SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Mason's Rifle Room    Thinking about PCCs
Page 1 2 

Moderators: Chris Orndorff, LDD
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Thinking about PCCs Login/Join 
Sigforum K9 handler
Picture of jljones
posted Hide Post
So, I have been around long enough that I started my career in black nomex and an MP5. During the clan lab days, I ran it suppressed with a suppressor full of Hydrogel.

The reasons why the Subguns went away is multi-fold. I’d wager the biggest reason was that the subgun is a shoulder fired pistol. The PCC falls neatly into that category.

The terminal ballistics required training everyone to deliver two 2 round bursts to be ballistically efficient. It was the standard back then. You fired a minimum of four rounds in an engagement. The MP5 also required you to take the weapon off safe when you got out of the van. (The Navy trigger groups were better, but still not something you would flip on and off like an AR unless you had tremendous hand size).

The AR evolved and we learned that it wouldn’t shoot through houses like we were always told. The reliability was there, and it would do things that the subgun wouldn’t. When clan labs went away in favor of imported Mexican dope, the MP5s went away.

I remember 2 early shootings that the State Police had through windshield glass that cemented the AR for me. (Granted they shot a lot of people with MP5s and it was effective, but less effective through barriers).

It also simplified logistics when I transferred to a larger agency.

If you want to choose a PCC for a defensive weapon, you’ll do fine. It has its pluses and minuses like everything else.

I feel based upon experience, if I want to shoot a pistol caliber, I’ll stick with a pistol. A long Gun will be in a rifle caliber, in an AR platform.




www.opspectraining.com

"It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it works out for them"



 
Posts: 35714 | Location: Logical | Registered: September 12, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by bubbatime:

I've read numerous accounts from overseas that found that the M4 rifle left a lot to be desired. Soldiers were trained to shoot the subject down to the ground. Keep firing until the subject falls down, however many shots that may be. One shot was NOT getting the job done.


Having been down range, I can tell you that folks that were killed with 5.56mm tended to stay dead. Also, the ones that got hit with 7.62 or .50 Cal tended to get hit with multiple shots as well. I even saw a guy survive a Hellfire strike (the secondary explosion got him). But, when I was there, in 07-08 (IRAQ) and 09-10(ASTAN), there was not alot of two way gunfights. Most incidents where IEDs, Snipers (very lose use of the term) and Mortars/Rockets.
I'd also point out that when my guys got into gun fights, we rarely recovered bodies, limiting our ability to do a post mortum and see where the rounds actually struck. Even when we did put a bad guy in the freezer, they didn't let us examine him as we had to return the body to locals for burial IAW the local customs.

If you dig through the internet and find 4ID's AAR PowerPoint from Iraq, they said 9mm wasn't effective either. The slide deck has a picture of an Officer sitting on a stack of money on the last slide.

Also, the 5.56 issue in the GWOT is a many faceted discussion, including the Angle of Attack issue found with M855 (written about in infantry magazine by Glen Dean) especially in the M4, Soldier's actual accuracy (effective vs ineffective hits or just plain misses). Also old TTPs or generational TTPs like "double tapping a downed enemy combatant while you assault through the objective, or putting additional rounds into someone who might be wearing a suicide vest are another reason why more then one round was used. You could also look at soldiers qualification scores vs combat accuracy. How many of the "failure to stops" where actually misses or ineffective hits?

If you want to go further down the military rabbit hole I'd point out that the Army dumped submachineguns for the general purpose forces when they got ride of the M3 grease gun. The M4 carbine was to be it's replacement. Even the SOF guys got the carbine with their M4A1s (the BOIP is dated around 1993, and they where using short barrel AR carbines back to the XM-177 and variants in Vietnam). The new submachineguns that the Army seem to be only going to a limited audience. Open source reporting states the Army purchased only 350 of them with the option to purchase an additional 1,000. it must be noted that there are over 400,000 soldiers in service.

