Lightweight handgun package

[D.B. Cooper]

The recent fires and associated deaths in California have me thinking about the need to leave home quickly. I'd like to add a defensive handgun and ammo to my bag of tricks. (I do not now, nor plan to, EDC a sidearm for self defense.) From the experience of shooting a Redhawk in USPSA for a year, I understand the limitations of a revolver for defense; for the purposes of this discussion,I have no preference for either revolver or autoloader.

My requirements are:

1.) Light as possible (or practical). For the entire package To include gun, ammo, holster etc. (This likely means 38 spl or 9mm and kydex holster)

2.) Easily accessible ammo. Again, this likely means 38 spl or 9mm, but I'm open to other ideas.

3.) Any autoloader MUST have a manual safety that must be physically manipulated/disengaged prior to firing.

4.) Does not necessarily need to be concealable. We have Constitutional open carry. (Although, there may be some added value to said sidearm being small enough to conceal.)

At the moment, I've been looking at the Ruger LCRx and Charter Arms Undercover. Haven't really thought about autoloaders other than a Beretta 92F. (Because I'm familiar with it.)

This might be considered a primary firearm; I may not have time to go to the safe and grab a long gun on the way out the door.

What are the group's thoughts on this?

 

[rpenmanparker]

Likely heavier than you want, but I am satisfied with my Ruger LC9s (or EC9s for less money). 7-9 rounds+1 depending upon the magazine configuration you choose. Solid, highly regarded 9 mm pistol. External safety. My hand fits well with even the shorter magazine equipped with the pinkie support bottom plate.

Actually I’m not saying you should buy one, but having one, I feel well equipped for the situation you describe.

 

[Hokie_PhD]

If you didn’t want a manual safety I’d say get a S&W SD9VE. They’re cheap, shoot well and are about the size of the new 9 compact. I say this as I can’t see having an expensive gun in a bug out bag. Rather I see it as an extra to go in the bag and as a supplement to my EDC.

If you want a manual safety how about a police trade M&P if you can find one with a safety?

 

[D.B. Cooper]

If you didn’t want a manual safety I’d say get a S&W SD9VE. They’re cheap, shoot well and are about the size of the new 9 compact. I say this as I can’t see having an expensive gun in a bug out bag. Rather I see it as an extra to go in the bag and as a supplement to my EDC.

If you want a manual safety how about a police trade M&P if you can find one with a safety?

I didn't know the M&P had a safety. But you're right-I should be looking for cheap.

 

[TreeDoc]

2nd on the Lc9s, just came from the range with my ec9s and man does thing shoot well. While I was there, I handled a ruger security 9, same size as Glock 19, but with a safety and 1/2 the price.

 

[JTQ]

I'm a long time 1911 shooter (pretty much all I shoot), and I can appreciate a manual safety, but a "lightweight bug out gun, with readily available ammo and accessories" will pretty much show a picture of a Glock 17 or Glock 19 next to that definition in the dictionary, and I don't own a Glock and never have.

If you've got to have a safety, there are a few poly auto's in 9mm that should work...

Similar controls to the 92FS is the Beretta PX4 http://www.beretta.com/en-us/pistol...9.1129190339.1542157460-1810196551.1541287018

There is also the HK USP and P30S guns https://hk-usa.com/product/pistols/

CZ P-07 and P-09 http://cz-usa.com/product-category/handguns/polymer-omgea-series/

 

[rpenmanparker]

2nd on the Lc9s, just came from the range with my ec9s and man does thing shoot well. While I was there, I handled a ruger security 9, same size as Glock 19, but with a safety and 1/2 the price.

Yes, I also have the SR9, probably a dressier Security 9. Nice gun, but a bit large for OP’s purpose.

 

[TomJ]

This may be what you're looking for. I have 4 of the M&P 2.0's (9mm Shield, 9mm compact with a 4 inch barrel, 9mm full size and 45). They've been reliable and the ergonimics are excellent.


http://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/mp-9-m20-36-compact-manual-thumb-safety

 

[JTQ]

Here's a Lucky Gunner review of the PX4 Compact Carry. This a special model that comes as a "G" model (decocker only), but the regular PX4 (full size, compact, and sub-compact) is available with a safety.

 

[chicharrones]

Likely heavier than you want, but I am satisfied with my Ruger LC9s (or EC9s for less money). 7-9 rounds+1 depending upon the magazine configuration you choose. Solid, highly regarded 9 mm pistol. External safety. My hand fits well with even the shorter magazine equipped with the pinkie support bottom plate.

Actually I’m not saying you should buy one, but having one, I feel well equipped for the situation you describe.

