Mak for home defense

[MikeTF]

The only gun I own that doesn't have a round in the chamber is my muzzle loader. A gun is a tool, it should be ready to do its job.

 

[gizzard]

a hit from a mak is better than a miss from a 44

 

[BeoBill]

Here's a range report I posted seven years ago, comparing the P64 and the LCP.


https://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=629671&postcount=6

I still like the LCP within its specialized niche: a reliable little "better than nothing" I can easily carry unnoticed in my pocket. I occasionally carry it around the house when I want to be armed without alarming my over-anxious wife.

Here was my conclusion on the P64 seven years ago:






I do need to thin the herd... My Bohemian Bombshell languishes neglected in the dark.

You don't like the P64 - we get it.

 

[BeoBill]

Just buy a nice new CZ and be done with it.

Id trust some surplus but only after I had inspected it in detail, replaced critical springs and wearables, tested it for a couple hundred rounds etc.

Some of us are opposed to submitting to the HQL scam.

 

[Threeband]

You don't like the P64 - we get it.

Not that I don't like it. I love old guns. I'm far more interested in old guns than new guns. I love to shoot my M1 Garands, and almost never shoot my AR, though. I cannot muster very much interest in "self defense." That is not the reason I own guns.

I own dozens and dozens and dozens of old guns, interesting guns, but none of them are intended for Close Quarters Combat or Dynamic Entry or Slicing the Pie.

I own a few modern guns, which are not very interesting, but can Do The Job if the Balloon Goes Up.

My point was, I can't imagine why someone would go out of their way to acquire a second rate pocket pistol that was obsolescent on the day it was adopted 53 years ago, if their only interest is to equip themselves with a well thought out tool for self defense. If you already own one and need to press it into service, that's different. If you want another neat old range toy, that's also different.

But if you just want to buy well thought out tool for self defense which does not require an HQL, there are far better choices. Get a Model 10 S&W, or better yet a Model 19. Get a S&W Model 39, or a Colt Government Model. Or just wait 20 years and buy a Glock.

 

[John from MD]

Some of us are opposed to submitting to the HQL scam.

You can buy C&R guns without a HQL.

 

[reverendbeer]

You can buy C&R guns without a HQL.

I think that was his point.

 

[lee2]

Not that I don't like it. I love old guns. I'm far more interested in old guns than new guns. I love to shoot my M1 Garands, and almost never shoot my AR, though. I cannot muster very much interest in "self defense." That is not the reason I own guns.

I own dozens and dozens and dozens of old guns, interesting guns, but none of them are intended for Close Quarters Combat or Dynamic Entry or Slicing the Pie.

I own a few modern guns, which are not very interesting, but can Do The Job if the Balloon Goes Up.

My point was, I can't imagine why someone would go out of their way to acquire a second rate pocket pistol that was obsolescent on the day it was adopted 53 years ago, if their only interest is to equip themselves with a well thought out tool for self defense. If you already own one and need to press it into service, that's different. If you want another neat old range toy, that's also different.

But if you just want to buy well thought out tool for self defense which does not require an HQL, there are far better choices. Get a Model 10 S&W, or better yet a Model 19. Get a S&W Model 39, or a Colt Government Model. Or just wait 20 years and buy a Glock.

the p64 is hardly a second rate pocket pistol.
it is a well made all steel pistol.
its compact and easy to conceal even when tucked in a pocket when answering the door. six shots should be more than enough to deter an intruder. the 9x18 is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[S&W19]

the p64 is hardly a second rate pocket pistol.
it is a well made all steel pistol.
its compact and easy to conceal even when tucked in a pocket when answering the door. six shots should be more than enough to deter an intruder. the 9x18 is nothing to sneeze at.

That's my take on it as well. That and it fits more discreetly on me than a 12 gauge shotgun.

I shoot mine enough to know if they will function properly or need repair.
I didn't buy any of my firearms to be range toys.

 

[Biggfoot44]

As long as nobody advocates a Tok , I won't have to counter with '58 Rem .

 

[knastera]

As long as nobody advocates a Tok , I won't have to counter with '58 Rem .

I'm not comparing a Tok to a Rem (as I don't have said Remington), but I'd trust my '53 Cugir TT-C for defensive use any day. In fact, when I'm working in the gun store, it's what I usually carry. The 7.62x25 is a nasty little round. When I got the gun, it was in pristine condition. I've run hundreds of rounds through it without any failure of any kind.

 

[Brychan]

the p64 is hardly a second rate pocket pistol.
it is a well made all steel pistol.
its compact and easy to conceal even when tucked in a pocket when answering the door. six shots should be more than enough to deter an intruder. the 9x18 is nothing to sneeze at.

Thank you, IMHO the fit and finish, as well as the design of the P64 is as good as any production firearm and better than many newer firearms.

 

[knastera]

Thank you, IMHO the fit and finish, as well as the design of the P64 is as good as any production firearm and better than many newer firearms.

