Posted: 10/12/2003 1:41:42 PM EDT
|
I will be purchacing my first Deticated CCW handgun soon and was hoping to get an education on the HK designs. I am planning on the HK USP. Its still up in the air as to the calliber but right now it looks like .45 or .40 (leaning twards .45). My question is this: What are the advantages/ Dis advantages of the Compct vs the Sub? Would I be better off with just a full size? TIA JIM |
|
The only sub-compact HK has is the P2000, and I dont even think that it is out yet) The compact isn't really that compact. The .40 compact is a bit smaller than the 45 compact. I carry a USP 45 compact in a IWB holster. I have a full sized .40, I've carried it a couple of times, but its a big gun to conceal. |
|
I just bought my second USP, this one in .357Sig. The other is a .45acp Compact. Damn wonderful guns. There is NO free lunch on handguns, or any gun for that matter. What you give away in size & weight you gain back in felt recoil. .40S&W caliber has the highest chamber pressures of almost any handgun calibers, IIRC. There's multiple stories of Glock 22/23s having kabooms. Whichever caliber you decide on, the Compact size gives a good balance between recoil absorption & concealability. |
| One of my two carry guns is a compact USP .45, which I tend to carry in the car, or in cooler weather, due to it's fair size, but I love that gun! I have the UTL for nighttime, plus night sights, and it's never done anything but go boom when I pull the trigger. Recoil and accuracy are great for a .45. I chose the decock-only variant. You won't regret it! |
That P2000 is fucking awesome!!!!!! |
| If you go 45 I would definately go full size. I trie the both the full size and compact before purchasing my USP. I decided on the fullsize simply because the compact produced more muzzle flip. The full size handles this better. The only toss up is concealability. The full size is a bit harder to cover up, but it can be done. |