New from Taurus: CT9/CT40 Carbine. Again.

CT9 01_right_view-1

OK, it’s not really news anymore, but Taurus just e-blasted their official press release announcing their new CT9 and CT40 carbines. And thanks to Kentucky Gun Co., there’s already a CT9 on its way to none other than Joe Grine. That means at some point down the road (Joe’s a busy boy) we’ll be publishing the most thorough review of this new pistol caliber fun gun anywhere. Yes, by the time Joe’s done that poor CT9 will feel like it’s had a full colonoscopy without benefit of anesthesia. Or lube. So until then, satisfy yourselves with these details . . .

TAURUS®LAUNCHES THEIR NEW VERSATILE CT9/CT40 CARBINE PLATFORM

(Miami, FL) – Taurus®, the global leader in revolver manufacturing, launches their new CT9/CT40 Carbine platform. The CT9 (9mm) and CT40 (.40 cal.) is a new close quarter carbine platform for Taurus, with a blowback-operated system that fires from the closed-bolt position.  The CT Carbine’s upper receiver is constructed of aluminum with an integral full-length Picatinny rail with sights attached.  The rugged rear flip up sight is elevation- and windage-adjustable and the square-post front sight has a protective hood. The convertible charging handle can be switched for right- or left-handed shooters.  The CT Carbine incorporates a versatile polymer handguard that can accommodate 3 additional Picatinny rails in the 3-6-and 9 O’clock positions for the addition of accessories.

The lower receiver is comprised of polymer with steel reinforcing inserts. The CT Carbine has a skeletonized fixed stock, pistol grip and a very distinctive magwell that doubles as a forward grip, providing additional control.  The ambidextrous fire/safe selector switch is located just above the grip for quick and easy operation.  The magazine release is located near the magwell housing, protecting the magazine from inadvertent releases.  Provided with the CT Carbine is a hard case, sling, cleaning brush and owners manual.

CT9/CT40 Carbine Specifications

CALIBER 9MM/.40
ACTION Semi-Auto
OPERATION Blowback
CAPACITY 10 ROUNDS (9MM) / 10 ROUNDS (.40)
BARREL LENGTH 16”
TWIST 1:9
OVERALL LENGTH 36”
WEIGHT 6.6 LBS. (without mag)
FRONT SIGHT Fixed
REAR SIGHT Fully Adjustable
REMARKS Accessory Rail Integrated in Upper Receiver (Picatinny MIL-STD-1913)
Ambidextrous Slide Catch and Magazine Release
Cleaning Brush
Carrying Sling (additional)
MSRP: CT9/CT40: $898

comments

  1. avatar Shane says:

    It’s a lot prettier than a Hi-Point… but way too expensive.

    1. avatar Denny says:

      Man you are soooooo right. She is pretty, but way too $$$!

      But for that cost one could probably buy two Hi-Point Carbines, ones choice mix or match.

      1. avatar Jeff says:

        Three Hi-Points now that prices have come back down.

    2. avatar Jeremy S. says:

      Crazy expensive. And no threaded barrel. What up with that?

    3. avatar Anonymous says:

      I agree. A semi-automatic mark V Sten would be better. I get 32 rounds (instead of 10). I realize the sten is pretty ugly. However it is made of wood and steel!

    4. avatar int19h says:

      Yup. At this price point, you might as well get a Beretta – at least it looks slicker. Oh, and also a pound lighter.

      Seriously, why are most of those pistol caliber carbines so heavy? When a full-size AR can fit into 6.5 lbs, I don’t understand this. Kel-Tec seems to be the only ones who actually made a 9mm carbine that makes sense despite the limitations of the cartridge just because it’s so damn light and compact. But this? What’s the point?

    5. avatar Andrew says:

      The ass of the civilian version of the HK UMP + the front of a berretta ARX=Styling by BUTTUGLY.

      (Pronounced “Buh-tugly”)

    6. avatar Hunter57dor says:

      ill accept the price point if it has the accuracy and reliability to back it up.

      you know, for a guy like me who the nearest big bore rifle range is an hour and a half drive away, and only gets to routinely practice on an indoor pistol range.

  2. avatar Ken says:

    Thanks, but, I think I’ll keep my Beretta CX4 as (one of) my little fun gun.

    1. avatar Richard W. says:

      Ditto. My Cx4 was cheaper than that and uses the much-more-available 92fs mags and not the just-like-but-slightly-different Taurus PT-92 mags.

  3. avatar Jeff O. says:

    10 round huh, what’s that about?

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      This seems to me like a VERY bad design flaw.

    2. avatar JoshtheViking says:

      Not sure, but I think it has something to do with import restrictions.

    3. avatar Texas Deputy says:

      Since they are made in Brazil they fall under the ATF “Assault Rifle” import restrictions. Taurus USA can NOT produce or sell hi-cap mags > 10 rounds for it, but the industry rumor mill has it that at least one independent domestic mag maker already has hi-cap mags in the production pipeline.

