has the meaning of full size handguns shifted a bit?

Stogies

Stogies

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2017
Messages
3,353
Location
NC
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
I used to think "full size" was a classic 5" 1911 and anything shorter was "compact" or "sub compact" but these days I see a lot of LEO trade ins come in at 4.25" for the main issue guns and shorter for the backup guns. You can clearly tell if they show up in pairs like that. Traditionally LEO guns were full size since concealment was not really a major concern. Is 4.25" now considered full size?
 
Stogies said:
I used to think "full size" was a classic 5" 1911 and anything shorter was "compact" or "sub compact" but these days I see a lot of LEO trade ins come in at 4.25" for the main issue guns and shorter for the backup guns. You can clearly tell if they show up in pairs like that. Traditionally LEO guns were full size since concealment was not really a major concern. Is 4.25" now considered full size?
Click to expand...
In this case, I believe full size is referencing the size of the frame
 
For polymer pistols, 4.25-4.5” is commonly full size, combined with a full size frame.

G17 4.5”
M&P 4.25”
XDm 4.5”
CZ 4.5”

And then they all have a long slide version of 5-5.25”+. Of course now we’re getting all kinds of combinations of grip length and barrel length, blurring those lines.
 
Today full size, compact, and subcompact mainly refer to concealability I think.
Overall size envelope vs bbl length.
Times have changed . . .
 
I always linked it to the ability to manipulate the pistol with gloves on. I’m not carrying a p365 in Detroit in the winter unless it’s inside a mitten.
 
I would call a g45/19x a full duty sized gun and it has the slide off of a compact. Although I would argue that the definition of compact has shifted aswell.

I think as others have stated it's more so the size of the grip/frame.
 
Stogies said:
I used to think "full size" was a classic 5" 1911 and anything shorter was "compact" or "sub compact"
Click to expand...
I consider the Commanders and Combat Commanders as full sized.

They offer no advantage in concealment over the 5-inch guns, though there is a weight benefit with the LW Commander.

Their only real advantage is that they clear the leather a little quicker.

Just my 2% of a buck.
 
One could also look at what was "Pocket sized" around the turn of the last century and see a trend....



A 1903 in *.380* was HOW big? It would not be a compact in todays metric.
 
Desolo said:
One could also look at what was "Pocket sized" around the turn of the last century and see a trend....



A 1903 in *.380* was HOW big? It would not be a compact in todays metric.
Click to expand...
Oh, I definetely think we have seen another shift just now with what I described.
 
Stogies said:
Oh, I definetely think we have seen another shift just now with what I described.
Click to expand...
The glock 48 and the newer 17rd frames for the 365 really mess with the situation aswell...

People dont believe me when I tell them the 48 has a *longer barrel* then the 19, but it does! Add in the shield arms mags and you loose nothing to the 19.

I just wish they would apply some of this to the larger calibers...imagine an "upscaled" 48 type glock, a 1.5 stack, thin 10mm as thin as a 1911?
 
I remember when an Sig 228 was a compact.

I think anything that allows you to grip it with your pinky as well without a mag extension or lip is full sized.

Glock 19 is full sized to most women
 
As opposed to 12 rounds of 9mm in a Hellcat or a tiny .380

Used to be a 1911 Commander or Officer was a "small gun"
 
Stogies said:
I used to think "full size" was a classic 5" 1911 and anything shorter was "compact" or "sub compact" but these days I see a lot of LEO trade ins come in at 4.25" for the main issue guns and shorter for the backup guns. You can clearly tell if they show up in pairs like that. Traditionally LEO guns were full size since concealment was not really a major concern. Is 4.25" now considered full size?
Click to expand...
A "full size" Glock like the 17 has been 4.49" since their inception what, half a century ago? I can't think of a semi auto handgun with a standard full size barrel length of 5" other than the 1911.
 
Flashpoint said:
A "full size" Glock like the 17 has been 4.49" since their inception what, half a century ago? I can't think of a semi auto handgun with a standard full size barrel length of 5" other than the 1911.
Click to expand...
For some of us older people, up until the 2000's, the full size 1911 was the gun of choice. Told to us by the gun rags of the time. I look the LFI course back in 96 and it was the gun of choice. We dressed around the gun, but other than the weight I can hide a 1911 well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom