PDA

View Full Version : Why no respect for pistol cal carbines as SD weapons?


RH
August 20, 2012, 08:58 PM
I'm curious why Americans don't consider 9mm or .45 carbines as "serious" military or SD weapons (or SHTF, if your tastes run in that direction). The 9mm and .45 have a long history as issued military long arms - from the Sten, Steryr, Thompson, to Uzi and MP5, and dozens in between to almost every military in the world. Granted, these were mostly SMG's or select fire, but why are the modern pistol cal. carbines dismissed as a novelty nd all discusion ends up as AK vs. AR? Other than rate of fire, modern carbines are the same as their forebear SMG's, and if they were good enough for hundreds of military units (inlc SEALS and other operators) why not for us civvies?

Jo6pak
August 20, 2012, 09:12 PM
I don't dimiss the choice, but if I'm going to carry something the size of a rifle, I'll take the rifle cartridge.:)

More power, range and ammunition capacity for just a little more bulk/weight.

JMO

tahunua001
August 20, 2012, 09:16 PM
those military weapons are all sub machine guns, small, lightweight guns that spit a lot of lead very quickly. I however like the pistol cal carbine as a self defense/home defense round. it does not over penetrate, it's not nearly as loud as the usual suspect home defense calibers, and it's still lethal and accurate for just about any range that is defensible in court.

why so many don't use them? I haven't a clue. my list of home defense weapons in order of which I would grab first is
1. handgun: quick to load, quick to acquire target, compact and easy to move around corners. does not penetrate walls as easily as rifle cartridges
2. pistol cal carbine: not as easy to move around corners and increases both noise and velocity but still under heavy penetration levels.
3. standard carbine: last thing I would want to grab.

I don't follow the chain of thought that says your best option is a shotgun loaded with 00. I am fighting to protect my property and family, why would I want a gun that fires multiple projectiles at once in multiple directions and destroy my own stuff and possibly a loved one?

for survival situations or self defense outside the home however I would leave the 9mm at home and grab the 223 instead, more lethal and more accurate over range.

Luger_carbine
August 20, 2012, 09:20 PM
I think 9mm carbines are great.

The Luger carbine was a great weapon IMO.

The HK94SG1 was a superb weapon, claw lock scope mount, factory zeroed Leupold 6X scope, HK93A2 stock with adjustable cheekpiece, Harris bipod and flash suppressor - out to 90 meters it was as accurate as any rifle.

But the shotgun does some things better and the 5.56 does other things better... I wouldn't choose a 45 or 9mm carbine in a break in - I'd choose a shotgun. And if I had some weird situation where I had to engage enemies past 25 yards, I wouldn't chose a 45 or 9mm carbine, I'd choose a rifle.

death2twinkys
August 20, 2012, 09:50 PM
Home defense they are great, same for close quarters, but for shtf unless you have it SBRed it loses its appeal personally. Because if I have something with an 18 to 20 in barrel I want to be able to engage targets at 200 yards minimum with it. That being said I own a PS-90 and if you had the accompanying 5.7 pistol then only needing one type of ammunition would be an advantage.

SIGSHR
August 20, 2012, 10:02 PM
They haven't caught on, that is true, the Marlins are out of production, I couldn't find the Rugers on their website. As others have noted, in an SD situation they prefer a rifle caliber, the usual argument for pistol caliber carbines is they are a good option in a jurisdiction where hand gun ownership is restricted, if not prohibited. With more people living in townhomes, condos, apartments over penetration is an important consideration hence the shotgun seems a better alternative.

44 AMP
August 20, 2012, 10:37 PM
those military weapons are all sub machine guns, small, lightweight guns ...

You have obviously never held a Tommygun. It is lightweight, only when compared to a crew served weapon! And several of the other early SMG designs are also in the 8lb+ range.

Modern designs, using alloys and plastics are much lighter.

I don't follow the chain of thought that says your best option is a shotgun loaded with 00. I am fighting to protect my property and family, why would I want a gun that fires multiple projectiles at once in multiple directions and destroy my own stuff and possibly a loved one?


it is difficult to determine sarcasm in text without a note identifying it, or using the little emoticons...

If its not sarcasm, describing a shotgun as "firing in multiple directions" really makes one wonder if you know what you are talking about. Shot loads do spread with distance, but at typical defensive ranges inside a house, not much larger than your fist. Now, if your house is huge, and you are shooting from one end of your olympic size pool to the other, then it will open up a lot more.

Pistol caliber carbines don't get that much respect because they are carbines. And except for the tiny fraction that are legal short barrel rifles, they are the same size as a carbine firing a rifle round.

Because of this, they have all of the drawbacks of a rifle (carbine size) and none of the advantages, (power range).

In the same size package one can get a .223 and with varmint bullets, actually less penetrative of walls than a lot of handgun bullets.

Rifle caliber carbines have their downsides as well, especially compared to handguns in close quarters. There's no free lunch.

