Has anyone tried a MecTec carbine conversion in .357 Sig? IMO that cartridge really bridges the gap between a pistol cartridge and a small rifle cartridge very well. I'm surprised that more PCC manufacturers don't offer that chambering. SC
Pistol- caliber carbines
- Thread starter kcmarine
- Start date
- Status
BullpupBen
Member
For HD, I would say that a pistol-caliber carbine (comparing it to a rifle, not a shotgun) is an excellent choice.
You are going to be creating much larger wounds than with a rifle round. The most comprehensive tests on pistol stopping power showed that 10mm auto was the perfect round, and a .40 with a 16" barrel is more powerful than a 10mm auto.
A .308 Winchester might have 8 times the kinetic energy of a pistol round, but it is only going to create a .30 caliber wound plus deformation of the bullet and then move right through your target, along with the rest of its energy.
A pistol round, on the other hand, will create a .355 (9mm) or .40 caliber wound plus deformation from the hollow point, which will cause your target to "bleed out" faster than any reasonably controllable rifle round.
Additionally, the noise and muzzle flash is nothing compared to a rifle, that along with the lower recoil will ensure you can take follow up shots without being disoriented.
They are also good to at least 100 yards, so you shouldn't have any worries about range.
Anyway, getting back to the question. The sub2000 is really nice except its stock is about 2" short on me, and the Beretta is probably excellent but very pricey.
You are going to be creating much larger wounds than with a rifle round. The most comprehensive tests on pistol stopping power showed that 10mm auto was the perfect round, and a .40 with a 16" barrel is more powerful than a 10mm auto.
A .308 Winchester might have 8 times the kinetic energy of a pistol round, but it is only going to create a .30 caliber wound plus deformation of the bullet and then move right through your target, along with the rest of its energy.
A pistol round, on the other hand, will create a .355 (9mm) or .40 caliber wound plus deformation from the hollow point, which will cause your target to "bleed out" faster than any reasonably controllable rifle round.
Additionally, the noise and muzzle flash is nothing compared to a rifle, that along with the lower recoil will ensure you can take follow up shots without being disoriented.
They are also good to at least 100 yards, so you shouldn't have any worries about range.
Anyway, getting back to the question. The sub2000 is really nice except its stock is about 2" short on me, and the Beretta is probably excellent but very pricey.
kcshooter
Member
I've never understood the point of pistol caliber carbines as serious weapons to defend your home with, I have a 995 HiPoint also and it's tons of fun but one of the last guns I'd grab should the SHTF. I've got better caliber carbines to fight with, if it came to that. If I were to shoot a pistol caliber defending myself, that bullet would come from, naturally, a pistol.
However, the fun factor of that HiPoint, along with it's reliability, make it a keeper for sure.
However, the fun factor of that HiPoint, along with it's reliability, make it a keeper for sure.
I'm holding a $189.95 rain check for a Hi-Point 4095 carbine, been pacing the floor since Father's Day waiting for them to come in. HP tells me they're having difficulty with a vendor getting a certain part to them, so they're backing up on the 4095 production.
Yes, it's a Hi-Point, but it's for FUN, not self-defense or combat.
They're "supposedly" going to be releasing their new 4595 carbine in .45 acp later this year, but I'm not holding my breath. This is an early prototype, the chrome has been dropped.
Yes, it's a Hi-Point, but it's for FUN, not self-defense or combat.
They're "supposedly" going to be releasing their new 4595 carbine in .45 acp later this year, but I'm not holding my breath. This is an early prototype, the chrome has been dropped.
J Star
Member
Love my 995. Ripped off the crap factory stock, threw on an ATI stock, got a bunch of mags, and now I have fun at the range for hours for less than the price of filling my 3 AK mags once each.
Waiting for a nice Spectre sling that I ordered, and the Moerse Lekker shoulder thing that goes up!
I had issues at first, but it was due to a messed up magazine spring on the included mag. My other mags all worked flawlessly right out of the bag. If I lived in PA, I'd even try the 15 round mags. :banghead:
Waiting for a nice Spectre sling that I ordered, and the Moerse Lekker shoulder thing that goes up!
