second pistol or 22 LR conversion?

[barlowc]

Not quite a year ago, I purchased my first gun... a stainless steel Ruger Mark III Target. It's a beautiful piece and I enjoy going to the range and shooting it and working to improve my skills. As I have learned more about guns, safety, maintenance, etc. my overall interest in firearms and our associated rights has grown.

Lately I've been thinking about getting something a bit more powerful for defense/safety. My family lives in a very safe area, but it's a crazy world and you just never known. Though maybe I'm just saying that in an attempt to justify another purchase because I have "the bug".

Purchasing a second gun - probably a 9mm - is of course the obvious option. But selling my Mark III and replacing it with something plus a 22 LR conversion kit is another. I kind of like the idea of having a single, versatile pistol that is suitable for home/personal defense but that I can also take to the range and economically shoot.

For those with more experience and knowledge in this area, what would you recommend? Do 22 LR conversion kits work well, or do they tend to be prone to FTFs and FTEs?

A Kimber Stainless II 1911 and their Rimfire Target Conversion Kit looks like it would be a nice setup. But the price of said setup lists around $1,350. I haven't yet researched things much, so I don't know what manufacturers offer 22 LR conversion options.

 

[DuckRyder]

I'd suggest keeping the Ruger and purchasing the additional pistol.

Most 22 conversion kits have a reputation for being finicky about ammunition and your Ruger will be a better .22 pistol than a centerfire pistol with a conversion.

 

[wsar10]

I have many guns, and for different reasons. I have pistols for open carry, conceal carry and some just plain target pistols (BTW I have a mark 2 and love it).
IMO I would opt for the second gun if your going to Cary I would not go with the 1911, although a great weapon I would go with something thats better for concealed carry. My CC is a GLOCK 30 its a subcompact 45. I would agree with going to 9mm, 45acp I would stick with something that is a NATO round because they will always be available someplace if things get real bad.
My kids love to shoot as-well and its nice to have multiple arms.

 

[Astro14]

A Kimber is a really nice gun...I've looked at them.

Depends on your budget, preferences and intended use. For a reasonable price, Glock makes a great gun: reliable, simple and easy to shoot. It's not in the same league as the Kimber, but it will make a great defensive weapon or good range companion.

For general use, the Glock 19 is a good size, easy to shoot, has good capacity and could be concealed should you choose in the future.

If you've not figured it out by now, I am recommending that you keep the Mark III and buy another gun. Guns are tools, and tools that are tailored to particular purposes perform better than all-purpose tools...

 

[andyd]

I've been told by the man who gave me the instructions needed to get my license, that the best thing for home defense is 12 gauge pump shot gun loaded with buck shot. Just the sound of racking in a shell is enough to give anyone pause. Pistol has too much velocity and requires too much accuracy.

 

[pcoxe]

I'd keep the dedicated .22 and get a separate 9mm. Semiauto 22's are usually kinda messy with powder residue. The switch back to centerfire with a conversion kit may require a lot of cleaning.

 

[The_Eric]

Originally Posted By: andyd
I've been told by the man who gave me the instructions needed to get my license, that the best thing for home defense is 12 gauge pump shot gun loaded with buck shot. Just the sound of racking in a shell is enough to give anyone pause. Pistol has too much velocity and requires too much accuracy.


What?

If you choose to keep your home defense shot gun without a round chambered, then that's your right. But don't expect people to cower at the sound. I do agree that buck shot of some sort is great for home defense though.

As for pistol rounds having too much velocity, I'm not sure where you got that from... The 00 buck I have lists it as 1325 fps, which is faster than most rounds from most pistols. Also way more energy too. Accuracy is just as important with a shot gun. Just last weekend, I had my wife shoot our 12ga 870 with 00 buck. At a distance of about 20', the shot group was about 2" to 2.5"...



back on topic, I too would recommend that the op keep his .22 and add an additional firearm to his collection.

Now for what kind and what caliber... It's hard to go wrong with 9mm, .40S&W or .45ACP. Many great offerings in those common calibers. All will serve range and home defense well. Now it's time to go and put some pistols in your hands.

Please keep us posted on your decision!

