How many rounds minimum are borderline sufficient in your semi auto pistol?

[el Godfather]

So your plan in case of a jam or running your gun dry is to run back to the car for Gun #2?

.

? Read entire thread plz.

 

[David E]

? Read entire thread plz.

I did. The same question remains, but my curiosity does not.

Carry on.

 

[GaryP]

I went with 8+1 and feel that is adequate in my Colt Combat Commanders for Concealed Carry. On occasion I will carry two extra Wilson - Rogers 10 round mags. The 10 round Wilson - Rogers Mags function flawlessly in all my Colts, but they do need to be broken in.

 

[Mike1234567]

It appears that folks are voting according to what they already own. So the question is; Are they voting that way because they already have firearms with those size magazines or did they buy them because they have the size mags they prefer for self-defense? If the former and not necessarily the latter, then what are their "real" 'druthers?

 

[benzy2]

It would depend on what you see as a realistic threat. I don't personally have visions of hoards of gang members knocking on my door.

The better question to me is what do I give up by increasing my capacity for any caliber? I'm willing to accept what a 9mm will do and have settled on it as a carry pistol. In 9mm, I don't find a double stack more intrusive than a single stack. With that, 12+ is easy to get in a small package. 15+ is easy to get in a full sized option. I don't see where I'd benefit from a 45 and I don't see where I'd be better off from today's options of single stacks in 9mm or larger. So, give me a double stacked 9mm with something around 12-17 rounds.

 

[tomrkba]

I don't personally have visions of hoards of gang members knocking on my door.

Train for the worst, hope for the best.

We do not train to fight a 90 pound weakling, though we certainly may end up doing so. A group of gang members performing a violent home invasion is a possible threat. I believe capacity is important, but carrying any gun at home is more important.

A quick search reveals:

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/t/video/30k-home-invasion-philadelphia-caught-camera-15978347

http://kfor.com/2013/10/24/gang-pistol-whips-91-year-old-ww-ii-veteran-after-breaking-into-his-home/

http://youtu.be/CAnIU--1m_o

 

[87jeep]

I only think about home.
All I need is 7+1 (sig P-220), That gets me to the AR(loaded with V-max).

"They all leave with the blanket covering their head"

 

[brutus51]

I voted 6 but the way I figure it if the job ain't done after two I probably won't need the other four.

 

[tomrkba]

I voted 6 but the way I figure it if the job ain't done after two I probably won't need the other four.

This is very poor thinking. The problem with it is that handgun terminal ballistics are not very good. An attacker may absorb multiple hits over many seconds before being incapable of continuing the attack. He can continue to attack you during that time. Relying upon typical criminal cowardice is also not good strategy. What if they decide to fight? Are you going to give up because you already fired two rounds? I believe you'll do the very best you can with what you have, but improving performance requires critical and honest thinking.

That gets me to the AR(loaded with V-max)

Maybe so, but maybe not. You do not know where you'll be in the house at the time. You may be surprised and they're already in close proximity. What if they follow you to the rifle and you don't have time to deploy it? The handgun you have on you may be all you have time to retrieve. Your shots will likely break them and cause them to flee, but it's no guarantee.

I think this all comes down to what you will carry daily in and out of your home. If you won't carry a 1911 or Glock mid-frame, then carry the largest gun you can get away with, even if it's only a pocket pistol. But, have it with you and not on the counter.

Always remember you can do everything right and still lose.

 

[Thompsoncustom]

This is very poor thinking. The problem with it is that handgun terminal ballistics are not very good. An attacker may absorb multiple hits over many seconds before being incapable of continuing the attack. He can continue to attack you during that time. Relying upon typical criminal cowardice is also not good strategy. What if they decide to fight? Are you going to give up because you already fired two rounds? I believe you'll do the very best you can with what you have, but improving performance requires critical and honest thinking.

The thing is that even a heart shot to a person not on drugs can live and fight anywhere from 1 to 8 secs on average. So one round to the heart or five doesn't matter if it's not beating.

Tho I carry a gun with 8 or more rounds I can't say I would fell less armed with a gun that carries 2. What I think it comes down to is even if you can make your shots count every time you don't know the situation you will be in and if there's 3 people and you have a 2 shot gun...well good luck.

