Why 8?
- Thread starter leadcounsel
- Start date
- Status
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
My P6 came with the box and the paperwork were it was issued to the west German police.
It was issued with two mags, and 15 rounds of ammo.
The gun obviously had been carried a lot as it was full of pocket lint.
But if it had ever been fired, I sure couldn't tell it.
I have a feeling that at the time, they treated their police like Barney Fife.
And only gave them 15 'Bullets' that were supposed to last their career!
rc
It was issued with two mags, and 15 rounds of ammo.
The gun obviously had been carried a lot as it was full of pocket lint.
But if it had ever been fired, I sure couldn't tell it.
I have a feeling that at the time, they treated their police like Barney Fife.
And only gave them 15 'Bullets' that were supposed to last their career!
rc
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
I felt the same way about mine.
I had two, and both came with the box and papers. The later one only had one mag though, as mags were starting to get scarce, and the shops were starting to pilfer the spare mag by then.
My "early" gun, was well worn, with a lot of finish wear, and a lot of rounds through it. It had a heavy "smiley" on the barrel. My "later" gun, looked brand new, and only showed a very faint smiley on the barrel.
I was lucky enough to get a bunch of spare mags early on. When I got rid of my P6's, I made out quite well selling the spare mags off.
tulsamal
Member
I will agree that the P6 design is a bit dated. You can certainly get "more gun in less space" today. But the single stack is part of the charm. If I was actually going to start carrying an older design 9mm, it would be an HK P7. But it's heavy and kind of big for the cartridge and capacity. Much like the P6. Both are wonderful designs though and fit my hand just great. The P6 feels the best "in my hand" of any SIG I've ever tried.
Gregg
Gregg
sixgunner455
Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2006
- Messages
- 3,052
:/
IIRC, the P228 (and later variant P229) were intended to be double stack, higher capacity answers to this question, just as the P226 was intended for the P220. And they are very nice guns, too.
That said, I'd rather concealed carry a single stack than one of those fat bottomed ones.
IIRC, the P228 (and later variant P229) were intended to be double stack, higher capacity answers to this question, just as the P226 was intended for the P220. And they are very nice guns, too.
That said, I'd rather concealed carry a single stack than one of those fat bottomed ones.
sixgunner455
Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2006
- Messages
- 3,052
I really like the P228, but I bought a S&W 3913. Much more slender grip than any of the above.
Perhaps with the exception of the P938... but it's getting into micro stuff which isn't really the same game.
leadcounsel
member
Yes - history is certainly filled with examples (both recorded and unrecorded) of the people with more bullets wins. Hence probably why guns have evolved to contain more bullets and fire them faster (from single shot, to bolt, to semi-auto, etc.)
If it wasn't a truism, guns would not have evolved in that direction.
The Browning HP, for instance, was extremely popular for a variety reasons, and named and coveted for the high capacity which was unique.
The Uzi, for instance, brought a lot of firepower in a compact 9mm package with the 32 round stick mags.
Go back to the prohibition days when the bootleggers could outgun the police in terms of 1) capacity and 2) caliber and 3) volume of fire.
The Garand was the best infantry battle rifle of its era because it was 1) semi auto and 2) held 8 rounds versus the enemies smaller capacity rifles, and the M1 Carbine and BAR and Thompson also had high capacity. Few perhaps only the Brits had larger capacity in their bolt guns.
LA shootout - the capacity and rates of fire of the 2 bank robbers, using high capacity HK and AK rifles, killed and wounded and kept police at bay for nearly an hour with laying down massive amounts of effective fire. Cops had them surrounded but their pistols and shotguns were ineffective due to range, caliber, and capacity. The cops retrieved higher capacity and caliber AR15s from local gunshops to engage. The bank robbers had the upper hand in firepower, briefly, but were horribly outnumbered, outgunned, and surrounded and make severe tactical mistakes. This led to a change in LEO policy and adoption of carbines for LEO.
Florida FBI shootout. Cops with revolvers were significantly outgunned by a couple bad guys with high capacity pistols and rifles. The bad guys had the advantages of firepower, and that allowed them to kill/injure many of the agents. But ultimately they had other disadvantages that led to their demise. This caused LEO to re-evaluate both caliber and type of pistol and caliber, adopting semi-auto .40 caliber pistols nationwide.
Vietnam - we adopted the lighter and smaller caliber M16 over the M14 so we could carry more ammo.
Probably millions of examples where the person firing the most rounds wins or otherwise the lesson that more ammo is better.
Last edited:
Mainsail
Member
You're reading to suit your objective. I didn't say "more bullets". I said "...outcome was determined by who had the gun with the most cartridges aboard.
