FAST coin # 15 and the advancement of pistol shooting

[SLG]

I have been thinking about this a fair bit, and have discussed it with many shooters, both better and worse than me.

I apologize to Asian Jedi for saying that his accomplishment is not the same. I believe my rational was correct, but in retrospect, it just doesn't matter, and I didn't need to open an argument over a trivial thing like hardware. If someone wants to shoot with a gun they actually carry, especially a civilian who can carry whatever he wants, more power to him. It is not my place to opine on the merits of these things. Technology and weapons will not advance if everyone sticks to what we've always used. Period.


Now, in addition to that, this whole thing has really gotten me interested in how various accessories affect a shooters ability to hit fast and accurately. So, I'm breaking out my "Roland Special", and I'm going to shoot various drills to see how different components affect me. I may or may not post them up here, as I'm not looking to open or reopen any arguments. I'm genuinely interested in the technology, and as a lifelong performance shooter, my interest is always in higher performance.

I hope Asian Jedi accepts my aplogies, as well as my intents. I can be too grumpy sometimes, and also fixed in my ways.

[psalms144.1]

After reading that last thread, I thought to myself that a Roland Special might be in my future. Frankly, the only reason it's not likely to happen is that my agency's policy on personal weapons SPECIFICALLY prohibits both compensators and optics, which are deemed "competition only" changes. And, I'm too dang cheap to invest the kind of coin needed to build a Roland if I'm not going to carry it at work.

And, there's NO chance I'll ever be in the running for #16, given the fact that I'm down to shooting once a quarter, if I'm lucky, and then only 1-300 rounds per session. I, for one, would be personally interested in how your experiment works out, though, so I'd be happy to see you post results.

[JHC]

After reading that last thread, I thought to myself that a Roland Special might be in my future. Frankly, the only reason it's not likely to happen is that my agency's policy on personal weapons SPECIFICALLY prohibits both compensators and optics, which are deemed "competition only" changes. And, I'm too dang cheap to invest the kind of coin needed to build a Roland if I'm not going to carry it at work.

And, there's NO chance I'll ever be in the running for #16, given the fact that I'm down to shooting once a quarter, if I'm lucky, and then only 1-300 rounds per session. I, for one, would be personally interested in how your experiment works out, though, so I'd be happy to see you post results.

Consider introducing just one variable at a time. I'd suggest adding the comp first and run it with irons. I've found it to be an advantage for hitting accurately quicker. How big of an advantage so far has depended on the drill and whether some attribute of it cancels out any comp advantages.

But for myself and another four shooters that have shot my pistol or who've screwed this barrel and comp onto their G19s, they've all seen it improve their shooting.

For example, PF member BES (currently forum MIA for reasons I think) was introduced to The Test with his close to stock G19 and he shot it clean under 10 sec a few times.

But then using the KKM comp I watched him shoot a half dozen consecutive Tests in the 6-7 second range which was like a second faster than clean without the comp and of all those shots there was ONE outside the black and the 10 ring had been turned into a rat hole. I was shooting with him a LOT during that period and there was no doubt whatsoever he got more accurate at a faster tempo with it.

[scw2]

Now, in addition to that, this whole thing has really gotten me interested in how various accessories affect a shooters ability to hit fast and accurately. So, I'm breaking out my "Roland Special", and I'm going to shoot various drills to see how different components affect me. I may or may not post them up here, as I'm not looking to open or reopen any arguments. I'm genuinely interested in the technology, and as a lifelong performance shooter, my interest is always in higher performance.

What would be interesting would be if there was data on how much each component added to performance. E.g. How do the times change with comp only, RDS only, neither, and both. Same with the speed on reloads with the magwell and such. In any case, still very solid shooting to earn the coin.

[Gray222]

I have been thinking about this a fair bit, and have discussed it with many shooters, both better and worse than me.

I apologize to Asian Jedi for saying that his accomplishment is not the same. I believe my rational was correct, but in retrospect, it just doesn't matter, and I didn't need to open an argument over a trivial thing like hardware. If someone wants to shoot with a gun they actually carry, especially a civilian who can carry whatever he wants, more power to him. It is not my place to opine on the merits of these things. Technology and weapons will not advance if everyone sticks to what we've always used. Period.


Now, in addition to that, this whole thing has really gotten me interested in how various accessories affect a shooters ability to hit fast and accurately. So, I'm breaking out my "Roland Special", and I'm going to shoot various drills to see how different components affect me. I may or may not post them up here, as I'm not looking to open or reopen any arguments. I'm genuinely interested in the technology, and as a lifelong performance shooter, my interest is always in higher performance.

I hope Asian Jedi accepts my aplogies, as well as my intents. I can be too grumpy sometimes, and also fixed in my ways.

Post the drills and your times I want to run them with my voodoo special

[orionz06]

Consider introducing just one variable at a time. I'd suggest adding the comp first and run it with irons. I've found it to be an advantage for hitting accurately quicker. How big of an advantage so far has depended on the drill and whether some attribute of it cancels out any comp advantages.

But for myself and another four shooters that have shot my pistol or who've screwed this barrel and comp onto their G19s, they've all seen it improve their shooting.

For example, PF member BES (currently forum MIA for reasons I think) was introduced to The Test with his close to stock G19 and he shot it clean under 10 sec a few times.

But then using the KKM comp I watched him shoot a half dozen consecutive Tests in the 6-7 second range which was like a second faster than clean without the comp and of all those shots there was ONE outside the black and the 10 ring had been turned into a rat hole. I was shooting with him a LOT during that period and there was no doubt whatsoever he got more accurate at a faster tempo with it.

I suspect the comp is the bigger difference maker here. It doesn't change what the shooter sees. This being the case I'd also bet that the difference between irons and RDS is back to where it was in 2010 and folks with vision deficiencies are the ones the benefit the most.


In the case of the fauxpen gun you're also adding weight to the front, with a comp, so tackling recoil two different ways.


This makes something like the Agency Noc look rather appealing.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GRV]

Now, in addition to that, this whole thing has really gotten me interested in how various accessories affect a shooters ability to hit fast and accurately. So, I'm breaking out my "Roland Special", and I'm going to shoot various drills to see how different components affect me. I may or may not post them up here, as I'm not looking to open or reopen any arguments. I'm genuinely interested in the technology, and as a lifelong performance shooter, my interest is always in higher performance.

Please post the data!

Do you intend to spend enough time with it to get attuned to it, whatever that means? I've often figured it'd take about a month of weekly practices and a some dryfire before data on new hardware is relevant.

[GJM]

This is a shallow attempt by SLG to gather "Likes." :)

Kidding aside, my view was and still is, that given how closely associated the FAST is with Todd, this was a grief thing, and Asian Jedi was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

As to the unfair advantage, when I asked YVK what he thought, his response was that he wanted to buy a comp'd KKM barrel for his 19.

[Chance]

Now, in addition to that, this whole thing has really gotten me interested in how various accessories affect a shooters ability to hit fast and accurately. So, I'm breaking out my "Roland Special", and I'm going to shoot various drills to see how different components affect me.

If you'll excuse my geeking out: if you're wanting to be TLG-level thorough, you might want to really focus on only a few components. Using five components will give you 120 different combinations to try, whereas four components would just give you 24.

I'd also really be interested in seeing what turns out.

[AsianJedi]

I have been thinking about this a fair bit, and have discussed it with many shooters, both better and worse than me.

I apologize to Asian Jedi for saying that his accomplishment is not the same. I believe my rational was correct, but in retrospect, it just doesn't matter, and I didn't need to open an argument over a trivial thing like hardware. If someone wants to shoot with a gun they actually carry, especially a civilian who can carry whatever he wants, more power to him. It is not my place to opine on the merits of these things. Technology and weapons will not advance if everyone sticks to what we've always used. Period.


Now, in addition to that, this whole thing has really gotten me interested in how various accessories affect a shooters ability to hit fast and accurately. So, I'm breaking out my "Roland Special", and I'm going to shoot various drills to see how different components affect me. I may or may not post them up here, as I'm not looking to open or reopen any arguments. I'm genuinely interested in the technology, and as a lifelong performance shooter, my interest is always in higher performance.

I hope Asian Jedi accepts my aplogies, as well as my intents. I can be too grumpy sometimes, and also fixed in my ways.

Although an apology is not necessary, it is humbly accepted.

To reiterate, I did not mind the message but rather was disappointed that it came from someone so close to Todd. I am sure my responses were overly defensive and fanned the flames a bit. So I, in return, offer my apologies.

With that behind us, if anyone wants to discuss the merits, differences, advantages of the Roland config with the comp only vs comp + RMR, vs an RMR only gun, I am happy to lend any insight I have.

[AsianJedi]

What would be interesting would be if there was data on how much each component added to performance. E.g. How do the times change with comp only, RDS only, neither, and both. Same with the speed on reloads with the magwell and such. In any case, still very solid shooting to earn the coin.

One could also add variables of light (ie indoor vs outdoor, day light vs low light, etc).

[RJ]

I'm about as likely to shoot even a sub-10s FAST as the Swiss are to getting a Navy, so excuse the question, but:

Is there a record of what pistol the various FAST coin shooters actually used?

[orionz06]

With that behind us, if anyone wants to discuss the merits, differences, advantages of the Roland config with the comp only vs comp + RMR, vs an RMR only gun, I am happy to lend any insight I have.

If you have the data I'd love to see how things stack up. Also curious when it was collected and how you might perform now, assuming some significant time and/or round count has passed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[orionz06]

Double tap

[AsianJedi]

Regarding the comp....

Here is a short video doing the FAST at the last KSTG match held at the NRA. This was my best run of the classifier at 4.91. My other two times were in the mid 5s. This is my Carry Optics gun so no comp obviously. It is an ATEI milled G17 with an RM06.

My times with the Roland at the class were 4.57, 5.3, 4.70. I will add that the KSTG match was before I got some instruction from Ernest Langdon on draw presentation and Tim Herron on incorporating speed mode into my practice. Could this account for the .2 to .3x improvement in time? Could it be the comp? Could it be a combo of both. I am going to go with the latter.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2El7NPTfpVk

[BN]

The open shooters in USPSA/IPSC have been shooting comps and optics for 25 years. If there wasn't an advantage, they wouldn't be doing it.

[AsianJedi]

The open shooters in USPSA/IPSC have been shooting comps and optics for 25 years. If there wasn't an advantage, they wouldn't be doing it.

Those are also with hotter 40/45 loads right?

The question is how much a comp helps with a normalish 9mm load.

[spinmove_]

Those are also with hotter 40/45 loads right?