  4. avatar blakdawg says:

    I like the idea of a new pistol caliber carbine.
    I’m not particularly a fan of the space-ray-gun look. Not a fan of the $900 price tag – if it was $450, I might give it a whirl. At $900, I’m more interested in an AK or an AR.
    Not excited about the 10 round magazine – chances are probably zero that it’ll accept magazines from other guns (like, say, Glocks or Berettas) that would allow those who are better endowed in the magazine capacity department to defend themselves to the fullest and share mags with their sidearm of choice.
    The forward grip configuration makes this a no-go for California from the get-go, so my quibbles about price are purely academic. Assuming our Sacramento overlords don’t take them all away.

    1. avatar Gregolas says:

      Agree. Plus 10mm would make more sense in an intermediate weapon. Somebody PLEASE make a 10mm M1 carbine clone!

  5. avatar Will says:

    $898!?!? I thought Taurus’ niche was offering guns at lower price.

    1. That’s MSRP. Guessing it wil sell for somewhere around $550. Guessing.

  6. avatar ensitue says:

    Hey Taurus! Battle Star Galatica wants their prop back!

    1. avatar Richard W. says:

      BSG even used Beretta Cx4 Storm Carbines. They knew what was up. Way sexier and lower price. You know you have issues if Beretta out-prices you on a rifle.

      1. avatar Jake says:

        MSRP on the CX4 is $915. So once all is said in and done the Tarsus might be cheaper, but will surely be uglier.

  7. avatar Mark N. says:

    I have been intrigued by the idea of the pistol carbines for some time. I was wandering around the internet a few nights back wondering how these pistol carbines compare to pistols in terms of range, velocity and accuracy, so I hope Joe gives us some hints in that regard. As best I could find –which wasn’t much– these 16″ barrels add no more than a few hundred feet per second in muzzle velocity and aren’t terribly accurate, something like 4 moa at 100 yards. And few if any are rated for +P ammo. If true, all that extra barrel length is kind of wasted, and for the size class you are better off with an M1 Carbine. Except that the cost of the .30 carbine ammo is at least double.

    What do ya think, Joe?

    1. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

      PCC’s can be very accurate, it comes down to ammo and sights. You are going to be hard pressed to shoot 4 MOA at 100 yards without magnification (or a nice red dot). Pistol ammo can vary greatly in velocity and bullet weight, and the bullet drop goes accordingly. You can’t mix and match ammo past 10 yards if you are shooting for 4 MOA. I have a Rossi/Taurus levergun (92 clone). It shoots 357 magnum/38 spl. With 3 different magnum loads, I can have up to a 3 inch elevation change at 25 yards. That being said, a good round nose or truncated cone load can do 4 MOA no problem. The hollow points and flat nosers tend to be more sensitive if the velocity spread of the same ammo is more than 10%.

    2. avatar Bob H says:

      I’m not Joe, nor do I play a Joe on TV. I will say that my CX4 in .40 adds about 400fps (or 550ish with +P), and in my amateur hands shoots just under 3″ groups at 100yds. I don’t own a rest so this was accomplished kneeling with the barrel resting in the raised front edge of a table in the shoothouse. Remember it is still a pistol round, so don’t expect it to match a rifle’s capabilities.

      1. avatar sean says:

        My 9mm CX4 will shoot minute of beer car at 100 yrds all day long. It will also make a steel plate ring as fast I can pull the trigger at 50 yrs. I can’t picture getting in a fight with it at any longer range than that anyway.

    3. avatar jim says:

      Not a Joe but… I had a Ruger P9C for a while when they were new, never really bonded with it and swapped it off after a few hundred rounds. Mainly it was a bitch to detail clean and at the time (90s) the high-cap mags were insanely expensive, plus in the purely personal area of handling it never worked for me. But 16 inch barrel and 125-gr JHP were well beyond .30 M1 bang and kick, and with 147 +P it was serious rifle category, based on what it did to a dead Dodge at the sand pit. Never sandbagged it but it was plenty accurate offhand (8 inches or so) for what it was. Some guns I just don’t see the point of worrying about MOA… if a lever-action .30-30 will shoot “minute of whitetail” offhand I don’t fuss over what it will do from a bench. But this gun re: .30 M1… if this is the Brazilian copy of the Chilean copy of the SIG family (looks like it) there was some buzz a while back about a .30 carbine version being made for the Brazilian cops doing the drug wars in the favela shantytowns. A US civilian version of that would move some units.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        All interesting stuff. Seems to me that you get into a toss up for which there is no single right answer as to which is “best.” For example, the 9mm and the .40 are only marginally different in the 147 gr weight range. The .30 carbine according to my ballistics chart is 1990 fps, but it is only a 110 gr round point. Then again, HPs become (according to what I’ve read) ballistically unstable at 100 yards, while the .30 will still be humming at 1230 fps at 200 yds. Handling should be about the same, as lengths and weights are comparable. So are prices–the Kahr Armscor M1 carbine sells for about $750 NIB.

