TexasCHLforum.com

I was talking with a friend about what the next step up in power in a CCW would be for someone who wanted a round with more punch than the .38Spl but without the bark & bite of a .357Mag. We narrowed it down to the choices listed below, but we couldn’t agree on a preference…..

1. 9mm in a small, single-stack auto.

2. .44Spl in a K-frame-like snubby.

Between the two, which would you prefer? And, if you have an alternative that would fit our CCW “envelope� (K-frame-snub size & weight), feel free to name it. (personal bias warning: I kinda like revolvers, myself—but I can be swayed….)

Many thanks in advance……

If you get your CHL with a semi auto pistol you can carry either. I personally believe the slimmer the better in concealed carry.

Between those two, I'd go with the 9mm. The reason I say this is that anyone carrying needs to have good practice with their carry gun. 9mm is cheap and easy to find anywhere ammo is sold. .44spl seems to be much more expensive, and you're not always going to be able to find it. Also, you can carry more powerful loads in the 9mm (I carry +P 124gr GDHP) without a lot of noticeable difference in felt recoil... whereas you're going to feel every bit of difference in a revolver.

I was the first to vote for the .44, so I'll elaborate.

I have a Taurus 445 in .44 Special, which is very close to the size of a K-frame and certainly much more compact than S&W's 696 L-frame.

It fits easily into most of my pants and jeans pockets in a Mika holster.

My preference for big bore cartrdiges goes back 40 years. While I admit 9mm load development has improved considerably since then, it wasn't until this year that I finally broke down and bought a full size 9mm pistol, and that was only because I wanted a Hi-Power.

Seeker,

For a CCW, I say your CCW should be what you are good with. If you shoot very good with a 9mm carry a 9mm. If you are good with a 44 carry that. More things to think about is cover. Bigger gun needs more cover. The more cover you have on the funner you look. My CCW is a High Standard 1911 (45) and or a Glock 23 in 40cal.


Calvin

I'll also throw in that the 1911 is something to consider. I've only shot 2 types of .45 pistols - a S&W Model 457, and 2 different 1911s. The difference was huge - the S&W had quite a bit of kick and took work to get a sight picture reset, and the 1911s were very easy to shoot. I carry a Hi-Power and find the handling and recoil of the 1911 to be very similar, despite the difference in caliber. They are also quite slim and easy to conceal.

I would suggest trying one out if you have the opportunity.

My daytime carry in the fall is a Kel-tec FP-9mm in a pocket of my Ranger Vest. I will also carry a Glock 19, depending on where I'm going.

If I go to the border, Dallas or Houston, I'll put the Glock in an ankle holster and carry a 1911.

Such is the life of the Realist in this day and time cause he know that bad things happen to good people when they least expect it.

Jungle Work

I carry a full size Kimber 45 (1 of the 1911s NcongruNt shot) and have no insumountable problems carrying it. If I felt a need for a smaller gun I would probably go to a Commander size 1911. I used to own a pair of Detonics CombatMasters and wish I still did.

I am curious about the small frame revos like the smith 642 and plan to investigate them.

9mm or any other caliber that is redily available. .44 Special isn't a caliber you'll find a most WalMarts. A gun without ammo is just an expensive paperweight.

Mojo wrote:9mm or any other caliber that is redily available. .44 Special isn't a caliber you'll find a most WalMarts. A gun without ammo is just an expensive paperweight.

I've heard ammo availability used as an issue in hunting situations and it has some validity there. After all, hunters sometimes forget their ammo and have to run to town to buy some.

I cannot visualize a self defense situation where you've got time to run into the local Wal-Mart to buy more ammo. BTW, I'm pretty sure my local Wal-Mart carries .44 S&W Spcl.

Anyone making the decision to carry a less common caliber has already dealt with ammunition availability. He's probably a reloader for practice ammo and has a stash of self-defense ammo. I just don't see ammo availability as any issue at all.

seeker_two wrote: ......
Between the two, which would you prefer? And, if you have an alternative that would fit our CCW “envelope� (K-frame-snub size & weight), feel free to name it. (personal bias warning: I kinda like revolvers, myself—but I can be swayed….)

Many thanks in advance……

I'd prefer the 9mm semi-auto because it's flatter and more comfortable for me to conceal.

nuparadigm wrote:I'd prefer the 9mm semi-auto because it's flatter and more comfortable for me to conceal.

I have a Kahr PM9 and the Taurus 445. I carry both in Mika pocket holsters.

There is no practical difference in carrying them.

If I was forced to choose I would say 9mm.
I have a 9mm and love it for range shooting.

My over all preference for carry is a .45, I have a compact 1911 and a full size. In a self defense situation I'm all about the knock down power and stopping the threat.

The 9mm is a great round but it does not have the same knock down power as the .45.
I my eyes 7 rounds of .45 beats 15 rounds of 9mm.

My backup gun is a Taurus 2", 5 shot 44mag loaded with 165gr Corbon 44spl. It sometimes becomes primary carry under certain situations. I think the 44spl is fine for a carry caliber.

I didn't vote primarily because of the single stack on the 9mm. I currently carry a hipower 9mm because I find Ishoot it more accurately than any other gun I have tried except for my 45 high point, which is way to big to carry. However my car gun is a Rossi 44 special which I shoot almost as well my hi power. Both guns have corbon DPX in them. I like both guns a lot. Carry what you can shoot well.