Who Else Has Finally Figured Out That Sub-Compacts Are a CCW Handicap?

[chaim]

IMO you should have went with who "decided" not who "figured out"... since one makes it clear you are stating an opinion and the other implies an objective fact. What carry gun is best is so subjective, there really is no objective correct answer, it is different for everyone.

That said, before I say what I need to say, your terminology shows you and I use different language when talking about guns and I want it to be clear what I'm saying. You use subcompact to refer to Micro-9s or micro compacts. I use it in its original use given by gun companies' marketing departments, the sizes were in comparison to the service pistol standard: full size (service pistol), compact (like a Glock 19 or CZ PCR), subcompact (like a Glock 26/27). A subcompact would be around the width (often exactly the width) of the service pistol, with a reduced length and height and thus reduced mag capacity, but it would often use the compact and full sized gun's mags if you didn't mind it extending past the butt of the gun. Of course, it is all arbitrary and with everyone growing their smaller class of guns it really is getting muddy, but I'm using the term subcompact for the original crop of subcompacts, and micro-9 or microcompact for the smaller compacts (both the original single stack and the current double stack or at least 10 round or greater smaller subcompacts/micro compacts).

So, I agree that (for me) subcompacts no longer fill a needed niche, but I'm talking a true subcompact, not a Micro-9. I find I shoot my SIG P365 just fine (I'm more accurate with it than my Glock 19), and it is very easy to conceal. The current crop of 10+ round Micro-9s takes away one of my previous main concerns with the Micro-9. So, a P365 has become my main carry. On the other end, a larger gun usually is easier to shoot, gives faster follow up shots, can offer more practical accuracy (though not always, the P365 is more accurate for me than the G19, though my CZ PCR is more accurate than either), and will give you a full hand grip. I can carry a G19 or CZ PCR most of the time, though the P365 is more comfortable and still carries a comforting number of rounds. I find a G19 or CZ PCR is no harder to conceal than a true subcompact, so much so, that I'm selling my 1st gen S&W M&P40c. Between the SIG P365 on one end and the Glock 19 and CZ PCR on the other, I have no use for the double stack subcompacts.

I am one of those in the carry rotation camp instead of pick one gun, though I understand wanting to keep it simple in a carry gun (a friend of mine's solution to that is to make his choice all Glock, a G19 for most of the time and a G43 or G42 for when he needs to go smaller). For me, my main carry rotation is a SIG P365 I like so much I just bought a second one, a Glock 19 and a CZ PCR (I pick between the P365 and G19 or PCR by which is most suited to my needs for the day, the PCR and G19 is decided by which one is currently in my range bag and I carry the one that hasn't recently been to the range so it is still clean). I occasionally carry a small frame revolver when the mood hits (quite often lately). I have a LCP for when I need something as small as needed, in the 4 months I've been carrying full time (since I got my MD permit after Bruen) and the years of part time (about once a month) carry on my UT non-res permit when out of state, I haven't carried the LCP more than once or twice and never in at least 4 or 5 years. Also, the LCP may be replaced, I finally seem to have fixed my Kel Tec PF9 enough to be reliable, it may replace the LCP as my theoretical deep concealment pistol (or I may just continue to do an aluminum J-frame or Taurus 856UL when I need that). Anyway, the point being, there is nothing wrong with having 2 or 3 carry guns for different concealment and wardrobe needs, if it concerns you to have different guns, consider two that are very similar otherwise (M&P Compact and Shield/Shield Plus, Glock 19 and Glock 43/43x, 1911 and EMP or 938, etc.).

 

[tdbmd]

I have average size hands and carry both subcompacts and compacts, in the form of Kahr PM9/Kimber Micro 9 or Springfield Hellcat Pro. But I will agree with you that I can shoot my full size weapons better.

 

[huntsman]

I have 2xl hands and carry everything from a Max to G19,G23.

weight is my issue so I want a gun(fully loaded) that tops out at two pounds or less.