Not quite the same.
Redcoat3340
Member
I guess I'm a traditionalist, and was never a professional who had to carry....but when I'm carrying a pistol I kinda like my S&W 908. Single stack, DAO (unless I want to fiddle with the bobbed hammer) totally dependable with anything I put in it, and I'm used to Smith triggers.
Attachments
leadcounsel
member
Guns evolve to be more efficient and win fights. If larger magazines were unnecessary, then they would not have evolved to be larger. Evolution has - in steps - gotten larger to the largest practical (weight, size, dimension) for a sidearm or rifle, typically 15-30 or so.
Take our military infantry weapon evolution - just in terms of capacity.
Single shot, slow reloads, 1 bullet.
Bolt actions with 5 round capacity.
Semi-auto with 8 round capacity.
Semi-auto/full auto with 20 round capacity.
Select fire with 20 round capacity, stepping down in caliber.
Select fire with 30 round capacity.
Same with sidearm, from 8 rounds to 15 rounds, stepping down in bullet size.
LEO came to the same conclusion, albeit slowly.
Revolvers to small capacity semis to large capacity semis.
More beats less, all else equal.
Take our military infantry weapon evolution - just in terms of capacity.
Single shot, slow reloads, 1 bullet.
Bolt actions with 5 round capacity.
Semi-auto with 8 round capacity.
Semi-auto/full auto with 20 round capacity.
Select fire with 20 round capacity, stepping down in caliber.
Select fire with 30 round capacity.
Same with sidearm, from 8 rounds to 15 rounds, stepping down in bullet size.
LEO came to the same conclusion, albeit slowly.
Revolvers to small capacity semis to large capacity semis.
More beats less, all else equal.
Walt Sherrill
Member
leadcounsel said:
Your interpretation of the FBI/Miami shootout is quite different than mine.
Two agents were killed. Two bad guys were killed. Others were wounded, but only one was unable to continue the fight.
One of the bad guys (Platt) was an ex-Army Ranger (with VN combat experience); Platt was considered to be "highly combat proficient" by his superiors. The other had been an Army MP, and prior to his Army service had reached the rank of Sargent in the Marines. Both were considered good soldiers and they obviously knew what they were doing -- and had been doing it for a while in a string of armed robberies.
One of the FBI agents rammed the bad guys' car trying to stop them. Both of the bad guys were hit early on in what could have been disabling shots, but they were able to keep going. One would have bled out were he not first shot at close range by one of the agents. The other was disabled after a brief exchange with a CNS hit. Most of the damage was done by the .223 rounds from the Mnii-14, fired by Platt (the one who was "highly combat proficient") -- HE and that Ruger Mini-14 were the big difference in the fight!
A higher rate of fire may not have helped much. A more powerful handgun round may not have have as much as they later came to believe. Had the FBI agents been able to use a .223, to return fire, I think the outcome might've been different and the fight over much sooner.. As it was, the FBI agents went into battle with two shotguns, three S&W 459 9mms, two .357 Magnum revolvers (both with backup .38 special handguns), and three more S&W revolvers. The bad guys had a shotgun and a Ruger Mini-14 in .223, and that Ruger did most of the damage. One of the FBI agents was badly wounded by .223 rounds that went through his car door!
This all makes the point that if you want to survive in a gunfight, you've got to get the other guy to quit quickly -- with a CNS hit. One of the BGs was knocked out early that way -- but he was the one with the Shotgun...
Mainsail
Member
I think the papermill over there is clouding your thinking.
Market forces have nothing to do with need or evolution; gun companies make what sells. What sells is somewhat related to what's most effective, but also to perceptions- "what do people want" or "what do people think they need". If Terminator had used a S&W .357 revolver, Smith would have enjoyed some brisk sales. Instead the movie featured the AMT Longslide Hardballer and that kept AMT afloat for a few years. Was the looooong slide more effective? No.
Your original concern was that the P6 held only eight rounds. So with one spare magazine that's 17 rounds, or with two spare magazines, is 25 rounds.
You continue to emphasize 'number of rounds', and refusing to recognize that the number of rounds carried is not the same thing as the number of rounds carried within the gun itself.
The P6 carries eight (or nine) rounds; I challenged anyone to find evidence that the number of rounds within the gun mattered in a gunfight. You haven't, and the examples you cited have little to do with capacity at all, whether in the gun or total.
Granted, but how is it relevant?
Again
They still went to jail. Capacity didn't win the fight.
You should have stopped there as that was a far more important technology.
Had nothing to do with on-board capacity of the guns carried by law enforcement whatsoever.
