View Full Version : Big Guns vs Small Guns
Tacti-square
07-22-13, 15:08
Just read a new review of the FNX-45 Tactical with an accompanying video. As cool as all the versatility is, especially the optic rail, I couldn't help but once again notice how bulky it is. I can only assume it's quite hefty, even without 15 rounds of .45 ACP.
Frankly I like the ergonomic qualities of smaller guns more, like the HK45 Compact Tactical. What bothers me about that option is the loss of magazine capacity and barrel length. 3.9" vs 5.3" is a pretty big gap, in my opinion. Will it actually significantly affect performance? Does anyone feel like an extra 5 rounds at a time would be a game changer?
So I guess my question is as follows: is a smaller and more ergonomic design worth the sacrifices associated with it? Does it really just come down to training and platform familiarity, or is there a clear winner in terms of overall performance (carrying purposes aside)?
FNX-45 Tactical
-Accepts red dots
-Capacity
-Barrel Length
HK45 Compact Tactical
-Much less bulky
-Lighter
-Slimmer grip profile
Thanks for your time
The FNX 45 is made with MEN in mind.
The HK goes after the metros/hipsters/women, etc.
You just have to decide where you fall. I don't do small guns at all. My compact pistol is a G22, my regular pistol is the FNX 45. :D
WickedWillis
07-22-13, 15:29
Good lord Mark hahaha.
The FNX 45 is made with MEN in mind.
The HK goes after the metros/hipsters/women, etc.
You just have to decide where you fall. I don't do small guns at all. My compact pistol is a G22, my regular pistol is the FNX 45. :D
I've tried everything from full sized to micro pistols and I can say on the whole I despise the "sub compact" or "compact" idea for the most part.
now I will also add the Glock sub compact guns are the best of the breed i.e. the 26,27,33 and I actually LIKED my 33 while I had it.
Then there's the new Beretta compact 92/M9A1-not really anything compact about it;the one I got to molest at Gander Mountain was wonderful but to me is just another type of full size handgun.
If I have a pistol it's ether a full size or I'll just get a micro,actually looking at a Walther PPK or a Sig P232 to go with my M9
And I had an FNX 45 sometime ago,really not that bad just two things kill it:
The slide,I had a Glock 21 for a long time and the same issue it had the FN did the slide is flippin' humongous! the old .45's weren't that big so come'on people! you can make a new type 45 without the lead bar sized slide.
The second thing is the mag capacity,yes it holds fifteen rounds of god's own .45 cal but Jesus man do you know how heavy that is??? even a ten round mag of 45 can be akin to trying stick a crowbar in you pants if you're trying hide a spare.
Otherwise unloaded it's not much different then any poly 9MM just for the huge slide,cram a loaded mag in and things go out the window a tad.
The FNX 45 is made with MEN in mind.
The HK goes after the metros/hipsters/women, etc.
You just have to decide where you fall. I don't do small guns at all. My compact pistol is a G22, my regular pistol is the FNX 45. :D
:lol:
Tacti-square
07-22-13, 18:58
So on the whole, do you folks think that 5.3 inches of barrel length is significantly more capable than 3.9 inches? Or is it even relevant?
So on the whole, do you folks think that 5.3 inches of barrel length is significantly more capable than 3.9 inches? Or is it even relevant?
I think sight radius means more for example I can shoot my M9 out to about 150 yards easy enough and accurate enough to make a bad guy nervous about standing in the open.
Same range with the SP2022 I had and it was harder and that gun had a 3.9 barrel with a sight radius to match.
Ballistics wise? go ask someone who knows,to me the 9MM works fine with ether a 3.9 or 4.9 barrel.
Last thing I observed is that to a point barrel length don't matter until about six inches,then it gets funny to stick down your pants while grip length means more those new really high capacity pistols (the XDm,CZ P9 et cetera) have loooong grips and my M9 is almost too long tucked under my shirt.
I've picked up an XDm and it was like it was made for someone with six fingers.....
