A follow up to this thread:http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.p...-GSR-XO-5-quot
Last weekend, I had an opportunity to comparatively use both pistols through an IDPA Classifier; I was able to send each gun through the entire Classifier (usually shooting a given stage portion with the NHC first, and then the SIG).
As suggested by The Man of Orange, I was able to get a set of VCD grips for the NHC-David Barnes' generous Holiday pricing for the grips was appreciated, and, much as I'd liked the look and performance of the OEM NHC VZ Blasted Black Canvas grips, the new VCD grips (which I got in brown, aesthetically nicely going along with the semi-retro theme that I have going with the gun) provide a quantum increase in hold and controllability. http://www.vcdgrips.com/
Additionally, the front sight's back face was given a base coat of flat white acrylic paint, followed by a coat of Testor's Fluorescent Orange, with a Fluorescent Green dot.
The rear sight is a Novak Low Mount Wide Notch tritium (with the tritium capsules/white surrounds blacked out, making it in effect a plain black sight).
The conventional 20 lb recoil spring was replaced with a brand-new 20 lb conventional recoil spring. I've had excellent results with this recoil spring weight, and as I use standard (full) power 230 gr or 185 gr +P loads for carry and competition, this seems like a good spring to cover the waterfront.
Magazines used throughout were Check-Mate welded baseplate Hybrid feed-lipped, metal fully skirted and dimpled followered, predominantly 8 round stainless steel, but with 2 of the blued steel 7 round variants also used. Extra-strength springs were used in all magazines.
Ammunition for both guns throughout was Federal Champion aluminum cased jacketed ball, 230 grain-standard pressure, but towards the high end of "norm," judging by the blast and recoil.
The SIGARMS GSR XO has had the VCD grips that I'd obtained for it in olive drab installed;
The front sight is the original OEM Novak .125 white dot contrast sight. The rear sight is a Novak Low Mount Wide Notch in plain black.
The OEM Wolff 18.5 lb conventional recoil spring was replaced with a new Wolff 18.5 lb variable recoil spring.
Magazines used throughout were Check-Mate Extended Tube Hybrids, with a metal fully skirted/dimpled follower, and extra-strength springs, along with several CerTac Extended Tube magzines, with semi-wadcutter feed lips and metal, fully skirted, but dimpleless followers.
Guns were zeroed, cleaned and lubricated; lubricants were TW25B grease and Weapon Shield.
Holster and magazine pouch were from Tactical Tailor. While the guns are normally carried in gun-specific holsters (usually Blade-Tech IWB), to expedite the process of this test I realized that it would be less distractive/time consuming if I used a single holster that worked with both 1911s, facilitating just switching the guns at the firing line, as opposed to having to go to the Safety Area subsequent to each gun's use and switch holsters. Tactical Tailor's excellent Low Profile Holster, a reinforced nylon/cordura fabric OWB holster really filled the bill nicely, both accommodating and correctly positioning both guns nicely. I use it without the thumbstrap. The additional fabric trim at the holster mouth nicely sufficiently keeps the holster mouth open after the gun is withdrawn, making one-handed re-holstering viable.
http://www.tacticaltailor.com/lowprofileholster.aspx
Magazine pouch is also from Tactical Tailor, being their Magna Triple Pistol Magazine Pouch,http://www.tacticaltailor.com/magnam...lmagpouch.aspx (although in the images you'll see the near-identical Magna double magazine pouch that I normally use for carry) which incorporated rare earth magnets in the body of each pouch segment; the magnets' strength is sufficient for me to carry the pouch upsidedown, allowing me to simply access a reload and yank down from the pouch-a technique that I've been using for over a year with good results (some magazines are more amenable to this than others-check to see if the magazine's weight when loaded overcomes the retentive strength of the magnets)-it's particularly beneficial when wearing sweaters or Hawaiian shirts as a concealment garment.
Belt used was The Wilderness' Frequent Flyer model, 1.25" width.
The Results: The underlying question for me is which 1911 would I be better with, as to channel my primary use and concentration towards it. The results were...mixed. On half the stages, I did better, both speed and accuracy wise, with the 4.25" Nighthawk Custom Talon II-Interestingly, the stages where this 1911 shined were on the movement and medium-distance stages. The SIG GSR XO seemed to excel on the close-in and farther-distance Classifier stages.
Subjectively, I came out of it favoring the Nighthawk Custom Talon II, for the following reasons: Significantly gentler recoil impulse made it easier to make follow-up shots and target transition shots. The orange/green-dot front sight face was very easy to acquire (but it will be easy enough to give this sight appearance to the SIG as well, which I'll probably do). I was again somewhat surprised by the increased recoil forces/gun torquing felt in my hand with the 5" SIG. It really was a significant increase compared to the NHC. I plan on experimenting with 16 lb and 18.5 lb conventional recoil springs with the SIG; at this point, I'm personally not very impressed or pleased with the 18.5 lb variable recoil spring.
Both guns and magazine sets ran flawlessly throughout the day, with literally zero hiccups or incidents of any type.
Tentative Conclusions: I will likely primarily concentrate on the 4.25" Nighthawk Custom Talon II, but will continue to refine the SIG GSR XO. At the end of the comparison, the NHC is easier and faster to shoot by a slight margin. While this might seem somewhat intuitive, given the assumed greater attention to assembly detail and higher cost/quality of components as provided as part of the NHC parcel, in my case there are several things inherent to the SIG that actually place the guns on a more even playing field; 1) It's an early "Second Generation" GSR, with very high quality internal components that were OEM sourcings by SIG back in that day (long since gone), and 2) two of SIG's most senior gunsmiths have personally gone through and set up my personal gun. At the end of the day, while I feel I can achieve desirable results with either gun, it's the NHC that, despite it's shorter barrel length (and correspondingly shorter sight plane) that will likely get (or more frequently get) the nod for use this year.
Other take-outs: I seriously need to concentrate on my distance shooting, both off-hand and kneeling low cover. While I shot marginally better with the 5" SIG in these stages, my results were still indicative of more (much more) work being needed, particularly on trigger control.
Despite it raining throughout most of the day, being able to shoot the same match with the two guns was a huge help to me-both in terms of increasing my 1911 platform time, and in diagnosing my relative strengths and weaknesses, and areas needed for training/practice concentration. And yeah-while I still feel, and perform significantly better with my Glock, Beretta, Ruger semi-auto platforms and my Ruger revolver platforms, this year I've committed to primarily concentrating on my 1911s (and no, Todd hasn't guilt-ed or paid me off for this, amazingly enough)(although I have absolutely no doubts but that he is quietly snickering on the sidelines). It'll be an interesting year. Thanks again for everyone's contributions on the previous thread where I solicited input towards my selection-the input/suggestions were very helpful and much appreciated.
Best, Jon
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by JonInWA
