May need another 9mm

[E.Shell]

...Micro should just be small.

Same thing I told her.

OP, don't overlook the small Sigs.

 

[teratos]

Same thing I told her.

OP, don't overlook the small Sigs.

THIS!!! The 365 is a great pistol for carry.

 

[Boats]

I know I'm probably going against the grain here, but why buy a gun you don't need?

I don't understand the concept.

 

[Boats]

Full size, compact, sub compact.

I dunno, terrible classifications. They should all go with small, medium, and large. Micro is stupid too. Micro should just be small.

I agree with this. Maybe an x-large for Deagles and H&K mk23s

 

[TheOriginalMexicanBob]

Liberty is not about needs…it’s about wants and desires.

 

[Bob A]

(Yes, I stole the title)

How practical is a Compact Pistol, e.g. Beretta, Taurus etc.
I know that they are just smaller versions of their big brothers, and usually some parts are not interchangeable.
Magazines are hard to find and much more expensive. And for the round count you can get the same if not more in smaller packages like a striker fired pistol.

I'm asking because an associate offered to sell me one, but I'm not sure that it's worth the extra expenses. I'm not a collector and I don't carry, not sure that even as an compact pistol that if carried how well it would conceal.

That being said, I am intrigued by it.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks in advance for any input.

IMO, compact pistols are eminently practical, especially so in the case of the non-tupperware types.

They give you nearly the same capacity as a full-sized weapon, while retaining enough of the mass to tame recoil. Additionally, they often have similar ergonomics as their larger relatives, enabling you to more easily wear and carry a pistol that is familiar in operation and design, without having to pay the penalty of bulk.

I'm fond of the ergonomics and design of CZ pistols. It's nice that they provide a broad range of features in varying sizes and configurations.

I'm also fond of revolvers, and I feel they're not as respected as they once were as self-defense weapons. Snubbies seem to multiply in the darkness of my gun safe; damned if I know how they got access to my finances, but it's always nice to find a new little one in there. I understand that the hidden-hammer S&W Centennials were inspired by J H Fitzgerald, who originated the Fitz Special, which I think is one of the most brutally appearing and appealing compact handguns.

If you're intrigued by a compact, you should get one. The guns I mostly regret not buying only seem to get more expensive as time goes on. I also count "intriguing" as a sufficient reason in itself to motivate a purchase. If you decide, down the road, that your purchase was a mistake, you can always find someone who will want it as much as you did.

Sounds like your friend has a hammer gun. While I don't want to argue the benefits of hammer vs striker, I think that the only striker-fired pistols on my safe are HK P7s; on researching the subject, I admit to FN 1910, Mauser 1934, Savage 1907 and Luger. The striker design is somewhat old-fashioned, and was resurrected by HK for their VP70 (the first polymer pistol, beating Glock by more than a decade) and the P7, whose gas-retarded blowback design and grip-operated cocking mechanism makes it a really odd duck.

Intriguing, no?

Obviously, I have issues regarding intriguing pistols. Be careful; intrigue has consequences.

Edit: Fitz Special. Hard to see that the front of the trigger guard has been removed, but I like the photo anyway.

Top

 

[inkd]

(Yes, I stole the title)

How practical is a Compact Pistol, e.g. Beretta, Taurus etc.

If it happens to be a Beretta 92M, it's a horrible compact handgun. I'll take it off your associates hands to spare you the pain of owning it

 

[imaoldcowhand]

Nope, not the Beretta but it's red headed cousin from Brazil.
I really don't know why it's called a compact. It only has a 1" shorter barrel and a shorter grip.

 

[joppaj]

Nope, not the Beretta but it's red headed cousin from Brazil

Not going to lie. A redheaded Brazilian sounds like a hard upper right corner on the crazy/ hot matrix (assuming it's female of course)

 

[wpage]

IMO, compact pistols are eminently practical, especially so in the case of the non-tupperware types.

They give you nearly the same capacity as a full-sized weapon, while retaining enough of the mass to tame recoil. Additionally, they often have similar ergonomics as their larger relatives, enabling you to more easily wear and carry a pistol that is familiar in operation and design, without having to pay the penalty of bulk.

I'm fond of the ergonomics and design of CZ pistols. It's nice that they provide a broad range of features in varying sizes and configurations.

I'm also fond of revolvers, and I feel they're not as respected as they once were as self-defense weapons. Snubbies seem to multiply in the darkness of my gun safe; damned if I know how they got access to my finances, but it's always nice to find a new little one in there. I understand that the hidden-hammer S&W Centennials were inspired by J H Fitzgerald, who originated the Fitz Special, which I think is one of the most brutally appearing and appealing compact handguns.

If you're intrigued by a compact, you should get one. The guns I mostly regret not buying only seem to get more expensive as time goes on. I also count "intriguing" as a sufficient reason in itself to motivate a purchase. If you decide, down the road, that your purchase was a mistake, you can always find someone who will want it as much as you did.

Sounds like your friend has a hammer gun. While I don't want to argue the benefits of hammer vs striker, I think that the only striker-fired pistols on my safe are HK P7s; on researching the subject, I admit to FN 1910, Mauser 1934, Savage 1907 and Luger. The striker design is somewhat old-fashioned, and was resurrected by HK for their VP70 (the first polymer pistol, beating Glock by more than a decade) and the P7, whose gas-retarded blowback design and grip-operated cocking mechanism makes it a really odd duck.

Intriguing, no?

Obviously, I have issues regarding intriguing pistols. Be careful; intrigue has consequences.

Edit: Fitz Special. Hard to see that the front of the trigger guard has been removed, but I like the photo anyway.