I suspect the new longer grips would look like a growth out my side....hey it's my unborn twin,so shaddup! :jester:
Well, the HK45 and HK45C are well pedigreed and designed. The Compact is in use by Navy SEALS, etc. LAV and Hackathorn were very involved in the design process.
The FNX?
Well, who knows.
1_click_off
07-22-13, 19:30
All data I have seen shows a linear relation to about 50fps per 2" of barrel for rifles. Can't find anything on pistols.
Dang! I need to change my screen name to "Hipster"? Can one of the mod's help me out with that?:cray:
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-22-13, 19:56
LOL. Then HK designed the manliest .45 of all time--the SOCOM. I had one of those and I wasn't man enough!
Five_Point_Five_Six
07-22-13, 21:20
I like a fist full of gun. If I thought I was going to be attacked by a hoard of male actors from the Bravo channel I would carry a small, probably Lilac in color, Ruger LCP or some other gay crap.
Reloading in a gun fight sucks. With that being said, unless you are in law enforcement, military or some kind of contractor or security the likely hood of needing more then 8 rounds in a gun fight is pretty low.
The FN is an extremely large pistol to conceal, I think it is one of the only guns that is fatter then the glock. They are pretty accurate and so far have held up quite well.
On the other hand, the HK is an overbuilt pistol made to work in rough territories. It will also conceal a lot better then the FN and can accept the 10 round mags if you want a little more capacity (maybe for your extra mag).
Between the two I would personally go for the HK, especially if it is going to be a concealment gun.
Just read a new review of the FNX-45 Tactical with an accompanying video. As cool as all the versatility is, especially the optic rail, I couldn't help but once again notice how bulky it is. I can only assume it's quite hefty, even without 15 rounds of .45 ACP.
Frankly I like the ergonomic qualities of smaller guns more, like the HK45 Compact Tactical. What bothers me about that option is the loss of magazine capacity and barrel length. 3.9" vs 5.3" is a pretty big gap, in my opinion. Will it actually significantly affect performance? Does anyone feel like an extra 5 rounds at a time would be a game changer?
So I guess my question is as follows: is a smaller and more ergonomic design worth the sacrifices associated with it? Does it really just come down to training and platform familiarity, or is there a clear winner in terms of overall performance (carrying purposes aside)?
FNX-45 Tactical
-Accepts red dots
-Capacity
-Barrel Length
HK45 Compact Tactical
-Much less bulky
-Lighter
-Slimmer grip profile
Thanks for your time
The FNX 45 is made with MEN in mind.
The HK goes after the metros/hipsters/women, etc.
:D
You just offended millions of "Metal of Honor warfighter" players around the world. Not to mention all the IDPA Sharpshooter and marksman who show up at matches with matching HK range bags , hats and shirts, ready to kick ass.:D
The FNX 45 is made with MEN in mind.
The HK goes after the metros/hipsters/women, etc.
You just have to decide where you fall. I don't do small guns at all. My compact pistol is a G22, my regular pistol is the FNX 45. :D
Geez, you probably drive an F350 with a 6" lift too, don't you?:rolleyes:
(sarcasm intended)
In the interest of keeping on track, I prefer compacts (not sub). Easier to CCW should you need to, and lets face it, most of us won't need the extra range another 1-1.5 inches of barrel will give. The extra rounds could be handy, but a lot of compacts hold 10-15 rounds anyway - provided your local legal system isn't getting involved. So to me, a full size gun is nice only if you can carry it non-concealed, or if you truly need to have 15+ rounds between reloads. Assuming, of course, the ergonomics fit your hand.
Apricotshot
07-23-13, 07:38
[QUOTE=rathos;1703440]Reloading in a gun fight sucks. With that being said, unless you are in law enforcement, military or some kind of contractor or security the likely hood of needing more then 8 rounds in a gun fight is pretty low.
The FN is an extremely large pistol to conceal, I think it is one of the only guns that is fatter then the glock. They are pretty accurate and so far have held up quite well.
