Thinking about getting a Pistol, need some advice.

[SmokinLoon]

IMO go with somthing of a .45 or higher 9mm no stoping power at all

You Sir, are as wrong as can be.  The 9mm Luger is quite enough to put a man down.  With all things caliber related there are benefits and curses.  If you read up on your wound channels the 9mm Luger has far more and away than needed to cause trauma enough to make a person bleed out rather quickly.

Some of the benefits to having a 9mm is its lighter weight (able to carry more ammo), less recoil (less fatigue), faster follow up shots (able to put more shots down range in an accurate manner).  The down sides have to do with FMJ ammo, and even then that topic is still quite debatable.

Dont forget the benefit many forget about: a 9mm used typically has more ammo, that equates into having the ability fire more freely to keep the baddy pinned down while you either move for a better shot angle, or let your partner go for help or maneuver for a better shot.  If you have 15+ in your mag you are able to use a few or so rounds for that purpose.  If you have a 7 round mag (or 10rd mag, or 6 round cylinder, etc), you're less able and less apt to do such a thing.     

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

The 9MM has to have +P ammunition to achieve the standard desirable penetration of 12" minimum. It often has to sacrifice bullet expansion to achieve that 12" minimum. Given that it starts off with a 0.100" diameter deficit to the 45, giving up expansion is a very questionable decision, and is the reason most agencies at least step up to 40 S&W.

The sharper recoil of 9MM, especially when loaded to +P levels, is actually harder to deal with than the slower shove from the 45ACP, and far less fatiguing. At the range, it appears that most shooters seem to have more problems with the 9MM +P than even 45ACP in +P loadings, because of the sharper pressure curve that produces not only a snappier recoil, but also a louder and more objectionable muzzle blast.

Fifteen rounds of 9MM takes up nearly as much space as 13 rounds of 45ACP. And does not weigh a lot less. The 92 series Beretta double stack grip is in fact so large that it does not fit smaller hands nearly so well as a 1911 single stack grip frame, and does not fit them much better than a double stack 1911 45SCP grip frame. Even the military now admits that the 92 Beretta grip frame is not even close to ideal for a large number of military personnel.

The average "gun fight" for the police lasts just 7 rounds, for both parties. For civilians, that number is even smaller. For civilian concealed carry purposes, anything that carries 8 rounds of good ammunition is more than sufficient, as to date, I have not seen any case where a civilian shot even an 8 round gun dry and was killed or wounded because of it.

The truth is, the reason the military moved to the 9MM, and the Beretta 92FS, is to fall in line with the rest of NATO. None of the elite military units regularly issues or carries the 92FS, the ones that do use the 9MM use some version of the Sig Sauer line, and many of them actually use the 45ACP, many of them in the 1911 Colt pattern. The closest the military could come to a justifiable reason for the 9MM round in combat is that it "more reliably penetrated the standard military issue metal helmet", the problem with that theory was few could even hit that helmet reliably at an angle that allowed the 9MM round to penetrate the helmet on a regular basis, as neither the 9MM ammunition nor the 92FS are consistently that accurate. It came down to logistics more than anything for the choice of 9MM or 45ACP, and the choice of weapon was a matter of economics. The 92 Beretta is a side arm to the military, you have it either to fight your way to your rifle, or to fight your way to more ammunition when you run out of 5.56 NATO for your M-4 or M-16. The fact that the elite units also use the M-14 on a regular basis is another subject for another day.

[Jayhawk]

I've read this debate 100 times, we still haven't figured out an answer?

Penetration isn't the only issue when talking about a defensive handgun.  A lot of this stuff, "snappier recoil" and "fatigue", size and weight, all are going to vary vastly with the specific gun choice.  Weight, even a couple ounces, can make a big difference for someone who carries daily.  A 1911 is a great gun, but some of us just can't conceal that size gun. Like I said before, the big issue for me is that I can afford to practice shooting the 9mm a lot more than a .45.

In the end I kind of look at it as if, "would you rather be hit by a toyota or a hummer?"  They're both going to take you down. It's just personal preference, you have to weight the factors and decide what fits you best.    It's better to carry a .380 than carry nothing at all.

I think a 9mm would be good for the OP because this is not a defensive gun in the first place, remember that? 

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Penetration is a huge issue for personal defense. You absolutely must penetrate to either the central nervous system or the center of the circulatory system to reliably stop the fight as quickly as possible. FBI agents Ben Grogan and Jerry Dove were killed by a dead man walking, that Jerry Dove had inflicted a fatal wound on. They are not the only ones that has happened to.