I had issues at first, but it was due to a messed up magazine spring on the included mag. My other mags all worked flawlessly right out of the bag. If I lived in PA, I'd even try the 15 round mags. :banghead:
BullpupBen
Member
What do you mean by a better caliber? A 125 gr .357 magnum round will stop an attacker with a single center mass hit 96% of the time.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm
In 125 gr loads .357 sig more-or-less duplicates this in a 4" barrel, imagine what kind of stopping power that would have from a 16" barrel?
And even a 9mm has the energy of a .357 magnum from a 16" barrel
If you think a .223 round (which I assume is what you mean) will stop in one hit over 96% of the time... then I must say I disagree.
In addition it will accomplish this without blinding you or deafening you (try firing a 16" AR with the stock collapsed in pitch black without ear protection)
While a PCC wouldn't be my first choice for home defense, I wouldn't sneeze at it either. If you're going to reach for a pistol, why not reach for a pistol with a longer sight radius, quicker follow up shots, and better velocity?I know people hate them/see no point to them, but if the ball drops, I'd definitely have my Sub2k with me. I view a PCC as a trunk/SHTF/civilian PDW type weapon. As has often been said the gun with you trumps any gun at home. The Keltec can go unseen darn near anywhere you don't have to go through a metal detector or get your bag tossed on a regular basis. Would it be nice to have a real rifle with you? Sure would, and yeah you're giving up range and penetration, but a rifle's an option in a lot less places than something that folds down to under 18". Not an ideal tool for combat in the wide open, but it's fine as a light survival gun, or an urban/suburban defensive weapon. It uses the same mags and ammo as my pistol, which means redundancy and simplified logistics, a handful of mags and a couple boxes of 9mm and you're good to go.
kcshooter
Member
All I meant by that was if I'm grabbing a gun to put to my shoulder to defend myself, I will go for a shotgun first and a AK second, followed by the AR. But since the shotgun isn't a carbine, the subject of the thread, then an AK would be my first carbine choice.
(But for home defense, I feel better with a pistol anyway. One hand free, no barrel swing to get in the way, just my opinion.)
While a .357magnum does have a huge stopping power, I haven't seen any evidence showing the 9mm is as effective a stopper out of a 16" barrel as a .357mag. Not saying it isn't out there, but I've never seen it. Got a link?
Besides, if the .357 is the best caliber for stopping someone in one shot, why not just start there?
Have you ever shot a 9mm or .357 in the dark without hearing protection? While the Db's of the rifle caliber might be higher, deaf is deaf! From personal experience, I can tell you pistol rounds fired in self defense in the dark with no earmuffs inside a home are deafening.
My opinion is there are better weapons to shoulder up with in a SD situation. YMMV.
Last edited:
skinewmexico
Member
Range toy. If you need a rifle.........get a rifle, and take advantage of the better ballistics.
ThomasT
Member
Pistol bullets out of rifle length barrels are very destructive. If you us a 357 or 44 mag for deer hunting you better test your bullets. I have seen deer shot with a 44 mag on 3 occasions. Really nasty wounds and that was with winchester 240gr sp wb ammo.
One deer was hit high in the back. It took out half the spine. It looked like a Jurrasic Park velocer rapter bit a chunk out of it. I shot a coyote with a 357 158hp once. It was a raking shot that blew off half of its rear and wrapped the intestines around its neck. The dog was running straight away from me.
If you load for the 9mm a load of 6.0gr unique will give you nearly 1400fps from the marlin 9mm.
When shooting side by side with a 223 the difference in muzzle blast is pretty noticable. Anything shot indoors will be loud to some degree.
I have PPCs in 44 mag, 357 mag. 32 mag and 9mm. I like them for what they are. I don't feel undergunned at all having one for HD duties. I also have a Mini 14 and two SKS rifles and two 30-30s if more power is needed in an intermediate power range.
My favorite of all is the Marlin 357.
One deer was hit high in the back. It took out half the spine. It looked like a Jurrasic Park velocer rapter bit a chunk out of it. I shot a coyote with a 357 158hp once. It was a raking shot that blew off half of its rear and wrapped the intestines around its neck. The dog was running straight away from me.
If you load for the 9mm a load of 6.0gr unique will give you nearly 1400fps from the marlin 9mm.
When shooting side by side with a 223 the difference in muzzle blast is pretty noticable. Anything shot indoors will be loud to some degree.
