JohnBT
Member
No, but a hammer will.
I finally realized why I never heard of Taffin when I was growing up. He was eleven when I was born.
I finally realized why I never heard of Taffin when I was growing up. He was eleven when I was born.
Perfect Packing Pistol Revisited
- Thread starter leeroy71
- Start date
- Status
Actually I have many PPS that have interchangable bits. Lyman makes a handy gunsmith one that holds several bits in the handle. It'll handle most everthing you really need to do with a screwdriver. I keep one in a couple of my smaller range bags. I also have a nice B-Square and a Chapman set that stays in my bigger range bags.
Now can we keep this gun related and stop this ludicrous drift.
I think it's a great racket for John Taffin. He writes about a concept:
The Perfect Packin Pistol. So, the best gunsmiths in the world put together
what they think is the perfect packin pistol, and he gets to try them, and, if he likes them either keep or buy them.
Hence how he has 10 or 12 PPP's.
Also keep in mind JT has a deep love for the .44 Special, and it's not like you can go out and buy a SA .44 Special very often with the specs he's after.
So, gunsmiths do customs, he writes about them then keeps the gun.
JRH has a FA 83 that fits that description right now, in .500JRH, IIRC.
When done it's on the block for sale. As close as I can tell, the parameters
are short barrel, custom, accurate, in a caliber that at least starts with a .4 and goes up.
The Perfect Packin Pistol. So, the best gunsmiths in the world put together
what they think is the perfect packin pistol, and he gets to try them, and, if he likes them either keep or buy them.
Hence how he has 10 or 12 PPP's.
Also keep in mind JT has a deep love for the .44 Special, and it's not like you can go out and buy a SA .44 Special very often with the specs he's after.
So, gunsmiths do customs, he writes about them then keeps the gun.
JRH has a FA 83 that fits that description right now, in .500JRH, IIRC.
When done it's on the block for sale. As close as I can tell, the parameters
are short barrel, custom, accurate, in a caliber that at least starts with a .4 and goes up.
If you inferred that "everything I really need to do with a handgun" means something other than " to be able to handle any reasonable task, should one come up." you inferred wrong. While I like to have the ability to do more extrordinary tasks I really don't need to.
Although for the record I have seen a SAA with signs that it had been used as a makeshift hammer and a Lewis L'Amour character used his front sight for a screwdriver, which I could see working.
Strykervet
member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,610
Well, for me a single action isn't going to cut it as a "perfect packing pistol" either for woods or for street, and if it is "perfect" it should be ideal for both, no? Furthermore, while I CAN open carry, I prefer not to, so carrying on the hip is, for the most part, out of the question. A "perfect packing pistol" should also be one that a person carries all the time and "is comofortable all day", right?
So for me, that has to be my G29 in a Milt Sparks VM2. I am wearing a G27 in a VM2 at the moment, it works better for just daily carry really, but the G29 is really just as comfortable. I should be carrying it, I just don't have any loads for it right now --I love the tens and shoot them up a lot. The G29 has ten rounds, 10mm, more power than a .357 for the same 3.78"(?) bbl. length and a heavier bullet as well. With 200gr. FMJ's, it is good for protection against anything alive in the 48 states, and small and comfortable enough to carry on the streets. Very flexible in loadings too, very.
I have a G20, but it is more of a range gun. I suppose in a belt holster, it would be an amazing pistol, truly perfect in all respects. 15 rounds and with the 4.6" bbl., more velocity and it drives 180gr. Speer Gold Dots at 1320fps with no problems at all. Suppose 200gr. Hornady FMJ's at 1200. Those things can go a few FEET in gelatin.
I also have a VM2 rig for my 1006. A 5" bbl. Smith and Wesson 3rd. Gen. all stainless pistol. 8 shot mag and thinner than the G20, but built MUCH heavier, it is a tank. Can handle serious loads. I figure if folks carry 1911's, I can carry this no problem in the VM2, it is similar in size and weight and that holster works great. If it works (I may need the 1066 or similar --the shorter version) then this could be the "perfect packing pistol".
