Talk:.440 Cor-Bon

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!
I'll clean this up. That's just complete crap. Only contribution from that user. Avriette 22:00, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I read your user page etc and saw you had been on holidays. I've changed the article a bit and hopefully some people who might be watching it will come back here to fix it up.  My knowledge of guns is nil. I'll leave it in your capable hands. --Randolph 15:58, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I've cleaned up the article and expanded it about as much as it can be. The only thing really missing would be pictures of the round, possibly with comparisons to popular cartridges such as the .45 ACP. Anyways, I've removed the and  templates, as I think this is fine for now. Avriette 13:37, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

"in the field"
... is not to mean, literally, in a field, eg with daisies and deer. It is meant "in the field" as in, deployed as a working pistol in a combat environment. as such, i have reverted and re-added the paragraph. please note that a scoped hunting revolver is also a large "pistol", but one would never be able to holster it. the DE is assumed, by form and function, to be a large-caliber tactical pistol, with hunting capabilities. please contact me if you wish to revert the revert. Avriette 06:59, August 2, 2005 (UTC)


 * I would certainly not consider the DE a "tactical" pistol, unless you decided to use it as a mid-range sniper weapon. The DE was designed from the first to be a competitor to the .44 magnum revolver; it was in a caliber that is far too powerful for defensive use, and it was designed from the start to mount a scope.  It's a hunting and silhouette shooting pistol, and comparing it with a Glock is like saying "A Peterbuilt 7 liter diesel engine is far too heavy for a passenger car, and lacks the high RPM abilities of a modern 24 valve V-6."  While that statement is entirely true, it is also entirely irrelevant.  A 24v V-6 is even more impractical when put into a semitractor, but either way the comparision is just not important.  You could  17 round .440, but what's the point?  By the time you got the round down to a size you could actually fit in a grip that a normal sized human could hold, you'd have essentially a .45 ACP, and Para Ordnance did that nearly two decades ago (although it was only 15 rounds, in the +2 magazine).


 * If you do wish to make a comparision with the wonder-nines, then I think that is entirely valid, but the comparison needs to include a comparison of purpose. You're not going to lug around a .440 CorBon DE for self defense, and neither should you go moose hunting or shoot at 100m silhouettes with a Glock 17.  scot 14:38, 2 August 2005 (UTC)


 * This may come down to a difference of opinions. In which case, I've found that it's better to simply let the other person come up with some neutral wording. That having been said, I'd like to differ on the purpose of the DE. Magnum Research doesn't seem to offer any guidance on usage. Everything I've read has more or less said that it's one of two things. Either a recreational firearm, be it because you want the gun that Demi Moore had in whatever godforsaken movie she was in, or you just want "a fifty cal", or whatever. Secondly, as a working pistol. The latter such use is generally described as suboptimal, saying that the gun is mostly for show. It's a large, heavy pistol. It gets you greater capacity (by 2) than a comparable .44 Mag revolver, and less recoil. The tradeoff is a finicky mechanism that requires proper, technical use of the gun. Only after describing the pistol as a working weapon or a recreational weapon do people suggest that it could be used for hunting. As a correllary, consider the Grizzly 1911-alike chambered in .45 Winchester Magnum. It's a monstrous firearm, and considered to be useful for hunting, but is very much shaped to be "compatible" with the form factor of the 1911. Consider also the GI 50 pistol, built to similar considerations. Caliber and "power" compromising utility, somewhat.


 * Let me also say that there may be a distinct difference of opinion on the utility of the weapon because of relative perspective. I'm kind of a large dude, and I could comfortably carry a DE (or the Grizzly, or the GI 50) in a shoulder holster, and fire competently and consistently when required. My wife for comparison has a difficult time getting her hands around double-stacked Para's, maintaining the stiff wrist required for the DE, and certainly doesn't have a long enough torso to holster the DE. She's got a hard enough time with my Glock 21.


 * If you'd like to reword the paragraph, I think that's fair. However, I think a discussion of the utility of the gun itself should be on the Desert Eagle page. Which, incidentally, is lacking such a discussion. Avriette 14:02, August 3, 2005 (UTC)


 * I think the suitability argument should focus on the cartridge as compared to it's peers--it's definately powerful enough to hunt anything you'd want to hunt with a handgun, and even some things you wouldn't. The power is up at .454 Casull levels, and there are certainly .44 bullets available for taking just about any game.  This also means, of course, that you wouldn't use a .440 for self defense any more than you'd use, say, the Magnum Research BFR in .45-70.  scot 22:57, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

WPMILHIST
The WPMILHIST tag has been removed due to this article not being military related.--Oldwildbill 07:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)