I have PPCs in 44 mag, 357 mag. 32 mag and 9mm. I like them for what they are. I don't feel undergunned at all having one for HD duties. I also have a Mini 14 and two SKS rifles and two 30-30s if more power is needed in an intermediate power range.
My favorite of all is the Marlin 357.
Last edited:
BullpupBen
Member
First off let me say I think a shotgun is the best weapon for HD in most situations, but leaving that out of the equation:
My point exactly, and the effects on humans will be roughly comparable.
We'll in real life when SHTF and your adreneline is pumping your hands are gonna be shaking and your not gonna be aiming like you do at the range. Using a handgun effectively in combat takes much more proficiency than using a rifle, so a PCC means it is more likely you will hit the target before he hits you.
And as for the comparison between calibers just here is a chart: http://www.saysuncle.com/images/9mm.gif
(the chart is for 115 grains but lower the velocities a bit and you can imagine what 125 would look like)
Now, the muzzle velocity for a 125 gr .357 Magnum round in a 4" barrel is about 1440 fps according to Federal Cartridge, and as you can see the 9mm in a 16" barrel would hit a little over this.
So a .355 125 gr bullet at 1500 fps vs a .357 125 gr bullet at 1440 fps: it doesn't take much to see those two rounds will perform very similar both in external and internal ballistics provided they are both using the same type of bullet.
Well its OK if thats your opinion but if your going to state it publicly than just back it up with facts. Explain to me why a rifle round would do more damage and what advantages a rifle caliber has over a pistol caliber in a carbine for HD.
My point exactly, and the effects on humans will be roughly comparable.
We'll in real life when SHTF and your adreneline is pumping your hands are gonna be shaking and your not gonna be aiming like you do at the range. Using a handgun effectively in combat takes much more proficiency than using a rifle, so a PCC means it is more likely you will hit the target before he hits you.
And as for the comparison between calibers just here is a chart: http://www.saysuncle.com/images/9mm.gif
(the chart is for 115 grains but lower the velocities a bit and you can imagine what 125 would look like)
Now, the muzzle velocity for a 125 gr .357 Magnum round in a 4" barrel is about 1440 fps according to Federal Cartridge, and as you can see the 9mm in a 16" barrel would hit a little over this.
So a .355 125 gr bullet at 1500 fps vs a .357 125 gr bullet at 1440 fps: it doesn't take much to see those two rounds will perform very similar both in external and internal ballistics provided they are both using the same type of bullet.
Well its OK if thats your opinion but if your going to state it publicly than just back it up with facts. Explain to me why a rifle round would do more damage and what advantages a rifle caliber has over a pistol caliber in a carbine for HD.
kcshooter
Member
Like I said, I think there are better options. I didn't say the pistol caliber would be ineffective.
Are you under the impression that a 9mm out of a 16" barrel is going to do more damage than a rifle round out of a barrel of the same length?
Are you serious? I don't care what the barrel length is, there is no way a 9mm or .40 is going to have the stopping ability of a 7.62x39. Is that really something you disagree with??
Are you under the impression that a 9mm out of a 16" barrel is going to do more damage than a rifle round out of a barrel of the same length?
michael_aos
Member
My Olympic K9GL shoots the Buffalo Bore 115gr +P+ @ ~1600fps. ~650 ft/lbs of energy and nowhere NEAR the noise of an AR-15.
Mike
Mike
BullpupBen
Member
Yes, now explain to me why a rifle round of smaller diameter and mass would create a greater wound channel.
ThomasT
Member
Bullpen and KC i don't want to get in the middle of your discussion too much but have you guys seen what a small 243 can do to deer?
Thats the funny thing about guns and loads, You can make a low velocity pistol round work like a high powered rifle and high powered gun punch a small hole in your target. The variables are all over the map. Thats why i like to reload my own ammo.
Pistol carbines do a lot of work for what they are. So do intermediate rounds like a 7x39.
The bullet does the work and choosing a bullet for the desired affect is what its all about. I don't want to be shot with any of them.
Thats the funny thing about guns and loads, You can make a low velocity pistol round work like a high powered rifle and high powered gun punch a small hole in your target. The variables are all over the map. Thats why i like to reload my own ammo.
Pistol carbines do a lot of work for what they are. So do intermediate rounds like a 7x39.