        Hey, I know, Joe, ya gotta do a comparo shoot off!

    4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Mark,

      The 16 inch barrel of a .40 S&W carbine bumps up the .40 S&W ballistics to .357 Magnum velocity and energy levels with all bullet weights except for the 180 and 200 grain bullets. Saying it another way, .40 S&W with a 16 inch barrel = .357 Magnum with a 4 inch barrel. In terms of self defense against human attackers, pretty much everyone agrees that a .357 Magnum revolver with a 4 inch barrel shooting full-house Magnum loads is on the upper end of handgun stopping power.

      Examples shooting full power (e.g. DoubleTap or Buffalo Bore) standard (not +P) .40 S&W ammunition in a 16 inch barreled carbine:
      135 grain bullet — muzzle velocity around 1650 fps.
      155 grain bullet — muzzle velocity around 1430 fps.
      165 grain bullet — muzzle velocity around 1390 fps.
      180 grain bullet — muzzle velocity around 1180 fps

      Thus you get the energy of a .357 Magnum revolver with a four inch barrel without the deafening report or recoil of the revolver … plus you get a lot more accuracy for long distance shots and much faster follow-up shots. And I hear that you can expect to put all shots on a human torso sized target at 100 yards. What’s not to like?

    5. avatar int19h says:

      >> As best I could find –which wasn’t much– these 16″ barrels add no more than a few hundred feet per second in muzzle velocity

      True – in fact, all of that gain comes from the first few inches, and extending the barrel beyond 12″ is pretty much pointless. But necessary for NFA compliance if you also want a stock – and the stock is the main point of these. It’s really day and night in terms of accuracy and controllability compared to a handgun in the same cartridge.

      >> and aren’t terribly accurate, something like 4 moa at 100 yards.

      Depends. I’ve seen people claim 2 MOA with CX4.

      >> And few if any are rated for +P ammo.

      Which ones aren’t? CX4 is so rated, and for Sub-2000 Kel-Tec recommends +P and +P+ even. You also need it if you want to make use of those extra barrel inches in any meaningful way.

      >> for the size class you are better off with an M1 Carbine. Except that the cost of the .30 carbine ammo is at least double.

      Depends on which one you’re comparing. This monstrosity, yeah, M1 would win hands down. CX4, they’re about even on weight, though I’d still take M1 since it’s wood & steel. Sub-2000 is both lighter (4 lbs unloaded!) and more compact (32″ OAL), and folds in half to boot – and can be carried around in a laptop case when folded.

      To me, the main point of scaling down to pistol caliber in a rifle is weight & size, hence why I don’t see the point of any of them but Sub-2000 – and that one is my trunk gun.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        int19h,

        Where did you read that Kel-Tec recommends +P ammunition in their SUB-2000? Was that recommendation for 9mm or .40 S&W or both?

        1. avatar Schlegel says:

          don’t get the “few if any carbines take +P” comment. Hi points are cheap and easy to find these days, and all models are rated for a steady diet of +P. Which makes sense, as it’s in +P that you get the most noticeable jump in velocity in a carbine- particularly in 9mm.

        2. avatar int19h says:

          I have only investigated 9mm so no idea about .40 S&W.

          I can’t find the source for this now, but it is a well-known thing on KTOG. I believe a few people have phoned them and asked? You could try phone/email, too.

          Looking at the manual, it does in fact mention +P on the ballistics chart for the gun – and does not say anything about not shooting +P. I suppose that could count as a tacit endorsement. I know that a lot of people pretty much only use +P in their Subs with no trouble.

      2. avatar KCK says:

        int19h,
        If you would note your city of residense, car model and Licence plate number, at least I would know where to find a Sub2K. I’ll just punch out the lock instead of prying to minimize the damage.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          It’s hardly worth the trouble, even considering other contents of my car emergency bag (and ignoring the contents of my pockets – I pocket carry). There are over 50 of them on GunBroker right now, selling for less than I’ve paid for mine, because I needed an S&W version, not the most common Glock 17 one.

    6. avatar Lajos Tresser says:

      Citadel M1 in 9 mm.

    7. avatar Edknn says:

      The Hi-Point 995ts is rated +P and at 100 yards, hitting a bullseye is no problem especially with a trs 25 red dot. They are a lot of fun, and ammo cost less than 1/2 the price of my .30 carbine.

  8. avatar phoenixNFA says:

    there was one on the shelf at the local academy store for $750…..why is this news?

    1. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

      Because the world doesn’t revolve around you and your community.

  9. avatar John S. says:

    Said it before I will say again, make one in the US with a folding stock, high cap mags and a flash suppressor and I will buy one. Until then i will stick with my 9MM AR

    1. avatar Shane says:

      Amen brother. That kind of set up would make an excellent home defense set up or bug out gun!

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      I would love to see an AR15 chambered for .357 Magnum. Now that would be an awesome self defense and bug-out pistol caliber carbine. I think magazines would be the really tough part since I don’t believe anyone makes any.

