M1911 vs Makarov.

>>32045540
For buying, or do you want to know which is a better service handgun?

File: 20150526_230835.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>32045540
A 300 dollar makarov is of a higher quality than a 300 dollar 1911

>>32045540
Tilting barrel > Blowback

>>32045540
The Makarov is a terrible design for a service pistol, it's too damn small leading to low ammo capacity and the cartridge is too weak against decently equipped combatants but as a civilian pistol for fun it's my all time favorite. I've never owned a 1911 since I can't justify the absolutely retarded cost of a decent one but for its time it was a god-tier design and even in the days of the Makarov it was a more sensible service pistol

penis grips

>>32045557
Well, just in your opinion with either or, honestly.

>>32045588
>$700
>retardedly expensive
Kys

>>32045540
.45 has much more power to it than 9mm, the Makarov is definitely not as good.
Especially since we're talking military hand guns, and light kevlar would stop 9mm like nothing.

>>32045679
>Paying $700 for 100 year old tech that costs $75 to make because of muh John Moses Browning
I'm good kid, call me when Zastava starts making a $200 knockoff and I'm sold

I own both and have to say they're both equally fun to shoot but as an American it's way easier to get .45acp than 9mm mak so my 1911(basic bitch RI GI model) wins.
I do carry the mak way more than my 1911 though.

>Personal choice for combat sidearm
1911, all day
>Government choice for efficiently arming 10 million illiterate conscripts
Makarov, all day.
>Concealed carry
Makarov. If I need more than 8 shots of 9mm Makarov walking back from the grocery store I doubt 8 shots of .45 would've done much better.

>shit capacity because your caliber is fucking fat and slow
or
>shit capacity because your "service pistol" is fucking tiny
they're both shit service pistols, not adopting the Hi Power was a mistake.

>>32045698
>Hr actually believes it costs $75 for a 1911 to be manufactured

Machine time costs money, you're not just paying for the raw steel friendo

if I were being issued one I'd prefer the Mak, simply because it's light and sidearms never get used. Most pistols are equally useless as combat weapons.

>>32045540
There's something special about the Mak.

The vast majority of pistols have what's called a Browning tilting barrel, basically when the slide goes back the barrel tilts up, which makes for reliable feeding and less wear and tear on the slide and the recoil spring. It's been used for well over a century, but it's only certain handguns that need a tilting barrel. Weaker, smaller caliber handguns such as .22s, .25s or .32s have blowback designs, which means that the barrel is fixed and never moves during cycling. That's one less moving part, which is good for reliability, plus it's less expensive to manufacture

Basically, what they did with the Makarov is, they tried to push the limits of the blowback design, they tried to chamber it in the most powerful cartridge that could fit in a blowback design and still be practical (not fuck up the gun). Sure, there are more powerful handguns out there that are blowblack, but the only one I know of is the Hi-Point, and it has a huge and heavy slide, not good for carry. But what they did for the Makarov is to make it as powerful as a blowback pistol could be, while keeping it lightweight, and just like that they had designed a service handgun that was comfortable to carry, inexpensive, ridiculously reliable and pleasant to shoot.

The ballistics of the 9x18mm Makarov cartridge fits between the .380 and the .38 special. It's not particularly impressive, but there's no doubt that it's good enough for its intended purpose.

>>32045753
Seconding this

>>32045712
>as an American it's way easier to get .45acp than 9mm mak
I don't understand how people post things like this on the internet and somehow don't realize that the internet exists

>>32045724
im borderline about to apply this same logic to my next step of arming my household. i need a pocket gun, a car gun, and a second CC piece, and eventually a couple extras laying around in case i need to arm my neighbors. I'm basically at a crossroads to invest in either 9mm/45 and a <platform>. I could get a ruger lcp, a glock 26, and a glock 19, then pick up some 17s on the cheap for my arsenal. or, i could just get 10 makarovs and spread them around like butter.

>>32045845
i've always been split on this. if its wartime and you are actually going to your pistol is it better to have 16rd-33rd of 9mm to dump or 6 hot rounds of .44 mag to really make count

File: nbCjJ1J.jpg (53KB, 457x425px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 457x425px

>>32045594
Indeed.

Deagle vs SigP226
honestly, which is better?

>>32047281
Are you implying he is wrong? You can order lots of cartridges on the net but at Walmart it is pretty common for them to stock .45 and not 9 mak

>>32045588
>stoppin powah
>ammo capacity is too small on the mak despite having larger magazine capacity than the 1911

This is what a 1911 fag honestly believes.

The Makarov is the more sensible service handgun. It has way less parts and is infinitely more reliable than a 1911. The number one thing service handguns do is sit in holsters and gather dust/get dirty. The snackarov eats up dirt like its nothing. If you're banking on handgun caliber FMJ ball ammo having an edge over another pistol caliber in regards to terminal performance, you're literally perpetuating fuddlore. Both will poke pencil wounds through their target.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAEbbhRJNYw