GA Firing Line

NEW Sig Wizards Sleeve

chance

chance

Tracker
Laufen said:
As mentioned before, B&T makes a superior gun mechanically and comes in at $400 less than the Sig.

I get it though, Sig drops a lot on R&D and that costs a lot of money.............but this looks like a Taurus or Mossberg.
Click to expand...
It depends on what you need the gun for too. For a dedicated competition gun, I think you would be better off with the MPX. But there are many reasons why I chose to buy a B&T over an MPX, and price had nothing to do with it.
 
G

Grunk

Why leave anything here?
Kalash Klub
Lifetime Supporter
Leshaire said:
Better question. Why a longer barrel?? 9mm performs best around 4". Why would you want to make it longer??
Click to expand...
That's kinda my point though. This gun is already so large why not go to 4 or 4.5 inch barrel. I realize those gains would be marginal, but they'd be there and it doesn't seem to me it would have any effect on the handling of the weapon Now, it it was threaded and the assumption was a suppressor would be adding length, I guess that would be different.
 
Leshaire

Leshaire

Weekend Warrior
Grunk said:
That's kinda my point though. This gun is already so large why not go to 4 or 4.5 inch barrel. I realize those gains would be marginal, but they'd be there and it doesn't seem to me it would have any effect on the handling of the weapon Now, it it was threaded and the assumption was a suppressor would be adding length, I guess that would be different.
Click to expand...

But if the goal is minimal size and weight, which it is, why would you add more of each for “marginal gains” in ballistics?


Sent from my Obamaphone using Tapatalk
 
G

Grunk

Why leave anything here?
Kalash Klub
Lifetime Supporter
Leshaire said:
But if the goal is minimal size and weight, which it is, why would you add more of each for “marginal gains” in ballistics?


Sent from my Obamaphone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I guess I just don't get it. If I'm going to give up being able to holster it, I don't see a little more barrel hurting anything. But hell, I can't afford one anyway so my opinion is pretty meaningless. :sick:
 
Laufen

Laufen

Beloved flaming retard
Lifetime Supporter
Grunk said:
I guess I just don't get it. If I'm going to give up being able to holster it, I don't see a little more barrel hurting anything. But hell, I can't afford one anyway so my opinion is pretty meaningless. :sick:
Click to expand...
I think the point of it was to make it as absolutely small (short) as possible for some sort of a cqb entry type option. When it comes to that type of scenario, a few fps aren't that important. Compactness, and the ability to shoulder the firearm are the pluses.
 
Last edited:
Leshaire

Leshaire

Weekend Warrior
Laufen said:
I think the point of it was to make it as absolutely small (short) as possible for some sort of a cqb entry type option. When it comes to that type of scenario, a few fps aren't that important. Compactness, and the ability to shoulder the firearm are the pluses.
Click to expand...
Exactly! For the intended purpose, shorter is better.
 
G

Grunk

Why leave anything here?
Kalash Klub
Lifetime Supporter
Laufen said:
I think the point of it was to make it as absolutely small (short) as possible for some sort of a cqb entry type option. When it comes to that type of scenario, a few fps aren't that important. Compactness, and the ability to shoulder the firearm are the pluses.
Click to expand...
Leshaire said:
Exactly! For the intended purpose, shorter is better.
Click to expand...
cmshoot said:
Yup. I remember clearing areas where a 14” Benelli or 10” Colt SMG were too long, and having to switch to my secondary.
Click to expand...

This is why I ask questions. The only 'room clearing' I've ever been involved in was when I was a bartender/bouncer in a biker bar in Colorado. That mainly involved 'hickory shampoos' administered with cut down ax handles. :fish:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top