Size VS Capacity

[cmgee67]

What are yalls thoughts on the size vs capacity debate? I see this discussed all the time and wanted to bring it here!
Ready...... GO!

[jason812]

Like single stack vs double stack size vs capacity or 9mm vs 45 size vs capacity?

If the later the answer is .40cal

[oljames3]

Or 4.25 vs 5 inch barrel?

Size does matter.

Very subjective and personal. I prefer a 5 inch barrel, 9mm (cost and availability), 17+1 or more. For me, this is adequate power in a pistol that I will carry and can shoot well, having sufficient rounds in one mag, using ammo that is light enough that I can carry the quantity I want to carry.

[crazy2medic]

I settled for both, full size 1911 double stack .45 14 +1

[MechAg94]

Concealed Carry: Overall size versus width? Many single stack pistols are just as tall and long as compact double stack pistols. Does the narrower pistol help enough to justify the lower capacity?

My answer is the two carry guns I use right now are the Glock 19 and the Springfield XD Mod 2 45. I prefer more capacity. I had never used OWB holsters until recently. Since I normally don't tuck a shirt in and usually use shirts that hang over a holster well, OWB holsters are more comfortable than IWB for me.

[imkopaka]

Why choose? I can carry 13+1 in my Springfield XD .45. Not really concealable, but since OC passed that's not really much of an issue.

[maverick2076]

It depends on what I am doing, where I am going, and what I am wearing. As a general rule, I choose the largest pistol with the highest capacity that I can easily conceal. Usually that is a Glock 19 OWB on my hip. Sometimes it will be a Sig P229 in the same place. Now that I have lost some weight, I am adding appendix carry to the mix for running errands and such. I've carried either a G26 or my Shield AIWB. And I always carry a spare magazine. With the Glocks, I carry a full sized (17 round) spare. Mags are your most likely source of malfunction, and the easiest way to correct that malfunction is to change mags.

[yerasimos]

I settled for both, full size 1911 double stack .45 14 +1

This setup preferred by crazy2medic would seem to offer the most in a handgun, in terms of:

1. maximizing the diameter and frontal area of each cartridge;

2. maximizing the weight of each cartridge's bullet (for defensive carry, I believe heavier is better, and quality .45 ACP cartridges with defensive 230 gr bullets are not too difficult to find);

3. maximizing capacity of the gun before a magazine change is required;

4. optimizing the trigger for accuracy, shot placement and user friendliness.

I would like to run this type of gun myself, and would have no qualms about using a 1911 or something very similar for competition purposes, or simply for fun at the range. For defensive carry, however, I would prefer a different set of controls and action mechanism.

Unfortunately, the double-stack .45 ACP offerings that have controls and an action mechanism that I like are too big for my hand to properly work the trigger (a man-machine interface problem), so I find myself looking at other guns for defensive carry.

[Soccerdad1995]

As others have noted, you also need to consider caliber in this debate.

Regardless, there is only one correct answer to this question. It is the same correct answer to 99.632% of all the questions in the world. That answer is....

It depends.

I own a tiny .380 caliber gun that holds 6+1 rounds. Next to my bed I have a "too large for IDPA" gun that holds 18+1 rounds of 9mm. In my car, I usually have my Calico M950 that holds 100+1 rounds of 9mm in the magazine. And my most common EDC is a Dan Wesson CCO that has 7+1 rounds of .45 ACP. They are each a perfect mix of size, caliber, and capacity, IMHO, for their varied purposes.

[cmgee67]

I guess I should have worded my question a little better.

Would you rather carry a smaller gun with less capacity or a larger gun with more capacity and are you comfortable with that smaller gun being what you need? Since we never know when we may need a firearm against one person or many persons is the 6+1 or 7+1 going going to be adequate enough? Even if a spare mag is carried you could still carry a glock 19 with 15+1 and have more rounds on you then a single stack with a back up mag. Caliber is just a preference so that's up to the decision maker.

[Bitter Clinger]

I guess I should have worded my question a little better.

Would you rather carry a smaller gun with less capacity or a larger gun with more capacity and are you comfortable with that smaller gun being what you need? Since we never know when we may need a firearm against one person or many persons is the 6+1 or 7+1 going going to be adequate enough? Even if a spare mag is carried you could still carry a glock 19 with 15+1 and have more rounds on you then a single stack with a back up mag. Caliber is just a preference so that's up to the decision maker.