 

[wsar10]

If you are going for cost effectiveness or efficiency with a wide choice of options GLOCK is definitely your best bet,
this is my post in my GLOCK forum to a guy who was asking "what the best GLOCK was":
But what the below really means is you could have a 9mm,.40, 357sig and .22 all in one gun.


you can put a slide on a GLOCK 23 from a 19,25,32
glock says you gotta change the mag and or trigger housing for the 19 or 25

the guns that are most universal are a 17, 22, 24, 31, 34, 35
these guns can all except slides from a 17, 17L, 22, 24, 31, 34, 35 on certain conversions you need to change the mag and or the triiger housing

If you have a gen 1 than the most universal is the 22
it will except slides from a 17, 17L, 22, 24, 34, 35


the barrel from a 23, 24, 32 are the most universal they will each fit into 3 different guns.
23 into a 27, 32, 33
24 into a 22, 31, 35
32 into a 23, 27, 33

.357sig barrels can only be used in FGR frames (3rd gen, 3pin) with prefix "DAN" which is post 99.

So I guess to answer the OP's question the best GLOCK for the money would be the one that is most universal.
__________________

 

[hatt]

Keep Ruger, get Glock. 1911s are a poor choice for the novice.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: hatt
Keep Ruger, get Glock. 1911s are a poor choice for the novice.


I'll agree that 1911's are a poor choice in the case of a novice for defense, but they're a lot of fun at the range.

Since the OP is considering future SD use, I'm 100% with you....

 

[Mr_Incredible]

Never sell a gun.

Have both.


You'll thank me later.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

Originally Posted By: andyd
I've been told by the man who gave me the instructions needed to get my license, that the best thing for home defense is 12 gauge pump shot gun loaded with buck shot. Just the sound of racking in a shell is enough to give anyone pause. Pistol has too much velocity and requires too much accuracy.


Worst advice ever. Read and learn until YOU know why.


If someone is breaking into a house where there are people present they've already made the decision to kill if they have to.

Have you?

Relying on a sound to scare somebody that already made their peace is whistling past the graveyard.

 

[barlowc]

Originally Posted By: hatt
1911s are a poor choice for the novice.

How come? Is it because they are typically chambered for .45. What about 1911 in 9mm?

As I've continued to research things, I've seen a lot of praise for the CZ 75. It sounds like a great full-size 9mm. And CZ offers an all steel conversion (i.e. the "Kadet") *IF* I were to go that route.

 

[wsar10]

Originally Posted By: barlowc
Originally Posted By: hatt
1911s are a poor choice for the novice.

How come? Is it because they are typically chambered for .45. What about 1911 in 9mm?

As I've continued to research things, I've seen a lot of praise for the CZ 75. It sounds like a great full-size 9mm. And CZ offers an all steel conversion (i.e. the "Kadet") *IF* I were to go that route.



Its usually a BIG gun, 45 or not I carry a 45 thats not an issue to me. its not near as simple a something like a GLOCK it will not withstand the abuse that a GLOCK will take, and the finish requires constant maintenance to keep nice. I own a Kimber UC 2 and I cant carry the [censored] thing because it forms surface rust or corrosion in a week ! I just dont have time to oil and pamper my defense weapon every time I disarm myself !! I carry my 30 everyday and shoot it once a month and I have not completely cleaned it in two years, I pop the barrel out add oil to the oil points (very little) and dry brush the slide and barrel !! If your gonna shoot competitively than by all means a steel framed gun is the way to go.
I have never owned a CZ but they have definitely staked there claim with defense weapons and I have never heard a bad thing about pistols or rifles. FNP's are also nice guns along with the S&W M&P and the XD but again the finish on an XD sucks....

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: barlowc
Originally Posted By: hatt
1911s are a poor choice for the novice.

How come? Is it because they are typically chambered for .45. What about 1911 in 9mm?

As I've continued to research things, I've seen a lot of praise for the CZ 75. It sounds like a great full-size 9mm. And CZ offers an all steel conversion (i.e. the "Kadet") *IF* I were to go that route.


The caliber is not the issue, the operation of the pistol is the issue. The more complex the manual of arms for a firearm, the greater the training & practice required for its effective use, particularly in a stressful/SD/combat situation. This has been proven through police and military experience, where trained officers/soldiers draw their weapon and are unable to fire because the safety is still on. This happens despite extensive training.

