What factors / objective performance standards went into your carry gun decision?

[JCN]

I have been struggling with this one a little. Would love to hear some opinions and thought processes behind them.

I have sometimes heard the mantras of: “carry what you shoot best” and “a gun should be comforting and not comfortable.”

But from competition, I know that I shoot heavy CZs with light triggers better than most other traditional carry guns.

When I carry something like my P365, I definitely give up objective performance in order to be comfortable.

I try and run most performance drills back to back with carry and competition guns so I get a sense of how much I’m giving up and it’s a real thing.

How good is “good enough” though? I try and vet my carry gun against objective performance standards like the Federal Air Marshal, FAST and Gabe White standards. I set a minimum performance requirement and whatever gun I carry has to pass this.

I thought this might be a good place to ask for opinions and learn what people are carrying and why?

And as a follow up question, if you were to do a pistol class with one of the famous trainers... would you use that carry setup?

[Archer1440]

By no means do I want to derail your theme here, but let me interject that carry solutions like the PHLster Enigma do help shift the balance of the equation to allowing one to more easily carry much more shootable pistols, which of course tend to be larger with fewer ergonomic compromises.

I think we need to look at overall systems rather than individual components, with training being an integral part of those systems.

I carry the most shootable pistol, compatible with my training, that I can completely hide, in a manner that does not compromise speed.

I also carry other tools that are lower on the force continuum compatible with my training and capability.

Micro pistols have their place, for me as backups, for others as primaries, but personally I choose not to compromise accuracy, power, and speed with the pistol portion of the system, whenever possible. I’m just not good enough to shoot micro pistols as fast and accurately as larger ones.

[snow white]

I'm a bit different in that the gun i carry is the gun I compete with (from concielment) and its the gun I take to classes (run from concielment unless OWB is mandatory for the class im taking) but even then im using the same clutch belt i have staged next to my bed. I will carry a j frame 638 when im at work during the summer where i could get fired if caught with a blaster. 100% of the time out of work im carrying a compact 9mm semi auto. I started with compact cz's then it was a ltt compact carry, then to a ltt92 compact now its a G19 due life just being easier due to it being such a well supported platform throughout the industry. I dont shoot full size pistols because I dont carry full size pistols and I have no interest in shooting pistols i won't carry ( thats just my own neurosis) so I'd say for me
1. Reputable manufacturer (I surely have my preferences)
2. Classic compact size
3. 9mm
4. Ability to accommodate modern tools like red dots and lights (this is why I moved away from the compact carry even though I LOVED everything else about that gun)
If it meets that basic criteria I will run the gun like a raped ape.

[YVK]

Answering your question back to front: if I am doing a class with Stoeger or competition people at TPC, I use Shadows. If I am doing a defensive class, I use not Shadows.

Good enough: one step above "don't suck". I mean, this is a forum where practitioners of pistol get together and where people push themselves so there are some biases here, but I still remember when founder of this site ranked sub-10 FAST as an "intermediate". This was just few years ago. I think that a D class guy is good enough. Sub-5 FAST is overtraining. It doesn't hurt, it even offers advantages but it takes your time and resources from other things in life.

Comforting not comfortable: there was a time when I carried full sized guns that I competed with, took classes with TLG, RSS, and Gabe and shot failure drills with. I carry a G43x now and don't do any of that with that gun anymore. See above under "good enough". If I am wearing clothing that takes G19, then sure but dressing around a gun is not a thing for many.

[RJ]

Good question.

Thought about it a bit before posting. This is only "for me".

My personal history starts in 2013, knowing zip about guns. Over the past 7 years, I proceeded to buy and sell a number (12) before settling on my current carry, and 13th firearm, a stock G48. For reference, I shoot USPSA poorly (Production, D, 36%). My Gabe White standards are Bill Drill 3.49s; F2S 2.95s; II Drill 3.26s; and 4B2H 4.19s. I'm a retired engineer; just another random geezer trying to avoid being on YouTube.

