# Help me build my "Audition List."



## Gruesome (Apr 30, 2013)

Howdy all - long time shooter first time poster.

After inheriting a large collection of guns, long and short, from my dearly departed father, I have come to the conclusion that I need more. Specifically, something less than 20 years old. All his crap is not just old but rusty. Blech. The only keeper is a S&W .357 magnum. So as I wait for my Illinois FOID card (I can't even TOUCH a gun in IL without the card! This state blows!) all I can do is internet research. I have done a lot of that, but I'd love to hear from some experts.

Criteria:
The gun will be used for home defense and fun at the range. No micro-guns.
I prefer American made.
I strongly prefer an exposed hammer (no Glocky firing pin stuff.)
I mildly prefer .40 over 9mm, but I could get over that real quick.
My budget needs to be no more than $700. I have to buy a safe/cabinet too.
I mldly prefer a metal frame.
I prefer a decent name brand. 
I prefer to buy new.

Already on the audition list:
FNH FNX .40
Stoeger Cougar .40
BerettaPx4 Compact (yes, I know the relationship to the Cougar.)

What am I missing? What else belongs on the list? My aversion to the Glock style may confound some, but I owned a model 19 years ago and hated it. I am leery about any 1911 due to price and magazine limitations.

What'cha got for me, interwebs?
Thanx!
Gruesome


----------



## hud35500 (May 8, 2010)

There are a ton of handguns for you to consider. Sig P226 or 229, S&W M&P, Springfield XD/XDM, Taurus 24/7, Glock, or HK. I'd say you have some shopping to do. If you have a range that rents, it will be much easier to narrow it down.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

The Beretta 96A1 would be a top pick, the Storm has a polymer frame, but I've heard the Storm really shines in the .40.:watching:


----------



## JMessmer (Dec 30, 2012)

Cz-75b, fits criteria well.


----------



## goNYG (Apr 4, 2012)

Only my opinion of course, but given your criteria, I think you absolutely must consider the following:
CZ-75 (I prefer the SP-01)
Beretta 92 variant
Sig Sauer P226 or 229

This is not to say that other firearms do not belong on this list, just that your "audition" would be highly flawed if these weren't on it.


----------



## high pockets (Apr 25, 2011)

I would suggest either CZ, or Springfield.


----------



## Gruesome (Apr 30, 2013)

goNYG said:


> Only my opinion of course, but given your criteria, I think you absolutely must consider the following:
> CZ-75 (I prefer the SP-01)
> Beretta 92 variant
> Sig Sauer P226 or 229
> This is not to say that other firearms do not belong on this list, just that your "audition" would be highly flawed if these weren't on it.


My thoughts on your suggestions:
The Beretta 92 worries me a bit because I have read that it has an enormous handle. My pudgy sausage fingers are unlikely to fit on an especially fat gun. Also, for a gun that size, it seems to have a poor capacity. Of course the design is battle tested and as solid as you could want, I won't argue that. And I do like the look of it.
The SIGs are awfully expensive, aren't they? I refuse to spend $1000 on a gun. I don't see the return on investment. I plan to keep this guy a long time, not trade it in a year for the next hot thing.
I'll check out the CZ - I like the look of the P07 Duty. That does fail at least three of my criteria points, but if the others fail me then I'll need some options.

Thanks guys!
-Gruesome


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

A Beretta 92FS, 96FS (.40 cal) or a Sig P226 would serve you well. 

Both of these firearms can be had in your price range. Used ones are available if you take some time and look. 

You spoke of capacity, and both the Beretta and Sig are at least 15+1 rounds, if not more. Neither have such large grips that would pose a problem for you. 

And both brands maintain their value in the future very well.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Gruesome said:


> My thoughts on your suggestions:
> The Beretta 92 worries me a bit because I have read that it has an enormous handle. My pudgy sausage fingers are unlikely to fit on an especially fat gun. Also, for a gun that size, it seems to have a poor capacity. Of course the design is battle tested and as solid as you could want, I won't argue that. And I do like the look of it.
> The SIGs are awfully expensive, aren't they? I refuse to spend $1000 on a gun. I don't see the return on investment. I plan to keep this guy a long time, not trade it in a year for the next hot thing.
> I'll check out the CZ - I like the look of the P07 Duty. That does fail at least three of my criteria points, but if the others fail me then I'll need some options.
> ...


You need to handle a 92FS before you make that judgment. To fat compared to what? Poor capacity? All 92 series pistols interchange with all 92 series magazines, including the 90-two, so you got 15+1, 17+1, 20+1, 30+1, in factory Beretta mags.........Mec-gar makes 18+1, 20+1 and so forth, so a capacity issue for the 92 series is a non-issue.


----------



## hud35500 (May 8, 2010)

The Sig Pro in .40 is a very nice shooting handgun as well. Hard to beat at it's price.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

I have a SIG P250C in .40 cal. 

13+1 capacity, night sights, and a tactical rail on it. It can be had new, in the range of $450.00 or so.


----------



## Gruesome (Apr 30, 2013)

Cool! I had not known about the SIG PRO 2022 and the like. That goes on the list.

Thanks to all for the responses. It is frustrating to do all this on-line and not have the ability to go and hold any of these at the shop. I might be able to cut things off the list (or add to it) in seconds just by handling the weapon for a moment.


----------



## Gruesome (Apr 30, 2013)

Thanks again to all who responded.

My FOID finally arrived so I managed to fondle a few of these beauties. I had to strike some from the list: Stoeger, Sig 2022, Px4 Compact, and a Taurus 840 which was only on my list between the time I saw it in the case (that is a handsome weapon) and the moment I held it. The Beretta 92 variants were never really on my list but I did confirm that they indeed do not belong there.

The Px4 fullsize felt pretty darned good, and the FNX was just barely on the chubby side for my short, fat sausage fingers. I have not yet met the CZ.

One guy did warn me against the Px4 in 40 cal. He says the gun wasn't designed to handle that round. He has been in the business for a few decades so he's not just 'some guy,' but of course that experience doesn't make his word golden either. I haven't found much corroborating evidence on line and I am inclined to ignore his advice, but I am wondering if the community here has any founded criticism of the Px4 40 in terms of reliability.

Thursday I get some time to go to the range so I'll be renting a Px4 and hopefully an FNX. It'll be my first time firing a gun in about a decade. I hope I remember which end is which.

Thanks to all,
Gruesome


----------



## Gruesome (Apr 30, 2013)

A check has been written and an FNH FNX-40 is on it's way to my LGS with my name on it.

Thanks for all your help!
Gruesome


----------



## high pockets (Apr 25, 2011)

Congrats! Good choice!


----------



## slowhand100ca (Jun 18, 2013)

shoulda got the glock 22. quick and dirty. Re phrase, still quick when very dirty. lots of pistols hate sand- the Glock loves dirt....and muck....and water..Skills are more important, if you don't acquire them, you are well enough off to also invest in some good running shoes. .22 is cheap to train with fyi. Grab a Norinco woodsman knock off for 150.00$- Maybe not readily avail in the CONUS though.


----------