Yeah, a 380 is better than nothing.

If you can't conceal a 1911, you can't conceal a full size 9MM, either, especially not a 92F series Beretta.

And 9MM is just not an inherently accurate round. If he's target shooting for accuracy, 9MM is not the round to buy.

If cost is a factor, buy a good solid 357 revolver, and shoot 38 Special through it.

[Jayhawk]

The point I was getting to about concealing a 1911 (I never got there, my bad) was that I have to carry a smaller sub-compact pistol.  I'm going to be much more effective with a smaller caliber vs. a .45.

[SmokinLoon]

I'm the guy who can pick up most any handgun and shoot %99 or better in qualifying.  Matter of fact, from memory I can say that I've qualified with the SW Mod 10 in .38Spl; SW 686+ (7 shot) in .357 Mag; Glocks 17/9mm, 19/9mm, and 22/.40; Beretta 92FS/9mm; Sig 226 in both 9mm and .40, Sig 220/.45 ACP; and the Sig 232/.380ACP.  I'm sure there are a few more.  My point is simple: I'm not going to advocate a particular caliber for anyone is specifics because everyone is different to a degree.  We had this tiny little gal who weighed 120lbs sokin wet, the firearms instructor put a Glock 23/.40SW in her hands and told her "that is what you need to buy!".  Some time to take the course she was so intimidated buy the recoil and wrist whip she could barely hit the target.  I took her 1 on 1 and put a few different 9mm's in her hand and she completely turned around her accuracy.  The biggest thing for her was the ergonomics, so she said.  She hated the Glock.  She still carries a Sig 228/9mm almost 10 years later.

Each caliber and each gun has its ups and downs.  I can nod and approve of most brands and calibers for any use.  I will however, frown upon those who bite off more than they can chew as far as caliber, etc. 

FWIW, I carried a Sig 226/9mm as my a duty gun and a Sig 232/.380ACP in my ankle holster as backup.  I also carry that same Sig 232/.380 ACP for concealed carry.  I do from time to time carry a 1911A1 (Rock Island Arsenal) during the winter months as those great big heavy winter coats can act like a ballistic vest to a certain degree AND I can still easily keep the 1911 bulk concealed.        

Last thing.... someone made reference to the average number of shots made by both the bad guy and LEO as being 7 rounds... too bad that has steadily risen each year  from 2.5 for LEO's and 4.2 in 1990.  Also, the typical ranges are still 7 to 10 yards.  The more urban the closer, the more rural the further.  Out here on the prairie we have an AR15 close at hand for those "reach out" situations.  The WY state troopers still have "leased" M14's in their trunks.

 

[Masherbrum]

Penetration is a huge issue for personal defense. You absolutely must penetrate to either the central nervous system or the center of the circulatory system to reliably stop the fight as quickly as possible. FBI agents Ben Grogan and Jerry Dove were killed by a dead man walking, that Jerry Dove had inflicted a fatal wound on. They are not the only ones that has happened to.

Yeah, a 380 is better than nothing.

If you can't conceal a 1911, you can't conceal a full size 9MM, either, especially not a 92F series Beretta.

And 9MM is just not an inherently accurate round. If he's target shooting for accuracy, 9MM is not the round to buy.

If cost is a factor, buy a good solid 357 revolver, and shoot 38 Special through it.

Without question one of the most accurate statements in this entire thread that has NO BIAS.   The .357/.38 have the best penetration.

[Gman]

And 9MM is just not an inherently accurate round

I agree with nearly everyting the quoted posters has said, but I take issue with this.  

It's funny, you go on the PPC league tour, the guys shooting stock auto in this and a number of other leagues like IDPA will tell you in nearly every case that .40 is the inherently inaccurate round, and that it "flies badly".  I don't shoot anything in .40 regularly enough to make that same judgement.

I have a dozen Sig P210's in my vault here.  Every one has a test target.  They are all around 3" or less groups, a couple are under 2", and they are using SECA (swiss) brand 9mm ammunition.  I've shot winchester 115 white box, which we buy in the 1 million round lots through these pistols.  Same results as the SECA ammo.  These are shot at 50 meters.  Not so inherently inaccurate.

My point is, while 9mm isn't the best round for Olympic shooting, for target shooting out to 25 yrds with a standard pistol, it'll more than suffice for the OP.



