Well, I haven't even shot my C9 yet, so I won't comment on its performance, but something else was bothering me.
I'm often hearing folks complain about the size of the C9. Can't conceal it, huge, bulky, etc. So I was wondering how it stacked up to two other 9mm that I hear people rave about as a carry gun, the Sig Sauer P229 and the Glock 17.
The Hi-Point C9 is:
6.75" Long
5.00" Tall
1.50" Wide
25 oz. (unloaded)
The Sig Sauer P229 is:
7.10" Long
5.40" Tall
1.50" Wide
32 oz. (unloaded)
The Glock 17 is:
7.32" Long
5.34" Tall
1.18" Wide
22 oz. (unloaded)
So, with the exception of the Glock being about 1/3" thinner and 3 oz. lighter, these two other "outstanding" CCW guns are larger and heavier than the C9. I know that 1/3" difference in thickness does matter when it comes to concealing, but I just don't see where they big, heavy thing comes from. (Ugly, I get - big and heavy, not so much.)
I'm often hearing folks complain about the size of the C9. Can't conceal it, huge, bulky, etc. So I was wondering how it stacked up to two other 9mm that I hear people rave about as a carry gun, the Sig Sauer P229 and the Glock 17.
The Hi-Point C9 is:
6.75" Long
5.00" Tall
1.50" Wide
25 oz. (unloaded)
The Sig Sauer P229 is:
7.10" Long
5.40" Tall
1.50" Wide
32 oz. (unloaded)
The Glock 17 is:
7.32" Long
5.34" Tall
1.18" Wide
22 oz. (unloaded)
So, with the exception of the Glock being about 1/3" thinner and 3 oz. lighter, these two other "outstanding" CCW guns are larger and heavier than the C9. I know that 1/3" difference in thickness does matter when it comes to concealing, but I just don't see where they big, heavy thing comes from. (Ugly, I get - big and heavy, not so much.)