A little education please

[older gunner]

i've been reading several forums lately and would appreciate some informed opinions about my choice of weapons. first of all, i've shot several pistols over the years and my best pistol was probable a browning hp. unfortunately, i had to let it go several years ago. this year i got serious about concealed carry and spent several weeks trying to make up my mind. cost was definately a factor, since i'm semi-retired and work part-time. all of the forums seem to favor sig, glock and 1911 platforms. i chose a taurus titanium 627, 4" in .357 as my bedside piece and a ruger 944 with hogue grips in .40 s&w for my concealed piece. talk about going against the tide. my question is: considering the difference in cost, is a glock or sig that much more effective and/or reliable? Also, what the heck is meant by using S&W for s&w? thanks for any help.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[The Tourist]

It's still a game of putting hot metal into your aggressor's boiler-room. If you can do this with a revolver (while keeping your spleen out of the spinning parts) I say more power to you.

Most modern combat debates on calibre effectiveness and weapon type sooner or later return to the 1984 Miami FBI fiasco. As a result, we got the 10mm, then the .40 SW and fancy-schmancy pistols.

I like 1911's, but don't use them for my defense guns. My wife is not a gunner and left handed. Every gun I have for serious purposes must be ambi and simple to fire under duress. In our home that means a .44 SPL Charter Arms Bulldog, a 4516, a Glock 27 and a custom Colt .380 ACP Government auto.

Except for the .380, all of the rest make big holes with Golden Saber ammo. To that I admonish my wife to "use plenty, we have lots."

But if my wife wanted a nice 396, I'd buy one for her. Like I say, it's hot metal into the boiler-room, and always has been. Some of us like automatic methods of accomplishing this goal.

[preacherman]

The Rugers are generally very reliable, and are service-pistol-accurate (i.e. you should be able to get a 4" group with defensive ammo at 25 yards from a rested shooting position). In this respect, they're as good as SIG, Glock, etc.

The other guns probably have an advantage in concealability, as they offer models ranging from very small, through compact, to full-size. Ruger doesn't offer this size range. However, if you're able to conceal your Ruger, and it shoots well and reliably for you, why change?

[The Tourist]

The padre' is right. Firearms, like any device for safety and security, must fit the needs of the indivdual owner. That might mean a Ruger, it might mean a Smith, but it must get you home in one piece.

Here's a weird concept. I work on feet for several hours, using my arms and shifting postions. (Oh, the drudgery of being a photographic model.) I haven't been able to find something small or reliable for living a troubled life of abuse and sweat. I don't want to buy something expensive for this crappy purpose.

I have been thinking of one of those teeny .25 ACP Taurus models, plated or stainless, in 25 ACP. Now before you yelp 'yikes,' remember that I will be within counter top distance as one would be waiting on a customer. It's hot back there behind the counter; I'll be in a T-shirt and jeans and I must be able to twist at the waist.

We had bangers in the store a few months ago, and the entire 12 person staff had ZERO firearms between us. We were going to charge the bangers and hope for the best if things got ugly. And I'm too old for 'ugly.'

There were bugs in these gun originally, and rumor has it that the bugs have been fixed. I've heard that before.

I'm thinking if worst comes to worst, I'll buy a small fan and get a photographers vest.

So, Old Gunner, here's Colt guy that might have to buy a small Ruger 101.

[Bumper]

i've been reading several forums lately and would appreciate some informed opinions about my choice of weapons. first of all, i've shot several pistols over the years and my best pistol was probable a browning hp. unfortunately, i had to let it go several years ago. this year i got serious about concealed carry and spent several weeks trying to make up my mind. cost was definately a factor, since i'm semi-retired and work part-time. all of the forums seem to favor sig, glock and 1911 platforms. i chose a taurus titanium 627, 4" in .357 as my bedside piece and a ruger 944 with hogue grips in .40 s&w for my concealed piece. talk about going against the tide. my question is: considering the difference in cost, is a glock or sig that much more effective and/or reliable? Also, what the heck is meant by using S&W for s&w? thanks for any help.

If you can shoot it and conceal it well and have confidence in your selection, it's good. If there were enough people offering you suggestions probably every handgun ever made would be put forth for your consideration. Me, I want a full size 1911 (flat profile, easy to conceal) .45acp (big bullet) in as close to the original 1911 design as possible (no gimmicks and reliable). And the one on my hip is the same one on my headboard at night.

And, the little "&" is the HTML representation of the "&" symbol. I have HTML turned off but for some reason, vBulletin still wants to use it. It used to drive me crazy but since I can't seem to fix it I ignore it....

[SSKC]

I agree with the previous posters: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. If the guns you have work for you, you're set. No need to follow the crowd.

On the other hand, if you have access to a range where you can rent guns, don't hesitate to try some others when you're there for practice. You may find something that works even better. In my case, I tried several guns that were "fine." Then one day I rented a 1911. Wow! Love at first magazine!

So...if what you have works, great. If you happen to find something that works better, go for it. The bottom line, of course, is that whatever you have, practice, practice, practice.

Welcome aboard.

SSKC

[Euclidean]

You know what gunner? We have something in common. I like a format no internet forum likes, and I have a Ruger P89 that's perfectly serviceable. I have considered seeing if I could make it work as a spare CCW because after testing the waters I've found I can't get enough for it if I sell it.

I counted here the other day. I own a whopping 4 handguns, and only one of them is a semiautomatic and it's not one of the wondernines either.

Are there better guns? There are always better guns. You'll always want to try something new. That doesn't mean there's something wrong with the ones you have.

[Betty]

Everybody has great answers. Use what works best for you. If what you have has proven reliable, concealable, accurate, and of sufficient caliber, than you've made a good choice. Less expensive does not necessarily equate with poor quality. There's cheap lemons and expensive lemons. I used to have a 2" .357 Taurus 617, and it's still one of my favorite revolvers and the revolver I was the most accurate with.

[Tom357]

...my question is: considering the difference in cost, is a glock or sig that much more effective and/or reliable?...

A handgun, any handgun, is effective only if you can shoot it and put your shots on target. It is reliable only if it fires and functions every time you want it to. Part of that is the shooter, part of that is the ammo, and part is the weapon. Quality does vary, but when you are choosing among the major manufacturers, the choice of firearm becomes one of personal fit and budget because most are reliable if you use good quality ammo.

I think the brand rivalry you see on the boards is rather like Chevy vs Ford vs GMC. If I were you, I wouldn't worry about it. I chose a SIG because I shot it the best. My second choice was a CZ. (By the way, if you liked your Browning HP, you really ought to try a CZ-75, sometime. It is an excellent value.)

You chose a Taurus bull barrel .357. I had the pleasure of shooting one, and I think you made an excellent choice. It is accurate and controllable, and I found it easy to shoot.

You chose a Ruger P-series in .40S&W. It is built like a tank and combat accurate. Ruger pistols have been the choice of major police departments because they are tough, reliable, and an excellent value. Again, you made an excellent choice.

Now, take care of them, practice with them, and carry them.

[rocky]

Everybody has great answers. Use what works best for you. If what you have has proven reliable, concealable, accurate, and of sufficient caliber, than you've made a good choice. Less expensive does not necessarily equate with poor quality. There's cheap lemons and expensive lemons. I used to have a 2" .357 Taurus 617, and it's still one of my favorite revolvers and the revolver I was the most accurate with.

very well stated. No 1 gun will be the best for everyone.

[older gunner]

thanks to all for the input. i'll keep putting the rounds through the guns i've chosen and not worry about if i made the right choice. as an aside, i worked with the mrs. to get a piece that she was comfortable with and ended up with a sig 232 in .380. she can handle it well and qualified for her CCW firing 200 rounds while seated in her electric scooter. she had a blast and i take my hat off to her instructor, who worked patiently with her.

[The Tourist]

'Gunner,

The 232 is an excellent gun. I use a .380 sometimes, myself. Modern ammo has made some cartridges better than at the time of their natal date. But as someone says in their signature, "The first item in a knife fight is to bring a gun."

That philosophy works against blunt objects, other guns and more muscular or trained opponents. Use what works and stay alive.