Am I the only one who is not enamored but the new PCC rage?

[Radny97]

Let me start with definitions. PCC (pistol caliber carbine) as i am using it here refers to semiauto rifle-styled guns. Most of the guns in this category will be braced or unbraced pistols, or SBRs chambered in a pistol caliber, or AR’s with either a pistol or rifle length barrel chambered in a pistol caliber. I don’t include lever guns of any kind in this category.

So, with that out of the way, let me acknowledge that PCCs are all the rage. Seems like all the gun reviews on you tube are touting these, lots of manufacturers are getting into the game (Ruger, CZ, HK, and many others). So they have to be selling like hot cakes.

But i don’t get it. They don’t have a lot of practical value. I’ve tried them, and frankly if I’m going to be shouldering a gun that size, i see no point in a pistol caliber. I’d prefer my 300 blackout braced pistol every time.
I guess for competition it allows shooters to shoot steel without damaging targets, but other than that i don’t see the point.

If they are not shouldered (and most are sold without pistol braces) then they are very unwieldy. If they are shouldered, why not just have the extra effectiveness of a rifle caliber?

I realize that guns like this are featured on lots of popular video games. Is that the reason for the demand? Because from a real world practicality standpoint, i don’t see their purpose or appeal. Thoughts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Blue Jays]

I have recently become interested in the carbine idea because it allows beneficial flexibility.
The other positive aspect I see is it lets people "throttle" ammo usage depending on what is most available.
Shoot common pistol calibers if that is most plentiful, or shotguns, or rifle cartridges all depending.

[Hawg]

My LGS has a couple of MP-40 clones and while they're about as useless as teats on a boar hog I want one. The rest of them don't interest me.

[BourbonCowboy]

I bought a Hi Point Model 995 a while back. I just wanted something cheap and fun - and that would use the same ammo that I used in my pistols. Besides being cheap and fun, it was surprisingly accurate to about 75 yards. I decided to add the Hi Tower Armory bullpup stock and it instantly went from hideously ugly to really cool - while retaining its accuracy. It's still a lot of fun to shoot, but the HTA stock eliminated the "cheap" aspect. I don't regret buying it.

[tex45acp]

I was not enamored in any way about a pistol caliber carbine....until I got my hands on a buddies KelTec Su-2000 in 9mm and I fell in love with the little carbine. It folds in half and is easily deployed when needed. Its accurate and reliably functions to a level that is really unbelievable for the price point. Here's mine folded and deployed for action

[TunnelRat]

It used to be a lot cheaper to shoot 9mm. For my wife the lack of muzzle blast and report compared to say an AR15 is noticeable and it’s much more comfortable for her to shoot. For me I grew up watching movies and playing video games with sub machine guns in them. This as close as my budget will likely allow. I find it fun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HiBC]

I don't need one myself. I can see how they would be a lot of fun.
These days ,white box WalMart cheap ammo is a memory. For most folks,the "budda-budda-budda" thing is a memory,too. But a fun range toy has merit.

And a PCC is useful as an SD tool. To each their own!!

I think you smacked one nail on the head. I know a serious steel shooter who has quite a personal range. Huge investment!! We just don't tear up his steel with high vel rifle rounds.
His 9mm AR carbine is fun!

[railroader]

Many indoor ranges only allow pistol caliber firearms. With 9mm rifles I can shoot at these ranges. I also shoot handgun matches where PCCs are allowed to shoot. It just allows more people to shoot which I'm fine with.

[zeke]

For me, a PCC in 300 Black out is just not as practical as a PCC 45 acp with 5 in barrel. The 45 gets full caliber performance from short barrel, is quieter suppressed and being a straight wall case makes it much easier to reload for. For my purposes the 300 has a 8 in barrel min, and own several. Others choice/opinion/purpose may certainly differ.

Am getting older and the short PCC are easier to hit with and control. Can practice with on our local the pistol range steel targets. Almost anyone can pick one up and be adequately proficient very quickly for defensive purposes.