      1. Except you face the significant difficulty of shooting a rimmed cartridge out of a magazine. There’s a reason there have been so few aoutloaders chambered in .357, and it’s the same reason the .357 Sig was created. It’s really hard (maybe impossible) to load a large number of .357 rounds into a mag and have it function reliably.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          How significant is the difficulty, really? Russians have been making semi-autos shooting a rimmed cartridge – 7.62x54R – for a long time now. Yes, this usually means sticking to a single-stack magazine, but you can still fit 10 rounds in a reasonably sized one, as is the case for SVD and PSL. For an example specifically with .357 Magnum, see Coonan Magnum.

  10. avatar Fug says:

    It looks like it could be decent with a new stock, handguard and hi cap mags. Until then… It is almost uglier than a hi-point carbine.

  11. avatar AlphaGeek says:

    If his test procedures are as dry as his prose, of COURSE I would expect him to test the carbine with no lube.

    I kid, I kid.

  12. avatar Steve in NY says:

    This “new” Taurus might be NY legal. I’ll have to do some additional research.
    Hmm… Let’s have a look see: 10 round magazines, No folding or telescoping stock, and No flash hider. The pistol grip maybe considered a thumbhole stock. Looks to be NY legal. Please correct me if someone finds out that this rifle isn’t.
    Semi auto PCC’s are in limited supply here in NY. The only offerings I have come across are the Beretta Cx4 Storm, a Kel-tec sub 2000 (if you can ever find one in NY), and a ghetto Hi-point. I really would like to get a Kriss Super V but that isn’t in the cards. I’m just happy to see additional firearms that are legal in the empire state.

    1. avatar S_J says:

      Pretty sure the pistol grip rules it out, along with the other pistol carbines.

      1. avatar S_J says:

        Worth nothing though that Taurus/Rossi’s revolver carbines are still legal here. Seen quite a few of them, and at about $250-350 less than this. Been considering one in .44 Mag.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          Wouldn’t M1 Carbine be the best in that category then? I realize it’s not quite “pistol caliber”, but it’s closer to that (modern heavy .357 Mag loads in particular) than to a full-fledged rifle, and also similar in terms of size & weight.

    2. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

      You are completely mistaken. That is a pistolgrip/thumbhole stock. It is a banned feature. Check out NYFirearms.com/forums if you are looking for good legal info

      1. avatar Steve in NY says:

        Thanks for the heads up!

      2. avatar S_J says:

        It is not a banned feature on some guns, including the Circuit Judges and bolt action rifles. Only appears to apply to semi-autos.

  13. avatar Chaotic Good says:

    Why is it so hard to make a pistol-chambered carbine for a reasonable price that isn’t hideous?

  14. avatar tdiinva says:

    I am about to purchase a Cx4. The Taurus will not change my decision not because its a Taurus. I just like Beretta especially now that they announced that they are pulling chocks and leaving Maryland. Unlike some people I like the 40 watt Phaser rifle look. The Cx4 has Italian style. Who wouldn’t want to be as fashionable as a Carabinieri.

    The pistol caliber carbine, whether on an AR platform or the Beretta Star Trek style, is a very useful self defense tool in an urbanized environments. It may not have the power of a rifle cartridge but you will outgun the typical bad guy you are going to face in a self defense situation. Just remember beyond 10 yards your ability to justify self defense rapidly declines. Your results may very in Texas.

  15. avatar doesky2 says:

    Hmmm…Keltec S2k is about 3 POUNDS(!) lighter, folds in half, costs hundreds less, and supports 33 RD Glock mags. Where does this gun beat a Keltec?

    1. avatar Richard W. says:

      This one uses their own mags, where the KelTec one uses those standard, yet un-proven ones from companies like S&W, Beretta and Glock.

      1. avatar int19h says:

        One seemingly little known trick, by the way, is that Sub2K that takes S&W mags will also take CZ-75 mags… so if you have the latter, it’s the natural option to pick as a paired gun.

        1. avatar doesky2 says:

          Damn! I have a CZ75 and when I bought a S2K I went with a glock version since I didnt have any of the other styles and a Glock got me 33rd capability. That would have been a hard decision if I had known your little tidbit of info. Oh well.

    2. avatar cigr says:

      Well if you can find these on the shelf, they automatically beat the sub2k. I’ve never seen one of those on the shelf in a gun store. Every now and then I”ll run across them at a gun show, and they’re always marked up to 600 or more.

      1. avatar int19h says:

        You can pretty much always find one for sale on GunBroker. And yes, they do go for about $600. Still cheaper than this, and you actually get something out of it in return for going for a weaker round.

  16. avatar Jacknine says:

    I have always wondered why there aren’t more pistol caliber carbines/submachine pistols on the market. They are an excellent blend of stopping power, accuracy and handiness for close and near close work. Being highly accurate at 100 yards is not what they are intended for. Having served in a place far away, a long time ago, I still pine for the 9mm Madsen, one of my favorite firearms of all time.