The 1911 is a fine pistol, and I love shooting it. The .45 ACP is one of the best rounds for SD/combat performance, and in fact, the USMC is going back to the 1911 as an issued sidearm; but the 1911, as a SA pistol, is more complex than a DA/SA (like the M11 or M9) or DAO pistol. Those are more complex than a Glock (or LE model of some lines, like the S&W) or a revolver. With a Glock, or revolver, you pull the trigger, it goes bang. Easy.

With a SA, you either carry cocked and locked and remember the safety, or you remember the safety and hammer cocking when you draw the weapon. Under stress, without stress training (like LE or military receive), you are not likely to get the safety or the hammer, and you'll have a defensive gun that didn't go bang when you needed it...

Shooting at paper on a range is not stressful. It doesn't prepare you well for combat shooting, so remembering the safety (or cocking the pistol) on the range counts for little in predicting actual combat performance. You fight like you train. Before carying a 1911, you need to put a few thousand rounds through it under stressful, realistic training, otherwise, you're fooling yourself into thinking that you will be able to handle the manual of arms (safety and hammer) when your fine motor skills and fore-brain thinking abandon you during the adrenaline pump that hits you in the first seconds of combat...

If you want this 2nd pistol for SD, then you should consider either a revolver, or a Glock (or other pistol that doesn't have a safety), not the complex 1911. No matter how effective the .45 ACP may be as an SD round, it won't do much good if the bullets stay in the chamber...

 

[wsar10]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: barlowc
Originally Posted By: hatt
1911s are a poor choice for the novice.

How come? Is it because they are typically chambered for .45. What about 1911 in 9mm?

As I've continued to research things, I've seen a lot of praise for the CZ 75. It sounds like a great full-size 9mm. And CZ offers an all steel conversion (i.e. the "Kadet") *IF* I were to go that route.


The caliber is not the issue, the operation of the pistol is the issue. The more complex the manual of arms for a firearm, the greater the training & practice required for its effective use, particularly in a stressful/SD/combat situation. This has been proven through police and military experience, where trained officers/soldiers draw their weapon and are unable to fire because the safety is still on. This happens despite extensive training.

The 1911 is a fine pistol, and I love shooting it. The .45 ACP is one of the best rounds for SD/combat performance, and in fact, the USMC is going back to the 1911 as an issued sidearm; but the 1911, as a SA pistol, is more complex than a DA/SA (like the M11 or M9) or DAO pistol. Those are more complex than a Glock (or LE model of some lines, like the S&W) or a revolver. With a Glock, or revolver, you pull the trigger, it goes bang. Easy.

With a SA, you either carry cocked and locked and remember the safety, or you remember the safety and hammer cocking when you draw the weapon. Under stress, without stress training (like LE or military receive), you are not likely to get the safety or the hammer, and you'll have a defensive gun that didn't go bang when you needed it...

Shooting at paper on a range is not stressful. It doesn't prepare you well for combat shooting, so remembering the safety (or cocking the pistol) on the range counts for little in predicting actual combat performance. You fight like you train. Before carying a 1911, you need to put a few thousand rounds through it under stressful, realistic training, otherwise, you're fooling yourself into thinking that you will be able to handle the manual of arms (safety and hammer) when your fine motor skills and fore-brain thinking abandon you during the adrenaline pump that hits you in the first seconds of combat...

If you want this 2nd pistol for SD, then you should consider either a revolver, or a Glock (or other pistol that doesn't have a safety), not the complex 1911. No matter how effective the .45 ACP may be as an SD round, it won't do much good if the bullets stay in the chamber...


I agree with this as-well, and frankly its sad and scary. You should be trained with YOUR weapon and "forgetting the safety" is not an option ! If it is, you should re-evaluate your training.
I started CC when I was 21 and took a "combat pistol" training class at Fort Indiantown Gap here in PA because I knew that CC is a responsibility and I want to put forth my best in everything that I do. We had to pass a written test and a physical test . Allot of carrying for defense is responsibility, technique and awareness.
I think EVERYBODY who carry's for defense should be required to take some type of defense class and a firearms safety course. The left wing in this country wants gun control.... WELL THERE IT IS !!

