Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Which is better car gun: Glock 17 or Ruger GP 100?

Discussion in 'Handguns: General Discussion' started by el Godfather, Oct 9, 2012.

?

Which is a better car gun?

  1. Glock 17

    128 vote(s)
    53.6%
  2. Ruger GP 100

    111 vote(s)
    46.4%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rexster

    Rexster Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,951
    Location:
    SE Texas
    BMV is the single most-committed property crime, involving loss of property, in most parts of the USA. This makes me very hesitant to reply to "car gun" posts, unless I know precisiely what the OP means by that term. I do NOT believe in running a gun-giveaway program, no matter how inexpensive the gun. I think of a "car gun" as a powerful weapon that might be better than a pocket pistol for fighting opponents who may be using vehicles, or parts of vehicles, as cover, and/or sights that facilitate longer-range shooting. A car gun may be in a bag or other container, or on a specialized holster, rather than a typical concealment rig, in order to facilitate access while seat-belted.

    OK, regarding the two handguns under discussion, both of which I actually own; the GP100's original factory grip, before the Hogue monstrosity beame standard, is a beautiful fit it my hand, as if designed by a twin from whom I was separated at birth. This is a beautiful grip for a handgun. I am sure this grip contributes to the practical accuracy of the GP100, for me.

    A Glock, however, with its massive double-column magazine, is more of a hands-gun for me, as I cannot realize its full accuracy potential unless I have two hands on it, and use the modern thumb-forward grasp with the support hand. I know, from training, including force-on-force "sim gun" training with my employer, a big-city PD, that I can shoot a Glock amazingly well (for me) under some hairy conditions, but not quite as well as a GP100 or K/L S&W sixgun. The Glock, however, does hold more rounds.

    Really, I like to have both a GP100 and a serious autoloader with me on a long road trip that might go through what I will euphemistically term "bad" areas. The GP100 gives me accuracy that rivals some carbines I have fired, whereas the auto provides sustained firepower. As the GP100 might be carried in a place other than holstered on my hip, I reckon that makes the GP100 my "car gun" choice, by default.

    Regarding guns left in cars, I have used a bicycle U-lock to secure a revolver, through the cylinder window, to a much larger metal object, such a roll bar. If I just had to leave a weapon inside an unattended vehicle, this might tilt me toward a revolver, all else being equal.
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2012
  2. shotgunjoel

    shotgunjoel Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,572
    Location:
    illinois
    Sound/pressure wise I think that I'd prefer to shoot a 9mm in a car instead of a 357.
     
  3. 481

    481 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,946
    I'd go with the Glock 17.
     
  4. EVIL

    EVIL Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    246
    Location:
    Wright-Patterson AFB
    I could go either way - both are excellent, accurate reliable firearms that shoot well for me. If I was mostly traveling to and from urban/suburban areas I guess I would lean towards G17, as a "get me home gun." If I was country dweller then I would probably take the GP100, which could be pressed into service for defense, hunting or survival.

    Personally, I don't like to keep too much value of guns in my car due to the slight risk of car theft. I prefer to keep them on my person at all times if possible.
     
  5. David E

    David E Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,455
    Hey, I saw that movie too!!
     
  6. easyg

    easyg Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    2,867
    Location:
    off-line mostly.
    If you had to shoot through the glass or through the door of the vehicle, the .357 would probably perform better, especially with 158g .357 rounds.
     
  7. Rail Driver

    Rail Driver Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,525
    Location:
    Quincy, FL
    I carry my firearm on my hip. I don't need a different, special gun just for in the car. It's dangerous and STUPID to leave a firearm in a car unattended, especially for extended periods of time. I'm aware that sometimes it's unavoidable (such as when going into the post office or various other prohibited places), however anyone that leaves a firearm in a car for an extended period of time (such as overnight) is grossly negligent.

    The above is MY OWN opinion. Take from it what you will.

    As to the question, I'd go with the GP100 over the Glock. It fits my hand better.
     
  8. IllinoisGun

    IllinoisGun Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    Carolinas
    Got to go with a pistol. Revolvers are so 1980's.
     
  9. Old Shooter

    Old Shooter Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,040
    Location:
    Virginia
    I think that is the way I'd go also. I'm not a fanboy of the Glocks but if the case arose that I needed to use a weapon in a hurry and from the scenario of only having available the gun in the car...I think I'd prefer having 17 rounds on tap rather than 6 and a couple of reloads that I may or may not fumble during stress.

    Also, most likely in that situation each shot will be taken with the double action method of the Ruger rather than the consistent "safe, single" action of the glock.

    For the record my "car gun" is a stainless Colt Commander in 45.
     