[QUOTE]
I hate when people say that as it shows a lack of forethought. How do you know that you'll only need 8? The scenarios are endless as to circumstances where you may need more than what is in the gun regardless of pistol type.
The FNX 45 is made with MEN in mind.
The HK goes after the metros/hipsters/women, etc.
You just have to decide where you fall. I don't do small guns at all. My compact pistol is a G22, my regular pistol is the FNX 45. :D
Some would also say people who carry large guns are compensating for something :secret:
You need to carry this:
http://mfiap.com/files/catalog/socom-mk23-pistol-2-med.jpg
Just read a new review of the FNX-45 Tactical with an accompanying video. As cool as all the versatility is, especially the optic rail, I couldn't help but once again notice how bulky it is. I can only assume it's quite hefty, even without 15 rounds of .45 ACP.
Frankly I like the ergonomic qualities of smaller guns more, like the HK45 Compact Tactical. What bothers me about that option is the loss of magazine capacity and barrel length. 3.9" vs 5.3" is a pretty big gap, in my opinion. Will it actually significantly affect performance? Does anyone feel like an extra 5 rounds at a time would be a game changer?
So I guess my question is as follows: is a smaller and more ergonomic design worth the sacrifices associated with it? Does it really just come down to training and platform familiarity, or is there a clear winner in terms of overall performance (carrying purposes aside)?
FNX-45 Tactical
-Accepts red dots
-Capacity
-Barrel Length
HK45 Compact Tactical
-Much less bulky
-Lighter
-Slimmer grip profile
Thanks for your time
I'm not sure how anyone can actually answer that for you. Plenty of BTDT shooters carry compacts. There's legit pros/cons to each, which is why most will have more than one option depending on their recs at the time. If you're unsure, I suspect a quality compact would be your best choice as you're probably more likely to have it, and one fact remains a constant: the .22 you have on you is by default better than the .44Mag you left at home.*
I'm not a professional in this arena, but if you'll actually carry it, more rnds, longer site radius, etc is generally a good thing all things being equal. ;)
Me, I'm of the "guns are not meant to be comfortable but comforting" school of thought and CCW'd a Government 1911 for a decade plus and the only polymer wonder pistol that finally changed that was a FS M&P 9mm.
* = to make the point, I'm not recommending the .22 as a good SD/CCW choice.
Swamp Yankee
07-23-13, 08:19
I like big guns and I can not lie.
I was carrying a H&K P2000SK 9mm for a while, but lately I find myself carrying my P30LS. It conceals well if you do part. The size, sight radius, and capacity give me a much more comforting feeling without sacrificing much in terms of comfort.
I plan on buying an HK45 in the near future (IE: When I am not broke as a joke)
Do the extra rounds make a difference? Hmmm... A friend of mine related a story to me about a story soon after he got the option of carrying a 1911 in service. While clearing a structure, his rifle ran dry, he made a quick transition to pistol, and emptied it into an insurgent who came into the room. He was left with an empty rifle, an empty pistol, and a still (albeit barely) moving bad guy who still had a hand on the grip of his AK. He went back to carrying his M9 shortly thereafter.
That's obviously not a civilian story, but it's an example of one bad guy eating a surprising amount of rounds, which can happen anywhere in the world.
Statistically, these types of situations are extremely rare. Extra rounds CAN make a difference, but they probably won't ever be necessary. Being a family man, I don't screw around with it. I like more rounds. Then again, I'm happy with 9 or .40.
Geez, you probably drive an F350 with a 6" lift too, don't you?:rolleyes:
Lord NO! I can't afford that gas. :eek:
And I HATE Mullet trucks.
Just read a new review of the FNX-45 Tactical with an accompanying video. As cool as all the versatility is, especially the optic rail, I couldn't help but once again notice how bulky it is. I can only assume it's quite hefty, even without 15 rounds of .45 ACP.
