Hey /k/ommandos. I'm about to buy my first handgun and

File: IMG_20160309_102437022.jpg (2MB, 1945x2029px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1945x2029px

>>32178638
10mm is fine, .45 is better

>>32178638
>effective range barely above 25 meters
CZ is well known for its high accuracy

>>32178656
>.45 is better

>less energy than 10mm, and less capacity than 10mm

>>32178638
cz's are most definitely not inaccurate. I own a variety of handguns and they're all very accurate, people just shitpost because they love their brand and want it to be the best. its a pistol and many people are shitty as shooting them which leads too blaming user error on an inanimate object. Aka this brand is the best and that brand is shit.

>>32178638
>effective range
What.

I've shot a 75B and a P-07 at 50yards just fine.

>>32178747
inb4 machine marks, inb4 imperfect finish. Cz's are great firearms.

File: IMG_2753.jpg (2MB, 4021x3015px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4021x3015px

>>32178766
This

Don't listen to the memelords

>>32178728

>Less capacity.

NIgga what? Unless we're talking about 1911, most .45 handguns have 12-15 rounds capacity. Conversely most 10mm handguns have 8-10 rounds

>>32178728
All three of those pistols hold 15 rounds

>>32178873
Cz's are overrated as fuck. Literally mediocre slav shit that's not even that well priced.

>>32178638
I don't even like CZs but
>I was considering a CZ, but discarded the idea once I read from a couple of sources that its effective range is barely above 25 meters
Are you retarded? Does the bullet just disappear?

>>32178959
No, they generally have bad crowns and will cause the POI to be off about 2 feet or so at that range.

>>32178934
dunno mang, I've put about 1500 rounds through mine without a single problem, and it's pretty damn accurate too. Ergos are great, cleaning is easy. Upgraded hammer makes the trigger break like a 1911. Dunno why people complain about machining marks, mine is spotless on the inside

also
>implying czechs are slavs

>>32178976
>3 glocks have been credited to your account

>>32178978
You got lucky dude just like some of kel-tec's products work ok.
>>32178993
glocks are pretty shit tier too, unless polymer with 2 paperclips for slide rails is your kind of thing...

>>32178638

CZ is quite accurate, and depending on how much money you want to spend the sky is the limit - CZ's competition pistols are VERY nice and highly accurate. I'm a shitty marksman and I was able to hit dinner plate targets at 50 meters with my plain jane CZ75.

Most pistols are more accurate than the operator, and you have to shoot a LOT until you surpass the inherent accuracy of a pistol.

As for guns to consider..

Glock gets honorable mention for their .45ACP full size model. 13 rounds, reliable, reasonably accurate. Can't go wrong with that.

The EAA/SAR K2 .45 is a full size steel frame CZ75 clone with 14 rounds of .45ACP, costs about $500. The Turks make good guns, and the CZ75 design IS highly accurate (whoever told you they aren't is misinformed) however as it is made by a foreign company and imported (EAA/SAR) warranty is iffy at best. No negative reviews that I've seen though, which bodes well.

The FNX Tactical is a nice gun, a buddy of mine has it and loves it. Personally I recoil at the idea of spending 1100 on a pistol, but if you are member of "no such concern as money" club then more power to you. FN makes a great pistol.

While SIG's are nice and all, the default magazine is a 10 rounder, and while you can get a 14 round extended mag I'm inclined to give the FNX the nod by virtue of capacity.

The only 15 round .45 ACP aside from the FNX is the upcoming RP 45 from Remington, which will be released sometime soon, supposedly. If big green manages to NOT fuck this up and ship a polished turd a'la the R51, I'll be buying one. It should be available for $500 out the door BNIB with 15+1 rounds of .45ACP. From a stateside manufacturer, so if there are warranty issues/mechanical problems you have a much better chance of resolving the issue without just scrapping the gun or selling it to someone else who is willing to spend the $$/time to fix it- pic related.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/10/25/remington-introduces-new-rp-9-rp-45-pistols/

>>32179006
Have you read CZ owners' reviews of their pistols? They love them. Dude at the range was talking about buying a High Power until he saw my 85

>>32178959

Are YOU retarded? Effective range=/=maximum range.

