Makarov might as well be a .22. I've
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
G
Guest
·More GK BS.
G
Guest
·Believe you? Youi a REMF reject that shot himself in the foot and got caught TWICE by the cops? Believe someone who don't know how to use a map and compass? Believe an uneducated stupe with no woods knowledge and dumps johny-on-the-spots for a living? Stupe, you never shot a Mak and can't shoot worth a <font color=red>[**censored**]</font>. WE all know that.223 fan said:
G
Guest
·The only time you shot an animal was when you were [email protected] off and hit the dog.223 fan said:
Joined
·
5,689 Posts
.22 Versus 9 MM Makarov
I find this one hard to believe. The .22 long rifle cartridge has a lot more going for it than most people give it credit for, but it is NOT in the same class as a 9MM Makarov. The Makarov pistol outclasses the .380 in a similiar configuration which certainly is more effective than a .22. (See Cooper on Handguns, or more currently, the works of Peter G. Kokalis). The Makarov is a fine self defense weapon that is worth more than it is currently selling for.
I find this one hard to believe. The .22 long rifle cartridge has a lot more going for it than most people give it credit for, but it is NOT in the same class as a 9MM Makarov. The Makarov pistol outclasses the .380 in a similiar configuration which certainly is more effective than a .22. (See Cooper on Handguns, or more currently, the works of Peter G. Kokalis). The Makarov is a fine self defense weapon that is worth more than it is currently selling for.
Jeff has MANY times said that a 380 is
a joke as a manstopper, and a Makarov has a whoopee 5% more power than a 380. It's got HALF of the energy of a 90 gr 9mm, which NOBODY thinks is a real manstopper. The 380 and the Mak require the SAME tactics as does the .22, empty the mag at the guy's face, then beat his head in.
a joke as a manstopper, and a Makarov has a whoopee 5% more power than a 380. It's got HALF of the energy of a 90 gr 9mm, which NOBODY thinks is a real manstopper. The 380 and the Mak require the SAME tactics as does the .22, empty the mag at the guy's face, then beat his head in.
Nobody with any real experience
at shooting people or animals thinks that a 9mm or a regular .45 load is a man stopper. Lethal, yes, instantly effective, no. The 90 gr 9mm is the best readily available load, with 450 ft lbs from a 4" barrel. but it's still nothing much. You have to get up into the 800 ft lb level of the shorty 223 sp to have a real manstopper, and only specialized loadings of the .45 Super or 460 Rowland, 10mm, .44 mag, and similar rounds offer such. Then you get 98% or so instant stops with a chest hit.
at shooting people or animals thinks that a 9mm or a regular .45 load is a man stopper. Lethal, yes, instantly effective, no. The 90 gr 9mm is the best readily available load, with 450 ft lbs from a 4" barrel. but it's still nothing much. You have to get up into the 800 ft lb level of the shorty 223 sp to have a real manstopper, and only specialized loadings of the .45 Super or 460 Rowland, 10mm, .44 mag, and similar rounds offer such. Then you get 98% or so instant stops with a chest hit.
Animals don't react the same as people when hit, that is a fact.
The Makarov is a proven mankiller, and THAT is also a fact.
The Makarov is utterly reliable. Few, if any centerfires are as reliable as the Mak. Regardless of the conditions, the Mak will ALWAYS fire and ALWAYS cycle.
Yeah, it's power is low compared to some rounds, but there ARE 9 shots in the pistol.
It has 9 rounds, and due to the low recoil and the extremely accurate fixed barrel, they all impact where you point.
And yes, the Mak's hollowpoints do work.
Saying the Mak is no better than a .22 because the Mak has ONLY more than twice the muzzle energy is patent nonsense.
There is a LOT more at work than just muzzle energy. To base everything on muzzle energy is lazy and shows a lack of hands-on.
The Makarov is a proven mankiller, and THAT is also a fact.
The Makarov is utterly reliable. Few, if any centerfires are as reliable as the Mak. Regardless of the conditions, the Mak will ALWAYS fire and ALWAYS cycle.
Yeah, it's power is low compared to some rounds, but there ARE 9 shots in the pistol.
It has 9 rounds, and due to the low recoil and the extremely accurate fixed barrel, they all impact where you point.
And yes, the Mak's hollowpoints do work.
Saying the Mak is no better than a .22 because the Mak has ONLY more than twice the muzzle energy is patent nonsense.
There is a LOT more at work than just muzzle energy. To base everything on muzzle energy is lazy and shows a lack of hands-on.
Actually, his choices in equipment and firearms and ammo smacks of someone who looks through the Guns & Ammo Annual, skimming the catalog section and the ballistics tables and chooses soley on the basis of numbers provided. Which, in the real world, almost never work out as expected.mrostov said:
Reading the FBI ammo tests, which were evaluating cartridges soley on their ability to do damage (not statistically insignificant one shot stop data), they reported that the highest velocity/energy round were NEVER the top performers The drive-the-lightest-thing-you-can-find-to-the-highest-velocity-you-can bullets did NOT penetrate well in bare gelatin, and their penetration was abysmal in barrier penetration. If it comes apart going through plywood, forget about it making it through body armor, as someone claims. Such is the falacy of looking at foot pounds energy alone.
