Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/26/2003 7:47:37 AM EDT
Ok, I like the look of this thing. But I need some recomendations:

1) 9mm or .40 S&W.

2) Which mag style should I go with. I'm leaning away from the Glocks because they cost a damn fortune.

Please help!!!

Thanks,
Rob
Link Posted: 8/26/2003 8:09:29 AM EDT
IMO, it depends on what your current investment in handguns looks like. In my case, I have several 9mm guns and a fair amount of "infrastructure" (reloading equipment, etc.) to support that caliber. Since I also have a fair investment in .45 ACP, I don't see any reason to add .40 cal to the mix. One of the beautiful things about the S2K is compatibility with handgun mags, so I'd let that be the determining factor.

If you have no prior investment in any particular caliber or handguns, I'd go with .40 cal. The version that accepts Glock mags can only take Glock. The other version is convertible between Beretta (and presumably Taurus), S&W and Sig mags. So you get a little more flexibility if you go that route.

Hope that helps.
Link Posted: 8/26/2003 12:52:31 PM EDT
OK, that helps a lot. I have no handguns at present. I don't live in a particularly handgun friendly area yet. (This will hopefully change within the year)

That cleared up the mag question perfectly. Thank you. =)

Why do you reccomend the .40? I know almost nothing about pistol ammo.

And maybe I can get one of those good "which caliber is better" flame wars going here. =)

Thank you,
Rob
Link Posted: 8/26/2003 5:59:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/26/2003 6:06:39 PM EDT by BlammO]
Wellllll, one of the main reasons .40 is rapidly gaining popularity is that it's an excellent "compromise" between 9mm and .45 ACP -- without really compromising much at all. You get nearly as much power as .45 ACP, but still have a large magazine capacity like the 9mm's. Of course, the *&#%@! AWB of 1994 dilutes the value of magazine capacity a bit, that may change in the future. Hi-cap mags are out there, although usually at a premium price. If I were starting fresh, I'd invest first in .40 cal, then get some .45 guns down the road (or vice versa -- you can't miss out on the 1911 platform!). As it is, I got started with 9mm long before .40 came out.

But don't get me wrong, 9mm is still a very viable choice. It's probably the most commonly-available centerfire handgun caliber in the world, the ammunition is very inexpensive and it's a breeze to reload. Factory ammo options abound. It will remain a versatile choice for many years to come. There are those who say that 9mm lacks stopping power, but it's a very weak argument at best. 100 years of police and military use all over the world gives it a lot of credibility in my book.

So although, you really can't go wrong either way, I think that .40 gives you a bit of an edge because it does deliver more power (but not much more recoil), it's gaining popularity due to widespread police adoption and, like 9mm and .45 ACP, it's here to stay.

And by the way, the Sub-2000 is a great gun and its design is ingenious. I love mine!

[Edited to fix a plethora of unfortunate grammatical constructs.]
Link Posted: 8/27/2003 5:15:58 PM EDT
This post is great. I've been looking at the Sub 2000 recently and have the same questions regarding the 9mm vs .40S&W. Since I have both a G22 and Sig 226 with standard magazines for both I'm more interested in the ballistics difference between the two out of the 16" barrel. Can anyone post velocites for either? Also, what kind of groups are people getting with this gun? I'm thinking of using it out to 50yds max.
Thanks.
Link Posted: 8/27/2003 5:54:25 PM EDT
Can't help on .40 cal velocities, but I'm hoping to take my 9mm Sub-2000 out to the back 40 with the chronograph in the next week or two. The only thing I know for sure is that the longer barrel delivers higher velocities. When I finally get around to it, I'll have data for Kel-Tec Sub-2000, Kel-Tec P11, Walther P99, Taurus PT92 and Glock 19. Will post the 9mm results as soon as possible.
Link Posted: 8/27/2003 8:36:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Bhart89:
This post is great. I've been looking at the Sub 2000 recently and have the same questions regarding the 9mm vs .40S&W. Since I have both a G22 and Sig 226 with standard magazines for both I'm more interested in the ballistics difference between the two out of the 16" barrel. Can anyone post velocites for either? Also, what kind of groups are people getting with this gun? I'm thinking of using it out to 50yds max.
Thanks.



I think the gun is more accurate than the sights will allow. That said I don't have much of a problem hitting a 5x5 steel plate at 50yds.
Link Posted: 8/28/2003 4:22:39 AM EDT
I consistantly hit center of mass on a sillhouette target at 100 yards with my 9mm Sub2000.
Top Top