How Many EDC Full Size Guns VS. Compact Guns?

[CDW4ME]

I've not carried smaller than a Glock 19/23 for at least three years; currently carrying a "commander" size 1911 which conceals as easily as the Glock 19/23.

[Moonglum]

I carry a Glock 26.
At home I have one reload
Out of the house I have two

[HistoryJunky]

Originally Posted by Carl the Floor Walker

I stopped carrying (EDC) anything larger than a Micro 9mm years ago.

I am jealous of your small gun collection.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[volkstrm]

I have a P6 also 1st thing I did was replace the hammer spring with a liter one. Made the trigger pull much better. Did you do the same?

[9ballbilly]

My EDC is a Para-ordnance elite commander 1911 .45acp. I guess you could say it's a full size pistol. My favorite fishing/ trail gun over the last couple years has become my Colt Pocket Positive .32 S&W long.

[armoredman]

I carried a full size CZ SP-01 Phantom for years, and in a Down Under IWB by High Noon, it disappeared under a baggy t-shirt. For the last couple of years my ECD is a P-10C, the "compact" version of the P-10, and it still hides easily in a High Noon Stingray OWB rig. I also don't really care if I look like a slob off duty, so huge ugly baggy t-shirts are the rule.

[JERRYS.]

much depends upon what I am wearing, though G17 is the usual.

[tlm225]

S&W Shield is my primary EDC with a Glock 48 carried on occasion. I've carried larger sidearms in the past but these meet my needs now.

[dakota.potts]

I carry a Glock 19 with a micro comp and a Streamlight TL-7 light on it.

I'm told this is the compact option. Well, I have small hands so the Glock 19 is a full-sized gun to me. The 17 is a full-size plus and larger-framed models are jumbo size.

That's how I see the world, anyways.

[Brit]

The more I chew this thought pattern around IE. The ideal pistol to carry? Well, that is really the subject is it not?

The more the choice is clear. The choice starts with the individual. So I looked at me! I no longer work! I am a retired Firearms Instructor. So naturally, I am into handguns.

#1. It has to be reliable, it must go bang, till empty, every time you press the trigger.

#2. Common sense capacity, that is easily concealed. 15 and 1 Glock19.
Spare Glock 17 magazine as in name, an extra 17 rounds.
With a bright flashlight, on the offside. Have utilized the light more than the Magazine. But the extra magazine is very comforting. TruGlow night sights.
Extended slide lock (Release) flush fit butt plug. 4.5 lb trigger. On night table.

Dress in Florida, a sweater in cold weather, not often. Colourful shirt normally.
My wife of 28 years, and I, are normally together. Both of us tend to not be a friend type of person, sooner be together (Noval situation yes?)
Yesterday, Thanksgiving we eat at my Sons Club. Two grandkids, our Wives.
One each, 6 in total. My Wife could have made a better meal! My Son likes to eat out, his Wife as well. I had my normal wine amount, small glass and a half. Over an hour and a half.

Home by 8-pm. Backed into the garage, lowered outside door. In for the night. Never leave Jeep outside at night. Back to finish off my night's sleep!
Always do it in two halves. 85 YOA, what can I say. Good night.

[Kevin Rohrer]

#2. Common sense capacity?!

Your "common sense" is certainly different from most others. Any handgun that holds >5 is fine, and some will say >4 is ok. I prefer 8 +1 adult-size rounds.

More is not better, it is just more of the same.

[CSO Dobb]

For a while my favorite EDC has been a Sig365. Still carry it in my home town, but through the week I work in a large metropolitan city so on work days a carry a bigger high capacity pistol. Since so much civil unrest is taking place, usually carry a Glock 19X. I have the extended round mag in the gun and another in my pocket.

[Carl the Floor Walker]

Quote"#2. Common sense capacity?!



Agree, there is the internet and then reality. On two other forums they did a survey of how many members have actually used their guns and how many actually fired more than three shoots. Almost zero have ever used one, and just a small fraction have ever shot one especially more than three rounds.

I live in a city of 500,000 people. I actually had a job of viewing daily crime reports. Plus since shooting is my hobby and I am a active club member that went to the range about twice a week for many many years. In that time I have never known anyone personally that had to use a gun. The other people I know that have been shot that I knew were from negligent discharges. Usually from holstering. Gang related shooting but even then not many rounds other than drive by shooting.
Yes, there have been shooting non police rated. Mostly domestic arguments, people robed and shot once etc. Never have I seen anyone in a gunfight that actually had to use more than one magazine.
When the 365 and Hellcat came out, all over the internet people practically claimed that if you carried anything less than 10 rds you were a dead man walking.
What is interesting is that the rest of the manufacturers never really jumped on the idea. Single stacks of less than 10 rds prevail in the market and revolvers remain popular.