Also have a 9mm, but not as much power as the 45 acp.

[larryf1952]

Who remembers the Marlin Camp Carbines of 25 years ago? Those were super sweet little carbines with nice wooden stocks, chambered in 9mm and 45ACP. Crazy fun to shoot.

They were selling for $299 back in the middle 90's, and I came within a hair of picking one up several times. IIRC, the 9mm gun used S&W Model 59 mags.

In the end, I opted for a Winchester Trapper Carbine in 44 Mag, instead. The little Winchester would've been a very viable brush or close range deer gun.

[Nanuk]

I am currently putting together a mech tech 10mm carbine that uses a Glock receiver. I had an AR pistol in 40 S&W. They are a hoot to shoot. The 10mm really shines in a longer barrel, not quite up to what a 44 mag does in a carbine but not bad. The pluses include that they are very quiet when compared to a high powered rifle.

[bamaranger]

The semiauto pistol caliber carbines have always left me a bit cold. THe AR varieties niche seems to affordable practice with a platform similar to a true fighting carbine. With ammo scarcity like it is, the entire family's practicality seems questionable. I agree with the thought that if I am going to carry a full size carbine, it might as well be chambered in a carbine cartridge, like 5.56 or 7.62x39mm.

The magnum pistol lever carbines, and the defunct semiauto Rugers in .44 mag have always had an appeal to me, and I find them useful for short range whitetail hunting. I will admit to buying a Hi-Point carbine in 10mm. One reason was because it was CHEAP. The 10mm in a carbine gains about 150-200fps over my pistol loads and becomes more near a mag pistol cartridge, like the lever carbines.

[SIGSHR]

My Marlin 9MM Carbine takes my S&W M659 magazines, my 45 takes M1911 magazines, many more recent ones take pistol magazines. I also have Marlin 1894s in .357 and .44 Magnum. I think they make a lot of sense, ease ammo supply and at SD ranges a carbine in the right hands is very effective, that extra weight dampens recoil.

[rock185]

I've owned Marlin Camp carbines since about the time the were introduced in '85, and realize that a rifle caliber carbine probably makes more sense. I like the little Marlin 9MM PCC just because it's fun. Not much recoil or noise, boringly reliable, easy to hit with out to about a hundred yards, uses my S&W pistol magazines, relatively inexpensive to feed, and kicks up more dirt than a .22 when I miss Just a fun plinker to me. Can't claim it's somehow better than someone else's choice of whatever other type or caliber of firearm.

[Double Naught Spy]

Am I the only one who is not enamored but the new PCC rage?

Obviously not. Otherwise we would all have them or all be talking about them.

I don’t include lever guns of any kind in this category.

That seems rather arbitrary, but okay. Pistol caliber carbine lever guns have certainly been around for quite a while, and as mentioned, so too have non-lever PCCs.

But i don’t get it. They don’t have a lot of practical value.

That is your opinion. Everybody gets to have an opinion, right? It is the sort of opinion I often see repeated when people "don't get" a new caliber or new design. Mostly, it seems, because said item doesn't fit their own preconceived notions of what the item should be. In this case, your preconception seems to be that if you have a carbine, it needs to shoot a rifle caliber. Of course, that begs the question as to why it really matters as to the arbitrary rifle/pistol designation. If that is important, then should you not also be asking about the rifle caliber pistols that have been popularized over the years?

I guess for competition it allows shooters to shoot steel without damaging targets, but other than that i don’t see the point.

From a competition standpoint, not only do pistol calibers not damage the steel, but the reduced recoil makes them so much easier to shoot than rifle calibers and when shooting steel, so much safer than rifle calibers. They also tend to be several dB quieter and for competitors that reload, are easier and sometimes cheaper to reload.

Because from a real world practicality standpoint, i don’t see their purpose or appeal. Thoughts?

Purpose? Like questioning why people NEED them?

