Favorite Round for CC?


B

Blakester

I shoot therefore I am
I have been an advocate for .22lr for cc for a long time. I am now wondering though if I should refocus to something in .40 cal. I have been doing a little bit of distance plinking with pistols lately, just broadening my horizons, and I find the .45 ACP just drops too fast at distance for full consideration. I can consistently hit a bowling pin at 50 yards, and I can nail an E-type at 100 with no issues, which is what is making me lean more toward .40 cal. I know .40 cal will fly flat for 100 and still have some knock down power. I am not sure about the knock down power of .22lr at 100. I know the .45ACP (230 grain0, drops about a foot at 100 yards and feels like I am doing a volley fire just to get it to reach 100.

What do you guys think is ballistically the best round for carrying concealed, while maintaining lethality from 0-100 yards?
 

.22 in summer with one layer of clothes is deadly inside 21 ft. Accurate. No recoil. Simple to conceal. Perfect for defense so long as the bad guy doesn't want you dead. If he does, it isn't enough gun. Ten holes in his chest will kill him but maybe not before he kills you. Any common used self defense round (38, 357, 9mm, 40 or 45) is adequate for self defense but pistols aren't good out to 100 yds.
 
For my EDC I have a Glock 27 and I carry Winchester Supreme Elite Bonded PDX1 .40 S&W 180gr.

I tried them out and I liked the grouping at 25 yards. very decent round and it had a little bit of a kick. But, I believe that was because it's a subcompact pistol.
 
Blakester said:
...What do you guys think is ballistically the best round for carrying concealed, while maintaining lethality from 0-100 yards?
Click to expand...

Concealed carry is for self-defense only, and asking for "lethality" and "knock-down" (both mythical slogans, of course, but they sure sound impressive) assessments for distances beyond the range at which it's likely to sound like an assault of some sort just doesn't make sense. (Yes, yes, I know that every situation is unique but the likelihood of shooting a gun in "self defense" of somebody beyond 20 or 30 yards, while theoretically conceivable, is unlikely).
 
Knock down power. There is a lot of debate about this topic. Unless you are carrying a 357 mag. or larger, most handguns do not have the energy. Some facts, you can shoot a deer, grizzle, man... in the heart destroying the heart, and it will live for around 10 seconds. And it can fight for that time. Most hunters know that deer can run 100 to 150 yards with a heart and lung shot before they go down. Yes, sometimes the game will drop immediately however most of the time it will run away. There are many accounts of police shooting someone on drugs multiply times and keep coming before they go down. Unless you hit the brain, spinal column or major bone don't count on dropping anything. Most hunters and military know you give time for something to bleed out.

A .22 long rifle ammo shot with a 20" barrel will penetrate 3/4" plywood at 300 yards. Which depending on shot placement could be deadly. I don't want to be shot by any caliber.

I prefer a larger caliber than .22 for CCW but I know of older people with arthritis and don't have the hand strength to carry a larger caliber. A .22 will not penetrate barriers as well as a larger calibers which depending on the situation could be a good thing or bad.

A large mag. handgun or rifle is the only way to get knock down power in the real world. And without shot placement you are wasting money.
 
If he is running away at 100 yards, I have already done my job. He is most likely going home to change his undies. LOL
 
Self defense shootings statistically occur within 10ft. I'm not worried about my .45 altering its trajectory. And sniping someone at 100yds is an ridiculous venture with a pistol...and just plain dumb for a host of reasons.

Sent from my hand-held mind distractor
 
I can't think of a situation where you'd need to shoot someone 100 yards away for self-defense. That said, I carry a 9mm, because 9mm with a +P or +P+ round has pretty much identical ballistics to the .40 cal (which doesn't come in a +P variant) and I can carry more rounds in a same-model gun.
 
dad45acp said:
Self defense shootings statistically occur within 10ft. I'm not worried about my .45 altering its trajectory. And sniping someone at 100yds is an ridiculous venture with a pistol...and just plain dumb for a host of reasons.

Sent from my hand-held mind distractor
Click to expand...
I also ignore .45acp trajectory ballistics. They are an absolute non-issue at SD distances. I carry it because I don't like high pressure rounds.

I'm a bit baffled that anyone would carry .22LR for a SD round, but something is better than nothing. I'd carry a high capacity sidearm, if that's all I had.
 
Living in the frozen state of MN, people wear multiple heavy layers. I like the 40 because IF I ever have to use it I want to put them down not just make the BG mad. For summer I would like 9MM or maybe a .380. But so far I have not found the handgun that makes me want it as yet.

So in short it depends on where you live and the climate as what caliber is best. But mainly what handgun and caliber each person can handle is what is best!
 
If carrying .22, at least go with a .22 magnum. As to a 100 yard shot, I am confident in my ability to get to safety without firing a shot.


