Help me choose a gun

peripatew

peripatew

Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
1,421
I'm trying to decide what would be a good gun to look into for backpacking and short wilderness trips. I'm leaning towards small and concealable, rather than oversized hand canon.

My brother and father have a Kel-Tec P3 that I like quite a bit, but I didn't know if this would be realistic protection from animals?

I don't know a lot about guns, so this is the beginning of my learning. I'm moving soon, and once I'm settled I'm going to get my conceal carry permit.

So, the P3? Other options?

I'm on a budget, so price is a conern.

Thanks! (I tried search but didn't have much luck)
 
naked said:
My brother and father have a Kel-Tec P3 that I like quite a bit, but I didn't know if this would be realistic protection from animals?

I don't know a lot about guns, so this is the beginning of my learning. I'm moving soon, and once I'm settled I'm going to get my conceal carry permit.

So, the P3? Other options?

I'm on a budget, so price is a conern.

Thanks! (I tried search but didn't have much luck)
Click to expand...

.380? No, that's not realistic protection from the larger 4 legs like bear or mountain lion. I would also question the reliability in a harsh outdoor environment.

How about a Ruger SP 101? Tough as hell, .357 goodness, and can be found used at a very reasonable price.
 
mapper66 said:
.380? No, that's not realistic protection from the larger 4 legs like bear or mountain lion. I would also question the reliability in a harsh outdoor environment.

How about a Ruger SP 101? Tough as hell, .357 goodness, and can be found used at a very reasonable price.
Click to expand...

So a Revolver for reliability, or for the bigger round? Or both? What would be the minimum sized round for protection?
 
Are you concerned only about four legged problems, or also the two legged kind?

Have you any prior experience with firearms?

Are you going to be using the weapon for any food gathering, or just protection?


Regardless of choice, it's most important that you get some training if you have none so far. Contact a local shooting range or gunshop to find out where you can get some local schooling. This is right up there with getting first aid training before thinking your prepared to give first aid, or getting driving lessons before just jumping behind the wheel.

A .22 pistol is a great choice for a beginner and makes a fun backpacking gun. It is not, of course, very good for defense against much of anything but snakes and ninja squirrels. Still, I highly recommend it for someone just starting out.

(~$250)
PB100021.jpg


For animal defense, I wouldn't recommend going smaller than .357 Magnum in a revolver or .40 in a semi-auto (though I vastly prefer .45 over the .40). Go to a range and shoot/handle as many pistols as you can, and then shoot the ones that feel best. Then find which shoot the best for you and which you enjoyed shooting. That should be what ultimately guides your choice.

People here will be able to tell you their preference, but that's got nothing to do with you. We can really just tell you some good manufacturers and types of firearms to start looking into.

If you disregard the statement about the .22, a .357 magnum revolver is a great way to start things. You can use low-power .38's for training and target work, then move up to .357 for defense. They are also largely bomb-proof and easy to learn on (very few switches and buttons).

Edited to add: A good semi-auto will give you excellent reliability. A good revolver will give you excellent reliability. Don't let that be a determining factor for you. Find what fits, above and certain quality and power point.
 
I don't think you can ever do better than a 5-shot .357 with about a 3 inch barrel for backpacking protection.

The .357 is a great stopper, no two ways about it. You can also use .38s for practice...low recoil and cheap.

I don't trust the .380 for performance on anything tougher than a 12 year old, personally. (joking, would use it on a 17 year old if I had to.)

But a DA revolver is not very likely to jam up on you, either, so all around a light .357 makes a pretty good choice.




Well, looks like I type too slow!
 
misanthropist said:
I don't think you can ever do better than a 5-shot .357 with about a 3 inch barrel for backpacking protection.

The .357 is a great stopper, no two ways about it. You can also use .38s for practice...low recoil and cheap.

I don't trust the .380 for performance on anything tougher than a 12 year old, personally. (joking, would use it on a 17 year old if I had to.)

But a DA revolver is not very likely to jam up on you, either, so all around a light .357 makes a pretty good choice.




Well, looks like I type too slow!
Click to expand...

You're dead on correct about the 3" barrel SP101 in .357 Mag. That's the least I would carry if worried about 4 legged critters. For the two legged variety I favor a Kel-Tec K3AT, which I got for my wife, or a Kahr PM40, which I got for myself. Where weight is a issue I'd go with the K3AT.
 
Im gonna go with whats been said so far.. An SP101 would be a great choice, and as small as you would want for any sort of formidable animal encounters.
My wife has had one for over 10 years and its been a great gun. Its also stainless so you dont have to fuss over it. I have its big brother a Ruger Alaskan 454;-)
 
Why do you think you need a gun?

