I'm of the mind that a 9mm carbine makes sense as a HD weapon, especially if you have 9mm as your primary handgun cartridge. Also, as you said, it would be something (especially the Kel-Tec) that your wife could handle with confidence.

Makes sense, but not necessarily the ideal firearm for any one thing...but for HD and as a backup weapon (and a way to get a little more out of your 9mm stock) it makes perfect sense.

Just be sure not to overpay too much for a Sub2K or HiPoint.

Just my opinion. I'd recommend trying to handle one before buying.

 

Sorry TS, don't kid yourself on these performance increases. They aren't that substancial. The problem with comparing the 9mm with the .357 magnum is that the 9mm is a short case that doesn't hold much powder, and commercial 9mm isn't loaded with powders slow burning enough to take advantage of the longer barrel.

Looking at the data you yourself provided you can see that the increase in velocity is only 1243 fps compared to 1061 fps for a 124 grain bullet. The .357 however goes from 1425 to 1741fps.

This parallels my own chronograph data where I was testing Lyman's 150 grain 358477 SWC out of a 6" revolver and a 16" rifle, with the velocities 1440 and 1810 respectively. That's shooting with Blue Dot, a slow burning magnum powder.

That's not to say however that the carbine is of no value. More than power increase, I'd say it's more valuable for it's accuracy increase. I find that the rifle produces smaller groups at 50 yards than the handgun does at 25. Most probably, the single most important factor adding value is that it's a light recoling rifle that will incourage your wife to shoot well without developing a flinch or other bad habits. Get it for that reason.

 

I like my marlin carbine 9mm; interchangle 15 and 32rnd mags with my Rouger P94.

 

As a Reloader, I always resist yet ANOTHER caliber to reload for - means more costs.

As an Engineer, I am always aware of the Compromises in adapting/repurposing any Machine Design.

As a Husband, I am always trying to get My Beloved to shoot more, better, and more powerfully.

So, I made a similar choice: I have a Marlin Camp .45, set up to give Wife a "Long Gun" that she is comfortable with. Uses Standard Colt .45 Design Mags (I have several Hi-Cap Drums that fit). The (Slight) Increase in MV given by the 16 inch barrel helps make the Marlin a good Short-Range, Handy in Small(er) spaces, Easier to Aim, Weapon for the Mrs. The Semi-Auto Feature helps any Defensive Shooter keep any Gremlin In The Sights.

That was Fine, for a While.

Then, She Who Must Be Obeyed decided She wanted an AR, in .300 Blackout!!!

Now, I get to play with the Marlin!

 

Just remember, energy is mass multiplied by the SQUARE of velocity, so any additional boost in speed translates to an exponential increase in energy. This is why it drives me crazy to hear someone say, "I only lose X hundred feet per second by shortening the barrel to Y." I'm thinking, but that is a LOT of energy sacrificed...

 

i concur that the higher pressure round will always outperform over distance in a direct barrel length comparison using similar bullet weight/geometry, i also think that the OP recognized the barrel length difference when comparing a 9x19 coming out of a 16" barrel while the .357 was only coming out of the 6"... he probably realized that a .357 out of a 16" would also outperform a 9mm coming out of the same length barrel.

Confirming Mefunky, in the OP I was comparing the 9mm coming out of a 16" carbine versus a .357 coming out of a 6" pistol. The article I read (I think it was in Gun and Ammo?) used that same comparison to illustrate the added power that the longer barrel gives a 9mm, just a food for thought type thing. I always double check things that appear in magazines to see if they are giving unbiased info and thats when I stumbled upon that ballistics by the inch link so I put it in OP for anyone interested. To be honest I did not know that barrel length added velocity. I thought it was just for accuracy so it was cool to learn that and see all the good feedback on the thread, thanks for sharing all!

 

There is power perceived and power achieved.

Power perceived is paper ballistics and doesn't always tell the whole story.
On paper, the .44 Special is a dud. Low velocity, big heavy bullet, etc. But power achieved, it has a good street record going back to the cowboy days (.44 Russian) and has well proven itself in the woods.

It's hard to keep a .44 bullet in a deer when its moving at 800+ fps. 9mm at 1200? Don't bet on an exit.

