New to Handguns: Pistol Overview?

alucard0822 said:
That is a broad net to cast, and it is near impossible to tell what is the best fit for you without more information. You have experience with a few models, what do you like about them? what don't you like? Concerns like "stopping power" and "over-penetration" between service calibers(9/40/45/38/357 etc) don't mean much outside of arguing for fun. You want a model that is affordable in a caliber you are comfortable with in cost, perceived need and recoil, and then try it out and see if it feels good. Some formal instruction and an open mind can also be beneficial, and can help you develop a technique that fits, and help you gravitate towards the best firearm choice for you.
Click to expand...

Well, I've tried a couple of .38 revolvers, just tiny Taurus Airlite models, and they seemed well built and shot +P rounds well but had a good snap to them, being so small and light. I have handled four Beretta 92's belonging to friends in family, three in 9mm and one .380. I didn't shoot them because they felt down right rickety, though the .380 felt more solid, I suppose since it was smaller. I've also handled but not shot an IMI Jericho, and it felt worlds better as far as build goes compared to the 92s. I just feel comfortable with revolvers, and if I did go out for an auto, it would have to be one of the most reliable extant under budget for me to be happy. That's what lured me to CZ, in part because I know that it was one of the first autos to put the slide inside the frame, and it uses an action similar to a Browning hi-power, which seems to be a fairly straightforward and simple design.

As I say, this is primarily a recreation and hunting gun (not to go out hunting with necessarily, but to carry while I do). I have no delusions about SD, if I have a gun at hand, I'm going to point and shoot. I'll be practicing weekly with drawing and shooting, but that's about it. I just want something I can count on and will be fun to shoot at the same time. I just have very little experience with anything recent and I'm wondering about opinions to see if much has changed since a .357 S&W was the handgun to beat.
 
Then go get you that 627 I linked. It's on an N frame (which is a large SW frame). Recoil won't be bad because of the weight of it. Can't be 8 torpedoes worth of 357 with a slicked up action job.
 
Check out a EAA Witness Elite Match. A bit heavier than a 1911 but great quality for around $600 and available in 9mm, 40, 45 & 10mm. Otherwise a S&W 6" 357.
 
fishface5 said:
Check out a EAA Witness Elite Match. A bit heavier than a 1911 but great quality for around $600 and available in 9mm, 40, 45 & 10mm. Otherwise a S&W 6" 357.
Click to expand...

OOOH, great suggestion. Totally forgot about those.

OP: EAA is what the guns are called after getting imported to the US. They are actually Tanfoglio guns made in Italy. They take after the CZ 75, but look more similar to the Jericho.
 
harkamus said:
OOOH, great suggestion. Totally forgot about those.

OP: EAA is what the guns are called after getting imported to the US. They are actually Tanfoglio guns made in Italy. They take after the CZ 75, but look more similar to the Jericho.
Click to expand...

Cz 75's, jericho 941, eaa, tangfolio, baby deagle all are fundamentally the same firearm.
 
Same design yes but the EAA Elite models get extra smithing attention without paying much extra for it. I shot one that was noticeably nicer than the. CZ 85 I had, and the CZ was already a sweet gun.
 
cm_bushman said:
Well, I've tried a couple of .38 revolvers, just tiny Taurus Airlite models, and they seemed well built and shot +P rounds well but had a good snap to them, being so small and light. I have handled four Beretta 92's belonging to friends in family, three in 9mm and one .380. I didn't shoot them because they felt down right rickety, though the .380 felt more solid, I suppose since it was smaller. I've also handled but not shot an IMI Jericho, and it felt worlds better as far as build goes compared to the 92s. I just feel comfortable with revolvers, and if I did go out for an auto, it would have to be one of the most reliable extant under budget for me to be happy. That's what lured me to CZ, in part because I know that it was one of the first autos to put the slide inside the frame, and it uses an action similar to a Browning hi-power, which seems to be a fairly straightforward and simple design.

