Thread: How many people CCW here?

Well I am not rolling out at the moment, but always at my side.
p.s. It is out of the holster for photo op only....

I love the XD's, I'd buy one now but unfortunately it's between a new gun and a new torque convertor, and I have to drive.

Originally Posted by CStevens

I love the XD's, I'd buy one now but unfortunately it's between a new gun and a new torque convertor, and I have to drive.

I hate it when choices like that are made for by Life.

I've seen some very nice handguns here. It made me think. A CCW is something you have with the mindset that you're going to depend on that gun working flawlessly when you need it. Murphy's law says that when you do, other stuff will go wrong as well.

I've read that e.g. Glock is very reliable even in very bad conditions, such as wet and muddy environments. In my unqualified opinion, reliability like that would be of the highest interest. So how do some of these fancy handguns compare to something like a Glock in terms of reliability in bad circumstances? Will they all work after having fallen in a muddy puddle?

The 1911 is not a platform I recommend to a new gun owner as a carry piece.
The 1911 was the service duty pistol in the us military for a long time and when properly tuned and cared for is very reliable.
The XD line from Springfield is the Prvi Hrvatski Pištolj or First Croatian Pistol.
It is actually the HS2000.
The HS2000 was adopted by the Croatian military and law enforcement as a standard issue sidearm and continues to fill that role.
A very reliable platform, internally almost Identical to the Glock and it has a grip safely.
Smith & Wesson's M&P line is also proven and in use by several Law enforcement agencies.
Almost every carry piece I have seen mentioned here I would not hesitate to utilize.
As with any piece of equipment it has to be tested, preferably with the rounds you will be using,
and it needs to be maintained. It is a mechanical piece and can fail, it is not end all be all just a tool in your arsenal.

You are SOOOOO right Bruno, this is why I chose a Glock 26 with Crimson Trace laser for my wife to carry & my secondary carry gun (mine just has night sights, 3.5 lb connector, & extended slide release). All of our magazines have the Pearce +2 pinky extensions. She doesn't understand the concept that a handgun is a finely tuned machine, of which most don't like a dirty environment. The Glock is the AK-47 of the handgun world.

I actually did check out my Kimber Ultra CDP 1911 in a muddy puddle for three shots. I dipped it & really made an effort to get grit into it. I lifted it out of the puddle, gave it one good shake to ensure the barrel didn't have any sizeable obstructions & shot. My buddy said it looked like a bomb went off in my hand as muddy water misted out of it. I shot two more times after the first shot to ensure feed and reliability, but it was enough for me & I didn't want to subject it to more "torture" as it's not a cheap gun. I was amazed at how much of the mud I ended up wearing & also amazed at how much of a PITA it is to break down a weapon to every single minute part to properly clean it after such a test. It was a good test as I had gunk in every moving part. I bet I used a roll of paper towels & a box of q-tip ear swabs cleaning it. Doing this test really built a lot of confidence in my 1911 & I'm glad I did it. I have absolutely zero doubt that it would function if I ever had to use it...which I hope I never ever do. Kind of like a spare tire on the automobile, it's there...but I don't want to ever have to use it.

Originally Posted by shooter74743

I actually did check out my Kimber Ultra CDP 1911 in a muddy puddle for three shots. I dipped it & really made an effort to get grit into it. I lifted it out of the puddle, gave it one good shake to ensure the barrel didn't have any sizeable obstructions & shot. My buddy said it looked like a bomb went off in my hand as muddy water misted out of it. I shot two more times after the first shot to ensure feed and reliability, but it was enough for me & I didn't want to subject it to more "torture" as it's not a cheap gun. I was amazed at how much of the mud I ended up wearing & also amazed at how much of a PITA it is to break down a weapon to every single minute part to properly clean it after such a test. It was a good test as I had gunk in every moving part. I bet I used a roll of paper towels & a box of q-tip ear swabs cleaning it. Doing this test really built a lot of confidence in my 1911 & I'm glad I did it. I have absolutely zero doubt that it would function if I ever had to use it...which I hope I never ever do. Kind of like a spare tire on the automobile, it's there...but I don't want to ever have to use it.

The first thought to cross my mind after reading this was the punchline to the old "Wanna hear a dirty joke?"

"A white horse fell in a mud puddle."

Bruno, I think you have hit one point a lot of folks glance over concerning reliability. Glock has pretty well proven themselves in that arena, as have other manufacturers.

Personally, I carry my subcompact Springfield XD in .40, because I know that it will work each and every time I pull the trigger. I have no idea if it will take the same abuse as a Glock, though I suspect it would be pretty close. But short of being in a war zone in Siberia and firing thousands of rounds without stopping, cleaning or lubricating, it serves my purposes well.