My choices ( besides aforementioned guns) includes a pair of Shields and a M&P subcompact.

The shields and max I add a slip on rubber sleeve for a bit of thickness.

 

[WYO]

Especially in the age of red dot sights, the accuracy difference between micros such as the Sig P365 and larger guns is negligible if the gun fits your hands. The main difference for me is shot-to-shot split times, which favors the larger guns. Once you quantify the difference by shooting a variety of potential carry guns using a timer, and engaging single and multiple targets, an informed decision can be made about ease of carry versus survivability in a worst case scenario.

If the accuracy difference or overall time difference (initial engagement plus split times) is too great because the gun does not fit or is too light, then the priority should be finding a gun that meets those minimum criteria within the bounds of concealability requirements. Everyone is different.

 

[Mosin77]

There’s always been a market for tiny guns and a market for larger ones. The Colt Vest Pocket .25 is practically speaking too small for me to feel confident I’d depress the grip safety successfully in a pinch, and I have smaller hands. But some people liked them because gunmakers sold a boatload of such small pieces in the early-mid 20th century.

I personally think the LCP is a great size, but I wouldn’t want anything smaller. And I’m 100% sure that the larger compact sizes make for a better “serious duty” gun.

 

[Targa]

Do what works for you.

 

[Capybara]

I mainly posted to get some consensus about what others who carry are experiencing and reading the responses, I see a lot of people are enamored with Hobbit sized guns like the 365. I've never considered my hands to be large because I have friends who have what I would term LARGE hands and when we shake hands, their hand dwarfs the size of mine. But the friends who have the 365 and Hellcat self admittedly have Hobbit sized tiny hands and fewer women have large or even medium sized hands when compared to the average guy. Another factor I've noticed with my Shields is I recently just bought a new Clinger Holster for my Shield Plus but I have carried a Crossbreed Super Tuck with my Shield 1.0 for years. I tried carrying my Shield Plus in the Supertuck for a while and I discovered that the magazine ejection button on the Plus sticks out a bit more than the Shield 1.0 and I kept having the gun accidentally eject the magazine while holstered because the Horsehide in the Supertuck wasn't stopping my hip or side from slightly releasing the magazine.

A colleague recommended the Clinger, it's a weird looking holster but with the pad is AMAZINGLY comfortable and the way it's designed, it does hug your hip for 2-4 o'clock carrying. I was running some drills last night and noticed that I am able to draw from under two shirts even MUCH better from the Clinger versus the Supertuck or my Alien Gear Holsters I have for the G17 and the Max 9. This was a revelation. I think it has to do with the cant and the way the holster reveals the grip. My presentation is much smoother and quicker from this holster. It doesn't mitigate that it still feels as if it takes too long for my to be able to get a good two handed hold with the Shield Plus because of the thinness of the body so I'm beginning to think that one of the reasons I can shoot the G17 better isn't just the overall size, it's the thickness of the grip. The Shield has a very thin grip. Same story with the Ruger Max 9, the grip is pretty small and thin. I do practice shooting one handed, right and left handed but I obviously shoot better with a standard two handed grip so that would be my default. This is leading my toward the G19 because it has the same thickness grip as my G17 but it would be easier to conceal.

I totally get the horses for courses and if you have small hands or are a woman, I can see why the 365 has completely dominated the CCW market the past few years. It's interesting what Chaim says about terminology, I have heard the 365, Hellcat and a few others referred to as Micro 9s, Micro compacts and sub compacts. I always took it as there are full sized, one size down, which I would term compacts (G19, G48, PDP) and then everything else smaller I call a subcompact. I tried out a G26 almost a decade ago when I began carrying and found that not only could I not get my pinky around the grip because it was too stubby, but my ring finger was even slipping off. So I eliminated that as a contender right away. This was well before the current huge catalog of Glock models. It's also interesting that after the 365 and Hellcat completely dominated, both companies came out with larger sizes (Hellcat Pro, 365X/Macro) and even the Shield, when they came out with the Plus, we now have the regular and the 4" versions, so I thought this kind of beared out my assertions about too small isn't as popular as a bit larger. Here in California, you can't buy a Hellcat or 365 new because they aren't on the Handgun Roster but in tracking what sells on Calguns in the marketplace, there seemed to be a HUGE selloff of 365s because their roster exempt owners (mostly cops) decided they wanted the larger variants like the 365 Macro.

