Is a PCC that uses a different mag than your pistol a dealbreaker?

See this whole conversation going on, is why I have a love hate relationship with AR's.

You can have a sbr 5.56/.223, and that same lower can be molded with something like a Stern defense kit, and make it capable of being a pcc.

Which, kinda destroys the need or reason for a pcc market or gun even.

While the Stern kit is creative and ingenious, it has the potential to destroy the pcc market.

Because all they or anyone else has to do is make magazine adapters for any pistol.
I respectfully disagree. Those kits have been around since the 80s. They offer a reliable option to get more flexibility from a lower but most people don’t want the hassle. Many gun owners are incredibly frugal but only a small fraction go this route. The PCC market exploded because of marketing and the markets love for all things AR and tactical. They just came together at the right time.
 
See this whole conversation going on, is why I have a love hate relationship with AR's.

You can have a sbr 5.56/.223, and that same lower can be molded with something like a Stern defense kit, and make it capable of being a pcc.

Which, kinda destroys the need or reason for a pcc market or gun even.

While the Stern kit is creative and ingenious, it has the potential to destroy the pcc market.

Because all they or anyone else has to do is make magazine adapters for any pistol.
Stern’s been around for a while. Probably since before the PCC market blew up. It’a a cool product, but there are plenty of lower specifically designed for pistol magazines and they have taken a much bigger market share than Stern.
 
Well, I am new and green just starting last year.
Which is why I brought up Stern.

Also, purely because they are the only manufacturer I've found that has a beretta magazine adapter.

Outside of the cx4 storm,sub2000 and the impossibility of finding a Wilson combat lower, I know of no other source for beretta 92/96 adapters.
Never mind one for usp magazines
 
Well, I am new and green just starting last year.
Which is why I brought up Stern.

Also, purely because they are the only manufacturer I've found that has a beretta magazine adapter.

Outside of the cx4 storm,sub2000 and the impossibility of finding a Wilson combat lower, I know of no other source for beretta 92/96 adapters.
Never mind one for usp magazines
Stern is great for us in MA, who need to take lower and magazine availability into consideration. But the rest of the country has cheap and plentiful(before 2020) options.
 
Just an idea, I think this is a legitimate third option. Buy a Ruger PCC in .40 and have a smith make it into a 10mm. Off the top of my head you would have to resize the chamber and change the recoil spring/buffer to handle the hotter load.
If it were that easy Ruger would have done it by now. I mean, Ruger makes a 10mm revolver, doubt anyone was asking for that, but a 10mm PC carbine I've seen a lot of people asking for. So, Ruger doesn't make them and I figure it's because the gun can't handle it or they don't make it because it would be a Glock only mag option and Ruger doesn't like making a gun that only uses a competitors magazine, unlike their 9mm Carbine that uses a Ruger pistol magazine and had the adapter that could be switched out for a Glock mag.
 
It think the last point about pistol vs PCC is, if you're going to have a carbine length gun, why use pistol ammo when we know the rifle ammo is going to be better at stopping the threat? If you gave me a choice between a 17 round PCC with even a short 8" barrel or a 30rd AR pistol with an 8" barrel, I pick the AR every day.

With the pistol you are limiting lethality and most of the time capacity over the AR. Why do that for a defense gun?

I'd love to own an MP5. But the reality is if I bought one it would be a toy and my AR pistol would still remain my house clearing gun.
Because I reload for the pistol and not for a .223 or 5.56 rifle.

Being "better" at stopping a threat when discussing a 10mm rifle or a .223 rifle, they both will work at distances under 100 yards.
 
See this whole conversation going on, is why I have a love hate relationship with AR's.

You can have a sbr 5.56/.223, and that same lower can be molded with something like a Stern defense kit, and make it capable of being a pcc.

Which, kinda destroys the need or reason for a pcc market or gun even.

While the Stern kit is creative and ingenious, it has the potential to destroy the pcc market.

Because all they or anyone else has to do is make magazine adapters for any pistol.
The Stern's cost $200, but they do work, I own one. Bought it specifically because I wanted a 9mm AR braced pistol to shoot cheap ammo (lol, 9mm isn't cheap anymore and never will be again) but I didn't want to own a 9mm specific lower that cost $150 because my thinking was if laws change and I can't buy AR lowers anymore, I'd want to have a second standard AR lower for a cheap backup rifle.