 

[fastbolt]

FWIW, the last 4 experienced cops I know who have been in shootings, 2 of whom are firearms instructors, still include 5 & 6-shot revolvers among their off-duty weapons. They understand the risks and the potential trade-off's of their decisions. I've listened to other cops who have similar experiences and still include smaller off-duty and/or retirement weapons among their daily choices.

While studying & listening to other cases where "low capacity" 5-shot .38's and little .380's had been used to good effect to save the lives of cops, the disadvantage of their lower capacity seemed fully recognized, but their small size & weight still made them desirable for use as secondary & off-duty weapons.

I don't have anything resembling a crystal ball, but I'm still willing to choose when & where I'll carry diminutive versus larger handguns as retirement weapons.

The thing I consider important is that if a smaller CCW/off-duty/secondary/retirement weapon is employed, the owner ought to be just as skilled and experienced with accurately, rapidly & effectively using it as when using their larger one(s). Choosing a smaller weapon doesn't mean having to settle for less capability on the part of the owner/shooter.

Capacity is just one of the considerations. The ability to make fast and numerous misses isn't an advantage.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I am not a firm believer in loads of magazines unless I want to be fortified some where and expecting a drawn out gun fight, in which case I wont be relying on pistols

The flaw in that argument is that it assumes the defender gets to choose the time, place and mode of attack. And that ain't so --an attack is like an automobile accident, a heart attack, or a house fire, it happens at its own choosing.

The reason for carrying a spare magazine is the magazine is the Achilles heel of an automatic pistol. It doesn't matter how big your magazine is -- if it packs up on you, you need a spare -- fast!

 

[brutus51]

The point of my comment was based more on the fact that 90% of all firearm altercations have less than three rounds fired, ergo shot placement is by far more important than available round count. Look at the history of the greats, Wild Bill Hickock, Wyatt Earp, Bat Masterson all did it with five rounds , with my level of efficiency a 50 round drum magazine might not be enough.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Actually, Bat Masterson, for one, never did it at all -- he never killed anyone that historians can locate. And he was once in a gunfight where he was nearly blinded by sand kicked up by a near miss as he was "lying down to reload."

 

[Bobson]

Didn't vote. I can't bring myself to arbitrarily select a number for "minimum acceptable capacity." I chose my EDC based on a number of factors. Capacity wasn't one of them.

 

[CA Raider]

"It is better to work on accuracy, technique, tactics and situational awareness"

+1

CA R

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

It appears that folks are voting according to what they already own. So the question is; Are they voting that way because they already have firearms with those size magazines or did they buy them because they have the size mags they prefer for self-defense? If the former and not necessarily the latter, then what are their "real" 'druthers?

A good question.

Since I own more than one handgun, I answered based on the one that I use for carry, which is my Colt 1991A1.

I have a higher capacity Beretta 92FS. But since I rarely carry it, it didn't figure into my answer.

 

[Bobson]

It appears that folks are voting according to what they already own. So the question is; Are they voting that way because they already have firearms with those size magazines or did they buy them because they have the size mags they prefer for self-defense? If the former and not necessarily the latter, then what are their "real" 'druthers?

A good question.

You didn't answer it.

Do you carry your Colt 1991A1 primarily because it has a capacity you trust, or is there a more significant reason? And if there is a more significant reason, which seems very likely, what is your minimally acceptable capacity?

I think most people pick a firearm because it's a specific platform (such as a 1911 or a Glock), or maybe because it has a certain reputation (like an Hk or a SIG), and then convince themselves that whatever their gun's capacity happens to be is the number they can "minimally" tolerate. That's exactly what happened with me with my Glock 19. Now I can't see carrying a gun with less than 15 rounds... why would I? And in the future, if I suddenly take a liking to 1911s and start carrying one, it will be easy to quickly convince myself that a capacity of 8+1 is acceptable, because reloading is quick anyway, and hey, this will make me focus more on accuracy!