Sounds like a good choice. A single stack auto will be lighter than a double stack auto due to less ammo capacity weight. Yet, a single stack 9mm will almost always hold more ammo than a small and light centerfire revolver.

 

[Armored farmer]

A SR9C meets your criteria.
Cheap enough to buy and put in a backpack with a couple of magazines and a weapon light and forget it. A natural, easy shooter too.

 

[Telekinesis]

I'd look at a S&W M&P 2.0 Compact. You can find them with a manual safety (which can be easily removed if you change your mind about it) and you can find them new for around $400 (add in tax or transfer, etc). Mags are inexpensive and available, as are other parts and accessories like holsters.

I would stick with a gun in the size range of the Glock 19 and M&P 2.0 Compact. There are a lot of people on both sides of the concealed vs open carry debate, but having a gun in this size gives you the option to do either, which may not be the case if you get a full sized gun.

 

[FL-NC]

S&W M&P or Ruger SR-9.

 

[Mike .45]

Not cheap but the HK USP fits your crireria. the compact models are pretty easy to conceal or full size for OC.

 

[Mike .45]

As mentioned above. The SR9 and M&P are both solid choices as well.

 

[roscoe]

Lots of choices out there. I went with a Shield 9mm. It is a great gun, and they can be found around $300 nowadays with a safety.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

So...first thanks for the comments. I guess I was just under the mistaken belief that all composite guns were a.) striker fired and b.)no manual safety.(i.e. Glock copies) I'm very much a traditionalist, and all my guns are wood and steel.

So...one other thing I should have mentioned in my original post, that these guys bring up here:

A single stack auto will be lighter than a double stack auto due to less ammo capacity weight. Yet, a single stack 9mm will almost always hold more ammo than a small and light centerfire revolver.

So this may be chasing the tail a bit. What's the difference in weight if I carry two 7-round magazines in a single tack gun as compared to one 15 round magazine in a double stack gun?(Other than the fact that most people always carry a spare mag no matter how many rounds it holds.)

[...]put in a backpack with a couple of magazines[...]and forget it[...]

And this brings up the discussion of autoloader vs revolver. I can load 5 rounds in a revolver, throw it in a pack, and in 5 years (15 years, 50 years) it will shoot. If I load up a 7 round magazine, put it in a gun and leave it for ...5, 10, 15 years...how long before the prings in that mag go bad and I get one shot and a fail to feed? Is it worth the trade-off? (5 for sure vs 8 maybe)

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Seems like every one of the double stack guns people have suggested are within a 2 oz spread in weight difference. (Almost all are 25-27 oz.) Compared to 33oz on the 92FS (half pound difference) and 48 on my current revolver (almost double).

 

[Tallball]

If the OP could do without the safety requirement, the Taurus PT111 G2 would be a good choice. It's small, light, and inexpensive. IIRC it holds 12 rounds. The trigger is sort of strange, but mine is accurate for a smallish 9mm. I got the stainless steel version brand-new for around $220.

View media item 1591
Ruger P-series pistols are maybe a little more heavy/bulky than the OP wants, but they are cheap and reliable. Here is my P94 polymer 40 caliber as an example. They are known as being very reliable/durable. Most of them have safeties.

View media item 1727
My go-to would be a Tanfoglio CZ75 "clone". I have purchased several of the polymer versions for around $250, gently used. They have a safety. Mine are very reliable and accurate. Like the Ruger, it's not super small, but it's a good service pistol that isn't expensive or super heavy.

TanfoglioWitness40

• Tallball
• Jun 17, 2018

The ultimate in small, light, cheap pistols has to be the Kel-Tecs. The 380 is tiny and the 32acp is smaller than that. I got my P32 for $120-something used. It goes bang every time. I don't think there's another centerfire handgun that beats it for a combination of small, light, and cheap.

KelTec P32

• Tallball
• Jun 11, 2018

 

[bannockburn]

A Ruger SR9c would fill the bill nicely as it also has 17 round magazines available for it and it does have a manual safety.

 

[Spats McGee]

The situation described by the OP brings a couple of models to mind. They are: (1) Ruger SR9c; and (2) S&W Shield. I've never owned an SR9c, but I do own a Shield. I have to admit, though, that a revolver is also very tempting for this situation, and if I were going that route, the LCRx would get a pretty hard look from me.

 

[rpenmanparker]

So...first thanks for the comments. I guess I was just under the mistaken belief that all composite guns were a.) striker fired and b.)no manual safety.(i.e. Glock copies) I'm very much a traditionalist, and all my guns are wood and steel.

