|
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
|
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/multi...uns-under-500/ Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 7:40:03 AM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
and nothing very special in the bunch. Just like you, ****. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://www.washingtontimes.com/multi...uns-under-500/ Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch. Your narcissism is showing, deadbeat. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://www.washingtontimes.com/multi...uns-under-500/ Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch. For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:
On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://www.washingtontimes.com/multi...uns-under-500/ Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch. For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right? |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On Thursday, April 30, 2015 at 3:46:48 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote: On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://www.washingtontimes.com/multi...uns-under-500/ Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch. For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Harry, I don't have to consistently 'practice' to prove I can 'shoot'- and shoot the guns I have. Aren't you a Mosin fan? No, John is a Mosin fan. I'm a Lee-Enfield fan Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right? No. And even so. I have an Enfield made in 1906 by BSA which shoots extremely well up to 200 yards. incidentally the first few inches of the rifling is shot out on it. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote: On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://www.washingtontimes.com/multi...uns-under-500/ Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch. For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right? I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 4/30/15 7:38 AM, Tim wrote:
On Thursday, April 30, 2015 at 3:46:48 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote: On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://www.washingtontimes.com/multi...uns-under-500/ Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch. For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Harry, I don't have to consistently 'practice' to prove I can 'shoot'- and shoot the guns I have. Aren't you a Mosin fan? No, John is a Mosin fan. I'm a Lee-Enfield fan Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right? No. And even so. I have an Enfield made in 1906 by BSA which shoots extremely well up to 200 yards. incidentally the first few inches of the rifling is shot out on it. Oh. I practice to improve my skills. I had "Steelie," my Henry .357 lever action rifle out at a place where I could shoot targets at 200+ yards, and I was pleased with the results using the iron sights. Haven't tried my .22LR rifle at that distance yet. I've now shot my AR-15 at 300 yards, using a scope. My buddy with the Swedish Mauser got that rifle about 10 years ago, and though it was manufactured in the 1800s, it was "as new" inside and out. It's a really sweet shooter. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 4/30/15 8:29 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote: On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://www.washingtontimes.com/multi...uns-under-500/ Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch. For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right? I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. If I were carrying regularly, I'd get a Ruger LCR DA revolver, the "hammerless" one. Five .357 MAG rounds should be sufficient. I've seen enough FTFs and other problems with semi-auto pistols at the range I frequent to wonder if they really are reliable enough for self-protection for a shooter who doesn't practice a lot. There's very little that goes wrong with a decent revolver. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On Thursday, April 30, 2015 at 8:29:50 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote: On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote: On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://www.washingtontimes.com/multi...uns-under-500/ Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch. For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right? I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Stovepipes and FTF in semi-autos are primarily either using the wrong (cheap?) ammo or an issue with a particular pistol. Finding the ammo a pistol likes and sticking to it, or correcting the issue and keeping the pistol clean makes a semi very reliable. I've fired hundreds of rounds through both of my CZ82 Maks, and have never had a single failure. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
That's one thing I like about my Hungarian. It piped on me when I shot a couple rounds of .380 in it and the results were to be expected. Otherwise it's handled and performed flawlessly. One thing I like about it, is that in double action it has a hard trigger pull. I belive it was designed that way.. It's a police issue and that feature would help on a judgement call. Once cocked the trigger is smooth and not hairpin.