Effective range means the bullet will hit with its full force and you will be able to effectively aim at a target within that distance, it doesn't mean the bullet will phase out of existence once it crossed that mark, rather it will slow down and will become very inaccurate

>>32178638
Whichever one fits your hands best. Ergonomics is uber important with handguns. handle each one extensively before you arrive at a decision.

>>32178638
>dont talk to me or my wife's son ever again

>>32179063
Yes, because a 9mm round fired from a CZ 75 will magically be weaker than if it was fired from a P226.

>>32179088
kek

>>32179006
Dude.. CZ's are decent, reliable guns and are accurate. Haters bitch about the weight, finish, machine marks, and shear-happy slide stops, but reliability and accuracy aren't in question. I'd be interested in seeing some sauce on the claims of CZ's inaccuracy.

CZ defense force out in force

>>32179096

>what is barrel length

Also I never said the CZ range was false. Just that op clearly said EFFECTIVE range which is clearly different from maximum range.

>>32178638
Can you spring for a FN57? Pretty sweet with 20 rd mags.

No Glock? There is a reason why police and military all over the world carry Austrian Tupperware.

>>32179147
4.6" on a cz75 And 4.4" on a p226 fyi

>>32178638
>I was considering a CZ, but discarded the idea once I read from a couple of sources that its effective range is barely above 25 meters.

If you are this dumb, you really have no business spending this much money on a first handgun. However, it is extremely fitting that you plan to

What do you plan on doing with the gun? All of those are impractically sized if your intention was to carry the gun every waking hour of every single day. If you just want a range toy though they should work. About each gun specifically:

>226, 227
Don't buy a new production one. If you weren't aware, Sig has been absolutely terrible since they got bought out in the early 2000s by some textile magnates who don't know anything about guns. Their current CEO is the one who transformed Kimber from a small company that actually made quality firearms to a large company that makes terrible ones at a vastly inflated price, and he's been taking the same approach with Sig.

If I were you, try and find a used German-made Sig in good condition. As far as build quality goes

West German > post-reunification German >>> Exeter (USA production)

>FNX tactical
They're awesome. Expensive, but awesome. If your budget will allow you to get one and still afford all of the things you need to clean, maintain, and practice with your gun, you can't go wrong.

>hows 10mm for handguns
It has superb power, but it has a number of disadvantages too. 10mm guns are generally going to have a lower life expectancy than their closest 9mm equivalents, on top of having a longer time between follow-up shots and very expensive ammo that you may not be able to find outside of buying online. The guns themselves are also harder to conceal.

Is there a reason you aren't considering a 9mm? It's not the late 80s/early 90s anymore; there are lots of good, inexpensive options for 9mm guns and ammo, and 9mm is cheaper per round than any other cartridge except .22 LR.

>>32179105
>CZ's polymers are decent, reliable guns and are accurate
Their metal frame pistols are average at best, and the only people who disagree are snowflake CZ owners/weaboos who masturbate to gunsmith cats and are convinced otherwise out of pride of ownership alone. Or the handful of people who own/shoot CZ's race/custom shop guns or have good condition+ Pre-Bs/short rails, which is a small handful anyways.

The P07/09 are pretty damn good guns though, and hopefully/likely the P10 will be too.
Kind of (un)related, but I would also say that CZ is still king of .22s for price/quality.

>>32179145
More like internet fact checkers really. There are cons to the CZ but accuracy is not generally regarded as one of them. Still waiting on sauce for OP's claim. Of any kind. In the meanwhile.. http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/10/12/exclusive-testing-worlds-accurate-pistols-part/

I don't think anyone on /k/ actually thinks there's a "perfect" pistol (aside from the most hardcore glock fanboys anyway) but most of us prefer discussions to stick to facts, not fantasy.

>>32179161
Second this; if money isn't an issue the 5.7 is accurate to long ranges and a very nice gun.

Though honestly OP, unless you're planning to shoot competition, or you just have an absolute hardon for MOST MAXIMALLY ACCURATE PISTOL EVAR and money is no object.. you're not going to be shooting a pistol, practically, at more than 50 feet. Anything further than that calls for a long gun. Furthermore.. the odds of you training to the point of beating the accuracy of your pistol are slim. It can be done but very few people have the time, money, and inclination to do so.