The question is how much a comp helps with a normalish 9mm load.

An interesting question indeed. I wonder how a comp'd G22 would do against a G35. A comp'd G23 vs either of those?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[orionz06]

The open shooters in USPSA/IPSC have been shooting comps and optics for 25 years. If there wasn't an advantage, they wouldn't be doing it.

With specific loads that are narrowly within the limits, metal framed pistols, and frame mounted optics.

So while the G19-Comp-rmr-light is like an open gun it's still in many ways far from it. It's an attempt to capture as many of the positives as possible.

Measurbating each "open gun feature" is of great interest and depending on who has what it's possible to have someone so a full open gun comparison as well to really put it all into perspective.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chance]

Is there a record of what pistol the various FAST coin shooters actually used?

Search "fast coin site:pistol-training.com". Todd usually recorded what pistol and what holster they were using. If there's a compiled list somewhere, that's news to me.

ETA: Can't figure out how to escape that emoji. That's "site : pistol-training.com", with no spaces in between the characters.

[Wondering Beard]

I don't remember all the mods that go into making a Roland Special, but, as was mentioned before, good data would come through minimizing the variables.

Thus shouldn't the testing order be something like:
1) light alone
2) comp alone
3) optic alone
4) comp and light
5) optic and light
6) optic and comp
7) optic, comp and light

Were there any trigger mods made for the Roland Special?

[Surf]

My first thought is that I am willing to use anything that gives me an advantage. It must be reliable and practical, in other words functionality does not suffer and is something I can, or am willing to carry. Individually, I can clearly see advantages that a red dot may offer and separately the benefits of a compensated weapon. Combining the two on a pistol seems like a great idea therefore my interest in something like a "Roland". My big hangup at this point and always has been since its inception is my comfort and / or skill level with a red dot on a pistol.

I am wanting to do a variant of the Roland but starting with a G17. I had planned on starting with a comp and irons first to compile some data, then adding the red dot. Time is more of an issue at this point than anything else.

My thoughts are that I greatly prefer the G17 grip over the G19. I interface better on the 17 even when I do "frame mods" to both weapons. Not a fan of the longer more nose heavy G34 so I have some doubts about the comp on a 17, but weighing frame vs length I think I will try the 17 first. Ideally, I would like a 17 frame and a comped 19 upper.

I have shot more traditional competition red dots where the dot is frame mounted and I can see a difference in performance vs a reciprocating slide mounted dot. Initial learning curve on first dot sight picture acquisition is similar on slide and frame mount dots, but the tracking aspect has been noticeably different on the 2 mounting options. So at this point I look at practicality of slide vs. frame mount for perhaps carry purposes and admittedly I am the weak link in the system.

As for the "FAST", I have no stake in the drills creation or adoption as a standard or coin award drill. I had commented in another thread about how to score a hit / miss as quite frankly I didn't know what was the norm for whatever regulating body etc.. I am definitely OK with creating a standard, no matter what it is, provided it is followed and scored equitably across the board and I don't doubt that anyone closely associated with the formation or administering the FAST test for score or coin, does indeed score fairly across the board.

I look forward to trying out new things. No matter the results it is always a learning experience and positives can be gleaned even from things that don't work out as planned. I also clearly understand that what works for me, may not work for someone else, or vice versa. What I do know is that, I won't know anything if I am unwilling to try.

[Default.mp3]

Search "fast coin site:pistol-training.com". Todd usually recorded what pistol and what holster they were using. If there's a compiled list somewhere, that's news to me.

ETA: Can't figure out how to escape that emoji. That's "site : pistol-training.com", with no spaces in between the characters.There's a "Disable smiles in text" check box in the additional options section, which is under the "Submit Reply" button. You can see there is no smiley in my quote, due to my checking of that box.

[GJM]

Those are also with hotter 40/45 loads right?

The question is how much a comp helps with a normalish 9mm load.

9 major, .38 Super, .38 SC

[GRV]

If you'll excuse my geeking out: if you're wanting to be TLG-level thorough, you might want to really focus on only a few components. Using five components will give you 120 different combinations to try, whereas four components would just give you 24.

I'd also really be interested in seeing what turns out.

Don't you have a CS PhD? ;):p It's 32 and 16 respectively. Though I expect those are nearly 31 and 15 combinations more than he wants to try.

Someone is a little too excited! by combinatorics ;)

[busdriver]

9 major, .38 Super, .38 SC
What GJM said,

All loaded very "not normal" by open shooters. For example; my 124g load looks like this (124g HST on the right for reference):

11999

That load is moving at 1400fps.

As far as more normal 9mm, I think I've read on here that guys have had issues with lower powered ammo and the "Roland Special. Which tells you the comp is working.

[RJ]

Search "fast coin site:pistol-training.com". Todd usually recorded what pistol and what holster they were using. If there's a compiled list somewhere, that's news to me.


Thanks for the search tip; I did not find a compiled list? Anyway, since I had some time this afternoon, I did a survey to see what I could find, which are below.

Mods/Admins: If there is a better compilation of this info somewhere else, please fee free to move, edit, delete this post. Obviously there are some holes; I entered what I could find directly. For the entries I did not find published information on the rig, I just left the owner of the F.A.S.T. coin listed on the FAST page on www.pistol-forum.com.

For the record, I'm not trying to stir any pots here, I was just curious about what folks used to shoot the F.A.S.T test.

#0 HK P30 V4 / TG Special / CCC Shaggy AIWB
#1 SLG
#2 Dave S.
#3 Todd K.
#4 Ernest L.
#5 S&W M&P9 / DIY trigger job, stipped backstrap, Warren Tactical rear SSS FO front / Safariland "Custom Fit" Paddle
#6 Glock 17 / 3.5# connector Warren Tactical night sights / Uncle Mike's Kydex Belt Holster
#7 Glock 17 EXO / Heinie Straight 8s and prototype gadget / CCC Shaggy
#8 Sig P226 / Safariland SLS Rig
#9 Glock 34 / Ameriglo DeFoor sights / Keepers Concealment Holster
#10 P30 LEM / Heinie QWIK Sights / JM CK AIWB Holster
#11 Robert V.
#12 Beretta 92A1 / Combat rear sight Green FO front + / Safariland retention holster
#13 Glock 22 / Safariland 295 duty holster
#14 Trey E.
#15 Glock 19 / RMR

[JHC]

As far as more normal 9mm, I think I've read on here that guys have had issues with lower powered ammo and the "Roland Special. Which tells you the comp is working.

Not a lick of trouble with my three G19s and a variety of factory 9mm loads for at least 1000 rounds and nil cleaning. Iv'e seen fellows with Zev kits and lighter springs choke after a couple hundred rounds though.

[scw2]

#15 Scott J.
#16 Glock 19 / RMR

I believe you've double counted #15 by accident!

[busdriver]

Not a lick of trouble with my three G19s and a variety of factory 9mm loads for at least 1000 rounds and nil cleaning. Iv'e seen fellows with Zev kits and lighter springs choke after a couple hundred rounds though.

I have a lone wolf comp that I screwed around with first, G19 would jam on normal 9mm but ran +P. The G26 wouldn't cycle at all with the normal stuff.

I guess I'll find out for myself this weekend, KKM parts enroute. Should be fun comparing it to an actual race gun.

[RJ]

I believe you've double counted #15 by accident!

Thanks, I didn't connect the dots. Fixed :)

[AsianJedi]

#14 Trey E.


I believe Ernest said Trey ran it with a 92FS.

[Mr_White]

Very cool discussion and I'm glad to see it get started.

Better gear is better and it's worth finding the middle path between getting distracted looking for it, and ignoring capability that may be there for the taking.

It's extra neat to see some of the details about the FAST Coin winners getting filled in. I'm certainly interested to see what gear was used in winning the Coins so far, because I only know about a few of them. Another detail that might be interesting is the circumstance in which each Coin was won. I know at least some were earned in class with TLG, and now EL. I don't know what kinds of circumstances were involved with the others. And I wonder how many tries everyone took. I know I needed all of mine. :)

[CCT125US]

Search "fast coin site:pistol-training.com". Todd usually recorded what pistol and what holster they were using. If there's a compiled list somewhere, that's news to me.

ETA: Can't figure out how to escape that emoji. That's "site : pistol-training.com", with no spaces in between the characters.

Think I managed to miss a coin by .55 or so with a v3 P30 and a 5 Shot SME. This was back in 2012, while in the Wilmington class.

[BN]

http://pistol-training.com/fastest/fast-wall-of-fame

http://pistol-training.com/fastest

Todd ran the FAST Test at Fort Harmar at a Sunday Study Group one time. Hack and Rob Haught got on the wall that day. I was shooting a revolver that day. :(

[Chance]

There's a "Disable smiles in text" check box in the additional options section, which is under the "Submit Reply" button. You can see there is no smiley in my quote, due to my checking of that box.

Thanks, I had no idea that was there. I spent about 20 minutes trying to figure out how to escape it.


Don't you have a CS PhD? ;):p It's 32 and 16 respectively. Though I expect those are nearly 31 and 15 combinations more than he wants to try.

Someone is a little too excited! by combinatorics ;)

I was thinking they were permutations for some reason. It'll be interesting to see the student surveys of this discrete structures class I'm teaching....


Thanks for the search tip; I did not find a compiled list?

There is a compiled list, that being the FAST Wall (http://pistol-training.com/fastest), they just don't list the gear. It should also be noted that the FAST itself (http://pistol-training.com/drills/the-fast) specifies: "Start position: weapon concealed or in duty condition with all holster retention devices active..." so it was either concealment or a duty holster.

[Luke]

As far as more normal 9mm, I think I've read on here that guys have had issues with lower powered ammo and the "Roland Special. Which tells you the comp is working.

I'm not convinced that it's not because the extra weight on the end of the barrel effecting unlocking. Fast 9mm powder at minor levels only had so much gas. I'd wager the weight of the comp helps more than the comp itself on this pistol. I also don't believe that if you can't shoot a sub 5 a Roland will suddenly make you a sub 5.

[BCL]

Thanks for the search tip; I did not find a compiled list? Anyway, since I had some time this afternoon, I did a survey to see what I could find, which are below.

Mods/Admins: If there is a better compilation of this info somewhere else, please fee free to move, edit, delete this post. Obviously there are some holes; I entered what I could find directly. For the entries I did not find published information on the rig, I just left the owner of the F.A.S.T. coin listed on the FAST page on www.pistol-forum.com.

For the record, I'm not trying to stir any pots here, I was just curious about what folks used to shoot the F.A.S.T test.

#0 HK P30 V4 / TG Special / CCC Shaggy AIWB
#1 SLG
#2 Dave S.
#3 Todd K.
#4 Ernest L.
#5 S&W M&P9 / DIY trigger job, stipped backstrap, Warren Tactical rear SSS FO front / Safariland "Custom Fit" Paddle
#6 Glock 17 / 3.5# connector Warren Tactical night sights / Uncle Mike's Kydex Belt Holster
#7 Glock 17 EXO / Heinie Straight 8s and prototype gadget / CCC Shaggy
#8 Sig P226 / Safariland SLS Rig
#9 Glock 34 / Ameriglo DeFoor sights / Keepers Concealment Holster
#10 P30 LEM / Heinie QWIK Sights / JM CK AIWB Holster
#11 Robert V.
#12 Beretta 92A1 / Combat rear sight Green FO front + / Safariland retention holster
#13 Glock 22 / Safariland 295 duty holster
#14 Trey E.
#15 Glock 19 / RMR

Dave S. used a G34. Maybe others can confirm, but I think Todd was awarded Coin #0/created prior to his shooting the P30. Given that SLG is Coin #1 and it was awarded in Feb '07, Todd probably Coined #0 prior to the M&P9 test in 2008.

[JSGlock34]

Dave S. used a G34.

Here's Dave Sevigny's run (February 10, 2009).

Glock 34
Atlanta Arms & Ammo
Kytac Beltlocker Holster
Kytac MP-2 magazine pouch


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXt6zGwwk_o&feature=youtu.be

[busdriver]

Extra weight doesn't really have anything to do with unlocking, the ramp on the barrel and the locking block will either force the barrel to unlock or the whole thing will just come to a crashing halt. Nerdery to follow aside, an aluminum comp that size doesn't weigh much anyways. The comp obviously isn't doing as much as it would running open ammo, but I'm positive it is doing something.

What additional mass on the barrel does do is slow down the slide. The barrel and slide together make up the reciprocating mass portion of the pistol; mv (bullet)=MV (slide/barrel). Since the slide and barrel hit the frame at different points, you can change the perceived recoil by altering the balance between the two; or just slow everything down with a ton more mass. That's why open guns with steel comps, bull barrels and no slide cuts need really light recoil springs and tend to be super finicky.

It also bares mentioning, shorter barrels have higher gas pressure at the muzzle. Probably part of why my G26 wouldn't cycle at all with the LW comp and the 19 would, but jam. That plus the higher spring rate in the subcompact gun.

I've never shot the FAST, but it appears that the draw and reload are more important than shooting super fast. Shaving .5s from those combined is a lot of extra shooting time.

[YVK]

As to the unfair advantage, when I asked YVK what he thought, his response was that he wanted to buy a comp'd KKM barrel for his 19.

I am over it. I figured I could never carry a 34-length thing AIWB. You know, I am amply filled down there, so there's that. A G26 with a comped bbl, maybe.



I've never shot KKM comped bbl but I've seen one being shot. Visually from the outside it didn't look like it was keeping the muzzle down that much.

[SLG]

A couple minor points, and I really hope this can be viewed as objective shooting info, and not a continued attack on anyone or anything.

Teaser, I may be eating more crow than i would prefer if my testing continues this way.

I shot my Roland today. Compared to the last time I shot it, and even compared to last week with just a dot gun, there was a much smaller difference in ability for me. It was a consistent, definite difference, but much smaller than it used to be. Around .02 faster per split on the plate. Around .1 faster on 2nd shot of the 3X5. That's pretty small. I didn't break out the draw or reload today, so just splits.

One thing to note though, like all previous dot shooting I have done, is that I hit the target far more often with the dot than with irons. Almost twice as many dropped shots with irons. That is very significant, but can't be measured on the timer.

The other thing is that my iron shooting has really jumped in the last week or so, so that may account for the smaller difference. Also the ammo I was using is not particularly hot (standard 124 hydra shok) so that may affect it a bit. The weight of the comp is miniscule, so I doubt that ha much to do with it, but IDK.

To specifically address Luke's hypothesis, it is incorrect to say that a Roland will not make a greater than 5 second FAST shooter into a less than 5 sec FAST shooter. It all depends how much slower than 5 sec you are, and how much faster the special makes you. Kind of obvious, right?

My contention with all forms of dot guns, as stated previously, is that they are an advantage. How much of an advantage obviously differs from shooter to shooter. What I have always seen, even with minor differences like I saw today, is that the ability of the shooter to CONSISTENTLY make the hits/times/reloads, whatever, is improved with things like dots, magwells and comps.

I still have to wonder about anyone who thinks these things are not advantages. I'm open to discussing how much or how little an advantage they may be in any given situation or for any given shooter, but advantages they are. Period.

I really do want to stress that none of this is in anyway at all aimed at AJ and his coin win. As others have pointed out, some previous coin winners used fairly challenging equipment, while others used pretty sporty stuff. I don't care, I don't think Todd would care, Ernest doesn't care, so I'm over it. I look forward to shooting with AJ in the not too distant future.

As for number of tries at the coin that someone asked about. Only a few people won it on their first attempt. Most did not.

Todd won his with a SIG, well prior to the P30. He didn't really claim it for quite a while, but I don't remember the details now.

I shot my FAST with a P229R, from a Milt Sparks EX, from under a polo. That was my standard carry gear then. Todd did the same.

[Lon]

I'd like to try a "Rolanded" CZ P-07. Got the RMR on there already just need to find a comp to go with the factory threaded barrel that's available.

[JSGlock34]

I'm going to try to make 2017 the 'year of the Roland Special' for me. I've experimented with RMR equipped Glocks before; my Roland will be my third iteration with this concept. I've made a few observations though...

First, I've found I am significantly slower to my first shot with RMR guns. Picking up the dot from the draw remains a challenge for me. Considering how important the draw time is in FAST tests, this is also where I've seen the largest performance delta compared to my iron sight times. This is my single biggest area for improvement.

Second, it is much easier to 'track the dot' on the compensator equipped guns. I found it easy to lose the dot under recoil in multi-shot strings with my previous RMR equipped G17 pistols. The addition of the compensator means the Roland tracks very flat, and the dot is comparatively easy to pick up from shot to shot. The compensator and MRDS complement each other extremely well; the whole is more than the sum of the parts.

Third, I've spent some time lately working on my overall 25 yard shooting. A friend's advice about sight picture has significantly improved my shooting at this distance with irons. But the MRDS really shines at longer ranges, and I shoot my best at distance with the dot. No question.

Fourth, I've commented in the Roland thread about ammo sensitivity. I've found that my Roland will choke on underpowered ammo, such as Blazer/Blazer Brass. I've switched to Geco 124 grain for my Roland and the problems have disappeared. If I ever decide I am confident enough in this contraption to carry it, I'll feed it Gold Dot +P to ensure function. Of course, YMMV.

[GardoneVT]

FAST stands for Fundamentals ,Accuracy, and Speed Test.

What's "fundamental" about a red dot scope ,aftermarket trigger system and compensator?

[SLG]

FAST stands for Fundamentals ,Accuracy, and Speed Test.

What's "fundamental" about a red dot scope ,aftermarket trigger system and compensator?

Change is fundamental.

[AsianJedi]

I shot my Roland today. Compared to the last time I shot it, and even compared to last week with just a dot gun, there was a much smaller difference in ability for me. It was a consistent, definite difference, but much smaller than it used to be. Around .02 faster per split on the plate. Around .1 faster on 2nd shot of the 3X5. That's pretty small. I didn't break out the draw or reload today, so just splits.

One thing to note though, like all previous dot shooting I have done, is that I hit the target far more often with the dot than with irons. Almost twice as many dropped shots with irons. That is very significant, but can't be measured on the timer.

I still have to wonder about anyone who thinks these things are not advantages. I'm open to discussing how much or how little an advantage they may be in any given situation or for any given shooter, but advantages they are. Period.


My experience regarding splits and 3x5 hits resembles yours SLG.

And to clarify I do think the dot is an advantage for anyone willing to commit to it. For me the advantage is that I can see, otherwise my sight package is a shit show. Does the dot however give me an advantage over the perfectly visioned iron sight shooter? I am going to guess based on competition and classes that the answer is yes. However the data and science needed to prove that are beyond my headlights.

Oh and the other clear advantage is not having to clean my X300U after every range session. :)

[peterb]

As far as I can tell, you still have to draw, align the sight with the target, press the trigger without disturbing the gun, and reload. The equipment may make those tasks easier, but does not eliminate the need for those fundamental skills.

[GardoneVT]

Change is fundamental.

Where does this philosophically leave the individual carrying a stock pistol- whether by choice or mandated necessity?

Disclaimer: I'm not even touching the matter of Coin #15. Langdon is exponentially more qualified then I will ever be to decide who has earned a coin. He was there and I wasn't. My question is regarding the test itself: if it's designed to evaluate overall performance regardless of equipment then that should be made clear. In which case even the dude with the $5,000 Open gun should be recognized if he earned it under the rules and carries the pistol.

If the FAST was intended to measure shooter competency with production, more or less stock handguns accessible to Joe Public that's a different story. Hence my question.

[MSparks909]

While we're on the subject, what MOA red dots are people using? 3.25 or 6? What dot size most closely resembles a .115-.125 front sight post when the gun is extended?

[busdriver]

based on competition and classes that the answer is yes.
Something to keep in mind is the number of shots/targets you're dealing with. I'm going to bastardize SLG's data, but using .1s faster per transition (his 1st 3x5 shot and the same for reload) and .02 faster per split comes out to .28 faster on the FAST.

Assuming you think USPSA has their shit in a sock for classifiers, the following are for a clean run (all Alphas) to get a 100% score:
Fluffy's Revenge 2; a close range hoser stage with no reload: Open is 3% faster than Limited
3V; medium range stage with tight targets, shooting around a barricade with a reload: Open is 5% faster than Limited
4 Bill Drill; long range stage with reloads and strong and weak hand shooting: Open is 8% faster than Limited

A 4.72s FAST is 94.4% of a 5s run.

[Lon]

While we're on the subject, what MOA red dots are people using? 3.25 or 6? What dot size most closely resembles a .115-.125 front sight post when the gun is extended?

I prefer the 3.25.

[YVK]

Where does this philosophically leave the individual carrying a stock pistol- whether by choice or mandated necessity?



I think it leaves him at the same place where first fourteen coin holders reside?




In which case even the dude with the $5,000 Open gun should be recognized if he earned it under the rules and carries the pistol.



Doubt anyone will buy carrying an Open gun concealed idea but, if memory serves me well, there was a three second penalty rule for running FAST from an open, unconcealed rig. Not my business to decide but if an Open dude could run clean it under two seconds raw, I'd say give him all the coins he wants.

In regards to Roland-type RMR'd guns, you should try to get your hands on one and see where it takes you comparing to your regular gun.

[BCL]

Doubt anyone will buy carrying an Open gun concealed idea but, if memory serves me well, there was a three second penalty rule for running FAST from an open, unconcealed rig. Not my business to decide but if an Open dude could run clean it under two seconds raw, I'd say give him all the coins he wants.

Given that an Open shooter would have to rack the slide after the reload, it would probably be more difficult, not less, for an Open shooter to shoot a raw time of 2 seconds. That said, Stegger ran it in ~2.77 without concealment and an in-battery reload using an Elite II, so if there was an Open shooter who hadn't disabled their slide stop, then it might be possible.

[busdriver]

it might be possible.
Sure, .7 draw with a .2 split, .8 reload and 3 .1 splits.

[Gio]

For an additional data point, I've shot both a Roland and a stock G17 MOS gun in the last couple weeks, and shot the latter on the FAST drill. I don't own either gun and have less than 500 rounds through an optic equipped pistol in my lifetime. My big take away in comparing the two was the MOS gun would cause the "blinking" effect where I'd lose the dot under recoil. However, most of the time it was quick and easy to re-acquire and came back consistently to the same spot. The comp on the Roland worked well to keep the dot in view throughout a string of fire. I don't know what kind of practical difference this would make on a drill like a FAST, but I think the advantage would be much more noticeable at 25+yd targets.

Last week, I was able to shoot three FAST drills with a mostly stock G19 and then followed it with three runs with the MOS gun using the same holster, mag pouches, concealment, etc.

G19 - 4.07, 4.01, 3.99 (all clean)
G17MOS - 4.55, 4.34, 4.47 (also clean)

The only real significant time difference was the draw to the head shot with the G19 averaged about 1.3 seconds vs. 1.6-1.7 with the MOS, which is not surprising bc this range trip was the first time I had ever really drawn an optic equipped pistol on a timer. Anyone who spends significant time dedicated to a dot gun should be able to get the draw at least as fast as irons, if not faster.

As SLG mentioned, the real difference that the timer doesn't measure is the hits were much easier to guarantee with the MOS than with the G19, especially the 3x5 card hits. With irons you really have to focus on getting the alignment correct. If you don't get the front sight settled all the way after a shot or you see the orange dot of an HD front sight without picking up the top edge of the sight, you are likely to throw one of the head shots. The optic makes it very easy to put the dot in the middle of the white card then grip it and rip it.

[Lomshek]

Where does this philosophically leave the individual carrying a stock pistol- whether by choice or mandated necessity?

Disclaimer: I'm not even touching the matter of Coin #15. Langdon is exponentially more qualified then I will ever be to decide who has earned a coin. He was there and I wasn't. My question is regarding the test itself: if it's designed to evaluate overall performance regardless of equipment then that should be made clear. In which case even the dude with the $5,000 Open gun should be recognized if he earned it under the rules and carries the pistol.

If the FAST was intended to measure shooter competency with production, more or less stock handguns accessible to Joe Public that's a different story. Hence my question.

FAST can measure shooter competency even as the equipment and skill levels change.

Does that mean comparing the time of a shooter using a DAO Beretta 92 or NYPD Glock with factory sights to a shooter using a pimped out Roland Special is not "fair" to the guy with a 92?

Sure just like comparing the times of COL Cooper's early Bear Valley Gunslingers shooter's times on El Presidente to a modern shooter isn't "fair" to the old timers but it is still a relevant test.

Runners don't say the mile is no longer a valid test of running ability because times are faster now than they were 100 years ago.

We bicycle racers don't say the Hour Record (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hour_record) is no longer valid just because equipment and training advances have nearly tripled the speed since the first attempt.

None of the "new" record holders get an asterisk next to their name as if they cheated. It's simply the evolution of the activity as software and hardware advancements are made as it should be.

[GJM]

Covered at length in the MOS thread, my experience is the 19 MOS shoots noticeably flatter than a MOS 17 or 34.

Here is a possible explanation for why iron sights can be faster in certain situations. With the dot, the sight alignment is essentially the same regardless of distance. With iron sights, you have a range of possibilities from just the slide, target focus, just a fiber front, just a full front, the front and rear, and the front and rear with equal light bars. Given the range of possibilities, it shouldn't be surprising that someone could be faster with irons, depending upon how much sight alignment they used, and that accuracy might suffer as a result.

[YVK]

Sure, .7 draw with a .2 split, .8 reload and 3 .1 splits.

That's 2.0 seconds. With 3 seconds added penalty, fail.

[YVK]

Last week, I was able to shoot three FAST drills with a mostly stock G19 and then followed it with three runs with the MOS gun using the same holster, mag pouches, concealment, etc.

G19 - 4.07, 4.01, 3.99 (all clean)
G17MOS - 4.55, 4.34, 4.47 (also clean)




Nicely done.

[BWT]

I was tracking this thread earlier and may be repeating something.

Two things to also keep in mind:

1.) Although the comp may or may not be of a huge benefit (considerations being given to load, caliber, and design). The lights that are being put on the front of the weapon do indeed place more weight in the muzzle end of the gun. In the Roland interview by P&S one of the things he said he would definitely take was the lack of carbon, etc. on the light.

2.) Also, I saw GJM contribute here earlier and the other discussion is fleshing out; I might peruse this thread before committing to an EDC Roland. https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?21688-RMR-in-the-rain

I have a lot of respect for the Roland Special and other weapons. But, it has it's own subset of issues like every platform; just have to have both eyes open and test stuff before staking your life on it.

God Bless,

Brandon

ETA: I'm also noticing a pattern to go with flat-faced, short reset, and lighter trigger assemblies among the various Roland guns.

I do think that there's a long learning curve for the dot and it does seem a bit slower close up, but it makes up for it with precision at range it seems.

[Paul Sharp]

FAST stands for Fundamentals ,Accuracy, and Speed Test.

What's "fundamental" about a red dot scope ,aftermarket trigger system and compensator?

My understanding of the Fundamentals in F.A.S.T. is it's the fundamentals of shooting which have little to do with equipment. I'm going to execute the fundamentals relatively the same way regardless of my pistol, rifle or shotties configuration.

[orionz06]

My understanding of the Fundamentals in F.A.S.T. is it's the fundamentals of shooting which have little to do with equipment. I'm going to execute the fundamentals relatively the same way regardless of my pistol, rifle or shotties configuration.

Yup, fundamentals don't change but equipment, learning/teaching, and expectations/standards do.

[GRV]

I hope I'm not adding to unwanted drift. Also, personally, I don't care about the FAST, so I hope none of this comes off as trying to define any sort of party lines.



Where does this philosophically leave the individual carrying a stock pistol- whether by choice or mandated necessity?

Disclaimer: I'm not even touching the matter of Coin #15. Langdon is exponentially more qualified then I will ever be to decide who has earned a coin. He was there and I wasn't. My question is regarding the test itself: if it's designed to evaluate overall performance regardless of equipment then that should be made clear. In which case even the dude with the $5,000 Open gun should be recognized if he earned it under the rules and carries the pistol.

If the FAST was intended to measure shooter competency with production, more or less stock handguns accessible to Joe Public that's a different story. Hence my question.

I think Gardone's question is a sincere and worthwhile one. I don't know what the intentions were behind the FAST's inception, nor where they live on the spectrum Gardone is suggesting, but I'd be interested in hearing about it from anyone who was there. From my perspective as a relatively recent PF member, I can say that upon joining I definitely perceived a culture suggesting that the purpose of the FAST was as a measure of and delineation of excellence in defensively-oriented pure shooting "with production, more or less stock handguns accessible to Joe Public". Retrospectively, I don't think the actual terms of the test do a good job of fostering that hypothetical suggested purpose.

IMO, I think the best perspective is just that the FAST is what it is, nothing more, nothing less, that what it is will evolve and change over time, and that it's not worth getting philosophically wrapped around the axle trying to perfectly abstractly characterize it. Having clearly defined driving purposes for these sorts of institutions is certainly nice, but is definitely not necessary, and there are pros and cons either way.

Having said that, it does seem to me that there is a real lack of high-profile platforms for defining and fostering competitive skill metrics for the defensive-oriented pure shooting of near-stock real-world carry/duty gear. Also, to the extent that such platforms exist or ever existed, they seem to be short-lived, and I mentioned to Mr_White that I see an analogy here with the FAST and Bill Willson's split from IPSC to create IDPA. However, for me, I don't think the Roland Special is as responsible for clearly distinguishing the FAST as not that type of platform as was the acceptance of IDPA SSP race gear for the standard. The fact that, as many people have brought up, the FAST tests draw and reload times much more than splits goes a long way towards strengthening that opinion.


FAST can measure shooter competency even as the equipment and skill levels change.

Does that mean comparing the time of a shooter using a DAO Beretta 92 or NYPD Glock with factory sights to a shooter using a pimped out Roland Special is not "fair" to the guy with a 92?

Sure just like comparing the times of COL Cooper's early Bear Valley Gunslingers shooter's times on El Presidente to a modern shooter isn't "fair" to the old timers but it is still a relevant test.

Runners don't say the mile is no longer a valid test of running ability because times are faster now than they were 100 years ago.

We bicycle racers don't say the Hour Record (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hour_record) is no longer valid just because equipment and training advances have nearly tripled the speed since the first attempt.

None of the "new" record holders get an asterisk next to their name as if they cheated. It's simply the evolution of the activity as software and hardware advancements are made as it should be.

Indeed. But I also would guess that what used to qualify as a GM score on El Prez isn't a GM score anymore. As acceptable equipment evolves either the standards evolve with it, or the standards become less prestigious. Achieving the previously prestigious standards by means of personal self-restriction is always an option and a possibly worthwhile pursuit in it's own, but such achievement is unlikely to be as recognized after such an evolution. And so, the underlying purpose such a standard serves will inevitably change too, unless it is tightly restricted to not allow for any evolution.

Realistically, I think the FAST is pretty robust, and we are still very far away from 2 out of 3, 5.00s, clean, concealed being a less than spectacular achievement with any equipment.


FWIW, I think the whole thing would have been less controversial if the Roland Special was unanimously considered fit for duty use. While no doubt there are people carrying them and even others employing them in a duty role, their fitness for duty is undeniably still a matter of controversy, particularly amongst the opinions here. If/when this sort of technology is by and large accepted as ready for primetime, I think most people will be switching to it and have much less issue---even be glad---seeing it being welcomed into various competitive environments. I'd also expect, however, that the bars for various levels of excellence would move too.

In the meantime, we're not quite there yet, and that's probably part of the reason people have such strong personal opinions about this sort of equipment and it's newfound prevalence. Just because someone can and does carry it doesn't mean it's a good idea to. We had a user on PF once talk about their "carry vetting" of an STI 2011. I don't doubt that someone could conceal an Open-class gun AIWB. So, while some people have cast current events in terms of enthusiasm that people have found a way to carry more capable hardware, I think others have been frustrated because it is not their inability to carry that hardware that has held them back from doing so and using it in these various venues, but rather a perceived lack a soundness in those options.

However, SLG really hit the nail on the head in the OP, that technology can never advance without allowing it to bumble and stumble onwards and encouraging it to do just that. You don't go from iron-sighted duty guns to thoroughly accepted and vetted comped barrels and frame-mounted optics on duty guns overnight in a single discrete jump. It is inevitable, even necessary, that there will be a spectrum of sketchy, experimental middle ground between here and there. The rise of the Roland Special and winning of coin #15 are some of the most significant expressions of those necessary growing pains that we've seen yet. Given that we should all be looking forward to the end goal they foreshadow, we should all also be equally excited to witness these growing pains, even though we undoubtedly differ in opinion on where the various lines in the sands and merits stand during such transitional times.

[SoCalDep]

I believe Ernest said Trey ran it with a 92FS.

Not quite stock though...

It was an M9A1 with a "D" spring, Elite II hammer, Brig-Tac style mag release, Wilson grips, rear sight, and guide rod. It had a Streamlight TLR-2 attached run out of a Safariland 6280-LASD with covered snap mag pouches (bullets facing out)... My personally-owned and department-approved duty gun and rig. I love that gun.

[SLG]

I appreciate that people here are interested in the FAST history and concept, but please stop discussing its validity, in anyway whatsoever, especially in regard to using non stock equipment like the Roland.

My only interest in discussing this further, is to learn exactly what equipment might be more or less useful for improving shooting performance.

As an example, my well know dislike of magwells. I find them capable of greater speed on the reload, but usually they just remove the number and severity of fumbled reloads. If they are small enough, they can not only be concealed, but on small guns like the G19, they can help with draws and grip. The problem I have with them is that I am unaware of a magwell that will let you rip a flush mag out with your fingers. Since that is a critical part of malfunction clearance, and I've seen every kind of gun malfunction, a small increase in performance is not worth a potential decrease in reliability (the ability to fix the issue). Nonetheless, as magwells evolve, it is worth keeping an eye on them.

[TCinVA]

SLG and I talked about this a bit as both of us spent more than a little time talking with Todd about the slide-mounted RDS concept. I've always maintained that there was likely a decisive performance advantage on moving targets in low light, probably close to the performance advantage you would see with a laser. When I think back on occasions where I've tried to hit a moving target in more realistic scenarios (hunting, FOF) I think it would have been much easier to process a single red dot as opposed to the traditional sight picture. In those situations I was essentially looking "through" the sights at the target and seeing enough of a sight picture to hopefully hit.

At least with my eyes, getting a hard front sight focus would have meant losing track of the person or critter I was trying to hit.

I'm hoping to do some work with a slide-mounted RDS in the relatively near future to see what I can get out of it. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that I perform significantly better as I have a tendency to look "through" my sights at speed anyway.

I'm looking forward to what SLG concludes in his experiments.



To specifically address Luke's hypothesis, it is incorrect to say that a Roland will not make a greater than 5 second FAST shooter into a less than 5 sec FAST shooter. It all depends how much slower than 5 sec you are, and how much faster the special makes you. Kind of obvious, right?


I would be the perfect example of this. The last FAST run I did was in class with Todd, SLG, and Ernie Langdon. It was 5.21 seconds with my Wilson Brig Tac 92.

I'm reasonably certain I could find another .22 seconds in a dot, a compensator, and a big mag well.

[AsianJedi]

For purposes of data, the magwell most use on the Roland is a RCS Freya. Not big by any stretch but not as small as an Agency.

[GJM]

For purposes of data, the magwell most use on the Roland is a RCS Freya. Not big by any stretch but not as small as an Agency.

How does it compare in size to the magwell on Todd's Jason and SA 1911 pistols?

[AsianJedi]

How does it compare in size to the magwell on Todd's Jason and SA 1911 pistols?

Not sure. Don't remembering seeing a magwell on Todd's SA 1911 but I did not follow it that closely. Pic?

[AsianJedi]

Not sure. Don't remembering seeing a magwell on Todd's SA 1911 but I did not follow it that closely. Pic?

Here is a pic of the Freya with a Magpul GL9 mag.

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c29/asianjedi/Freya_zpsdiil24vc.jpg

[farscott]

Covered at length in the MOS thread, my experience is the 19 MOS shoots noticeably flatter than a MOS 17 or 34.

I have been trying to wrap my head around that sentence as I stayed awake due to the weather. Not that I doubt the truth of it; I struggled to make it fit with what I know about guns and physics. The shorter slide should mean, for the same round, the slide is faster than the longer slide during the recoil cycle. It also means (and this one for me was the "duh" moment) that the longer slide rises more because of the longer lever arm. Torque is force*distance, and the force on the breech should be same for the same round in each gun. So the longer gun has to have more muzzle rise as the lever arm is longer. The combo of the faster and shorter slide does means the shorter gun should be faster at getting back on target.

This makes me want to try a G26 with an MRDS. How short is too short? When does the round lose enough velocity to stop cutting the slide length down? And should the barrel be longer than the slide? In other words, is a Glock 26 with a G19 barrel better than a G19 or G26?

This is what happens when I do not get enough sleep.

[JHC]

I have been trying to wrap my head around that sentence as I stayed awake due to the weather. Not that I doubt the truth of it; I struggled to make it fit with what I know about guns and physics. The shorter slide should mean, for the same round, the slide is faster than the longer slide during the recoil cycle. It also means (and this one for me was the "duh" moment) that the longer slide rises more because of the longer lever arm. Torque is force*distance, and the force on the breech should be same for the same round in each gun. So the longer gun has to have more muzzle rise as the lever arm is longer. The combo of the faster and shorter slide does means the shorter gun should be faster at getting back on target.

This makes me want to try a G26 with an MRDS. How short is too short? When does the round lose enough velocity to stop cutting the slide length down? And should the barrel be longer than the slide? In other words, is a Glock 26 with a G19 barrel better than a G19 or G26?

This is what happens when I do not get enough sleep.

Through my eyes and with my grip, I think the 26 runs flatter.

[GRV]

I shot my Roland today. [...]

SLG, what parts does your version of the Roland use? I seem to recall you saying that it wasn't 100% canonical.

Also, do you have a Glock with a 6-sec mount you'd be interested in running for comparative data? Minus the rail/light issue, I imagine a lot of the reliability concerns would be eased by a 6s mount + aimpoint micro, and as silly as it sounds, I'm kinda surprised I haven't seen someone attempt to conceal that or at least mention open-carry duty use.

If you continue to experiment with the dot, I'll be very interested to see if the data changes at all. Surely there are further benefits to reap from this sort of gear by running it as primary practice equipment for an extended period of time. How much additional benefit that can provide is very unclear though. That's a very difficult question to answer, but I find it very interesting.

[breakingtime91]

Interesting thread. I have been waiting for the aimpoint optic to hit the market before I even attempt to look at trying a RDS on a hand gun. Like SLG, I think they are an advantage and I think LL said, like 3 years ago, they are the future of hand guns.

[uechibear]

SLG and I talked about this a bit as both of us spent more than a little time talking with Todd about the slide-mounted RDS concept. I've always maintained that there was likely a decisive performance advantage on moving targets in low light, probably close to the performance advantage you would see with a laser. When I think back on occasions where I've tried to hit a moving target in more realistic scenarios (hunting, FOF) I think it would have been much easier to process a single red dot as opposed to the traditional sight picture. In those situations I was essentially looking "through" the sights at the target and seeing enough of a sight picture to hopefully hit.

At least with my eyes, getting a hard front sight focus would have meant losing track of the person or critter I was trying to hit.

I'm hoping to do some work with a slide-mounted RDS in the relatively near future to see what I can get out of it. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that I perform significantly better as I have a tendency to look "through" my sights at speed anyway....

I'm glad to see mention of a laser, as that may be another variable to consider testing.

With a laser sight, you don't have to look through a small glass window to pick up the dot like on a MRDS; however, the laser grip does change the shape of the pistol grip to some extent. That could be a negative for some people. For some, once accustomed to it, that "extra grip" could even be helpful.

My main interest is the best use of a Crimson Trace laser grip in a self-defense situation with a carry gun (G17, AIWB), so I don't know if that question warrants its own thread or not, but laser grips could also be considered relative to the FAST, so I'm putting it here, and the Mods can decide.

[scw2]

My main interest is the best use of a Crimson Trace laser grip in a self-defense situation with a carry gun (G17, AIWB), so I don't know if that question warrants its own thread or not, but laser grips could also be considered relative to the FAST, so I'm putting it here, and the Mods can decide.

As someone with zero experience with either WML or lasers, how does a laser/light combo like the TLR-2 compare with laser grips for purposes of self-defense? Am I right in that it's an extra step to engage the laser, but the benefit would be that the grip profile wouldn't change at all?

Just wondering out loud since Roland Special-esque guns seem to generally come with a WML already.

[AO20]

I have been trying to wrap my head around that sentence as I stayed awake due to the weather. Not that I doubt the truth of it; I struggled to make it fit with what I know about guns and physics. The shorter slide should mean, for the same round, the slide is faster than the longer slide during the recoil cycle. It also means (and this one for me was the "duh" moment) that the longer slide rises more because of the longer lever arm. Torque is force*distance, and the force on the breech should be same for the same round in each gun. So the longer gun has to have more muzzle rise as the lever arm is longer. The combo of the faster and shorter slide does means the shorter gun should be faster at getting back on target.

This makes me want to try a G26 with an MRDS. How short is too short? When does the round lose enough velocity to stop cutting the slide length down? And should the barrel be longer than the slide? In other words, is a Glock 26 with a G19 barrel better than a G19 or G26?

This is what happens when I do not get enough sleep.

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I don't think that that is correct. The force acting at the muzzle is the same in all directions (unless your barrel is ported), so the length of the slide will not create a longer lever arm. The actual lever creating muzzle flip is the height of the barrel as compared to the height of your wrist. This is why people make such a big deal about the 'bore axis.' Think about holding a ruler in your fist and having someone push it close to your hand versus at the tip of it. In reality for a non-expert like me I find little difference, but some people think a high-bore-axis gun like a SIG will have more flip than, say, a Glock.

Edit: Now that I think about it, I wonder if your long slide/lever idea is applicable in the opposite way for compensators/ports. Meaning I wonder if a ported long slide like a G34 will tame muzzle flip more than from a ported G19, or even exert a noticable force downward. Hmm...anybody want to do an experiment?

[Mr_White]

Here is a pic of the Freya with a Magpul GL9 mag.

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c29/asianjedi/Freya_zpsdiil24vc.jpg

How is that setup for ripping a stuck mag out of the magwell? From the picture it looks doable.

[spinmove_]

How is that setup for ripping a stuck mag out of the magwell? From the picture it looks doable.

It looks like it with Magpul mags, but how would that look with Glock mags?

I think it might be neat to see a magwell with cutouts on the front and back to facilitate stripping a mag.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[Mr_White]

Here's Dave Sevigny's run (February 10, 2009).

Glock 34
Atlanta Arms & Ammo
Kytac Beltlocker Holster
Kytac MP-2 magazine pouch


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXt6zGwwk_o&feature=youtu.be

I don't think Dave Sevigny's world record run is the same as the one where he won the coin. I think that because the video is dated February 10th, 2009, but the pistol-training.com FASTest page lists him as winning FAST Coin #02 in February 2008. Or maybe the date on the P-T.com page is a mistake? Don't know.


Where does this philosophically leave the individual carrying a stock pistol- whether by choice or mandated necessity?

I think that's purely Timmy Conscience stuff, like I said in the other thread.


It looks like it with Magpul mags, but how would that look with Glock mags?

I think it might be neat to see a magwell with cutouts on the front and back to facilitate stripping a mag.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

Yep, maybe, that's why I was asking. I've never put any time in with magwells myself.

[jetfire]

Magwells make everything better. I'm totally buying a Freya.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Grey]

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I don't think that that is correct. The force acting at the muzzle is the same in all directions (unless your barrel is ported), so the length of the slide will not create a longer lever arm. The actual lever creating muzzle flip is the height of the barrel as compared to the height of your wrist. This is why people make such a big deal about the 'bore axis.' Think about holding a ruler in your fist and having someone push it close to your hand versus at the tip of it. In reality for a non-expert like me I find little difference, but some people think a high-bore-axis gun like a SIG will have more flip than, say, a Glock.

Edit: Now that I think about it, I wonder if your long slide/lever idea is applicable in the opposite way for compensators/ports. Meaning I wonder if a ported long slide like a G34 will tame muzzle flip more than from a ported G19, or even exert a noticable force downward. Hmm...anybody want to do an experiment?
I don't believe this fully explains it. You can only make that assumption if the slide travel is completely parallel to the shooters grip. I'm 99.99999% sure that is never the case. Thus you don't have a singular moment arm as you describe.

Edit: I'm sure this is horribly explained, my point is that you don't have a singular moment force acting on the shooter as you describe.

[Lomshek]

I have been trying to wrap my head around that sentence as I stayed awake due to the weather. Not that I doubt the truth of it; I struggled to make it fit with what I know about guns and physics. The shorter slide should mean, for the same round, the slide is faster than the longer slide during the recoil cycle. It also means (and this one for me was the "duh" moment) that the longer slide rises more because of the longer lever arm. Torque is force*distance, and the force on the breech should be same for the same round in each gun. So the longer gun has to have more muzzle rise as the lever arm is longer. The combo of the faster and shorter slide does means the shorter gun should be faster at getting back on target.

This makes me want to try a G26 with an MRDS. How short is too short? When does the round lose enough velocity to stop cutting the slide length down? And should the barrel be longer than the slide? In other words, is a Glock 26 with a G19 barrel better than a G19 or G26?

This is what happens when I do not get enough sleep.

Or it's as simple as the shorter slide has less reciprocating mass and the shorter barrel means higher pressure gas is hitting the comp.

[GJM]

All I know is I have two MOS 34, two MOS 17 and three MOS 19. I had asssumed I would game a 17 or 34, and carry a 19. The 19 just flat out shot the 17/34, when a RDS is mounted. I much prefer the 17/34 grip. A 26 would seem to be getting in the too short grip category for my main pistol.

[busdriver]

There's really no single good easy answer to short vs long slide, light vs heavy. The actual math is a mess that I've long since forgotten how to do, my degree is 15 years old this point and I don't often find myself doing mechanical engineering as a pilot. So proceed with caution!

I poked the topic a bit on post 40, however you're basically talking about rotational inertia (polar moment of inertia) and momentum transfer. The amount of momentum is determined by the bullet mass and velocity. How we perceive that in the form of recoil is the mess.

Here's an example: it's common to hear that .40 is more snappy than .45 even at the same power factor, why? Most .40 guns are small frame, with less reciprocating mass than the 9mm in the family. .45s are large frame, with much heavier slides. The lighter slide has less inertia, which means it resists rotation less, both starting and stopping. The heavy slide doesn't get going as fast, but it's harder to stop once it does. So the light slide snaps, and the heavy slide shoves. An XDM 5.25 or a 1911 in .40 aren't snappy at all.

Over on benos, Cha-Lee (Charlie Perez, Limited GM) talks about switching to a bushing barrel because he could run it faster than a bull barrel. As long as you have the grip down, the "snappier" gun will run flatter. It's not how much torque the gun applies to your wrist, it's how much torque you need to apply to the gun to stop the rotation and get the muzzle back down.

[karmapolice]

Magwells make everything better. I'm totally buying a Freya.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


How is that setup for ripping a stuck mag out of the magwell? From the picture it looks doable.

It is definitely doable, I've run the freya for awhile now. I use it as more of a reverse use magwell as I've never had any issue loading a mag at speed with a 19. However I have big hands and I cannot lie, this causes the mag sometimes to not drop free during the reload if I keep my firing hand grip and I would have to do a gun shake or more severely adjust my firing hand. It worked and again this didn't occur all the time but enough where I developed a mag flip in my reload.

The freya prevents that and buffers the mag from my fat ham hock hand, and as a bonus gives me a better grip and point on the 19 to me. All in a package that's still shorter than a 17 grip. I want to run some of taran's new 19 specific base pads and or some factory plus twos as they will give even more purchase. That said I can get enough purchase to rip a stuck mag out with a factory 19 mag.

Excuse the poorly done photos as they weren't shot in my normal studio but they show the gap. Also excuse my typing, this was typed on a tablet.

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5470/31304901926_5042862820_k_d.jpg
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5524/31196989492_81222a0042_k_d.jpg
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5321/30972030290_994115b832_k_d.jpg
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5773/30518698344_240df8045d_k_d.jpg

[AsianJedi]

How is that setup for ripping a stuck mag out of the magwell? From the picture it looks doable.

I have not had issues ripping it out during a replicated double feed.

[SLG]

Karma,

Is that a Glock 19 mag in there? I have handled the freya, but not as much as some other designs. It seemed to have much less benefit as a mag well over some others, say, the Zev pro for example. I don't recall a 19 mag sticking out that low, but maybe I recall incorrectly.

Dove,

I have a 6 second mount and will compare it later on in testing.

My "Roland" is gen3 19, with Zev Pro magwell, KKM barrel/comp and a Bowie milled slide for the original Deltapoint. I've had it for quite some time, though I only recently added my own KKM, as I had been using a friends previously. All stock internals. I do wish the slide had forward cocking serrations, but they aren't strictly needed for me to handle the gun.


Forgot to add, I think you would have to be crazy to carry aftermarket mags in your glock, in order to run a magwell. Talk about getting your priorities wrong, sheesh. :-)
Mr White, Dave won the coin in Feb/08, as reported on PT.


Finally someone besides me mentioned lasers. I used them for years for shooting under nods, as well as all sorts of other lighting/movement/downed/awkward positions. A good laser is vastly superior to a red dot, of any flavor and any mount, to me. I gave up on them when I switched to glocks, but my duty 1911 has CT master grips on them. I've used them quite bit, and on sigs before that. I am in the process of reacquainting myself with the glock options, which were never very good. A 400U with a dev group switch is likely the best choice, but I have no idea if I can carry one. I used to have a red one, but no longer. I need to get a green one to try again.

[Mr_White]

Forgot to add, I think you would have to be crazy to carry aftermarket mags in your glock, in order to run a magwell. Talk about getting your priorities wrong, sheesh. :-)

I got some of the new Magpul 21-round Glock magazines, but it is going to be a really really slow process for me to decide that they are reliable enough that I would actually start carrying them. Plus, have to work out one remaining concealment issue. So I hear you on that, even though it is not related to a magwell for me.


Mr White, Dave won the coin in Feb/08, as reported on PT.

Thank you for the confirmation!

[SLG]

I got some of the new Magpul 21-round Glock magazines, but it is going to be a really really slow process for me to decide that they are reliable enough that I would actually start carrying them. Plus, have to work out one remaining concealment issue. So I hear you on that, even though it is not related to a magwell for me.


Are yours as hard to load as mine?

[JHC]

I got some of the new Magpul 21-round Glock magazines, but it is going to be a really really slow process for me to decide that they are reliable enough that I would actually start carrying them. Plus, have to work out one remaining concealment issue. So I hear you on that, even though it is not related to a magwell for me.



Thank you for the confirmation!

My five Magpul 21 rounders are feeding well but don't seem deliver slide lock on empty all the time.

[Le Français]

My three or four 21-round Pmags aren't very difficult to load to full capacity. They've worked very well for USPSA Limited Minor, in part because they slide more easily out of a kydex pouch compared to stock or ETS mags. I think this has to do with the material/finish.

[karmapolice]

Karma,

Is that a Glock 19 mag in there? I have handled the freya, but not as much as some other designs. It seemed to have much less benefit as a mag well over some others, say, the Zev pro for example. I don't recall a 19 mag sticking out that low, but maybe I recall incorrectly.

Yes it is a regular ole Glock 19 mag in there. I have seen some of the other designs but was always interested in the Sentinel Concepts (Clint Lynch's design) but it was gen3 only and hard to get for long time but the Freya is his design with Raven being the manufacture. The new taran one looks interesting but I'd have to play with it for awhile same with the zev pro or agency mag wells. I've got around a year with the freya and a combination of over 6k+ rounds through it.