The issue with the Stern adapters is if they don't make one that works with 10 and .45 Glock magazines (or whatever else) then you can't buy one.
 
If you haven't come out from under a rock lately and felt the political climate, semi autos and detachable clipazines are not very popular with the ruling party.
Holding out for a ruling class which has developed
a new-found revulsion for trees and hemp.

I think the press and court system would have a field day in a defense situation if I ventilated a home intruder with an SP5 with a binary trigger.
Move to a less exclusive neighborhood where
home invaders are people who won't be missed...
 
i dont get the fascination with PCC's in MA especially

preban glock mags or other preban 30 high cap pistol mags cost way more than preban AR mags, and then you still end up with a carbine with less stopping power

is there something im missing other than (what used to be) cheaper ammo prices?
 
If it were that easy Ruger would have done it by now. I mean, Ruger makes a 10mm revolver, doubt anyone was asking for that, but a 10mm PC carbine I've seen a lot of people asking for. So, Ruger doesn't make them and I figure it's because the gun can't handle it or they don't make it because it would be a Glock only mag option and Ruger doesn't like making a gun that only uses a competitors magazine, unlike their 9mm Carbine that uses a Ruger pistol magazine and had the adapter that could be switched out for a Glock mag.
I starting to think you never wanted options, you really just want to buy the retarded hi-point.
 
See this whole conversation going on, is why I have a love hate relationship with AR's.

You can have a sbr 5.56/.223, and that same lower can be molded with something like a Stern defense kit, and make it capable of being a pcc.

Which, kinda destroys the need or reason for a pcc market or gun even.

(cue this up for full effect pls it needs to be playing when you read this post)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xg7FLrzM2xA

wapner-sm.jpg


The ghost of Judge Wapner Says:

"Lol, no, it doesn't. Maybe as a "PCC as only a range toy" sure, but I don't see the point of flinting to save a few hundo when you can just build out
another gun. Worst part is someone pays for an upper, BUIS, probably optic, they're not far away from just getting another gun....... smells like a fools
errand, to me. Also an AR9 is a bit of a bastard child to begin with. Running this thing on an AR is like bastard child, squared. "

"I hereby find the defendant guilty of FLINTING in the first degree. "



vomit.jpg
massimo.jpg

"Do Not Want"
 
I starting to think you never wanted options, you really just want to buy the retarded hi-point.
Well, once I looked into all what was available it was either you get a Glock mag carbine or a Hi Point one and I was leaning to get the TNW and I still might considering we all may be paying a special tax on each semi auto gun we buy in the future.
 
That is giving me AIDS. f***ing AIDS.

A fixed AR stock.

I could cry.

Well, it bothers me too, but I'd rather have it and not get jammed up, then play loose with the AWB law in this state and get really jammed up. My AR has a pinned stock, so no difference there. As to why the SBR stock is pinned, it's because it started life as a 16" carbine and the stock had to be pinned/fixed to have the dealer transfer it into MA. I didn't want to damage the original stock in case I leave MA and want the folding/adjustable option again, so I had the smith drill a pin in the Magpul stock to pin it. When I leave MA, it will go back to fully adjustable, but until someone can clarify if an SBR actually qualifies under the MA AWB language or not (most dealers and smiths just don't know), as an SBR is not a rifle, nor is it a pistol, so it is possible it could have an adjustable stock, if one were willing to deal with the legal system if there is a problem.
 
The velocity of 5.56 makes many of its loads less likely to fly through a bunch of walls compared to 9mm. The 5.56(bullet dependent of course), is more likely to break apart. But any cartridge capable of killing someone is also capable of flying through a few dry wall sheets.

Also, you mentioned this:

That is very wrong. The permanent cavitation caused by rifle rounds at close self defense distances is vastly more likely to kill someone quicker than 9mm. The rifle cartridge is more likely to cause sudden hypovolemic shock. And it’s also less location dependent. For 9mm, you have very small targets for instantly putting the bad guy down. With a rifle, there’s more wiggle room. In fact, just having a rifle bullet pass in close proximity to the spine can cause temporary incapacitation. The pressure through the tissue/fluids during the temporary cavitation can travel through the subarachnoid space around the spinal cord and cause the spinal cord to smack against the vertabrae. Causing the bad guy to drop, even if not permanently. That can, of course happen with the temporary cavitation of a pistol cartridge too, but their temporary cavitation is much smaller.

Rifles are way easier to cause immediate incapacitation than pistol calibers at self defense distances.