  10. Rail Driver

    Rail Driver Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,525
    Location:
    Quincy, FL
    A Glock isn't single action. It's striker fired, which is closer to a double action trigger than it is to a single action. Think of the difference between your Colt and a Glock - The Colt is single action. The Ruger won't have an inconsistent trigger unless it's been damaged or neglected. They're quality firearms.
     
  11. coolluke01

    coolluke01 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,041
    Location:
    MN
    Loose brass in the car being a problem is just plane dumb. It's not going to cause a problem. What could a 9mm brass casing do? Stack up end for end in a tower and jamb the break peddle? Come on, it's not even remotely an issue.

    I would go for the Glock with 17 rounds. When driving with one hand any shots fired are going to be in an attempt to provide cover. More rounds the better. Also one hand firing is easier to do with a DAO than a heavy DA revolver. No you won't be able to shoot it SA when you are driving for your life.
    I think FMJ's would be in order since barriers of glass and metal are very likely. Also roadways are often wider and longer than most SD locations so over penetration may not be as much of an issue.

    During deer season I would put my GP100 in the car. Never know when you run across that "Turdy Point Buck"

    Carrying a gun in the car is not always negligent and careless. Where I live it wouldn't be a problem at all. If you live in an area where I could be stolen a simple safe bolted to the floor would serve as a deterrent.
     
  12. Rail Driver

    Rail Driver Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,525
    Location:
    Quincy, FL
    I didn't say carrying a gun in the car is always negligent and careless - I said LEAVING A GUN UNATTENDED in a car is careless and negligent. What good does a safe do you if your car gets stolen from your driveway or from the parking lot of a prohibited place? Sure it prevents your firearm from actually being used in a crime, but that is only part of the point.

    We ALL live in an area where a vehicle could be broken into and/or stolen (at least those of us that don't have a 30 foot wall surrounding our property, topped with electrified razor wire and a pack of guard dogs running loose inside the wall), and we all have occasion to take our vehicle to public places where any safeguards that are in place at home won't be effective.

    The safe in the vehicle does negate the negligence factor, but it doesn't eliminate the risk of loss, just lessens it slightly.

    I stand by my statement.
     
  13. Kahr33556

    Kahr33556 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2012
    Messages:
    210
    Location:
    USA
    I have a gp100 but voted glock because of more firepower.
     
  14. silicosys4

    silicosys4 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    2,373
    Glock 17 here.
    BYW, if you are shooting and driving at the same time in a "self defense" situation, you are likely going to be charged with a serious crime. In the eyes of the law, If you are in control of a car you have more than enough opportunity and ability to evade or escape a "situation" before opening fire on a public roadway while operating a motor vehicle.
     
  15. Doc3402

    Doc3402 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    Messages:
    183
    Location:
    NE Florida
    That would depend on where you live and what your state laws are. Blanket statements like that can be very misleading, and could even cost someone their life. In Florida self defense is self defense, and it doesn't matter what you are doing as long as you aren't committing a crime when you defend yourself.
     
  16. coolluke01

    coolluke01 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,041
    Location:
    MN
    ^^^^ this is hardly even remotely true. Doc beat me too it. Pointed at above post


    There are not hard fast rules which dictate which acts are always or never justifiable use of force.
     
  17. silicosys4

    silicosys4 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    2,373
    Yea...sorry guys, but this isn't "mad max", and there are pretty "hard and fast" rules dictating proper use of a firearm in such situations. I'm pretty sure in any state, you'd have trouble explaining why you decided driving along at speed exchanging shots with a bad guy was the best course of action and why pulling over and doing your best to disengage from a dangerous situation, or call for LE help, wasn't. At least, that's the argument I got from the police when my friend was charged with a crime for simply showing a firearm during a situation in which someone was actively trying to run him off the road at highway speed in a much larger vehicle...pretty much the exact situation being fantasized about throughout this thread.
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2012
  18. coolluke01

    coolluke01 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,041
    Location:
    MN
    Please site those hard fast rules that apply to SD while driving a car!

    Are you driving towards them or away from them? That might change things. We can't always turn a 4000 lb car around and speed away. Forward is often the only option. Shooting at someone outside your car while driving could be very justifiable use of force.

    Things are never all or none. You need to read your local laws and find out what it says about justifiable use of force. MN says you need to have a reasonable fear of great bodily harm or death. The key is the word "reasonable". It's in that regard that one needs to be mindful or how their actions will be perceived by others.
     