For me anyway. The 10mm in the hands of a handloader is a very serious round capable of a wide range of uses. From plinking, to targets, to hunting, to defense, to woods defense, it excels in all of them. A truly phenomenal round, highly underated, but I think it is making a comeback. Hopefully it doesn't take off until I get my hands on a few more Smiths!
I have a 686+ 6" and I bet that author would really like it, but to me, it isn't the "perfect packing pistol" so that illustrates that to each his own.
In absolutely every case, had I the opportunity to pick and it had to be handgun, I'd ALWAYS go with the G20SF. That pistol has more firepower, power, all of it, than any other handgun out there. You can IWB one, but I keep the G20 for range use with adj. sights but it also has a Surefire X200 for HD use. I don't carry it. I have the G29, and maybe the 1006 for that.
So for me, that has to be my G29 in a Milt Sparks VM2. I am wearing a G27 in a VM2 at the moment, it works better for just daily carry really, but the G29 is really just as comfortable. I should be carrying it, I just don't have any loads for it right now --I love the tens and shoot them up a lot. The G29 has ten rounds, 10mm, more power than a .357 for the same 3.78"(?) bbl. length and a heavier bullet as well. With 200gr. FMJ's, it is good for protection against anything alive in the 48 states, and small and comfortable enough to carry on the streets. Very flexible in loadings too, very.
I have a G20, but it is more of a range gun. I suppose in a belt holster, it would be an amazing pistol, truly perfect in all respects. 15 rounds and with the 4.6" bbl., more velocity and it drives 180gr. Speer Gold Dots at 1320fps with no problems at all. Suppose 200gr. Hornady FMJ's at 1200. Those things can go a few FEET in gelatin.
I also have a VM2 rig for my 1006. A 5" bbl. Smith and Wesson 3rd. Gen. all stainless pistol. 8 shot mag and thinner than the G20, but built MUCH heavier, it is a tank. Can handle serious loads. I figure if folks carry 1911's, I can carry this no problem in the VM2, it is similar in size and weight and that holster works great. If it works (I may need the 1066 or similar --the shorter version) then this could be the "perfect packing pistol".
For me anyway. The 10mm in the hands of a handloader is a very serious round capable of a wide range of uses. From plinking, to targets, to hunting, to defense, to woods defense, it excels in all of them. A truly phenomenal round, highly underated, but I think it is making a comeback. Hopefully it doesn't take off until I get my hands on a few more Smiths!
I have a 686+ 6" and I bet that author would really like it, but to me, it isn't the "perfect packing pistol" so that illustrates that to each his own.
In absolutely every case, had I the opportunity to pick and it had to be handgun, I'd ALWAYS go with the G20SF. That pistol has more firepower, power, all of it, than any other handgun out there. You can IWB one, but I keep the G20 for range use with adj. sights but it also has a Surefire X200 for HD use. I don't carry it. I have the G29, and maybe the 1006 for that.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
No, apparently lots of folks still don't get it, even after reading the article. Which outlines clearly what it is and what it's for. As evidenced by all the confused and confusing posts, references to compact Glocks, 9mm's, etc..
For many years I carried just such PPPs---an old Ruger "Flattop" 44 Mag that had been trimmed to 4 3/4"---with five rounds of 44 Special reloads on board (240 SWC @ 950 FPS) or a stag gripped Colt SAA 44 Special reloads (same) thru it's 4 3/4" barrel.
Then I figured out the only animal I might encounter in my area was a mountain lion or a person and now I carry a lightweight HK P2000 pistol in 9mm with a lot more ammo on board (plus spare mag)---I still feel well-armed.
Then I figured out the only animal I might encounter in my area was a mountain lion or a person and now I carry a lightweight HK P2000 pistol in 9mm with a lot more ammo on board (plus spare mag)---I still feel well-armed.
