Current thoughts are:
Revolver: SW 686, Ruger GP100
Auto: Sig p226, CZ sp101, something HK?, 1911
use case would be home protection/fucking around at the range
any thoughts are appreciated... what would you get?
>>29453125
P320
>>29453150
I'm currently leaning towards something all metal. I'm not going to be carrying it, so what is the benefit of a polymer frame? Why the P320 specifically?
>>29453172
Polymer framed guns are usually lighter(not useful/necessary in your situation), and cheaper.
For home defense I would recommend a semi auto double stack 9mm. .40 and .45 would be appropriate as well.
I would suggest a full sized glock/cz/sig/sw m&p in your preferred caliber. Beretta 92 wouldn't be a bad choice either.
Im not too familiar with HK but they've got a bit of a reputation for being overpriced, albeit still being good guns.
Make sure to budget for a light and night sights for it, besides maybe the sig, all of what I listed should easily stay under $1k.
>>29453125
FNX 45.
Browning HI Power.
"You broke into my house, and now you answer to a Higher Power"
>>29453336
Maybe I just need to get down to the range to try out a few. 92fs, 1911, maybe a glock or sig or w/e. There aren't a ton of ranges in my area and I have some kind of aversion to indoor ranges. The thought of shooting around a bunch of strangers freaks me out. I don't trust most people to tie their own shoes, let alone shoot their guns next to me in an enclosed room while following safety rules. Guess I just need to get over it.
>>29453125
Your revolver choices are solid, a redhawk or 629 would be decent if you want that .44 mag powah.
semi auto, glock 17, M&P 9, or if you're dead set on 1911, get a springfield, they even make a few in 9mm now if you want, or go with the fuddy five.
stay away from CZ like the plague.
HK and sig are good, but overpriced for what you get IMO, but if you got the cash, and want one, then go for it.
but go shoot a couple guns you want before buying.
USP are awesome guns. Awesome as fuck, and around $900
The tactical .45 will costs more, but get a USP 9 or a USP 9c
>>29453125
Ruger sr9
Thank me later
>>29453125
all good choices.
of those I'd get a S&W 586 since I like blue steel more than stainless.
a Colt 1911 as a second choice.
>>29453520
>colt 1911
Colt hasnt been able to compete in the 1911 market for decades.
>>29453579
then get a vintage series 70
>>29453125
Beretta 92 brigadier with a few shekels left over to get it gussied up by Wilson combat.
>>29453603
Or buy a springfield/smith/ruger for half the price and it will actually function.
>>29453610
OP here. So I like the 92 a lot but the slide-mounted safety kind of puts me off. Is it as big of a deal as a lot of people make it out to be? Am I just being picky?
>>29453650
Colt's been making them for over a century. The market is saturated with great quality used guns for less than you'd pay for any knockoff brand.
>>29453125
CZ is pretty good. Check if you're ok with the tiny slide first. That was a deal breaker for me. Sig I wouldn't trust. Big decocker bulge on the frame, high bore axis, even higher price tag.
Other metal wonder nines include Arcus 98DAC, Beretta 92 and turk CZ clones.
As for 686 vs GP, I'm definitely more of a Ruger guy because price and durability. But a Smith will be better finished, if you obsess over that and don't mind the Hillary hole.
>>29453679
the safety is on the slide
it juts out on both sides
it decocks the gun
I can't fucking stand it
>>29453679
It's not a big deal but FYI Taurus PT-92s are Beretta copies with frame safeties. They tend to be good as far as Taurus goes.
>>29453679
You have to be a hamfisted retard to between the decocker sound, the different sight picture, and the physical impossibility of the malfunction to begin with even when racking the pistol like an oper8or to accidentally engage the safety
IRL an assmad grunt didn't know about the safety on pistol day at basic and looked like a yard when he flinched but no pew happened on the first shot.
But in all seriousness think about it. The slide serrations are physically below the safety and up is fire. It literally can't happen as idiots describe. Also the safety detent is stiff enough (due to the decocker) to use the safety as cocking wings.
Glock 17 and spend the left over money on a bunch of 33 round magazines.
USP-9
>>29453748
>33 round magazines
get a load of this fag. Go big or go home OP
>>29453125
I say the 686/586 S&W are ducking great. For 1911, I say look up auto ordnance, pretty great for their low price(500-700 new, cheaper used), for another pistol, HK's like you said are hard too beat, never used one myself though.
The beretta 92 like the other anon said are fucking great. Another great 9mm are the jerichos(can get surplus ones for 3-400 off gunbroker) or a new one in the low 500's. And always heard the best about CZ's. Never used a SIG even though my dad owns one and I like using some of his guns along with my own(has a great .380 beretta and S&W stainless pistol)
The Ruger revolvers are solid though and can't go wrong with one either.
USP 45
>>29453358
Well I'm sold
>>29453125
cz sp01 is goodshit, my most accurate from the factory semi auto. it will also leave you with money to get more ammo and magazines. I have a sp01 phantom and love it. However walthers are very good too and if not a cz I'd reccomend a walther. Berettas and FN's would be other reccomendations to try out. GP100s are nice and robust but I wouldnt use my revolver, a dan wesson .357, for home defense because of the muzzle flash and capacity. However a gp100 is on my list as is a HK USP 9 or 45. M1911s are cool too but I again would like more capacity if my life depended on it. I see glock is not on your list but they are very common and have a good reputation and I would reccomend a 19 as well.
>>29453579
Id take a production line colt over a dan wesson 7 times out of 7
>>29453172
Unless you specifically want the extra mass for putting holes in paper choosing a metal frame is dumb as fuck.
Glock 17, P320, M&P 9, fiveseven
