Does an M-4, AR15 9mm have a place in defense?

RattleSnake Jake · January 10, 2009, 03:34 PM

I am interested in finding out what place would a M4, AR15, in 9mm, have as a defensive weapon or for training.? I know that Rock River makes this rifle and I've shot one before and it was extremely reliable.

Thanks for your input/insight.

KLRANGL · January 10, 2009, 03:42 PM

Compact, controllable/high-rate-of fire, and high capacity magazine without the penetration of a traditional rifle caliber... as an SBR, I think it would work out well enough...

JohnH1963 · January 11, 2009, 09:16 PM

The 9mm is a very controllable caliber. Other calibers are not so controllable.

Try firing bursts from a 5.62 vs. a 9mm. You will notice that the 5.62 will have a tendancy to climb and you have to re-zero after each burst. The 9mm wont climb so much. A small burst of 9mm on a target is more effective then a 5.62. The 9mm coming from a longer barrel will have a little more speed and thus be more effective.

The 9mm SMG is one of the best weapons out there. I found that I could put 4-5 round bursts on-target reliably from a 9mm MP5. You cant do that with any other caliber. I would put my money on 4-5 9mm bullets stopping a man on the first try then anything else. How could that many bullets not stop or cause severe bleeding on the first burst into the chest especially when its traveling at a higher rate out of the carbine then the pistol.

In reference to body armor, a 4-5 round burst would probably penetrate it. 1 or 2 rounds may not, but 4-5 in the same area probably would...

Mike in VA · January 11, 2009, 10:55 PM

Better than a 9mm pistol, though not as good as a .223/5.56. For CQB in an HD situation, seems like a reasonable compromise, additional effective range/accuracy can be a big plus.

KUHIO · January 11, 2009, 11:01 PM

I'd say its as adequate as the MP5

KLRANGL · January 12, 2009, 12:39 AM

Quote:

Try firing bursts from a 5.62 vs. a 9mm. You will notice that the 5.62 will have a tendancy to climb and you have to re-zero after each burst. The 9mm wont climb so much. A small burst of 9mm on a target is more effective then a 5.62. The 9mm coming from a longer barrel will have a little more speed and thus be more effective.

Is the 5.62 the love child of a 5.56 and a 7.62?

evan1293 · January 12, 2009, 03:42 AM

I think that in a full auto, SBR platform then sure, its got a place...just as much as the mp5 does. As far as semi auto I would prefer a glock 17 over an m4 9mm. The reason being is that the 9mm m4 would be suited for CQB type situations. Theres no real fire power advantage with the m4 (as compared with a g17 using a g18 magazine.) For what little benefit the buttstock will be to you, the added barrel length will hurt you more as far as retention goes. The glock would be far lighter, faster and easier to manuever in real tight environments. Sure, the m4s will probably beat the g17 in the accuracy department, but when you're working in distances that are common to one's house for instance, distances generally are within 10 yards or closer.

A semi auto m4 in 5.56 is a different story however.

Rifleman 173 · January 12, 2009, 04:31 AM

A 9 millimeter carbine is the kind of firearm that you would use at close range with a high velocity of fire to defend yourself. That would be the defensive scenario probably best suited for a 9 mm shooter which is why the British made the Sten and Sterling submachineguns. Get close and strafe the bad guys.

It would make a very good training firearm to teach somebody to learn basic shooting skills and handling techniques of firearms. It wouldn't be one that kicked the trainee all around either and it would be a good psychological device to produce positive feedback for the new shooter.

It would be cost effective or cheaper to use than a lot of other firearms. It wouldn't be the cheapest but it would be far from the most expensive with which to train.

Downsides would be the fact that there are more effective firearms that one could use for personal defense. Less range than other firearms.

Over all, a 9 millimeter carbine wouldn't be a great device but it wouldn't be a super bad one either. It would probably be at the bottom end of firearms that I would prefer to use.

Erik · January 12, 2009, 09:04 PM

9mm submachine guns have a place. I'd opt for an 5.56 SBR, given the choice.