How can one person's perfect pistol be so perfect for so many other people in the variety of situations a "packing pistol" will be used in. The whole concept doesn't make sense to me.
My perfect packing pistol is the one I pack in my holster and bring most everywhere. That being my S&W M&P9.
My perfect packing pistol is the one I pack in my holster and bring most everywhere. That being my S&W M&P9.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
I really don't understand why so many have so much trouble with the concept. It's not about concealed carry guns. It's about general purpose guns and that includes everything a handgun could be used for. Which means woods walkin', hunting, big game backup, targets of opportunity AND personal protection. So the PPP must be adequately powerful for medium sized game like deer, hogs and black bear. Not just concealed carry downtown. Believe it or not, some people actually USE their handguns for purposes other than self defense.
I think it might have been less confusing if the author had simply called it an "arbitrarily chosen set of criteria pistol," or an "ideal for woods carry if you're worried about black bears but not large browns pistol," but he didn't. He used the words "perfect" and "packin'," both of which already have meanings in the minds of most readers. When you try to lay claim to terms that don't seem accurate to many readers, you're going to create confusion.
Imagine if some auto journalist wrote a series of articles about the "perfect truck." Now imagine that the list of criteria put fuel efficiency at the top, gave weight to comfort and cargo space, and ground clearance was disregarded. That author might conclude that the "perfect truck" was in fact a minivan with a small engine. According to his criteria, that might be a very reasonable conclusion - but the list of criteria is mis-named.
I think Taffin's basically up against the same thing. His allegedly "perfect" pistols would be decidedly sub-optimal for many "packers." They wouldn't be powerful enough for someone trekking through the coastal Alaskan wilderness as a defence against a Kodiak bear. And a large-frame SA revolver would be a lousy choice in an urban environment if a group of criminals decided to mount a determined attack, not to mention cumbersome. And a large-caliber weapon would be silly in many parts of the eastern US that are just rural enough to allow shooting on your own land; not only are the dangerous animals very few and far between, shooting big guns is somewhat rude to the neighbors and unduly expensive. A .22 is a far more perfect woods pistol in much of America if you're going to plink on your walk.
So he's got a mis-titled category. For whatever reason, the category he has described is very appealing to him, and to some number of others. But by trying to make it seem universally appealing, he's just made it confusing.
Imagine if some auto journalist wrote a series of articles about the "perfect truck." Now imagine that the list of criteria put fuel efficiency at the top, gave weight to comfort and cargo space, and ground clearance was disregarded. That author might conclude that the "perfect truck" was in fact a minivan with a small engine. According to his criteria, that might be a very reasonable conclusion - but the list of criteria is mis-named.
I think Taffin's basically up against the same thing. His allegedly "perfect" pistols would be decidedly sub-optimal for many "packers." They wouldn't be powerful enough for someone trekking through the coastal Alaskan wilderness as a defence against a Kodiak bear. And a large-frame SA revolver would be a lousy choice in an urban environment if a group of criminals decided to mount a determined attack, not to mention cumbersome. And a large-caliber weapon would be silly in many parts of the eastern US that are just rural enough to allow shooting on your own land; not only are the dangerous animals very few and far between, shooting big guns is somewhat rude to the neighbors and unduly expensive. A .22 is a far more perfect woods pistol in much of America if you're going to plink on your walk.
So he's got a mis-titled category. For whatever reason, the category he has described is very appealing to him, and to some number of others. But by trying to make it seem universally appealing, he's just made it confusing.
Mauser lover
Member
I always figured that the perfect packing pistol was whatever you had on you at the time, not laying uselessly in the gun safe, or the gun shop counter.
