Full Size vs. Sub-Compact Semi-Autos

[Maximum1]

In MY opinion with all the NEW breeds of Sub-Compacts on the market today like: Springfield's XD9sc, S&W's M&Psc. Walther PPSsc, etc I don't see any need to carry a full size pistol anymore...They're too heavy, too bulky and hard to conceal and only offer DISADVANTAGES over these new breeds of sub-compacts.


What's you opinion?


Poll clarification...Just in case

Yes = There is a need to carry a full size.
No = There is NO need to carry a full auto.

 

[Autolycus]

I disagree. I feel the full size guns are generally more accurate, they give the bullet better velocity, and I feel they are less prone to malfunction. Not to mention there will be less recoil.

 

[Airman193SOS]

I don't own a full-sized gun. In fact, I think that my SIG P239 is the upper limit for size for me. I'm sure that accuracy is improved with full-sized weapons, but I do quite acceptably with my smaller weapons, and they are much easier to hide and much more comfortable because they are (comparatively) light.

Service size weapons are simply not my bag. Take that for what it's worth.

 

[Maximum1]

Poll clarification...Just in case


Yes = There is a need to carry a full size.
No = There is NO need to carry a full auto.

 

[Airman193SOS]

Wonderful. I read it as a yes affirming your assertion, so it's already dorked up.

The way it was asked, you may as well have asked us if we've stopped beating our wives.

 

[AK103K]

I agree with Tecumseh. I've carried pretty much full sized guns my whole life. Never found them to be heavy, bulky, or hard to carry. I'm only 5'-6" 165# too.

Most of the "smaller" guns really are not all that much smaller than their full size counterparts. They carry less, usually are harder to shoot well with, and some breeds are not reliable below full size.

 

[Autolycus]

I wanted to add that a lot of the full size guns have greater capacity. It may not be an issue. Some guns only lose 1-2 rounds but others can lose more.

My biggest concern is losing velocity. I know .45 ACP firearms dont do very well in sub-compact size guns with a loss of velocity. Not to mention the loss of capacity. Yet it seems that .45 ACP is the most popular round for THR members to carry concealed.

In a smaller caliber such as a 9mm or .40 S&W I would not be concerned.

 

[MCgunner]

My Kel Tec is slower due to short sight radius than a full size gun, but it shoots 3.5" groups at 25 yards. It may not be a bullseye gun, but it's plenty accurate for a combat/service gun and it fits in a pocket in south Texas summers. Hell, I hardly ever carry a full size gun anymore, usually a .38 snub revolver or the KT.

 

[KrankyKraut]

For self-defense CCW purposes, and within self-defense range, the sub compacts are plenty accurate enough. In CA, mag capacity is limited to 10, so that's a moot issue. Even in other states that don't have the limitation to 10 rounds, the difference between, say 14 and 16 rounds is in the vast majority of cases negligible.

 

[makarovnik]

You gotta appreciate the longer sight radius and faster followup shots of a full size. Not to mention the sometimes higher capacity and sure grip of a full length handle. However, comfort and concealability are probably more important to most people. Carry the biggest gun you are comfortable with, and I don't necessarily mean just the size of the hole in the end.

 

[wally]

I generally can only conceal a sub-compact, but I always carry the biggest I can.

Larger guns shoot better, but its a trade off between having a smaller but sub-optimal gun vs. having none because I can't hide the full sized.

--wally.

 

[Autolycus]

My feeling is that if I can carry a fullsize gun comfortably, legally, and well concealed there is no reason for me not to. In the end it is up to the user but I prefer a fullsize or compact (Sig 228 / Glock 19 / HK P2000 etc.) size guns.

 

[M2 Carbine]

I have a couple full size 1911A1's. Love the guns but wouldn't consider carrying one.
I carry one of the four Kimber Ultras I have.

 

[Maximum1]

You sure its not Airhead instead of Airman? Everyone else got it....

 

[Maximum1]

"Most of the "smaller" guns really are not all that much smaller than their full size counterparts."


Uh, so *5.3" to 6.5" vs. *7.2 to 8.5" isn't all the much smaller in your book? Not to mention the height differences between the two....


*Average length of the sub-compacts and full size pistols listed in the Mfgr specs.

