Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Huge_Midget posted:

I got my Indiana lifetime concealed license earlier this year and am finally starting to consider what I want to carry. I think I'm leaning towards an M&P Shield in 9mm at this point. I'm assuming most of you would advise against the model with the external safety? Also, does anyone have any experience with the APEX Tactical DCAEK kits for the shield? I've shot my brother in law's full size M&P .40 and my main complaint was the trigger feel and reset distance, so I wondered if anyone had shot a Shield with the APEX parts. Also, pocket holster recommendations for a 9mm Shield?

The AEK and RAM for the full size M&Ps is night and day, excellent and easy to install. The factory trigger on the Shield is nice enough that I don't feel the need to gently caress with it, while I can still get suitable performance from it in terms of both speed and accuracy. The Shield is hella chunky, though, and most of my pants not marketed as "tactical" will not accommodate it in the pocket.

And yeah, skip the external safety if you can.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

vigorous sodomy posted:

Only when a dame with everything to lose walks into my smoke filled office.

I see the Sccy CPX 2 is beginning to get more and more positive reviews. Has anyone ever experienced a Sccy?

They're modestly acceptable. The one I shot did not impress me in any way but it didn't kill me either.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

vigorous sodomy posted:

Did it dissuade you from recommending one or buying one?

The trigger is unremarkable, similar to the LC9 or Beretta Nano, not as good as a Kahr (or the options I'm about to list in a few words). It clearly beats a pointed stick, yeah, and I'd take it over a Taurus or a Kel-Tec.

But, I wound up getting a Shield. If you're looking at the Sccy I'd look harder and go for a PPS, Shield, G26, hell, even a J-frame or LCR. Price is really the only thing it's got going for it, and for about 100-150 more you open up a ton more options.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

I shot an unmodified Llama in .40 that had a nicer trigger than a Glock. However, a factory G34's trigger is still demonstrably better than every single competition revolver trigger I've felt, ones polished by professionals, and lightened to the point that they only ignite Federal primers. It's not a question of how much you like them; I think they feel like poo poo. But to say they're flat out worse than a model 10 is a dumb poo poo statement.

As for the Shield, it's ugly as gently caress. You can OWB it if you like, but its small size means that a variety of IWB options work. The trigger is stiff, but refrain from loving up and you'll hit your target.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

snotball007 posted:

You really can't compare a revolver to a striker fired pistol when it comes to triggers. Completely different mechanics at play.

Sure you can. A DA revolver has longer travel, longer reset, and more weight by quite a bunch. For as gross as Glock triggers are, I have never short stroked one. The operating mechanism is different, yes, but that doesn't mean the trigger gets automatic points for having more to do.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

vigorous sodomy posted:

Bought a shield today it has the manual safety, but I don't mind since I can totally ignore it. Now to get a holster and belt.

Awww yeah

snotball007 posted:

And apples make terrible oranges.

Yep, measuring two systems based on measurable criteria sure is a poor way to compare them.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Sixgun Strumpet posted:

Remember, this isn't a duty weapon, this is insurance. In my judgement what matters is having enough cartridge to stop someone, in a gun that I can shoot accurately, that no-one knows I have (jframes conceal like no other by the way), and most importantly that I will actually carry.

I found with autos they were such a hassle I found myself leaving the house without it, then what good is it?

To an extent you will always have some competing interests at play. These are of course good points. Which autos did you try, and what didn't you like about them?

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Sixgun Strumpet posted:

I did a dumb-ish thing the other day. I had to get my first drug test for work, some sort of government contract my company wants to send me to. Since I had never had one it didn't occur to me not to wear my gun. When I asked the tech what I should do with my gun she was really confused, it was all fine when I put it in the box, but even in khakis and a Hawaiian shirt she had no idea I was armed. My khar concealed like that.

They want you to piss in front of them or some poo poo?

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON




Mine was six years ago and waaaaay more laid-back evidently. The only stricter ones I'd heard about involved a labbie who actually had to watch your plumbing, for parolees and poo poo.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

poeticoddity posted:

I know the chance of this happening is basically zero, but it'd be nice if you were required to go through whatever your state's carry application process was before you were allowed to apply for a LEO position. We'd probably have better informed officers and a bit more push-back to terrible licensing requirements.