However, I don't think that military usage is particularly relevant to a discussion about using a PCC for home defense. Given the restrictions on round usage, threat sets, logistical considerations, etc. That the military is saddled with or saddles itself with. For conversations like this I'd look at Law Enforcement data, as they do better post shooting documentation and investigation.

One advantage of a PCC for defensive use is it's ability to be used at most Pistol ranges, enabling more year round practice. Most of the places I've been stationed or lived have had an Indoor pistol range available year round. Finding an indoor rifle range generally took more research or traveling. IMHO training and practice improves your chances of winning in a defensive encounter and better a PCC you practice with vs a rifle you don't.

Another advantage of the PCC is reliability in a shorter package. Paul Buffoni of BCM has stated that he will not make carbine barrels below a certain length because they cannot provide the BCM level of reliability. However, the ATF's regulation on minimum barrel length and overall length sort of negates this advantage by restricting both a PCC or Rifle caliber carbine to the same length. But then the Pistol brace opens it back up.

On the sound side, if the report of a rifle caliber carbine deters you from training and practicing, I'd point you towards the PCC. I am not as concerned about the noise during a defensive shooting as at that point I'd prioritize winning the gun fight now vs losing hearing if I survive. Most folks spend more time on the range then they do in gunfights, YMMV.
 
Posts: 4386 | Location: Where ever Uncle Sam Sends Me | Registered: March 05, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Amurr
posted Hide Post
Look, plenty of reasons to argue every way. Obviously at this point an AR pistol/SBR can deliver better terminal ballast at about the same size. If I was a legit door kicker I would never pick a PCC. That being said my main HD weapon is a B&T APC9 with omega 9k. It’s expensive yes. But
1. I really like it. I think it’s cool.
2. I stock 9mm 147gr HST deep around my house and I think it will do what it needs to do heaven forbid I ever have to shoot someone inside my house. I like being able to go from my main EDC to my HD weapon in one caliber I can buy in large quantity and shoot practice rounds for cheap.
3. It’s very low recoil and quite and thus I consider it very usable inside by typical civilian shooter.

Is it the best defensive weapon possible from a pure size/capacity/terminal ballistics standpoint. Absolutely not. Is it still a kick ass home defense gun that will do its job if I do mine. Absolutely!
 
Posts: 2606 | Location: On the shore of Lake Lanier | Registered: November 19, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Fighting the good fight
Picture of RogueJSK
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Amurr:
Is it the best defensive weapon possible from a purse size/capacity/terminal ballistics standpoint. Absolutely not.


Personally, none of my purses are large enough to fit either an AR or a PCC...
 
Posts: 28220 | Location: Northwest Arkansas | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Amurr
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RogueJSK:
quote:
Originally posted by Amurr:
Is it the best defensive weapon possible from a purse size/capacity/terminal ballistics standpoint. Absolutely not.


Personally, none of my purses are large enough to fit either an AR or a PCC...


LOL clearly you need to start a thread reviewing your purse selection Big Grin

I fixed it!
 
Posts: 2606 | Location: On the shore of Lake Lanier | Registered: November 19, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I like PCC's because I grew up seeing them on TV and in Movies. Let's be honest here. And at the time we were too young to understand the difference between a 9mm PCC and a 5.56 SBR.

For the first decade as a gun owner I didn't buy any because of the SBR issue. As pistol braces because more common I got a Scorpion, then an MPX-K, then a Banshee MK17, and finally an HK SP5. For range use they are fun, especially with binary triggers. I'd like an APC9 Pro in the future, and an SP5K PDW tops the list if I ever see one available at a non-insane price.

Once I am done setting it up, the Banshee will be for HD. My other HD pistols are an M17 Bravo and a P320c MS, so the mag sharing is a plus. With 124+P Gold Dots it will get the job done if ever needed.

I don't expect my home to be invaded by a tac team wearing body armor. But if that was a risk, I have plenty of AR's and shotguns I could keep ready.
 
Posts: 3556 | Location: Indiana | Registered: December 28, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Mason's Rifle Room    Thinking about PCCs

© SIGforum 2022