EDC choice

Get the red hawk. Much stronger

>>33254806
Second the redhawk. You could probably run a thermo nuclear load through it and still be fine.

Are we talking about animal defense here or are these guns for use against humans exclusively?

>>33255250
Also are we talking about a wilderness sidearm or town gun?

I assume this is for self defense from relatively small animals and humans? I'd go for the g40. Having the extra 7 rounds over the .357 revolvers could be very handy. But if you're maybe worried about not having the power to take down animals, go with the red hawk. v nice gun.

Really no point in the 1911, sig, or g40 though IMO.

>>33255323
Err, no point in the g29. Whoops.

>>33255323
Yeah if he isn't thinking about stopping game animals the 10 mm is probably the most useful, but even that is a worse choice than a generic plastic 9mm imo.
Like I carry a .357 when I go out into the wilderness because it's at a sweet spot between animal and human defense.
I wouldn't choose it for general use unless I thought I might need to shoot an elk or something.

>>33255372
On the other hand if you need to choose a carry gun for a rural setting I'd go with a small ruger .357 if I needed to conceal something.

>>33254778
>357 S&W R8/TRR8/627 [8]
>.357 Ruger Red Hawk 5503 [8]
bulky as fuck. you might not mind it but theyre uncomfortably huge for me, its like a flare gun. Id rather have a 6 shot .367 if I realy want to carry one

>10mm RIA/equiv 1911 [8]
you will be paying a lot for any 10mm 191. Colts and RIA are good, ive heard some have issues but not as much anymore. if you really want a 10mm there are arguably better options but if you want the niche 10mm 1911 these are pretty much your best choices, im lean towards colt but im biased

>10mm Sick Sour P229 [8]
heavy, so be ready for that. Of all the sigs and or 10mms there are better options. the p229 is a good .40 though

>10mm Glock G40 [15]
I wouldnt even consider this, its basically a competition gun. too unwidley to carry unless you like shoulder holsters and even then drawing it would be a pain

>10mm Glock G29 [10]
probably the most practical for ccw, though boring and it seems like you want a special snowflake carry gun

>>33254778
There is no such thing as a Sig 229 chambered in 10mm you fucking moron

>hurr durr Glock 40
>hurr durr Glock 29

Just get a fuckinf Glock 20 dipshit

>op here again with thanks for your advise
>also preferring red hawk
>adding/editing a few entries:

.357 Ruger GP-100 (6") [6] -- same weight as Red Hawk

10mm Sig Sauer P220 [8] -- the 10mm, not the .40S&W

.357 Coonan 1911 [8] -- yes: a magnum 1911

10mm EAA Witness Hunter [15] -- that name

>really wanting an 8" .357 redhawk

>>33254778
I would just go for the middle ground of the Glock 20. The 29 is good too though. Check both out.

>op here again with thanks for your advise
>also preferring red hawk
>adding/editing a few entries:

.357 Ruger GP-100 (6") [6] -- same weight as Red Hawk

10mm Sig Sauer P220 [8] -- the 10mm, not the .40S&W

.357 Coonan 1911 [8] -- yes: a magnum 1911

10mm EAA Witness Hunter [15] -- that name

>really wanting an 8" .357 redhawk

>>33254778
Get the glock 20. For you.

>>33255613
>eferring red hawk
>>adding/editing a
Again are you thinking of concealing this gun OP? because if so forget the 8 inch redhawk.
I use a 5 inch .357 for my all purpose sidearm but even that is not super concealable and it's slimmer than a redhawk.

>>33256065
didn't mean to quote anything. oops

>>33254778
OP, why would you have g40 and g29 on your list but not a glock 20? It's far more practical for ccw than a 40 while giving you more real estate than a 29.

>>33256129
look bro, there's two options here.
Either OP is frequently in a wilderness setting, or he's a faggot/16 year old/nogunz
No one is going to be concealing an 8 inch redhawk unless they are super concerned about bear attacks, even then, why an 8 inch .357? Why not either step down to a shorter barrel length and/or go to a higher caliber if you're going to be EDCing such a big piece of steel?
OP's post raises so many questions about what's going on in his head.

>>33257100
>op here
Just want a single, jack-of-all-trades handgun to carry along with about eighty pounds of other gear through a variety of situations while traversing many miles of varigated terrain both on foot and embarked aboard vehicles; potential targets include black bears, timber wolves and armed humans.

I'm a former airborne infantryman and am presently pleasently high on marijuana while shitposting on this korean fingerpainting board.

>>33257552
Glock 20, every day, all day then.

...and as far as wanting an eight-inch, well, that just sounds pretty neat because I'd like to hunt with it, but I'm fine with six, four or even this 2.75" barrel. EDC, yeah, but no worries on concealment thanks to heavy field jacket.

>>33257552
Well fuck me then. Sorry.
I think you should consider a .44 mag, I think it's the most potent woods gun that can also realistically serve as a people shooter.
My old man actually carried a s&w .44 mag loaded with hot handloads, one speedloader of mag handloads, and one speed loader of .44 special for the ride back through town.
If concealing is really important I'd recommend the shortest ruger .357 you can stomach.

>>33257584
im this guy again >>33257584
I carry a 4 inch .357 for that kind of situation loaded with semi-wadcutters and I at least feel well armed, but I wouldn't hunt with it unless I was desperate. Your long barreled redhawk idea makes sense in that case. Maybe you should consider stepping up to .44 for that even.

File: pix142154662.jpg (21KB, 450x328px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 450x328px

>>33257999
>>33258025
.44 Magnum is a favorite caliber of mine, but I feel the lighter recoil and extra two additional rounds of the new .357 Red Hawk makes up for the lesser firepower; besides, this is predominantly intended to handle two-legged threats. Oh, but I am sorely tempted to go for that new .44 Special GP-100 (four inch). Might as well go for a .44 Magnum Red Hawk with a 7.5" barrel.... but that would be another purchase; this is primarily and anti-personnel sidearm.

Also, there is this condition:
>decent ammo capacity
Decent here meaning at least eight rounds.

>>33258110
with that in mind then the 10mm starts to make sense too, but are you aware that most of the 10mm ammo available is not loaded to it's full power?
Also I wonder how well a full house 10mm hollowpoint would do against game. You might actually want to go with a lead projectile or plain fmj. IDK much about 10mm guns desu.

>>33258110
>ruger
throw some buffalo bore's in that bitch

>>33258203
also I wonder where the .357 sig and .38 super fall on this discussion. I'm unfamiliar with either's ballistics but my philosophy for woods pistols has always been to try and emphasize penetration, so maybe they'd do alright if you wanted to tinker with reloading them.