  19. Doc3402

    Doc3402 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    Messages:
    183
    Location:
    NE Florida
    I agree this isn't Mad Max, and I also agree that unless someone is shooting at me or trying to ram me gunfire on my part is not the best response. The thing is, we have had several instances around here in the last year where gunfire appeared to be the only appropriate response, and charges were never filed against the defender.

    For some reason road rage seems to be increasing by leaps and bounds, and people are even using their cars as weapons. Shots fired from one vehicle at another is rare, but not anywhere near as rare as it was 10 years ago. Right off the top of my head I can think of five instances in the last year or so.
     
  20. beatledog7

    beatledog7 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    5,093
    Location:
    Tidewater
    Defensive driving and defensive shooting are an utterly unsatisfactory mix.

    Drive if you can; shoot if you must. Trying to do both at the same time is strictly TV/movie stuff. It will get a lot of people hurt, and you'll probably do time in the end.
     
  21. Dr_2_B

    Dr_2_B Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Messages:
    1,850
    Location:
    midwest
    I voted G17.

    Far greater capacity, up to 20 rounds without going to an abnormally long mag.

    Also, a 9mm is not a quiet round, but it's quieter than a 357 magnum. In an enclosed car, that could be the difference between ringing ears and permanent hearing loss.
     
  22. Doc3402

    Doc3402 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    Messages:
    183
    Location:
    NE Florida
    It does happen, this ain't Hollywood, and the driver that fired the shot was not charged. If you'll read the story at both links you will see who did what, who got charged, and who didn't.

    http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/...ad-rage-incident-not-fault-shooter-police-say

    http://www.news4jax.com/news/Teen-A...-Rage/-/475880/1948692/-/dkfl8oz/-/index.html
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2012
  23. iblong

    iblong Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Messages:
    505
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I like both the 17 and the GP but dont use either for a truck/car gun.
    Im alway carring (IWB) I do have and keep a LCP in the center council
    in a pocket holster for various reasons.But to me a truck/car gun would be a
    long gun,But then Im a hunter so I have other reasons than just self defence
    involved with my choice.Also If given the time or option to use something other than my 1911 Ill take the carbine every time.While I shoot a lot and am proficent with all my hand guns,Glocks and revolver inc.Id feel much more comfortable with my mini 14 with optics,that rides under my back seat of my truck.I do live out in what some would call the sticks though.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2012
  24. chicharrones
    • Contributing Member

    chicharrones needs more ammo

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Messages:
    4,257
    Location:
    Galveston Bay is an Hour Away ©
    Me too. I've already had experience trying to blow my eardrums out while firing my GP100 outside many years ago. I can only imagine my ears after firing a .357 while in a car.

    I'll take the hi-cap 9mm Glock in this situation. My ears will still hurt, I'm sure. Hopefully, my ears would only ring for a few days instead of a few months.

    Yet, consideration for my ears are not my only reason for picking the Glock.
     
  25. beatledog7

    beatledog7 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    5,093
    Location:
    Tidewater
    Doc:

    You posted this as if the story you cite was the point of the OP's original question, or as if it had been linked and was under discussion. Neither is true.

    It's not too hard to find cases that prove any rule by being exceptions to that rule. I did not follow the links; I presume they lead to a news story in which a person was shooting in self defense as he/she was driving and that said driver was not charged in connection with either the firearm discharge(s) or the non-standard driving.

    OK, but that doesn't negate my point. I invite you to follow my reasoning:

    Driving is a serious activity that most people tend to take for granted. Doing it properly requires one's full attention. Most of us have had close calls in traffic while we were doing something we shouldn't have been doing. Shooting is a similarly attention-heavy activity.

    Trying to make an accurate shot, or even an inaccurate one, falls squarely into the "not while driving" category.

    If I'm focused on drawing and shooting, I'm not focused on driving, and I could very well collide with another vehicle, a pedestrian, or an obstacle. If I do that, personal injury will likely result, and since I was doing something other than focusing on driving, I will very likely be charged with negligence, reckless driving, etc. If someone dies, that escalates to homicide.

    If I'm firing a shot while I'm focused on driving, I'm not properly focused on where that bullet is going. If I miss my target or my bullet passes through it, how can I know what's beyond? If that bullet strikes another person, I will be charged. If that person dies, again we're looking at a homicide charge.

    That's why I said the driver/shooter will likely do time. Sure, he might get lucky and not hurt anyone with either his car or his bullet, but I stand by my position that mixing two such potentially lethal activities is severely unwise and can almost certainly be avoided. Training is what makes good drivers and good shooters, but almost nobody trains or practices for such a drive/shoot scenario. Why would we advocate doing something under stress that we have not trained to do under controlled conditions? Why on Earth take such a risk when simply driving will nearly always separate us from the danger?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page