  17. avatar Chris says:

    Glad to see another player in the pistol carbine space. For me ill keep my sexy Bella ( cx 4), for one picking up cheap 92 mags is awesome and second I can run 30 rd mags if I wish.

  18. avatar fanfare ends says:

    “Yes, by the time Joe’s done that poor CT9 will feel like it’s had a full colonoscopy without benefit of anesthesia. Or lube.”

    What is it with you guys. For months we can’t get you to shut up about how some gun is like a hot chick you are never going to get with, and now we have to read about your fascination with rump rangers.

    Shut up about your sex problems, and STICK TO THE GUNS.

  19. avatar Andy says:

    Will have to see about the review,the low round mag count is not a good selling point,unless they are going to offer higher cap mags for a lot of money.The price is too high in the market as of now,it does resemble an MP-5 in a way,but the buttstock looks cheap and flimsy,if it was priced at a little more but just a little more than a Hi Point it would be a better seller than what it will be.Heck I can get a Keltec carbine alot less expensive than this and they both appear to have a lot of polymer on them.Be prepared and ready.Keep your powder dry.

  20. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    People’s views of pistol caliber carbines tend to filter through the familiar prism of the glass half full/empty metaphor. Optimists see their advantages over handguns, pessimists see their disadvantages against rifles. Well.

    Maybe a more useful approach is to regard the PCC as occupying the penumbra between those two, and offering a set of situation-specific trade-offs. While not superlative on either the handgun or rifle’s home field, the PCC is well-suited for the narrow region between them. Concealed carry? Nope. Big game hunting? Nope. Home defense, active shooter defense, countryside varmint defense, post-verdict riot defense? Abso-lock-and-load-lutely.

    In a PCC you’re gaining accuracy, penetration, and often ammo capacity, with less felt recoil at higher calibers and more rapid recoil recovery than with a same-caliber handgun, but with lighter weight and shorter length than a true rifle. Toss in pricing generally closer to that of a handgun and less expensive ammunition that you probably already stock, and you have a great companion piece. PCC’s are for when you need a little more oomph than when you’re just walking around town or popping into the store; but not so much as when you’re kicking down doors in Kandahar or staring down moose in Alaska.

    For me, my Kriss Vector in .45 ACP fits the bill; but that might not be for everyone. Whatever your choice, maintain focus on the PCC bridging the gap between handguns and true rifles. In particular, you should be able to articulate how this addition complements, not complicates, your arsenal by leveraging your existing ammunition, magazines, and accessories.

    1. avatar int19h says:

      >> In a PCC you’re gaining accuracy, penetration, and often ammo capacity

      If you mean relative to a pistol in the same caliber, then it’s only always true for accuracy.

      Penetration-wise, it depends on the caliber and on your choice of bullet. For example, since you brought up Kriss, most .45 ACP loads gain less than 100 ft/s going from a 5″ barrel to a 16″ one.

      Ammo capacity, usually not, since most of them use standard pistol magazines. But, of course, we’ve had hi-cap pistol mags for ages – 32-round ones for Glock etc.

      OTOH, if you look at it from rifle perspective, a 5.56 30-rounder is considerably shorter than a 9mm 30-rounder. And weight-wise, both rounds actually weigh the same!

      >> with less felt recoil at higher calibers

      Not really. That’s what you’d logically expect, but in practice most (all?) pistol carbines are straight blowback, with a heavy bolt slammed back hard during the cycle… and trust me, you do feel this. I wouldn’t say that e.g. CX4 recoils significantly less than AR; the impulse may well be less, but it’s felt more sharply. Even more so with Sub-2000, where you are literally resting your cheek on the receiver where the bolt goes.

      Kriss is special because of their unique recoil compensation system.

      >> but with lighter weight and shorter length than a true rifle.

      Depends on the exact gun in question. E.g. this thing here weights as much as your typical AR. CX4 weights less than most ARs, but you could still make one with about the same dry weight (pencil barrel etc). OTOH, SU-16 weighs less than 5 lbs. Then again, Sub-2000 weighs 4.

      >> Toss in pricing generally closer to that of a handgun and less expensive ammunition that you probably already stock, and you have a great companion piece.

      Magazine compatibility is another positive factor, if you pair it with the appropriate handgun.

      1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        >> In a PCC you’re gaining accuracy, penetration, and often ammo capacity

        >>>If you mean relative to a pistol in the same caliber, then it’s only always true for accuracy.

        I said “same caliber handgun”, so yes, that’s what I meant; but no, you’re mistaken. And don’t slip in your own personal “always true” and hold me to it, as we all know there’s always some rare exception out there. That said, take a given statement of mine to mean “typically” or “generally” or “most often” the case. I’m not here to quibble about outliers. Now, since you concede accuracy, let’s move on.

        >>>Penetration-wise, it depends on the caliber and on your choice of bullet. For example, since you brought up Kriss, most .45 ACP loads gain less than 100 ft/s going from a 5″ barrel to a 16″ one.