Frankly I like the ergonomic qualities of smaller guns more, like the HK45 Compact Tactical. What bothers me about that option is the loss of magazine capacity and barrel length. 3.9" vs 5.3" is a pretty big gap, in my opinion. Will it actually significantly affect performance? Does anyone feel like an extra 5 rounds at a time would be a game changer?
So I guess my question is as follows: is a smaller and more ergonomic design worth the sacrifices associated with it? Does it really just come down to training and platform familiarity, or is there a clear winner in terms of overall performance (carrying purposes aside)?
FNX-45 Tactical
-Accepts red dots
-Capacity
-Barrel Length
HK45 Compact Tactical
-Much less bulky
-Lighter
-Slimmer grip profile
Thanks for your time
Generally the golden rule is that you carry the biggest gun you can successfully hide.
With that said, it is also important that one is comfortable with the gun they are using. Meaning that if you feel that you cannot properly conceal the gun you are carrying, you are going to fidget with it none stop. This will eventually lead to you not carrying it at all or only when you can wear heavy clothing.
Most CCW encounters happen within 10ft with 1-2 rounds fired. So you could say that a S&W Shield or an HK 45C would be a perfect choice then (and you would probably be right).
For me, I want a gun that has at least 15rds in it and is a gun that I take to training classes. If the gun is too small to take to a 3 day pistol class, then you might want to rethink it as a carry option.
So to answer your question OP, I would stick with the gun that you like and enjoy carrying the MOST and then apply other rules (like capacity) second.
C4
Generally the golden rule is that you carry the biggest gun you can successfully hide.
With that said, it is also important that one is comfortable with the gun they are using. Meaning that if you feel that you cannot properly conceal the gun you are carrying, you are going to fidget with it none stop. This will eventually lead to you not carrying it at all or only when you can wear heavy clothing.
Most CCW encounters happen within 10ft with 1-2 rounds fired. So you could say that a S&W Shield or an HK 45C would be a perfect choice then (and you would probably be right).
For me, I want a gun that has at least 15rds in it and is a gun that I take to training classes. If the gun is too small to take to a 3 day pistol class, then you might want to rethink it as a carry option.s
So to answer your question OP, I would stick with the gun that you like and enjoy carrying the MOST and then apply other rules (like capacity) second.
C4
Good advice.
Generally the golden rule is that you carry the biggest gun you can successfully hide.
C4
If we had to break down this thread into one sentence this would be it. right now I'm carrying an M&P fullsize because I found the compact a bit small. I'm considering transitioning back to a G19 for no other reason than its the perfect damn size.
WickedWillis
07-23-13, 10:40
HEY! The HK wasn't in warfighter.... Oh wait. All joking aside, I have had really good experiences with H&K. I just find it hard to justify the price tag on most of them. The FN though, was way to damn big for my baby dick hands.
You just offended millions of "Metal of Honor warfighter" players around the world. Not to mention all the IDPA Sharpshooter and marksman who show up at matches with matching HK range bags , hats and shirts, ready to kick ass.:D
WickedWillis
07-23-13, 10:44
I carry a 19 IWB, or OWB depending on how I feel 99% of the time. I just bought a Shield in 9 though for running around in my shorts and T-shirts (and tactical flip-flops) where I feel the 19 is a tad too big. It's also easier to grab the Shield and toss it in my pocket for a late night Mountain dew run.
If we had to break down this thread into one sentence this would be it. right now I'm carrying an M&P fullsize because I found the compact a bit small. I'm considering transitioning back to a G19 for no other reason than its the perfect damn size.
HEY! The HK wasn't in warfighter.... Oh wait. All joking aside, I have had really good experiences with H&K. I just find it hard to justify the price tag on most of them. The FN though, was way to damn big for my baby dick hands.
I've had good experiences with them too, WickedWillis.
Overall, I think they are great guns.
I try to carry my big azz .45s (Glock 21 and HK45) from time to time but I always end up coming back to a Glock 19 or HK45c. I guess i'm not hard core enough for the big full size guns.:)
I like big guns and I can not lie.