I will say that CCW, in general, is a journey, it takes quite a while to figure out which gun(s) will work best, which holster and refining your technique. The Clinger is the first holster I've had in a decade of carrying that actually feels "right", in wearing it, drawing from it. I have a drawer full of other holsters that I have tried and then discarded (Sticky Holster, Bellybands, Crossbreed Super Tuck, Alien Gear, various single clip Kydex). I do practice, I should practice more often, especially dry fire at home. Unfortunately none of our local ranges will let you draw from holster to practice so I shoot my CCW guns but can't really do live fire presentation drills unless I go to one outdoor range and rent an entire huge private range for $400, then they'll let you draw from holster there but not on the public range. Neither of the local indoor ranges will let you do that.

Link to the Clinger Hinge Holster https://clingerholsters.com/product/iwb-hinge-holster/

 

[CNobbe]

Thoughts? Anyone else thinking of dumping their subcompact CCW guns for something a mid size like a G19? It's all fine to have a smaller, lighter, less bulky carry gun but if you don't shoot it as well, is comfort everything?

I think you're talking micro compacts rather than sub-compacts, but either way..

Honestly, no. The expectation for a micro 9 to shoot as well as a full size pistol is kinda far-fetched. A 686 is always going to be easier to shoot well than a J frame, and the same with autos. That said.. When I bought the 365 back in '18, I wanted it because I felt like it would be easier to shoot than a 43X. And, for me, it proved to be. I was stunned by how well I could shoot the little thing. It wasn't as good as my bigger Glocks, etc, but for the purpose of CCW distances it was excellent.

I have medium hands, narrow/longer fingers and so my pinky wraps around the bottom of the flush base plate, but it doesn't bug me. The pinky extension/12 round mag make things easier. In trying a few of the other guns, the Max 9 was kinda snappy compared to the little Sig to me, the Hellcat was on par with the Sig, and the Shield Plus was a peach. I tote my 365X most of the time in winter on by belt, but in summer I'll swap it to the smaller grip. I bought the 365 in .380 after the wife rented one, we both loved how pleasant it was and I do favor it now over the others as it can be machine gunned easily..hehe.

Back on topic, I do carry my CZ P-10 C in winter on occasion. It's my favorite compact as the grip texture is the absolute best (IMO) and it just shoots so softly.. I'd carry it more, but don't really need to. I bought a used P-10 S as I wondered if I'd like it more than my X, but surprisingly shot the X just as well. It is a journey, and there's always something new coming out that leads to wonderment if it'd be a better option.

Case in point, I bought a Micro Canik the other day on impulse, kinda felt like it could replace something. The grip in wider front to back than most of the other 9s, felt like I was holding something closer to a Shield Plus, but definitely better hand-filling than the Sig, despite being the smallest Canik.

The jury is still out, so I better go try it today.

 

[Old Dog]

Thoughts? Anyone else thinking of dumping their subcompact CCW guns for something a mid size like a G19? It's all fine to have a smaller, lighter, less bulky carry gun but if you don't shoot it as well, is comfort everything?

No.

I have zero problems shooting pistols such as the SIG P938, SIG P365XL and GLOCK 43X. These three fit my hands (large) well, point naturally and shoot as well as some full-size pistols for me. I still prefer to carry them OWB strong side, just like everything else.

But, I still mainly carry a SIG P228, P229 or Commander-sized 1911.

