Glock 22 vs Smith & Wesson M&P 40?
925684
glock\nhalf as many moving parts\nlifetime warranty\ncan be repaired by you with little trouble\ncan order replacement parts from glock (sometimes free)\nwith smith you will have to send the gun to smith\nmags are cheaper\nglocks will take a lot of abuse and keep on going boom\ngunney ermy likes em\ncheck out glocktalk.com and look at big bores test of his 21
814627
The UTG is a longer lasting rifle, as in it maintains it's FPS...forever, basically. But the Super 9 starts with an incredible FPS, but wears down over a year or two. Hope this helps.\n\nEDIT: Replacing internals can often cost more than a new rifle, however, so if you're going to airsoft for more than a year, go with UTG, if it's just a phase, go for Super 9.
11409
I like glock 18 cause of its extended mag and full auto capability.
261936
A SIG is a heaver gun and cost more. I am thinking of getting a .40 or .45 in the SPRINGFIELD XD, AND ABOUT 1/2 OF the cost of a SIG. I now carry a 9mm TAURUS and it works fine for me. I just want one that is made of polymer. The XD comes in 9mm-.357SIG-.40S&W-.45GAP,and .45ACP...I hope this is some help to you, and as we say at the range KEEP IT IN THE 10 RING.......
432302
I have thought about the Springfield XD-45 ACP, but I still prefer the steal frame of either my Peacemaker or a 1911
616449
I am going to say Browning. They are a little pricier than the Remington's which are also great guns by the way but the Browning line of guns are so smooth and accurate. I have a Browning 270 BLR and love it. I have shot many different guns in all configurations but this is my all out favorite. It is fast and flat shooting and accurate and silky smooth with the lever , trigger and the hammer. It has the lever safety and also the folding hammer and half cocked safety so that you can feel sure the gun will not accidentally fire and it is a beautiful looking gun too. Hope I have been helpful.
683022
Found you a very informative site that goes into all performance categories with all bullet weights\n\nThe following article assumes the reader is familiar with the new .45GAP (Glock Auto Pistol) cartridge and the Glock 37 pistol which fires it.  There isn't room in this article to lay out the background, but it shouldn't take much effort on the reader's part to get up to speed on this new cartridge and the controversy between it and the .45ACP round that the gunzines are trying to create to beef up magazine sales.\nhttp://www.outdoors.net/site/features/feature.aspx+Forum+Firearms+ArticleCode+1117\n\nHope that helps.
302625
I would opt for the M-16. People don't give it enough credit. They claim it is too weak, unreliable, and fragile for combat. That's bullsh-t. That little .223 round spalls and fragments on impact, opening up a huge wound cavity, whereas an AK wound is usually just a straight in-and-out wound. It's also reliable if you just take care of it and give a good once over every now and then. It's more accurate, easier to use, and much more comfortable than an AK. I used both in Iraq. The AK is a good rifle, don't get me wrong. But it was overrated in my opinion. My M-16 never let me down, and that's all the convincing I will ever need.
858864
Absolutely the load difference.  Even a few grains of bullet weight difference will make everything change.  Also, every gun is different.  You can take 3 very similar loads, shoot a group with each, and every gun will "like" something different.  That's one of the things that makes hand reloading so great, you have the flexibility to really figure out what will work best with your gun.  There's such a huge difference in bullet drop between a 65 gr. and a 100 gr.  Regardless, it always makes you feel like crap when you miss.  But don't beat yourself up too badly, everyone who's ever hunted has missed a few times, and if they say they haven't either they're lying or have no experience.  Hopefully you'll see an even better, tastier buck tomorrow.  Good luck!!!
785517
depends on your budget but i would chose ruger
98085
James's PPK was a .380 parrabellum.  While it is a very small round (useful for a small handgun), it certainly lacks power.  Even a 9mm is stronger, and that's considered a medium sized round.  I'd rather be shot with a .380 than with a .22.
1175589
It depends on the feel of the revolver in your hand. Check out several. Different models even made by the same manufacturer have a different feel. I had a Smith & Wesson 38 Special military & police model 10 that I liked. A friend had an older model that fit my hand better. Another friend had an old Colt that I didn't like the feel of at all.
847076
Bound's hubby here:\n\nLonger barrel versus shorter barrel and accuracy has more relevance when you're shooting iron sights. When you're shooting a scoped rifle the most important job of the barrel is to start bullet rotation and completely burn the powder. In smokeless powder cartridges, the powder is generally completely consumed by the time the bullet has exited the barrel of an 18" carbine... so the difference between 22 and 26 inch barrels is academic.\n\nIf you are shooting with iron sights, barrel length is important. The greater the distance between front and rear sight, the finer the adjustment for elevation and windage, making for more precise placement of the bullet. \n\nAs an aside... the M1 rifle and the M14 rifle have about 22 inch barrels and both can be counted on to accurately place their shots at 1000 yards. \n\nGood luck.