Also, for the OP, the most important thing is to find something that fits your hand well and you feel comfortable with.  With proper defensive training, any pistol that is .38+p/9mm and up will serve you well as a target and defensive tool.  You'll never master the grip, stance, sight picture, fire control, and follow through/breathing skills you need if your hand isn't fitted well to your pistol.  IMO try a Glock19, Sig 228/229, or 9mm 1911 size pistol to begin with.  I personally recommend a 1911 in 9mm, then go up to a .45 after you get some training and trigger time with the 9mm.  If you are concerend about everything you've read about 9mm defensive capabilities, shoot me a PM, I'll send you a bunch of SIG's official stuff from the course binders, as well as point you in the direction of some 9mm ammo nobody here talks about, which will stop anyone when struck in the T-line or vertical track.



Best regards, good luck with your purchase.  And remember, the WORST handgun in the world is 10x better than the next available defensive option.

Gman

[Masherbrum]

Personally, I'd say a Ruger .22 or a Browning Buck Mark in .22 would be a better way to go than ANY 9mm.   It'll build a stronger foundation of skills and habits.

Onto another issue.   I've only had Stovepipes with a Beretta, I'd never own one.  I carried a .40S&W Cougar and refused to carry it after qualification.   I went back to a S&W J-frame .38.  Just because the Beretta is the Military sidearm doesn't mean anything except "Lowest Bidder".   There's a reason the HK's are being introduced.   "You get what you pay for".   I own an HK, but would NOT hesitate to buy a Sig, Kimber or Glock.   Ruger's have always had "good trigger action" to me.   

[Gman]

It'll build a stronger foundation of skills and habits.

Not necessarily true.  They don't issue new police recruits who have never used a firearm with a .22 lr first do they?

I agree, a good .22 is a decent place to start with pistols, particularly for kids who shouldn't have the burden of using a pistol for defence, but the OP said he had lots of shotgun experience, and was interested in a 92F, so he likely isn't going to want a .22 instead.

Also, a Ruger or Buckmark .22 is a HORRIBLE pistol to learn holster work with.  The safety system isn't designed for the pistol to be carried in a holster with a round in the chamber with only that dinky little safety which can easily be bumped off.  Also, if the OP wants to learn proper defensive pistol fighting skills, a holster capable pistol is a must, not to mention one with a combat minded magazine and slide release.  Doing emergency and tactical reload drills, much less FTF/stoppage drills with a Ruger .22 is..well..useless really.

I have a couple Ruger .22's, and they are a good to have around, particularly when mated up with suppressors, but IMO it shouldn't be your only pistol, or even your first.



As for the relaibility issues being discussed here, I'm a little hesitant to comment, as it'll look biased because of my work.....

On my range, we have over 5,000 rounds a day shot here.  A lot of it is with new shooters using range "rental" guns.  We have a wide variety of everything you've ever heard of, plus we are the national distributors for Kimber, Sig, and a number of other high and brands like DPMS and Sig 550 rifles.  I've had a number of Sig 226's go over the 100,000 round mark with little issues, and some Kimber 1911's push the 70K mark.  Glock, 20,000 rounds and they are in the garbage been, we have had dozens of castosrophic failures, mainly slide rail seperations, but others as well.  HK USP's?  The 5 we had on the wall are all gone, from massive failures, less than 30,000 rounds.  Beretta 92F's?  I've personally beat apart dozens that have had the locking lugs shear off and lock the pistol up tighter than Ft Knox.

Point being, ANY pistol you buy can, and eventually if you put enough rounds through WILL fail....the OPERATOR is the tool, focus on training and don't worry so much about what pistol you get, so long as it FITS YOU...few people, if ANY on this board will ever shoot as much as I do, or as much as the range rental guns I described above get put through them.

[Jayhawk]

I've got a Walther P22 that is a little more conventional pistol, if you can get used to the different mag release system Walther has.  Ideally you would get a .22 conversion kit for the gun you own (if offered) for training.

[Gman]

Walther's aren't bad, other than extremely high failure rates, and HORRID double action trigger pulls, but ya, Jayhawk, you are correct it does have the proper safety system and DA/SA for training for a .22 pistol anyhow.   Reliability is a HUGE issue with Walthers however, every Walther P22 I've ever sold or had on the range has gone back to the distributor.  Ask Montreal city police how much they like their Walther 9mm's, since they have a 100% failure rate ATM. (Same as the P22 almost, haha).  Also, every Walther I've had on the wall has had the ejector/extractor little box assembly fly out or snap 1/2 off under 1000 rounds.  100% failure.