That wouldn't do much in Colorado.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Kommienzuspadt posted:

I'm pretty sure neither of those guns has a "street record."

I was going to make a drop gun joke, but the two beater LC9s we have for class function reliably. They're just thoroughly mediocre in every other way. I haven't had a chance to play with the ones with the improved trigger, so they could very well be worth it. But, all I can give that is a "could" and not a "would." The Shield is a twentieth of an inch wider and a tenth of an inch longer and taller. For that, I get a gun that is far more pleasant to shoot.

I'd have the Bodyguard .380 over the LCP, but that's solely based on me being able to fire it without it feeling like I'm gripping the back of an axe head, and I'd really not have to pay for a laser I'm not going to use. The LCP really isn't meant to be pleasant to shoot, I suppose, and reliability is excellent. The Bodyguard .38 is okay, but I'd sooner have a 642 or an LCP. I don't know if Smith's poly-framed round gun has gotten enough of a beating to get a thumbs up, and truly, since the 642 exists, why?

And Itchy pretty much covered the Sccy.

Also, thanks for the comparison photos.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

rifles posted:

Pretty much every M&P has a like 50% chance of that happening. It used to be a huge thing when people compared them to Glocks or whatever but nobody really cares anymore because everyone replaces their sights anyway, or if they don't, they usually don't shoot it enough for it to happen.

The best one was Hickok45's first video with an M&P, a 40c where this happened:



and then in the subsequent video right after he got the gun back from S&W the front sight's dot flew out after like the second magazine.

Fun fact: The little dots in the slide in that picture indicate which mill the slide came from.

The crack indicates you shouldn't shoot it anymore

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Sixgun Strumpet posted:

If you break it down far enough, how stupid was detonics and colt and all the guns I can't think of right now that didn't have sights or where the sights were so rudimentary as to not having mattered?

Very. However we get the benefit of retrospect, thanks to just about everything that happened in pistol shooting between Jack Weaver and now.

Sixgun Strumpet posted:

It might be an interesting experiment for some of you guys (maybe when you are upgrading to night sights) to go shoot your carry gun for a while without sights, see if you can get good with it, see if it makes you a better shooter.

I've ignored the sights on my competition guns before. Hits were nowhere near acceptable even at about 5 yards, and speed does not suffer using sights. Sights are how you know where your bullets are going to go; they are not negotiable.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Sixgun Strumpet posted:

Way too much of the advice in this thread seems to be geared towards a duty gun, or a competition gun. Not a carry gun.

And what I'm telling you is that in the best possible situation (a COMPETITION gun), point shooting sucks rear end compared to using your sights, even at spitting distances. I have tried it fairly extensively. Trying to pull it off with a pocket gun makes things even worse.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Juice posted:

And on Sixgun's sites argument - start dedicating an hour to shooting with your sites taped up next time you go to the range. You'll still get combat-accurate hits at engagement ranges. He's not talking stupid.

I have, with all of my M&Ps, my 1911, my Shield, my K frames, my N frames, and someone else's J frame. He is talking stupid. If your hits are not better and faster with sights than without, something is wrong with you.

Juice posted:

If you haven't done night shooting, you don't have an opinion and should stop posting.

I have, but others have covered the flashlight part already.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

snotball007 posted:

Competition ≠ defense. Again, X ring at the low ready at 5 yards is easily attainable. I did it with a Glock 21 SF after not shooting from December until April. And that should be considered acceptable by anyone's standards.

It's easily attainable, but if it's slower and tougher than using the sights, all you're doing is jerking yourself off with a deliberate handicap.

You seem to think competition is this magical land where "normal people" don't exist.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

snotball007 posted:

And you seem to think that people always will have the time and ability to get a proper stance and sight picture in a defensive situation.

If all you know how to do or all you equip yourself to do is point shoot, then you're limiting yourself to the quality of that shooting, which is pretty awful. If you know how to use your sights, carry something with usable sights, and also know how to point shoot, then not only can you get the best possible shots off faster, but you can also deal with situations where you're unable to get the gun into your line of sight.