January 10, 2009, 03:34 PM	#1
RattleSnake Jake Member Join Date: May 24, 2006 Location: Rocky Mountains Posts: 19	Does an M-4, AR15 9mm have a place in defense? I am interested in finding out what place would a M4, AR15, in 9mm, have as a defensive weapon or for training.? I know that Rock River makes this rifle and I've shot one before and it was extremely reliable. Thanks for your input/insight. __________________ RattleSnake Jake To Lazy to Work To Nervous to Steal To Jelous to Pimp NRA Lifer

January 10, 2009, 03:42 PM	#2
KLRANGL Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2008 Location: Fredericksburg, VA Posts: 958	Compact, controllable/high-rate-of fire, and high capacity magazine without the penetration of a traditional rifle caliber... as an SBR, I think it would work out well enough... __________________ And it's Killer Angel... as in the book

January 11, 2009, 10:55 PM	#4
Mike in VA Senior Member Join Date: October 16, 1998 Location: Santa FE, NM Posts: 2,163	Better than a 9mm pistol, though not as good as a .223/5.56. For CQB in an HD situation, seems like a reasonable compromise, additional effective range/accuracy can be a big plus. __________________ M2 The Second Amendment IS homeland defense!

January 12, 2009, 09:04 PM	#9
Erik Senior Member Join Date: December 24, 1999 Location: America Posts: 3,479	9mm submachine guns have a place. I'd opt for an 5.56 SBR, given the choice. __________________ Meriam Webster's: Main Entry: ci·vil·ian Pronunciation: \sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən\, Function: noun, Date: 14th century, 1: a specialist in Roman or modern civil law, 2 a: one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force b: outsider 1, — civilian adjective

January 11, 2009, 09:16 PM	#3
JohnH1963 Junior member Join Date: October 22, 2008 Posts: 416	The 9mm is a very controllable caliber. Other calibers are not so controllable. Try firing bursts from a 5.62 vs. a 9mm. You will notice that the 5.62 will have a tendancy to climb and you have to re-zero after each burst. The 9mm wont climb so much. A small burst of 9mm on a target is more effective then a 5.62. The 9mm coming from a longer barrel will have a little more speed and thus be more effective. The 9mm SMG is one of the best weapons out there. I found that I could put 4-5 round bursts on-target reliably from a 9mm MP5. You cant do that with any other caliber. I would put my money on 4-5 9mm bullets stopping a man on the first try then anything else. How could that many bullets not stop or cause severe bleeding on the first burst into the chest especially when its traveling at a higher rate out of the carbine then the pistol. In reference to body armor, a 4-5 round burst would probably penetrate it. 1 or 2 rounds may not, but 4-5 in the same area probably would...

January 11, 2009, 11:01 PM	#5
KUHIO Senior Member Join Date: October 19, 2008 Location: North Carolina Posts: 250	I'd say its as adequate as the MP5

January 12, 2009, 03:42 AM	#7
evan1293 Senior Member Join Date: February 16, 2007 Location: CT Posts: 783	I think that in a full auto, SBR platform then sure, its got a place...just as much as the mp5 does. As far as semi auto I would prefer a glock 17 over an m4 9mm. The reason being is that the 9mm m4 would be suited for CQB type situations. Theres no real fire power advantage with the m4 (as compared with a g17 using a g18 magazine.) For what little benefit the buttstock will be to you, the added barrel length will hurt you more as far as retention goes. The glock would be far lighter, faster and easier to manuever in real tight environments. Sure, the m4s will probably beat the g17 in the accuracy department, but when you're working in distances that are common to one's house for instance, distances generally are within 10 yards or closer. A semi auto m4 in 5.56 is a different story however.

January 12, 2009, 04:31 AM	#8
Rifleman 173 Senior Member Join Date: August 16, 2007 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 589	A 9 millimeter carbine is the kind of firearm that you would use at close range with a high velocity of fire to defend yourself. That would be the defensive scenario probably best suited for a 9 mm shooter which is why the British made the Sten and Sterling submachineguns. Get close and strafe the bad guys. It would make a very good training firearm to teach somebody to learn basic shooting skills and handling techniques of firearms. It wouldn't be one that kicked the trainee all around either and it would be a good psychological device to produce positive feedback for the new shooter. It would be cost effective or cheaper to use than a lot of other firearms. It wouldn't be the cheapest but it would be far from the most expensive with which to train. Downsides would be the fact that there are more effective firearms that one could use for personal defense. Less range than other firearms. Over all, a 9 millimeter carbine wouldn't be a great device but it wouldn't be a super bad one either. It would probably be at the bottom end of firearms that I would prefer to use.