dragun wrote:Thanks for the suggestion AM. So is the keltec sub 2000 considered a pistol carbine, meaning the same ccw laws apply to this as if I'm carrying a pistol? At least in TX?
Seems these are not easy to find in 9mm
You're welcome. Based on your previously described "mission", you have two, no three, questions to answer for yourself, according to your previous declaration of wanting something powerful that conceals well in a backpack (or by extension, a briefcase or messenger bag):
1 - Pistol versus folding carbine of some sort.
2 - If Pistol, then CZ or AR.
3 - Pistol caliber versus rifle caliber.
So.....
1.
Pistol versus folding carbine of some sort: What are the comparative advantages of a rifle caliber pistol versus a folding carbine of the same length as the pistol? Well, you might be able to deploy the pistol a little faster than the folding carbine - depending on how highly organized the inside of your backpack is, and how you have the gun stowed. On the other hand, you can legally carry the folding carbine almost anywhere you can't carry the pistol because of 30.06 - a law which applies only to handguns. For legal purposes, the Keltec is considered to be a rifle, not a handgun. You
might have a modicum more accuracy with the rifle cartridge than the pistol cartridge, assuming a supported shooting position, but at the ranges you're likely to to actually
use the weapon, either cartridge is more than accurate enough for minute of man - up to and including head shots with the right ammo. The AR and CZ outweigh the folding Keltec by some amount, of around a pound or so.
2.
If pistol, then CZ or AR? If you choose a CZ or AR pistol, you would be wise to consider the parts availability, commonality, and price and availability of extra magazines and stuff like that. Again, I have nothing against the CZ, although I realize that it sounds like I do. It may be a GREAT gun. But whenever
I purchase a gun, I always consider if I'm going to be able to get parts for it if I need them. I really have no idea what that looks like for CZ products.
3.
Pistol caliber versus rifle caliber? A short barreled AR pistol in a pistol caliber would be self-defeating. Why bother? Why not just get a full-sized regular pistol in 9mm, .40, or .45 then? Like I pointed out above, with the data to back it up, a 9mm exiting a 16" barrel will impart more energy into the target than the rifle bullet will. For all practical purposes, if you go with a pistol, you're pretty much limited to a short action bottleneck cartridge that will chamber in some kind of AR variant, OR, .223/5.56 if you choose the CZ. Bottleneck cartridges have some flaws in short barrels. Unless they were
designed to be used in a short barrel, like .300 Blackout, they suffer a big loss of velocity and energy, not to mention stability, as soon as they leave the muzzle. I would be VERY surprised if shooting an AR or CZ pistol at 100-150 yards wouldn't produce keyholing, not to mention bizarre trajectories. Then consider bullet performance itself. The Keltec will shoot pretty much whatever hollow point ammo you'd use in a pistol, and it's performance would be even more dramatic because it is going much faster. OTH, the bottleneck cartridge bullet - already traveling at substandard velocities for the caliber, may not have enough velocity to either cause the bullet upset that the FMJ depends on, or to cause a hunting type bullet to expand properly. And then consider this...... a bottleneck cartridge from an unsuppressed pistol length barrel is
LOUD!!!! Are you going to do a $200 tax stamp on a suppressor (if HPA doesn't pass), not to mention the hundreds of dollars they cost with or without the stamp? And even if you can, guess what? A lot of supressor companies will void the warranty on the suppressor if used on a barrel of less than 10", because the pressure in the barrel is still so high when it leaves the muzzle that it doesn't have time to disapate. So you can't even suppress the gun easily. My son just built himself a 7" SBR AR, and none of the three suppressors we currently own, or the one that is on the way, will stand up to that kind of pressure. Sure, SOMEBODY makes one that will work.......and be prepared to pay through the nose for it. On the other hand, you can suppress a pistol caliber all day long with a pretty inexpensive can, as long as the caliber of the can is correct for the bullet. But even if you can't afford a suppressor, a pistol cartridge's bullet coming out of a 16" barrel just isn't anywhere near as loud as a rifle cartridge's bullet coming out of a 7" pistol barrel.
Mind you, I am not opposed to spending a whole lot of money on guns. I have a carbine/SBR combo with two uppers - a 5.56 carbine length upper and a .300 blackout 10" SBR upper, suppressed, with tax stamps for the suppressor and the SBR. In all, optics included, I've got about $6,400 in it. But I won't carry it around in a backpack. Here's why. Let's say you have the extreme misfortune to need to use that gun in self defense, and it is a completely righteous shooting. Like it or not, the police are going to confiscate your gun until the disposition of the case has been finalized. That could be months, or even longer; and even if you're innocent, you might have to get your lawyer involved in getting your gun back.....and it may not come back to you in the same condition it was in when it was surrendered to them. Sad, but that can happen. Now, would you rather that be your $700 or $800 CZ or AR, or would you rather have it be your $400 Keltec? And given that your 9mm exiting the Keltec's 16" barrel will hit with more energy than the 5.56 bullet exiting a 7" barrel will, and with better terminal ballistics, at least at the kinds of self defense ranges being contemplated here, I'd take the 9mm over the 5.56.
I can think of a lot of reasons to go with a long gun instead of a rifle caliber pistol. But, these are just my opinions, and they may not be worth much.
Just trying to make sense out of the 9mm/.223 comparison....
Always the one solution with which no one can argue: "Buy 'em all!"