9mm Sub Compacts
Thinking about a .380? What about a 9mm?
Paul Scarletta has a great article in the October/November issue of Handguns. In it he contrasts 2010 as being the year of the .380, with 2011 as being the year for the 9mm sub-contact.
Since citizen Concealed Carry has dug into the framework of most of the states, the demand, production, and sales of "pocket-able" handguns has boomed. This demand, along with advances in manufacturing technology, has increased the variety of what is available through our free market.
What's So Great About the 9mm?
As you probably know, the caliber-diameter of the 9mm is practically identical to the .380, .38, and .357. That size is considered by many to be the minimum size for a serious man-stopping round.
The 9mm has been around a long time. And a lot of guns have been, and are being, made in that caliber. Therefore, there are a wide varieties of formats for this cartridge. Its continued presence in the firearms industry shows that it is a popular round.
For that reason alone, ammo availability is strong with the 9. Not only can you find 9mm ammo practically everywhere, but you can find it in a huge selection of bullet configurations. The prices reflect the proliferation of this caliber. 9mm ammo is normally very affordable.
How Does It Compare?
Back in the 90s, I was trying decide between a Glock 27 in .40 or a Glock 26 in 9mm. I went with the Glock 27 because they were about the same size, and I felt the .40 would have a bit more punch. Similarly now, the same can be said when comparing some of the 9mm offerings with what you can find in the .380. For just a little more weight and size, you get substantially more power.
To jump up to a .40 from a 9 in a sub-compact, there is usually quite a difference in size and weight. But not so much when looking at 9 versus .380. So for about the same physical characteristics, you get quite a bit more whoop'um.
How Much More?
According to Scarletta's article, you get around 35 to 45 percent more foot-pounds of energy in the 9mm. Ed Sanow and Evan Marshall rate the best 9mm, in their book Stopping Power, at about 90% in one-shot stop capability. The .380 labors to make 80%.
If the little bit bigger size/weight is something you can deal with, the 9mm is more "gun". That could translate to better put-down-ability.
So What's the Score?
When you compare to the .380, the 9mm has:
A smidgin' more in weight
A tiny bit bigger in size
Better ammo availability
Wider range of type of ammo available
Cheaper ammo
Greater ballistic effect
Does that make it better for you? The trade-off will be a little bit better conceal-ability for the .380 versus better knock-down-ability for the 9mm. My feeling is..."If you can put up with the greater size and weight (which isn't much), the 9mm wins!"
Conversely, if you need it as small as possible, the .380 still beats out the 9mm.
More articles & videos on the 9mm
My last issue had some links in "Tidbits" that will take you to recent comparisons and evaluations of the new 9mm sub-compacts. If you're thinking of trying one out you may want to see what other knowledgeable (hopefully) folks have had to say on the subject.
Here's a re-hash of those links with a couple extra:
Guns Magazine takes a look at Kimber's Solo.
Speaking of 9mm micros, here's a comparison between the Ruger LC9 and Kel-Tec's PF9.
Gun Tests (one of my favorite publications) prefers the Kel-Tec PF9.
And a comparison between the LC9 and the Solo.
Summary
For me, knowing that I have a gun that'll make a 45 hundreths-of-an-inch hole, even if it doesn't expand, is reassuring. But there are times where that .45 caliber handgun just doesn't fit-in with my wardrobe. A sub-compact 9mm is well suited for me in those times.
As the old saying goes: The number one rule in a gunfight is "Have a gun".
- Don
No comments:
Post a Comment