I'm in the same market, have shot several and have yet to find one I like better than my Colt .380. A close runner up was the Bersa Ultra Compact 9mm, was the best balance of weight and size/accuracy of those I tried. I really want to try a Beretta Nano, have heard good things about them but none are available locally for trial and don't know anyone who owns one to check out.

I've found some good 9mm pistols, foremost the Ruger 89 and Beretta 92FS, but these are full sized frames with long barrels. They are not ideal for concealed carry, but very accurate with very minimal recoil compared to the sub-compacts.

I tried the Kel Tec PF-9 and PF-11, too light for anyone less than an experienced marksman to control well. First rounds were all very accurate, but went downhill from there. I couldn't rapid fire either one well at all, but then again, I will be the first to admit I'm not a trained marksman, probably why I still carry a .380. It is the largest caliber I can shoot consistently and well.

double post

Why did you start two separate threads on this? I responded to your other thread.

I would check out FNH's FNX-9 and CZ's compacts, the P-01 and P-07 or the CZ-75 compacts

Ruger SR9 and SR9c are both great for range and home defense use and SR9c is also great for CC, 10 round mag for CC and 17 rounds for backup or range use. They are both accurate dependable and pleasant to shoot. The safety and mag release are well suited for left or right hand use and the price is quite reasonable.

I bought a beretta px4 storm 9mm (full size), however you can get one in compact. I really like the manual safety feature as its my first firearm. I considered the GLock too but I'm in the same bought, the safety features for a first time gun owner are piss poor.

I haven't seen the Beretta Nano but have heard good things. I'm a huge fan of Beretta as you can probably tell. How about the S&W Bodyguard? I believe that's what its called.

I'm looking to invest in a Sig .40 cal here soon. We can't carry in CA so getting a super small firearm doesn't have any attraction for me.

Go to the range and try out 5 or so, that's what I did and finally found my niche!

For a pure range pistol, I have to second the Beretta PX4. I have a .40 full size and at the range it is a pure joy to shoot. I have a Sub Compact 9 as well and it shoots really nice. The shorter barrel makes accuracy a little bit more challenging but it still is good... I am still old school and like the hammer fired SA/DA style and these fit me really well...

I would start off by saying this. There is a huge difference between a range gun and a carry gun. This is not to say that a range gun cannot be a carry gun or visa versa. What it does mean is this. If a gun is to be used as a carry gun, THAT is its most important reason for existing in your collection. A fun or range gun is NOT it main reason for being. What this means is if a gun is to serve as something on which you may have to stake your life, you had better select one that meets criteria geared towards that purpose only. Now obviously you are going to take this gun to a range and you should do so.... frequently. But your range work with a carry gun is more in line with serious business, not casual plinking or simply punching holes in paper targets.

I hope you understand the difference here because it is important and could affect which gun you buy. You might look at gun thinking, "this is what I want for range time" without thinking, "is this gun going to serve me well as a potential life saving tool". I'm not playing with words here or twisting semantics with all of this. It is a matter of one's reason for buying a particular firearm. And extreme case in point would be a target .22LR.

Some people buy target .22's with the idea that they could also use it as a self defense gun. Well yes, in the pure form they certainly could. But would most want to deliberately select, say, a Ruger Mark III as their carry gun? No, not if they know anything about the subject. Not while this may seem extreme, you can apply the same logic to centerfire handguns for target and SD use. Can you target practice with an M&P 9mm? Of course you can. I do this frequently. But I do it with training in mind with that gun, not simple target shooting. I happen to have one of those guns and it is in my carry stable. Very accurate and I treat it for what it is: a fine SD gun.

I do hope this all makes sense. I have seen people over the years make mistakes along these lines so I just wanted to clear a few concepts and ideas up. If you are of a mind to buy a handgun which you will want to use as a carry gun as well as a range gun, your first priority should be how it will serve you as a self defense gun.

Originally Posted by SouthernBoy

I would start off by saying this. There is a huge difference between a range gun and a carry gun. This is not to say that a range gun cannot be a carry gun or visa versa. What it does mean is this. If a gun is to be used as a carry gun, THAT is its most important reason for existing in your collection. A fun or range gun is NOT it main reason for being. What this means is if a gun is to serve as something on which you may have to stake your life, you had better select one that meets criteria geared towards that purpose only. Now obviously you are going to take this gun to a range and you should do so.... frequently. But your range work with a carry gun is more in line with serious business, not casual plinking or simply punching holes in paper targets.