All you subcompact guys can't deny ....
That when a girl walks in with an itty bitty waist
And a HK thing in your face
You get sprung, wanna pull out your tough
'Cause you notice that FN45 was stuffed
Deep in the jeans she's wearing
I'm hooked and I can't stop staring
Oh baby, I wanna get with you
And take your picture
My homeboys tried to warn me
But that G21 you got makes me so horny
Ooh, Rump-o'-smooth-skin
You say you wanna get in my Benz?
Well, use me, use me
'Cause you ain't that average groupie
Ok, I'll quit now....
If we had to break down this thread into one sentence this would be it. right now I'm carrying an M&P fullsize because I found the compact a bit small. I'm considering transitioning back to a G19 for no other reason than its the perfect damn size.
The G19 and the HK P30 are probably the two best pistols when you compare size, weight and capacity.
My normal everyday pistol is a GEN 2 G19.
C4
Coal Dragger
07-23-13, 16:34
I've never tried to conceal either the HK45, HK45c, or the FN 45 but I have concealed an HK USP45. It wasn't too bad, but for everyday carry would be a bit on the large side for keeping under cover and being comfortable.
I'd like to get another HK, probably an HK45 or HK45c for a carry gun and house gun. I handled an FN and it was just not to my liking. The grip was roughly the same size and shape as a brick, which reminded me of the USP45 and not in a good way.
I also really like the HK P30's that I have had a chance to handle, and might have to get one of those too.
The FNX 45 is made with MEN in mind.
The HK goes after the metros/hipsters/women, etc.
You just have to decide where you fall. I don't do small guns at all. My compact pistol is a G22, my regular pistol is the FNX 45. :D
Markus just likes to send off the atom bomb to stir the pot. But he does love his FN. As do I, but I won't be concealing it nowhere but my brief case :D.
I love big handguns to shoot and for home defense. I prefer smaller guns to stash by the boiler. The only time I feel under gunned is with my Smith 340 wheel gun, but at that point it's that or nada. So it's that.
The HK45C is a fine CCW, which is what I been rockin the last few weeks however the G19 or M&P9/40 are hard to beat. I believe in Grants 10ft 2 rounds, so even my Shield gives me much comfort. Cause I can shoot that little bitch. Lotta very fine guns to carry.
On the range, I want that big nice FN /HK45 /P30long/ 1911. I have CCW a 1911, not my cup of tea and I do love them.
I am enjoying this thread, it's about time one of the mods lock it down :no:
So on the whole, do you folks think that 5.3 inches of barrel length is significantly more capable than 3.9 inches? Or is it even relevant?
Sight radius is important, more so when more precision is required or at longer distances.
The G19 and the HK P30 are probably the two best pistols when you compare size, weight and capacity.
C4
Goddamnit S&W! Make the .45 Compact in 9mm!
I carry a glock 19 daily and I don't feel like I'm really giving up much if anything to a bigger gun. Bigger guns are great but they are always harder to conceal no matter the circumstances. When you have a gun on your hip for 12+ hours a day smaller is better in my book, within reason. Carrying a j frame is easier than a g19 but capabilities are night and day. I think everyone needs to find that balance between size, weight, and capability that fits them. For me 90% of the time I carry a g19, the other 10% is a g26, I don't feel underarmed with either. In the end the Indian is more important than the arrow, and having a smaller gun is better than having nothing.
I am enjoying this thread, it's about time one of the mods lock it down :no:
That's RIGHT! LOCK THIS SHIT YESTERDAY.
USE THE SEARCH BUTTON! :mad:
Swamp Yankee
07-25-13, 12:10
Generally the golden rule is that you carry the biggest gun you can successfully hide.
With that said, it is also important that one is comfortable with the gun they are using. Meaning that if you feel that you cannot properly conceal the gun you are carrying, you are going to fidget with it none stop. This will eventually lead to you not carrying it at all or only when you can wear heavy clothing.