As I say, this is primarily a recreation and hunting gun (not to go out hunting with necessarily, but to carry while I do). I have no delusions about SD, if I have a gun at hand, I'm going to point and shoot. I'll be practicing weekly with drawing and shooting, but that's about it. I just want something I can count on and will be fun to shoot at the same time. I just have very little experience with anything recent and I'm wondering about opinions to see if much has changed since a .357 S&W was the handgun to beat.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you are stuck between a solid metal frame auto, and a 357 revolver(S&W is still the one to beat). Full 357 loads can be a handful until you get to a 4" L frame(686), that is really the sweet spot IMO, small and nimble enough for comfortable carry and quick handling, but beefy enough to hold up and tame recoil, you can go larger in an N frame (627 or R8) as Harkamus suggested, even better suited to range and hunting use, less twards action shooting and carry, a 6" barrel balances well and adds some velocity in that size. Small frame revolvers are tough to shoot well, the short sight radius and recoil make them better suited to intermediate or advanced shooters contrary to gun shops that seem to love to sell them to women and new shooters. For autos, I have an M9(mil version of 92), bought it new, shot it lots, and it is still solid and feels great, but there are a lot of police trade-ins(usually 96s, but some 92s around) that while usually carried a lot and shot a little can be beat up. This is why you want to try out what you intend to buy, there are some nice firearms that just won't fit you, and others you love to shoot, but never considered before. CZ75 pattern pistols are very nice handling, and if they fit it's a good choice, I could also suggest a Sig P-series(probably 226 or 229), they fit a lot of people well. No idea where you are located, but if by chance it's southern PA around York, I have a private club range that I RO and instruct at, and can help you try a few out.
 
I shoot an old Colt 1911 Mark IV, and a Colt Officer’s ACP.

I’m not a big guy, but I prefer to shoot the Officer. Recoil is no problem and it points naturally for me. A smaller 1911 might be worth a try.
 
I like the Ruger MkIII for a .22, it's all I've ever known, but it was a blast to shoot when I was younger.

I think it's down to a CZ (97B most likely) or a Stainless S&W .357 with a 4" barrel.

Does CZ make a 10mm?
 
if you are thinking of any of the practical gun games like USPSA or 3 gun you might want to extend your search to the polymer pistols... I've been shooting USPSA since 1982... about 25years of 1911's in .45, both single stack and wide body... today I have a single recommendation to new shooters... Glock 34 in 9mm...you need a good pair of aftermarket sights...and it does have a longer learning curve to shoot quickly and accurately, compared to a single action... learn to shoot with both thumbs forward

G34 with Heinie rear, Dawson front sights, JP Industries mag button, Jentra grip plug, grip decal... full length guide rod and ISMI un captured spring

 
cm_bushman said:
I was thinking a .357 revolver, simply because of it's versatility and reliability.
Click to expand...
There's nothing wrong with a .357 revolver for SD. To me, there are only two choices in the full-size, defensive revolver category; the S&W 686 or the Ruger GP 100. Colt revolvers are excellent but they are OOP and generally command collector's prices. There really no reason to look at smaller framed revolvers if concealed carry isn't a consideration. As far as other choices, I just don't trust my life to them ( apologies to owners of Taurus, Charter, etc. revolver). As far as barrel length, I think 6 inches is actually starting to get a bit too long. I prefer 4 inch or maybe 5 inch (if you can find it) as optimum for a full size, combat revolver.

cm_bushman said:
I'm partial to steel frames, and I hear great things about CZ, as far as cheaper autos go.

Edit to add: I'm not worried about concealed carry, and I'm looking to reduce recoil as much as I can without sacrificing performance or getting a handgun that weights as much as a rifle.
Click to expand...
Steel frame, low recoil, full size, under $1000, I would look the Browning Hi-Power, CZ 75 or the Sig Sauer P226 all in 9mm. (BTW I would not classify CZ as "cheap" autos). These are all well respected, quality guns and with modern premium JHP bullets (Federal HST, Speer Gold Dots, etc.) The difference between 9mm, .357, .40, and .45 is much less than you might think.
 
As a former master firearms trainer for the department I worked for. One of the biggest questions I got was what handgun to buy for home defense. Even though they qualified with a Glock 22, 40 caliber. I always recommended they pick up a 357 mag and shoot 38 specials out of it for practice. it is way cheaper to practice with. I also said in home defense a handgun is for fighting your way to a 12 gauge shotgun. My 357 magnum is a Colt King Cobra stainless with a 6 inch barrel. I have owned it since 1989. I love that gun. It is extremely accurate. I own handguns from 22 LR to 454 Casull. The 22 is also a gun I recommend for practicing and getting the fundamentals of shooting down verses a loud recoiling handgun that has you develop bad habits like flinching jerking the trigger and a number of other bad habits. This is just my 2 cents from a Master firearms trainer that taught staff and firearms trainers for close to 20 years. Remember these are just suggestions for you to think about. The final choice is yours. If you do not enjoy shooting it you will not shoot much. Practice and repetition are the keys to survival.
 