For 2021, I've selected three primary metrics: 1) Find Your Level, a pass fail of 10 shots on a 1" square, 2" circle, and so on. I aim to pass this at 5 yards, untimed. 2) My goal for "The Test" (10 rounds 10 sec 10 yards on a B8) is 95, and finally 3) for a 25 yd, static, 10 rounds, untimed, on a B8 is 90 points.

My goal for USPSA is to make it to C class. I purchased a G34.5 this year and retired my G19, which I've used the last 4 years.

Factors / Objective Performance Standards

These are in order, I think, again, just for me:

1) Size

I am 5'6" and have M hands. I cannot shoot a MK23 very well. In fact, I can't shoot an M9 either. So from the get-go, gun selection is limited to guns which allow an M grip size or smaller.

2) Reliability

So this eliminates "all" unreliable guns. What is reliable? You can quantify probabilistically, I guess. I think I read somewhere recently the MHS Procurement Specification for the Army's new selection had to have no more than one stoppage in 2,500 rounds (don't quote me.) Mainly squeeze = bang. That is the kind of reliability I am looking for in a carry gun. This factor includes operating with duty/carry ammo. It needs to be on Doc's List, function in my gun and (see next point) be accurate. (The SD ammo also needs to be available in quantity I need, but that's not the gun.)

3) Accuracy

This is I think almost a given, these days. For sure, literally all of the pistols I've ever owned (possibly except the M%P 1.0 FS 9mm, the first gun I ever had) were more accurate than I was. But worth mentioning as a factor. The gun must go bang, and it must land rounds to PoA, otherwise it's of no use.

4) Ergonomics

This is a very broad term. Again, "for me": does it have unusual controls? Can I reach them? Are they large enough to operate? Does it have a mag release that ejects the mag if bump it? (looking at you, Walther PPS M2.) Is it annoying to shoot? (Glock 26). Is the felt recoil too harsh? (G43X) Is the trigger system too weird to get your head around (HK P30SK LEM V1)

Suffice it to say it should able to be shot and carried. I've also figured out "Ergonomics" also involves weight of the loaded gun, per rounds carried, slide thickness, grip length, etc. (I kept a chart of ozs per round for all my carry guns, and ranked them all. The Glock 19 still is the overall champion on that list. It beats out even the touted P365.)

5) Capacity

It needs to be "sufficient", whatever that means. In today's climate, 10 round mag bans are a distinct possibility. Again, for me, that's the lower limit, since I am somewhat restricted to carrying a medium sized handgun. Say between 10 and 15 rounds would be ideal. Guns at both ends of that range have their pluses and minus. But a G43 (6+1) or Shield (7+1/8+1) is not "sufficient", in my mind for a "carry" gun.

6) Robustness

Can you use the gun through it's intended service envelop, without issue? I dropped a partially full P365XL mag during a USPSA match. I went to reload it, and noticed the follower had barfed out of the top. That and other issues caused me to conclude the small Sig was not really up to the job of competition and daily carry use. So the gun has to be able to be banged around a bit.

7) Serviceability

Can you (I) maintain the gun? A simple design with minimum number of parts is ldeal, especially if it can be maintained by relatively untrained people (me) who have not attended specialized Armorer's Training (also me).

8) Minimal Through-Life Cost (Recurring and Non-Recurring)

Ideally, the initial cost of the gun should be affordable, and the running cost in terms of aftermarket parts (holsters, sights, magazines, spare parts) cheap, plentiful, and easy to come by.



I think that's my list for a carry gun. As say, ended up with a Glock 48, but it did take me about 6 years to work this out.

For the bonus question: My next training experience will be Tac Con '21 in Dallas in March. I am hopefully going to be in some shooting sessions with "national" trainers. I plan to take my G48 AIWB for those, and to shoot the Pistol Match with it as well.

[BehindBlueI's]

This is something I've evolved on over the years. Early me was all about objective shooting standards. What can I pull and get 5 shots into a 5" circle at 5Y the fastest sort of things. I no longer care about minute differences, because after working a metric shit ton of shootings I just don't think the hair splitting over a few tenths here and there are very likely to matter and to get those tenths I often have to give up something that is more likely to matter. For "tie breakers" there's certainly nothing wrong with objective measurement, I just don't make it my focus.