 

[A.ENGIN IDEMEN]

I am with Tecumseh.
The smallest pistols I would trust to carry are P228,P2000, etc, since they stay at the lowest limit to have the shooting capabilities of a full size pistol for me.
In non-stresfull situations you may be considerably accurate with smaller pistols. But, when the time comes, natural pointing characteristics related to the grip control, sight radius, recoil would definitely detoriate your shooting capabilities.
It does not matter how the pistol is comfortable or easy to carry for me, unless it provides optimum amount of Vis, Celeritas,Diligentia in stressfull conditions.
Regards.

 

[10-Ring]

I don't own a single sub compact...I just don't care for all the compromises I have to make in my grip, accuracy and shootability. Especially w/ the adrenaline pumping, I would prefer knowing that I have the best tool in my hands to do the job

 

[Rexster]

The way the poll is worded can be misinterpreted, so I did not vote. Full-sized pistols offer a greater sight radius, greater velocity, and more steadying weight toward the muzzle, so I think they are viable. In the case of 1911 pistols, I have owned several examples of each size, and found the full-sized pistols to be more likely to be reliable, and easier to make right if unreliable. I will never buy another 1911 with less than a 5" barrel. OTOH, I really like my SIG P229, and am very glad it is one of the choices on my agency's list of approved autos. Of course, my affection for the P229 has me itching for a P226 X-5.

 

[duckjihad]

Smaller's easier to conceal in my opinion. I carry the largest gun I can conceal. I think the compact guns make a lot of sense.......and I don't beat my wife. The kids? Another story entirely!

 

[possum]

i only own one full size gun, i don't know what it is i just like compact and sc guns expecially the striker fired sorts that is why i own so many. the sc guns do everything i need them too in a defensive role, and are definetly accurate enough to carry anywhere anytime.

 

[ak-kev]

I've never carried full size handguns. I would need to wear a ganster style shirt (really long) to hide the muzzel of my 1911's. I use those for night time duty. To me, the Desantis Yaqu Slide and an Officers Model or Defender is the bees knees!! I wont even do that in the summer here in Florida, when I resort to any number of pocket guns, or one of my Colt D-Frames.

 

[pablo45]

Yes, I agree I think the new sub-compacts are plenty size for daily and duty carry. But I still like shooting full-size for fun.

 

[Hokkmike]

Actually, aren't there three sizes?

1. subcompact

2. compact

3. full size

My Beretta 9000s holds 10 rounds of .40 S&W in a tight little package. Why carry something bigger?

 

[Ala Dan]

I still prefer full size handguns, on some occassions~!

 

[alucard0822]

I basically look at it as a compromise between control, portability, utility, power and concealability, and legality.

If Concealability is not an issue at all, but the most effective weapon is needed, as in home defense, well I reach for a rifle, if I want greater utility and power, and range/rapid followup shots are not needed, a shotgun is ideal. And in many places a "truck gun" is legal, but CC or even posessing a pistol is not.

If I need a weapon that keeps my hands free, can be drawn and fired quickly, is very portable, but needs for concealment and power are minimal, as a law enforcement officer would need most of the time, well then a full size pistol is ideal. G17,g22, beretta 92, 1911 duty calibers 9mm, 40, 45 10mm in autos, 357mag, 41mag, 44sp for revolvers

For a weapon that takes little effort to effectively conceal, but retains most of the power, capacity and control of a full size, then the compact or midsize pistol is best. G19, g26, hk2000, m&p compact in duty calibers, 9,40,45 for autos, 38+p, 357mag for revolvers

For absolute concealability and portability, where power, capacity and control are even less of a neccesity, or a backup to a main weapon is needed, then the mouseguns or pocketpistols come into play. ppk, p3at 32acp or 380 in autos, 32h&r or 38sp in revolvers

Different needs require different tools, there is alwas a level of compromise that must be reached in order to be comfortable with your choice, and physique makes adifference too. Someone who is 6'5" 300lbs and wears baggy layered clothing can probably hide a 6" 1911, or a HK mk23 without much effort, and might find anything smaller than a fullsize uncomfortable, or uncontrollable. A 5' 90lb woman might be able to get a full grip on a G26 or ppk, and be quite comfortable with a lighter and softer recoiling pistol, but anything larger would be uncomfortable or impossible to conceal. Basically there are so many choices one is bound to fit within the needs of most.