TimW77
August 21, 2012, 12:24 AM
You will also find many of the supposed "hundreds of military units using pistol caliber carbines" moving away from them...

T.

trg42wraglefragle
August 21, 2012, 04:53 AM
You have obviously never held a Tommygun. It is lightweight, only when compared to a crew served weapon! And several of the other early SMG designs are also in the 8lb+ range.

I recently got to play with one and lightweight is not a word that would come to mind at all, nor ergonomic.
Also played with a Sten gun, and I would not use that as an advertisement for a pistol cal carbine, it was a horrible horrible weapon!

BlueTrain
August 21, 2012, 06:52 AM
The Sten gun is practically an antique today but that doesn't speak to the original question. Personally, I have no idea if Americans like pistol caliber carbines or not, but I doubt they are as popular as AR-15 variations and there are good reasons.

In the military world, I believe intermediate caliber weapons basically outclassed submachine guns. They may or may not weigh less, depending on what particular weapons you choose to compare but 5.56, 5.45 and 7.62x39 are really more powerful than any 9mm or .45, and a 5.56 at least is easier to shoot.

Ah, but what have they done to the AR-15! Ever pick up an M4? What with the rail and all the gadgets that get tacked on, they are no longer as light as a plain old AR-15. And an M1 carbine is even lighter than that in the first place.

Has no one mentioned the Uzi yet? They were all the rage a couple of decades ago. Not bad, once you come to grips with grip safety but an AR-15 is easier to use, even though it is longer. I have not had a chance to handle any of the shorter versions of an AK. My son and I were both able to handle an old German MP-40 (I think it was). His first comment: it's heavy!

More as a matter of novelty than anything else, I'd rather like to have a bolt action 9mm Largo.

Skimp
August 21, 2012, 07:05 AM
I don't plan being in a self defense or SHTF situation with a carbine, I have some good handguns for that operation. However, I have the 4595TS and the JHP, which use the same magazine, if the opportunity should arise.

moxie
August 21, 2012, 08:05 AM
Having done it myself, try lugging an M3 and a few 30 rd. mags around. Heavy!

The 9mm subguns have merit, but those that are reliable are hard to get and costly, e.g., the MP-5. The clones are north of 2 grand. Many only come in open-bolt, like the Swedish K configuration which isn't too pure in a household setting. Or are full auto only. The Camp Carbines were pretty good, but they aren't being produced any longer. Many reported reliability issues.

The modern M-4 (or M4orgery) is as small and light as most 9mm subguns and fires the .223. No contest. It's replacing most subguns in most applications, including home defense.

2damnold4this
August 21, 2012, 08:20 AM
Having done it myself, try lugging an M3 and a few 30 rd. mags around. Heavy!

The 9mm subguns have merit, but those that are reliable are hard to get and costly, e.g., the MP-5. The clones are north of 2 grand. Many only come in open-bolt, like the Swedish K configuration which isn't too pure in a household setting. Or are full auto only.


I had a full auto only Stemple 76/45. It took M3 magazines and was a heavy open bolt gun. While it was a fun toy to shoot, it would not have been my first choice for self defense.

The modern M-4 (or M4orgery) is as small and light as most 9mm subguns and fires the .223. No contest. It's replacing most subguns in most applications, including home defense.

+1

An M4, a shotgun or Mini 14 makes more sense as a home defense long arm to me.

Fishbed77
August 21, 2012, 09:40 AM
Another issue that no one has touched on so far is how expensive most modern semi-auto pistol-caliber carbines are.

The Beretta CX4, Kriss Vector, Thompson replicas, HK94, 9mm AR-15s, etc., etc., aren't exactly inexpensive. Even good-quality USGI M1 Carbines will set you back a pretty penny these days.

The Kel-Tec Sub2000 (if you can find one) is an obvious exception, as are the Hi-Point carbines (which many folks just won't consider).

allaroundhunter
August 21, 2012, 09:50 AM
it does not over penetrate, it's not nearly as loud as the usual suspect home defense calibers, and it's still lethal and accurate for just about any range that is defensible in court.

An AR firing a good defensive 5.56 round will over-penetrate less than a pistol caliber carbine firing a premium JHP. The 5.56 will be more lethal, while still having quick follow up shots.

As far as volume, auditory exclusion will most likely come into play if you ever have to use a firearm to defend yourself, so it is not something that I personally worry about.

Sabre9mm
August 21, 2012, 10:38 AM
My first choice is my Sub-2000.

9MM, damn accurate, short enough and light enough to get around with, will not blow through three walls and kill my neighbor like my 5.56 could.

I see it as a better choice for me because it folds easily under the bed, weighs next to nothing, deploys quick and easy.

With 600 lumens glaring out the front end, I will see, hit, and most likely stop whatever threat even half asleep.

Using my handgun I would stand little chance of doing anything short of scaring whatever the threat is to death.