It's a nice small gun. |
Quote:
Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote:
Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 5/1/2015 8:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. I hear Kahr made their PM9 series Mass. legal. Hopefully they didn't crappify the pistol in the process. -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On Fri, 1 May 2015 06:51:07 +0100, RGrew176 wrote:
Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. The Sig P938 with the De Santis Nemesis holster is a great combination also. http://tinyurl.com/nb43aha Like one of the reviewers said, in a front jeans pocket it's very comfortable, easy to draw, and not at all noticeable. -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner behavior causes problems. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 5/1/2015 8:18 AM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 5/1/2015 8:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. I hear Kahr made their PM9 series Mass. legal. Hopefully they didn't crappify the pistol in the process. One requirement is a 10lb trigger pull on *all* handguns. It's not a big deal on larger, heavier handguns but can affect the lightweight ones. In the case of the Bodyguard it was the 10lb pull plus the long action of the trigger that messed me up. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 5/1/2015 8:26 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/1/2015 8:18 AM, Justan Olphart wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. I hear Kahr made their PM9 series Mass. legal. Hopefully they didn't crappify the pistol in the process. One requirement is a 10lb trigger pull on *all* handguns. It's not a big deal on larger, heavier handguns but can affect the lightweight ones. In the case of the Bodyguard it was the 10lb pull plus the long action of the trigger that messed me up. 10 lb single action mode too? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 5/1/2015 8:47 AM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 5/1/2015 8:26 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:18 AM, Justan Olphart wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. I hear Kahr made their PM9 series Mass. legal. Hopefully they didn't crappify the pistol in the process. One requirement is a 10lb trigger pull on *all* handguns. It's not a big deal on larger, heavier handguns but can affect the lightweight ones. In the case of the Bodyguard it was the 10lb pull plus the long action of the trigger that messed me up. 10 lb single action mode too? Good question. I'll have to check on the only revolver I have left ... the .38 Chief's Special. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 5/1/15 8:26 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
One requirement is a 10lb trigger pull on *all* handguns. It's not a big deal on larger, heavier handguns but can affect the lightweight ones. In the case of the Bodyguard it was the 10lb pull plus the long action of the trigger that messed me up. A 10-pound DA pull is not unusual on a DA/SA service revolver. My S&W 686 measures 6 pounds DA and 3 pounds SA, and they both now feel pretty good to me. The SA action is...short. My Ruger Mk III Volquartsen has a 2-1/2 pound trigger pull, which is pretty nifty for target shooting. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
Justan Olphart wrote:
On 5/1/2015 8:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. I hear Kahr made their PM9 series Mass. legal. Hopefully they didn't crappify the pistol in the process. The CM9 is my boat gun. Small, stainless, and reliable. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/1/2015 8:18 AM, Justan Olphart wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. I hear Kahr made their PM9 series Mass. legal. Hopefully they didn't crappify the pistol in the process. One requirement is a 10lb trigger pull on *all* handguns. It's not a big deal on larger, heavier handguns but can affect the lightweight ones. In the case of the Bodyguard it was the 10lb pull plus the long action of the trigger that messed me up. Can you legally alter that after the purchase? |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/1/2015 8:47 AM, Justan Olphart wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:26 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:18 AM, Justan Olphart wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. I hear Kahr made their PM9 series Mass. legal. Hopefully they didn't crappify the pistol in the process. One requirement is a 10lb trigger pull on *all* handguns. It's not a big deal on larger, heavier handguns but can affect the lightweight ones. In the case of the Bodyguard it was the 10lb pull plus the long action of the trigger that messed me up. 10 lb single action mode too? Good question. I'll have to check on the only revolver I have left ... the .38 Chief's Special. Same would be true with a pistol on round 2 or a pistol with an exposed hammer. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/1/15 8:26 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: One requirement is a 10lb trigger pull on *all* handguns. It's not a big deal on larger, heavier handguns but can affect the lightweight ones. In the case of the Bodyguard it was the 10lb pull plus the long action of the trigger that messed me up. A 10-pound DA pull is not unusual on a DA/SA service revolver. My S&W 686 measures 6 pounds DA and 3 pounds SA, and they both now feel pretty good to me. The SA action is...short. My Ruger Mk III Volquartsen has a 2-1/2 pound trigger pull, which is pretty nifty for target shooting. Good for you! Did you buy them with your tax savings? ;) |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 5/1/2015 9:26 PM, Username wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:18 AM, Justan Olphart wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. I hear Kahr made their PM9 series Mass. legal. Hopefully they didn't crappify the pistol in the process. One requirement is a 10lb trigger pull on *all* handguns. It's not a big deal on larger, heavier handguns but can affect the lightweight ones. In the case of the Bodyguard it was the 10lb pull plus the long action of the trigger that messed me up. Can you legally alter that after the purchase? Good question to which I don't know the answer for sure. The MA laws stipulate certain design issues such as the 10lb trigger pull, a safety, drop tests and even overall size that would theoretically prevent a 5 year old from being able to fire the handgun. Apparently making any modifications to the original design (other than making it fully automatic) is not illegal however should the handgun be involved in an accident at the range or even if used in self defense, the fact that it was modified in any way could be used against you in court. The other issue is warranty. