Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
3/20/2017 5:03:23 PM
Posted: 3/23/2001 5:00:27 AM EDT
After reading some of the theads over the last couple days, such as 40 vs 45, and glock vs sig vs HK, I have been very confused by some recurring thoughts. Most people are saying the 45 is the only round a real man would shoot, and the 40 and 9 are just comprimises for pussys who can't handle the 45. Then you have people saying the HK is nice but the damn grip is just too big for me. I can see if your talking about too big for concealed carry, but not just for plinking and home protection. I'm only 5'6", 140 lbs and the full size USP isn't even too big for me. So WTF are some of you guys talking about? Are you saying that you are a hardcore MF'er because you have a 45, but your too big of a pussy to shoot the USP? I just don't see the logic involed in arriving at that decision. Explain it for me. Rant off. Anti-flame suit on.
Link Posted: 3/23/2001 5:46:49 AM EDT
I have 3 HK`s and the grip is not 2 big. I even went as far as to put the houge handall on them, still not too big. I dont have big hands either. 2 45`s and a 9mm.
Link Posted: 3/23/2001 6:39:04 AM EDT
I tried several USP's in a shop a couple years back. The grips weren't too big. 9mm, .40, well, maybe the .45 was a little awkward. I remember thinking the ammo was a bit longer & consequently the need for a bigger hand. Is it my memory, or is the .45 acutally bigger around the grip? My impression was that the .45 would have been preferable if all things were the same, but they weren't. The .40 seems to have good enough energy. I would definitely rather have a 9mm than nothing in a knife fight..... Don't get it - all these PD's going to 9mm after high-profile shoot-outs. Why not .40 or .45? I hear some wanted DA only for liability, etc., but it seems odd that if the six-shooter just won't cut it in your mind, why not pick a more effective caliber? While I'm mouthing off, it just seems that coupling auto-loading with DA only is a bit oxymoronic.
Link Posted: 3/23/2001 6:48:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/23/2001 7:00:21 AM EDT by gardenWeasel]
Originally Posted By HKer: I can see if your talking about too big for concealed carry
View Quote
Yeah well I carry a Mark 23 in an ankle holster hidden by my big baggy ass gangsta jeans!
Are you saying that you are a hardcore MF'er
View Quote
[:D]
Link Posted: 3/23/2001 6:04:46 AM EDT
I'm 5'6" and have pretty small hands. I can't hold the Glock or HK .45's and pull the trigger due to the size of the grip. Really wish I could. So I bought a 1911 to shoot the .45 round, feels great. For me its not about recoil its about being able to pull the trigger while holding the gun correctly. Don't have a problem with Glock and HK 9mm/.40/.357sig models. Can't touch the safety on a Beretta 92 with my thumb without shifting my grip. sucks to be me :)
Link Posted: 3/23/2001 6:23:52 AM EDT
I'm 6"1, but only 150 lbs, I have skinny arms and small hands. Smaller than my Dad's who's the same height, but heavier(not saying how much, he might read this.) [:D] My USP is not too big, it is a USP9F, but I have held the .45 frame, and I would be fine shooting it, it barely bigger. I was wonder just the same thing today, so I pulled out my Taurus PT92, and my HK, and drew and pointed them. Held them at arms length, saw how the grips felt. They were different, but the USP grip didn't feel or look and bigger. The USP is a bit more boxy than the 92, but that just makes it slimmer, which is good considering how wide the 92 is. Sure the grip is bigger than that of my Kimber, but I still don't see why people say that it is too big...I'm sure it is actually too big for some people, but in that case, many guns will be. I am on of the biggest HK proponents there are, and I think what some of these people might mean is not "bigger" but different shaped, which it is. I've held a Sig 220, and it felt too big, but I looked at my grip and realized that I had enough wraparound, it just placed and filled my hand differently. Don't get me wrong, if you can't hold it right in YOUR hand, it's not the gun for you, but but considering the guns people pick instead of a "too big" USP, such as Sig 220's, and Beretta 92F's, I think it just felt weird in some people's hands. Give one a chance, go to a range and give one a try.
Link Posted: 3/23/2001 6:30:05 AM EDT
Personally I was one of the people who bought the USP 45 Full Size because of the fact that it was the biggest of the entire line. I'm 6ft4in and my hands ingulf most handgun grips. The USP grip is very filling but I find one problem with the USP, the back web area of the hand is not allowed to ride up high enough so that the barrel centerline is lower in the hand. To me the gun seemed to sit too high out the top of the hand, with the 45USP I literally had to "find" the sights as where with my ParaOrdinance P14 Limited the gun just naturally points for me and the sights seem to magically always be right there for me. I sold off my HK USP because I was not as fast with it nor as accurate with it as I am with my ParaOrdinance P14. Both guns are very big with good sized grips, most everyone who had the opportunity to shoot both guns side by side would agree that they liked the ParaOrd more. I loved the HK for it's amazing ruggedness and simple user friendly features, I just wasn't very good with it. Would have liked to have gotten an HK MK23 but didn't have the cash to do it, not only that but because of the threaded barrel Ca. now considers them to be assault weapons! If I had a MK23 you can bet I'd never sell it, I know it's massive as I've held the things on numerous occasions.
Top Top