Small Limits

Gratuitous Gun Pics, The Gun Thing

Via Insty, I see this trend, and I’m not happy about it:

While data from 2019 to date shows the compact category has consistently had the greatest sales performance, hovering around 40%, the biggest changes have occurred in the micro-compact category. From 2019 to date, the micro-compact market has grown from an 18% to 25% share, making them a quarter of the 9mm semi-automatic handguns sold. Also notable is the fact that micro-compacts have taken a majority share in the combined sub-compact/micro segment.

Almost all, of course, in the 9mm Europellet chambering.

I’ve tried quite a few of these belly guns in the past, and never found one that suits me — unless in a smaller caliber like .32 ACP.  And frankly, if you’re going to use a belly gun (thus named because its use is to stick it into your target’s belly before pulling the trigger), I think the actual difference between calibers is irrelevant because a 1.5″ barrel develops no muzzle velocity past that created by the powder charge itself.

I understand that some people may find a large frame carry pistol to be too heavy and cumbersome and all that.  While I don’t have a problem carrying a 1911 myself, I can see that someone else might want something smaller but still retaining more oomph than a 1.5″ barrel throwing out [sic]  a 9mm bullet.

Allow me, then, to suggest something like Colt’s excellent Combat Commander, which differs from the full sized 1911 only insofar as it has a 4.5″ barrel, an inch or so shorter.

Longtime Readers will know that I dislike the “extended” grip safety which seems to be what all the cool kids are asking for these days:

…but which is easily swapped out for a normal one, the only irritant being to add about $50 to the cost of ownership.

The Commander-sized 1911 is pretty much the only compromise I’d be willing to make in the “ease of carry” argument, so forget those teeny lil’ pocket guns.  Especially in 9mmP.

If I wanted a real belly gun, I’d get a Bond Arms Derringer in .45 Colt / .410ga:

Now that’s going to leave a mark in some goblin’s belly, you betcha.  And it fits nicely into a pocket, too.

6 comments

  1. The Smith & Wesson M&P 9c is a delightful handgun to shoot. The interchangeable back straps make it able to fit a variety of hand sizes. The Shield in Europellet isn’t a bad handgun either.

    But the 45acp in a 1911 is absolutely delightful. went to a class and the intructor used a Glock of some sort. He wasn’t happy with my 1911 but I enjoyed it a lot.

    JQ

  2. The most hilarious comment on the Insty post was the goof who tried to convince everyone that the .380 was more effective than both .45 ACP and 9mm.

  3. I don’t understand what you mean by ” a 1.5″ barrel develops no muzzle velocity past that created by the powder charge itself.”

    Isn’t that the case for all barrel lengths? (Except maybe for a beautifully restored Lee Enfield No. 4 Mk I which fell off a truck in front of me last week. What a bargain!)

    1. In a shorter barrel, you’re going to have more unburned powder as the bullet leaves the muzzle, meaning wasted energy and lower muzzle velocity.

  4. Unless you are trying to stuff a Govt Model 1911 into a fanny pack, the biggest problem is the length of the grip frame. The Officers Model grip length works much better.

    That bump on the bottom of the beavertail/grip safety is an attempt to get that safety to disengage for those who like to shoot with their thumb on top of the thumb safety. That undercut beavertail design was a really bad idea for those who follow the Cooper doctrine. Bad, BAD ergonomics. The fact that JMB didn’t design it to shoot that way is overlooked by the devotee’s of Cooper. It DIDN’T HAVE a thumb safety when the Army accepted the gun for production. That was added after the fact.

Comments are closed.