During my 10 years in Alaska, I ran into bears, wolves, moose, woverines, cariboo, and musk ox. Even got chased by a moose on a jog once. Never needed a gun, except one night I got scared about a bunch of drunks camping down the road. We just got up and left.

I packed a 30.06 or 12 gauge, then a .44 mag revolver, then bear mace, then nothing but a knife and a camera. Took about two years to shed the guns. Another three to get rid of the bear mace.

People aren't rational about risks. The local paper in Anchorage did an article in the early 1990s noting that dogs killed more people in Alaska than all the wild animals combined. When is the last time you packed heat to protect yourself from Fido?
 
My main desire for a gun comes from wanting to protect my family. I'm likely more concerned with crazy people than animals. I was leaning towards a P3at, but figured I might as well have the added protection against larger animals. I've never had any trouble from people or animals, but when I take my wife and son into the mountains to places that I am unfamiliar with, I want to be prepared. It would be my desire to never have to use it at all.

I'd be happy to kill Fido if he tried to hurt my family with a gun if I thought that other means wouldn't work.
 
misanthropist said:
I don't think you can ever do better than a 5-shot .357 with about a 3 inch barrel for backpacking protection.

The .357 is a great stopper, no two ways about it. You can also use .38s for practice...low recoil and cheap.

I don't trust the .380 for performance on anything tougher than a 12 year old, personally. (joking, would use it on a 17 year old if I had to.)

But a DA revolver is not very likely to jam up on you, either, so all around a light .357 makes a pretty good choice.




Well, looks like I type too slow!
Click to expand...


I agree! The last thing you want is for your gun to "jam" up while rolling around on the ground being mauled by some large four legged critter and this is a very likely possibility for an auto. Auto's are very reliable under normal circumstances but they need room for the slide to work back and forth properly. If the slide gets blocked, well, its gonna take some time to clear the jam. A good revolver is NOT going to jam up under these conditions. The only thing I can recomend that hasn't already been said is instead of the Ruger revolvers is to check out the Smith & Wesson line. They make some great guns which are a lot lower in weight than the Rugers which are heavy as lead. The .357 mag should take care of most any problem you may run into, four or two legged! :D ,,,VWB>
 
I've never needed a spare tire but I carry one!

There are three questions NO ONE can answer for any of us...

Q1 - Who the threat will be? It could be a two or four legged preditor...the young gal in Georgia who had a dog and martial arts experience didn't expect to be accosted by a puke who murdered her after torture her in a public hiking/camping area.

Q2 - When or Where a Threat will take place? Rarely in the annuals of time has anyone been given real advanced notice they are about to come under attack. We are susceptable to attack at any time in any place. There is no sanctuary.

Q3 - What it will take to Stop the Threat? We need a Plan A, B, & C with even a Plan D. Maslow said "if the only tool we have is a hammer than every problem will look like a nail." So a handgun is only a tool - one tool. I'd get the biggest hammer I could afford and carry and then learn other life saving skills to augment my one tool.

The purchase of gear (hardware) should be determined based upon an understanding of what you need the tool for (What is my primary and secondary mission or purpose for this piece of gear I"m going to pack) and based upon a decision after 12 to 15 hours minimum of training (software). The development of Software is always going to be more critical than the hardware! Attend a basic handgun course then move past that and take the next level handgun course.

Once you get things sorted out (by training) then you'll make a much better decision on the hardware...besides then you might find one used for a lesser price than a gun shop will sell it too you.

Ah, what the heck do I know anyway!
 
When is the last time you packed heat to protect yourself from Fido?[/QUOTE said:
Yesterday. For the reason you quoted.... If you saw the unleashed pit bulls and dobermans that harass me when i run, you would too..... :)

To answer the original question. There has been some good advice already provided. I have that .380 and only carry if if larger calibers are not an option. (It's ok for jogging where only fido is likely to be the concern) I would never carry it as a woods gun. While some may disagree, and I don't want to start a caliber war on a knife forum, I would not go below a .357 in the woods and don't carry less then a 40 cal for the reasons detailed by Quirt.
Click to expand...
 
A gun in the woods gives you the advantage. Simple as that.

Since most larger predators can be scared away with just the sound of gunshots, I would say any gun would do. I would feel protected carrying a 9mm in the woods. Chances are I would never have to actually point it at the attacking animal.