If we are talking theoretical packing pistols, I think six double action .44 Rem. Mag. shots would be sufficient for just about anything short of a Kodiak bear. If you don't think six shots is enough for a gang of "bad guys", just ask all of Dirty Harry's opponents
If we are talking theoretical packing pistols, I think six double action .44 Rem. Mag. shots would be sufficient for just about anything short of a Kodiak bear. If you don't think six shots is enough for a gang of "bad guys", just ask all of Dirty Harry's opponents
Looked over "Sheriff Green Giant" S&W Model 58 with 4" barrel. I think that would work. If I recall correctly Taffin likes stuff that requires thumb cocking each time, 4" barrel in .454 or .500. I just don't want to carry welder gloves to shoot the stuff he cherishes.
Last edited:
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Taffin doesn't help his case when he misquotes himself as to what a PPP is. Then opens up the definition to encompass nearly every gun made, even tho he discounted most of them a sentence or two before.
Oh, well.
My take is he's talking about a general purpose woods handgun. Your take may be different.
Oh, well.
My take is he's talking about a general purpose woods handgun. Your take may be different.
Don't worry 10mm pistoleros will be along shortly to help.
Smith & Wesson makes light weight light alloy framed .44Mag with 4" or 5" barrel. Taffin top pics only viable if you're on horseback with mule following behind. If you're guy carrying your own kit forget about his advice.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
For many of my outdoor excursions, a Glock 20 is my choice.
Other times, a 5" S&W Model 25-5 works well, carried crossdraw in a KyTac Woodswalker holster.
Other times, a Ruger 5.5" Bisley in SS, also chambered in .45 Colt
I never felt unduly burdened carrying these on my person with no horse or mule in sight.
Other times, a 5" S&W Model 25-5 works well, carried crossdraw in a KyTac Woodswalker holster.
Other times, a Ruger 5.5" Bisley in SS, also chambered in .45 Colt
I never felt unduly burdened carrying these on my person with no horse or mule in sight.
a It isn't THAT hard a concept. The lightest, most compact gun you can carry on your hip, with a short barrel, single action, with enough power to keep you safe and bring home dinner anywhere.
This brings up a category that isn't gone into much, aluminum or scandium framed single action revolvers.
This area is one that has been explored a bit by a number of gunsmiths.
Just for fun, here are few:
All by Jack Huntington Advanced Gunsmithing:
.41 Magnum on a Ruger:
except for the scope, both of these .500JRH's qualify:
50-110 BFR
and then there is Hellboy:
A custom SA .500JRH:
This brings up a category that isn't gone into much, aluminum or scandium framed single action revolvers.
This area is one that has been explored a bit by a number of gunsmiths.
Just for fun, here are few:
All by Jack Huntington Advanced Gunsmithing:
.41 Magnum on a Ruger:
except for the scope, both of these .500JRH's qualify:
50-110 BFR
and then there is Hellboy:
A custom SA .500JRH:
Last edited:
The concept itself is what I "don't get" about it.
I understand why you'd want a good reliable handgun when you're in the woods for general purpose woods stuff and defense, but why does it have to be a single action to be "perfect"?
Just because that makes someone feel warm and fuzzy?
No offense to anyone... just saying that a 10mm Glock or a .357 Ruger GP-100 or any number of other guns other than a single action could also fill this role just as well for many people.
I understand why you'd want a good reliable handgun when you're in the woods for general purpose woods stuff and defense, but why does it have to be a single action to be "perfect"?
Just because that makes someone feel warm and fuzzy?
No offense to anyone... just saying that a 10mm Glock or a .357 Ruger GP-100 or any number of other guns other than a single action could also fill this role just as well for many people.
Taffin has more guns then God. I was once in the will, but, he has since disowned me. He also has what he likes, and, for HIM, SA's are where it's at. He also likes .44 Special. I like .45 Colt.
Taffin can indulge his fantasies because of his position in the gun industry.
Live with it.
He once told Gary Reeder I was a 'know it all'. That's really funny, because Taffin fits that description to a T, and you know what? He really is.
Read his books. They are fantastic.
The problem with semi-autos are they tend to be picky with bullet designs, like the Keiths, that Taffin respects, and reveres, and the LFN's.