 

[dogtown tom]

Went back to a flip phone.

Me too!

 

[chicharrones]

I mainly posted to get some consensus about what others who carry are experiencing and reading the responses, I see a lot of people are enamored with Hobbit sized guns like the 365. I've never considered my hands to be large because I have friends who have what I would term LARGE hands and when we shake hands, their hand dwarfs the size of mine. But the friends who have the 365 and Hellcat self admittedly have Hobbit sized tiny hands and fewer women have large or even medium sized hands when compared to the average guy.

The hobbit commentary comes across as an insult. I take it you don't fire many revolvers. Even mid size revolvers can have small circumference grips since a magazine doesn't get stuffed up the grip frame. Both equally shootable in their own way.

View attachment 1142170

View attachment 1142171

View attachment 1142172

Glock 19 on the right.
View attachment 1142175

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Thoughts? Anyone else thinking of dumping their subcompact CCW guns for something a mid size like a G19? It's all fine to have a smaller, lighter, less bulky carry gun but if you don't shoot it as well, is comfort everything?

I carry tiny guns when circumstances don't allow for carrying a larger gun. Do I shoot them as well as my full size 1911. I do down as small as my 9mm EMP, and then things get a little more difficult. However, I don't carry small out of comfort so much as out of necessity. If I wasn't carrying small, I wouldn't be carrying at all in these circumstances.

 

[CapnMac]

Me too!

I get the logic, and the convenience of the form factor, but, it just seems to me like it's introducing a potential failure point. But, that's probably more due to how annoying I find the process of replacing phones.

But, it's all part of the relatively "golden age" we live within, too.

Phones can be found in various feature sets, form factors, price points, accessories fits, etc. Finding the right one is down to each person's priorities.

So, too, are firearms.

Let us cast our minds back to, oh, 1980. Your compact handgun choices were very scant. Pretty much tiny 5-shot revolvers, random European autos, often in 32acp. An assortment of "pocket" 25s--not exactly ideal choices. Oh, and in 1980 a concealed carry permit was pretty rare, too. So, why would anyone bother with considering the needs of daily carry?

And, there are plenty of considerations. Size is only one of those. It makes a difference if a person is standing or sitting most of the day as to whether a given handgun is too heavy or not. Or too blocky/stabity for that matter.

We, each of us, should find what works for us, individually. That might be a large firearm, it might be small. It might be a heavy arm or a light one. Maybe it has a long grip or a shorter one. There is no one singular answer. And, there should be no judgement attached to anyone's choices (despite how judgemental we humans can reflexively be).

 

[Skribs]

Handguns are are already a tradeoff because it's generally not acceptable to carry a long gun for personal protection (excepting civil unrest or way out in the sticks). Long guns are a compromise because we don't have 20mm autocannons on our cars. Even those would be a compromise because we don't have F15s on retainer.

I think pretty much everyone recognizes that there are advantages to having a larger gun. Better grip surface, less recoil (in the same caliber), longer sight radius, bigger capacity (and/or bigger bullet), generally more reliable, etc. I didn't buy a Ruger LCP because it was the best gun around. I bought it because it would fit in my pocket as a quick and easy carry option.

I think we've reached the same point with sub compact CCW pistols that we reached with cell phones. Remember the older days when we all had flip phones and candybar phones? They reached a point where some of the models were just too small, you couldn't even manipulate or use them to make a call without almost dropping them. The earpiece and mouthpiece were so close together that your mouth was almost too far from the mouthpiece when you had the phone to your ear. I think sub compact pistol mania is at the same point, we went too small and now the trend is going back to the more compact size, rather than sub/micro compact.

If we treated our CCW the same way we treat our cell phones, we would be charged with brandishing faster than Jerry Miculek can reload.

IMO you should have went with who "decided" not who "figured out"... since one makes it clear you are stating an opinion and the other implies an objective fact. What carry gun is best is so subjective, there really is no objective correct answer, it is different for everyone.