Had very little to do with magazine capacity. This incident was a failure of tactics primarily, then failure to bring the right gun, or a gun, to the gunfight.
You seriously aren't going to compare the P6 to the M16 are you? How often do you visit the Museum of Glass downtown with a battle rifle?
You haven't made the nexus from magazine capacity to 'number of rounds' yet, so this is moot.
Last edited:
leadcounsel
member
Mainsail, I'm sorry but you are totally wrong, and are missing the point. I'm not comparing the M16 with the P6. I'm simply making the point that more rounds are better ALL THINGS EQUAL... that means equal size of gun, caliber, design, etc.
It's simply nonsense to argue that anyone carrying a gun, exactly the same size and weight, would prefer LESS rounds.
Wrong. In the famous FBI shootout, two FBI agents shot while reloading and were unable to reload their revolvers because of hand injuries. McNeill, after scoring 2 head/neck shots out of 6 shots on Mattix, was shot by Platt in the hand and unable to reload his revolver and was seriously injured and knocked out of the fight. It would be easy to presume that his fate would have been better if he was only 1/2 or 1/3rd into a 12-18 round magazine of 9mm... not stopping to reload. His focus was on reloading (down on his gun) and not scanning for threats or firing on Platt as he moved to position.
Hanlon was shot in the hand while reloading his revolver and seriously injured.
Note, Grogan was able to get off 9 shots with his 9mm (14 round capacity) and credited with scoring the first hit of the gunfight, wounding Mattix before being killed with the .223. Give Grogan only 6 shot revolver, perhaps he doesn't score that first hit before being shot reloading.
The FBI report concluded that the Agents handguns were less effective due to low stopping power and reloading repeatedly under stress due to low capacity.
It was 8 FBI agents against 2 bad guys. The Agents had initiative, fired first, struck the first hits, and had better fields of fire (they were flanking/behind the criminals), and laid down fire from more directions.
Consider that Mattix fired only 1 shot of #6 buckshot and was taken out of the fight. Platt did a LOT of damage. Yes his weapon was a superior .223 but he only had to reload one time, firing 42 rounds in total with that. He also fired 6 shots total from two .357 revolvers. So he was responsible for firing 1/3rd of the 145 shots fired from 9 different people. The biggest advantage wasn't necessarily the ballistics of the .223 (while that surely did help it wasn't a death ray), as the shots were all within handgun range and nobody was shot through any heavy cover. Instead, it was the capacity of the rifle that was a huge benefit.
Against basically one target firing back the 8 FBI agents suffered huge casualties and barely won, due to underpowered handguns and troubles reloading.
Sure, reloads are possible, but why make it more complicated with artificially low capacity?
Back on OP surely the lessons of WWI and WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc. couldn't have been lost on the designers of the P6.... that greater capacity is beneficial.
It's simply nonsense to argue that anyone carrying a gun, exactly the same size and weight, would prefer LESS rounds.
Wrong. In the famous FBI shootout, two FBI agents shot while reloading and were unable to reload their revolvers because of hand injuries. McNeill, after scoring 2 head/neck shots out of 6 shots on Mattix, was shot by Platt in the hand and unable to reload his revolver and was seriously injured and knocked out of the fight. It would be easy to presume that his fate would have been better if he was only 1/2 or 1/3rd into a 12-18 round magazine of 9mm... not stopping to reload. His focus was on reloading (down on his gun) and not scanning for threats or firing on Platt as he moved to position.
Hanlon was shot in the hand while reloading his revolver and seriously injured.
Note, Grogan was able to get off 9 shots with his 9mm (14 round capacity) and credited with scoring the first hit of the gunfight, wounding Mattix before being killed with the .223. Give Grogan only 6 shot revolver, perhaps he doesn't score that first hit before being shot reloading.
The FBI report concluded that the Agents handguns were less effective due to low stopping power and reloading repeatedly under stress due to low capacity.
It was 8 FBI agents against 2 bad guys. The Agents had initiative, fired first, struck the first hits, and had better fields of fire (they were flanking/behind the criminals), and laid down fire from more directions.
Consider that Mattix fired only 1 shot of #6 buckshot and was taken out of the fight. Platt did a LOT of damage. Yes his weapon was a superior .223 but he only had to reload one time, firing 42 rounds in total with that. He also fired 6 shots total from two .357 revolvers. So he was responsible for firing 1/3rd of the 145 shots fired from 9 different people. The biggest advantage wasn't necessarily the ballistics of the .223 (while that surely did help it wasn't a death ray), as the shots were all within handgun range and nobody was shot through any heavy cover. Instead, it was the capacity of the rifle that was a huge benefit.