Bullet construction means a lot more in the arena of effectiveness than does fpe.
Another thing (the biggest in my book) against the .22 for defense is that rimfires are notoriously less reliable than centerfires.
The MAK is a better defensive weapon than a .22 on all counts.
Placement and terminal ballistics beat fpe every time.
I thought the Mak was one of those guns in which the quality of which is rather flaky, and it's not always apparent if the one you possess is one of the better produced. I know that the well made ones are reliable, but, from what I hear, the quality varies wildly, and there are many more poor quality Maks than high-quality Maks. Am I wrong?mrostov said:
Joined
·
5,689 Posts
Makarov's
I think it would be a lot tougher finding a badly mad Makarov than a good one. I own two East German and one Russian and my next malfunction with any of them will be my first one. My friend owns two Bulgarian ones that may not match the fit and finish of the German ones, shoot and work just as reliably and accurately. The Makarov, loaded with proper ammunition, is a fine self defense gun. You won't go wrong with one.
I think it would be a lot tougher finding a badly mad Makarov than a good one. I own two East German and one Russian and my next malfunction with any of them will be my first one. My friend owns two Bulgarian ones that may not match the fit and finish of the German ones, shoot and work just as reliably and accurately. The Makarov, loaded with proper ammunition, is a fine self defense gun. You won't go wrong with one.
All of the E. German Maks are used. I've seen a couple of the later imported E. German Maks that were in their army and they were kind of beat up.
My E. German was surplused from the STASI (secret police) arsenal and it's in pristine shape and had armorer's work done to it. The trigger is smooth as glass, probably the one of the best double action triggers I've ever used.
The Chinese Maks were built on tooling from E. Germany and are usually pretty good. They are very similar to an E. German. The brand new for commercial sale Russian and Bulgarian maks are very similar and are reliable, tough pistols, though the triggers could use some smoothing out.
My E. German was surplused from the STASI (secret police) arsenal and it's in pristine shape and had armorer's work done to it. The trigger is smooth as glass, probably the one of the best double action triggers I've ever used.
The Chinese Maks were built on tooling from E. Germany and are usually pretty good. They are very similar to an E. German. The brand new for commercial sale Russian and Bulgarian maks are very similar and are reliable, tough pistols, though the triggers could use some smoothing out.
G
Guest
·Mak's are outstanding. I own one and have shot several. Like a glock they just shoot and shoot. Overengineered for their power.
Stupekid, you must get all you knowledge from gun rags. Since you can't own guns and you have a bad back plus loss of hearing (as you can't here that .22 bolt work but for just a few feet you MUST have a hearing problem) it seems you just read stuff and get some very wrong ideas.
I don't know any .22 pistol that I could say is combat reliable. Just can't find one. The Ruger MkII is about as close as you can get but it is not a 99.999 percent reliable weapon with ANY load. The Mak is with almost all loads!
Mak ammo is not expensive and is well worth the price they go for now.
Stupekid, you must get all you knowledge from gun rags. Since you can't own guns and you have a bad back plus loss of hearing (as you can't here that .22 bolt work but for just a few feet you MUST have a hearing problem) it seems you just read stuff and get some very wrong ideas.
I don't know any .22 pistol that I could say is combat reliable. Just can't find one. The Ruger MkII is about as close as you can get but it is not a 99.999 percent reliable weapon with ANY load. The Mak is with almost all loads!
Mak ammo is not expensive and is well worth the price they go for now.
Joined
·
10,278 Posts
My experience has been very positive with the Com-Bloc weapons. The MAK is superbly accurate and fun to shoot. The CZ52 shoots the powerful 7.62x25 Tokarev cartridge and is very accurate. The Tokarev is a sleek powerful package that shoots the 7.62x25 also.
I used to think that anything the Commies produced was junk. A very dear friend (now deceased) introduced me to these weapons and I learned their value. I miss him very much but I now own his Bulgarian MAK and it is a very valuable and practical handgun.
RIKA
I used to think that anything the Commies produced was junk. A very dear friend (now deceased) introduced me to these weapons and I learned their value. I miss him very much but I now own his Bulgarian MAK and it is a very valuable and practical handgun.
RIKA
A little off topic, but did you notice that the inexpensive, reliable weapons get pooh-poohed on in the gun rags, yet the expensive (more heavily advertised) weapons are always good, and at least "combat accurate"? 20 failures in 500 test rounds is "good enough" reliability if it's a hot new $2000+ 1911, but 2 or 3 failures in something like a Mak "calls the weapon's reliability into question"?Unregistered said:
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