If you dont belive me, watch this. All this guy did was fire into the water infront of the charging bear. Caliber meant nothing, it was the bears instinctual fear of the gunshot that made it back down.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=uMbnmLLnsfw

After watching that, tell me that that mans sidearm was useless. It saved his life, and he saved the bears as well. He could have easily put one right in the bears face.
 
vwb563 said:
I agree! The last thing you want is for your gun to "jam" up while rolling around on the ground being mauled by some large four legged critter and this is a very likely possibility for an auto. Auto's are very reliable under normal circumstances but they need room for the slide to work back and forth properly. If the slide gets blocked, well, its gonna take some time to clear the jam. A good revolver is NOT going to jam up under these conditions. The only thing I can recomend that hasn't already been said is instead of the Ruger revolvers is to check out the Smith & Wesson line. They make some great guns which are a lot lower in weight than the Rugers which are heavy as lead. The .357 mag should take care of most any problem you may run into, four or two legged! :D ,,,VWB>
Click to expand...


If you get a GLOCK then you don't need to worry about mud,water, dirt, etc.... This gun is top of the line when it comes to dependable ! You can beat it, drop it in mud , what ever & it will still keep on going. I pack a G19 (9mm) & I have shot all diff. types of ammo & it has NEVER misfired or had a jam :cool: Do some research on GLOCK & you will be pleasently surprised ;) & if you do some research on the ballistics of the 9mm+p+ it is very close to the famous .357mag.
But on the other hand if I couldn't get a GLOCK then a Ruger sp101 or Tarus Raging Bull !
 
Check out the new 327magnum SP101. Similar to 357magnum but with less recoil and 6 shots rather than 5. Also the SP101 is availible in 9mm. Makes for cheap target practice and fast reloads using moon clips.

If you are a gun novice, I'd urge a revolver.
 
if you want compact or subcompact, check out a glock 32 or 33 in .357sig (.357 auto) or if you want a fullsize get a glock 31. the ballistics on the .357sig are extremely good, and on top of that it uses a tapered casing like a rifle which greatly improves reliability because the seam where the jacket meets the casing does not come into contact with the feed ramp so it can't jam as easily as other rounds. i have a G31 and i love both the round and the gun. the kick is only slightly more than a .40 but the power and reliability are quite a bit higher. If you are going to get an auto, read up on the .357sig before you buy, trust me you won't regret it. If you decide to stick with a revolver, .357 mag will give you the best combination of size and performance.

as for 9mm+p+, that kind of round puts a lot of stress on a gun, and while glocks are made to take it, i just don't see why you would buy a 9mm and use +p+ ammo when you could just buy a .357sig and get the same performance, increased reliability, and still have high capacity. my G31 holds 15+1. you can check out the ballistics here http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ballistics/ .357sig and .357mag are very similar when fired from the same length barrel. it really does give you get the best of all aspects- high power, high capacity, high reliability. add to all that glock's legendary reputation for reliability and durability and you have a damn fine gun.
 
I've been shopping around for a first gun too. There is a ton of info for the taking all over the internet. There are also about a million differing opinions on which gun is best for what which can create a bit of confusion. I had just about settled on a Ruger GP-100 for my first gun but I'm wavering a bit on that now. I want to be able to shoot the heck out of my first gun so I can learn how to shoot well. To that end I've started leaning toward a .22. None of the .22 revolvers I've looked at so far have appealed to me so I looked at a couple of variations of the Ruger Mk III. The .22/45 version (with a handle and controls similar to the 1911 Colt) wasn't as comfortable to me as the standard Mk III. For me concealability isn't too big of a concern in my first handgun. I want something that I can shoot comfortably and accurately and affordably. The Mk III seems to be the ticket for me. The GP-100 will probably be my second gun, for home defense and woods carry if I feel I need something bigger than the .22. I may try hunting with it as well. After I've gotten some training and practiced shooting a lot and gone through some more training I'll probably get one of Smith and Wesson's little lightweight .38 revolvers for daily concealed carry. If I were only ever planning on buying one gun though, I think I'd have to go with a .357 revolver. . . The Ruger GP-100 just feels right in my hands. As always YMMV.
 
The trick is to hit what you are aiming at. As a result, I think you would be best served with either a Ruger SP101 or 3" GP100 in 357 mag for protection against most woods creatures, two and four legged. You can always shoot it with 38spls if you find the recoil troubling. My carry gun is a Smith 442 38spl which I feel is okay, but not much good past about 25 feet as far as hitting things consistantly.

I always recommend a 22 handgun for new shooters. There is no better guns to learn to shoot with and for most things in the woods, a 22 is just fine. You are unlikely to kill a big bear with one, but how often have you seen an aggressive bear in the woods?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top