The 9mm out of a carbine can be highly effective. However bullet selection is also critical. Too frangible a bullet and it doesn't penetrate enough. Too solid and you may as well use ball.

 

However bullet selection is also critical. Too frangible a bullet and it doesn't penetrate enough. Too solid and you may as well use ball.

This is one of the most overlooked points of pistol caliber carbines. Driving a projectile to a speed well over what it was designed for, doesn't guarantee an increase in effectiveness, quite the contrary. Many bullets will perform far worse at higher velocities, especially hollow point bullets designed for handguns. Bullet selection is critical. Some bonded bullets will do much better, as they will stay together within a much larger velocity window.

I would like to tell the OP that velocity and so called "energy" calulations alone give you little to nothing to go on when considering the necessity that a bullet penetrate flesh and bone to the point of achieving a KILL. Energy is intentionally or unintentionally a misleading marketing concept for non-exploding projectiles.

Exactly. A higher energy level is not a predictor of effectiveness. A 115 grain HP designed for 1200 fps+/- will often fragment and under penetrate at considerably higher velocities. That increase in energy will do you no good if the projectile doesn't penetrate sufficiently. A ball round that completely penetrates a target won't do significantly more damage at 1600 fps that it does at 1200. Pistol velocities do not cause the type of wounds that rifle velocities do.

A pistol caliber carbine's main advantage is it's improvement in practical accuracy, not in it's increase in velocity/muzzle energy.

 

Be honest, you just want an argument that you can make plausible to your wife for another gun. A pistol caliber carbine would be a good thing to own. So are about a thousand other platforms. Longer barrel mean more velocity and that means better stopping power.

The weight and size make it easier to shoot for you and your wife than a heavy rifle caliber. I have a wife who rarely tries to limit my gun purchases or enjoyment for shooting them. She joins me occasionally, not as much as I'd like. After over 30 years of marriage she knows I'm not going to change and I know she's going to have her hobbies and budget for them. As long as you're not going into debt or struggling to pay the bills, get what you like and enjoy them.

 

9mm is lethal out of a 4 inch barrel, it only gets better out of a carbine.*

*Uzi, MP5, MP40, Suomi, Sterling, Sten.... all of those racked up quite a few kills with FMJ ammo, granted, they were f/a, but we all know how that has to be used in a very disciplined fashion to be effective in such a small platform. Balance that out buy the wonderful array of modern, lethal, expanding ammo for the 9mm and you've got yourself a winner.

No, its not an AR/AK/FAL/Barret .50 BMG, but it'll take care of you and threats to your life out to at least 100 yards. Perfect for most defensive situation faced by us today and really pretty practical for SHTF.

Just like the REMFs were given .30 carbines during WWII because their hands were occupied with other tasks, its seems a lightweight compact carbine is ideal for mending fences, cleaning gutters, planting gardens, and myriad of other high intensity tasks. Keep your AR in the truck, on the fence, at the foot of the ladder nearby and keep the PCC slung on your back. Seems better than firing back at a threat with a handgun to me, then maneuver/fight your way back to your heavier rifle.

 

i use blue dot in my 9mm loads for my beretta Cx4, longer burn rates then some other pistol powders so i suspect better long barrel performance... i havent chrony'ed them yet, but i can compare to a 4" ruger gp100 and a 2.3" ruger lcr (both .357)... ill try to do that in june and post some results (i am curious myself).

they are really different rounds though in general... the .357 was orignially loaded over blackpowder and it brings all the cons of having a rimmed round (i.e. box magazine feeding issues)... the 9mm was designed with smokeless powder in mind and is rimless... each has its own purpose in my mind... 357 more for hunting... 9mm more for volume/supressive fire.

 

.357 was orignially loaded over blackpowder and it brings all the cons of having a rimmed round (i.e. box magazine feeding issues)... the 9mm was designed with smokeless powder in mind and is rimless... each has its own purpose in my mind... 357 more for hunting... 9mm more for volume/supressive fire.

Actually the .357 Magnum was originally designed in the 1930's using smokeless powder too. You can load it with blackpowder but the entire purpose of the .357 Magnum was to increase the penetration of the existing .38 caliber loads of the day.


http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/history-357-magnum/

As far as the 9mm carbine vs the .357 Revolver, with a 16" barrel a 9X19 carbine can come awfully close to performing as well as 4" .357 Magnum revolver. But this is only with the 124g +P loads, and the .357 can be improved upon pretty easily and shoot heavier bullets much faster. Here are some of the chrono numbers I have taken from the past...