If you have any choice in the matter, you should not be point shooting.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Juice posted:

Nice strawman argument. Of course they are more accurate and faster with sites. Sites aren't there for loving decoration. He said he wasn't sure they were necessary at handgun combat distances. He's right. Doesn't mean we shouldn't have them and use them - but you can get effective hits without them.

Ability to get effective hits doesn't mean you get to pass on sights on a carry gun, nor that you should strive to avoid using sights. What I am saying is that sights will always yield more accurate hits faster, therefore considering them a luxury as other posters suggest is some Adam-12 level bullshit.

You like to use "combat accuracy" as some kind of catch-all for halfassing your marksmanship, which belongs in the stupid poo poo thread. Spend more money on ammunition and less on shiny things and you might say fewer stupid things.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Juice posted:

When did you become an intolerable douchebag? Is this new, or did I just fail to see it previously?

About the same time people started giving lovely advice.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Butch Cassidy posted:

No citation

:razzbert: should be an emoticon.

Personally I'd go with :dgaf: for this one.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Outside Dawg posted:

OWB a Sig 229R in an Aker Nichols.


Excellent holster choice.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

PRESIDENT GOKU posted:

For fucks sake. Why get anything when anything is roughly the same price/size. I already have a shield, but wanted a revolver because I've never had one, and the bodyguard has a great trigger for being a DA only revolver.

This thread needs a list of accepted guns, holsters, and sight combinations in the OP so goons don't get the wrong stuff and then have to explain why their purchase deviated from entrenched norms.

People may have thought you're getting the thing on the bottom when you really got the thing on the top.



Smith sometimes names its products in dumb ways.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Leaving the laser on's going to drain the battery. You can practice mashing the little button, but if it's tough to do, I'd ignore the laser.

Doctor Grape Ape posted:

That isn't even everything they've named "Bodyguard." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson_Bodyguard


thermobollocks fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Oct 23, 2014

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Greengarden posted:

It's been a few years since I looked, but I don't recall ever seeing any exhaustive study on the efficacy .32 versus .380, and how the bottom line for self-defense is .380. I've heard it repeated a lot, but my Google search just returns posts on every firearms forum repeating the proposition. Does anyone have this data at their fingertips so I can look at it? I don't recall it being this cut and dried when I bought the pistol, but it's been years.

I seem to recall the Fiocchi 73gr far out-penetrating pretty much everything else, but this is about the only thing I've been able to find to that effect. http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com/2012/11/clear-gel-terminal-testing-sellier.html

I like this one. http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power

Greengarden posted:

Edit: Can I add multiple pictures to a post without an image host?



Imgur works. You don't need an account or anything.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

MrTuffPaws posted:

Don't you guys ever need to set down? Appendix carry looks miserable if you have to sit for any period of time.

It's actually fantastic for driving. Mine rides high enough the barrel doesn't grind too hard into my thigh. It's there, yeah, but not a problem. It definitely beats sitting directly on the thing.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

PRESIDENT GOKU posted:

Hey thermobollocks, when you AIWB your shield in your INCOG, do you use the attached mag carrier, or do you not have that thing?

I didn't get a mag carrier.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

PRESIDENT GOKU posted:

I can take it off if I want, but why would I not want extra ammo?

I like an extra magazine, just not the carrier that's mounted to the holster.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Exit Strategy posted:

The only time I've ever drawn my carry pistol to do the needful

I like this more than I like "social purposes"

And yeah revo front sights can be a pain in the butt, but at the very least Smith has a SKU of 442 and 642 (I think?) that come with a tritium front. Other than that I'd dig around and see what the local smiths can do for you. Luckily, I know a revo smith who can do it out of the back of his truck.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

PRESIDENT GOKU posted:

mused the gay man, not realizing carrying a hidden gun is far less inconvenient than taking extra laps around the block every day.

You should consider doing that anyway

Question: Has anyone seen an LCR 9mm in the wild yet?