SHTF, or other survival situations, I would bet on my AR15 in more open environments, the subbie would be used for cleaning buildings something like it. I cannot imagine what it would sound like to pull the trigger on that AR in a room with no plugs in :eek:

I also cannot imagine anything living that would stand back up after a hit from that 9, I would bet the average burglar is not wearing body armor...

allaroundhunter
August 21, 2012, 11:26 AM
9MM, damn accurate, short enough and light enough to get around with, will not blow through three walls and kill my neighbor like my 5.56 could

The idea that pistol calibers will penetrate walls less than a defensive 5.56 round is subject to several variables, including the type of ammunition being used, and barriers that are being fired through.

Sabre9mm
August 21, 2012, 11:33 AM
Safety slugs in the 9mm, barrier defeating rounds in the 5.56....

Not a misconception on my part, if either would do otherwise it would be a mis advertisement of the ammunition manufacturer.

I am sure there are rounds that will stop at a wall with the 5.56, and rounds that will penetrate them with the 9mm.

But they are not what is loaded in my weapons ;)

KevK.
August 21, 2012, 11:36 AM
My father has a 9mm pistol and a Kel-tec 9mm carbine. He kits them together along with other supplies has his grab-n-go SHTF kit. He figures that he would have two weapons with a common ammo and then just carry more of 1 ammo type instead. Also he still has a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with #4 has his primary home defense weapon.

With additional time to prepare, also to be dragged along are several other rifles/pistols of various calibers.

My grab bag contains a .357, and 12 gauge. As funds allow I will be adding an AR15 to the mix. My HD weapon is chambered for 9mm Mak, and would also be tossed into the kit if we had to leave in a hurry. The Mak might seem like a 'weak' caliber to some, it will still work for HD without tearing through my house completely.

Given 15 minutes extra, additional weapons and supplies would be loaded up into the vehicles to go.

But I think any SHTF kit does need a semi-auto rifle with at least modest magazine capacity.

allaroundhunter
August 21, 2012, 11:42 AM
Safety slugs in the 9mm, barrier defeating rounds in the 5.56....

Not a misconception on my part, if either would do otherwise it would be a mis advertisement of the ammunition manufacturer.

I am sure there are rounds that will stop at a wall with the 5.56, and rounds that will penetrate them with the 9mm.

But they are not what is loaded in my weapons ;)

Fair enough, and, IMO, a good choice in ammunition for the two.

Typically I would not consider safety slugs a good 9mm choice, but with the added velocity coming out of a carbine barrel that would be a great help to the round.

I apologize for jumping the gun and thinking that you were just assuming that the 5.56 would overpenetrate just because it was a rifle cartridge :o

Edward429451
August 21, 2012, 02:17 PM
I don't see an advantage in carrying a pistol caliber carbine just for common ammo. If I have to carry the weight and size of a rifle firing piece then I want it to fire rifle cartridges which are much more versatile than any pistol cartridge.

Sabre9mm
August 21, 2012, 03:20 PM
@allaroundhunter, No harm no foul, I have planned to set up a few tests, I actually want to see what happens to targets behind a couple sheet rock boards after the safety slug impacts them, and I want to set some on the other side of an old car door or something and see what the other rounds are capable of.

All of this is a new world from the ownership point, the Sub-2000, and the AR15 are both new purchases. I get the physics of it all, but I generally do not trust much until I have seen it.

I can do the math and determine energy of a projectile and its mass, what I do not have other than internet research is how different projectiles will maintain their mass and shape, and how that affects different materials. Obviously 70-115gr of wood hitting a target would behave different that the same mass in steel at the same velocity regardless of equal energy the material performance characteristics would vary.

And trust me it would not be the first time something performed other than advertised, seen a few strange things in my life. :D

Right now I figure it like this, *if* someone were to need to be shot by being in my house intending harm, my family is already in danger, taking well thought out reasonable precautions in ammunition and weapons choice is step one, hitting what I want to is step two. For that the folding 9mm carbine is my personal best choice from what I own.

I contemplated a judge with buckshot, but figured my chances of getting them all in the target were less and overshooting / over penetration would be more of a concern...

That, and the videos of them hitting ballistics gel are awesome...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAgC6B5yiyQ

I would not shoot someone in my driveway stealing my car or raiding my shed, hell I hope I never have to shoot anyone, but I would if I had to protect myself or my family, for that I figure I have one chance, better make it count.

2damnold4this
August 21, 2012, 04:20 PM
IMHO, Glaser Safety Slugs are a poor choice.
link (http://www.brassfetcher.com/Brassfetcher_evaluates_9mm_Glaser_Safety_Slug.pdf)

Sabre9mm
August 21, 2012, 04:34 PM
Most interesting...

See anything I can think of, someone has done and posted on the internet.
Ohhhh the implications of that...

So any other suggestions on other frangible rounds and or those safer?
I know the concept of a *safe* bullet is an oxymoron, but certainly alternatives exist to some degree.

Soft targets ( Presumably clothed :rolleyes: ), with good terminal ballistics, and low over penetration.

