P938
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
What do you think this gun would have looked like if it hadn't been a derivation of the Colt Mustang? For example, if a company of Sig's caliber had designed the gun from the ground up as the perfect single stack 9, would it be SAO with a thumb safety? Would it have an aluminum alloy frame with a plastic mainspring housing? What do you think the gun would have looked like instead?
>>29240839
The P238 was cooler. The P938 is SAO, so it's unsuitable for carry, especially when it costs as much or more than a dozen or more better options around the same size. And it's disproportionate and ugly.
>>29241214
This is a pretty bad post, and you should feel bad for writing it.
>SAO is unsuitable for carry
In other words, you don't know anything about guns? baka.
>implying it costs that much anymore
baka
>disproportionate and ugly
Yes, well. That was kind of the point of this thread.
>>29241235
Since when did s m h filter to baka.
>>29241214
The 238 is SAO too you fucking moron
>>29241250
But it's not disproportionate and ugly. It's like a piece of jewelry that also shoots bullets.
>>29241235
If you can afford a P938, you can afford a superior gun for carry, is the point. SAO is obsolete outside of competition.
>>29241267
>If you can afford a P938, you can afford a superior gun for carry, is the point
What, if anything, is superior to a P938?
>>29241285
Rekt
E
K
T
>>29241285
>if anything
fucking kek
The P938 will be completely forgotten in 10-20 years and you'll have to order parts through Numrich.
>>29241360
That may be true, but you still haven't given me a gun that's superior to a P938 today.
>>29241311
>samefagging this obviously
Nope.
>>29241385
>Shield without safety
>Glock 43
>any of the comparable Kahrs
>fucking PF9
If you consider .380s or doublestacks, there's dozens more, too.
Manual safeties are a detriment to a defensive handgun.
>>29241406
>trying to prove you're not samefagging
>instead, the (you) proves you're samefagging
>>29241394
>samefagging
Not even
You didn't even check em though, sprout
>>29241418
>>Shield without safety
Enormous and heavy.
>>Glock 43
Enormous and has a shitty trigger.
>>any of the comparable Kahrs
Cultist garbage.
>>fucking PF9
Just garbage.
>If you consider .380s or doublestacks
I don't. I'm talking about single stack 9's.
>Manual safeties are a detriment to a defensive handgun.
Explain.
>>29240839
Then it'd be like the CZ rami line
>>29241452
You're so retarded that you might actually fit in here, newfriend
It probably would've looked like a p239 with a 3" barrel and a shorter grip...which is why they didn't go that route
>>29241457
I don't think you know what the word 'enormous' means. And a Shield is less than 3 ounces heavier than a P938.
But then again, you've obviously never shot a Glock, judging by how you think they have shitty triggers... while not making the same criticism of the DAO guns (lol, wtf?).
If you have to have it explained to you why a manual control that has to be disengaged to use a weapon under stress when fractions of seconds can make the difference between life and death, while simultaneously not making the gun any safer if you're using a rigid holster that covers the trigger completely, is a detriment...
Then there's no reason to talk. Manual safeties don't make handguns safer and can get you killed.
>>29241385
LC9S series.
>>29241532
I own Glocks. I've shot Shields. I've owned Kahrs. Kel-tec is beneath consideration.
>If you have to have it explained to you why
Listen, fag. There's this thing in polite conversation called giving someone a chance to explain himself before you steamroll him. That's all I was doing. If you're just going to use the opportunity to insult me, then I don't need to reply to you. I guarantee that you can't draw and shoot a gun fast enough that "fractions of a second" would make any difference, and there really isn't a good reason to completely shun guns that have them.
>>29241564
What makes it better?
>>29241576
>Isn't any reason to shun them
No advantage and multiple disadvantages.
>>29241589
>no advantage and no practical disadvantage
FTFY.
I'm getting one when I turn 21 for my EDC, which is best for pocket carry
>>29241598
>forgetting to turn off safety
>safety getting stuck
>accidentally engaging safety
Yeah, what could go wrong?
>>29241632
>being too incompetent to operate your carry gun
Found the problem!
>>29241710
My first centerfire handgun was a 1911. Competence isn't the issue; needless complexity and additional points of failure for no actual defensive benefit are a serious problem, though.
>>29241726
>My first centerfire handgun was a 1911
Do you think that this statement means anything? Owning a 1911 and being competent enough to use it for carry are two different situations.
>>29241768
Okay.
Find a respected defensive firearms instructor recommending the use of manual safeties on handguns.
Even if the user operates the safety 100% of the time, exactly right, without fail, it's still a needless point of potential failure with no practical advantage.
>>29241794
>appeal to authority without providing anything himself
>burden of proof fallacy
>point of failure fallacy
>>29241814
I'd say /thread but this is getting juicy...
>>29241794
You're damn right. They should completely scrap the concept of fighter jets. Nobody could possibly be able to calmly control all those switches in a high stress situation. Training is completely out of the question, there's just no way.
>>29241214
ahaha my p938 IS my carry gun. cocked and locked safety on at 5 o'clock. light. accurate.
and its beautiful