I am not sure what real world standpoints you are talking about specifically. I guess that would depend your real world. A pistol caliber carbine for self defense is a tad quieter that rifle calibers (so a bit less damaging, some say a lot less damaging, but still damaging) than rifle calibers, offer better chances for landing shots on target than a pistol, particular at greater distances, in many cases mean having ammo and mags that work in both pistols and carbines, less muzzle flash than pistols or rifle calibers, better suppression when using a suppressor, often (not always) increased velocity over just a pistol, less recoil and so better for faster followup shots even for less skilled shooters, etc.

How much quieter are PCCs? That is a good question and something not usually presented when people talk about the loudness of guns. However, a Glock 9mm pistol runs about 162 db at the muzzle (https://www.silencercentral.com/wp-c...sion_chart.pdf). A 16" 9mm carbine (IIRC) is ~150-155 db at the muzzle for super sonice ammo (IIRC from an article from several years ago). Regardless of the actual numbers, the perceived noise reduction is quite noticeable. Is the reduction significant? Yes and no. Yes in that each shot will do less hearing damage than the same shot fired from a pistol. No, because each shot is still damaging.

Pistol caliber carbines can and often are used as substitutes for training with rifle calibers for many of the reasons noted above.

Pistol caliber carbines offer less risk to people and property down range than rifle calibers.

In the grand scheme, I can understand where you are coming from. I don't see the reason for a lot of gun stuff. I think a lot of calibers are created simply for the purpose of manufacturers claiming to have something new, despite the fact that the calibers show a huge amount of overlap with already existing calibers. A classic would be the 300 BO. What is the point? Did it really resolve any issues that similar calibers weren't already covering? No. Did it truly offer some sort of ballistic advantages? No. It does offer some nifty subsonic to super sonic capabilities which I find rather neat, but aside from having the capability, virtually everybody that I find that shoots them either doesn't take advantage of it or tried and has opted to reside at one end of the velocity spectrum or the other, so don't take advantage of it as a practical matter.

I am not picking on you or your favored caliber, but you mentioned it and so I figure it would be familiar with you. I could have picked a variety of calibers and made very similar arguments. When people select a specific caliber they like, they often like to cherry pick features to justify its relevance. They like to ignore the negative features and ambivalent features that are matched elsewhere. People favoring them often tend to place very high relevance on miniscule advantages and detractors tend to put very high relevance on miniscule disadvantages.

In the grand scheme, you have already made up your mind that you don't like pistol caliber carbines. They don't fit your needs. I tend to not like a lot of trendy and even very well established things that don't fit my needs either. However, so long as they aren't causing me a problem, not give them much thought.

However, to answer your question as to why they are so popular, I would guess that while video games might have a little bit to do with it, a LOT of the people buying them are not gamers. I would be willing to bet that arm braces (which can be shouldered) have contributed significantly to their popularity, and if not significantly, do certainly seem to parallel in popularity with arm braces (correlation v. causation) and separating the two trends might be difficult to do to say one way or the other.

[Radny97]

Double Naught Spy, you make good points. To be clear I’m not bagging on people who buy PCCs. Far be it from me to throw shade on someone else’s firearm choice. The more the merrier IMHO.
I guess what I’m saying is they don’t speak to me. And I’m wondering if I’m missing something.
I reload and have a lot of components stockpiled, so the difference in cost of a 9mm to a 300BO is really not that much for me. So maybe that colors my perspective.
As far as practice guns go, i fill that role with rimfire guns. And then if i step up to a center fire rifle, i figure it might as well be the real deal, and not a pistol caliber.
I’m also really pretty good with a handgun (i compete a lot) so i don’t see a lot of accuracy gains from PCCs. I even beat some experienced PCC shooters with an iron sighted handgun in my last match.
But i guess i am beginning to understand the appeal. They’re just not a great choice for me in particular.
I think you’ve hit on an important point. If the ATF makes good on their threat that they made in December and decide to crack down on pistol braces, the PCC craze may come to an abrupt end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Classic12]

I used to think that an AR 15 in 9 mm did not make sense. It had to be in 5.56.

