If you, yourself had to decide to buy a handgun for defensive purposes, but knew you wouldn't have the luxury of vetting it prior to carry, what would you choose?

With ammo in such short supply and outrageously priced when available, is there a design that you believe to be so well executed that it could forego the initial reliability test many of perform and be carried daily in full confidence until ammo became more readily available?

No.

I have to know it will work and I have to know it will work for me.

Carrying for SD an untested firearm with which one has not trained is the height of folly, IMO.

Glock or HK if absolutely necessary. But I would lock the slide back and let it sit that way every time I'm at home and keep every mag loaded (even spares) to break in the springs.

Or just about any S&W revolver.

You need to find out if your gun goes bang at least once or twice and not wait until a defensive situation arises to find out that it goes click.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
No.

I have to know it will work and I have to know it will work for me.

Carrying for SD an untested firearm with which one has not trained is the height of folly, IMO.

Carrying for SD an untested firearm with which one has not trained is the height of folly, IMO.

+1000 percent!

Not enough information given.

There are numerous horror stories of those who learned that their weapon wouldn't work; parts installed from the factory incorrectly, broken or missing firing pin, etc. Ive seen it at the range. Even as simple as a buddy who had a ruger P95 that he carried and "trusted." He just didn't shoot it. One day we went to the range, and it jammed repeatedly.

I examined it, found it bone dry. I cleaned and lubricated it, and he shot it again, and it functioned without incident. Good thing he wasn't in a gunfight, the first time around.

Most modern, reputable firearms will function just fine, out of the box, but until you shoot them, you have no way of knowing that.

A year or two ago, a poster here, who carried a P320 on duty, said he was surprised to learn that the FCU safety had to be reset after assembly, or he'd have a dead trigger. He checked his duty weapon, and sure enough, it had a "dead" trigger, and was disabled. Bad time to find that out in a gunfight.

I understand that ammunition is scarce right now and that it's expensive, and I understand that you may not be able to find, or afford ammunition for practice, training, or to get out and shoot. That raises a couple of questions.

One is if you have experience shooting a particular firearm (make and model), the other is shooting proficiency in general.

Remember that it's not just a matter of whether the pistol will cycle, or function. You're also responsible for every round that exits that barrel, as well as safe carry. Not only must enough ammunition be expended to ensure the firearm functions, but to ensure that you will know where every round is going, when you fire, and that you'll fire accurately, and be able to operate the firearm when you need it most.

If you've got a hundred thousand rounds downrange through a Glock 19 and you're just picking up a new G19...that's different than never having fired a Glock, and now you're picking up a new G19. See the difference?

Even if you're intimately familiar, the pistol should still be function fired, and most any pistol will need several hundred rounds to get through the "break-in" period.

If you're going to get something that you can't shoot first, and if you're already proficient, then a Glock is hard to beat. Revolvers are generally reliable. Just remember that Murphy is always close by, and he is the law.

I'd never carry a firearm for self defense without testing

Interesting possibilities. Cycling is different than just going bang. You can test most revolvers to cycle even if they're empty. We had a situation over across the river where the Yankees live. A guy who owned a bar wanted to test fire his new automatic. So he went to the basement and let one loose. Seemed to work fine so he put it away. A few days later the building exploded/blew up. His one shot managed to hit his gas meter. Filled things up with natural gas and a spark from someplace demolished the building. A more common trick is to just step out the back door late at night and fire one into the back yard.

All sounds like automatics aren't as reliable as revolvers. At least for that first shot anyway. Lots of mechanical things that can go wrong. You can pretty much trust one with that roundy thing to go around like it should. I live amongst hillbillies who just go out and shoot their new gun regardless of where they are. At least they know it fires. City folks in more civilized place don't do that. Even urban youts test fire their newly stolen toys. Its why God made alleys. Listen at night in the city and you'll hear an occasional gunshot. We have no way of knowing if it was a "hit" on a non-friendly gang member or just somebody playing around.

While it still wouldn't be advisable for my comfort level to carry a gun without trying it. IF I had to choose a concealed firearm to carry without having the ability to shoot it first, it would be an S+W revolver, can function test it better than a semi auto.....pencil in the barrel test, see that the trigger rotates the cylinder and cocks the hammer and it drops after every trigger pull. etc.