Sent from my iPhone using Link Removed
 
Blakester said:
I have been an advocate for .22lr for cc for a long time. For what reason are you an advocate? Are you compensated for such service? I am now wondering though if I should refocus to something in .40 cal. Are you coming to the realization that the .22LR is not even close to being one of the best defensive rounds? I have been doing a little bit of distance plinking with pistols lately, just broadening my horizons, and I find the .45 ACP just drops too fast at distance for full consideration. Full consideration of what? Distance plinking and self-defense are two completely different animals. I can consistently hit a bowling pin at 50 yards, and I can nail an E-type at 100 with no issues, which is what is making me lean more toward .40 cal. I know .40 cal will fly flat for 100 and still have some knock down power. There is no self-defense situation that you can show me where shooting someone with a pistol at 100 yards is an intelligent move. I am not sure about the knock down power of .22lr at 100. I am! Even with a rifle, you'd be hard pressed to get a squirrel at 100 yards, let alone a pistol. I know the .45ACP (230 grain0, drops about a foot at 100 yards and feels like I am doing a volley fire just to get it to reach 100. Why are you focusing on how well the round does at 100 yards for self-defense???? This makes absolutely no sense.

What do you guys think is ballistically the best round for carrying concealed, while maintaining lethality from 0-100 yards?
Click to expand...

The best round for self-defense should not be a consideration for out to 100 yards. Heck, even at 10 yards you're starting to get to a point where you'd be hard-pressed convincing a jury your life was on the line and you needed to take that shot. A football field away is a loooooooooong distance to claim you had a fear for your life unless at 100 yards away there was a man with a rifle aimed at you. At that point you had better hope you too have a rifle because no pistol is going to be that effective at 100 yards.

These are considered standard self-defense rounds and have served people well over the years: .38, .357, 9mm, .40, .45
Any of those calibers would be light-years ahead of what you are using now.
 
Interesting concept since most all hand gun issues take place at under 50', hell 90% of all deer taken are under a hundred yards. But whatever floats your boat.
 
Clearly I need to specify a few things. First and foremost all of you have criticized the 100 yard issue for defense, and some of you even doubt it being possible with a handgun. I can say with 100% certainty that I can consistently hit a target the size of a torso at 100 yards with a pistol, left or right handed As far as 100 yards of standoff is concerned, if you have the capability why would you ignore it and not develop it?
In an age where mass shootings are getting more and more popular I like the knowledge that if all I have on me is a pistol, it is still a relatively fair fight in a wide open public place. So if I had to stand off against someone with an AR, at least within 100 yards I still have a fighting chance. Take Aurora Colorado as a prime example. That little prick shot over 70 people and only killed 12 (12/70 *100 = 17.14% lethality). He had an AR 15, a Remmington 870 tactical 12 gauge, and a Glock 22 (.40 cal) inside a movie theatre which is what maybe 35 to 45 yards long from corner to corner depending on the size of the theatre? At that distance I am consisting hitting a bowling pin with 230 grain .45 ACP... advantage me. But if he had time to wound 70 people, then a lot of people sat back and did not react at all, or did so very slowly. It would have only taken one well trained person (one who had considered shooting more than 25 yards when they selected caliber and weapon) legally carrying concealed to stop that shooting.
Now take the same scenario and apply it to a mall setting like one of the more recent shooting. How far are the distances in a mall? 100 yards, 150 maybe even close to 200 or 300 in the largest parts of bigger malls. Yes statistically speaking I am more likely to win the lottery or get hit by a meteor; but how stupid would I feel in death if I knew I could have prevented being a victim but only limited myself to a 10ft to 25 yard plan of action? I have the ability, I would be stupid to ignore it and not develop it because it is not considered the "norm" in the firearm community. As far as the law is concerned my first squad leader shared a little wisdom with me when I was a young kid that I still think rings true today: "It's better to be judged by twelve than carried by six."
 
apvbguy said:
name one law enforcement agency that uses a .22 as a duty weapon, name one military that uses a .22 as standard issue
Click to expand...

Name one LEO, or one military that has developed their own round or weapon system...here's a hint they go to the private sector for that. Anyone who thinks that LEOs or the armed forces are the standard for marksmanship, weapon craft, weapon knowledge, weapon expertise, are naïve. There is a reason they contract out the work every time they need a new capability. Research the SRD formerly DCD for the Army, or Aberdeen Proving Grounds, or ATK Lake City, or Browning, or Colt, or Armalite, or AAI Corp, ect. The military got ride of the M1 Carbine for the AR weapon platform because "the .30 cal M1 Carbine did not have enough stopping power." The Military then got rid of the Colt 1911 for the Baretta 9mm, and I have never heard a good or consistent reason for that change. When the US Military adopted the AR weapon platform they made NATO convert from .308 to .223 (from 7.62 to 5.56).
The real question is why the hell would you consider LEOs and the Armed forces to be a good source of expertise?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 181 (members: 0, guests: 181)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,543
Messages
611,260
Members
74,964
Latest member
sigsag1

Share this page

Back
Top