I finally relented and bought one on a very good deal and I am very happy I did. It’s a very fun light and compact AR 15, the longer barrel boosts the 9 mm velocity, it’s a lot cheaper to shoot, holds 20 or 32 rounds, and is accurate out to 100 meters.






There’s also the heavy lump of steel and wood from 1941, firing .45 ACP. What’s not to like though





And living Switzerland we do not have any of this nonsense SBR, braces, NFA etc.

[Radny97]

Nice tommy gun. I might make an exception for one of those beauties.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TBM900]

@Radny97

Clearly you’ve never fired a “rifle caliber” inside a confined space.
I have... it sucks.
That right there is justification alone.

But generally speaking PCC’s are also usually lighter and shorter than typical rifles.
Ammunition is also typically a fraction of the cost of rifle calibers.
And more training is far more important than caliber in typical defense situations.
A properly suppressed PCC will be quieter than a suppressed rifle.
Suppressed PCC’s also tend to run more reliably when not using a can.

I own lots of wonderful rifle caliber long guns and SBRs including 24” AUG’s.
What do I typically use for home and vehicle defense...?
A PCC

Usually a GHM9 or P90 for vehicle, and usually an SBR CX4 for home.
If I didn’t have those compact platforms I would still rather use a PCC like Camp 9, Model 44, or a 357 CSBL, defensively indoors than a true rifle caliber.


PS
Your notion isn’t new
I’ve seen the “PCC are the latest craze” assertion every couple years going back easily four decades.
So apparently this “latest craze” is some 40 years strong.
And it’s always followed by the “why” question and/or the “just use a rifle”.
The answers and justification have remained unchanged.

PSx2
PCC’s are just stupid fun

[scoobysnacker]

While I'm not a big fan, I can understand the appeal- better aim and (a bit) better ballistics, while having shared ammo across platforms.

I don't personally like the 9mm ARs or AKs, from an appearance's sake.

I also don't see anything wrong with it. Personally, I'd say 357/38 Special in a revolver, and then in a handy lever gun, would be the way to go.

[FITASC]

I dunno, I like my Ruger PCC 9mm with red dot - so much so that my HD shotgun is now the backup to that

[Radny97]

Originally Posted by TBM900

@Radny97

Clearly you’ve never fired a “rifle caliber” inside a confined space.
I have... it sucks.
That right there is justification alone.

Uh, yes i have. Lots. I mostly shoot at an indoor range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TBM900]

Originally Posted by Radny97

Uh, yes i have. Lots. I mostly shoot at an indoor range.

Now try it without ear protection, in the dark, in a self defense (or offensive) situation.
Which was my point

If you’re simply talking about a range toy...
Buy whatever you like and who cares whatever anyone else thinks.

[Radny97]

Originally Posted by TBM900

Now try it without ear protection, in the dark, in a self defense (or offensive) situation.
Which was my point

If you’re simply talking about a range toy...
Buy whatever you like and who cares whatever anyone else thinks.

Yeah i don’t ever intentionally discharge a firearm without ear protection unless I’m hunting. And i don’t rely on rifles in my self defense set up. Those are my choices, and so a PCC doesn’t fit well into my needs or likes. Of course i have no problem with people making different choices for their own situation. So far it’s been confirmed for me that I’m not really missing anything in regards to the popularity of PCCs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Double Naught Spy]

And I’m wondering if I’m missing something.

Yes, a repeated failure to perceive why anybody would like something that doesn't fit your own personal situation. You are trying to understand a community set of values but ONLY through the filter of what you value as important. You haven't been asking why people like PCCs in the context of their own situations, but how could people like them when you don't perceive any use for them because you have compensated for many of the same things in other manners.

It is sort of like saying you don't understand why a person would drive a pickup truck when you have an SUV and a trailer. Other people's opinions and buying decisions weren't ever going to factor in your perspective.