Open carry Mac 11?

The original Mac 11 was chambered in 380. It was also an open bolt pistol about the size of a 1911a1.

jeeper1 said:

The original Mac 11 was chambered in 380. It was also an open bolt pistol about the size of a 1911a1.

Click to expand...

yeah this one isnt an actual mac, it is an M11, made by cobray and not ingram

jeeper1 said:

The original Mac 11 was chambered in 380. It was also an open bolt pistol about the size of a 1911a1.

Click to expand...

I believe you're right. Subsequently offered in 9mm Luger when they changed the design. .380 is of course also 9mm, but 9X17mm. Makarov (Ruskie pistol) is 9X18 as I recall.

Kwikrnu?

More 'special gun' elitism....

I'm not sure why you would consider a pistol round for wilderness carry, unless you are concerned about the 2-legged animals, for which it might be adequate. Consider the Kel-Tek Sub 2000 line.

Frankly, I'd recommend an AK-pistol. The MAC seems to defeat your intended purpose by generally sucking.

If you wnat to carry it simply becasue it's what you've got, I doubt anyone can argue with that. It is hard to carry a firearm you don't have.

I don't care if you carry an orange bazooka. I'm merely suggesting that a MAC 11 is probably not useful for your purposes. Nor is an orange bazooka.... An AK-pistol, of any color in whole or in part, is one hell of a handgun and a very, very effective self-defense weapon in a variety of scenarios in which a more 'conventional' handgun would be sadly insufficient. You can carry your large round count, the round really means business, it has a longer site radius, follow-up shots are faster, did I mention the round is superior to .223 forget .380, 9mm, .45ACP etc... You can get mag pouches that hold 4 mags........ If you think you need round count, this implies you'd like that round to actually COUNT.

Kwikrnu is on the fringe, he's from TN. He is accused of the very same thing that OCers of 'normal' guns were all accused of only a few years ago. "It's different" is the basis for that whole brew ha ha. You're being accused of the same by elitists. Ignore the trolls.

In short, a MAC 11 is better than nothing I guess... But I'd much rather be made fun of with an AK pistol, than be made fun of with a MAC 11; the AK is far more useful. Some people are sissies and can't handle a more powerful gun. I test fired .50BMG rifles for 5 years. I honestly think the 7.62x39 makes a cute pistol round. All .223 ammo should be pink.

ix, that may have been the funniest comment of the week, if not the month!

well if i were to carry an ak pistol id just carry my ak rifle? the point was that i wanted a pistol, in a holster, that wouldnt take up much room. Ill already be carrying a pack, and an ak pistol wouldnt work. the ammo weighs alot, its big, its bulky, and unless there is some holster out there, it would be useless to me.

i have a decent assortment of weapons to chose from, the mac just seemed good since its not TOO big, the ammo is pretty light, and id rather have a 350$ gun get beat up, than my glock or 1911, or any other gun (with the exception of a few 100$ guns, but they are either 22 or 25).

"I honestly think the 7.62x39 makes a cute pistol round. All .223 ammo should be pink. "
Matter of opinion as to which round is better. Personally, I'll take Mark 855 5.56MM NATO over any Kalashnikov round in an M-4 v AK47 discussion. M-4 is far more accurate at 50 m +, as well. And FAR more accurate in select fire. Too bad they don't make an M-4 pistol.

@OP, your circumstance is understood. I honestly haven't got a better suggestion beyond 'carry a different gun.' It really is the best course of action. I built my AK pistol for less than $250 (AMD-65 actually), but understand your weight requirement.

@GunSlinger, in the short pistol barrel, the SS109/M855 projectile does not perform anything like it does in the M4. At range, it becomes even less accurate than the AK due to it's light weight. The PLR-16 is a good example of how a .223 pistol should be built. But it's still a .223. For wilderness carry, I will continue to prefer the 7.62x39, by a wide margin. .223 might be good on 2-legged beasties, but I really would prefer something more meaningful if confronted with a bear, etc. Pretend you're going hunting for the animal you would likely encounter. Is .223 the round for that? Does anyone hunt with a .223? Really?

Perhaps a matter of opinion, but I still like color of Kwikrnu's Wife's PLR-16. It suits the round it fires.

.380 is almost useless.

flb_78 said:

Do you have family in Tennessee?

Click to expand...

Grapeshot said:

Very long story with lots of contention.
Search threads and internet regarding screen name Kwikrnu.

Click to expand...

Thats Hilarious!!! I was roflmao!

ixtow said:

@OP, your circumstance is understood. I honestly haven't got a better suggestion beyond 'carry a different gun.' It really is the best course of action. I built my AK pistol for less than $250 (AMD-65 actually), but understand your weight requirement.

@GunSlinger, in the short pistol barrel, the SS109/M855 projectile does not perform anything like it does in the M4. At range, it becomes even less accurate than the AK due to it's light weight. The PLR-16 is a good example of how a .223 pistol should be built. But it's still a .223. For wilderness carry, I will continue to prefer the 7.62x39, by a wide margin. .223 might be good on 2-legged beasties, but I really would prefer something more meaningful if confronted with a bear, etc. Pretend you're going hunting for the animal you would likely encounter. Is .223 the round for that? Does anyone hunt with a .223? Really?

Perhaps a matter of opinion, but I still like color of Kwikrnu's Wife's PLR-16. It suits the round it fires.

Click to expand...

Agree on the short barrel not getting as much tumble, but the round still should keyhole to some degree. I'm thinking two legged, not four. In that case I'll take a .404 Jeffrey double rifle made by Holland and Holland in 1908...I'll take it to the nearest classic firearms auction...some do use the .223 or 5.56 for coyote or deer size game I've heard. I don't hunt, so a moot point. Have to say I've never heard of a 7.62 X 39 in a hunting application, however. A lot depends on the round you carry, I guess.

Gunslinger said:

Agree on the short barrel not getting as much tumble, but the round still should keyhole to some degree. I'm thinking two legged, not four. In that case I'll take a .404 Jeffrey double rifle made by Holland and Holland in 1908...I'll take it to the nearest classic firearms auction...some do use the .223 or 5.56 for coyote or deer size game I've heard. I don't hunt, so a moot point. Have to say I've never heard of a 7.62 X 39 in a hunting application, however. A lot depends on the round you carry, I guess.

Click to expand...

i was considering carrying my magnum research lone eagle, it is chambered in 30-06, but if you arent careful it will literally blow your hand off. Ive only fired it 5 times, mainly because it still scares me to shoot a handgun like that, but it would be perfect for an attacking bear or something. it also has, i think a burris red dot on it, for fast target acquisition.

This thread confuses me.

>meso.40< said:

i was considering carrying my magnum research lone eagle, it is chambered in 30-06, but if you arent careful it will literally blow your hand off. Ive only fired it 5 times, mainly because it still scares me to shoot a handgun like that, but it would be perfect for an attacking bear or something. it also has, i think a burris red dot on it, for fast target acquisition.

Click to expand...

Wonder how the kick compares to a .500 S&W. Magnaporting certainly helps, but it's still a cannon in pistol form.