I hope you understand the difference here because it is important and could affect which gun you buy. You might look at gun thinking, "this is what I want for range time" without thinking, "is this gun going to serve me well as a potential life saving tool". I'm not playing with words here or twisting semantics with all of this. It is a matter of one's reason for buying a particular firearm. And extreme case in point would be a target .22LR.

Some people buy target .22's with the idea that they could also use it as a self defense gun. Well yes, in the pure form they certainly could. But would most want to deliberately select, say, a Ruger Mark III as their carry gun? No, not if they know anything about the subject. Not while this may seem extreme, you can apply the same logic to centerfire handguns for target and SD use. Can you target practice with an M&P 9mm? Of course you can. I do this frequently. But I do it with training in mind with that gun, not simple target shooting. I happen to have one of those guns and it is in my carry stable. Very accurate and I treat it for what it is: a fine SD gun.

I do hope this all makes sense. I have seen people over the years make mistakes along these lines so I just wanted to clear a few concepts and ideas up. If you are of a mind to buy a handgun which you will want to use as a carry gun as well as a range gun, your first priority should be how it will serve you as a self defense gun.

Well look at the genius over here?!?!?

SO what is a good carry good in your opinion boss? And whats a good range gun?

Any of the sub-compacts that offer an extra clip with a grip extension would work well for what you want. I personally like the Springfield Xd, Xdm's but a lot about handguns is how they fit you so shoot as many as you can.

Gotta side with SouthernBoy on the carry gun vs. range gun.

For some people, it could be the one and same gun. For others, it may not. Both serve two very different purposes. I have numerous range guns that I never use for carry.

My carry gun can and does change at times. But for the most part, once I decide on one, I stick with it for quite a while.

A range gun for me, is to spend some time honing my shooting skills and to pass some time with friends or family.

A carry gun for me, is one that I know like the back of my own hand, one that I've shot thousands of rounds thru, and one that has proven itself to be completely dependable and reliable.

It will also be of such a caliber that I know will do the job, if it ever comes down to that.

Carry vs. range can open a debate that will last forever. I have several pistols that I use for both. I have shot several thousand rounds through each and would not hesitate to depend on either if needed. My PX4 Subcompact is not as much fun at the range as my PX4 compact but I still shoot it well and enjoy it. My XD is my primary carry but sometimes it is just too big. For that matter I have carried my 92A1 on occasions but not often. A 1911? Yes but not my favorite carry piece. For tee-shirt and shorts weather I carry my Bersa BP9cc. But whatever you carry, we can all agree that you should be absolutely sure that you are comfortable with it and confident in your ability with it which in most if not all cases comes only from shooting it a lot at the range.

I would personally stay away from Smith&Wesson and newer Walther's(If made by S&W). I would go with a Sig or a Beretta. The Beretta Px4 9MM SC is a great little weapon and so is the fullsize. I always try to get older guns that dont have polymer. I did cave in and buy a Px4 .40 and love it but the Beretta's seem to be one of the few makes that don't feel like crap in my hands. When I went to buy my Sig Mosquito, I also held the M&P 22Lr and laughed at the feel and the quality it seemed to not be. Even my wife was like " That gun is junk, Lets get the Sig"

Originally Posted by TheLAGuy

Well look at the genius over here?!?!?

SO what is a good carry good in your opinion boss? And whats a good range gun?

I trust that's a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor.... right?

Please don't misunderstand my message with that post. What I was trying to convey was more along the lines of one's primary perception of what purpose the gun is to serve. If range work is to be its primary purpose, then perhaps one's choice of guns may differ a bit as opposed to a primary self defense gun. This by no means is to say that you can't have fun with a Glock on a range doing all sorts of things. It just means that when the primary concern is SD, other factors take a front seat to one's candidate selections.

My opinion of range versus SD guns is going to be just that... my opinion. If I was going to just do range work only, not to include SD training scenarios, I might be inclined to go with a modified 1911 in either 9mm or .45ACP. My inclination would then be tight groups and absolute accuracy at distance. Along with these would be target .22's and probably a good single action big bore from some metallic silhouette work.

Where SD is my prime concern, I would go with several in my imaginary SD stable. A Glock 19 and 23, and an M&P 9mm, would top the list. I would also add an M&P .40 and .45 for some variation and throw in a Glock 17 and 22 to boot. The CZ75 would be a very nice addition as would the Browning Hi-Power. And for an occasion change either the Beretta 92 FS or the Taurus 92 AF.

I have a Smith & Wesson M&P 9c that I love. It's good for concealment, good capacity for how small it is (12+1) and I find it a lot of fun to shoot at a range. Might be worth a look.

Originally Posted by paratrooper

Gotta side with SouthernBoy on the carry gun vs. range gun.

For some people, it could be the one and same gun. For others, it may not. Both serve two very different purposes. I have numerous range guns that I never use for carry.

My carry gun can and does change at times. But for the most part, once I decide on one, I stick with it for quite a while.

A range gun for me, is to spend some time honing my shooting skills and to pass some time with friends or family.

A carry gun for me, is one that I know like the back of my own hand, one that I've shot thousands of rounds thru, and one that has proven itself to be completely dependable and reliable.

It will also be of such a caliber that I know will do the job, if it ever comes down to that.

Thank you. I'm glad I got my point across because I'm sure I probably caused a bit of confusion with my post. A prime example of a fun range gun for me is one of my .22LR target pistols. Shoot a lot for little money and just have a good time with them. There are certainly crossovers and some folks just cannot afford the luxury of having a wide variety of guns in their collection from which to choose. A very good dual purpose pistol is the M&P series, especially in 9mm. Accurate, easy to shoot, superb feel, and just a very good all around pistol.

Frankly for carry, while I have three M&P's I prefer one of my gen3 Glock 23's. Reliable to a fault, it is a gun you can depend upon to do its job when called upon.

Originally Posted by SouthernBoy

Thank you. I'm glad I got my point across because I'm sure I probably caused a bit of confusion with my post. A prime example of a fun range gun for me is one of my .22LR target pistols. Shoot a lot for little money and just have a good time with them. There are certainly crossovers and some folks just cannot afford the luxury of having a wide variety of guns in their collection from which to choose. A very good dual purpose pistol is the M&P series, especially in 9mm. Accurate, easy to shoot, superb feel, and just a very good all around pistol.

Frankly for carry, while I have three M&P's I prefer one of my gen3 Glock 23's. Reliable to a fault, it is a gun you can depend upon to do its job when called upon.

Not to be a dick but I hate this argument. How many guns do you have that aren't reliable? I have 5 handguns currently (none of which are Glocks) and I'd trust my life to any of them any day. And for the record, I'm not a Glock hater. I want one actually. I just dislike the main pro-Glock argument being their incredible reliability, as if other handguns FTF or FTE on every other shot.

Originally Posted by hof8231

Not to be a dick but I hate this argument. How many guns do you have that aren't reliable? I have 5 handguns currently (none of which are Glocks) and I'd trust my life to any of them any day. And for the record, I'm not a Glock hater. I want one actually. I just dislike the main pro-Glock argument being their incredible reliability, as if other handguns FTF or FTE on every other shot.

You're not being a dick, you just have an opinion. I base my statement on facts which I have observed. While no gun is going to be 100% reliable, it has been my experience that of my carry guns, my Glocks have the best record to date. I am not a super Glock fanboy... I just recognize what I see and experience. In my carry stable, there are presently three manufacturers represented. Of course I have other handguns, but I have chosen these to be in my carry stable for a reason. Some have never failed to feed, fire or eject. But of the ones I have shot the most, the three Glocks I have in my carry stable are at the top of the heap.

Some guns have peculiar quirks such as sensitivity to dirty magazines which tend to keep the slide from locking open after the last round. Others are sensitive to ammo and are only reliable feeders with certain bullet designs. Neither of these quirks are deal killers and as long as you take the necessary steps (keeping mags clean, using correct ammo), the guns function properly. Reliability is a wide umbrella so when one considers this term, one is wise to also consider a host of variables which could fall under that umbrella.

Some people are so set on Glocks, they ignore all other options out there. Some are like this with 1911's, believing anything that doesn't have a hammer, is not a single action, and can't be carried cocked and locked is not worth considering. And some wouldn't give two cents for a "plastic" gun. I don't fall within any of those categories because I don't want to cheat myself out of something that just might wind up being the best handgun I have ever encountered. I did say I wasn't a Glock fanboy... right? I like Glocks. I also like a mess of other guns. Glock just happens to be one of them. I have carried Kahr's, a Browning, M&P's, Kel-Tec's, Rugers, Taurus, older Smith and Wessons, and others which seem to escape my memory. It's just that at this time, my prime carry gun is a Glock. Who knows. In a month or a year, that could change.

