Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 11/20/2008 11:17:56 AM EDT
You would think there would be more types available considering how perfect they seem to be for urban defense.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 11:36:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zan:
You would think there would be more types available considering how perfect they seem to be for urban defense.


9mm is far from perfect for anything, much less defense, regardless of what you shoot it out of IMO.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 11:39:52 AM EDT
because its a shitty round. too f'n small for a rifle.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 12:46:46 PM EDT
It's cause the .223 round in itself is such a good round for CQB.

But I agree with you 100%, the 9mm is a great round for 100 yards and less.


Link Posted: 11/20/2008 12:48:31 PM EDT
.223 is more versatile.  That's why I cannot understand 9mm rifles being as common as they are.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 12:59:05 PM EDT
Just a range toy unless it has a happy switch. The same rifle in 5.56 is infinitely superior.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 1:47:28 PM EDT
You mean like: Uzi, MP5, PC9, Kel-Tec, Marlin, Hi-Standard, Beretta Storm, or 9mmP ARs?

I personally have a semi-auto Uzi. It's primarily a range toy that I use at matches that don't allow rifle (5.56) cartridges. It's also a great trainer as a 9mmP weapon that weighs 8+ pounds has very low recoil and even less muzzle blast. The other advantage for training is cost: 9mmP is about 1/2 the price or less than 5.56 NATO.

All that said, 9mmP, like any handgun cartridge, sucks. You don't have the energy of a rifle round nor the ability to get hits much past 200 yards. Less recoil is nice but ARs and AKs don't suffer that much in that department. Except for a few very specialized applications, assault rifles have killed subguns worldwide. Even for cop use, light 5.56 bullets are less dangerous than 9mm as they have less penetration and fragment faster.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 1:51:25 PM EDT
So you want something as heavy and bulky as a rifle, but with the power of a pistol.

[>:/]
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 1:52:11 PM EDT
9mm Rifle = Oxymoron
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 4:47:04 PM EDT
Range toy or not, I love my Colt 6450.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 5:45:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/20/2008 5:48:29 PM EDT by Zan]
For the elderly, young people, folks with arthritis, or anyone of small stature, I would think a 9mm carbine to be a good choice. You get adequate range, ease of use, and affordable ammo. Nonetheless, I don't consider myself knowledgeable enough about firearms to argue these points. While I own and shoot guns, there are folks here that live, eat, and breath firearms, so I suppose there must be better choices available or more people would be asking this same question.

I guess it boils down to the fact that I'm somewhat enamored with the Marlin 9mm camp carbine (due to the reasons I gave plus it's non threatening appearance), but can't bring myself to pay the going rate (400+). It's unfortunate that Marlin stopped producing them. I wonder if there was dwindling interest in the firearm itself or maybe it just wasn't "tactical" enough to compete against meaner looking rifles.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 5:47:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By twistedcomrade:
Range toy or not, I love my Colt 6450.



+1!!  I love my Colt 6450 as well!  I think it is a great gun and very good for home defense IMO.  It is small, light and almost no recoil.  It is for my wife if SHTF.  Also the Uzi is a great weapon too!
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 6:30:42 PM EDT
Because we can't import Uzis and MP5s.  The only good thing about 9mm is how cheap they are to shoot.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 6:32:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zan:
You would think there would be more types available considering how perfect they seem to be for urban defense.


Most 9mm subguns are open bolt...

The Colt SMG and HK MP5 are exceptions (closed bolt by default), making them easier to make semi-auto....
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 7:05:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/20/2008 7:11:48 PM EDT by Lympago]
While certainly not perfect, a good 9mm carbine is still useful taking into account it's range.
With good hollowpoint even more and a CX4's is about 125 yards while being an excellent house gun besides having much better ergo's than alot of rifles out there for me.
It's short length and handling make it very manueverable indoors too. Much better than a 16 inch barreled AR, which my last one was a POF with Predator rail.

It's definitely not a rifle caliber and I wouldn't grab it for a situation that could need it, but it's still a good tool.
My CX4 runs the same mags as my 92FS and M9 and that makes it very convenient since extra mag pouches slide easily on any standard belt with my pistol in a holster on my strongside.
It is my house carbine and I don't need a 5.56 to do the same job which is one reason why I sold the POF. I haven't shot with anybody that couldn't shoot it well and that says alot of it being a good rifle for family.
I would rather grab an M1A for anything where rifle firepower is called for anyways and put 7.62x51mm into someone regardless.




