Posted on 07/29/2002 3:51:37 PM PDT by New Horizon
I may have to take a closer look at the SIG...I didn't check the price tags, but the Beretta and Glock were around $500 - $600.
Is the SIG much more expensive?
At the time last year, the 9000 was at the top of the magazine 'hype' parade. I'm very happy with my Glock 23 and have no regrets on passing on the Beretta. Perhaps they should market it to the fanny pack runner crowd.
I know there are many internet sites where you can look and get some price ideas for a "used" gun.
If anyone knows the url for a site please let me know. Specifically, A golf buddy has a 8-9 year on S&W .22 with a 7 inch barrel used for around 1,000 rounds. I'm looking for a plinking/target .22 and thought that I'd make him an offer but don't know what it's worth. I guess he also has a laser target attachment but I have know idea what brand etc. I think it's a model 41?
Do everything you can to enroll in a Jeff Cooper GunSite class. He's not getting any younger and he's a National Treasure. The class will teach you everything you need to become a pistol expert. More importantly it will teach you the skills to continue your education.
My single experience shooting one left me just short of climax.
The next closest was a Para Limited, but it only felt and shot excellently. Cadillac vs the Chevy I was shooting at the time.
You never need apologize for shooting .45 or for shooting USP.
Sorry to disagree with you, but your experiences seem to be with some of the lots Beretta supplied the military in the past. The locking block problem HAS been solved, and the gun does not seize up when hot (personal experience here, and the experience of many, many others). I've put thousands of rounds through an Elite II with NO malfunctions whatsoever. I can't say that for the Glock, or my Sig P220 or my Kimber or my P232 (I can say that for my USP, but hey, it's a USP). Combat conditions (adverse elements, spotty maintenance, hot loads, occasionally ignorant users) are quite different from what any normal person, even an IDPA competitor, is going to put a firearm through.
You are right. It boils down to a training issue. As you observed, knowledgable instruction can make an attentive student effective with the "heavy" calibers as well as the lighter punch of a 9mm. The overiding rule is still "hit what you aim at" and in a desperate situation, any size hole will do if it's in the offending torso and not in the wall.
Besides, I'm not about to argue with a troop of boyscouts packing 1911's
Selecting a handgun for "personal protection" is a big decision, the choice depends on a number of important criteria. Your experience level and your willingness to train with the gun are probably more important than the gun you choose. If you're not experienced and don't care to spend time at the range frequently, it's probably best to disregard the semi-auto's and go with a revolver - the manual of arms is much simpler and easier to remember under stress. It's tough to go wrong with a quality, medium frame 38/357 sixgun.
If you choose to go the semiauto route, it's probably best to ignore the "buy a 45 and pack it cocked and locked" advice as few can really shoot a 45 well under stress without regular practice. If you want to be a true hard core pistolero, you have to pack a 45, but be prepared to put in the time necessary to master it. Even the best 45 shooters will run a 40 or 9mm faster and with greater accuracy, simply due to the reduced recoil. If you want the biggest, baddest fighting handgun out there, the 1911 .45 is probably it - the bad news is they are generally not as reliable as some newer designs "out of the box" and often require tweaking to get them to operate reliably. The best versions are customs and VERY expensive.
That leaves the alternatives, including Glock, Beretta, SIG, HK, et al. Glocks tend to dominate most forms of pistol competition where 1911's are not allowed, and are actually the only alternative format that's competitive with the 1911 on it's own merits - at least in IDPA and USPSA competition. Glocks are reliable, lightweight and durable, but they are not for everybody as they require careful attention to trigger control and upon reholstering.
SIG and HK are probably "the best of the rest" and are often preferred choices for concealed carry, as they offer ultra-safe modes of carry that still allow you to put the gun into operation quickly. For concealed carry, both the Glock and 1911 models require somewhat more training and experience than double action automatics with manual safeties.
Caliber is important, but bullet selection is critical. A quality 9mm JHP like Golden Saber or Cor-Bon is a more effective bullet than 45 FMJ- don't assume 9mm is an ineffective caliber. With the right bullets 9mm is an excellent choice, and they're much easier to shoot than larger calibers like 40 and 45.
40SW has taken off like gangbusters and I think outsells every other caliber by a large margin, because it combines much of the power of the 45ACP with only slightly greater recoil than 9mm -many see it as the ultimate compromise, and it also permits greater magazine capacity in pre-ban or law enforcment magazines.
Whichever gun you choose, seek out competent training, and practice with it frequently.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.