2damnold4this
August 21, 2012, 05:06 PM
I think this is a good link (http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm) for ammo selection.



edit to add: Make sure any ammo selected functions in your firearm before relying upon it. The best 9mm load in the world does no good if it jams in your gun.

Sabre9mm
August 21, 2012, 05:30 PM
Nice read, thanks.

I wish I had the resources to educate myself more on these things hands on:cool:

Nathan
August 21, 2012, 05:37 PM
In a nutshell, it is the 16" min barrel length without a tax stamp.

If that were not there, I would have a 40 or 45 6" -8" carbine which used Glock or other 30 rd mags. Aimpoint micro and a bright light.

Something Uzi or MP5ish comes to mind, but Uncle Sam has made those too hard to own. A small pcc with a 16" barrel is pointless. A tax stamp is a waste of time and money.

jmr40
August 21, 2012, 08:59 PM
Pistol caliber carbines are as good as ever. But since the introduction of lightweight 16" AR's there is simply no need. With the right ammo the AR just does every thing a pistol caliber carbine does, and does it better.

akguy1985
August 22, 2012, 03:39 AM
I'd love to have an SBR'ed MP-5 but i cant afford one.

Master Blaster 2
August 22, 2012, 05:10 AM
Lets see..I have an UZI, MP-5, Thompson, PPS 43,KelTec 2000, Soumi, and Scorpian to name a few. They are novialty semi-autos that had been converted from full auto. They all work just fine too. Where i live i can'tg own SBR's or machineguns as they were designed ..

Shotgun693
August 23, 2012, 06:11 PM
While not modern military type guns I do have a lot of experience with rifles what use revolver cartridges. They're great for hunting game up to WT Deer size and as such would do on 2 legged vermin. I live in the country and for around the house or in the house they'd do a fine job. Having said that, my AR can do more. It has longer range, holds more rounds and, at least on mine, has better optics. If I only had my '73 I'd not feel under gunned but I'd likely grab my AR if I had the choice.

gak
August 23, 2012, 06:55 PM
The OOP Ruger PCs (9 and 40) were nice guns, unfortunately 3/4 lb heavier than necessary or desirable for the rounds they fired. They were a chunk for something firing a pistol round. Always puzzled me. Otherwise a "modern day M1 Carbine," admittedly without the range. For close-in urban/SD/HD encounters, however, that extra range isn't necessary. If reintroduced at an appropriate weight, I think they'd sell very well (with .45 added to the mix as well). Also helping (but would never happen of course), ability to use hi-cap Glock or other mags other than just relatively lo cap Ruger pistol mags. I think "PC" stood for Police Carbine?

Bartholomew Roberts
August 23, 2012, 07:20 PM
I think the major issue is size and weight. You can step up to a much more powerful caliber for the same size and weight as most pistol caliber carbines.

However, I think pistol caliber carbines can do very well in a defensive role. They are easy to shoot and more accurate than a handgun. Some of them have more onboard ammo than a typical pistol as well.

tulsamal
August 23, 2012, 08:53 PM
In a nutshell, it is the 16" min barrel length without a tax stamp.

If that were not there, I would have a 40 or 45 6" -8" carbine which used Glock or other 30 rd mags. Aimpoint micro and a bright light.

Which IS exactly where I was going to go!

This is exactly where the pistol caliber carbine is better than a rifle. Sure, you can SBR a 5.56mm AR but then you have the lower velocity to deal with. Cut that barrel back too much and you have some serious issues with how your ammo is going to work. Plus you have all that extra blast and flash. Sort of the opposite of what happens with a pistol carbine.

Let's use one of my own weapons for an example. Start with a Lone Wolf AR lower designed for Glock magazines. Have Ron Williams build a gas operated upper in .357 SIG. Go with a 9" barrel and a LaRue free float tube that covers it out to the flash suppresser. Then all the usual AR stuff. It uses the standard G31 mags, 15 rounds. It also uses the 22 round ones Glock has started selling for the .40's. I changed the followers over to the .357 SIG version. I put +2 followers on everything so that means the mags are 17 and 24 rounds.

You end up with a short and light little rifle that fires a 125 grain JHP Gold Dot bullet at 1550 fps. (Standard Speer load that the Air Marshal's carry. Double Tap loads are much hotter but the AM load works just fine.) Our of the SBR, it is much quieter and you have very little flash. It can be fired as fast as you can work your trigger finger. Nobody is going to complain about the recoil. But the bullet is considerably wider and 2.5x heavier than a 5.56 bullet. And that Gold Dot bullet is sure as heck going to expand and do its job.

The nine inch barrel will go up and down your hall much easier than any full length rifle or shotgun. Collapse the stock and you can store it next to your bed or in a closet. Pick it up, pull the stock out, turn on the sight, you've got a weapon that will hit a human torso every darn time out to 200 yards.

I like rifles. I like them a lot. But that little .357 SIG AR is a sweetheart. And that $200 tax stamp was a big nothing. I had to pay a $3600 car repair bill last month. How much of that money will I still be enjoying in ten years???