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Covert Ops Wizard posted:

Can anybody give me some suggestions for a iwb holster for a s&w 642 j-frame? I'm looking for a low profile kydex leather hybrid, though kydex only is good too. I saw a picture of a kydex with cowhide inside but couldn't find out who made it if anybody here knows anything about a holster like that.

Kydex with cowhide inside is kind of useless in my opinion -- you're going to get some level of holster wear for one, and bare kydex provides excellent draw speed and retention all by itself. The J-frame is small enough you may be well served by a single clip model rather unlike the hybrids that occupy quite a bit of belt space. Galco and Desantis both make hybrid options, and Blade-Tech makes IWB options, though with Blade-Tech you will pay for it. There's a variety of other custom kydex makers, but I haven't used them.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

The Rat posted:

But guns do send our immortal souls screaming into the Warp, where they will be flensed and devoured by daemons for all eternity under the mocking laughter of thirsting gods.

What soul

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Depends on how much Joe the beat cop wants to gently caress you up.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

SpelledBackwards posted:

My CHL instructor said the weird part is that they don't define a BAC limit for said intoxication, unlike with driving (.08), so he said just don't risk it ever. I'm not actually sure if that's true.

This is how it is in Colorado.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Network42 posted:

I haven't bought a holster in maybe half a decade, is the MTAC still the general go-to, or has something surpassed it?

MTAC's pretty sweet, Incog is nice for junk carry, also maybe Milt Sparks and whatever Galco racks your sack.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

The Rat posted:

Blood red.

Blood for the BLOOD GOD



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BNBQCBmQuQ

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Pubic Lair posted:

We also watched the Tex Grebner video where he explains shooting himself and the instructor made a point to dismiss his explanation as excuses are like assholes while recommending we buy the exact same style of holster.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYvAxLX6OzE

Maybe he's secretly trying to cull the population of people who'd believe him

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Fang posted:

There is no SAAMI spec for bullet shape.

Yeeeep I've made round noses that a Glock can't feed and some it can fire exactly once and RNFPs that my M&P dislikes. Some guns just don't like some ammo. Some guns like more kinds of ammo than others, but it's always something to check on.

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Kommienzuspadt posted:

Yes, it means your pistol is broken. Your pistol should feed all major JHPs. That is something you as a consumer have the right to expect from a modern handgun. The Walther PPS is no exception. Do you have to try all of the JHPs? no. but if it doesn't feed the one you intended to carry, that should be a huge red flag that something isn't right. This isn't a hand assembled gun .

The model 19's spoiled you, dude

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Kommienzuspadt posted:

All Glocks, All M&Ps, pretty much all of the SIG PRO/Sig Classic series pistols, every modern HK, All 92 series Berettas, hell even most well built 1911s..... basically any pistol that might make its way into the holster of an LEO or military serviceman probably can feed whatever ammo you throw at it, unless that particular one is defective. I don't really think this is a terribly controversial thing for me to be saying...? I do tend to overstate things so maybe it is just the way I come off, but I think that the idea itself is pretty common sense...

thermobollocks posted:

Yeeeep I've made round noses that a Glock can't feed and some it can fire exactly once and RNFPs that my M&P dislikes. Some guns just don't like some ammo. Some guns like more kinds of ammo than others, but it's always something to check on.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

thermobollocks
Jul 5, 2009

GET A DILLON

Kommienzuspadt posted:

I'm referring to factory ammunition from one of the Big Three manufacturers (Winchester, Remington, Speer/ATK)... Handloads are a whole nother story.

How many people have reported issues with WWB in their Glock/Sig/M&P/duty suitable guns? poo poo, Google "gold dot won't feed" and see what happens.

I wasn't underloading a thing -- that part would be easy. It was a feed issue related to the shape of the cartridge, which was within spec. Nothing exotic about it. If a gun should run every major hollowpoint, shouldn't it run a standard power round nose or RNFP?

Wanting even a duty gun to feed every major hollowpoint from every major manufacturer is a tall order, and no, your gun is not necessarily broken if there's a kind of ammunition that induces malfunctions. The ammunition may not even be broken either. As much as modern manufacturers can try to account for every possibility, maybe your poo poo just doesn't get along with someone else's.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply