PDA

View Full Version : Platform Concentration and Focus



JonInWA
09-27-2011, 04:07 PM
As some of you know, I tend to concentrate on 4 basic platforms throughout the year: Glock, Beretta, 1911, and revolver. My modus operendi has been to somewhat exclusively focus on a given platform for several months at a time, to build up proficiency and muscle memory. In the past year, I've had several "ah ha" moments, which are probably "duh" revelations for most, but I'd genuinely appreciate comments and feedback.

First, out of all the platforms, I clearly shoot my Glocks the best. The match results over time and over varying match venues are pretty indisputable and undeniable; no matter how much I may like other guns that I have, I clearly perform best with my Glocks-and the performance differences are significant, not marginal. Out of the Glocks that I have, (G17, G19, G21, and G34) I've had the best consistant results with my G19 and G17 (in fairness to the G21 and G34, I have the most hammer- and dry-fire times on the G17 and G19).

Second, I shoot my revolvers (Ruger GP100 and Security Six) competantly, but not brilliantly. Last year I devoted 2 months to them, and was pleased with the results, relatively speaking, but I simply don't see myself dedicating more than 2 months per year, if that, on my revolvers. I enjoy and appreciate them, but they're of relatively minor significance in my operational arena.

Third, despite dedicating myself to my Beretta 92D from March through August, while I again enjoy and appreciate the gun, and have tweaked it to where it's set up exactly to my liking, my performance is somewhat middling with it. I feel competant in using it, and it will remain a constant nightstand gun (if I need to pass it to my wife, the simple controls and the DA-only trigger are ideal, along with the magazine capacity if needed), but will probably for the most part constrain it to that duty in the forseeable future.

Fourth, and here's the biggie: I shoot my 1911s poorly-especially in comparison to my Glocks. A recent IDPA Classifier that I went through last weekend really brought that home. My 1911s (primarily a Nighthawk Talon II and a SIGARMS GSR XO) are quality guns, and are both set up exactly to my specifications, and have been thoroughly set-up and gone through by expert gunsmiths, so the problems I have is inherent to me, not the guns per se. While I'm hardly a threat to David Sevigny, in the past year I've done well (and with significantly more ease/less drama) with my Glocks by comparison.

So-What's the point here? I realize that I have limited time and resources to dedicate to my shooting at best, most likely 2 live fire sessions per month; usually one IDPA match and one range practice/drills session), probably consisting of a total monthly live ammunition expenditure of 200-300 rounds, and daily (five times a week) of dry-fire practice at home for 20 minutes to a half-hour per session, where I concentrate on fundamentals and drills, along with some scenario recreations. My quandary it that while I genuinely like and appreciate my 1911s, I'm at a bit of a cross-point: Should I devote significant time, resources and energy towards becoming more proficient on them, or should I face reality and relegate them simply to occasional-use, essentially relegating them to hobby gun status?

Philosophically, much as I admire the 1911 platform, I firmly believe that it's been for most purposes eclipsed by modern polymer-frame guns (in my specific case, Glock), especially when it comes to user friendliness, overall operational effectiveness, after-market support, maintenance, reliability and durability. Somewhat reluctantly, I probably need to look at things objectively and maturely, and pretty much retire my 1911s, and more single-mindedly simply concentrate on my Glocks (with occasional deviations, of course-just to keep things spiced up...). Probably not surprisingly, this approach is something that my coach has been steering me towards for some time...

I'd appreciate hearing others thoughts and experiences in relation to my rambling.

Best, Jon

F-Trooper05
09-27-2011, 04:38 PM
It sounds like you already know the answer. If you want to maximize your effectiveness with Glocks, then you pretty much have no other choice than to throw all of your other guns in the safe for a while and "relegate them to hobby gun status" as you say.

gtmtnbiker98
09-27-2011, 05:42 PM
Very few if any will ever become the next Sevigny so until then enjoy shooting. If you like the revolvers, Glocks, and 1911's then by all means, shoot them. Way too many take this way too seriously, for 98% it is just a hobby. Enjoy the hobby.

CK1
09-27-2011, 06:05 PM
Jon,

I've kind of gone through the same cycle of shooting different platforms for 2-3 months ending up always back with either a G34, G17, G19 (my order of preference as far as Glocks go), though, some different semi-auto models and no wheel-guns for me... What conclusion I came to is that while I like and could do well with some of the others, I carry a Glock, and my work-issued gun is a Glock (though like most agencies a .40, which I detest, and think is based on obsolete mid-80's LE trends but that's a different discussion for another time...), ...so my training/match gun ought to be a Glock too, and so for the last few months I've been back shooting the Glocks exclusively.

I've had several "ah-ha!" moments as well, particularly earlier in the year when I was shooting an STI Trojan that I had tooled up and upgraded to be about good as one can get a 1911 to perform, only to find when I compared my previous seasons IDPA scores, when I was shooting a garden-variety G17, that I was just about the same scoring-wise, if not slower (the 1911 would almost always have me burning down a few stages followed by a costly time-sucking malf or two that just hadn't happened with the Glock).

Now, I had shot some groups with the 1911 that the likes of which may never appear in front of my Glocks, but, as far as running a gun tactically/practically, I'm just plain faster with the tupperware and most of the "0's" I had with the 1911 are still "0's" with the plastic fantastic. In fact, another "ah-ha!" moment occurred recently for me, and now, more so than any time in the past I can print accurately with the Glocks with all of the all-too-common low/left tendencies eradicated... and that mini-milestone probably wouldn't have happened if I hadn't committed to sticking with the Glock (and now my Glock groups can be fairly-pretty too sometimes).

For me, I just decided to choose pragmatism as an ethos, and to stop worrying about the "arms-race/gadget-factor" and just worry about becoming a better Indian more than finding a nicer arrow... whenever I think I might want to try something else I'll just check out a couple vids of Sevigny and/or Vogel and I'm quickly reminded that the tupperware is up to it if I am.

Past phases have included: multiple different types of H&K's, M&P's, Steyr M-A1's, Walther P99's, Beretta 92FS's and some others. The only other platform I found I liked as much as the Glock (in fact that I liked a lot more really) was the CZ Shadows which are just awesome as they run like a Glock but have the trigger, heft, and built-in easy-to-tap-into-accuracy-potential of the finest 1911's, and I'd still be running one of those except, frankly, they're just too-good trigger-wise, and IMO are not really in the same realm as the pistols I use for carry and duty, shooting one often was just too far away from the guns I use in those other roles. Though, if CZ ever puts out an alloy or poly framed Shadow, and if hell freezes over and my agency would let me carry a Shadow variant, I would go back in a heartbeat, but as of now CZ's viable carry options aren't up to the Shadow's echelon and my agency is more about adhering to policies and using similar equipment as other agencies more than trailblazing and letting officers pick their own equipment.

The Glock is the only one that really does it all for what I need them to do consistently over the various applications, so I just decided to just relent and come to terms with being stuck with it... and so far it's been working out, as I'm improving as a shooter rather than switching back and forth and wasting training time becoming re-acclimated to the tool.

l8apex
09-27-2011, 10:52 PM
I've been chasing this 'unicorn' for some time. Over the years I've narrowed it down to 9mm. And now Glock [G19] and HK LEM V1 [P30]. My dilemma is that I'm more accurate overall with the HK LEM vs Glock, but slightly faster with Glock over the HK LEM. Most of it comes from years shooting Glock and familiarity with the design. I would assume that as time rolls on with the HK, I will be able to par my personal bests with the HK. Also, I need to do more DOT torture and shooting for accuracy with the G19. For now I'm only a few tenths off with the P30 vs the G19. It'd be more if I didn't take Todd's class and learn proper press outs [shameless plug]. It will be tough for me to get rid of either of these fine weapons. I probably won't. YMMV.

YVK
09-28-2011, 10:01 AM
I look at it from an angle of challenge variability. Sufficiently different platforms challenge you with somewhat different tasks. This is even more so true if said platforms perform best in different calibers - 9 mm in Gs and 45 in 1911 is the best example. My analogy is going to gym and hitting different machines and exercises for the same muscle groups - at the end, you're better off in a global sense.
One thing that's important to me is not just say "I shoot A better than B", but also understand why. Without that, it's hard to map a path to further progress.

ToddG
09-28-2011, 10:19 AM
The flipside of that: if you're spending time each year jumping from gun to gun, you're never putting in the dedicated time on one gun that would more quickly lead to mastery.

Kyle Reese
09-28-2011, 10:21 AM
The flipside of that: if you're spending time each year jumping from gun to gun, you're never putting in the dedicated time on one gun that would more quickly lead to mastery.

I wish I learned this lesson a decade ago. :cool:

TNWNGR
09-28-2011, 11:38 AM
To paraphrase an old truism: “one should be wary of the shooter who consistently trains with the same pistol.” I have a high degree of respect for serious competitive shooters because I recognize the training costs involved. These costs far exceed money spent and to be among the best take far more than just raw talent. Whether you’re a competitor striving to make your mark or simply choose to legally carry a defensive sidearm, invest your training resources wisely. :)

Long tom coffin
09-28-2011, 11:43 AM
I wish I learned this lesson a decade ago. :cool:

There we go. This was a very expensive lesson for me to learn. If i had stopped my "I need every gun Jack Bauer uses" phase earlier on and focused my efforts on spending my money on range time and training, it boggles my mind how much further along in my progress I would be than I am now.


From wikipedia:

"Jack of all trades, master of none" is a figure of speech used in reference to a person that is competent with many skills but is not necessarily outstanding in any particular one."

In a real world deadly encounter where it is my life on the line, or my family's, I would much rather be "outstanding" than merely "competent". Specialize, and focus. I'd rather be out at the range at all times of the year practicing with my generic glock 19 under all types of weather conditions and circumstances as opposed to bringing a new gun to the range each week.

Dagga Boy
09-28-2011, 12:11 PM
I have my four platforms as well. I have divided them into Service guns and Enthusiast guns in both .45 ACP and 9mm.

9mm-Glock service (and I carry them more than anything, I also shoot them best across the board)
HK P7 enthusiast (I simply love the gun and always have one around to shove in a back pocket)

.45 ACP-HK45C service (favorite gun for pure size and feel and working with my prior experience)
1911 enthusiast (no explanation-finest close quarters gun fighting tool ever.......I just do a ton more stuff than close quarters gunfighting)

I used to be able to go from a USP platform to a 1911 without an issue. SInce I started carrying a Glock 9mm (mostly due to the severe arthritis in my hands), I shoot them better than anything else, and I have a very hard time going back to a 1911 platform.

It is pretty basic-you will be far better off if you stick with one platform. On the other side of the coin, i love guns-period. Throw in the gun writing stuff, and I have to be adaptable to several platforms. I also have to be adaptable to working different platforms for different job requirements or dictates. With all that said, if I was both competing and working full time in L/E again, I would live with a 9mm Glock (which I did in my last few years of full time L/E).

I am doing a 1911 article right now, and will be taking a 10-8 Duty 1911 class with Hilton Yam. I have already warned Hilton that I will be testing his instructor skills as I have a hard time transitioning back to a 1911 from the Glock.

GJM
09-28-2011, 01:48 PM
I think there are two issues at play here.

First, I think different people have varying ability to move between different platforms. My wife, for example, just wants to shoot a Glock, and feels like she has a hard time moving between different platforms. What is odd, is that she can fly a helicopter, jet and float plane on the same day, but move the position of the slide stop or mag release and she is uncomfortable. I don't have an issue moving between platforms, and commonly will shoot several different platforms during the same session or course.

Second, different people have different requirements for a handgun. I view handguns as tools, and while I shoot the M&P series best, sometimes I need/want a different tool. That might mean a big bore revolver when traveling around grizzly bears, an HK with an LEM trigger in extreme cold and for appendix carry, and a Scandium J frame in your front pocket. No different than hunting with a bolt gun, carrying a short 870 or Guide Gun for defense, and having an AR.

If you don't have the requirement for different tools, and/or aren't comfortable moving between platforms, certainly you will be best served by sticking with one platform. If you have different requirements and/or enjoy shooting different platforms, you will proceed differently.

JonInWA
09-28-2011, 02:58 PM
I think there are two issues at play here.

First, I think different people have varying ability to move between different platforms. My wife, for example, just wants to shoot a Glock, and feels like she has a hard time moving between different platforms. What is odd, is that she can fly a helicopter, jet and float plane on the same day, but move the position of the slide stop or mag release and she is uncomfortable. I don't have an issue moving between platforms, and commonly will shoot several different platforms during the same session or course.

Second, different people have different requirements for a handgun. I view handguns as tools, and while I shoot the M&P series best, sometimes I need/want a different tool. That might mean a big bore revolver when traveling around grizzly bears, an HK with an LEM trigger in extreme cold and for appendix carry, and a Scandium J frame in your front pocket. No different than hunting with a bolt gun, carrying a short 870 or Guide Gun for defense, and having an AR.

If you don't have the requirement for different tools, and/or aren't comfortable moving between platforms, certainly you will be best served by sticking with one platform. If you have different requirements and/or enjoy shooting different platforms, you will proceed differently.


Your points (and those of all contributers to this thread) are well taken. If I had to shoot in different venues, I certainly would orient my training, competition and carry around such gun(s). My reality is that I'm perfectly well served with my Glocks for my current specified needs, which are self-defense, carry, and competition (IDPA and GSSF). My "problem/quandary" is that I appreciate, enjoy and admire other firearms that I own. However, to achieve true mastery with them would require disproportonate amounts of my resources (i.e., time, ammunition, matches) which are somewhat constrained. Such time spent on 1911 and/or non-Glock platforms would likely require disproportonate cost (i.e., .45 ACP, .38 Special +P, or .40 S&W ammunition versus 9mm), and would concurrently likely require disproportonate (and intensive) efforts to achieve parity with the results I currently can achieve with my Glocks-and loss of "Glock time" would likely result in a plateau-ing of my accrued Glock skills (or, worst-case, a degradation of my Glock skills due to diminished Glock use).

As F-Trooper05 answered in his response, yeah, I kinda know what the right answer is...put the other guns pretty much aside, and predominantly (i.e. virtually exclusively) concentrate on my Glocks. That's what I'm going to do for the most part-while I do have some real-world responsibilities to my sponsor, Check-Mate Industries, to dedicate some time on continued 1911 and Beretta 92 magazine evaluation and refinement- but I've pretty much worked the Beretta with its Check-Mate dry-film magazines hard for 6 months, with completely satisfactory results (at least in terms of the magazine's performance!), so I can give it a rest, essentially relegating it to nightstand duty, and the next evolution of 1911 magazine refinements requiring evaluation aren't due until mid/EOM October.

I appreciate the responses to the thread so far. While most of us on this forum are hardly fickle gun divas, I suspect that my quandary is one that most of us are at least occasionally faced with, and some good discussion on the thread here has come out of it. Despite a not insignificant financial (and ego) investment in some of my handguns, the obvious, objectively-derived mature decision is really pretty clear cut; that I really need to just concentrate on my Glocks for the most part, which is what I'll do. As always, continued thoughts and discussion is appreciated.

Best, Jon