Gregg

GI Sandv
August 23, 2012, 10:19 PM
But that little .357 SIG AR is a sweetheart.

Pictures please?

SIGSHR
August 23, 2012, 10:31 PM
IMHO a pistol calber carbine-a semiauto, that is-is a lot like the M-1 Carbine-a great choice for some who either is legally barred or restricted from using/owning a handgun, while handier at close quarters than a full size rifle.
Also we need to specify what situations we are talking about. In the confines ot one's home, especially a condo or row house, a pistol round is better, less chance of over presentation, in a social collapse/urban riot situation, some with more range is preferable.

raftman
August 24, 2012, 01:57 AM
2. pistol cal carbine: not as easy to move around corners and increases both noise and velocity but still under heavy penetration levels.

Wouldn't a carbine actually reduce noise relative to a pistol? Seems to me the report from a .22lr mousegun is significantly greater than from a long gun firing the same round.

FloridaVeteran
August 24, 2012, 02:51 AM
No longer made but still findable are the Marlin Camp Carbines in 9mm (std. S&W mags) and .45ACP (std. 1911 mags). Handy length and if they malfunction, use those same mags in your semi-auto handgun.

There is an oddball gun I'd be tempted to buy if I won a hefty scratch-off - the "mare's leg" that Steve McQueen made famous - comes in .357 and .45LC. Assuming you had the time and presence of mind to throw a bandolier over your shoulder (fat chance), you could re-load it without losing the ability to get off repeat shots if you needed to. Not much of an advantage over a clip/mag-fed semi-auto, though, so I'd still grab the Marlin in a pinch.

All based on the OP inquiry about handgun-caliber carbines.

Skans
August 24, 2012, 08:03 AM
In answering the OP, I'd say it's because you can have the same size carbine in 5.56. More power, lighter and smaller weapon than the classic 45acp carbines. Compare a Tommy Gun to an AR short-barreled rifle. I'm at a loss to see where the advantage is with 9mm or 45acp weapons!

Sabre9mm
August 24, 2012, 08:42 AM
@raftman, indubitably, the longer barrel does provide significantly less sound.
Same rounds fired side by side will leave you deaf from the handgun, I can shoot my carbine without plugs comfortably.

Lower recoil so faster keeping on target than the handgun (albeit in the average untrained hand), lower report, very little flash compared to handgun (Assuming powder is mostly burned before exiting the longer than expected barrel for the load).

Again, no expert, still learning myself, but I can only assume shortening a 5.56 barrel would increase all of these, while decreasing the terminal ballistics of the round.

So it seems logical would you rather make a 9mm hotter or a 5.56 cooler?

Mayhap the 5.56 toned down is still superior to the 9mm amped up, again would have to see specific comparisons to know for sure.

The end result would have to be some real data concerning energy and expansion in the same range of a pistol caliber carbines vs rifle caliber weapons of same length and weight. And then probably subject to load type, manufacturer, etc..

Certainly someone has done studies.

moxie
August 24, 2012, 09:16 AM
Regarding that bright light on your gun. Look at it from the bad guy's perspective. You have just given him a perfect aim point.

Regarding "very little flash." Inside a house at night it still looks like a giant fireball.

And again, there is not and can't be any comparison between handgun rounds and the .223/5.56. Just ain't!

allaroundhunter
August 24, 2012, 09:31 AM
Moxie, if you get a light that is putting out 100+ lumens directly into an intruder's eyes, it does not give him a good aiming point. Especially if his eyes are adjusted to darkness. It will disoriented the intruder and give you time to first assess whether you need to shoot, and second it will make aiming much easier.

Sent from my HTC One X

zincwarrior
August 24, 2012, 10:08 AM
those military weapons are all sub machine guns, small, lightweight guns that spit a lot of lead very quickly. I however like the pistol cal carbine as a self defense/home defense round. it does not over penetrate, it's not nearly as loud as the usual suspect home defense calibers, and it's still lethal and accurate for just about any range that is defensible in court.

why so many don't use them? I haven't a clue. my list of home defense weapons in order of which I would grab first is
1. handgun: quick to load, quick to acquire target, compact and easy to move around corners. does not penetrate walls as easily as rifle cartridges
2. pistol cal carbine: not as easy to move around corners and increases both noise and velocity but still under heavy penetration levels.
3. standard carbine: last thing I would want to grab.

I don't follow the chain of thought that says your best option is a shotgun loaded with 00. I am fighting to protect my property and family, why would I want a gun that fires multiple projectiles at once in multiple directions and destroy my own stuff and possibly a loved one?

Most people are thinking of the sit and hole up plan-aka have a plan and get into a defensible position. Shotguns are very good in that regard. Rifles are decent as well in that the additional size is not a factor. People who believe they need a hand free to shepherd children etc. sometimes may still think of the shotgun, but often step down to a one handed pistol view (that’s mine).