There is a mod on another forum will do nothing but pick a fight to those that carry only a 5 shot snubbie and argue post after post. And watch out if you disagree with him. Sad thing to see. I have no problem with any size gun a person carries or how many magazines they carry. I know one person on the internet that carries 4 spare mags. Maybe he needs 4, I am just glad I do not live in the same city he does.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Carl the Floor Walker

Quote"#2. Common sense capacity?!



Agree, there is the internet and then reality. On two other forums they did a survey of how many members have actually used their guns and how many actually fired more than three shoots. Almost zero have ever used one, and just a small fraction have ever shot one especially more than three rounds.

I live in a city of 500,000 people. I actually had a job of viewing daily crime reports. Plus since shooting is my hobby and I am a active club member that went to the range about twice a week for many many years. In that time I have never known anyone personally that had to use a gun. The other people I know that have been shot that I knew were from negligent discharges. Usually from holstering. Gang related shooting but even then not many rounds other than drive by shooting.
Yes, there have been shooting non police rated. Mostly domestic arguments, people robed and shot once etc. Never have I seen anyone in a gunfight that actually had to use more than one magazine.
When the 365 and Hellcat came out, all over the internet people practically claimed that if you carried anything less than 10 rds you were a dead man walking.
What is interesting is that the rest of the manufacturers never really jumped on the idea. Single stacks of less than 10 rds prevail in the market and revolvers remain popular.

There is a mod on another forum will do nothing but pick a fight to those that carry only a 5 shot snubbie and argue post after post. And watch out if you disagree with him. Sad thing to see. I have no problem with any size gun a person carries or how many magazines they carry. I know one person on the internet that carries 4 spare mags. Maybe he needs 4, I am just glad I do not live in the same city he does.

Yes, actually having to use a firearm is quite rare. As for how much capacity is “needed” or typical, it doesn’t seem particularly easy to find an average. There are always exceptions to the often repeated rule of 3s (3 shots in 3 seconds at 3 yards). In both of the following two examples it’s one police officer against one assailant. And the officers even used “adult sized” rounds, with the first using the venerable 45 ACP shooting the assailant 14 times. The assailant continued to fight back.

https://www.police1.com/officer-shoo...BbLYpnqqHxwMq/

https://www.policemag.com/340305/sho...ida-01-26-2008

Are a law enforcement officer’s needs more than a typical concealed carrier? Likely, as their chances of using their firearms is no doubt higher. But in the previous examples these weren’t mass shooters. The assailants used pistols they had on their person and in their cars. Sometimes humans aren’t easy to stop and they seem to keep fighting despite what would be life ending injuries with enough time (the 1986 Miami shootout is another good example of this).

Manufacturers do continue to make single stacks. There are a number of single stack pistols that are much cheaper than the P365 and Hellcat. For a lot of gun purchasers cost is a major factor. The P365 has sold incredibly well, however. Do I think all single stacks are obsolete or will cease to be made? I don’t think so.

And yea I’m glad I’m not on that other forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnKSa]

On two other forums they did a survey of how many members have actually used their guns and how many actually fired more than three shoots. Almost zero have ever used one, and just a small fraction have ever shot one especially more than three rounds.

You have to be kind of careful here.

Before I start, let me say I'm going to focus exclusively on the logic here and never mention any number of rounds that is enough/too much/too little/etc., let alone try to recommend a particular number.

Ok, with that out of the way.

It might make sense to not carry a gun at all if one assesses that the chance of needing one is too small to bother with.

But if a person assesses that the chance of needing one is sufficient to carry one, then it doesn't make sense to carry one that is likely to be insufficient for a reasonable scenario. What a person needs when they need a gun is a different problem from whether or not a person needs a gun.

That may not be immediately obvious, so here's an example. Let's say you're running an air force for a small country. You are looking at the expense of giving every one of your aircrew members a parachute and it's going to cost enough money that it's difficult to budget for.

So you decide: "The odds of them needing a parachute in peacetime is so small that I'll just have them each carry parachutes that will only safely support the weight of a person who is 100lbs or less. It will save a lot of money. Sure, all of our aircrew members are heavier than that, but it's so unlikely that they will need them in the first place there's no point in spending more."

Well, it might have made sense for you to decide that the risk of needing a parachute was so small that there was no need to carry parachutes at all. But if you're going to give them parachutes, it doesn't make sense to give them parachutes that are so small that they won't work for them. If they actually do need a parachute, they will need one that is rated for their weight--it does them little good to have a parachute that isn't going to work for them when they need it. You might as well have just saved the money entirely and not bought any parachutes at all.