That said, I do think PCCs have their merits in home defense. They are much quieter, even as you go down to the shorty short barrel lengths that are desired in some smaller homes (like those common in New England). People rarely balk at having a pistol in a nightstand for home defense. Yet you mention a PCC or braced pistol, and woah, all of a sudden the cartridge won’t stop


9mm and .45acp both penetrate drywall and wood similarly. 5.56 not only penetrated the test targets, it kept going...

This is overpenetration. Yes, pistol calibers will penetrate drywall, wood, glass, etc. Rifles will penetrate farther, much father. Really is that simple.


5.56 XM193 round tumbled... eventually. Also over-penetrated.

Last is this gem of info:
Wound Ballistic Terminal Performance

Here's an excerpt :
Dr. Martin Fackler, the man who has done more research on the 5.56 mm 55 gr M193 FMJ than anyone else on this planet, has written the following (Fackler, ML: “Literature Review”. Wound Ballistics Review; 5(2):40, Fall 2001) about 55 gr FMJ: “In 1980, I treated a soldier shot accidentally with an M16 M193 bullet from a distance of about ten feet. The bullet entered his left thigh and traveled obliquely upward. It exited after passing through about 11 inches of muscle. The man walked in to my clinic with no limp whatsoever: the entrance and exit holes were about 4 mm across, and punctate. Xray films showed intact bones, no bullet fragments, and no evidence of significant tissue disruption caused by the bullet’s temporary cavity. The bullet path passed well lateral to the femoral vessels. He was back on duty in a few days. Devastating? Hardly. The wound profile of the M193 bullet (page 29 of the Emergency War Surgery—NATO Handbook, GPO, Washington, D.C., 1988) shows that most often the bullet travels about five inches through flesh before beginning significant yaw. But about 15% of the time, it travels much farther than that before yawing—in which case it causes even milder wounds, if it missed bones, guts, lung, and major blood vessels. In my experience and research, at least as many M16 users in Vietnam concluded that it produced unacceptably minimal, rather than “massive”, wounds. After viewing the wound profile, recall that the Vietnamese were small people, and generally very slim. Many M16 bullets passed through their torsos traveling mostly point forward, and caused minimal damage. Most shots piercing an extremity, even in the heavier-built Americans, unless they hit bone, caused no more damage than a 22 caliber rimfire bullet.

There is also research from Afghanistan and Iraq as well as Somalia that showed targets getting hit with 5.56 rounds and getting back up and in the fight, especially when doped up. I'm not knocking 5.56 or AR's. I own an AR and a Tavor in the caliber. I think what you described regarding what happens is fine in a lab under perfect circumstances. I think real life things change dramatically. There will be cases that show what you described in terms of cavitation damage, but statistically that doesn't seem to be the case in the real world for FMJ rifle rounds like XM193 at close distances anyway.

I'm not saying your wrong. I'm not saying you're right. People much more knowledgeable than me have studied these issues in depth. For home defense, I'll stick with a PCC. It's more accurate than my handguns, same caliber. Like someone else said, if we're willing to use our handguns for self-defense in the home, then an PCC SBR should work even better.
 
Last edited:
Lol this talk about over penetration is just hand wringing faggotry - basically anything worth shooting a bad guy with, is going to sail right through a wall or two... or more, possibly... if you can't deal with that or it poses too much risk you probably should be using a different defensive weapon/strategy
 

9mm and .45acp both penetrate drywall and wood similarly. 5.56 not only penetrated the test targets, it kept going...

This is overpenetration. Yes, pistol calibers will penetrate drywall, wood, glass, etc. Rifles will penetrate farther, much father. Really is that simple.


5.56 XM193 round tumbled... eventually. Also over-penetrated.

Last is this gem of info:
Wound Ballistic Terminal Performance

Here's an excerpt :
Dr. Martin Fackler, the man who has done more research on the 5.56 mm 55 gr M193 FMJ than anyone else on this planet, has written the following (Fackler, ML: “Literature Review”. Wound Ballistics Review; 5(2):40, Fall 2001) about 55 gr FMJ: “In 1980, I treated a soldier shot accidentally with an M16 M193 bullet from a distance of about ten feet. The bullet entered his left thigh and traveled obliquely upward. It exited after passing through about 11 inches of muscle. The man walked in to my clinic with no limp whatsoever: the entrance and exit holes were about 4 mm across, and punctate. Xray films showed intact bones, no bullet fragments, and no evidence of significant tissue disruption caused by the bullet’s temporary cavity. The bullet path passed well lateral to the femoral vessels. He was back on duty in a few days. Devastating? Hardly. The wound profile of the M193 bullet (page 29 of the Emergency War Surgery—NATO Handbook, GPO, Washington, D.C., 1988) shows that most often the bullet travels about five inches through flesh before beginning significant yaw. But about 15% of the time, it travels much farther than that before yawing—in which case it causes even milder wounds, if it missed bones, guts, lung, and major blood vessels. In my experience and research, at least as many M16 users in Vietnam concluded that it produced unacceptably minimal, rather than “massive”, wounds. After viewing the wound profile, recall that the Vietnamese were small people, and generally very slim. Many M16 bullets passed through their torsos traveling mostly point forward, and caused minimal damage. Most shots piercing an extremity, even in the heavier-built Americans, unless they hit bone, caused no more damage than a 22 caliber rimfire bullet.

There is also research from Afghanistan and Iraq as well as Somalia that showed targets getting hit with 5.56 rounds and getting back up and in the fight, especially when doped up. I'm not knocking 5.56 or AR's. I own an AR and a Tavor in the caliber. I think what you described regarding what happens is fine in a lab under perfect circumstances. I think real life things change dramatically. There will be cases that show what you described in terms of cavitation damage, but statistically that doesn't seem to be the case in the real world for FMJ rifle rounds like XM193 at close distances anyway.

I'm not saying your wrong. I'm not saying you're right. People much more knowledgeable than me have studied these issues in depth. For home defense, I'll stick with a PCC. It's more accurate than my handguns, same caliber. Like someone else said, if we're willing to use our handguns for self-defense in the home, then an PCC SBR should work even better.
M193 and M855 are the benchmarks for defensive rifle performance? Let’s just use 115 or 124 9mm FMJ then while we’re at it.
 
Lol this talk about over penetration is just hand wringing faggotry - basically anything worth shooting a bad guy with, is going to sail right through a wall or two... or more, possibly... if you can't deal with that or it poses too much risk you probably should be using a different defensive weapon/strategy

I live in a city of 90,000. I have multiple neighbors within 200 yards and hundreds within 400-500 yards, not to mention lots of traffic on both my streets. I have no problem with my defensive weapons/strategy, including a pit-bull mix dog. .308 has the best terminal ballistics of anything currently in my arsenal. However, I don't need a round to kill a bad guy who breaks into my home only to pass through him and keep going... and going. I also don't need a 20" barrel to navigate the U-shaped layout of my house and clear the small rooms. 5.56 not a whole lot different.

Use the right tool for the job. Handgun or PCC with specific ammo that is not designed to penetrate barriers other than gelatin and flesh without significant changes to velocity/form to minimize risk while meeting the need for self-defense and target disabling. Disclaimer: I did my own research. YMMV. Use what you want.
M193 and M855 are the benchmarks for rifle performance? Let’s just use 115 or 124 9mm FMJ then while we’re at it.

I have a ton of M855 and M193 so, in my case, the shoe fits the data so to speak. I get your point, and there is data out there regarding different 5.56 rounds for various purposes, but I'm kind of done justifying my case and drgrant above seems to think this debate is foolish, so I'll leave it to everyone to DYOR and figure this stuff out for themselves. If I lived in the boondocks of NH or ME, with 10+ acres and no neighbors near by, my posts might be different. As pretty much any book about self-defense shooting will attest, just surviving the initial encounter is only the first problem. A whole host of problems are created after...
 
I live in a city of 90,000. I have multiple neighbors within 200 yards and hundreds within 400-500 yards, not to mention lots of traffic on both my streets. I have no problem with my defensive weapons/strategy, including a pit-bull mix dog. .308 has the best terminal ballistics of anything currently in my arsenal. However, I don't need a round to kill a bad guy who breaks into my home only to pass through him and keep going... and going. I also don't need a 20" barrel to navigate the U-shaped layout of my house and clear the small rooms. 5.56 not a whole lot different.

Use the right tool for the job. Handgun or PCC with specific ammo that is not designed to penetrate barriers other than gelatin and flesh without significant changes to velocity/form to minimize risk while meeting the need for self-defense and target disabling. Disclaimer: I did my own research. YMMV. Use what you want.