I think that guns that you can't fit three fingers on the grip are objectively worse shooters. What's subjective is if it's a worthwhile compromise to give up shootability for concealment comfort.

Especially in the age of red dot sights, the accuracy difference between micros such as the Sig P365 and larger guns is negligible if the gun fits your hands. The main difference for me is shot-to-shot split times, which favors the larger guns. Once you quantify the difference by shooting a variety of potential carry guns using a timer, and engaging single and multiple targets, an informed decision can be made about ease of carry versus survivability in a worst case scenario.

If the accuracy difference or overall time difference (initial engagement plus split times) is too great because the gun does not fit or is too light, then the priority should be finding a gun that meets those minimum criteria within the bounds of concealability requirements. Everyone is different.

I'm thinking of guns that will most likely never have an RDS, such as the Ruger LCP I mentioned above. This gun is never going to have a red dot on it. You could even argue it doesn't have functional ironsights.

However, chances are shot-to-shot split times are not going to be a determining factor in whether or not you are successful in self-defense. Having the gun is the most important part.

 

[chaim]

I mainly posted to get some consensus about what others who carry are experiencing and reading the responses, I see a lot of people are enamored with Hobbit sized guns like the 365.

I totally get the horses for courses and if you have small hands or are a woman, I can see why the 365 has completely dominated the CCW market the past few years.

So, I see you skipped over most of the posts where people talked about their hand size, most who like the smaller guns who mentioned hand size had average or large hands, they didn't like them because of small hands. Me, I didn't mention mine, but my hand itself is average to large and it is quite meaty, and my fingers, while short for the rest of my hand, are quite thick (I wear a large glove and they usually fit a bit tight, but I don't go to extra large as there would be too much extra material in the fingers, so I try to get stretchy larges). Yes, I notice that the P365 grip is small, but I can still shoot it well. Sure, there is less muzzle flip in a larger gun, but some of the smaller guns aren't bad. I prefer a larger gun where possible, more rounds, less muzzle flip, faster follow up shots, I gave up single stack micro compacts long ago for a reason. If I didn't find my P365 and similar guns performed well, I wouldn't use them. With a 12 round mag, I can still get a full hand grip and have a lot of control. I do find it easier to shoot one handed with the flush 10 round grips than trying to get a two-handed grip, and my groups do open up a bit when shooting rapid fire, but it is still within easy "combat accuracy" and still more accurate than I can fire my G19. I am quite comfortable with it up to 20 yards, and "combat accurate" to 25 yards (since I shoot at an indoor 25 yard range most of the time, I don't know how I'd do beyond that). Because it is capable, the next criteria is concealability. Sure, it isn't quite as capable as my compact service pistols, but it is very capable, and it is certainly easier to conceal. And that is with relatively large hands.

 

[dogtown tom]

...Let us cast our minds back to, oh, 1980. Your compact handgun choices were very scant. Pretty much tiny 5-shot revolvers, random European autos, often in 32acp. An assortment of "pocket" 25s--not exactly ideal choices. Oh, and in 1980 a concealed carry permit was pretty rare, too. So, why would anyone bother with considering the needs of daily carry?

Exactly!
The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibited the importation of small handguns. So foreign manufacturers were only bringing in guns that could meet the ATF points.
During the 1994 AWB magazine ban era, we saw normal sized pistols being sold with ten rounders. At the same time, states began liberalizing their firearm possession and carry laws and the small handgun boom was on......buyers thought "why carry a big pistol with a ten round mag when I can more easily conceal a smaller pistol with a ten round mag?"

 

[jdc1244]

I do not shoot them as accurately as a larger pistol, even with practice

It’s a matter of one’s perception of a self-defense incident, or one’s personal expectations – I anticipate using a gun in lawful self-defense at very close range or in physical contact with my attacker, where there is no ‘aiming,’ where ‘accuracy’ consists of the muzzle of my gun being inches from my attacker’s body.