The caveat with that is the same with any used gun, condition and maintenance are everything. I had a P-64s that appeared to be in great condition. It shot fine at the range, but one day, it malfunctioned and went off with the safety engaged. I have a Tok that is older than me, but I totally trust it because of its condition and proven track record with me.

 

[Brychan]

The caveat with that is the same with any used gun, condition and maintenance are everything. I had a P-64s that appeared to be in great condition. It shot fine at the range, but one day, it malfunctioned and went off with the safety engaged. I have a Tok that is older than me, but I totally trust it because of its condition and proven track record with me.

That's true with any firearm. I make sure all of my firearms are in good working condition.

What was wrong that allowed your P64 to go off with the safety engaged? Did the safety block not work properly'

 

[fred333]

Alright guys, I have other goodies for anyone who would want to break into my house. I am aware that the 9x18 round is not the best for bad situations. But, say the placement was in good places would 6 rounds take care of a bad situation or would you need 8. I am considering between a P64 and a regular Makarov. What do ya think. Bud

If you're defending against a single, average sized attacker that isn't under the influence, I reckon a few well-placed rounds from a Mak kitted-out with Critical Defense outta do the job.

But if the threat is a 300 pound drug-addled hood rat, who's likely feelin' no pain (and no stranger to getting shot), that Russian pea-shooter will look fetching next to the chalk outline of your body on the floor.

All things considered, if you're limiting yourself to a sidearm (shotgun or AR/AK's still the "best firearm in common use for the protection of self or others"), I think a Mak's a reasonable compromise for CCW. But, for home defense, where habiliment isn't as significant a concern as it is when out, I think there're better options. If you wanna go C&R, get a Beretta 1951. It's reliable (it's so reliable, in fact, that, after a few thousand rounds, it's become my regular training gun), packs more of a wallop than the Mak (the Beretta's 9mm Luger) and has a push-button mag release. Otherwise, get a 9mm Glock. I happen to hate the way they look, but I can't argue with their proven history of reliability. And reliability's the salient issue for defense. The most powerful weapon's of little use if it isn't [proven] reliable.

 

[knastera]

That's true with any firearm. I make sure all of my firearms are in good working condition.



What was wrong that allowed your P64 to go off with the safety engaged? Did the safety block not work properly'

I don't know what the exact problem was. I got rid of it "as is" to a C&R holder.

 

[John from MD]

For you guys using a 7.62x25 for self defense, you really ought to do some research about the cartridge. It penetrates too much and does not deform in soft tissue.

Back in the day, I did a unscientific experiment with deer and pig meat. It makes little holes and keeps on going. I even loaded up some .32 hollow points and they came apart due to the high velocity of the bullet. At the time, the ammo we had was combloc rated at 1400 fps. Maybe today's ammo might be a little slower but it still has to be pretty hot to operate the gun due to the bullets low mass.

Just my .02.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

If you're defending against a single, average sized attacker that isn't under the influence, I reckon a few well-placed rounds from a Mak kitted-out with Critical Defense outta do the job.

But if the threat is a 300 pound drug-addled hood rat, who's likely feelin' no pain (and no stranger to getting shot), that Russian pea-shooter will look fetching next to the chalk outline of your body on the floor.

All things considered, if you're limiting yourself to a sidearm (shotgun or AR/AK's still the "best firearm in common use for the protection of self or others"), I think a Mak's a reasonable compromise for CCW. But, for home defense, where habiliment isn't as significant a concern as it is when out, I think there're better options. If you wanna go C&R, get a Beretta 1951. It's reliable (it's so reliable, in fact, that, after a few thousand rounds, it's become my regular training gun), packs more of a wallop than the Mak (the Beretta's 9mm Luger) and has a push-button mag release. Otherwise, get a 9mm Glock. I happen to hate the way they look, but I can't argue with their proven history of reliability. And reliability's the salient issue for defense. The most powerful weapon's of little use if it isn't [proven] reliable.

Bu bu but very good to excellent condition Maks are inexpensive and you can circumvent the HQL by having them shipped to your front door while flipping Maryland the bird.

Reliability and stopping power be damned.

 

[knastera]

For you guys using a 7.62x25 for self defense, you really ought to do some research about the cartridge. It penetrates too much and does not deform in soft tissue.

Back in the day, I did a unscientific experiment with deer and pig meat. It makes little holes and keeps on going. I even loaded up some .32 hollow points and they came apart due to the high velocity of the bullet. At the time, the ammo we had was combloc rated at 1400 fps. Maybe today's ammo might be a little slower but it still has to be pretty hot to operate the gun due to the bullets low mass.

Just my .02.

That's why the only thing I load my Tok with is PPU JHP. I've never fired surplus ammo with it. I've seen the ballistic tests for PPU and it is effective. It is definitely a hot round and penetrates a lot, but it is still effective.

 

[fred333]

Bu bu but very good to excellent condition Maks are inexpensive and you can circumvent the HQL by having them shipped to your front door while flipping Maryland the bird.

That's why I suggested the Beretta; you can flip-off the buggers whilst having the firepower to fend off they'a keeds (i.e., constituents).