I have a ton of M855 and M193 so, in my case, the shoe fits the data so to speak. I get your point, and there is data out there regarding different 5.56 rounds for various purposes, but I'm kind of done justifying my case and drgrant above seems to think this debate is foolish, so I'll leave it to everyone to DYOR and figure this stuff out for themselves. If I lived in the boondocks of NH or ME, with 10+ acres and no neighbors near by, my posts might be different. As pretty much any book about self-defense shooting will attest, just surviving the initial encounter is only the first problem. A whole host of problems are created after...

I agree with you that PCCs have their defensive uses. But it is downright silly to compare pistol cartridges tailored for defense against FMJ rifle cartridges. I can guarantee you that FMJ rifle bullets have a higher probability of large amounts of tissue damage compared to FMJ pistol bullets. Yes, FMJ rifle bullets are dependent on yaw variations when entering terminal ballistics. But pistol FMJ just doesn’t do much of anything aside from a bullet sized hole. If you want to use a rifle for defensive purposes, get some defensive ammo just like you would for pistols. You’re not restricted like the military.

And if you’re going to cite a Dr. Roberts paper, it’s disingenuous to use it as a reason why pistol calibers are “just as good”. He would recommend rifle over pistol whenever possible.

“All projectiles that penetrate the body can only disrupt tissue by these two wounding mechanisms: the localized crushing of tissue in the bullet's path and the transient stretching of tissue adjacent to the wound track. Projectile wounds differ in the amount and location of crushed and stretched tissue. The relative contribution by each of these mechanisms to any wound depends on the physical characteristics of the projectile, its size, weight, shape, construction, and velocity, penetration depth and the type of tissue with which the projectile interacts. Unlike rifle bullets, handgun bullets, regardless of whether they are fired from pistols or SMG’s, generally only disrupt tissue by the crush mechanism. In addition, temporary cavitation from most handgun bullets does not reliably damage tissue and is not usually a significant mechanism of wounding.
 
(cue this up for full effect pls it needs to be playing when you read this post)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xg7FLrzM2xA

View attachment 440911


The ghost of Judge Wapner Says:

"Lol, no, it doesn't. Maybe as a "PCC as only a range toy" sure, but I don't see the point of flinting to save a few hundo when you can just build out
another gun. Worst part is someone pays for an upper, BUIS, probably optic, they're not far away from just getting another gun....... smells like a fools
errand, to me. Also an AR9 is a bit of a bastard child to begin with. Running this thing on an AR is like bastard child, squared. "

"I hereby find the defendant guilty of FLINTING in the first degree. "



View attachment 440899
View attachment 440897

"Do Not Want"

Way to build a reply!!! [rockon]
 
front sight is backwards. does that an operator thing?

the eotech sits high. me thinks with that stock one would have a chin-weld. nah thanks.

I was forced to do that with an 8.5" side charging upper on my PCC because the forward location of the side charger, coupled with an unusually low pic rail height meant the clamp side of the front BUIS ended up being too low when mounted in the correct orientation, and got in the way of the charging handle. The fixed side of the BUIS mount was cut high enough to clear the charging handle.
 
I agree with you that PCCs have their defensive uses. But it is downright silly to compare pistol cartridges tailored for defense against FMJ rifle cartridges. I can guarantee you that FMJ rifle bullets have a higher probability of large amounts of tissue damage compared to FMJ pistol bullets. Yes, FMJ rifle bullets are dependent on yaw variations when entering terminal ballistics. But pistol FMJ just doesn’t do much of anything aside from a bullet sized hole. If you want to use a rifle for defensive purposes, get some defensive ammo just like you would for pistols. You’re not restricted like the military.

And if you’re going to cite a Dr. Roberts paper, it’s disingenuous to use it as a reason why pistol calibers are “just as good”. He would recommend rifle over pistol whenever possible.

“All projectiles that penetrate the body can only disrupt tissue by these two wounding mechanisms: the localized crushing of tissue in the bullet's path and the transient stretching of tissue adjacent to the wound track. Projectile wounds differ in the amount and location of crushed and stretched tissue. The relative contribution by each of these mechanisms to any wound depends on the physical characteristics of the projectile, its size, weight, shape, construction, and velocity, penetration depth and the type of tissue with which the projectile interacts. Unlike rifle bullets, handgun bullets, regardless of whether they are fired from pistols or SMG’s, generally only disrupt tissue by the crush mechanism. In addition, temporary cavitation from most handgun bullets does not reliably damage tissue and is not usually a significant mechanism of wounding.