>>32179190
on the subject of the race/custom guns, I have to say the CGW race hammer dramatically improved my 85's trigger break. Easy to install, and the trigger breaks like a 1911 now. Definitely worth it.

Considering going to SAO with the straight trigger, any experience with those?

>>32179190
I never said anything about CZ's polymer offerings, mostly since I have no experience with them. Not sure why you added that to my quote.

"Average" does not equal "poor accuracy" especially given the competitive field. Glock has a crap ton of aftermarket barrels since their stock barrels aren't as accurate as they could be. CZ.. not so much. Since you're making the claim of CZ's accuracy/inaccuracy the burden of proof lies with you. Add some sauce or stop posting.

>>32179299
the proof is in the pudding, everyone knows cz's are mediocre at best and their barrel quality is sub par. Their barrels are notorious for having fucked up crowns.

I'm going to ignore all the content in this thread and go off of OP only.

Consider a glock 21, with a conversion barrel for 10mm. Best of both worlds. If you're set on the sigs or FN though you can't really go wrong with any. The FNX45T however I would caution you against unless you plan on putting an optic and silencer on, as the $500 mark-up over the standard fnx45 model will be for nothing if not.

>>32179330
>Their barrels are notorious for having fucked up crowns.
Proofs

>>32179273
No experience, but I don't see the point in switching to SAO.
I'm not a trigger snob or have any particular preference for one or the other since I've carried both, but DA/SA has its benefits and is just fine, I think.
>>32179299
I meant to say "fixed" for that quote, my mistake.
I'm not OP and I don't care about his accuracy claims.
Accuracy claims/concerns on current productions pistols are almost always irrelevant as probably 99% of them are more accurate than their shooters and probably less than ~5% of pistol owners/shooters can even maintain a fist/palm sized group at 25yds to begin with, much less wring out a pistol's barrel's performance at that range without a vise.

My point is just that, having owned an omega, it was a $500 handgun at best.

File: leymwyW.png (212KB, 552x414px)

212KB, 552x414px

>>32179330
>>Says "proof is in the pudding"
>>has no pudding or proof
>>continues to shitpost opinions as gospel

/thread

>>32179330
>search for problems with cz barrel crowning
>nothing comes up

>>32179370
>>32179360
>>32179376
defending a company's mediocre products this hard. You guys getting paid / sponsored by them? why are you shilling?

>>32178638
I own the FNP-45 tactical, Sig P226, and...my newly acquired CZ P-09. I love, repeat, LOVE all three of them. If I could only choose 1 it would be the .45, but the 226 is my favorite 9mm. The CZ holds 22 fucking rounds...22!!

So, as usual, the answer comes down to personal preference. If you lived in Las Vegas I would invite you to come out and shoot them before you decide.

>CZ's effective ranges are 25 meters, FN's and Sig's aren't
the fuck is this? .45 is the problem, if you want higher effective ranges don't get the subsonic round

>>32178899
that's stupid, you're comparing double stacks and single stacks

>>32179382
>makes claims about inferior barrel crowning
>has no proofs
>calls others shills

I'm not saying you're a shitposter

>>32179382
Not who you replied to but...

> "hurr cz crown issues"

> such as?

> "hurr durr shill harder fag"

C'mon now

>>32179407
I'm not shit posting do you even own a cz? they're abysmal.

File: image.jpg (48KB, 413x324px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 413x324px

>>32179330
>Their barrels are notorious for having fucked up crowns.

Uhmmm...this is a bit awkward, but...do you know what notorious means?

>>32179441
Mine's the one with the wood grips further up. Like i said, it's great

>>32179458
I know what it means obviously, its a known issue along with their terrible fit / finish / machining.

>>32179462
Sorry, as I stated earlier you got lucky. Every dog has his day.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 2016x1512px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2016x1512px

>>32179441
As previously mentioned, I love this baby.

>>32179494
Hows that frame bulged doing?

>>32179535
No issues here, but you keep trying, ok?

File: iLikeCzsALOT.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>32179603
twas all just a ruse my friend, filename.

I've been thinking about getting a Ruger MK() for my first pistol, no real practical reason, I just like them when I've shot them. I wasn't initially looking at getting one but I ran into a bunch of shit about how amazingly cheap they are, like sub $300, but everywhere I've looked they pretty much start at $350. Still pretty cheap I guess but not quite the massive bargain I was led to believe. So what am I missing? Is there a specific model I'm missing, did Ruger hike the price in the last few years, or was that meant to be used prices?