Why they don't make more of them is a mistake when having a carbine and pistol that use the same mags is very handy.
I thought Microtech was coming out with an AUG that runs Glock 17 mags but I haven't heard too much about it.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 7:10:20 PM EDT
answer to the 9mm rifle question, buy an  m1 carbine and be done with it, its got 20 and 30rnd mags , light weight, light recoil and better ballistic performance compared to a 9mm
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 7:20:11 PM EDT
A good 9mm HP hitting you at 1400FPS is going to ruin your day just as well as a .40 or a .45 and you have far more range and control then you'd have with a handgun at a longer distance if needed.

No it's not a rifle caliber nor is it intended to be, however, to say it's not effective is foolish, 32 rounds thru a fast reloading handy long gun will kick ass in most situations.

The fact that one can train for less then 1/2 the cost also kicks ass if one actually USES their AR more then a few hundred rounds a year.

Link Posted: 11/20/2008 8:37:19 PM EDT
If you willing to use 9mm in a handgun you shouldn't have any problem using it in a rifle.  If you SBR a 9mm AR, an Uzi, or an HK/clone and you will have a efficient close range weapon.  Your probably going to be more accurate than you would be with a pistol, more intimidating, and probably have more rounds in the mag.  We can bitch all day long if the 9mm is a good round for self defense, as usual its all about bullet placement.  Hell, if having an 9mm gets you out to the range to practice more, it might be worth it right there.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 9:37:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/20/2008 9:39:11 PM EDT by Lympago]
The CX4's sure are accurate. There's basically no recoil either so followups are really fast.
It's an effective tool, but like anything on ARF, there are people who don't like them and there are people who do.
I know for me, if it was a situation of clearing a home or building, I'd take a CX4 over an AR no problem, but the AR is a highly overrated rifle to me as are the ergo's.
Link Posted: 11/20/2008 10:30:00 PM EDT
Meh?  I enjoy them quite a bit.  I'm about to use the HK94clone in a zombie-scenario 3-gun match.  I'll save ~$60 in ammo in one day.

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/4523/photos233ub0.jpg
http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/1765/img3494gh8.jpg
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 1:48:17 AM EDT
Originally Posted By fxntime:
A good 9mm HP hitting you at 1400FPS is going to ruin your day just as well as a .40 or a .45 and you have far more range and control then you'd have with a handgun at a longer distance if needed.

No it's not a rifle caliber nor is it intended to be, however, to say it's not effective is foolish, 32 rounds thru a fast reloading handy long gun will kick ass in most situations.

The fact that one can train for less then 1/2 the cost also kicks ass if one actually USES their AR more then a few hundred rounds a year.




These are my thoughts as well.
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 3:11:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2008 3:12:55 AM EDT by whoanelly]
Universal mags/mag commonality is the wave of the future.  Since there's no universal 9mm magazine that will fit in multiple systems like the USGI M16 mag will, there's not as much chance for a particular 9mm carbine to get a mass following.  

How many times has someone here been thinking about buying a gun, but decided not to because it wouldn't be supported by your current stash of mags?  I have.
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 4:41:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 87GN:
So you want something as heavy and bulky as a rifle, but with the power of a pistol.

[>:/]


9mm gets better out of a rifle length barrel. I can see where one would want one from a controllability aspect.. A .223 that you miss with vs. a 9mm you don't etc. Follow up shots are much more likely of a hit under duress with a 9mm, IMO.
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 4:54:48 AM EDT
Originally Posted By briansmithwins:
You mean like: Uzi, MP5, PC9, Kel-Tec, Marlin, Hi-Standard, High-Point, Beretta Storm, or 9mmP ARs?



Fixed it.
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 5:17:02 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 6:02:42 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Chris_1522:
but still, a hit to the vitals is a hit to the vitals regardless of cartridge choice.


Eh, no.

A handgun makes bullet sized holes in flesh. Rifles with expanding bullets at close range destroy large chunks of tissue, literally vaporizing muscle and bone.

I've shot a few animals in my day, with rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Close range rifle fire is devastating and shotguns kill fast too, but handguns suck.

BSW
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 6:21:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By briansmithwins:
Originally Posted By Chris_1522:
but still, a hit to the vitals is a hit to the vitals regardless of cartridge choice.


Eh, no.

A handgun makes bullet sized holes in flesh. Rifles with expanding bullets at close range destroy large chunks of tissue, literally vaporizing muscle and bone.

I've shot a few animals in my day, with rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Close range rifle fire is devastating and shotguns kill fast too, but handguns suck.

