Tanfoglio Hunter 6" 10mm or AR 7" pistol/ SBR?

[husdat]

It just comes to my attention that EAA does offer the Tanfoglio Hunter at 6" barrel length. The shortest AR pistol / SBR barrel is 7". At these configurations, which one would be a better pick, with and without the CA 10 rounds limit? I know this is subjective, but I would like to see the arguments for each.

[Litespeeds]

Good luck finding a Tanfo Hunter. That's one of the more rare unicorns in the Tanfo line.

[boopiejones]

it depends on your purpose and budget.

an ar pistol is still pretty darn big, as the 7 inch barrel sticks out about 6 inches from the upper receiver, and the buffer tube sticks out another 8 or so inches on the back end. so the total length is more than twice that of the Hunter. so from a concealability/portability perspective, the Hunter wins hands down (if you can call a 10" gun "concealable").

but you can probably build 3 AR pistols for the cost of one Hunter, so if your budget is a concern then the AR wins (the AR can also be more expensive than the hunter depending on what components you go with)

another concern is the screwy CA laws regarding ARs, and more importantly, people's lack of knowledge or improper interpretation of those laws. i would feel much more comfortable being questioned by a LEO about a Hunter than an AR...

personally i'd go with the hunter. everyone and their mom has an AR pistol, and they kinda suck. to me, an AR pistol feels like a bad compromise between a handgun and a rifle. they took the worst parts of each and built them into a gun. a full size AR is no less concealable, not much heavier, and is way more functional. a handgun is way smaller and lighter, and way more functional.

[husdat]

Without the CA laws, I think the AR is better at accuracy, ammo count, cost and add-ons.

The Hunter wins for portability.

With the CA laws, I think the Hunter wins as portability outshines the clumsiness when there are 10 rounds max and silly featureless grip. This assumes that cost is not taken into account.