Originally Posted by SouthernBoy

You're not being a dick, you just have an opinion. I base my statement on facts which I have observed. While no gun is going to be 100% reliable, it has been my experience that of my carry guns, my Glocks have the best record to date. I am not a super Glock fanboy... I just recognize what I see and experience. In my carry stable, there are presently three manufacturers represented. Of course I have other handguns, but I have chosen these to be in my carry stable for a reason. Some have never failed to feed, fire or eject. But of the ones I have shot the most, the three Glocks I have in my carry stable are at the top of the heap.

Some guns have peculiar quirks such as sensitivity to dirty magazines which tend to keep the slide from locking open after the last round. Others are sensitive to ammo and are only reliable feeders with certain bullet designs. Neither of these quirks are deal killers and as long as you take the necessary steps (keeping mags clean, using correct ammo), the guns function properly. Reliability is a wide umbrella so when one considers this term, one is wise to also consider a host of variables which could fall under that umbrella.

Some people are so set on Glocks, they ignore all other options out there. Some are like this with 1911's, believing anything that doesn't have a hammer, is not a single action, and can't be carried cocked and locked is not worth considering. And some wouldn't give two cents for a "plastic" gun. I don't fall within any of those categories because I don't want to cheat myself out of something that just might wind up being the best handgun I have ever encountered. I did say I wasn't a Glock fanboy... right? I like Glocks. I also like a mess of other guns. Glock just happens to be one of them. I have carried Kahr's, a Browning, M&P's, Kel-Tec's, Rugers, Taurus, older Smith and Wessons, and others which seem to escape my memory. It's just that at this time, my prime carry gun is a Glock. Who knows. In a month or a year, that could change.

I understand completely what you're saying. I'm not denying the reliability of Glocks, they're fantastic guns. It just seems like most Glock fanboys (which you clearly aren't) try to convince people that if you don't carry a Glock, your gun has an astronomically higher chance of failure when it's needed most. I have 2 handguns that are Glock "impersonators", a XD 45 and my M&P9, so I definitely appreciate that design. I also have a Sig 2022 and a FNX 45, so I also love the hammer style with the decock feature. My other gun is a Colt Government which I will never carry strictly because of mag capacity. I love all types of guns and definitely really like Glocks. I just picked the worst time to try to find a Glock 19, 26 or 30SF lol. I do believe that many guns have better ergonomics than Glocks, but like you said, you can't deny their reliability.

Originally Posted by hof8231

I understand completely what you're saying. I'm not denying the reliability of Glocks, they're fantastic guns. It just seems like most Glock fanboys (which you clearly aren't) try to convince people that if you don't carry a Glock, your gun has an astronomically higher chance of failure when it's needed most. I have 2 handguns that are Glock "impersonators", a XD 45 and my M&P9, so I definitely appreciate that design. I also have a Sig 2022 and a FNX 45, so I also love the hammer style with the decock feature. My other gun is a Colt Government which I will never carry strictly because of mag capacity. I love all types of guns and definitely really like Glocks. I just picked the worst time to try to find a Glock 19, 26 or 30SF lol. I do believe that many guns have better ergonomics than Glocks, but like you said, you can't deny their reliability.

We're obviously on the same page with all of this. You mentioned ergonomics. In my opinion, two of the finest ergonomic guns out there are the M&P series and the CZ75's. Excellent feel in the hand and the gun always seems to go in you hand the same way every time. I shoot my M&P Pro Series 9mm a lot and find it to be one of the best shooters in that caliber. Same can be said for the verisons in .40S&W and .45ACP and I have copies of those M&P's as well.

I also have some biases but those tend to be based upon preferences more than anything. For example, I won't carry a 1911 because I have never been able to bring myself to carrying a single action pistol in condition one. I know that's what they're designed for and it's me... not the gun. The bias is not against the 1911 because I own a few. It's against me carrying one. Same thing for a single action army revolver. I love those guns but wouldn't want to carry one where other choices were available to me. And I carried a SA revolver for years when hunting.

Some people get so hung up on brands or types or styles that they are most likely overlooking some very good options out there. I don't want to fall into that trap beyond the biases I mentioned above, which as I said were me and not the guns.