[andy]

fired from a rifle. U THINK a lousy 60 ft lbs more makes ANY difference? You THINK a .22 rifle and Stingers reliably stops even a chuck, ****, or jackrabbit? U have NO experience at hunting with them if you "think" such.

yes, dummies, I AM aware that u cant ccw a .22 rifle, but I am talking about the EFFECT of the bullet, NOT what gun fired it. If you wouldn't be comfortable facing a given threat with a .22 rifle, you SURE should'nt be comfortable about doing so with the Makarov, either.; At least with the rifle, at pistol ranges, it's EASY to get head hits, swiftly and repeatedly, and with the rifle, penetration with the .22 is considerably greater than it is with the .;22 pistol The 22 pistol can have about 100 ft lbs, and that's only 120 ft lbs from the pathetic 220 ft lbs of the Makarov. The Makis TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY ft lbs short of the 440 ft lbs of the 90 gr 9x19 Cor Bon load. So the Makarov is TWICE as close to being a .22 as it is to being a real 9x19 load, and the 9x19 load is nothing much. Animal testing will prove that, REAL quick.

 

[Magnum88C]

Makarov=220 ft lbs. .22 Stinger is 160 ft lbs fired from a rifle.

So the Makarov is more effective than your vaunted .22, even from a rifle. So much for those quick .22 ambushes, especially when the 160 fpe .22 is NOT from an 11.5" barrel.

 

[mrostov]

Re: Makarov=220 ft lbs. .22 Stinger is 160 ft lbs fired from a rifle. .............. So the Makarov is TWICE as close to being a .22 as it is to being a real 9x19 load, and the 9x19 load is nothing much......

Again, you're comparing ft/lbs as the end all be all determinator. This is an inadequate analysis and leads to false conclusions. For instance, bullet diameter and wound channel have a LOT to do with the effect of a bullet upon a target, especially a human.

You're also ignoring the fact that with YOUR OWN figures, the 9mm Mak has more energy at 100m than the .22LR has at the muzzle.

HOWEVER, your info about the Mak is rapidly out of date and/or you are ignoring some of the better ammo, or are you just assuming everone will be shooting cheap, military ball? You're intentionally low-balling the numbers on the Mak.

The Brown Bear 115gr JHP 9x18mm usually chrono's out of a standard Makarov 3.83" barrel at about 1020fps.

The Federal 115gr JHP 9x19mm Parabellum round fired out of a G26 usually chrono's at about 1110fps.

Not a whole lot of difference there, eh?

Don't know where you learned math my friend, but the Mak is NOT a .22LR by any stretch of the imagination. If you don't think this stuff won't put a world of hurt upon you, you're frigging high.

Brown Bear 115gr 9x18mm

Did I say cheap ball? I can get over the counter here in AZ a 1000 round case of 9x18mm Brown Bear 115gr JHP for $105.00 plus sales tax.

Barnaul Tiger 95gr 9x18mm

Hornady XTP 95gr 9x18mm

Corbon 95gr 9x18mm

Makarov (9x18mm) alongside a CZ83 (.380)

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Comparisonof9x18mmMakarovetc.htm

 

[RIKA]

Mike, don't confuse the boy with facts. His sock puppet told him all that stuff and nothing is going to change his mind except another sock puppet.

RIKA

 

[Magnum88C]

No way Mike, don't you know that .22s expand to almost 5x their original diameter and pick up speed as they expand in flesh?

Of course this only works if fired from a suppressed pist. . .er, 11"rifle. . .
:dgrin:

 

[KJUN]

> U THINK a lousy 60 ft lbs more makes ANY difference?

It might. I know that the differences in frontal area of the projectiles in question will make a bigger difference, though. Why do you ignore that factor?

> You THINK a .22 rifle and Stingers reliably stops even a chuck, ****, or jackrabbit? U have NO experience at hunting with them if you "think" such.

Are you that bad of a shot? .22LR (not Stingers - I don't like them) do pretty well on all the small game I've hunted with decent shot placement, except for *****. of course, I've shot *****(while deer hunting) with .30-06 amd .30-30 in the chest from the side and had them run a ways before dying (very rarely, but it has happened). If that doesn't stop a ****, NOTHING will definitively drop it immediately. (BTW, I do eat them, so this isn't a waste and most stop where hit with any head shot - even a .22LR - and not with a chest shot unless some luck is involved.)

I'll take a .22LR any day for *****, rabbits, squirrel, and other similar sized game. If I could get silver bullets, I'd even use it to hunt vampires.