Having said that, I could see using a pistol carbine, especially for a person who can’t take shotgun recoil. It would be perfect for my wife, but she prefers: “big baby” her 9mm Beretta. Having seen her rapid fire that puppy I am definitely not going to argue.

Honestly I don't think people think about it much. There are some carbine models for pistol calibers, but its not exactly on the radar.


for survival situations or self defense outside the home however I would leave the 9mm at home and grab the 223 instead, more lethal and more accurate over range.
__________________
***I’d proffer unless you’re in the wilderness defending yourself against Yogi and Kodiak cousins, you don’t have much of a survival situation outside of the home-but agreed. If I am going deep woods where that is a concern I’m carrying a nice rifle or shotgun if at all possible (which means legal).

zincwarrior
August 24, 2012, 10:27 AM
Moxie, if you get a light that is putting out 100+ lumens directly into an intruder's eyes, it does not give him a good aiming point. Especially if his eyes are adjusted to darkness. It will disoriented the intruder and give you time to first assess whether you need to shoot, and second it will make aiming much easier.

Sent from my HTC One X

Thats assuming the light in his eyes...

allaroundhunter
August 24, 2012, 10:58 AM
Thats assuming the light in his eyes...

It really isn't difficult to put it there, it is a flashlight, the light is dispersed, not a laser sight.

Sent from my HTC One X

henschman
August 24, 2012, 11:13 AM
For the home defense role, I greatly prefer something like 5.56 over anything in pistol caliber, for 2 main reasons:

1) According to a couple of different tests, 5.56 with a light bullet (55 grain or so) penetrates hard barriers like drywall and brick less than 9mm or even 00 Buckshot.

2) The 5.56 puts a LOT more energy on target, and exhibits fragmentation in soft targets, especially at shorter distances.

The downsides are noise and flash... but those I can live with. Plus there are various muzzle devices that can mitigate these concerns.

zincwarrior
August 24, 2012, 03:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zincwarrior
Thats assuming the light in his eyes...

It really isn't difficult to put it there, it is a flashlight, the light is dispersed, not a laser sight.

Sent from my HTC One X

You kick the light on and he's in the hallway, another room, or in a corner. Light comes on and he shoots the light.

allaroundhunter
August 24, 2012, 04:45 PM
You kick the light on and he's in the hallway, another room, or in a corner. Light comes on and he shoots the light.

Have you ever actually tried to run a simulation for that type of situation? It is not as simple and easy as you are thinking it is.

There is training on how to use a light. And a main point is that you flash it, and then move. That way, if you are on the subject, you can leave it on and he will have a hard time seeing what he wants to see, or if you aren't on him, the light will be off and you will have moved and it will be quite difficult for him to get a fix on your location.

There are not nearly enough negatives to not have a light on (or with) a home defense firearm. I really can't think of a single reason not to have one available.

Sent from my HTC One X

bamaranger
August 25, 2012, 01:33 AM
The 9mm , .40 and .45 auto pistol carbines leave me a bit cold, just not enough punch, but I would feel well armed for most things with a lever .357 or .44 mag or one of Rugers defunct .44 auto loaders.

4V50 Gary
August 25, 2012, 08:51 AM
Neither fish nor fowl.

It lacks the selective fire feature of a smg and lacks the rifle caliber of the carbine.

Still, it's probably better for home defense than a handgun since it is steadier and being lower recoil, allows for quicker follow up shots.

10mmAuto
August 25, 2012, 11:06 AM
I have a close friend who was Army Special Forces (Green Beret) out of Seventh Group. He carried an MP5 exclusively when in a combat zone for the first 2 years he was operational. They ran into some bad guys with body armor on one patrol and he signed himself for an EBR afterwards. Even if he had just gone to an M4, he'd have been stepping up his firepower significantly and still have a very comfortable to carry, low recoil weapon - that doesn't get defeated by soft body armor.

44 AMP
August 25, 2012, 12:08 PM
http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/oo254/357amp/DSCF0312.jpg

This is one of my pistol caliber carbines. Neat gun, but not what I would grab first if something went bump in the night. On the other hand, it has a trememdous visual impact on rude squatters camping where they shouldn't be.:D

Other one is a Marlin carbne in .357, a nice handy gun short, light, and fairly powerful if needed. It is a excellent choice for a camp gun, and if you are a traveling camper, one of its biggest advantages is it avoids different states laws about assault weapons, and handguns, being neither one of those.

RangerHAAF
September 1, 2012, 08:09 AM
Because most people own and shoot either pistols or rifles when they go target practicing and those who shoot regularly aren't going to spend their money buying an under powered novelty gun that's only used by swat teams and in the movies. Unlike disinformation about AK-47s and ARs u really can't hunt with them practically or legally, so their appeal and application is limited.