The bullet does the work and choosing a bullet for the desired affect is what its all about. I don't want to be shot with any of them.
kcshooter
Member
You are asking me to convince you that rifle rounds are more powerful than pistol rounds?? No thanks. I'd rather just end this conversation here.
I'm not an avid hunter, but I know plenty of guys who are. My uncle's favorite all-around caliber is .243. Heck, I even know people who have hunted deer with a .223 successfully. (However, I don't know of anyone who's taken a deer with a 9mm.)
You pick your tool based on the job that needs to be done. Handguns, PCCs, shotguns, assault weapons, and battle rifles are all different 'tools.' If I were fighting in the desert at extended distances, where the buildings are made of brick/concrete, and my opponents may be wearing body armor then I would opt for a .308 battle rifle. If I lived by myself where the chance of accidentally hitting a family member with errant shot wasn't an issue then I'd probably go for a shotgun. Since I do have a wife and kids, I want something that allows for precise shot placement and minimizes overpenetration. For me, a PCC with light, fast-expanding hollowpoints is the ticket.
Phil DeGraves
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,531
Well, I have three pistol caliber lever guns left over from my Cowboy Action Shooting days. They are fun and cheap to shoot. I suppose I wouldn't mind getting a .45 Camp carbine as long as I could get one of those thirty round drum magazines for it. Sort of a semi auto sub gun. But then I already have a Powder Springs Mac 10 in .45 so it would be kind of redundant.
ThomasT
Member
Hello KC. My shooting buddy let his son shoot his first deer with a marlin camp carbine in 9mm. He said the bullet went through the deer and the deer ran about 40 yards and fell over dead. It never ran out of sight. He stated the damage to the inside wasn't what you might call massive, but tore up the heart and lungs.
He said it was about as quick a kill as anything else that hits behind the shoulder. The bullet was a 125gr speer soft point. A 115 HP would have most likely been more destructive. The range was about 45 yards.
There was a good article about 357 lever guns in an issue of Rifle Magazine by Brian Pearce. You can get back issues from their website. I would really suggest getting that magazine.
I wouldn't have any problems using a 9mm for deer. But i normally set up watching a trail or feeder and so the ranges i hunt at aren't long. The closes deer i have shot was 13 yards away. I had another deer less than 6 feet from me but couldn't bring myself to shoot it at that range. So i let it walk about 20 yards away and shot. I hit an unseen limb and missed the dang deer. AAAUURRGGG.
He said it was about as quick a kill as anything else that hits behind the shoulder. The bullet was a 125gr speer soft point. A 115 HP would have most likely been more destructive. The range was about 45 yards.
There was a good article about 357 lever guns in an issue of Rifle Magazine by Brian Pearce. You can get back issues from their website. I would really suggest getting that magazine.
I wouldn't have any problems using a 9mm for deer. But i normally set up watching a trail or feeder and so the ranges i hunt at aren't long. The closes deer i have shot was 13 yards away. I had another deer less than 6 feet from me but couldn't bring myself to shoot it at that range. So i let it walk about 20 yards away and shot. I hit an unseen limb and missed the dang deer. AAAUURRGGG.
BullpupBen
Member
The .357 is a proven deer cartridge, although it has a fraction of the energy of a .243 which is the smallest rifle cartridge most would take deer hunting.
Now, I am not saying a pistol round will be more powerful then a rifle round, I am saying that ballistically it will do more damage
You have to consider the purpose for pistols vs. rifles. Rifles are not as powerful as they are because it makes them more lethal, they are as powerful as they are to carry lethality over a greater range.
Based on the testimony from the poster above me, a deer hit with a 9mm carbine at 50 yards will bleed out about the same rate as one hit by a .243 at that distance, the .243 is pretty comparable to the 7.62x39 in bullet weight and energy.
The reason the .243 needs to be stronger is to maintain the ability to kill game at many hundreds of yards. If you were to hit a deer with a .357 magnum at 400 yards (provided you could make such a shot) there is almost no way you would get a kill, but a well-aimed .243 will almost ensure a kill at that range.
Home Defense and any other time you would have to shoot at human beings before **** REALLY hits the fan is going to be at ranges well within the effective range of a PCC.
Hell, 95% of military fighting takes place ENTIRELY within 100 yards even with modern optics and far-flinging .223 and 7.62x39 caliber rifles.