Always a chance you go a lemon. Absolutely would not. 50 rounds absolutely bare minimum. I won't carry without 200 rounds of break in/testing. Most people recommend 300-500

A cop at my range started carrying a S&W Shield .45 as a back-up to his P227 duty gun. About a year later, I asked him how he liked it as I was thinking of buying one. When he told me he never even test fired the gun, I was shocked. When the head instructor heard, that gun went right on the line. Thankfully, all was good. But I say this because you never know!

Another cop volunteered for a dangerous assignment where he could pick his own gun. He picked a 1911. The gun came with the (then) NY Compliant COBIS test round. When he tried to qualify with the gun, it wouldn't fire a round. Close up inspection revealed that the slide and barrel assembly were never properly finished.

I'm a firm believer of shooting several hundred rounds through a gun before I trust it.

quote:

Originally posted by kalford:
If you, yourself had to decide to buy a handgun for defensive purposes, but knew you wouldn't have the luxury of vetting it prior to carry, what would you choose?

With ammo in such short supply and outrageously priced when available, is there a design that you believe to be so well executed that it could forego the initial reliability test many of perform and be carried daily in full confidence until ammo became more readily available?

Personally I would NEVER/EVER trust my life to a new untested firearm, I have owned a number of guns over the years that didn't start to function correctly until I fired a number of rounds though them, or at least tested them to function with the ammo I intend to carry.

Now if I absolutely had to carry and depend on a gun that I couldn't fire, test, or vet then it would be a used gun from someone that I fully trusted to sell me a working gun.

Given your scenario I would only trust a revolver. You can dry fire it holding down the trigger and look at the back of the cylinder you should see firing pin protruding. This would be the best indicator that the gun MIGHT work.

In an EXTREME case where I might have choice of gun but literally no way to test at least 20 rounds I am probably going Beretta 92 as it is basically straight in feeding and nothing for the case to catch on, on the way out. I honestly think I would go Beretta 92 before a revolver as a revolvers lockwork is more complex and revolvers are more sensitive to out of spec tolerances.

All that said it would have to be an EXTREME case as I believe you need to run at least a box or three through to vet a new gun.

Of course the standard procedure is to test the gun & ammo 1st.

Given the choice between no gun & a gun that wasn’t properly vetted, I’d have to go with the gun. I always field strip a new to me gun, then lube where needed.

The VAST majority have always worked, yes, maybe the impact was a bit off desired.

I purchased a S&W 380EZ for the Mrs recently. I decided to take it with me on my last trip to the range to function test and I’m glad I did. It went click, no bang with 2 different types of ammo. I field stripped and didn’t see any issue. When I got it home and tried the pencil in the barrel trick and the pencil didn’t move when the trigger was pulled. Sent it back to Smith and it had a bad firing pin. Smith got it back to me in 3 weeks, and it’s been great with the 200 rds I’ve put through it so far.Every company can make a mistake.

The simple answer is no but life is not simple. If the choice is go with no gun or go with one not vetted then the realistic answer is go with the gun. It may or may not shoot but if you have no gun then you definitely are not going to shoot. Besides, if the unvetted gun doesn't shoot you can always throw it.

To clarify, my post is hypothetical in nature and in no way indicative of my own carry regimen. The thought comes from reading a famous gunsmith's opinion on the matter and how he would choose "brand x" given the scenario of not being able to test before use. There was also a YouTuber that makes holsters expounding the same virtue upon a different handgun. Add that to the very real scenario of our large influx of new shooters and ammo shortage.... well, I'm willing to bet someone will carry without testing in the short term.

To reiterate, this is not a solicitation for advise or endorsement of carrying without testing. I think we all know the value of that. This is more of a theoretical exercise discussing the merits of designs and manufacturer's ability to produce them as expected.

If forced to, choose a quality revolver.
But even then, avoid carrying an untested gun.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
If forced to, choose a quality revolver.
But even then, avoid carrying an untested gun.

Funny that the example I always tell people about was a S&W M15. My folks had it loaded for a while, but the first time they took it to the range it stopped working after two cylinders. I like to test with my carry ammo, full magazine and topped off, and try each magazine at least twice, if not more. If I had to, I would buy a Glock to carry untested.