Lashlarue
September 3, 2012, 05:15 PM
I have a Hi-point 995 with Ati stock and a reflex red dot that shoots 1" groups at 50 yds more accurate than my Saiga or Galil.I carry 5 ten round mags with it.:D http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v146/C5Sam/995reflex.jpg

bfskinnerpunk
September 3, 2012, 07:40 PM
Regarding the shotgun doing all kinds of collateral damage... it won't .

At home defense distances, those little pellets don't spread very far at all.... rather tight, actually.

I had a friend flash me with a 100 lumen flashlight at night. I was blind for well over a minute... utterly helpless. If I were to try to shoot at the light, I would be required to look even more closely at that light (to take aim)... something that would be very difficult.... especially considering that the dude with the flashlight already has me in his sights.

One nice advantage of having handgun rounds in a carbine is that you can have a very simple arsenal without any confusion. 9mm glocks combined with 9mm Sub 2000 gives you one type of ammo... one type of magazine.... and the carbine greatly improves the characteristics of the 9mm.... gets it close to a 357 magnum.

MJ1
September 4, 2012, 11:29 AM
I'm partial to anything in .45 ACP from 5 to 250 yards.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/f5c3ea2c.jpg

..MJ..

Father Time
September 4, 2012, 01:52 PM
I'm partial to anything in .45 ACP from 5 to 250 yards

Honestly.. Why?? Thats going to have some serious drop at that range. Hits will be difficult compared to other options. Not only that but the velocity of that .45 round is going to be reduced significantly at that range.

I love pistol caliber carbines but not for those kinds of ranges. For me they are for 100 yards and in. Unless your talking about .357 and .44 mag rifles

gggplaya
September 4, 2012, 03:51 PM
In a nutshell, it is the 16" min barrel length without a tax stamp.

If that were not there, I would have a 40 or 45 6" -8" carbine which used Glock or other 30 rd mags. Aimpoint micro and a bright light.

Something Uzi or MP5ish comes to mind, but Uncle Sam has made those too hard to own. A small pcc with a 16" barrel is pointless. A tax stamp is a waste of time and money.

Exactly why pistol caliber carbines are not popular in the U.S. You have to either go through all the crap of owning a SBR, or own a full size 16" rifle. If you're going to own a rifle, it might as well be a rifle caliber due to the extra range. Sure 9mm ammo is cheap but once you start getting into .40 and then 45acp the cost of .223 ammo is about the same to buy in bulk, like $330 for 1k rounds. .223 kick isn't that bad either and you get a heck of alot more range.

So really the only reason to own a pistol caliber is if you care about not putting as many holes through your wall like if you live in an apartment building, or for mag and caliber commonality, which i think is dumb. Just buy half as much of each ammo. AR mags are dirt cheap at 10 mags for $90. Whereas 30 round pistol mags are super pricey.

allaroundhunter
September 4, 2012, 04:23 PM
So really the only reason to own a pistol caliber is if you care about not putting as many holes through your wall like if you live in an apartment building

And once more.....the idea that pistol rounds penetrate less than a defensive 5.56 round is false, and has been proven false many times.

gggplaya
September 4, 2012, 04:57 PM
And once more.....the idea that pistol rounds penetrate less than a defensive 5.56 round is false, and has been proven false many times.

Then that leaves the only reason to own a pistol caliber carbine as mag and caliber commonality. Perhaps noise although all will be very loud. Recoil from a 9mm rifle would be very light, but a .223 ar15 isn't bad either.

Ammo price is cheaper for 9mm, but .223 ammo is about the same price as .45acp and .40sw. That's all FMJ though, if i were shooting someone with FMJ, i'd want the most bullet energy possible and the .223 also has the advantge of tumble and yaw creating more damage with 3x the bullet energy over 45acp or .40sw.

Granted ammo price is negligible when buying in small quantities for home defense. Most would buy hollow point anyways. But some like to actually practice with their weapons too.

SHR970
September 4, 2012, 05:58 PM
Originally posted by gggplaya: Then that leaves the only reason to own a pistol caliber carbine as mag and caliber commonality. Perhaps noise although all will be very loud. Recoil from a 9mm rifle would be very light, but a .223 ar15 isn't bad either.

Not quite true. One state comprises over 13% of the US population and that same state has some serious restrictions on what we can and can not own. AR's are a fixed 10 round proposition. Bullet button mag. releases aren't the quickest to reload with either. However, any legal semiautomatic pistol caliber carbine can be reloaded much quicker even if you are restricted to 10 round mag.s. In an urban / suburban location 200 yards is most likely a much longer shot than you should be taking. Even in a SHTF situation a pistol caliber carbine that is available to you with the ability to recharge quickly is not a serious handicap.

As far as hitting power is concerned, a 44 Mag. carbine is no slouch and only gives up longer range to any 223. You are more ammo limited but the power is there.

When it all boils down, you need to look at the totality of the situation. Some people can't use a handgun effectively. Some locations don't allow evil black rifles and have mag. capacity restrictions. Some people can't handle the kick of a 12 gauge. Some places don't require 500 yard shots. Etc. Etc.

gggplaya
September 4, 2012, 07:00 PM
I forgot about Komifornia. In that case i'd own a beretta CX4 or a sub2000 that takes glock mags. You are limited because i can't think of any rifle caliber carbine that wouldn't require a bullet button.