Speer 124g +P Gold Dot in Glock 19 w/ 4" barrel = 1220 fps
Speer 124g +P Gold Dot in Kel-Tec Sub 2000 w/ 16" barrel = 1375 fps
Federal 125g JHP in Ruger GP100 w/ 4" barrel = 1430 fps

So all in all it gets pretty darn close. The question of bullet performance is another matter as the 9X19 is designed to expand at lower velocities but I am willing to bet that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference if you were shot with one. Not to mention that the 9mm Carbine is semi-auto, generates less noise and muzzle flash, is easier to shoot, and has 30+ round magazines.

So yeah it makes sense for Home Defense and women/children who do not shoot a lot. But the .357 Magnum does even better out of a carbine, with heavy bullets it approaches the 7.62X39 and 30-30 power levels with lighter bullets...

 

You said more powerful, but the link is a Muzzle Velocity comparison, and if you compare the 125gr Corbon 9mm JHP+P (hot load) from a 16" to the 125gr Corbon 357 magnum JHP (same projectile, but not +P) the 357 is still faster at the muzzle ... from only a 4" barrel!

Click on the energy graphs: average factory 9mm from a 16" is 600 ftlb at the most ... just like a 357 Magnum from only a 4" barrel. Then compare ballistic trajectory, and you'll note that the 9mm loses energy and altitude much faster than the 357. I don't think its a compliment that it takes a 16" barreled 9mm to equate at the muzzle with a 4" 357 in factory loads, and then the 357 goes on to beat the 9mm at every 1" past the muzzle.

What does this mean? your effective defensive perimeter with a 9mm carbine will be reduced to about 30 yds, inside which, yes, you can spray more bullets at thin skinned aggressors. If your aggressor stands off at 75-100yds, behind even a thin layer of cover, they've neutralized the advantage of the 9mm carbine, and can pick you off slowly with a 6" 357 revolver (for example) without breaking cover.

If however you chose a 357 carbine (hold 11 rounds and can be topped off indefinitely without needing to have more magazines on hand) you'll more than triple your effective defensive perimeter (100yds), and even give you enough energy to kill a thin skinned aggressor at 200 yds. Assuming they have a 9mm handgun (for example) you've pushed them well beyond their effective combat range, and if they'd have to expose themselves and cover a lot of ground to close distance with you.

Personally, I'd keep 9mm in the hicap handguns for inside the walls and on the porch, and get something with longer legs for the yard out to the mailbox.

 

Is there really such a thing as .357 magnum +p? and I believe the original question was saying just what you said, that a hot 9mm out of a carbine can equate or surpass a .357 out of a handgun, which has set a certain standard of lethality. It's going to be easier to hit something with a carbine vs a revolver so there is that, and a carbine can have a 30+ round mag, which has a whole sort of quantity quality all of its own...

 

Hi Cougar, thanks for the feedback! If you have a minute can you expand on that formula about energy and mass a velocity? If I understood that then it means that E=MV(squared) so that for example a 110 grain JHP fired from a 6" .357 mag achieves 1461 fps so then the energy of that hitting you would be 110*(1461x1461) or 234,797,310 units of something, (not sure what we are measuring?) using the first column of this table http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html. By comparison, the Cor Bon 115 DPX 9 mm from a 16" barrel is 1476 fps, or 115*(1476*1476) or 250,536,240 units of whatever. I chose it since its the closest in mass to the 110 .357, sorry if it's not a fair comparison; I am not trying to make any point, I am asking a question so I won't take it personal if you tell me I am comparing apples to oranges, I am just having fun learning this stuff!! As a comparison, if I am understanding this right, my Springfield XD 9mm has a 4" barrel, so if I shoot the same 115 gr Cor Bon, it will have 1265 fps, so total energy is 115*(1265*1265) = 184,025,875 of something. Or putting it another way, the increase in barrel from 4" generating 184M up to the 16" generating 250M of the same thing, or a 35% increase? i.e. 184M to 250M is 66M increase, and 66 = 35% of 184.