One thing I will always recommend to anyone considering a firearm purchase is try and rent the exact gun you are interested in buying, and do so several times. Typically, a rental will have a high number of rounds through it, has probably been beat up a time or three and will probably not have as strict of a cleaning schedule or routine as a personally owned firearm. This lets you test, in part, how reliably the gun will perform should you buy one like it. Not to mention it gives you a feel for the way it fires, perceived recoil, ease of controls (mag release, slide lock, etc.) and most importantly, how it fits your hand.

SWMBO finally came with me to the range last weekend, and we rented a Diamondback .380 for her to shoot, as she is interested in a Ruger LCP. Since they didn't have an LCP, this was as close as they could come. We agreed to rent it, purchased a 50 round box of ammo for it and headed out to shoot. In the first 6 round magazine, I had to clear two failures to feed and one failure to extract. The second magazine had two more failures, one of each type, and only the first round fired had no issues. After the third shot (and second failure), I promptly dropped the magazine, unloaded it and took the gun and ammo back inside. They didn't charge for the rental, nor the ammo, since there were less than 10 shots fired with a slightly greater than 50% failure rate.

Needless to say, we won't be purchasing a Diamondback (though the LCP is still a possibility).

Now, it could have been the ammo, or just that the gun needed a good cleaning. But, I don't want a gun that is picky about ammo, nor one that has so many problems when a bit dirty. If I'm trusting my life to it, it needs to perform. If I shot 200 rounds at the range and got mugged on the way home (read:before cleaning), I need a gun that is up to the task of defending my life and well being.

Lucky for me, my XD is my daily carry gun, and it eats whatever I feed it and isn't afraid to get a little dirty.

Originally Posted by shooter74743

*snip*

I actually did check out my Kimber Ultra CDP 1911 in a muddy puddle for three shots. I dipped it & really made an effort to get grit into it. I lifted it out of the puddle, gave it one good shake to ensure the barrel didn't have any sizeable obstructions & shot. My buddy said it looked like a bomb went off in my hand as muddy water misted out of it. I shot two more times after the first shot to ensure feed and reliability, but it was enough for me & I didn't want to subject it to more "torture" as it's not a cheap gun. I was amazed at how much of the mud I ended up wearing & also amazed at how much of a PITA it is to break down a weapon to every single minute part to properly clean it after such a test. It was a good test as I had gunk in every moving part. I bet I used a roll of paper towels & a box of q-tip ear swabs cleaning it. Doing this test really built a lot of confidence in my 1911 & I'm glad I did it. I have absolutely zero doubt that it would function if I ever had to use it...which I hope I never ever do. Kind of like a spare tire on the automobile, it's there...but I don't want to ever have to use it.

Reading this reminded me of a brutal test the folks over at Ballistics101 put a SIG P229 .357Sig through a while back. Here's an excerpt:

"The Sig Sauer motto is "To hell and back." We decided to bury it in the sand and jump on it several times. We then pulled it out ejected the magazine and dropped the gun and mag in a bucket of muddy water. Next we cycled the slide a few times and proceeded to shoot another 50 rounds flawlessly. We figured what the hay, stick it in the mud at the bottom of the bucket. We pulled it out again and without a rinse launched 50 more mud splattering rounds. Because we had to give it back, I wanted to field strip, rinse and lube the whole thing we left. My good intentions were wasted. No sooner did I finish, our team grabbed it and fired it again. I guess they were not finished with it yet. It was as if everyone was waiting for more trigger time with it. It was popular that day to say the least. Throughout the rest of the day the SIG continued to perform nonstop. We counted the empty boxes of 357 rounds. All the shooters included, we ran just under 1300 rounds. Some hollow point, some flat point. Some Cor-Bon, Hornady and Speer. We had not one failure to fire or failure to eject."

I guess that helps explain the SEAL's love for their SIGs, especially considering that they can use anything they choose!

Originally Posted by Bruno

,,,,,,,,,
I've read that e.g. Glock is very reliable even in very bad conditions, such as wet and muddy environments. In my unqualified opinion, reliability like that would be of the highest interest. So how do some of these fancy handguns compare to something like a Glock in terms of reliability in bad circumstances? Will they all work after having fallen in a muddy puddle?

Simple answer,,,,,I never go outside after it rains,,,,so no muddy puddle problem,,,,

I had a Sig 229 in .40. Sold it. Nice gun but ......... if (shudder) I could only have one to choose from, my Glock G-27 in .40 would still be what I'd pack.

I was intrigued with the 357 sig. I've read that they suffer from relatively early barrel erosion but I don't know that for a fact.

Bruno, this is a now famous 'torture test' for the Glock back years ago. I don't think there is a more reliable semi auto, though some may be as reliable.

Unofficial Glock Page