1106129
the browning BL22 is a much better rifle,never jams and short lever throw..but you can find a marlin 39 at most gunshops  or walmart
275824
None that I know of make direct comparisons/contrasts.\n\nI can help you out a lot more than TheWiseOne, as his answer contains many inaccuracies.\n\nContrary to what the WiseOne stated, the M1 Garand was adopted as the standard US Army infantry rifle in 1936 and was standard issue when we entered the war.  The USMC still had a predominance of '03 Springfields, as they didn't receive new equipment until after the Army.  I find it odd that the WiseOne denigrates the Springfield for being "obviously dated and had been used in World War I.".  That's funny, because the standard infantry rifle the Germans used during WWII, the K98k, was simply a newer, shorter version of the Gewehr 98, the Model 1898 Mauser rifle, developed before and used during WWI (the Springfield used the same action as the Mauser by the way).  Both were fine bolt-action weapons, but couldn't compare with the M1 because of their slow rate of fire (the US was the only army in WWII to have a semi-automatic rifle as it's standard infantry weapon).\n\nThe primary sub-machine gun of the US Army during WWII was the M1928A1, M1, and M1A1 versions of the Thompson sub-machine gun.  A fairly heavy weapon, accurate at short ranges, and it had a lot of stopping power due to the fact it was chambered for the .45ACP round.  From 1944 onwards it was slowly phased out and replaced by the M3 Grease Gun.  It was cheaper and far simpler to mass produce than the Thompson.  Contrary to what the WiseOne states, both used 30 round box magazines (although 20 round was available for the Thompson).  The German MP-40 (the famed Schmeisser, although Schmeisser had no part in it's design) was chambered for 9MM Parabellum.  It was lighter and had a slightly lower cyclic rate than the Thompson (but a bit higher than the M3).\n\nComparing the MP-44 and the BAR is like comparing apples and oranges.  The MP-44 is the ancestor of the modern assault rifle, and was used as such.  The BAR is analagous to the M249 SAW that the US Army currently uses.  The MP-44 was a good weapon, with decent accuracy and range, and a cyclic rate high enough to provide fairly heavy firepower.  Very useful in urban fighting.\n\nThe BAR was a great weapon, heavy, but provided very good, accurate firepower for platoons.\n\nI don't know what "tiny Walther pistols" WiseOne is speaking about.  The standard German sidearms of WWII were the Parabellum-Pistole (popularly known as the Luger) and the Walther P-38.  Both were chambered for the 9MM Parabellum round, and both were fairly accurate.  The P-38 was easier and cheaper to make, and more tolerant of various environmental conditions.  The M1911A1 Colt .45 was a fairly good pistol, not particularly accurate, but the .45 ACP round provided good stopping power, and it was fairly reliable.\n\nThe German MG-42 was an excellent weapon, the best of its' class during the war.  It was the basis for the postwar design of the US M-60 machine gun.  I don't know what the WiseOne is speaking of when he mentions "and other lamer machine guns" when speaking of the US.  The primary US light machine gun was the .30 Browning.  It's sustained fire rate wasn't as good as the MG-42, but nevertheless the air-cooled version was a more than competent, if not very good weapon.  The standard heavy machine gun of the US was the Browning M2 .50.  This was an excellent weapon, best in it's class, and is still in use today by many countries. The M2 was just as accurate as the MG-42, and had greater power and ranger. Then again, pretty much any weapon designed by John Browning turned out to be excellent.\n\nThis following statement is absolutely wrong:\n\n"American planes were better than German planes by the time we entered the war, as the RAF killed off many of their better planes."\n\nThe best American fighters of the war at the time of our entry were the P-40 and F4F.  Neither one was anywhere near as good as the
651389
While I don't discuss whether or not I have any other weapon than a Peacemaker, I wouldn't carry under a 9mm Luger, But I prefer the .45 ACP round, because if I would ever have to drop a bad guy or a mountain lion I want them to stay down.  That being said I would think the .357 mag would do about the same, since I've never compared the ballistics
159690
Both are fine guns, but I personally like the S&W.  Ruger makes a very ruged and dependable pistol that will provide years of service.  However the S&W is also very dependable, but has a more refined quality and feel than the Ruger.  I also like the pull of the S&W trigger over the Ruger.  In my experiance, the S&W trigger is smoother out of the box than the Ruger.