So...one other thing I should have mentioned in my original post, that these guys bring up here:



So this may be chasing the tail a bit. What's the difference in weight if I carry two 7-round magazines in a single tack gun as compared to one 15 round magazine in a double stack gun?(Other than the fact that most people always carry a spare mag no matter how many rounds it holds.)



And this brings up the discussion of autoloader vs revolver. I can load 5 rounds in a revolver, throw it in a pack, and in 5 years (15 years, 50 years) it will shoot. If I load up a 7 round magazine, put it in a gun and leave it for ...5, 10, 15 years...how long before the prings in that mag go bad and I get one shot and a fail to feed? Is it worth the trade-off? (5 for sure vs 8 maybe)

Many folks say that is a myth, that the autoloader stored in a fully loaded condition will continue to function properly “forever “.

 

[JTQ]

And this brings up the discussion of autoloader vs revolver. I can load 5 rounds in a revolver, throw it in a pack, and in 5 years (15 years, 50 years) it will shoot. If I load up a 7 round magazine, put it in a gun and leave it for ...5, 10, 15 years...how long before the prings in that mag go bad and I get one shot and a fail to feed? Is it worth the trade-off? (5 for sure vs 8 maybe)

It can probably sit there for the rest of your life and still function if needed.

Springs weaken through use, cycles, unless compressed beyond their design parameters. Fully loaded, most magazine springs are not compressed beyond their design parameters.

 

[chicharrones]

So...first thanks for the comments. I guess I was just under the mistaken belief that all composite guns were a.) striker fired and b.)no manual safety.(i.e. Glock copies) I'm very much a traditionalist, and all my guns are wood and steel.

So...one other thing I should have mentioned in my original post, that these guys bring up here:



So this may be chasing the tail a bit. What's the difference in weight if I carry two 7-round magazines in a single tack gun as compared to one 15 round magazine in a double stack gun?(Other than the fact that most people always carry a spare mag no matter how many rounds it holds.)



And this brings up the discussion of autoloader vs revolver. I can load 5 rounds in a revolver, throw it in a pack, and in 5 years (15 years, 50 years) it will shoot. If I load up a 7 round magazine, put it in a gun and leave it for ...5, 10, 15 years...how long before the prings in that mag go bad and I get one shot and a fail to feed? Is it worth the trade-off? (5 for sure vs 8 maybe)

You can look up cartridge weights on the net and multiply that out by the gun's capacity and add the empty weight of a particular gun to it. Except, some gun makers don't include a magazine in their weight figures and magazine weight isn't always listed either.

Here's a webpage with a chart on some ammo weights.
http://closefocusresearch.com/commercial-and-military-ammunition-cartridge-weight-calculator-program
Here's another.
www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/04/09/how-much-does-your-ammunition-weigh/amp/

 

[jar]

Since us wheel folk seem underrepresented let me speak up for old and reliable. I'm always more comfortable with a revolver than any semi-automatic and that would be my choice for a bug out weapon. There are several reasons, mostly practical. I find revolvers much easier to use one handed than any of my semi-automatics; no tap and rack drills, a second strike capability, cartridge don't fire then just pull trigger again and move on (except in the case of a bullet stuck in barrel but that is the same with both formats), easier one handed reloads either one at a time or with moon clips/speed loaders. I also find switching between strong and weak hand operations easier with revolvers than semi-automatics and basically the only variations in manual of arms is whether it is Smith & Wesson push cylinder release or Colt pull to release the cylinder.

Revolvers ain't perfect, they still need maintenance and it's possible to jam the cylinder so it won't turn but in over a half century of shooting wheelies and bottom feeders I've had one instance of a cylinder bind (and it was cured by pulling hammer to half cock, swinging out and clearing the offending cartridge) but a dozen or so instances of feed problems and eject problems with semi-autos. I've had magazines that failed to easily come out and spent cartridges caught in about every imaginable position in the slide but just that one hangup with my wheelies.

Reloads with a revolver can be slower than with a semi-automatic when all goes well; but when all does not go well the revolver is far easier to reload and far more forgiving. Also I've found revolvers are generally less ammo specific than semi-automatics, if it fits in the hole and seats it almost always goes bang.

With the handgun I prefer another old solution for carry ammo and that's the classic dump pouch.

​

If I take a 38 then both sides are filled with loose 38s. If I take a 357 then one side is loose 357 and the other 38. If I take one of my 45acps then one side is 45s in moon clips while the other is loose ammo. Regardless, the old dump pouch is still a great solution that can be worn on a belt, tossed in the bug out bag or hung from a camp hook or vest.

The dump pouch will hold between 40 and 50 rounds per side and can be carried on your person. Throw a couple more boxes in the bag as you head out the door and your set.