I read that as well. Did nothing to change my mind regarding a PCC in my particular case over my rifle calibers.

Seems like John Stuart Mill's explanation in 1869 why you can't win internet arguments is still in effect...
 
I read that as well. Did nothing to change my mind regarding a PCC in my particular case over my rifle calibers.

Seems like John Stuart Mill's explanation in 1869 why you can't win internet arguments is still in effect...
I'm not dismissing your use case. I've even defended PCC use for defense, as it does have its role.

What I've done is challenge a few assertions of yours that are factually incorrect. Correcting those assertions doesn't need to change the decision for your use case. I'm merely trying bring the discussion back down the straight and narrow.
 
As far as the OPs original question, I think you generally should build a magazine to work around the constraints of the weapon, not the reverse, if you want the most ideal design anyway.

Looking at say a Glock versus Colt AR9, after researching it, IMO the native Colt design is simpler, more eloquent, because the Glock design is a retrofit.

But other PCCs out there use Glock mags perfectly eloquently, say a Ruger PCC, not much wrong with it IMO other than why they chose to make their work via an adapter so that it also supports the stupid Ruger mags nobody cares about.

As far as a PCC, for hunting certain game, a 9mm might be perfectly humane and adequate (say coyotes), more powerful than rimfire, but without an excessively distant killing potential or sound like say 5.56.

For self defense similarly, 9mm is powerful enough to stop a human without the same likelihood of say going through walls and killing someone 400 yards away, and even if not suppressed isn't as likely to cause the same hearing damage (or pain/distraction for that matter).

There are good reasons for PCC, or say a PC SBR/pistol, where it has advantages over true rifle calibers.
 
(cue this up for full effect pls it needs to be playing when you read this post)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xg7FLrzM2xA

View attachment 440911


The ghost of Judge Wapner Says:

"Lol, no, it doesn't. Maybe as a "PCC as only a range toy" sure, but I don't see the point of flinting to save a few hundo when you can just build out
another gun. Worst part is someone pays for an upper, BUIS, probably optic, they're not far away from just getting another gun....... smells like a fools
errand, to me. Also an AR9 is a bit of a bastard child to begin with. Running this thing on an AR is like bastard child, squared. "

"I hereby find the defendant guilty of FLINTING in the first degree. "



View attachment 440899
View attachment 440897

"Do Not Want"

Never said it was attractive or pretty.
Just a cheap easy way out.
And for the magazine option I have for pistols applies to 2 of them.
So a full kit depending on barrel length and other features, i.e. hand rail/guard

Barrel,adapter,and bolt
$400-$500


With rail,barrel,upper,bcg and gas system (extra for bcg finishes and echo trigger compatibility)
$650-750

After that, it's like you said optics, front grips etc.
But those things, can be carried over easily from the .223/5.56 ar setup.
Or bought cheaply via magpul or Amazon(commie bastards)

Especially the way stock and price is with scorpion evos, stribogs etc.

Nevermind mp5's and their clones.


I see it as a cheap entry to a pcc market. Especially if you already have the lower.
It's a 3 min hot swap.

Get an Anderson 80% lower, and or a upper as well, that's what
200 max on the upper and lower
50-80 for the fcg
100+/- hand guard
10-40 front grip
100 +/- stock and buffer
Then the rest of their kit

At the end of the day, you are entering stribog price territory ($1000), with better reliability, and better magazine availability.

You are under usc territory of $1400.
Under cmmg territory which is around usc.
Way under mp5 and their clones.
And way under B&T.
 
Last edited:
No, but my Kel-Tek Sub2000 just happens to take the same Glock mags as my favorite G19 Longslide carry.
 
No, but my Kel-Tek Sub2000 just happens to take the same Glock mags as my favorite G19 Longslide carry.

That's cool and great and all that, but typically free state minded anyway, we put about 30 round mags in our PCC's so isn't much usefulness from conventional pistol to carbine (well sure unless you are one of those carrying a stendo in their Glock but I think most of us here aren't :) )
 
That's cool and great and all that, but typically free state minded anyway, we put about 30 round mags in our PCC's so isn't much usefulness from conventional pistol to carbine (well sure unless you are one of those carrying a stendo in their Glock but I think most of us here aren't :) )
Now I'm jelly. No pre-ban 30 round mags for my CZ. Someday I'll move to a free state, or free-er.
 
Back
Top Bottom