[justherenow]

Maybe I am dumb and I have not picked up on it, but I keep hearing/reading the double vs. single stack debate. In my mind, I never cared which was which.

So the question, why is one preferred over the other?

 

[Rugergirl]

Matter of preference, really. A single stack is easier for most people to conceal, but you give up round count. Sure you can carry extra mags, but mag for mag the double stack still hold more rounds.
On the other hand, shot placement is everything, why would you need more than 8 or so? If you are a good enough shot you shouldn't need as many rounds.
My simple solution to this dilemma, carry a revolver.

 

[OldMick]

Maybe I'm missing something in the question, but the simple answer is that single stack magazines being thinner results in the circumference of the handgun grip being smaller, perhaps a better fit for some folks hands.

Double stack offers higher capacity in the same length, but results in a somewhat thicker grip. I'm personally OK with either. I love the feel of a 1911 or a Sig 239; both single stack. But I also like the Sig 229 and Glock 26.

Some shooters just prefer one over the other based on the way the gun fits their hands, or how much they value higher capacity. At least that's my take on it.

 

[obxned]

For concealment, a single stack magazine allows for the thinest pistol in a given caliber. It also means the weight will be less when loaded, since there are fewer rounds in the magazine. Thin and light is a big plus, but the negative is fewer rounds available. With oen spare mag, a single stack pistol could have as few as 13 rounds total; a double stack could have nearly 40. How many rounds is enough? Ask that question and you'll get an endless debate.

In a pistol that is not primarily for concealment, the single/double stack issue is more a matter of how the pistol fits your hand. A double stacker will have a thicker grip than a single stack pistol. However, there are double stack 9mms with grips as trim as a single stack .45.

Life sure was simpler back in the days when 'choice' was either a Browning 9mm or a 1911 in 45ACP.

 

[justherenow]

I honestly thought it was something like that, but was not sure if one was better generally or the other. For me not being a noob to this stuff, it sure was a noob question.

 

[gottabkiddin]

CC, Single Stack for weight and easier to conceal. Home defense, double stack for firepower.

 

[WHEC724]

Seriously, I think it comes down to what fits in your hand best. God gave me giant friggin' hands, so the notion of more bullets is always appealing. If I'm anticipating a rough day, that's what I'm gonna carry. The down side is that all those rounds make my shorts sag, so my 'easy-day' carry is now my BUG (S&W 637). In all honesty, if I can't take the BG down in 5 rounds, I'm probably screwed anyway...

 

[edr9x23super]

Single vs Double-stack? Simple:

Doubles are easier to reload......

 

[Ram Rod]

I have both. I seem to like my double stack mags better for some reason. I don't feel at a disadvantage carrying my single stacks though.

 

[RETSUPT99]

Obviously, my two Kimbers are single stack, but it was the single stack that gave my Glock-36 the feel that brought me into the Glock world.

Single stacks also make my KelTec's easliy concealed.

I have other firearms that are double stacks, Baretta, Glock-26...I have no real preference...they all have their place.

 

[llongshot]

I have both. If you don't need to choose for some reason I'd use the best for the application. My 1911 clone on the nightstand has a single stack in it and another beside it. My outdoor carry CZ clone has a double stack in it (and two spares available if I want to carry them) based on the distance I expect to be from the vehicle.

 

[F350]

Rugergirl-

On the other hand, shot placement is everything, why would you need more than 8 or so? If you are a good enough shot you shouldn't need as many rounds.

That is, with all due respect, a rather simplistic and in today’s world unrealistic view. You are assuming a 1 on 1 encounter, dogs run in packs. Just recently in the town I currently call home a group of "youths" (according to our city leaders we have no gangs) numbering over 2 dozen were harassing people downtown, when they learned someone was calling 911 they scattered.

Shortly afterward a group of 6-8 "youths" attacked beat and robbed a guy in a parking garage. Yea I carry a double stack 1911 and 2 mags full time when home, 'cause sometimes 5 or 6 rounds just ain't gonna do the job.

 

[ccw9mm]

I keep hearing/reading the double vs. single stack debate.

why is one preferred over the other?

For myself, the question comes down to (a) feed reliability and (b) capacity. So long as a given gun is exceedingly reliable, then it doesn't matter whether it's single- or double-stack, to me. But, I am partial to having a higher number of rounds, all things considered. Which, I suppose, predisposes me to select guns with dual-stack magazines.

I'd prefer 10+ rds. I'd prefer a somewhat smaller grip circumference, though some larger ones fit me fine (ie, CZ's P-01). Browning made the BDM 9mm, which was exceedingly thin for a steel-framed, dual-stack gun. It held 15+1 and was thinner than a 1911, due to the design of the frame, integration of the grip panels inside the frame instead of mounting on top. The Browning Hi-Power isn't bad, either. Though it's noticeably thicker than the BDM, it is decidedly smaller than most every other dual-stack gun out there, so far as my grip is concerned.

Nicely, there are a couple of choices on the market. The HK P2000SK, for one, has a suitably small grip circumference and yet uses a magazines of 10rds in the 9mm flavor. A great combination: 10+ rds, dual-stack to get the round count, yet small enough to be considered a sub-compact. Could be a bit thinner, but 1.28" isn't bad.

On the other hand, shot placement is everything, why would you need more than 8 or so? If you are a good enough shot you shouldn't need as many rounds.

Chest pounding aside ...

Why? Because not everyone is a marksman. Nor, in such a fluid, stressful situation, would you want to rely on being one. Almost everyone isn't, actually. I would think it's obviously better to have a bit of cushion, particularly if from a size/space consideration it doesn't cost you anything. If there's no downside for a given person, it's hard to see how having more rounds could be a detriment. Can't hurt, and it might well mean the difference between life and death in a real situation. WFM. YMMV, as always.

 

[varob]

Yea I carry a double stack 1911 and 2 mags full time when home, 'cause sometimes 5 or 6 rounds just ain't gonna do the job.

Who makes a double stack 1911?

If it has a double stack mag, is it still a 1911?

 

[ccw9mm]

Who makes a double stack 1911? If it has a double stack mag, is it still a 1911?

STI makes a 1911 on a double-stack frame of their own design, which they call the 2011.

 

[OD*]

Who makes a double stack 1911?

Para-Ordnance offers a number of wide-bodies.

If it has a double stack mag, is it still a 1911?

Technically, no, and Para doesn't refer to them as such. :wink:

 

[OD*]

It held 15+1 and was thinner than a 1911, due to the design of the frame, integration of the grip panels inside the frame instead of mounting on top.

They are just a tad wider than a 1911 with the thin stocks.

 

[Rcher]

My hands arent very big and the double stack mags make the grips too wide for my preference. I have always owned 1911's and maybe due to this, I have grown into this type of grip. It's hard to teach an old dog new tricks. I like the idea of a higher round mag but they just dont feel right in my hands. I think the single stack system conceals easier too. YMMV.

 

[OD*]

I have always owned 1911's and maybe due to this, I have grown into this type of grip. It's hard to teach an old dog new tricks.

My sentiments exactly. :hand10:

 

[TerriLi]

Who makes a double stack 1911?

If it has a double stack mag, is it still a 1911?

There is also a Charles Daly M-5 series is double stack, its also a poly frame.