[GRV]

I never totally understood the magwell hate, theoretically speaking. If it covers the baseplate of the mag then yea that's pretty bad, but if someone is capable of concealing a G17, then I imagine running a G19 plus magwell with a stock G17 mag in the gun would be viable, or am I misestimating how much purchase would be exposed? (All assuming the magwell itself doesn't break concealment.)

That said, the other day there was a post on here with a "mag compatibility" poster for the Freya.......:eek: Definitely over the line for me personally. What's the deal with that, does the Freya actually interfere with the space in the grip?



I have a 6 second mount and will compare it later on in testing.


Looking forward to it.

Do you have any opinions on the duty readiness of the 6-sec mount plus aimpoint micro?

I'm imagining it would offer both better performance than slide-mounted MRDS and offer plenty of reliability, provided the bulk can be managed. Though, I am speculating out of my ass, and I suppose Glocks have a history of getting touchy when people get up in their frame.



A 400U with a dev group switch is likely the best choice, but I have no idea if I can carry one. I used to have a red one, but no longer. I need to get a green one to try again.

I would be extremely interested to see what you think of that.

Modifying the grip shape is very off-putting, and although I realize the effects are minor in practice I have a strong psychological distaste for lasers mounted at a visible horizontal offset from the bore.

[Mr_White]

Are yours as hard to load as mine?

Sounds like it - mine are definitely hard enough that I really dislike loading them without an UpLULA. I need to see them stay loaded and not swell, get knocked around and dropped on concrete floors, and feed practice ammo well, all for a significant length of time. Then, I'll throw Gold Dot at them and see it they work just as well with that. Then, I'll give them serious consideration for carry. I'm sticking with the OEM G17 mags with +2 extensions for the foreseeable future. But I have some hope for the viability of the Magpul 21-rounders. They need a lot of time and testing though.

[JCS]

Magpul makes an extended base plate piece for use with their 15 rd magazines https://www.magpul.com/products/gl-l-plate-pmag-gl9-3-pack

I have 2000+ rounds through 5 magpul 15 round mags and haven't had a single malfunction. I would be comfortable using them for a carry gun but don't see a point since the oem have been equally as reliable. Plus they stick out a bit more.

[AsianJedi]

I have put a fair amount of rounds through the Magpul mags. No reliability issues in my experience. They do however drop slower than factory mags.

[karmapolice]

I made a quick video about the Freya, so yeah lol enjoy my monotone voice and awkwardness.


https://youtu.be/dOqnizd96UA

[AO20]

I don't believe this fully explains it. You can only make that assumption if the slide travel is completely parallel to the shooters grip. I'm 99.99999% sure that is never the case. Thus you don't have a singular moment arm as you describe.

Edit: I'm sure this is horribly explained, my point is that you don't have a singular moment force acting on the shooter as you describe.

I think we may be to the point of going off-topic here and I do apologize. However, the slide travel does not need to be parallel to anything to experience what I described. The wrist acts as an axis of rotation and to a (much) lesser extent so does the elbow.

[SLG]

I never totally understood the magwell hate, theoretically speaking. If it covers the baseplate of the mag then yea that's pretty bad, but if someone is capable of concealing a G17, then I imagine running a G19 plus magwell with a stock G17 mag in the gun would be viable, or am I misestimating how much purchase would be exposed? (All assuming the magwell itself doesn't break concealment.)


This gets back to "what is a pistol for?" That answer will be different for people in different jobs.

As far as the G19/magwell with G17 mags...I MUCH prefer a G17 grip, and since I don't want an RDS or comp, the 19 offers me literally nothing. My reloads are pretty much as fast as I have ever seen anyone be able to reload a glock, (1.1 from a tac rig, 1.5 from concealment, 1.8 to 2.0 if I screw up) so the magwell is not an attraction either. Someone may be consistently faster than me, and no doubt some people are, but is that difference meaningful at all?

[SLG]

Karma,

Watched the video, thanks for putting it up. Looks like it isn't an issue to pull the mag out. I was talking to Southnarc about this the other day, and I thought he thought it was not ideal for that, but I may be misremembering. I know he does like the freya though. Have you considered carrying a G17? I get why you like a magwell, but the 17 would seem to solve that issue as well. Also, for other people who want a better reload too, the Freya seems to have a smaller, less beveled opening.

I'm definitely liking the Zev Pro on my 19, but not as much as my 17 with a grip plug. I'm about to put a Geissele on my 22 with the 6 second mount, so we'll see about that.

[JSGlock34]

I don't think Dave Sevigny's world record run is the same as the one where he won the coin. I think that because the video is dated February 10th, 2009, but the pistol-training.com FASTest page lists him as winning FAST Coin #02 in February 2008. Or maybe the date on the P-T.com page is a mistake? Don't know.


Mr White, Dave won the coin in Feb/08, as reported on PT.


Thank you for the confirmation!

Thanks for clarifying! SLG beat me too it - I was going to post that upon further research, the video was definitely not of Sevigny's coin run, as Todd posted about an earlier record setting 3.75 second run by Sevigny on 7 February 2009 (Who's FASTest? (http://pistol-training.com/archives/1187)).

Todd posted a little more info about Sevigny's equipment than appeared in the video. Perhaps SLG knows if this was the gear used in the original 2008 coin run as well (if we're still trying to gather that info)?

For this record-setting F.A.S.T. run, Dave used the following equipment:

Glock 34
Sevigny Carry tritium sights
Kytac Beltlocker SH3 holster and MP-2 pouches
Wilderness CSM Instructor Belt
Competitor 1 concealment vest
Atlanta Arms & Ammo 147gr 9x19mm (Team Glock load)

[karmapolice]

Karma,

Watched the video, thanks for putting it up. Looks like it isn't an issue to pull the mag out. I was talking to Southnarc about this the other day, and I thought he thought it was not ideal for that, but I may be misremembering. I know he does like the freya though. Have you considered carrying a G17? I get why you like a magwell, but the 17 would seem to solve that issue as well. Also, for other people who want a better reload too, the Freya seems to have a smaller, less beveled opening.

I'm definitely liking the Zev Pro on my 19, but not as much as my 17 with a grip plug. I'm about to put a Geissele on my 22 with the 6 second mount, so we'll see about that.

I have and I've carried one in the past and a 34, for uniform I've been carrying a 34 for a couple of years. I definitely do not need a magwell on a 17 as you've stated. The biggest thing for me is the 17 grip pokes out more and seems to print a lot more for me carrying concealed. I carry AIWB and have a few different holsters, for holster placement and grip angle the 19 seems to work the best. If I cant the gun a little bit the 17 is fine but I prefer to have it at a straight drop.

I shoot the 19 just as well and I'm still go back and forth with going to the 17. The biggest thing is I've happened into three 19's and I have one 34. I don't have any 17's at the moment and I'm trying to get to the carry gun, back up carry, and training gun zen mode.

The 34 won't go anywhere because it's a great gun and it has some sentimental value but will become the full time nightstand pistol as I'm switching to a non uniform assignment and will go to carrying the 19 all the time.

Long story short I'm still having the 19 vs 17 battle but cost/money is prohibitive to the experiment and the three 19's worked out. I've had an ongoing discourse with myself mentally and with Ash556 and Mr. White ;)

[Gio]

Thanks for clarifying! SLG beat me too it - I was going to post that upon further research, the video was definitely not of Sevigny's coin run, as Todd posted about an earlier record setting 3.75 second run by Sevigny on 7 February 2009 (Who's FASTest? (http://pistol-training.com/archives/1187)).

Todd posted a little more info about Sevigny's equipment than appeared in the video. Perhaps SLG knows if this was the gear used in the original 2008 coin run as well (if we're still trying to gather that info)?

For this record-setting F.A.S.T. run, Dave used the following equipment:

Glock 34
Sevigny Carry tritium sights
Kytac Beltlocker SH3 holster and MP-2 pouches
Wilderness CSM Instructor Belt
Competitor 1 concealment vest
Atlanta Arms & Ammo 147gr 9x19mm (Team Glock load)

If I recall (going back 8 years ago now on memory), I seem to remember seeing or hearing about Dave shooting the FAST with a G23 with .40 JHP/duty/self defense rounds.

[busdriver]

I know the talk of carrying an open gun was hyperbole, but I got a chuckle out of it. Then it occurred to me that I didn't appreciate how big/heavy they were until I started shooting open. So I snapped a picture that I thought some might find amusing. The open gun weighs 3.75 pounds as shown with the mag loaded, with a loaded big stick it's 4 pounds.

12034

[GRV]

This gets back to "what is a pistol for?" That answer will be different for people in different jobs.

As far as the G19/magwell with G17 mags...I MUCH prefer a G17 grip, and since I don't want an RDS or comp, the 19 offers me literally nothing. My reloads are pretty much as fast as I have ever seen anyone be able to reload a glock, (1.1 from a tac rig, 1.5 from concealment, 1.8 to 2.0 if I screw up) so the magwell is not an attraction either. Someone may be consistently faster than me, and no doubt some people are, but is that difference meaningful at all?

I couldn't agree more. After going broke on my G19, I felt the grip on the SIRT, tested it in my holster, and then immediately went broke again to get a G17. Haven't shot the 19 since. Night and day in preference.


I get what you're saying though. It's not really the magwell itself that's a problem in particular, but that it's usually indicative of some amount of mis-prioritizing. But of course then, there will always be edge cases where it is reasonable and makes sense. Not to mention, if you're someone like Mr_White who can conceal a G34 with a +2 in the gun.....well, maybe then there's no reason not to run a magwell on it if you can pull it off and it offers an improvement or more consistency.

[GRV]

I know the talk of carrying an open gun was hyperbole, but I got a chuckle out of it. Then it occurred to me that I didn't appreciate how big/heavy they were until I started shooting open. So I snapped a picture that I thought some might find amusing. The open gun weighs 3.75 pounds as shown with the mag loaded, with a loaded big stick it's 4 pounds.

[img]

I don't know man, it seems like every other week someone is posting videos of people shoving bigger and bigger crap down their pants. ARs, AKs, etc. :p I don't doubt there's someone somewhere who could pull it off.


For the record, if someone comes to the ToddG Memorial Shoot carrying an MP5K briefcase AIWB.....their drinks are on me all weekend ;)

[OnionsAndDragons]

I made a quick video about the Freya, so yeah lol enjoy my monotone voice and awkwardness.


Thanks for that demo and (ove)review. I've been on the fence with trying a magwell on the G19 for similar reasons as yourself (hand meat either being pinched or sometimes fouling the drop of a mag). The Freya and the Zev Pro are both on my holiday wishlist. I think I've got a local dude that will let me try out his Freya next week!

[JHC]

The 34 won't go anywhere because it's a great gun and it has some sentimental value . . .