KJ

 

[andy]

no, stupes, it DOESN'T. So the Mak

has a lousy 60 or 120 more ft lbs, so WHAT? It's STILL FEEBLE. Since it's STILL not any more EFFECTIVE than a .22, why bother with the heavy, bulky clunker, DA trigger, and 5x as much for practice ammo, hmm? The M21 is a FAR better CCW pistol, because it will fit into a front pants pocket, and allow SWIFT draws from there, starting hand on gun. The Mak is a belt gun, which makes it a STUPID choice. The alloy compact 1911's are the SAME size and wt as the Mak, and can easily have 3 TIMES the power, and still be controlable. So only your CHEAPSKATENESS makes you even CONSIDER the Mak. Your sorry ass aint WORTH the $500 diff in price between a Mak and a fully loaded, compact alloy Springfield 1911.

 

[KJUN]

In one post, you rant and rave about the $60 Mosin Nagants because they are cheap and a good "cache gun" and then in the next post you rant and rave AGAINST the Makarov for almost the same reasons you supported the Mosin Nagant.

Make up your mind: does a cheap, old military firearm has a use or is it completely useless?

Personally, I don't like the Mak. I don't care if someone else owns one (and I don't think they are ignorant for doing so!), but I just have very little reason to own one. I like something with more power and the one that I have shot was NOT an enjoyable experience. Still, to each their own and the gun DOES have it's place in American Society in my opinion.

KJ

 

[mrostov]

JD, in one breath you bitch about the price of the Mak's ammo, and then in the next breath you talk about how every is just cheap if they don't spend the cash on an alloy M1991 compact.

BTW, for your info, the Mak isn't 'just a belt gun', it's a good CCW weapon. It lays flat and it's smooth. It's also tough and reliable because CCW guns get exposed to lint, sweat, etc.

I carry CCW in one of the hottest urban climates in the world. HAve for many years. I carried CCW before they even had a CCW law because then it was only a misdemeanor if you got in trouble for it, and there was some grey are because here you need no license to openly carry locked, cocked, and ready to rock.

I know what works and what doesn't when carrying a pistol on a constant basis. I don't have to theorize.

As for the M21, how 1970's can you get? The Keltec .380 is a far superior pocket pistol.

 

[Aslan]

Re: Re: Makarov=220 ft lbs. .22 Stinger is 160 ft lbs

> U THINK a lousy 60 ft lbs more makes ANY difference?

It might. I know that the differences in frontal area of the projectiles in question will make a bigger difference, though. Why do you ignore that factor?

> You THINK a .22 rifle and Stingers reliably stops even a chuck, ****, or jackrabbit? U have NO experience at hunting with them if you "think" such.

Are you that bad of a shot? .22LR (not Stingers - I don't like them) do pretty well on all the small game I've hunted with decent shot placement, except for *****. of course, I've shot *****(while deer hunting) with .30-06 amd .30-30 in the chest from the side and had them run a ways before dying (very rarely, but it has happened). If that doesn't stop a ****, NOTHING will definitively drop it immediately. (BTW, I do eat them, so this isn't a waste and most stop where hit with any head shot - even a .22LR - and not with a chest shot unless some luck is involved.)

I'll take a .22LR any day for *****, rabbits, squirrel, and other similar sized game. If I could get silver bullets, I'd even use it to hunt vampires.

KJ

you have to understand, that once he posted that the .308 was worthless because he hit a rabbit in the foot with one and it didn't die immeadiately.

His observations on shooting small game leaves one with the conclusion that he doesn't quite grasp the concept of shot placement.

:devil:

 

[Hard Rock]

Doesn't quite grasp it??? Try he doesn't comprehend it!

Mike

 

[Terry G]

Phoenix Arms is the way to go

"The Makarov is no good because shot placement doesn't matter. Your opponent has 15 seconds of oxygen in his blood to get to you." Next day's post on the same Forum. "The Phoenix Arms .22 is better for self defense because with the low recoil you can place your shots more accurately." Look familiar, John? Phoenix Arms, indeed. And he belittles Makarov's? I'll bet he has never shot one in his life.

 

[brass hammer]

beretta bobcat

i picked one up at a yard sale once, $125 it was 21a with fancy gold inlay, the barrel flipped up for loading , this had 2 mags. wood grips.

but the damn thing would go full auto on a regular basis, the trigger transfer bar was bent/sprung. probably some one squezzed the trigger with safety on.

i took it apart and straightend the bar, but if you shot it fast it would still dump the last 2or3. sometimes!

not worth my time, gave it to one of my uncles, he was all smiles.

i did tell him to shoot it slow.

i never bought a "mak" but the people i know who have like them alot and say about the same thing that i read posted here.


thanks my.02