The merits, or lack of merits of a pistol-cartridge carbine have been argued for a long time. The advocates of these carbines will never be silenced, nor will the opponents.
Although I've owned both the 9mm and .40 S&W versions of the Ruger Police Carbine, I now own only the .40. I love it. Wish I still had the 9mm model too.
As a small arms repairman in the service, I must have grown accustomed to heavier triggers, as I never would have described my Ruger PC's as having heavy triggers.
These guns are fun to shoot, are cheap to shoot, have very little recoil, remain surprisingly clean, are pleasingly accurate, and even have a noticeably more comfortable firing report.
Nope, I can't carry it in a holster, so that's a downside of a carbine over a handgun, but I do think a carbine such as the Ruger makes for a great defense weapon when a feller is in a position to have it at hand.
And velocity gains in the longer carbine-length barrel? It might surprise folks to know of 2-to-3 hundred FPS increases with some ammo. The least increase is with cartridges advertised and designed to be most efficient in a short barrel. Here's a link to a pretty neat chart showing the velocity differences of different ammo with different barrels. http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9luger.html
Why did the PC9 or PC4 fail? I've shared my opinion before. I think it was the gun dealers themselves that had little faith in its marketability. They wouldn't stock them, so there's no chance they would ever sell. And being a Ruger, they had little chance of police department acceptance.
Like 'em or hate 'em, the PC's will continue to surface, and the discussions will continue. I would suggest that for the opponents that hate them, but have never really handled one, they should make arrangements to give one a try, and have a little fun.
WAYNO.
Although I've owned both the 9mm and .40 S&W versions of the Ruger Police Carbine, I now own only the .40. I love it. Wish I still had the 9mm model too.
As a small arms repairman in the service, I must have grown accustomed to heavier triggers, as I never would have described my Ruger PC's as having heavy triggers.
These guns are fun to shoot, are cheap to shoot, have very little recoil, remain surprisingly clean, are pleasingly accurate, and even have a noticeably more comfortable firing report.
Nope, I can't carry it in a holster, so that's a downside of a carbine over a handgun, but I do think a carbine such as the Ruger makes for a great defense weapon when a feller is in a position to have it at hand.
And velocity gains in the longer carbine-length barrel? It might surprise folks to know of 2-to-3 hundred FPS increases with some ammo. The least increase is with cartridges advertised and designed to be most efficient in a short barrel. Here's a link to a pretty neat chart showing the velocity differences of different ammo with different barrels. http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9luger.html
Why did the PC9 or PC4 fail? I've shared my opinion before. I think it was the gun dealers themselves that had little faith in its marketability. They wouldn't stock them, so there's no chance they would ever sell. And being a Ruger, they had little chance of police department acceptance.
Like 'em or hate 'em, the PC's will continue to surface, and the discussions will continue. I would suggest that for the opponents that hate them, but have never really handled one, they should make arrangements to give one a try, and have a little fun.
WAYNO.