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted By: wsar10
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: barlowc
Originally Posted By: hatt
1911s are a poor choice for the novice.

How come? Is it because they are typically chambered for .45. What about 1911 in 9mm?

As I've continued to research things, I've seen a lot of praise for the CZ 75. It sounds like a great full-size 9mm. And CZ offers an all steel conversion (i.e. the "Kadet") *IF* I were to go that route.


The caliber is not the issue, the operation of the pistol is the issue. The more complex the manual of arms for a firearm, the greater the training & practice required for its effective use, particularly in a stressful/SD/combat situation. This has been proven through police and military experience, where trained officers/soldiers draw their weapon and are unable to fire because the safety is still on. This happens despite extensive training.

The 1911 is a fine pistol, and I love shooting it. The .45 ACP is one of the best rounds for SD/combat performance, and in fact, the USMC is going back to the 1911 as an issued sidearm; but the 1911, as a SA pistol, is more complex than a DA/SA (like the M11 or M9) or DAO pistol. Those are more complex than a Glock (or LE model of some lines, like the S&W) or a revolver. With a Glock, or revolver, you pull the trigger, it goes bang. Easy.

With a SA, you either carry cocked and locked and remember the safety, or you remember the safety and hammer cocking when you draw the weapon. Under stress, without stress training (like LE or military receive), you are not likely to get the safety or the hammer, and you'll have a defensive gun that didn't go bang when you needed it...

Shooting at paper on a range is not stressful. It doesn't prepare you well for combat shooting, so remembering the safety (or cocking the pistol) on the range counts for little in predicting actual combat performance. You fight like you train. Before carying a 1911, you need to put a few thousand rounds through it under stressful, realistic training, otherwise, you're fooling yourself into thinking that you will be able to handle the manual of arms (safety and hammer) when your fine motor skills and fore-brain thinking abandon you during the adrenaline pump that hits you in the first seconds of combat...

If you want this 2nd pistol for SD, then you should consider either a revolver, or a Glock (or other pistol that doesn't have a safety), not the complex 1911. No matter how effective the .45 ACP may be as an SD round, it won't do much good if the bullets stay in the chamber...


I agree with this as-well, and frankly its sad and scary. You should be trained with YOUR weapon and "forgetting the safety" is not an option ! If it is, you should re-evaluate your training.
I started CC when I was 21 and took a "combat pistol" training class at Fort Indiantown Gap here in PA because I knew that CC is a responsibility and I want to put forth my best in everything that I do. We had to pass a written test and a physical test . Allot of carrying for defense is responsibility, technique and awareness.
I think EVERYBODY who carry's for defense should be required to take some type of defense class and a firearms safety course. The left wing in this country wants gun control.... WELL THERE IT IS !!

One defense class is going to do very little or nothing. Many police have much more training, along with regular ongoing training, and still haven't a clue about using their gun in a high stress environment. So all your requirement would do is deter people from getting permits. But I imagine that's your true intention. See, right under the police that think only police should have guns are the elitist civilians that think only police and themselves should have guns.

 

[wsar10]

^^^you have quite an imagination than......
If properly training myself for defense with a weapon before I take on the responsibility of carrying one makes me an "elitist" than I guess I am. To pass the class that I took required several hours of training and practice,I still practice .
If education about weapons deters you from carry than YES I do not want you to carry ! BECAUSE eventually your gonna make a mistake that effects the rest of us gun owners and adds
fuel to the political fire of "gun control". Even one defense class can and WILL do allot, it will change most peoples entire outlook on CC and teach the basics, its up-to you to practice them.

 

[hatt]

I grew up around guns. I don't need you, or your .gov buddies, to tell me how to be safe. Thanks, the Fear Uncertainty Doubt stuff doesn't work on me.

 

[barlowc]

I have a favor to ask... can we go back on topic? Let's talk about whether I should consider a second pistol or whether there's something and a 22 LR conversion that might service my wants.

I've continued to read about the CZ 75 and the SP-01 variant which adds an accessory rail and some other tweaks. It sounds like a great 9mm and it sounds like the conversion kit works very well. This may just be the combo that I'm looking for. Now I just need to see if I can find one to try out.