It depends.

[Soccerdad1995]

I guess I should have worded my question a little better.

Would you rather carry a smaller gun with less capacity or a larger gun with more capacity and are you comfortable with that smaller gun being what you need? Since we never know when we may need a firearm against one person or many persons is the 6+1 or 7+1 going going to be adequate enough? Even if a spare mag is carried you could still carry a glock 19 with 15+1 and have more rounds on you then a single stack with a back up mag. Caliber is just a preference so that's up to the decision maker.

I think you are downplaying caliber too much. Consider that you need fewer center mass hit with a .45 to neutralize a threat, than you will need with a 9mm or a .380. In that way, caliber is directly related to capacity. If you are worried about having to neutralize a set number of BG's, then you will likely want X rounds in your .45 and X+ something more in your 9mm or .380.

My answer to your question above is that I would prefer to have the largest gun, caliber, and capacity, that I can comfortably carry and easily conceal. This will vary based on what I am wearing, what I am doing, and even how my back feels that morning when I wake up.

[maverick2076]

I guess I should have worded my question a little better.

Would you rather carry a smaller gun with less capacity or a larger gun with more capacity and are you comfortable with that smaller gun being what you need? Since we never know when we may need a firearm against one person or many persons is the 6+1 or 7+1 going going to be adequate enough? Even if a spare mag is carried you could still carry a glock 19 with 15+1 and have more rounds on you then a single stack with a back up mag. Caliber is just a preference so that's up to the decision maker.

I think you are downplaying caliber too much. Consider that you need fewer center mass hit with a .45 to neutralize a threat, than you will need with a 9mm or a .380. In that way, caliber is directly related to capacity. If you are worried about having to neutralize a set number of BG's, then you will likely want X rounds in your .45 and X+ something more in your 9mm or .380.

My answer to your question above is that I would prefer to have the largest gun, caliber, and capacity, that I can comfortably carry and easily conceal. This will vary based on what I am wearing, what I am doing, and even how my back feels that morning when I wake up.

The difference in penetration and expansion between the most common defensive calibers (9mm, .40, .45) when using quality self-defense ammo is practically nonexistent. Between those three, caliber is only relevant as it affects capacity, accuracy, weight and recoil. Which is why so many federal, state and local agencies, as well as individuals, are switching back to 9mm. No effective difference in penetration or expansion, but higher capacity, lighter weight, and lower recoil than either .40 or .45.

[oljames3]

I guess I should have worded my question a little better.

Would you rather carry a smaller gun with less capacity or a larger gun with more capacity and are you comfortable with that smaller gun being what you need? Since we never know when we may need a firearm against one person or many persons is the 6+1 or 7+1 going going to be adequate enough? Even if a spare mag is carried you could still carry a glock 19 with 15+1 and have more rounds on you then a single stack with a back up mag. Caliber is just a preference so that's up to the decision maker.

In the field artillery, when our computers go down and we have to switch to manual procedures, we call it "operations in degraded mode." It is an acceptable way to operate, just not our preferred way to operate.

For me, carrying concealed is a degraded mode. Carrying a small, low capacity pistol is a degraded mode. This is primarily because I have decided to carry a semi-auto with a 5 inch barrel and 16+ round capacity. Concealing the pistol is not a consideration, it is an afterthought. I want to carry the tool that I have determined to be the best to use in defending myself, my wife, and my children. I carry a S&W M&P Mod 2.0 9mm, 5 inch barrel 16 +1 with three spare 16 round magazines; basic load of 65 rounds.

I'll cover my pistol when I need to. Concealing it, beyond the letter of the law, is not really an option. Works for me. Your mileage will vary.

For a more thorough exposition, see: https://blog.hsoi.com/2009/02/14/a-simple-experiment/

[C-dub]

Ford vs. Chevy vs. Dodge

Glock vs. 1911

You might as well have started with something simple first like the choices above.

I started with .40's. That was recommended to me by a LEO to accommodate both sides of that argument. I have since since switched to .45's after learning more about recoil of both rounds. Thanks TAM. So, now I have 13+1 in .45 plus 2 spare 13 round mags. Unless I'm carrying my 1911, then it's 8+1 and two 8 round spare mags.