Sig and Kimber both make a .22 pistol (Sig P226 .22, not the Mosquito, which is GARBAGE).  That's what I'd get if I HAD to have a .22 and could only have one pistol.

Otherwise, I agree with Jayhawk, consider a conversion kit, especially if you get a 1911.

[eagl]

Agree 100% about the buckmark being a very poor weapon for carrying in a holster...  Once you chamber a round, it is impossible to de-cock the weapon.  There is no exposed hammer to cock/decock, and no decocking lever.  There is only a safety, which of course you may or may not trust.  The trigger is rather light as well (adjustable on some buckmark models) which again makes it a terrible gun to walk around with.  Once you chamber a round, the only way to make it really "safe" again is to remove the magazine and cycle the action, or fire the round in the chamber.  There is no dual-action either...  If there is a round in the chamber, it is ready to fire, period.

If you can live with these realities, then the buckmark is a great inexpensive pistol.  I got one when I was shooting standard pistol at the collegiate level, and in my relatively inexperienced hands it was just as accurate as the $1,800 pistol my instructor let me borrow for competition.  Unless you fire thousands of rounds a week, I am confident that a buckmark will be "better than you"...  In other words, getting a more accurate gun than a buckmark will not improve your actual accuracy unless you are really serious about shooting.  That gun is far more accurate than most people will ever be, which makes it a great gun to teach marksmanship on the range.

If you want a .22 to carry around out in the field, get a revolver like the S&W K-22.  That is another highly accurate pistol, but it is far safer to carry loaded in a holster than a buckmark.

I carried my buckmark around in the field for one day...  After an hour of being paranoid about blowing a hole in my foot, I ended up clearing the gun and carrying it unloaded with the magazine in my pocket.  I was never worried about carrying my Dad's K-22 loaded in the field.

[Masherbrum]

Not necessarily true.  They don't issue new police recruits who have never used a firearm with a .22 lr first do they?

I agree, a good .22 is a decent place to start with pistols, particularly for kids who shouldn't have the burden of using a pistol for defence, but the OP said he had lots of shotgun experience, and was interested in a 92F, so he likely isn't going to want a .22 instead.

Also, a Ruger or Buckmark .22 is a HORRIBLE pistol to learn holster work with.  The safety system isn't designed for the pistol to be carried in a holster with a round in the chamber with only that dinky little safety which can easily be bumped off.  Also, if the OP wants to learn proper defensive pistol fighting skills, a holster capable pistol is a must, not to mention one with a combat minded magazine and slide release.  Doing emergency and tactical reload drills, much less FTF/stoppage drills with a Ruger .22 is..well..useless really.

I have a couple Ruger .22's, and they are a good to have around, particularly when mated up with suppressors, but IMO it shouldn't be your only pistol, or even your first.



As for the relaibility issues being discussed here, I'm a little hesitant to comment, as it'll look biased because of my work.....

On my range, we have over 5,000 rounds a day shot here.  A lot of it is with new shooters using range "rental" guns.  We have a wide variety of everything you've ever heard of, plus we are the national distributors for Kimber, Sig, and a number of other high and brands like DPMS and Sig 550 rifles.  I've had a number of Sig 226's go over the 100,000 round mark with little issues, and some Kimber 1911's push the 70K mark.  Glock, 20,000 rounds and they are in the garbage been, we have had dozens of castosrophic failures, mainly slide rail seperations, but others as well.  HK USP's?  The 5 we had on the wall are all gone, from massive failures, less than 30,000 rounds.  Beretta 92F's?  I've personally beat apart dozens that have had the locking lugs shear off and lock the pistol up tighter than Ft Knox.

Point being, ANY pistol you buy can, and eventually if you put enough rounds through WILL fail....the OPERATOR is the tool, focus on training and don't worry so much about what pistol you get, so long as it FITS YOU...few people, if ANY on this board will ever shoot as much as I do, or as much as the range rental guns I described above get put through them.

Awesome.   Too bad you're so full of it, it's not even funny.   Thanks for the laugh though.   

[SmokinLoon]

Gman... you're shoving in a lot of opinions with out taking into account the differences between those personal opinion of yours and factual information.
Be a bit more careful when you're claiming what is reliable and what isnt.  Bubba or the "ex Navy SEAL" are mostly full of watermelon and blow nothing but smoke.

Walther is among the most reputable, reliable, and respected firearms companies in the world.