View attachment 395484 Top

Wow never saw a Fitz in other than 38 before... ^^^

 

[Chaim]

(Yes, I stole the title)

How practical is a Compact Pistol, e.g. Beretta, Taurus etc.
I know that they are just smaller versions of their big brothers, and usually some parts are not interchangeable.
Magazines are hard to find and much more expensive. And for the round count you can get the same if not more in smaller packages like a striker fired pistol.

I'm asking because an associate offered to sell me one, but I'm not sure that it's worth the extra expenses. I'm not a collector and I don't carry, not sure that even as an compact pistol that if carried how well it would conceal.

That being said, I am intrigued by it.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks in advance for any input.

These days, people mean so many different things when they say "compact," but I think you are referring to the traditional compact service pistols like the Glock 19 vs. 17, SIG P229 and P228 vs. P226, Beretta 92 Compact vs. 92, CZ PCR/P01/75 Compact vs. 75B, etc. (EDIT: I just saw your 10:06AM post, that is definitely what you were referring to).

If so, while they don't usually sell in the numbers as the full size gun (the SIGs and Glocks being notable exceptions where the "compact" versions are almost the standard for those manufacturers), many were sold in enough numbers that parts and mags aren't difficult to find.

The main disadvantages (vs. a full sized gun) are a slightly shorter sight radius (possibly somewhat lower accuracy), shorter overall length (possibly somewhat higher muzzle flip and thus slower follow up shots), a slightly lighter gun (slightly higher recoil), one or two round lower capacity, and a slightly smaller grip which can be a disadvantage during the draw. However, these are quite a bit bigger than today's crop of CCW pistols and aren't much smaller than the full sized versions.

The main advantages (vs. a full sized gun) are the smaller grip is better for those with smaller hands (even at the range), it is a little smaller and lighter if you carry. Many of these can be concealed carried pretty easily, and as a compact service pistol (belt/OWB carry by police, military, and security) they are lighter and easier to carry all day.

The main advantages (vs. a subcompact or micro carry pistol) are that it is a more capable pistol. It is heavier so you have quicker follow up shots and lower recoil (also allows more practice at the range and you can become better at the gun), the longer sight radius makes for somewhat better practical accuracy, the longer barrel means less muzzle flip, the longer grip makes for an easier draw, and it will have a greater (sometimes significantly greater) capacity. You can also use the mag for the full sized version for even greater capacity reloads (though they won't fit flush).

I love a compact service pistol. I often carry a CZ PCR (I used to carry a similar CZ P01), and now that I can carry here in MD (and not just when out of state) I often carry a lighter Glock 19. I find them almost as easy to carry as my smaller CCW oriented 9mms. Even without considering carry, they feel as good in my hands as my full sized pistols, they are easy to shoot at the range, and for whatever reason, I find them a little more fun to shoot than the full sized guns.

If you don't carry (or want to carry as small as possible) and you don't want to own many guns, and you have large hands, then you may be better off without them. If you like to have a few guns, you like some variety or like something a little different, and especially if you have small to medium hands, you should give a compact version of a service pistol a try (I especially like having one full sized and one compact from the same manufacturer to really see the comparison).

 

[TheOriginalMexicanBob]

Wow never saw a Fitz in other than 38 before... ^^^

I believe the first true “Fitz” revolvers were on the large frame Colt New Service large bore guns.

 

[inkd]

Nope, not the Beretta but it's red headed cousin from Brazil.
I really don't know why it's called a compact. It only has a 1" shorter barrel and a shorter grip.

I would pass. But, I am biased. I hate Taurus firearms.

 

[Objee]

I know I'm probably going against the grain here, but why buy a gun you don't need?

Better to have a gun you don't need than to need a gun you don't have.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Full size, compact, sub compact.

I dunno, terrible classifications. They should all go with small, medium, and large. Micro is stupid too. Micro should just be small.

At least to my thinking , Micro is useful distinction , on two fronts :

1. It actually , usefully fits into front pocket of regular pants .

2. It offers a caliber in a size format associated with a different caliber , enough so to create a new catagory ... Ie , .32acp the size of typical .25acp , or 9x19 the size of typical .380 .

**************

But yeah , concepts of size catagories do change over time .

Yusta be , service/ duty size autos were 4.5 to 5 inch bbl . Now the norm for duty guns is +/- 4 in previously known as compacts .

 

[Biggfoot44]

I believe the first true “Fitz” revolvers were on the large frame Colt New Service large bore guns.

Yes ! John FitzGerald first proved the concept with a pair of New Service in .45 Colt . He was a BIG guy , and for him they were pocket guns .

 

[Biggfoot44]

Say what you will about many Taraus products , but the M92 family is the exception that they have figured out , and do well . To many , they are actually preferable to the Beretta with their frame mounted safety .


Cowhand has his subcompact 9mm box checked off with his Shield 1.0 . How are you equipped for full size 9mm ? ( In this case , disregard the " compact " designation . A Compact M92 is modern era duty size .)

If you don't already have a full size 9mm , this could fill that slot for you .

 

[308Scout]

Say what you will about many Taraus products , but the M92 family is the exception that they have figured out , and do well . To many , they are actually preferable to the Beretta with their frame mounted safety .


Cowhand has his subcompact 9mm box checked off with his Shield 1.0 . How are you equipped for full size 9mm ? ( In this case , disregard the " compact " designation . A Compact M92 is modern era duty size .)

If you don't already have a full size 9mm , this could fill that slot for you .

IIRC, Taurus inherited some expertise when they took over the Brazilian factory that Beretta previosly owned.

 

[dannyp]

Well…I buy guns and I know things.

or the reverse .

 

[Harrys]

Buy a Kimber