Most CCW encounters happen within 10ft with 1-2 rounds fired. So you could say that a S&W Shield or an HK 45C would be a perfect choice then (and you would probably be right).
For me, I want a gun that has at least 15rds in it and is a gun that I take to training classes. If the gun is too small to take to a 3 day pistol class, then you might want to rethink it as a carry option.
So to answer your question OP, I would stick with the gun that you like and enjoy carrying the MOST and then apply other rules (like capacity) second.
C4
Grant,
I agree with this post completely. However, what if magazine capacity was restricted? Say 10 rounds. Would you go down in pistol size to maintain a size efficient 9mm or would you carry a lower capacity magazine in the same mid size 9mm (IE:P30/Glock 19/M&P 9)? Orrr, would you up your caliber to a 45 that is still easily carried (IE:M&P 45 Mid/HK45C/Glock 30)
Grant,
I agree with this post completely. However, what if magazine capacity was restricted? Say 10 rounds. Would you go down in pistol size to maintain a size efficient 9mm or would you carry a lower capacity magazine in the same mid size 9mm (IE:P30/Glock 19/M&P 9)? Orrr, would you up your caliber to a 45 that is still easily carried (IE:M&P 45 Mid/HK45C/Glock 30)
If I am in a ban state, I would first try and see if I could locate some Pre-ban mags for a 9mm. If that was a no go, then I would probably still carry a 9mm as it allows me to practice more for less money, softer recoil/faster follow up shots, etc.
Then, if I left that State (moving, training, etc), I can easily purchase hi-cap mags.
C4
RagweedZulu
07-25-13, 12:58
I love some big guns and wish I was in a climate that allowed heavier cover garments. My favorite under-the-jacket pistol is the G21. For me it's just perfect in the firepower/soft recoil/accuracy/reliability departments.
In hot weather I like my G30 for most of the same reasons. Bulky yes, but laser accurate and not too tough to carry under shorts and a T-shirt.
My newly discovered buddy is an XDs in .45. Now there's a tiny, slim package great for hot weather.
When it comes to capacity, Jim Cirillo did just fine with a J Frame. What capacity gives you though is more options. I feel I have greater tactical flexibility with a full cap, full size gun. That said, the only thing I can't do as fast with my G-19 as my G-17 is reloads (hand size), yet it conceals much better.
I like big guns and I can not lie.
Great. I got that tune stuck in my head now. :mad:
With the holster options these days, there is no reason NOT to carry a full size pistol IMO. I carried a Sig P229 all day every day for 5 years (citizen, concealed carry), and now carry a PPQ first gen with TLR-1s.
With a good holster, a full size pistol conceals perfectly well, and you have the added benefit of a longer barrel, more rounds, and a full size grip.
For me, I just asked myself, "If I ended up in a gunfight today, which pistol would I want to have? My full size or my subcompact?" I would choose fullsize in a gunfight any day of the week.
I've gone to the best of both worlds--a G17 cut to take G19 mags.
Okie John
I think it all comes down to what people are comfortable with. If someone can carry a full-sized pistol with large magazine capacity and they are not tempted to go unarmed, then by all means they should carry a big gun. Some folks, like myself, would feel uncomfortable carrying a big pistol all day, so I tend toward pocket pistols. Another consideration is how dangerous your environment is. If I lived or worked in a high crime area, I might want to trade some of my comfort and convenience for a bit more combat effectiveness. As my favorite Renaissance writer Machiavelli once wrote:
Before all else, be armed.
Old Nicky knew a thing or two!
With the holster options these days, there is no reason NOT to carry a full size pistol IMO. I carried a Sig P229 all day every day for 5 years (citizen, concealed carry), and now carry a PPQ first gen with TLR-1s.
With a good holster, a full size pistol conceals perfectly well, and you have the added benefit of a longer barrel, more rounds, and a full size grip.
If it works for you, that's great. But it doesn't work for all of us, good holster or not.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.