But .44 mag, that's too rich for my blood to practice with.

SHR970
September 4, 2012, 07:32 PM
Ruger carbines, Marlin Camp series, 30M1, just to name a few do not require BB. If it doesn't have a "pistol grip" or thumb hole sporter stock, it probably does not require a BB.

Edit: You are forgiven the oversight...every one seems to want to forget us. We make up more than 1 in 8 people nationally (a large market share) but we are often taken for granted. Just also keep in mind the other folks in less than free states like N.J., Mass, Il., etc.; we're not the only ones with asinine laws to deal with.

barnbwt
September 4, 2012, 09:49 PM
But .44 mag, that's too rich for my blood to practice with.

Related to that; are there any good 10mm carbines out there? Especially considering the handloading options, seems like that would a very capable platform, with a bit more reach than the more common 9/40/45 offerings. Since 10mm is often compared to 44 (well, 41mag, but close enough), it seems like it should be as capable as a big bore lever gun, while being mag-feedable.

I guess, since it couldn't be blowback, no one can afford to make one (if you don't count pistol stocks or AR uppers). Seems like a cool idea though; run anything from barn-burner Buffalo Bores to subsonic silencer rounds, with enough oomph to count in either case. Possibly a better use for the round than pistols...

TCB

Father Time
September 4, 2012, 11:55 PM
If your live in a restrictive state you should consider a lever action in .357
With the extra velocity gains in a 16 inch barrel, the right loads have energy levels that approach the 30-30 round:cool:
With practice rapid aimed shots are easy enough and you can top off rounds as you fire them.

It would be cheap to shoot and very PC. Lever action and no detachable magazine means the hysterical/hypocritical anti's can't make you look like a bad gun for owning it either. (Its hard for them to make your gun an evil weapon of death if it looks like something John Wayne would carry)

gggplaya
September 5, 2012, 09:42 AM
Ruger carbines, Marlin Camp series, 30M1, just to name a few do not require BB. If it doesn't have a "pistol grip" or thumb hole sporter stock, it probably does not require a BB.


Yes, but then you don't get a pistol grip, now you have a rifle carbine. I'd prefer the pistol grip for in the house, so a pistol caliber carbine wins out, probably in 45acp. Sucks to live in a state that doesn't really care about the rights of it's people or the constitution. Although i love the weather in LA, it's flippin awsome.

And BTW, i think i remember someone making a thumbhole stock for the ar15. Legality wise, it has never come up in court so there is no precedence as to whether you need a bullet button for that or not. But technically you don't need a bullet button. However, i'm no lawyer and not giving any legal advice.

SHR970
September 5, 2012, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by gggplaya
Yes, but then you don't get a pistol grip, now you have a rifle carbine. I'd prefer the pistol grip for in the house, so a pistol caliber carbine wins out, probably in 45acp.

Marlin Camp 9 (9mm) or Camp 45 (45 ACP) are pistol caliber carbines. Ruger PC9 (9mm) or PC4 (40 S&W) are too. A 30 carbine arguably is considered by many a pistol caliber carbine also. Let's not confuse pistol caliber for grip; they are two different animals.

An AR-15 is pistol gripped, but most wouldn't consider the 223 to be a pistol caliber. Platform style and platform caliber are two different considerations.

MJ1
September 6, 2012, 10:51 AM
Quote:
I'm partial to anything in .45 ACP from 5 to 250 yards
Honestly.. Why?? Thats going to have some serious drop at that range. Hits will be difficult compared to other options. Not only that but the velocity of that .45 round is going to be reduced significantly at that range.

I love pistol caliber carbines but not for those kinds of ranges. For me they are for 100 yards and in. Unless your talking about .357 and .44 mag rifles


Then you really don't know do you. I carried the .45 M1A1 and the M3 and could engage targets from 100 to 200 yards as well as 5 to ten yards. With the HK I can hit cans at 250 yards still today. The drop at 200 is only 18"~20" an easy hold over then back to 100 point blank. I have girls that can do it too.

Cheers

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/be3952dd.jpg

Father Time
September 7, 2012, 12:38 PM
The drop at 200 is only 18"~20"

I would consider that a lot of drop (compaired to 5.56 zeroed at 100 yards your only looking at about 2 inches of drop). And while haveing a reflex sight on your gun helps with holdovers its harder to do with irons due to the front sight obscureing your target.
The loss of velocity at those ranges is also something to consider.

If you can do it more power to ya. I wasn't trying to knock your choice in firearms

BTW nice HK. Is that a Burris red dot on it?

Edward429451
September 7, 2012, 01:41 PM
I would be interested in a big bore pistol cal carbine if it were in 45 WinMag or 50 AE. That would be an interesting carbine and would probably be more efficient than a 223, especially short range.