For a carry gun I require:

1) It's easy to NOT shoot when I don't want to shoot.
2) It's easy to shoot when I DO want to shoot.
3) It's dead-nuts reliable.
4) It can be carried during the activity I intend to carry it during (ie, jogging is not the same as on duty)
5) It is something I can reliably index on command.

Then questions of objective performance come in to play. I like "finding your level" as a drill since it gives you reasonable accuracy standards with short strings of fire (1, 2, 3, and 4 round strings).

*edit*
Grammar/clarity 2.0 installed

[1slow]

This is something I've evolved on over the years. Early me was all about objective shooting standards. What can I pull and get 5 shots into a 5" circle at 5Y the fastest sort of things. I no longer care about minute differences, because after working a metric shit ton of shootings I just don't think the hair splitting over a few tenths here and there are incredibly unlikely to matter and to get those tenths I often have to give up something that is more likely to matter. For "tie breakers" there's certainly nothing wrong with objective measurement, I just don't make it my focus.

For a carry gun I require:

1) It's easy to NOT shoot when I don't want to shoot.
2) It's easy to shoot when I DO want to shoot.
3) It's dead-nuts reliable.
4) It can be carried during the activity I intend to carry it during (ie, jogging is not the same as on duty)
5) It is something I can reliably index on command.

Then questions of objective performance come in to play. I like "finding your level" as a drill since it gives you reasonable accuracy standards with short strings of fire (1, 2, 3, and 4 round strings).

Makes sense.

[DDTSGM]

I have been struggling with this one a little. Would love to hear some opinions and thought processes behind them.

I have sometimes heard the mantras of: “carry what you shoot best” and “a gun should be comforting and not comfortable.”

I don't think a pistol should be comforting, that may give one the illusion that they can do things and go places that they wouldn't normally go or do if they weren't carrying.

I don't know who wrote this line but it makes a lot of sense to me: If you need a gun to go to the grocery store, you don't need a gun, you need a new grocery store.

That being said, for me I think it needs to be a pistol that I can always carry, regardless of activity. Using that criteria my 'carry' is a Ruger LCP. I occasionally carry a G43 or a Shield, but really nothing larger. I was shooting that pistol at least 100 rounds a month, but recently haven't been able to find any .380 I'd pay the price asked for, much less the 200 round Sig value packs I normally get from Cabellas.

And as a follow up question, if you were to do a pistol class with one of the famous trainers... would you use that carry setup?

Heck, no. I'm going to a course put on by Ben Stoeger in February, I'll be taking the SifgP320 Legion I plan on shooting in USPSA. I think it's fine to compete with the pistol you carry, if applicable, but in reality, the things you would pick up at a class should be transferable to other pistols when you get back home and practice them.

[Clusterfrack]

For a carry gun I require:

1) It's easy to NOT shoot when I don't want to shoot.
2) It's easy to shoot when I DO want to shoot.
3) It's dead-nuts reliable.
4) It can be carried during the activity I intend to carry it during (ie, jogging is not the same as on duty)
5) It is something I can reliably index on command.

I only have a few things to add to this excellent list:

6) Commonality with my competition guns, so practice is synergistic.
7) Well-engineered, sensible design that I disassemble fully and replace parts as needed.

That used to be Glocks, was briefly Sig320s (until I realized they didn’t meet several key requirements on this list), and is now CZ P-07s.

About objective or quantitative metrics: if I can approach match gun drill or classifier scores with my carry gun, I’m happy. Lately I’ve been starting practice sessions with 25 yd draws on 8” steel with my carry gun (shoot to failure), and finishing with the same drill using my Shadow2, but 10 shots, pushing my limits.

[Ed4032]

I’ve seen videos of how fast an accurate you can shoot. It probably doesn’t matter what gun or where you carry it, you’re going to make the bad guy have a bad day. Just sayin.