 

kinetic energy = 0.5 * mass * (velocity*velocity)

if you double the velocity, you quadruple the energy, whereas mass is linear, if you double the mass and keep the velocity consistent you only double the energy...

for the purpose of shooters you can simply use the following formula for determining energy as measured in foot*pounds (ft-lbs):

((bullet weight in grains) * (velocity^2 in FPS)) / 450380

the 450380 number comes from converting grains to pounds, then converting that to slugs (a mass not a weight) and it also factors in the 0.5 from the original equation.

it works too... take a generic 223.... (55 grains * 3000 fps * 3000 fps) / 450380 is about 1100 ft-lbs of energy

but you need to know that this is simply the kinetic energy of the bullet, how much of that energy that is transfered to its target is what actually does bodily damage... different bullet construction will give you different terminal ballistics (as opposed to external ballistics)

 

the argument is that a socked carbine with a longer sight radius is inherently more accurate. Tell you what, SHTF, scuff my shoes, I'll challenge you to a duel, 100 yds, I'll take a kel-tec sub2k you take a 6inch .357 magnum, I'd recommend either a taurus or S&w with the 8 round cylinder...

In all seriousness, I just don't understand the hate that PCCs get here sometimes.

FACT: the longer barrel DOES increase the velocity and therefore the energy
FACT: the stock and sight radius increases accuracy
FACT: they are light weight and high capacity (excluding the hi-point which makes up for this with its pricepoint
FACT: its the gun you have on you that you will use when your own personal SHTF happens, not the FAL in your closet or safe.

 

Slow your roll, killer. OP made an apples and oranges ballistic comparison, I wouldn't fight too hard to defend the superiority in that comparison.

Yes, compared to a pistol in the same caliber, the carbine is always superior. Happy!

I'm probably the wrong person to challenge to that duel ... I shoot competitively with revolvers out to 200 yds., and I've survived alot of kinetic engagements so shooting while being shot at is not a new experience. I'd never put my trust in mag capacity over the bullets capability, personally.

 

the FAL (SA58) in my closet has a 5x Pulsar digital night sight on it... if im taking that bad boy out, it will be after the sun goes down.

 

LOL OK sorry, didn't mean to start any arguments, thanks all for feedback. My take aways from your answers and original article I read are that yes, the 9MM comes out with noticeably more energy; that the 16" barrel configuration also is noticeably easier to aim than a handgun, especially for my wife; and that at the very least its not an obviously stupid idea to get it, which was what I was worried about, i.e. I was missing something due to my inexperience. Regardless, I am still planning on getting my own .308 FAL style or maybe a RRA by next year, and if SHTF before then I will rely on the 9MM/870/.22lr stuff I got already. Thanks all!

 

LOL OK sorry, didn't mean to start any arguments, thanks all for feedback.

Mention something other than .45 or .50BMG is all it takes for the fanboys to come out of the woodwork. Absolutely nothing wrong with 9mm carbine. They can be effective out to 200 yards. You can even hunt deer with them.

 

Sounds like you already have 9mm. Going 9mm carbine would work. Especially if use the same magazines as your pistols. Many police depts went that route, and some still do. Most have gone to 223 or 5.7mm, some 308. St Louis PD has 9mm beretta carbines. They are undergunned to the AK/AR/etc in the hands of the gangs. But the city fathers dont want overpenetration and 'collateral damage.' And cops are expendable, right?

I would rather have an AR for homeland defense and a 357/357 lever combo for survival.

 

Not hate....just realism. Hybrid, half way, jack of all trades anything will always have to give up something on one end to gain on the other end. A simple example....golf shoes. Spiked, high grip for a grass surface with just the right support for that slow speed goal. On the other hand....basketball shoes. Smooth soled, high tack rubber with just the right support for high speed play on polished wood basketball courts. You can *never* design a jack of all trades shoe that will outperform either of the others in their specialized fields. A spiked, soft rubber high top hybrid shoe might work for a grass court, long range basketball game played on a soccer field....but how often do you *really* see yourself being in that situation? A pistol will *always* be better in a pistol situation and a rifle will always be better in a rifle situation. By deciding to go halfway, jack of all trades, you suffer at both of the others.