Reading through this thread is proof enough that this is true for a great majority of us. Nothing wrong with that. Capacity just isn't important enough to be a primary factor, for most people, in an EDC or nightstand firearm - nor should it be. There are numerous more important factors without even getting into mere preference points (such as manual of arms): ergonomics/fit, recoil impulse (will you actually practice with it), build quality, size (will you actually carry it). Throw manual of arms preference in there and the average person isn't going to answer those questions and find that two guns - one with 17+1 capacity, and one with 6+1 capacity - both meet all the criteria equally well. It just isn't going to happen.

 

[Mike1234567]

It's been stated many times that the more important concerns are our firearm's reliability and our own ability to consistently operate it/them accurately and that we keep ourselves trained. I'm not as well trained as many folks here but I'll do okay in most situations, I think. Still, for me, I want as many rounds at my disposal as is practicable. I don't want a 30rnd mag sticking several inches below my grip but a Ruger SR9c has 16+1 and it fits nicely in my hand. I'm as accurate with it as any other and I'm not the type to panic. I don't really lust after too many firearms and consider them tools so I have no pricey 1911's... though I do like and respect some. I do assure that my SD forearms meet the more important standards first but then I choose one or more of the hundreds available based largely on magazine capacity too. It's just logical to me. In other words, if I had a beautiful/sexy 1911, I probably wouldn't rely on it for SD. More power to those who do and, yes, it probably has enough capacity. However, I don't want to be caught in fire exchange with three bad guys in my home with only three rounds to shoot back at each one.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

In my humble opinion, the ideal self defense gun has five characteristics:

1. Reliability. It's got to go BANG! every time you pull the trigger. If it doesn't, it's just a funny-looking club.

2. Shootability. Given that it went bang, I have to be able to hit with it.

3. Power. Given that I got a hit, it has to have enough juice to do the job.

4. Reasonable capacity -- if I don't hit, or it doesn't do the job on the first hit, I want a do-over.

5. Concealability -- the law requires it not be visible to a casual observer.

The M1911 fills those for requirements admirably.

 

[kbheiner7]

I carry a 5" 1911 with fully loaded Wilson 47Ds, 8+1. I've read about guys not liking the 8+1 option, but I've successfully run hundreds of firing drills without a hiccup. 8+1 plus 2 extra mags works for me.

 

[Zerodefect]

Any way, carrying a pistol, for legal self defense, as most of us do, on this forum, is depend on were you live, and what you do.

So living in the Communist states of New York or California, fixes your Magazine capacity! Hence Florida for ever.

The Glock 19 I carry, and use in IDPA competition, not much competition of late.
Has 16 rounds ready to go, and a G17 magazine, as a spare, or in the case of a malfunction.

Up to now, I have not had a stoppage with my Glock 19.

As a retired person, I can carry all the time, only do not, when visiting the Sheriffs Dept. as a Volunteer.

When dragged into a fight, with guns, that has not happened to me, but has others. I never heard any one say, "Oh these extra rounds are too heavy, I think I will leave the magazine just half full?"

Have any of my fellow free Citizen's felt this way?

I've tried it. Downloading my G23 to 7+1 like my 1911's to save weight. Not really a big difference,but I didn't feel less prepared either. Most of the time, I feel that a single 1911 gives me a decent advantage in the senerios I'm most likely to get stuck with.

If I can't get the job done with 8 rounds and need to reload......then I figure I'm about to die. But in an "urban senerio", I do prefer to carry my G23 (14rds) with a 15 rnd reload over my 1911's (8+10).

 

[el Godfather]

Why compromise and be stubborn against technological improvements that gives us better capacity than pistol decades back. I chose 12+ because its where most calibers can be found in modern platforms.

 

[saturdaynightpolitics]

Like most things it's subjective. It's been said before 'If you knew your were gonna be in a fight you'd bring a rifle {or a tank, or an M61 Vulcan, or the best option:avoid the fight all together}, not a handgun'.

Truth be told, I find myself carrying small 5 shot revolvers more than my autos, they work better for me and I have been training with them more lately, so the capacity argument is lost on me!

But that being said, I have never felt in-adequatley prepared whether armed with my 5 shot LCR or my 7+1 PF9, even when my work takes me to some of the highest crime rate areas in the city.

 

[dondavis3]

The more the better for me.

But I carry a M&P .45 compact that has 6 + 1 and when I do I just carry a second mag.