That example is picked to make the point, but the same general principle applies. When you need a gun, you will need it to solve a problem. What is required to solve that problem is a function of the particular problem you are faced with, not how likely it is that you will need a gun in the first place.

Never have I seen anyone in a gunfight that actually had to use more than one magazine.

I think we would need more information to determine the usefulness of that information. At a minimum, we would need to know the following:

1. How many of the people that lost the gunfight that reality handed them would likely have prevailed if they had more ammunition?
2. How many of them used what was in the gun only because that was all they had?

[HighValleyRanch]

I don't think anyone has brought up the factor of state limitations on magazine capacity in making the decision between micro, sub compact vs. full size.

Since I CCW in a state that has a limit of a ten round magazine, it doesn't make much sense to carry a full size glock 17 that has a much larger capacity magazine for that reason.

I carry a Kahr PM9 with an extended 7 round magazine with Magguts kit making it 8 in the magazine and one in the chamber. Therefore the balance of size, shootability and capacity is weighed against carry a larger compact like the glock 19 or 26 where I could only have 10+1 anyways. So does two extra rounds make the difference for carry a pistol twice the size of the Kahr PM9? Not for me.

It's always a compromise one way or the other.
FWIW, I can shoot the Kahr as well as the glock 19.

[JohnKSa]

Since I CCW in a state that has a limit of a ten round magazine, it doesn't make much sense to carry a full size glock 17 that has a much larger capacity magazine for that reason.

Certainly not from a capacity standpoint, but it might make sense based on other criteria.

• Larger guns have longer sight radii which tend to minimize sighting errors.
• Larger guns tend to be heavier which makes them recoil less making them more shootable and getting them back on target faster.
• Larger guns (talking semi-automatics) tend to be more reliable, all else being equal.
• Larger guns tend to be easier and more comfortable to get a good grip on and controls tend to be easier to operate.

It is certainly maddening to not be allowed to use the full capacity of a firearm, but even in circumstances when that's the case, there may still be enough of an advantage to a full-sized gun to warrant carrying it.

[Moonglum]

Originally Posted by Carl The Floor Walker

Agree, there is the internet and then reality. On two other forums they did a survey of how many members have actually used their guns and how many actually fired more than three shoots. Almost zero have ever used one, and just a small fraction have ever shot one especially more than three rounds.

I live in a city of 500,000 people. I actually had a job of viewing daily crime reports. Plus since shooting is my hobby and I am a active club member that went to the range about twice a week for many many years. In that time I have never known anyone personally that had to use a gun. The other people I know that have been shot that I knew were from negligent discharges.

Choosing a carry gun based on "I'll probably never need it anyway" is a really bad idea.

I've had a few criminal encounters. I know a couple of murders, I'm actually related to one by marriage. I also knew a few murder victims. It's been my experience that you're just as likely to run into two Vampires as one. I'm just not comfortable with less than ten rounds certainly not with five. Especially when I can carry a similar size gun with better ergonomics and higher capacity.

You do you.

Originally Posted by High Valley Ranch

Since I CCW in a state that has a limit of a ten round magazine, it doesn't make much sense to carry a full size glock 17 that has a much larger capacity magazine for that reason.

I'm in the same boat. That's the biggest reason I choose a Glock 26 over a 17. If I was starting now I might consider a Glock 48 but since the 26 is adequate to my needs I'll continue to carry it.

[HighValleyRanch]

It is certainly maddening to not be allowed to use the full capacity of a firearm, but even in circumstances when that's the case, there may still be enough of an advantage to a full-sized gun to warrant carrying it.

As I stated:

FWIW, I can shoot the Kahr as well as the glock 19.

*There is NO disadvantage in regards to SD distances between a Sight radius on a 3" gun to a 4" barrel gun. ! inch cannot make that much difference at ten to 12 yards.
*There even could be an argument that in a physical struggle, a smaller gun would be harder to grab by the perp than a larger pistol.
* The Kahr has been 100 percent as reliable as any of my larger weapons.
* Very little recoil on the Kahr PM9....recoil, flip and control are largely determined by the ability of the shooter.

[jr24]

It's always a compromise one way or the other.
FWIW, I can shoot the Kahr as well as the glock 19.

This is often said about small guns vs duty guns, but there is never a qualifier. Just as well, slow fire at a static range? How about rapid fire (Bill Drill or similar), how about transitioning targets (El president, triple nickel) or what about reloads (FAST, Devil). How about shooting and moving, forward, side retreating while engaging multiple targets.