 

sorry, I've been needing to vent my stress and frustration at finals week, those of you who were the target of my wrath, I apologize for getting too into it, it was cathartic. I just really like the PCC idea. Here's some fun video of a 9mm FMJ turning cover into concealment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NIjkfl0zBM&feature=player_embedded

 

The reason that shotgun slugs are so devastating, is because that is one huge chunk of lead flying through the air. Imagine dropping a golf ball on your head from 2 feet. It may sting, but won't harm you. Now, drop a brick from the same height... get my point? They are going the same speed, but the "energy" that is dictated by the mass of the object is what does the damage. A 22 can kill without a doubt, but you are more likely to survive a shot in the chest from a 22 caliber than you would a shotgun slug, 45 or 357. Whoever told you that the 9mm is better is an idiot (eve with the increased velocity). Also, the lighter the round, the more likely it is to break apart or disintegrate upon impact, doing less damage.

Can you kill with a 9mm... hell yea. But I wouldn't say it's better by any means. If you are accurate with your 9mm carbine, go for it. Accuracy is more important than anything...

 

Totally agree, not knocking bigger and slower, not at all, of course the best option is bigger AND faster! I do think the .40 gets more out of the longer barrel than the 9mm. Being a high pressure cartridge that fires a heavier round, you get both BIGGER and FASTER. This is of course all paper stuff, I honestly think a BG hit by either is going to regret his decision, though a BG hit COM with a slug may not be around too long to regret anything...

 

 

me and 2 nephews own 9mm carbines all different makes. mine is marlin there is both kel-tec (handy, foldable) and hi-point which is worth every dollar and when some mag maker comes out w/a 15rd mag it's even more valuable.
I handload 124gr +P jhp for all us. beleive me there is whomp there.
I have'nt shot mine past 100ms but at that range it really rings a steel 6" disc from standing leaning rest. the kel-tec has the best trigger of the 3.
that is what I have leaned in the corner by my sxs 12ga if I need to go outside my home for contingencys. and my 9mm pistol uses same mags.

 

9mm .4 grains--1750 rounds can be made with 1 lb of powder as opposed 250 rounds of 223 for 1 pound of powder. Beretta's CX4 will push a 90 grain COR BON bullet 1850 fps. with it's 16 1/2 inch hammer forged crome lined barrel and it is super accurate out to 100 yards. Same energy as a 357 out to 50 yards and same energy as a 380 at 200 yards. What's not to like.

 

There are several factors to consider

There are several factors to consider. I shoot a 9 mm su 31 16 inch carbine and a 357 with 7 1/2 inch barrel the 9 mm has an awful rainbow trajectory the 357 not so bad. If I have to guess the distances I will take the 357 over the 9 mm carbine

 

I learned about this from the opposite direction.

I got a cheap little Hi-Point 9mm on a whim for $199...looked like a fun toy. No big loss if a piece of junk.

It was a tack driver at close range, so I ended up putting a paper plate on a tree about 75-80 yards away. Drilled it every time with iron sights.

I went to change targets, and I saw that the rounds were passing right through the 8-inch diameter tree from 75+ yards . How could this be? A 9mm pistol won't do that at 5 yards.

This really blew my mind. I knew barrel length makes a difference, but I never realized it made THAT much difference.

After buying a couple extra mags, that crappy Hi-Point carbine became by primary home defense weapon.

 

I am not going to advise anyone to invest in a carbine length firearm that isn't capable of shooting RIFLE ammunition.

.223/5.56 and some 7.62x39 AK ammo will NEVER produce too much recoil for anyone that has any business shooting a longarm.

I personally prefer .357 over 9mm for anything that I find a handgun appropriate for if I can rely on having at least 6 shots ready to fire. The 9mm and .38spl would be a lesser consideration, but I consider it a good MINIMUM to depend on for the sake of killing. .380 and anything like it has no place with me.

 

I am not going to advise anyone to invest in a carbine length firearm that isn't capable of shooting RIFLE ammunition.

That's a pretty broad stroke statement. I think it's going to be more situation-specific. Think of an urban residential environment. 5.56 shoots pretty flat for 200-300 yards, 9mm carbine heads for the dirt at 125 yds. 7.62x39 will go through 3 houses.