        Partially correct. A round picks up more like 20 ft/sec per additional inch of barrel. Going from a 4-4.5″ handgun to a 16″ carbine would give you more like 230 ft/sec at the muzzle. Your basic 115gr 9mm leaps out at approx. 1,225 ft/sec yielding approx. ft.lbs. Bumping up to 1,455 from a 16″ barrel drives muzzle energy up closer to a not-at-all-insignificant 541 ft.lbs. That exceeds the boost from +P in the same caliber and actually approaches some .357MAG performance, were they fired from the corresponding handgun.

        And yes, the principle applies to .45 ACP, too, I just used 9mm as an example because that’s the Taurus’ load and for space limitations. You are correct that penetration does depend on the bullet; but incorrect that it’s primarily (always true?) the caliber. Penetration in pistol calibers pushed to their limits in carbines has more to do with the shape of said bullet and the surface struck. HP’s and non-flesh surfaces are more apt to result in fragmentation. FMJ’s/round nose into a body are more likely to fly through.

        >>>Ammo capacity, usually not, since most of them use standard pistol magazines. But, of course, we’ve had hi-cap pistol mags for ages – 32-round ones for Glock etc.

        Ummm…..sorry, you don’t get to disagree, then agree, and claim you’re correct. The Glock magazine angle alone is enough in itself to prove the point, as so many PCC’s accept them (Thureon Defense, ATI Just Right, Lone Wolf lowers, Kel-Tec Sub2000, and KRISS.) Even Glock themselves are finally supposed to be offering a carbine in 2014. A 9mm handgun, depending on size, of course, will typically (not “always true”) have a mag capacity of 7 up to 17 rounds. Most manufacturers’ handguns use proprietary magazines, not Glocks, and hi-cap versions aren’t available. So going to a Glock-compatible PCC opens the door to 32/33 rd 9mm mags or 25 rd .45ACP mags. On the rimmed cartridge side, your basic .357/.38SPL lever action carbine holds 8 rds, as opposed to the typical corresponding handgun holding just 6. Soooo………

        >>>OTOH, if you look at it from rifle perspective, a 5.56 30-rounder is considerably shorter than a 9mm 30-rounder. And weight-wise, both rounds actually weigh the same!

        Not sure what you mean here. A loaded 9mm PCC typically comes in about a pound or more less than a loaded AR-15. You have to compare the entire weapons systems to each other, not cherry picked individual components.

        >> with less felt recoil at higher calibers

        >>>Not really. That’s what you’d logically expect, but in practice most (all?) pistol carbines are straight blowback, with a heavy bolt slammed back hard during the cycle… and trust me, you do feel this. I wouldn’t say that e.g. CX4 recoils significantly less than AR; the impulse may well be less, but it’s felt more sharply. Even more so with Sub-2000, where you are literally resting your cheek on the receiver where the bolt goes.

        I don’t have to trust you, because I have the experience. Now, in an el cheapo like a Kel-Tec, I’ll grant you just about anything negative you want to say. But in the rest? Nope. Felt recoil is a matter of physics: primarily caliber and weight of the weapon. Caliber is moot since we’re comparing same calibers in handgun vs. PCC; but weight of the weapon is a factor. A Taurus large frame 9mm weighs 28 oz. This Taurus PCC is almost four times that at 6.6 lbs. Consider the recoil is also spread over the butt plate (like a snow shoe), so the felt recoil is lower than the handgun.

        >>>Kriss is special because of their unique recoil compensation system.

        KRISS is unique because the vector design redirects the bolt downward, true. However, it’s also equipped with a sling; whose use allows you to position the weapon forward with force and and pre-empt some of the recoil. A handgun won’t have that feature and must absorb recoil from a neutral force position. (I know, I know, you can counterweight your grip on a handgun, but that’s tricky in a groggy, hellish, midnight emergency compared simply to thrusting out against a sling.)
        >> but with lighter weight and shorter length than a true rifle.

        >>>Depends on the exact gun in question. E.g. this thing here weights as much as your typical AR. CX4 weights less than most ARs, but you could still make one with about the same dry weight (pencil barrel etc). OTOH, SU-16 weighs less than 5 lbs. Then again, Sub-2000 weighs 4.

        This one’s 6.6 lbs, a basic AR is about 6.9, true, but this as you mention is a particularly hefty PCC compared to its brethren. More telling, is that the 6.9 lb. AR is before attaching a lot of accessories, as owners would be far more likely to do on an AR than on a PCC; given their different duties. So the weight difference in real life would be more substantial, as per my point.

        >> Toss in pricing generally closer to that of a handgun and less expensive ammunition that you probably already stock, and you have a great companion piece.

        >>>Magazine compatibility is another positive factor, if you pair it with the appropriate handgun.