I say this because for me, that's where the rubber meets the road. Slow fire I was pretty impressed with the Sig 365 over my tried and true (and chunky) Glock 26. But as soon as I started shooting dynamically, the thin grips on the 365 became an immediate hindrance to keeping a solid grip on the gun and managing recoil properly, how easily I shot circles around it with the 26 was laughable, let alone a 19 or 17 (which I shoot better than a 26).

Not picking on you specifically and you very wellay shoot the kahr just as well as the 19, but it's just worth keeping in mind that if we actually need to use a CCW it's gonna be fast, confusing and chaotic and it's worth preparing as best we can.

[Carl the Floor Walker]

Originally Posted by jr24

This is often said about small guns vs duty guns, but there is never a qualifier. Just as well, slow fire at a static range? How about rapid fire (Bill Drill or similar), how about transitioning targets (El president, triple nickel) or what about reloads (FAST, Devil). How about shooting and moving, forward, side retreating while engaging multiple targets.

I say this because for me, that's where the rubber meets the road. Slow fire I was pretty impressed with the Sig 365 over my tried and true (and chunky) Glock 26. But as soon as I started shooting dynamically, the thin grips on the 365 became an immediate hindrance to keeping a solid grip on the gun and managing recoil properly, how easily I shot circles around it with the 26 was laughable, let alone a 19 or 17 (which I shoot better than a 26).

Not picking on you specifically and you very wellay shoot the kahr just as well as the 19, but it's just worth keeping in mind that if we actually need to use a CCW it's gonna be fast, confusing and chaotic and it's worth preparing as best we can.

I have been shooting the short barrel firearms for years. It is very seldom I have shot them as a Target gun. All the drills you mention etc. And there are many in my Club that do quite well with them as well. Now if you cannot shoot a small gun well, I get it. But understand that there are many that can. I am not saying you can pick up a pocket gun, snubbie or Micro 9mm and from day one shoot better than a duty gun. But if you put the time in it, you will be surprised at the ability of these guns to perform very well.
It is up to the shooter. You put in the time and diligent training, you reap big rewards.

[jr24]

Originally Posted by Carl the Floor Walker

I have been shooting the short barrel firearms for years. It is very seldom I have shot them as a Target gun. All the drills you mention etc. And there are many in my Club that do quite well with them as well. Now if you cannot shoot a small gun well, I get it. But understand that there are many that can. I am not saying you can pick up a pocket gun, snubbie or Micro 9mm and from day one shoot better than a duty gun. But if you put the time in it, you will be surprised at the ability of these guns to perform very well.
It is up to the shooter. You put in the time and diligent training, you reap big rewards.

Glad you put the time in, I wasn't saying I can't shoot all small guns well, just that one example. But even those I can, I will always shoot a compact/duty size equivalent better. Hand size is a big factor, I have wide palms and shorter fingers, so narrow grips are harder to lock in. I haven't tried it, but I'd wager the Hellcat would fit my hands perfect and I'd shoot it well, but I highly doubt it'd be as good or better than a Glock 19 no matter how much I practiced, assuming I kept up with the 19 too. Harder to get out of the holster as cleanly, small controls make reloads more problematic and recoil, while manageable, will be more pronounced. My comment wasn't saying folks can't shoot little guns well, it's that it's often unlikely they can shoot a tiny gun AS WELL as a duty sized gun in practical drills. Some can, I'm sure, but I've never met them.

Personally, I have never seen anyone actually do practical drills with a tiny gun, the few I see on the ranges will pop off a mag or two at 5 yards and call it a day. Glad you and your group do the fun stuff with the little guns too.

Caviat at the end, I have seen a few folks shoot the 365 well, especially the XL so it's kind of a tweener in the small/compact/duty size, just doesn't fit my hand geometry well. Perhaps if the hogue grips were available when I had mine I might have hung onto it.

[HighValleyRanch]

Personally, I have never seen anyone actually do practical drills with a tiny gun, the few I see on the ranges will pop off a mag or two at 5 yards and call it a day.

This about says it all. Just because you haven't seen it, you doubt that there are people good with the micro pistols? And just because you can't, you doubt others can?

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by HighValleyRanch

This about says it all. Just because you haven't seen it, you doubt that there are people good with the micro pistols? And just because you can't, you doubt others can?

He specifically said he can. He simply said he’s faster with larger pistols. That doesn’t seem like an outrageous comment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HighValleyRanch]

No, what he is implying is that because he is faster with larger pistols, then that would apply to everyone else.
That is his "qualifier"