kill one, provided you can throw it at least ten feet. However, the timber rattlers usually aren't aggressive. This one sat quietly while we took pictures from a distance (telephoto lens), but we initially almost tripped over it. I keep snakeshot as the first round in my revolver when hiking, but I'd rather not kill them.

 

[Mitlov]

I wouldn't kill a rattlesnake if I was in a situation where I didn't have to, but they are VERY common where my in-laws live, and I can't walk around with a shovel all day long. That's why I was interested in snakeshot in a revolver. But it sounds from people here like it's overrated. Ah well.

@Ed--I've read some comments on online forums and from certain youtube commentators (ie James Yeager) that the 1911 is significantly more prone to misfeeds than more modern designs. Is this just internet fanboyism to be disregarded so long as I buy a mainstream-brand 1911 instead of a third-world-bargain-basement brand? Or is this something I should factor into the buying decision?