‘Comfort’ likewise doesn’t come into play because there are no aiming or accuracy concerns.

 

[dogtown tom]

I didn't buy a Ruger LCP because it was the best gun around. I bought it because it would fit in my pocket as a quick and easy carry option.

Same here.

If we treated our CCW the same way we treat our cell phones, we would be charged with brandishing faster than Jerry Miculek can reload.

I'm thinking of guns that will most likely never have an RDS, such as the Ruger LCP I mentioned above. This gun is never going to have a red dot on it. You could even argue it doesn't have functional ironsights.

When I was sixteen, a local cop who worked security at my grocery store called his J frame .38 a "belly gun"....."only good for sticking in someones belly".

However, chances are shot-to-shot split times are not going to be a determining factor in whether or not you are successful in self-defense. Having the gun is the most important part.

True, I don't think any crime victim ever said they were grateful they were not armed.

 

[Ethan Verity]

It's a sliding scale between ease of carry, and ease of use. I'm pretty good with my M&P Shield, however I'm even better with the longer sight radius and fuller grips of my M&P Compact. In addition, you get an extra 5 shots, and an extra 50fps per round on a 147gr 9mm with the longer barrel. All wins, but it's bigger and heavier. Only you know where the line of comfort is in your carry and concealment needs.

Personally I have found that I can conceal my M&P Compact just as easy as my Shield, and as a result the more advantageous Compact gets carried far more often. In fact it's on my hip today, as the Shield rests in the safe at home.

 

[Skribs]

It's a sliding scale between ease of carry, and ease of use.

I'd argue there are some bumps on the scale. For example, when you can no longer fit 3 fingers on the grip, ease of use takes a sharp dip, but ease of carry only a small blip.

 

[Dave DeLaurant]

The only contribution I can make to this theme is that I personally have found that carry method dictates concealment choices.

After I began using spandex shirts with integrated holsters, I found a Glock 19 no more difficult to conceal on my person than a Glock 26. So I sold the G26. I also carried a Glock 30 a few times, but gave that up due to its greater weight rather than its size.

(I wish I had this guy's physique!)

FWIW, I mostly carry a S&W M60 3" revolver, which is about the same size and weight as my Glock 19.

 

[DeepSouth]

So, exactly who didn’t know smaller gun are harder to shoot well?

Is this really a new revelation to anyone?


Fairly recently I thought I’d try a true full size gun for the first time in 15+ years, about 3 days in remembered why I carry the PM45. But no doubt I could shoot a full size better, and have higher capacity, and a longer sight plane, and (slightly) higher velocity. But it’s just too big a pain in the end.

 

[LimaCharlie]

I carry either a five-inch 1911 or a four-inch revolver and a pocket gun.

 

[Capybara]

So, exactly who didn’t know smaller gun are harder to shoot well?

Is this really a new revelation to anyone?

I didn't know until I got my CCW in 2014. Up until then, I had owned a 1911, a Ruger P95DC and a S&W 625, all big, hefty, hand filling guns. Before I bought my first Shield, I had zero experience shooting sub or micro compact guns. I never really gave it a thought because I had never tried to do it. A pistol was something that filled up your hand, you could get a good grip on it and you aimed and shot it at the range, I had never carried, presented from underneath clothing quickly or tried to qualify or tried to get a good grip with such a tiny gun. This told me it would be a new revelation to anyone who has never shot such a small gun, which would include most people new to conceal carry unless a friend or someone had let them shoot their small pistol at the range.

 

[Capybara]

I'd argue there are some bumps on the scale. For example, when you can no longer fit 3 fingers on the grip, ease of use takes a sharp dip, but ease of carry only a small blip.

True for me, I can't shoot a pistol without all four fingers on the grip very well. I tried and decided that the G26 and a few others weren't for me.