Against basically one target firing back the 8 FBI agents suffered huge casualties and barely won, due to underpowered handguns and troubles reloading.
Sure, reloads are possible, but why make it more complicated with artificially low capacity?
Back on OP surely the lessons of WWI and WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc. couldn't have been lost on the designers of the P6.... that greater capacity is beneficial.
Last edited:
cluttonfred
Member
When it comes right down to it, we're really talking about the difference between civilian, police and military use of weapons. If I were a police officer going after drug dealers or a soldier going into combat or if civilization went out the window and I needed to fight looters or zombies or whatever to protect my family then absolutely, I'd want all the magazine capacity I could get. But for 99% of the real-life scenarios in which a private citizen is likely to use a handgun -- or a rifle for that matter -- in self defense, high magazine capacity is unnecessary. Many people believe it is their right to own whatever they want, and they are certainly fun to shoot, so I am not talking about rights or limits here, just what is actually needed in real life. Any analysis of actual civilian armed confrontations will show that only very, very rarely are more than a couple of shots fired. In this particular discussion, we were talking about a police pistol intended to be light and compact (for its day), carried much and shot little. For that use, and for private concealed carry, I just don't see a need for a massive gun with a high capacity magazine.
Mainsail
Member
You’re reading what you want to read and ignoring the actual words. The FBI shootout had little to do with capacity (I didn’t say nothing to do with, but little to do with). The FBI shootout was a failure of tactics and round effectiveness. Three of the agents had high capacity 9mm pistols and fired a total of 41 rounds. In all, seven of the eight agents fired 77 to 78 rounds of 9mm,.357, 38, and 12ga.
Be that as it may, if your personal safety plan is emphasizing a Miami FBI shootout, then magazine capacity should only be a minor factor in that plan. It’s a popular method of debating, a sly shift of environment. You and I are more likely to get hit by a bolt of lightning on the day we’re walking into the lotto headquarters with the winning powerball ticket than to get in such a firefight. Citizen self-defense and FBI field tactics are not in parallel.
You contend that the P6 eight round capacity is a deficiency and I disagree. I'm secure and comfortable with my nine round capacity 1911, or ten round capacity of my 1076, much more than I would be with 18 rounds in a G17. If I need to reload, which historically hasn’t happened in citizen self-defense, I certainly can do so.
Walt Sherrill
Member
Mainsail said:
I agree with most of what you wrote, and also think Leadcounsel misses the critical points in his analysis of the various LEO shootouts. The LEOs took handguns to a rifle fight -- and that's an unfair fight. To make matters worse, the bad guys in the LA fight were well ARMORED!!. Had any of the cops been armed with the equivalents of M16s, the fight would have been over far more quickly. (My son, an NC State Trooper now has that M16 equivalent in the back of his duty vehicle...) The BGs there were well protected and also using much more powerful weapons (including AK-47s, full-auto M16s, etc.). Their use of body armor, both vests and home-made materials, made the police rounds ineffective.
It's only your next to last sentence (which I made bold) above that I MIGHT take issue with...
In the reading I've been doing about shoot-outs, it seems that SHOT PLACEMENT is the most critical factor; it also appears that most semi-auto rounds CAN and DO penetrate deeply enough to do harm. Choosing the proper load for the weapon use is important, of course. B]Central Nervous System[/B] hits are critical to stopping the other guy quickly, thereby keeping him from returning fire and doing you harm... You can do that with (a CNS hit from) a 9mm, a .357 Mag, a.357 SIG, a .40, or with a 10MM. (The Ellifritz study, based on the analysis of over 1740 people actually shot in confrontations suggests you can might also be able to do it using a .380 -- but the .380 results are based on a much smaller sample.) Placement is arguably more important than caliber -- given that the round used CAN (and does) penetrate.
What is most critical, I think, is using the weapon THAT YOU SHOOT THE BEST. If you shoot your .45 and 10mm better than you shoot a G17, then you're doing the right thing. But if you're shooting the .45 or 1911 because you think the size of the HOLE they make is more important than where that hole is placed, then the other guy, like PLATT (in the Miami shootout, using the Ruger .223) is likely to keep on coming, doing you or others grave harm as he slowly bleeds out... Given the armor worn by the BG's in the LA shootout, I doubt that .45s or 10mm rounds would have made much difference, there.
Last edited:
Mainsail
Member
I'll also add that in the Miami shootout, Agent Mireles fired four rounds of buckshot at the windshield and driver’s window, from 25', in an attempt to stop the escape. Figuring nine pellets in each shell, that's 36 projectiles! None of those 36 .33 caliber (or 8mm) bullets found their intended target.
