Mag capacity vs Caliber
- Thread starter Darebear
- Start date
- Status
Bobson
Member
I think I may have just had the 9mm epiphany, provided I'm right in my assumption of what that epiphany is. I voted "more little rounds," but at any time up to an hour ago, I probably would have voted "less bigger rounds."
Edit: Guess my assumption was right, for the most-part.
Edit: Guess my assumption was right, for the most-part.
Last edited:
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
That oft quoted "2-3 rds per encounter" stat is WRONG. It includes suicides, AD's, warning shots, executions, animal put downs where only one round is typically fired.
I have asked your question before and when I got the "I feel perfectly comfortable carrying a High Standard .22 DAO derringer..." response, I realized that a lot of people have absolutely no clue.
I have asked your question before and when I got the "I feel perfectly comfortable carrying a High Standard .22 DAO derringer..." response, I realized that a lot of people have absolutely no clue.
Purgatory
Member
Started out highly preferring big .45 rounds, even in a lower capacity gun, but it was competition (IDPA) that revealed 'My' personal 9mm Epiphany.
Not just due to the advantage of higher round capacity and price of ammo, but the controllability of the 9mm lead to a much higher ratio of accurate hits on target and quicker follow-up shots.
For the record: I'm still endeared to the ol' flying ash tray and I've been nursin a hankerin for 10mm for quite some time.
Not just due to the advantage of higher round capacity and price of ammo, but the controllability of the 9mm lead to a much higher ratio of accurate hits on target and quicker follow-up shots.
For the record: I'm still endeared to the ol' flying ash tray and I've been nursin a hankerin for 10mm for quite some time.
Bobson
Member
Would you please supply the source that proves this?
The 2-3 shots per encounter claim (and the counter-argument you used here) seem to come up ridiculously often.
I've also seen multiple areas where people claimed that the main reason the 2-3 shots thing is false is because, in most situations where a firearm is discharged in SD, the would-be victim continues firing until his/her magazine is completely empty - even if 75% of those shots were unnecessary (eg, the attacker was killed with the third shot, but the would-be victim fired another nine shots anyway). Apparently, this is chalked up as "panic firing" or some such, due to a lack of training and high adrenalin. I'm not saying I believe this happens, I'm just saying what I've read [on THR, as this is the only "be prepared" / pro-gun forum I visit].
If that's true, the 2-3 shots per encounter bit may be a fallacy, but it's still demonstrates the point that 2-3 shots is sufficient.
Last edited:
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
I'm happy with a big-bore six-shot revolver.
So that hi-cap 7+1 1911 is really a bonus!!
I never subscribed to the "Spray & Pray" school of gun fighting.
Because the more shots you blast away with, the more times you miss.
And every stray bullet finds a place to stop somewhere!
rc
So that hi-cap 7+1 1911 is really a bonus!!
I never subscribed to the "Spray & Pray" school of gun fighting.
Because the more shots you blast away with, the more times you miss.
And every stray bullet finds a place to stop somewhere!
rc
orionengnr
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 5,713
"less bigger rounds" is another way of saying "smaller rounds"
The correct term is "fewer larger rounds".
And yes, I am in this camp.
The correct term is "fewer larger rounds".
And yes, I am in this camp.
I voted for less bigger rounds, I go with 13+1 in .45 ACP for HD and 8-17 rounds of 9mm (depending on the gun) when leaving the house. The .45 is my round of choice for SD, however, the older I get the lighter the gun I carry out the door and that would be one of the 9's.
Sigbear
Sigbear
What if the shot that finally makes the victim safe from their attacker isn't the second or third or even eighth one fired? Lots of people move around quite a bit when they are engaging in heavy aggression against someone else, and even more so when they know they are being targeted with a firearm.
I don't think you can conclude that 2-3 is sufficient just because many times that is enough to wrap up a violent encounter, especially since there is little way of knowing if a given attacker has friends with him that may decide they don't want to step into a fusillade of bullets and take off.
The 2-3 number isn't a useful figure if it includes all of the different situations David said it does, and I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that it does include all those extraneous events.
Dang-it. English was never my strength... actually broke up with a girl because she couldn't stand my "texting language". Lol."less bigger rounds" is another way of saying "smaller rounds"
The correct term is "fewer larger rounds".
And yes, I am in this camp.
Keepin' it Ol' School... I like that. I'm in love with the newer, modern firearms but LONG LIVE THE REVOLVER!
Hmm. It will be interesting to see where this goes. I was always told (not by cops) that a average volient encounter is always 5-10 feet and ends after 2-3 rounds.
I like my Sig P226 Tac with 20 rounds because 2-3 shots with it will leave me @17 shots left where as my long gone love HK45c 2-3 shots will leave me with @5 rounds. BIG DIFFERENCE. I also subscribe to the idea that a personal attack against me and my family can be commited by more than one person, so that's why I lean towards capacity being king.
guyfromohio
Member
I'm not sure if I'm going to answer the poll. My preference is the gun that goes bang every time and makes my job of hitting the target as easy as possible. When I carry my G19, it's not because of the 15 rounds. When I carried my Colt, it wasn't because of the larger round. I shoot my 642 as well as any and carry fewer rounds, but it's far more comfortable to carry. I would agree that five rounds isn't enough, but would argue that 8 rounds of .45 would not necessarily put one at a disadvantage. How's that for a nothing answer?
Bobson
Member
I wasn't coming to the conclusion that 2-3 rounds is sufficient, I was just saying it's a possibility. And assuming the statistic includes absolutely anything is unreasonable, because your assumption potentially changes that statistic entirely, regardless of what your assumption actually is, which is why I asked for the source.
Either way, like I said earlier, I voted for "more little rounds."
bikerdoc
Moderator In Memoriam
Ive been known to leave the house with a 1911 on my right hip, a 357 in my left pocket and a hicap 9mm mounted to the underdash of my truck. So I didnt vote.
RatherNotSay
Member
Hunter125
Member
I chose .40 as a compromise of both. If it's good enough for the FBI, I suppose it'll do. Plus I've just never been a big fan of 9mm and .45 is expensive.
That said, I plan to purchase a 9mm, a .380, a 642, and a .45 as my next several handguns. At that point I suppose what I carry will depend on my mood.
That said, I plan to purchase a 9mm, a .380, a 642, and a .45 as my next several handguns. At that point I suppose what I carry will depend on my mood.
Ar180shooter
Member
.40S&W has a little more oomph than 9mm, but without sacrificing too much in terms of magazine capacity. My $.02
Lucky Derby
Member
"I'm happy with a big-bore six-shot revolver."
My .44 Hand Ejector Second Model thanks you.
My .44 Hand Ejector Second Model thanks you.
HellBlazer
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2010
- Messages
- 52
I don't really care either way. I don't plan on missing the first shot.
Well well well aren't we a BAMF. Hopefully that ONE round handles your threat or threats.
HellBlazer
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2010
- Messages
- 52
I carry a revolver, so I'm used to making 6 shots or less count.
- Status