BSW



Ever used a hunting caliber handgun with the correct ammo and see the damage it does?
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 6:51:54 AM EDT
I tryed to find the write-up done a while back to post it, but couldn't find it.
When tested the longer 16 inch barrel of the CX4 added almost 400 fps with some ammo.
Taking that into account with it's ability to make very accurate hits close up, how well it handles and puts round after round on target fast with hollowpoint/EFMJ expansion,to blow it off as being useless for anything but a range toy or otherwise is silly.
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 7:08:10 AM EDT
As a range toy its ok; as a defensive weapon, its FAR FAR FAR less effective then a rifle caliber.
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 7:25:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2008 7:30:47 AM EDT by Chris_1522]
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 8:48:26 AM EDT
im sure this has already been said since i did not read through the entire thread.. there most likley arent more bc 9mm is a pistol round not a rifle round.. just not practical for rifle application especially with the abundance of AR and AR style carbines
Link Posted: 11/21/2008 9:20:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2008 9:37:47 AM EDT by BB]
Originally Posted By Chris_1522:
All I know is I'm pretty sure it's impossible to vaporize anything without....oh....a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range?


I'm not trying to say that there's no difference between rifle calibers and pistol calibers. I'm saying that shot placement is STILL more important - and that assuming EQUAL shot placement - there will be little difference in how quickly a threat could be stopped.

Regardless of rifle vs. pistol, you STILL have to place bullets effectively to STOP (not kill, but stop - NOW!) a threat. A shot in the right place with either will do the trick. A shot in the wrong place will not. A rifle might broaden your range of placement a little bit, but it isn't a death ray.


Shot placement is key. However, I've seen instances where a 9mm was deflected by bone. The same shot with a rifle round would not have reacted the same way. It broadens your range of placement a lot, not a little. The energy levels are vastly different, and the wound inflicted is vastly different. Theres little to no hydrostatic shock delivered with any pistol round; that means all you have doing damage is the bullet and the narrow channel it makes. A rifle round makes a huge cavity, which creates significantly more trauma.

Check it: http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm
Particularly: http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

Note the dimensions on these:


Link Posted: 11/21/2008 9:43:24 AM EDT
If you compare the wound profiles at the above link (http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm) you'll see what I'm talking about. The bullets that expand or fragment, like the .223 JSP have huge permanent cavities. Pistol calibers (and some rifle calibers when using FMJ) have permanent cavities that are simply the diameter of the solid projectile.

Handgun calibers (real handgun calibers, not .567 BFG) suck. Rifles are a different class of weapon. BSW

Link Posted: 11/21/2008 10:50:35 AM EDT
Originally Posted By briansmithwins:
If you compare the wound profiles at the above link (http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm) you'll see what I'm talking about. The bullets that expand or fragment, like the .223 JSP have huge permanent cavities. Pistol calibers (and some rifle calibers when using FMJ) have permanent cavities that are simply the diameter of the solid projectile.

Handgun calibers (real handgun calibers, not .567 BFG) suck. Rifles are a different class of weapon. BSW



I agree that rifle calibers do more damage but the graph above shows a JSP pistol bullet which is completely different then a modern JHP round with good expansion properties and possible fragmentation.

Not a person here that would volunteer to take a center mass shot from a +P+ velocity 9mm JHP round unless they are certifiably loony.

No  it's not a rifle round but it will ruin your day quite well, especially with the increased velocity a carbine length adds to a 9mm bullet.

A carbine length weapon adds to the capability of a 9mm round, in a rifle caliber like 5.56, it is decreased due to the slower bullet speeds.

Link Posted: 11/21/2008 11:48:54 AM EDT
Originally Posted By fxntime:
Originally Posted By briansmithwins:
If you compare the wound profiles at the above link (http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm) you'll see what I'm talking about. The bullets that expand or fragment, like the .223 JSP have huge permanent cavities. Pistol calibers (and some rifle calibers when using FMJ) have permanent cavities that are simply the diameter of the solid projectile.

Handgun calibers (real handgun calibers, not .567 BFG) suck. Rifles are a different class of weapon. BSW



I agree that rifle calibers do more damage but the graph above shows a JSP pistol bullet which is completely different then a modern JHP round with good expansion properties and possible fragmentation.

Not a person here that would volunteer to take a center mass shot from a +P+ velocity 9mm JHP round unless they are certifiably loony.

No  it's not a rifle round but it will ruin your day quite well, especially with the increased velocity a carbine length adds to a 9mm bullet.

A carbine length weapon adds to the capability of a 9mm round, in a rifle caliber like 5.56, it is decreased due to the slower bullet speeds.

Yeah, and a nutcase with a pointy stick can ruin your day as well. That doesnt mean I'd choose a spear as a defensive weapon if a better weapon is available.

Link Posted: 11/21/2008 12:42:03 PM EDT

"No it's not a rifle round but it will ruin your day quite well"






This.


I fuckin love Arfcom.
Top Top