Considering buying Ruger Carbine PC4 (.40 cal) or PC9 (9mm)... what do you think?

[ZWolfgang]

Hey guys... I'm thinking about buying the Ruger carbine in either .40 cal or 9mm. I would use the rifle for tactical competition exercises just for fun, along with either a 1911 in .45, a Browning HiPower .40, or a Glock 19 9mm.

First of all, is this rifle a good, dependable carbine in either or both .40 and 9mm? Secondly, is the rifle significantly more functional or reliable in one or the other caliber? Which of the following combinations would you choose:

Browning HiPower .40 cal with Ruger PC4 .40 cal
Glock 19 9mm with Ruger PC9 9mm
1911 .45 pistol with Ruger PC4 .40 cal
1911 .45 pistol with Ruger PC9 9mm

[Big Arm Hannigan]

Floozy and I are going through the same thing right now. We are strongly considering the PC9, but am also thinking about an Oly arms rifle, which is much more expensive. Let me know what you decide. As to caliber, you can buy 9mm very cheap and at the tactical matches they only pick up brass if you so request. Most of the people seem to use Glocks or some other high cap pistol. We are staying with our 1911's because that is what we carry.

[ZWolfgang]

Hey Mike... cool.. we're just trackin' along right beside each other! I keep thinkin' 9 would be great for the economy of it, then I think 40 would be smarter for its power and I read elsewhere on this forum after doing a search for pc40, that someone felt the pc40 was a better shooter (more accurate) than the pc9.... so, dang! This is a tough choice. Too bad they don't make it in .45! You said most of the tactical shooters at Tri-County shoot Glocks... any idea what percentage of them are 9mm vs. other calibers? Is there any advantage to having a more powerful round than 9mm in the tactical competitiion... like achieving knockdowns in CAS being easier with heavier calibers? If not, then 9 would probably make the most sense if retreiving brass is inconvenient or difficult... even if 9 is inferior to 40 as an actual defense caliber.

On the other hand, if defense use is also important, 40 seems to be at least the equal to .357mag in defense stopping power and is more "shootable" than .357 mag. And as most experts would agree, among pistol calibers, .357mag is pretty much the most effective overall caliber for defense... so that makes .40 look pretty good.

In pistols, with the kabooms and buldging cases found resulting from Glocks chambered in .40, I decided the Browning Hi-power was the way to go in .40, but still want a Glock 19 (9mm) since that seems to be "the" hot ticket in a Glock.

All in all I get the impression that the Ruger PC40 or PC9 is a very reliable and fine quality carbine, even if on the heavy side.

Someone here mentioned that Beretta will announce the "Storm" line of carbines in 9, 40, and 45 at Shotshow in February.... so... perhaps delaying the decision on the pc40/pc9 might be a good tactic.

[Legionnaire]

Had, and really liked, a PC4. I sold it to fund another project before I discovered that it could be converted to accept Glock magazines. The PC carbines are excellent, dependable guns. If you go that route, I highly recommend the model with ghost ring sights.

[Acujeff]

I have a PC9 and love it. Reliable, accurate and fun to shoot. For me, the big advantage is that it takes the same mags as my Ruger P95. 15, 20 and 30 rd mags are relatively available and affordable. I mostly use the 15 and 20 rders.