Carry Guns - doin' the math

[indytechnerd]

Originally Posted by wolfman

Overall length?
Are you measuring from the back of the hammer to the end of the barrel or hooking a tape on the barrel and swinging it in an arc from the hammer to the magwell, and taking the greatest measurement?

Height?
Are you setting the grip or mag on a level surface such as a table, then measuring the highest point off of the surface? Stock gun?, or are you including accessories such as extended mag's or optics as long as they are listed?

Please let me know so the measurements will be statistically similar, I have a couple I will add to the list.

At this point, since I don't have a test piece for measuring, I'm pulling the specs from the mfg website for that particular model. For example, the Kimber CDPII Pro from above is 7.7" long and 5" high according to Kimber's website.

[homeless]

You also mentioned the are of the "Triangle" how are you measuring that? Are you using Length X Width to find the area of the square that the gun fits in, or are you using 1/2 Base X Height?

Furthermore personally I have found that the area of the grip back of the slide and the trigger are the most important for CC use. If I am using an IWB setup then I can deal with a long slide, however it is the back end of the gun that causes printing. In fact the area of the slide and trigger guard make up the greatest flat spot in a cover garment, the smaller that plateau the easier it is to hide. The same can be said of the measurements of the grip, hammer, and rear of the slide; those form the peaks that can clue you into what is under that shirt. And the problem gets compounded when you look at using an OWB because then you have to look at the length between the hem of your shirt and the end of the barrel.


Then we can even look at the grip itself. The manufactures give you the height of the gun being grip + slide, however that doesn't tell you how big of an area you have to hold onto. So we need to look at the length of the back strap and the front strap. In the front we have the 3 fingers to accommodate, and in the rear we can start to see how high you can grab that gat. If you really want to start doing math we can look at the circumference of the grip itself, and even that changes with palm swells on guns that don't look like legos.

[indytechnerd]

Originally Posted by homeless

You also mentioned the are of the "Triangle" how are you measuring that? Are you using Length X Width to find the area of the square that the gun fits in, or are you using 1/2 Base X Height?

Furthermore personally I have found that the area of the grip back of the slide and the trigger are the most important for CC use. If I am using an IWB setup then I can deal with a long slide, however it is the back end of the gun that causes printing. In fact the area of the slide and trigger guard make up the greatest flat spot in a cover garment, the smaller that plateau the easier it is to hide. The same can be said of the measurements of the grip, hammer, and rear of the slide; those form the peaks that can clue you into what is under that shirt. And the problem gets compounded when you look at using an OWB because then you have to look at the length between the hem of your shirt and the end of the barrel.


Then we can even look at the grip itself. The manufactures give you the height of the gun being grip + slide, however that doesn't tell you how big of an area you have to hold onto. So we need to look at the length of the back strap and the front strap. In the front we have the 3 fingers to accommodate, and in the rear we can start to see how high you can grab that gat. If you really want to start doing math we can look at the circumference of the grip itself, and even that changes with palm swells on guns that don't look like legos.

I like the 'grip size' measurement, but don't really have a way minus getting a tape measure and calipers and heading to the LGS.. that would be fun, don't get me wrong. I know that I can't handle the little ones where my pinky hangs off the end, and getting extended mags to compensate defeats the compact nature of the beast.

Here's a sheet. It's far from comprehensive, and only has a few models, mostly stuff that I've been looking at.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?...1LXBpNkE&hl=en

The G23 is a real contender. The 'Score' column is the (Bang Factor/Loaded Weight) - Overall Length. The G23 comes in 2nd, narrowly topping the 4" Service model XD45. The Kimber, though it scores low because of weight and capacity, kicks the crap out of the Springer because it's a much lighter piece.

[cosermann]

I've used a similar technique in my evaluation of firearms because I view firearms as simply a launch platform for a particular cartridge. One can get to the point, however, where you see differences on your spreadsheet, real differences, yet they are insignificant differences for all practical purposes.

So I use my criteria to sort guns into categories (ex. micro, subcompact, compact, full-size, etc) recognizing that the categories have fuzzy edges and that other factors unrelated to the physical attributes of the gun, such as mfg warranty, popularity/aftermarket parts availability, etc, can be just a applicable to the selection process.

I've gone so far as to calculate the "density" of guns by dividing their weight by their volume. Finally decided "density" wasn't all that useful. Fun, but not useful.

[DeadeyeChrista'sdad]

Sigs! Must have Sig data or spreadsheet meaningless! Ugh!
No, I'm probably not the physics prof you were looking for.

[Redskinsfan]

I likey your idea. Quantitizing data is a very helpful way to discern useful information. I would add a column that simply divides bang factor by weight, it would provide a meaningful ratio to me.

Also a column that take the muzzle energy rather than bullet weight of a "typical" load simply using the bullet weight isn't as accurate. For example a 10mm typically uses a 185 gr. bullet, but its energy is considerably greater than the .45ACP with its typical 230gr. load.

I like your idea.

Terry

[redneckmedic]

Great now that we have proof that the glocks are better guns there is nothing left to argue about....wait, can you do that science nerd stuff or OC vs CC and if camo really helps in deer hunting?!?

[indytechnerd]

Originally Posted by Redskinsfan

I likey your idea. Quantitizing data is a very helpful way to discern useful information. I would add a column that simply divides bang factor by weight, it would provide a meaningful ratio to me.

Score does this, but subtracts length. This is due to the fact that a G34 would score higher than a G19 if you don't factor in the long slide. We're talking carry guns.

Originally Posted by Redskinsfan

Also a column that take the muzzle energy rather than bullet weight of a "typical" load simply using the bullet weight isn't as accurate. For example a 10mm typically uses a 185 gr. bullet, but its energy is considerably greater than the .45ACP with its typical 230gr. load.

I like your idea.

Terry

I'll look into this.

Originally Posted by redneckmedic

Great now that we have proof that the glocks are better guns there is nothing left to argue about....wait, can you do that science nerd stuff or OC vs CC and if camo really helps in deer hunting?!?

Yes, but it would require a chrono, a weekend in Appalachia, and 2 fifths of Jack Daniels. Oh, and I tried really hard not to stack the deck in Glock's favor, but the numbers don't lie.

ps - updated sheet with 3 models of sig. I'll keep my Glock and spend the other $200 on ammo and range time.

[ChalupaCabras]

Your "Bang Factor" segment is completely bogus; very little of that relates to anything in the real world.

Foot print and loaded weight are good things to consider though.

[indytechnerd]

Originally Posted by ChalupaCabras

Your "Bang Factor" segment is completely bogus; very little of that relates to anything in the real world.

So what you're saying is my .25acp with 7 rounds capacity should count the same as your 1911 with 7 rounds of capacity?
Why carry extra mags?
Why do manufacturers offer anything over a 10rd. mag, if 10rds is all you can legally have in some places?
For that matter, why all the discussion on autos anyway?
Why don't we all carry wheelguns or .44 2-shot derringers?

Sure, it's out there in terms of 'scientific' data, but I think the amount of lead you can send down range in an "Oh " situation is critical to a carry gun. That's why it's there. If anyone can come up with a better name, I'm all for it.