And once again internal ballistics from deer can be used to assume internal ballistics from other medium-sized game (i.e. humans)
Now, I am not saying a pistol round will be more powerful then a rifle round, I am saying that ballistically it will do more damage
You have to consider the purpose for pistols vs. rifles. Rifles are not as powerful as they are because it makes them more lethal, they are as powerful as they are to carry lethality over a greater range.
Based on the testimony from the poster above me, a deer hit with a 9mm carbine at 50 yards will bleed out about the same rate as one hit by a .243 at that distance, the .243 is pretty comparable to the 7.62x39 in bullet weight and energy.
The reason the .243 needs to be stronger is to maintain the ability to kill game at many hundreds of yards. If you were to hit a deer with a .357 magnum at 400 yards (provided you could make such a shot) there is almost no way you would get a kill, but a well-aimed .243 will almost ensure a kill at that range.
Home Defense and any other time you would have to shoot at human beings before **** REALLY hits the fan is going to be at ranges well within the effective range of a PCC.
Hell, 95% of military fighting takes place ENTIRELY within 100 yards even with modern optics and far-flinging .223 and 7.62x39 caliber rifles.
And once again internal ballistics from deer can be used to assume internal ballistics from other medium-sized game (i.e. humans)
BullpupBen
Member
To Junyo:
Yeah and that was with a pistol, in a carbine barrel the round is totally different. See my chart.
Yeah and that was with a pistol, in a carbine barrel the round is totally different. See my chart.
BullpupBen
Member
Although I'm sure that no one will notice or care, for the benefit of people who search the archives to improve their knowledge of firearms, I have to resurrect this thread to say that I disagree with my earlier position that a pistol caliber carbine will wound as well or better then a rifle.
I've been doing a huge amount of research into wound ballistics and have a few points to make:
1. The Marshall and Sanow tests are COMPLETELY USELESS due to the fact that they do not bother to list any controls in the area of shot placement, BG drug use, whether the shooting was defensive/offensive, use of clothing, size of BG, and many other issues. They should never be used by anyone to try to prove anything.
2. Rifle rounds traveling over 2500 fps do in fact cause massive wound channels and are more likely to expend all their energy in the body than very high-velocity and solid pistol rounds.
3. The advantage in ballistics is usually not that meaningful, as in real life the gains of having a longer barrel for pistol calibers are not nearly as large as the chart makers at Kel-Tec would like us to believe.
4. Pistol caliber carbines are still better then pistols for reasons other than better ballistics stated earlier.
5. The king of HD always has been and probably always will be the 12 gauge shotgun
here is the most insightful article on wound ballistics I have ever read:
http://www.mouseguns.com/deadmeat.htm
I've been doing a huge amount of research into wound ballistics and have a few points to make:
1. The Marshall and Sanow tests are COMPLETELY USELESS due to the fact that they do not bother to list any controls in the area of shot placement, BG drug use, whether the shooting was defensive/offensive, use of clothing, size of BG, and many other issues. They should never be used by anyone to try to prove anything.
2. Rifle rounds traveling over 2500 fps do in fact cause massive wound channels and are more likely to expend all their energy in the body than very high-velocity and solid pistol rounds.
3. The advantage in ballistics is usually not that meaningful, as in real life the gains of having a longer barrel for pistol calibers are not nearly as large as the chart makers at Kel-Tec would like us to believe.
4. Pistol caliber carbines are still better then pistols for reasons other than better ballistics stated earlier.
5. The king of HD always has been and probably always will be the 12 gauge shotgun
here is the most insightful article on wound ballistics I have ever read:
http://www.mouseguns.com/deadmeat.htm
I own several and have had several others go through my hands.
The 9 mm upper lets me shoot my ar at the indoor range with something hotter than the rimfire conversion.
My 44 and 357 lever guns are a different thing altogether but a complete hoot to shoot and a simple thing to reload for.
They don't "replace" any of my rifles but that doesn't mean I don't get lots of enjoyment out of them
The 9 mm upper lets me shoot my ar at the indoor range with something hotter than the rimfire conversion.
My 44 and 357 lever guns are a different thing altogether but a complete hoot to shoot and a simple thing to reload for.
They don't "replace" any of my rifles but that doesn't mean I don't get lots of enjoyment out of them
- Status