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/1/2015 9:26 PM, Username wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:18 AM, Justan Olphart wrote: On 5/1/2015 8:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/1/2015 1:51 AM, RGrew176 wrote: Mr. Luddite;1032876 Wrote: On 4/30/2015 6:46 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 11:27 PM, Tim wrote:- On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:40:03 AM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:- On 4/29/15 7:15 AM, Tim wrote: http://tinyurl.com/kt7vawl Interesting little reviews. Feh. All semi-autos, not a great choice for uber-reliable handguns, and nothing very special in the bunch.- For less than $500. a piece I'd take any of them. Of course in my hands they'd get limited use. I dont' go to a range just to burn up boxes of ammunition and see how soon I can wear one out. But I really don't need one. In my small bore line My Hungarian Mak.9mm does the job. And I haven't run through 300 rds. in 20 years . Gave $150 for it new, then. I still think I got a bargain. - There literally are dozens of pretty much better handguns you can buy for $500 or less than those depicted, including some top drawer or near top drawer revolvers, which is what I would pick these days for a conceal carry or nightstand pistol. As for shooting a pistol, well, I don't see how you can become adept with a particular one unless you practice with it at the range. It takes an awful lot of ammo to "wear out" a decent firearm. Plus, you can almost always replace a barrel. Aren't you a Mosin fan? Those military surplus rifles pretty much have clapped out barrels before they get into your hands, right?- I have a different opinion on revolvers vs pistols. I actually prefer revolvers and it is what I keep on my nightstand beside my bed at night. It's ready to fire in an emergency, either in double or single action but it's not being handled, carried or subject to being caught in a holster or clothing. But for concealed carry I prefer a pistol for a couple of reasons. First, they can be smaller and slimmer. Second, and you can call me overly cautious, but on the few occasions that I carry I think a pistol is safer. There's no exposed hammer (at least on the ones I own) that can get hung up and inadvertently cocked. I also don't carry with a round in the chamber making it very unlikely that a round could ever go off accidentally. I know many disagree with this practice but it is my feeling that I can afford the extra second or two required to rack the pistol if I ever had to use it ... which, we all know is very unlikely. I think not having a round in the chamber along with the gun's safety offsets the slight but still possible potential of an inadvertent discharge. Your reasons listed above is one of the big reasons that I purchased my Smith and Wesson M & P Shield 9MM. I can carry it in my pocket if I desire. It is a striker fire weapon no exposed hammer. I have no problem retrieving it from a pocket. It has a safety so I do carry it with a round in the chamber. As I am pulling it from the holster or pocket I am flicking off the safety with my thumb. It might be a little quicker than your racking a round but I agree with you it is safer to carry it without a chambered round unless you have a safety. I had a S&W M&P Bodyguard 380 for a while but ended up trading it back in. To meet Massachusetts safety requirements the trigger pull was very long and has a 10lb pull. By the time you fired a round the pistol was aimed too low. I thought it was just me but when I brought it back to the dealer he said others have complained about the same thing. Light gun, 10lb trigger and long pull. Your finger pulled the gun down as you pulled the trigger. It would have been fine if it was the only gun you used. I could adjust for it. The problem was then going to another handgun like the Walther or other larger gun and remembering not to adjust. I like the little Sig Sauer. Just about the same size as the Bodyguard but doesn't seem to share the same issue. Maybe it's a case of how they are balanced. I hear Kahr made their PM9 series Mass. legal. Hopefully they didn't crappify the pistol in the process. One requirement is a 10lb trigger pull on *all* handguns. It's not a big deal on larger, heavier handguns but can affect the lightweight ones. In the case of the Bodyguard it was the 10lb pull plus the long action of the trigger that messed me up. Can you legally alter that after the purchase? Good question to which I don't know the answer for sure. The MA laws stipulate certain design issues such as the 10lb trigger pull, a safety, drop tests and even overall size that would theoretically prevent a 5 year old from being able to fire the handgun. Apparently making any modifications to the original design (other than making it fully automatic) is not illegal however should the handgun be involved in an accident at the range or even if used in self defense, the fact that it was modified in any way could be used against you in court. The other issue is warranty. I'm not familiar with any firearm warranties that are voided by a trigger job and several do them in-house. The liability concern would be a stretch for the court. If they did test it how would they know it didn't come from the factory that way? It's not as simple as a marked dial on the firearm. Don't you think most 5-year old children could pull a 10lb trigger? It's a shame MA has such ineffective laws. |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On Sat, 02 May 2015 21:39:13 -0400, Username
wrote: It's a shame MA has such ineffective laws. === The laws are the result of what I call "Ain't it awful" politics. An accident or incident happens and everyone in politics says "ain't it awful, ain't it awful". And the next thing you know, another dumb law gets passed and the politicians pat each other on the back because they "did something". |
Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500
On 5/2/2015 10:55 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 02 May 2015 21:39:13 -0400, Username wrote: It's a shame MA has such ineffective laws. === The laws are the result of what I call "Ain't it awful" politics. An accident or incident happens and everyone in politics says "ain't it awful, ain't it awful". And the next thing you know, another dumb law gets passed and the politicians pat each other on the back because they "did something". Exactly. Even if they know they can't get a restrictive law passed, they file legislation anyway. Looks good on the resume'. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com