>>32179827
No, they just command higher prices based on region. The new Marks start around 350 which is pretty good for a dedicated steel target pistol. The price on II's spiked when they went out of production and stayed high when the III's turned out to be inferior models. If you want to go cheaper there are a few options, like Browning Buckmarks and Beretta Neos'.

>>32179827
The Mk. IV just got rolled out, and it's the first real improvement to the design in 30 years. Give it some time and prices will drop.

>>32179147
Wow anon you sure are stupid

>>32179827
Go with the MK4. All of the previous versions are a pain in the ass to take down and reassemble.

>>32178638
>Read that in essence, CZ's suck
>Ponders a 10mm as a first handgun.

Stick with Call Of Duty new friend because you are fucking clueless.

Hey guys OP here.

Im relieved to hear about the CZ range problems being BS. I read it on some range firing blogs.

The gun wll be for self defense, not competiive shooting. I want something I can access to in the car and to protect my home (inb4 ARs and shotguns, not the time for that) and something i can carry. I have no issue with open carry but I'm also gonna go with a torso holster for concealment because I wear field jackets pretty much all the time. I like full sized guns and in the past I carried an HK45 from my uncle and it wasnt a big deal as far as comfort-size were concerned.

>>32180673
Given everything you just said, I would go with the 226.

>>32180576
this

the mk iv is a breeze to work with, compared to the older models

I have an FNX 45T as my first gun.

Pros:
>Low recoil, even with 930 fps 230 gr. rounds
>15 round mags
>Free Streamlight from FN
>Red dot mount
>Threaded barrel
>Nice Trigger
>Decocker
>Raised Sights

Cons:
>The top half feels like FULL SIZE 45 ANGEL OF DEATH, the bottom half feels like a toy.
>Cant CC this unless you're 300 pounds
>It hurts to pay .30-.40 cents for ball, and $1+ per JHP round
>After shooting some 1911s and P220s, you get jealous at how they feel like "Real" guns

If I could go back I would probably get a 1911 TRP if I were to stick with .45, or a CZ75 if I decided to get 9mm

I love my fnx45, though I'd be hard pressed to spend even more on the tactical one since
>Suppressors are illegal in my country
>I don't really need to mount a sight to it
And that's a lot of money I'd be spending nearly $1600

TRP 1911

>>32181581
Why not one of STI's 2011s?

I have a 9mm 226, if I didnt' get it I would have bought an FNX. Or some FN modern handgun, I forget the specific type.

>>32178638

literally get a glock 19

>>32178728
yeah, I like both but the 10mm is "the best" performer. but you won't be disappointed by the 45 - it has more options and is much more common. The 10mm will beat a 45 in every metric but price and choices of platforms.

File: 1479379260897.jpg (55KB, 640x635px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x635px

>>32178899
All the 10mm pistols I have seen carry 10-15. 45. mostly 7-10.

this guy is a spider.jpg

File: 1475428772428.jpg (17KB, 236x350px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 236x350px

Not OP, but I'm also looking at getting babby's first handgun, mostly for range shooting but also for self and home defense.
I'm looking at getting a 9mm, and I prefer hammer to striker from the little bit I've fired.
I'm also lefty, so ambi or at least lefty-friendly would be nice. My current contenders are an FNX9, Baby Eagle/Jericho, a CZ85, and a Sig SP2022.

Any thoughts on these?

>>32184416

Is the P226 lefty-friendly?

>>32184446
I didn't really look into the P226 because it seemed kind of pricey for a first gun. My budget's around $700 and I'm not really confident buying used guns

>>32184491

No offense but I wasn't answering to your post, I was trying to find out if the P226 is lefty friendly because I'm lefty and I absolutely hate right-handed guns

>>32184416
>>32184446
Sigs
>lefty friendly
No, probably the most right handed/non-ambi handgun. Maybe a non-break action revolver is worse, maybe.

>>32182735
The bang for your buck is always said to be higher for TRPs

>>32178638
Don't ever talk to me or my gun again.png

File: interdasting.jpg (51KB, 685x567px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 685x567px

>>32184833
have you ever even heard of the p320s?