Wow, that Witness really is a slick looking gun. I had always thought they were more 1911 than CZ. Now that I look at them, I think that's my auto of choice, if it fits, as someone helpfully reminded me. I really dig the Jericho that my father in law has, so the CZ type pistols are at the top of my list.

The more I think about this, the more of an investment it seems to be. To phrase it another way, the more I think about having a single handgun (.22 not withstanding), the more I lean away from something I can just set in a box beside the bed. I figure if I'm going to go for a pistol to bet my life on, I should at least do my part to get proper training and practice time, so that I really learn the pistol and what to expect. This shouldn't be so hard, since I'll just need to get to know the one gun. So autos are fine with me, there is just a stigma about their reliability that is hard to shake coming from a revolver family. Of course, the first choice I'd make is my model 12 leaned in the corner, over any pistol.

So, regarding the Witness, If I spring for a 10mm, will it have more recoil than a comparable .45ACP? A CZ type gun cleaned up and tweaked for $600 is a tempting proposition.
 
For a SD handgun, it's hard to beat a Glock 17 or 19. Capacity, aftermarket support, factory support, the guns just run forever even when somewhat neglected all make the Glock a great choice. 10mm options are available if you need some umph. They are basically the appliance pistol. It's like the microwave that sits on your counter: it's not pretty, but provides years of service suffering constant use, but always works.

I like 1911s, but they require more maintenance than a Glock. IMO, you have to stay on top of them to ensure reliability.

Revolvers are an excellent choice. I like big bores (especially .45 Colt), but .357 Mag is a great option with a huge variety of ammo options available. I prefer 158 gr JHPs for SD and 180 Hard Cast Lead for hunting and animal defense. Options to consider: S&W (M28, M27, 686, M66, M19, 627), Ruger (GP100, Security Six).... I don't have a problem with owning a Taurus except the resale isn't great. I've owned quite a few over the years and while, I don't trust their autos, the wheel guns run fine as long as you give it a test run. I actually carry a Taurus 605 most of the time. I got it well used, but it runs like a top and is surprisingly accurate. I like snubs for pocket carry, 4 inch barrels for general purpose, and 6 inch barrels for hunting. In your case, 4 or 6 inches should be fine.
 
I know a lot of people like CZs. They feel great, shoot great, and are fairly reliable. I have one problem with CZs in general (thinking of guns based on the 75b): The purchase area of the slide that you would use to clear a malfunction is kind of small and may impede success with doing so.
 
Woodrow F Call said:
I have one problem with CZs in general (thinking of guns based on the 75b): The purchase area of the slide that you would use to clear a malfunction is kind of small and may impede success with doing so.
Click to expand...

Comes with the territory. The slide-in-frame design prevents you from having tons of purchase on the slide. That would defeat the entire purpose of having a lower bore axis inherent to the design of slide-in-frame guns. I've never had a problem since I'm also a one gun type of guy. I sell something if I get something. Started with a Jericho 941, so I'm used to the midget slide. It just takes practice. But I can see where your point of view is coming from too, since most firearms don't have a slide-in-frame design. Most are the opposite.
 
harkamus said:
Comes with the territory. The slide-in-frame design prevents you from having tons of purchase on the slide. That would defeat the entire purpose of having a lower bore axis inherent to the design of slide-in-frame guns. I've never had a problem since I'm also a one gun type of guy. I sell something if I get something. Started with a Jericho 941, so I'm used to the midget slide. It just takes practice. But I can see where your point of view is coming from too, since most firearms don't have a slide-in-frame design. Most are the opposite.
Click to expand...

The only problem I see is that the smaller purchase area may make the slide harder to manipulate when the fine motor skills are degraded in a high stress situation. Something like a Glock, M&P, 1911.... you can more easily wrap your hand around the top of the gun, close hand and manipulate when compared to the CZ.

I just point it out as something to consider. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top