        I agree, which is why so many PCC an advantage over handguns, for accepting Glock mags, and was my point. If you’re talking rimmed cartridges (.38, .357, .44, etc), the case is moot and the PCC has that built-in benefit of higher capacities without even bothering with magazines.

        So, overall, a couple of very minor, exception-proving-the-rule observations on your part, mixed in with some points of agreement with me, and an abundance of errors and omissions on your part. Sorry, Int19h, hardly a persuasive case you’ve made here today.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          First of all, I was not “making a case” – merely pointing out the inaccuracies. Since, apparently, I might as well make a case at this point, mine would be that PCCs have a useful niche (I own one precisely for this reason), but that niche is not quite as broad as you claim.

          >> Partially correct. A round picks up more like 20 ft/sec per additional inch of barrel. Going from a 4-4.5″ handgun to a 16″ carbine would give you more like 230 ft/sec at the muzzle. Your basic 115gr 9mm leaps out at approx. 1,225 ft/sec yielding approx. ft.lbs. Bumping up to 1,455 from a 16″ barrel drives muzzle energy up closer to a not-at-all-insignificant 541 ft.lbs. That exceeds the boost from +P in the same caliber and actually approaches some .357MAG performance, were they fired from the corresponding handgun.

          That is way too simplistic. In practice, the increase is only linear on increases that are not too big, and when both measurement points are far enough from the optimal barrel length. If you keep increasing the barrel length, the velocity increases will grow smaller with every inch, peak at some point, and then will actually start to decrease. This effect is harder to observe for typical rifle calibers as for them that peak length is pretty long, but for pistol calibers it’s surprisingly short. Have a look at tables at BBTI – they clearly show how the peak is somewhere around 15-16″ for both 9mm and .45. And when you’re close to that peak, the differences become so small that they fall under the margin of error in many cases.

          This is reflected in real world weapons, too – how many SMGs and such do you know with 16″ barrels? Most of them have barrels under 10″.The only reason why we have 16″ in our PCCs is to conform to NFA requirements.

          >> Ummm…..sorry, you don’t get to disagree, then agree, and claim you’re correct. The Glock magazine angle alone is enough in itself to prove the point, as so many PCC’s accept them (Thureon Defense, ATI Just Right, Lone Wolf lowers, Kel-Tec Sub2000, and KRISS.) Even Glock themselves are finally supposed to be offering a carbine in 2014. A 9mm handgun, depending on size, of course, will typically (not “always true”) have a mag capacity of 7 up to 17 rounds. Most manufacturers’ handguns use proprietary magazines, not Glocks, and hi-cap versions aren’t available. So going to a Glock-compatible PCC opens the door to 32/33 rd 9mm mags or 25 rd .45ACP mags. On the rimmed cartridge side, your basic .357/.38SPL lever action carbine holds 8 rds, as opposed to the typical corresponding handgun holding just 6. Soooo………

          I don’t see the reason why we should compare some unspecified “average handgun” with a specific PCC that takes Glock mags. It should rather be compared to a Glock. Furthermore, there are many other handguns which take extended mags – Beretta 92 and PX4, CZ-75, various S&Ws. And there are PCCs which take all these, as well.

          Simply put, since PCCs use pistol mags, they by definition cannot claim higher mag capacity. It’s literally the same mags if you’re comparing apples to apples.

          >> Not sure what you mean here. A loaded 9mm PCC typically comes in about a pound or more less than a loaded AR-15. You have to compare the entire weapons systems to each other, not cherry picked individual components.

          I referred to the weight of rounds themselves. For that, there’s no difference. We’ll get to the weight of weapons themselves later.

          >> I don’t have to trust you, because I have the experience. Now, in an el cheapo like a Kel-Tec, I’ll grant you just about anything negative you want to say. But in the rest? Nope. Felt recoil is a matter of physics: primarily caliber and weight of the weapon. Caliber is moot since we’re comparing same calibers in handgun vs. PCC; but weight of the weapon is a factor. A Taurus large frame 9mm weighs 28 oz. This Taurus PCC is almost four times that at 6.6 lbs. Consider the recoil is also spread over the butt plate (like a snow shoe), so the felt recoil is lower than the handgun.

          It is indeed the matter of physics, but there’s far more at play than merely bullet weight and velocity, and weight of the firearm. Felt recoil is about how your body feels it, not just feet-pounds of force. So the acceleration curve is very important, and can make the same impulse feel very differently. And even the impulse can vary depending on how the gas system of a particular firearm works (e.g. semi-autos recoil less than bolts or revolvers). And then there’s the secondary impulse from the moving parts of the firearm itself, such as when the bolt in a semi-auto stops on its way back – that accounts for a good chunk of AK recoil, for example.

          In semi-autos in particular, it is pretty well known that locked breech handguns have less felt recoil than straight blowback ones. Most 9mm and .45 ACP handguns are locked breech (you can’t have bolt heavy enough to do straight blowback in something of that size). Most PCCs are straight blowback.