Also Taffin likes bullet weight, and, that pretty much leaves out anything that won't shoot 250 grain or heavier bullets. So for him, it pretty much starts with the .41 Magnum, and goes up. The only semi-auto rounds that come close to the .41, or the .44 Special in a strong gun are the .45 Super, which I suspect he despises because of the group of lawyers that own the rights to that name, and the .460 Rowland.
Tim Sundles and Double Tap are putting the .45 ACP on the list with their 255 grain Truncated Cone type bullets, hard cast.
He's really not into the spray and pray approach that people suggest using semi-autos with inferior rounds, and making up for quality with quantity.
If you really want to get it from the horses' mouth, go to the Gary Reeder forum and give him a hard time there. He posts there all the time.
He also has what he likes, and, for HIM, SA's are where it's at. He also likes .44 Special. I like .45 Colt. Taffin can indulge his fantasies because of his position in the gun industry.
Live with it.
He once told Gary Reeder I was a 'know it all'. That's really funny, because Taffin fits that description to a T, and you know what? He really is.
Read his books. They are fantastic.
The problem with semi-autos are they tend to be picky with bullet designs, like the Keiths, that Taffin respects, and reveres, and the LFN's.
Also Taffin likes bullet weight, and, that pretty much leaves out anything that won't shoot 250 grain or heavier bullets. So for him, it pretty much starts with the .41 Magnum, and goes up. The only semi-auto rounds that come close to the .41, or the .44 Special in a strong gun are the .45 Super, which I suspect he despises because of the group of lawyers that own the rights to that name, and the .460 Rowland.
Tim Sundles and Double Tap are putting the .45 ACP on the list with their 255 grain Truncated Cone type bullets, hard cast.
He's really not into the spray and pray approach that people suggest using semi-autos with inferior rounds, and making up for quality with quantity.
If you really want to get it from the horses' mouth, go to the Gary Reeder forum and give him a hard time there. He posts there all the time.
jimbo555
Member
For me it's hard to beat the versatility of a 357 magnum service sized revolver with at least a 4inch barrel.Mine is a ruger police service six,the big advantage of the ruger is it can be easily dissassembled for complete cleaning in wilderness conditions unlike other revolvers.Also the ability to shoot a variety of rounds from low powered 38 spl.to hard cast 357's and snake loads works for me.
I've been reading the thread and wasn't going to comment. But it got so convoluted that I forgot the OP subject. So I'm just gonna interject what I usually do, but it varies from situation and mood.
I usually carry a 22 target pistol while hunting deer and black bear with a rifle (30-06). It's an original Ruger with its stock target grips. (I'm in NY state with no really dangerous animals)
Backpacking I have my 22 in my pack, but an S&W 629 in a crossdraw holster.
Sometimes I back pack in deep woods a few miles and camp. So the 44mag is good for deer or black bear. The 22 is good for the occasional rabbit or grouse. (Most don't realize that NY state has big woods. Where I go it's over 30 miles between roads)
When I'm bird hunting a keep a few slugs in my pocket. My 22 on my hip. Often times I substitute an S&W .357 mag 686 for the 22.
Socially I carry my Colt 1991 45acp. Frequently it's a Bersa .380.
Is that confusing enough?
I usually carry a 22 target pistol while hunting deer and black bear with a rifle (30-06). It's an original Ruger with its stock target grips. (I'm in NY state with no really dangerous animals)
Backpacking I have my 22 in my pack, but an S&W 629 in a crossdraw holster.
Sometimes I back pack in deep woods a few miles and camp. So the 44mag is good for deer or black bear. The 22 is good for the occasional rabbit or grouse. (Most don't realize that NY state has big woods. Where I go it's over 30 miles between roads)
When I'm bird hunting a keep a few slugs in my pocket. My 22 on my hip. Often times I substitute an S&W .357 mag 686 for the 22.
Socially I carry my Colt 1991 45acp. Frequently it's a Bersa .380.
Is that confusing enough?
- Status