How many handguns have a 36 round capacity?
I don't disagree. I shoot either of those two guns far more accurately than I did my G17 Gen 1 when I had it. The actual *difference* in accuracy however could be argued as irrelevant. The 1076 and the 1911 being full sized guns, my ability to establish a proper grip is definitely better than my grip of the XDs (pinky half off the bottom) or any mouse-gun. Proper grip and the weight of the steel gun helps with follow-up shots.
Last edited:
george burns
Member
With the coming of a new age in the war on terror, there will be more "raids" conducted like in France this past week. That's as close to being a fact as you can get. If you are likely to be in a place that is a target "like a metropolitan area", then you should carry according to what you feel safe with.
Perhaps 2 extra magazines. As Maas said in his last backwoods email, the guy with the 38, on a prior incident, was able to deter the terrorists from killing more people. So who knows, every situation is going to be different.
I always have 2 6 round mags for my single stack 9mm on me.
I hope I never need them.
Perhaps 2 extra magazines. As Maas said in his last backwoods email, the guy with the 38, on a prior incident, was able to deter the terrorists from killing more people. So who knows, every situation is going to be different.
I always have 2 6 round mags for my single stack 9mm on me.
I hope I never need them.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
Shot placement is the most critical factor. The "mines bigger and better than yours" caliber argument has been dated for quite awhile now. You have to put the rounds where they have to go, as quickly as possible, and continue to do so, until the threat is down.
Any reasonable caliber will get the job done. Why not pick the one you can shoot the best and fastest with, and one that will allow you to sustain the fire without a reload, should it be necessary?
I agree.
The fact that supposedly "trained" individuals had to expend what they did in that, and quite a few other cases, only emphasizes the capacity issue, police or not. Its a proven fact, pistol calibers generally suck as stoppers, and you dont (or shouldnt) stop shooting, until the threat is down. That simply takes what it takes, and not what you "thought" it should.
Is a civilian, who likely has little if any realistic training, and who probably doesnt practice much in any realistic manner to boot, likely to do any better than the police in a confrontation? Im betting not. Is carrying a smaller gun and/or less ammo a good or better solution for them?
You dont get to pick the fight, you get the luck of the draw. If youre not as prepared as you can be for that, thats on you. If you want a 5 or 8 shooter, have at it. Its your choice. To me, its the fact you can have a 10 or 17+ shooter, in the same or similar sized package, that makes the choice easy. If I only need 1, Im ecstatic. If I need 6 or 9, Im still realistically in the game. Do you really want to have to stop and reload if its not done?
Even my little Glock 26 can come close to that, and each of those could be a deliberate shot, not just a handful randomly thrown at once.
The shotgun thing really isnt something that proves anything, other than it too failed in that case. What it does reinforce is, capacity, and having enough to continue, when at first you dont succeed. Doesnt matter what it is youre using, having enough on board ammo to solve the problem is never a bad thing.
Thermactor
member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Messages
- 992
The take home lesson is to train, train, train; a person doesn't rise to the occasion but rather falls back to the level of his training in an emergency situation. Agreed here with AK103K.
I read about a shooting that killed two CCW holders in a road rage incident. One guy got a jump on the other once the guy got out of his car, and fired a .22lr round at him, striking him. The other guy jumped into his car to retrieve his 9mm handgun and took two or three more hits from the .22lr. When he drew and fired his 9mm at the attacker, he fired 5 shots and then collapsed on the pavement. Only one of the rounds connected, but it was placed accurately enough to fatally wound the assailant..
If you're in that kind of emergency situation with all kinds of crazy things going on, including getting shot at, you want to be damn sure that you know how to use your weapon effectively and under extreme stress.
I read about a shooting that killed two CCW holders in a road rage incident. One guy got a jump on the other once the guy got out of his car, and fired a .22lr round at him, striking him. The other guy jumped into his car to retrieve his 9mm handgun and took two or three more hits from the .22lr. When he drew and fired his 9mm at the attacker, he fired 5 shots and then collapsed on the pavement. Only one of the rounds connected, but it was placed accurately enough to fatally wound the assailant..
If you're in that kind of emergency situation with all kinds of crazy things going on, including getting shot at, you want to be damn sure that you know how to use your weapon effectively and under extreme stress.
silversport
Member
8 round magazines are what the West German Police Trials called for...
Walther P5
SIG Sauer P6
HK P7
...all were designed around the 9mm and had 8 round magazines...
Perhaps they thought that was enough...
Bill
Walther P5
SIG Sauer P6
HK P7
...all were designed around the 9mm and had 8 round magazines...
Perhaps they thought that was enough...
Bill
- Status