          >> This one’s 6.6 lbs, a basic AR is about 6.9, true, but this as you mention is a particularly hefty PCC compared to its brethren. More telling, is that the 6.9 lb. AR is before attaching a lot of accessories, as owners would be far more likely to do on an AR than on a PCC; given their different duties. So the weight difference in real life would be more substantial, as per my point.

          Again, if we’re comparing apples to apples, we should compare an AR that is outfitted similarly to our PCC – no rails and stuff dangling off them. That would give you something closer to 6.5 lbs in AR, actually. And with pencil barrel and lighter furniture you can go all the way down to 6 lbs. And why restrict it to ARs only? As noted, Kel-Tec SU-16 is under 5 lbs, and yet it’s a full-fledged 5.56 rifle.

        2. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          Sorry, not buying it. When your litany of “pointing out inaccuracies” is itself a collection of inaccuracies, then your post can hardly lay claim to being that, now can it? Coming in with an after-the-fact re-characterization of a post which already discredited itself is, well, hard to look at. I’m not going to lie. You attempted to make a case, and blew it. There’s no shame, other than it persisting in flailing about.

          You use this term “broad” to describe my claim. Yet, my claim specifically used the term “narrow” range between handguns and rifles. I don’t think “broad” means what you think it means.

          No argument that the increase is not linear. There you go introducing pedantic exactitude on your own when 1.) I never bound myself to that level of precision in my post and 2.) that level of precision does not alter the validity of the conclusion. To wit: I said it picks up “more like” 20 ft/sec per additional. I didn’t say it was exactly 20 ft/sec. nor did I state it was necessarily uniform (linear) along the length of the barrel. Moreover, ultimately what matters is the muzzle velocity, regardless the intermediate rates of acceleration, and that holds true as I stated. So you can nitpick all day and try to move the goal post, but it doesn’t invalidate my post.

          My God, if you ask a waiter for a glass of water, do you throw it back in his face if the container is actually plastic and the liquid contains some typical tap water levels of chlorine and fluoride and isn’t laboratory-specific H2O molecules only and nothing else? Please. Over the relevant range, what I stated holds true. If you can imagine a mile long barrel, then OK, I’ll concede that the round won’t increase velocity indefinitely and might actually not even exit that mile long barrel. So there. Any more irrelevant, unrealistic attempts at misdirection, or was that it? Oh, there’s your SMG comment, so apparently there’s more.

          Who cares what SMG lengths are? I get your retreaded point about nonlinear acceleration and it’s still irrelevant. Muzzle velocity is the point and you can’t refute it. Parsing acceleration rates inch by inch is a waste of time when the bottom line is, well, the bottom line and that is muzzle velocity. Whether SMG’s are shorter because they’re CQB weapons, or whether carbines are 16.1” because of NFA requirements, has nothing to do with the reality of what muzzle energy at the end of a 16” barrel is. More misdirection……

          The rest of this point-by-point countering of your hairsplitting goes beyond boring. It’s obvious you’ve struggled mightily just to put something, *anything*, out there, and none of it offers relevance, let alone rebuttal. So I’m going to cut it off here since it’s late. I’ll let you get the last word in hereafter, claim victory and shut it down. Take care.

  21. avatar Tim U says:

    If I get a PCC, I’ll stick to the CX4 thanks. Much better than this junk and not really that much more expensive.

  22. avatar Jim R says:

    Interesting, but at that price….I think I’ll pass.

  23. avatar Don says:

    If this had a folding stock, 40 round magazines, and less wavy plastic up front and on the mag well, then I’d have ordered one already.

    aftermarket solutions?

    -D

  24. avatar Judson Morrison says:

    For that price, I’d rather have a Thureon with standard Glock mags.

    Also, why would they try to sell this without a threaded muzzle?

  25. Seems kind of cool to me and for only around $550, I may get one in 9mm.

  26. avatar Mark N. says:

    Stopped by a LGS this morning and asked–if it has a pistol grip and detachable mag, it is deemed an AW in California and cannot be sold Unless you happen to be LEO). M1 Carbines are legal because they don’t have a pistol grip, and therefore have only one “evil feature.” That is, unless SB 374, which passed the Legislature late last night and is headed to the Governor’s desk, is signed into law, in which case M1 Carbines are toast. The next thirty days will be interesting–and if Brown signs off on this law, there will be a mad buying spree here on the left coast.

  27. avatar Shaun L. says:

    In the above replies I found the argument(?) between Jonothan-houston and int19h to be VERY thought provoking as well as informative on both sides…..

    If you guys ever decide to team up and go after some poor anti-gunner collaboratively make sure to give me a heads up…. It would be a SPECTACULAR smackdown to witness! With your combined knowledge you’d be unstoppable!

    As for the Taurus…. It’s ugly to me in a strangely endearing way…. Like a VW thing, Edsel or Corvair. Just because it’s ugly and may not be the best at anything doesn’t mean I don’t still want one. The price…. that’s another matter entirely.

    Here’s a thought…. What would the Archangel version look like?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email