Thank you. I am really attached to most of my Glocks for one reason or another. They understand me. They must have some soul. ;)

[Surf]

Fibers and a magwell treatment (not an added aftermarket magwell) have become standard in my Glocks. I am toying with the red dot, but my concern is time to first shot accuracy. I hear others say, I am still slower to my first shot accuracy with a red dot, which no doubt is 1000% true for me. Now if I put in diligent work with the red dot and get very proficient, yet I still find myself slower to my first round accuracy but find increases in performance in other area's, I may very well struggle with which I may feel is the better trade off.

For the Magwell topic I do a treatment to the stock pistol that I feel is a true option with all the benefit and without any negatives. Usually aftermarket magwells don't actually keep the stock magwell opening size and of course add girth or length. This option really opens it up while maintaining stock look and for feel. I also blend the grip plugs which wasn't done yet when I took this picture.

https://content-na.drive.amazonaws.com/cdproxy/templink/CGIB74YRdZ_uQ7o9T98ZdvK7w8Ax67vHPOTCQiHKLxUpX92IB? viewBox=1920,1276

[BaiHu]

Fibers and a magwell treatment (not an added aftermarket magwell) have become standard in my Glocks. I am toying with the red dot, but my concern is time to first shot accuracy. I hear others say, I am still slower to my first shot accuracy with a red dot, which no doubt is 1000% true for me. Now if I put in diligent work with the red dot and get very proficient, yet I still find myself slower to my first round accuracy but find increases in performance in other area's, I may very well struggle with which I may feel is the better trade off.

For the Magwell topic I do a treatment to the stock pistol that I feel is a true option with all the benefit and without any negatives. Usually aftermarket magwells don't actually keep the stock magwell opening size and of course add girth or length. This option really opens it up while maintaining stock look and for feel. I also blend the grip plugs which wasn't done yet when I took this picture.

https://content-na.drive.amazonaws.com/cdproxy/templink/CGIB74YRdZ_uQ7o9T98ZdvK7w8Ax67vHPOTCQiHKLxUpX92IB? viewBox=1920,1276

I've seen you work some magic like this on your P320 and the like, do you recommend anyone that can do this type of work? I do not trust myself with a dremel or sandpaper on a "get it right the first time or it'll cost you big time" kind of job.

[Paul Sharp]

I've seen you work some magic like this on your P320 and the like, do you recommend anyone that can do this type of work? I do not trust myself with a dremel or sandpaper on a "get it right the first time or it'll cost you big time" kind of job.

Not Surf but, Ben at Boresight Solutions did a G41 for me with a flared magwell. I can post up pics later once I'm home. It's integrated and is not a bolt on part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BaiHu]

Not Surf but, Ben at Boresight Solutions did a G41 for me with a flared magwell. I can post up pics later once I'm home. It's integrated and is not a bolt on part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sweet and thank you. It might be the way I go down the line.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[SW CQB 45]

while my version of the RS is not finished....ran out of $$ (bought a lot of ammo..... just in case)

I chose the AA magwell as I have large hands too and will trap mags, but have learned to roll my hand as I depress the mag catch.

I actually started out with a SI magwell (they were on sale) and sold it to a buddy as the edges were sharp and digging into my hand. The AA magwell is much more comfortable. I also feel a slight edge in reloads with the AA over no magwell.

I actually shoot a G19 better than a G17, which was another reason for going this route. SURF.....I like your magwell treatment and will do that to my G17 and duty carry G19. Was that done by hand (file and sandpaper)??

While I am still learning this RMR set up, I do feel slower on my first shot.....but decided to start dry firing with the RMR off. Being over 50, I am having trouble finding my plain front sight as I could not make a decision when my slide was machined. Mark at L&M suggested I paint the tip of my front sight to see if I improve on sight alignment speed during practice, but will be changing to a tritium with color ring. We did some night fire training a couple of weeks ago and I used my RS and did not like my performance on first shot. I have a lot of practice before I start carrying.

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee412/SWCQB45/Gun/FullSizeRender_zps3snvwcov.jpg (http://s1226.photobucket.com/user/SWCQB45/media/Gun/FullSizeRender_zps3snvwcov.jpg.html)

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee412/SWCQB45/Gun/G19%20RMR%201_zpscy1xbbax.jpg (http://s1226.photobucket.com/user/SWCQB45/media/Gun/G19%20RMR%201_zpscy1xbbax.jpg.html)

[Surf]

I've seen you work some magic like this on your P320 and the like, do you recommend anyone that can do this type of work? I do not trust myself with a dremel or sandpaper on a "get it right the first time or it'll cost you big time" kind of job.First I will mention that while I perform glass type of work on glocks to add tails or add or shape magwells, that is not my preference if I can avoid it. Of course there is some work that benefits from glass work even magwells. What is seen above is what I like to perform. Really keeps the pistol looking and stock with stock dimensions, for the most part. It is virtually not noticed by the casual eye.

As for you or others doing the work it is hard to say. I would say that anyone who is fairly proficient in Glock framework, including polymer work involving heat, could replicate this. The Glock is a heat and shape method but the Sigs poly material being different is strictly a sanding and shaping technique. Just like sanding, you can always remove more, but very difficult to replace material. Same with heat, just don't get crazy with the heat and take it slow if you were to tackle something like this.

The Sig P320 is greatly benefited from a magwell reshaping. I am 100% in favor of doing this on either pistol types. Pistol engineers / designers are not always shooters, or high level shooters, so they don't necessarily put enough forethought into incorporating such details in a stock design. I had tons of requests for worked over P320 grip modules and even very early release of the P320 I had considered doing a complete aftermarket one to my design, but I just didn't have the time or energy to pursue it. I wish I could design the next P320 or Glock frame design. ;)


Not Surf but, Ben at Boresight Solutions did a G41 for me with a flared magwell. I can post up pics later once I'm home. It's integrated and is not a bolt on part.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkBen does fantastic work, there are a few people / shops that I suggest for glock frame work and he is definitely one of them.

[karmapolice]

A caveat I didn't really make clear is that I can with no real issue reload a Glock 19 in stock form. I just like like the way the freya feels on the 19 and it's added length but that it still is shorter than a 17 grip. I would not run it on a carry gun if it impeded my ability to unkitten the gun due to a malfunction. Just adding that, carry on. Also Surf I really dig your magwell mod you do, Glock should give you royalties for the new M series Glocks ;).

[Hunter Osborne]

I'd like to try a "Rolanded" CZ P-07. Got the RMR on there already just need to find a comp to go with the factory threaded barrel that's available.

Springer Precision makes a comp for the 09 that works with standard CZ factory threaded barrels.

[busdriver]

SLG alluded to it but something to think about for those not familiar with magwells; they're not there to make your reload faster, they reduce the penalty for a screwed up reload. It will be more consistently fast if you can get the magazine cleanly into the gun without touching the funnel. (ETA: meaning you shouldn't be relying on the funnel to reload fast)

[Default.mp3]

Springer Precision makes a comp for the 09 that works with standard CZ factory threaded barrels.I'm pretty sure most of the 9mm comps work on the standard CZ barrel, including the KKM that goes on the Roland Special; the threads are 1/2-28 for both the KKM Glock 9mm barrels and the CZ barrels. The only issue would be whether or not the compensator matches the width of the slide.

[bravo7]

I'm pretty sure most of the 9mm comps work on the standard CZ barrel, including the KKM that goes on the Roland Special; the threads are 1/2-28 for both the KKM Glock 9mm barrels and the CZ barrels. The only issue would be whether or not the compensator matches the width of the slide.

KKM comps are not standard threads......unless they changed things lately.

[busdriver]

KKM bits are still enroute, so I shot the RMR'd G19 with and without the LW comp, along side an open gun. My results roughly mirror SLG's. The open gun is about the same amount faster again on splits on the same target, but not really any faster on transitions than the comp'd glock. I think most of the speed difference between the two comp'd guns is me. I can run the trigger much faster on the race gun and between the unfamiliar grip angle and grip size, it felt like I could grip much harder and get more control on the open gun.

[SLG]

Shot my Roland today back to back with my duty 17. I have been doing this once or twice a week for the last month or so, but I don't always write anything up.

With the Roland, on any target at any distance, I am at least as fast to the first shot, if not faster. I am always more consistent, that is, I have a higher percentage of hits every time. On index cards at 7 yards, I typically save .15 to a first shot hit vs. my G17. That equates to 1.20 with the Roland, and 1.35 with the 17. These are averages.

On things like Bill drills, I get much more centered hits, with less effort. Again, more consistency on target. I also shave a small amount of time on the splits and the first shot, enough that I can clean Gabe White's standards with the gun. Using my G17, I can clean all but the Bill Drill, which is just outside my ability to do with any consistency. This looks like 2.20 with the roland, and 2.35-2.40 with the 17.

The magwell definitely contributes to my ability to draw the gun fast. Normally I can't draw a 19 quite as fast as a 17, but the magwell makes them equal (afaict). I did get a mag stuck today though, and was unable to pull it out. With the Zevpro, there just isn't enough room to access a factory mag.


At 25 yards, bill drills on paper plates look like 3 secs, all hits. My G17...not quite there yet.

I really enjoy shooting the roland, unfortunately more than my 17. :-(

[Surf]

I really enjoy shooting the roland, unfortunately more than my 17. :-(Interesting stats. I admit that I am the limiting factor when it comes to a red dot as I am just not practiced enough with one. However I am going to make it a point early this year to correct that.

[GJM]

Shot my Roland today back to back with my duty 17. I have been doing this once or twice a week for the last month or so, but I don't always write anything up.

With the Roland, on any target at any distance, I am at least as fast to the first shot, if not faster. I am always more consistent, that is, I have a higher percentage of hits every time. On index cards at 7 yards, I typically save .15 to a first shot hit vs. my G17. That equates to 1.20 with the Roland, and 1.35 with the 17. These are averages.

On things like Bill drills, I get much more centered hits, with less effort. Again, more consistency on target. I also shave a small amount of time on the splits and the first shot, enough that I can clean Gabe White's standards with the gun. Using my G17, I can clean all but the Bill Drill, which is just outside my ability to do with any consistency. This looks like 2.20 with the roland, and 2.35-2.40 with the 17.

The magwell definitely contributes to my ability to draw the gun fast. Normally I can't draw a 19 quite as fast as a 17, but the magwell makes them equal (afaict). I did get a mag stuck today though, and was unable to pull it out. With the Zevpro, there just isn't enough room to access a factory mag.


At 25 yards, bill drills on paper plates look like 3 secs, all hits. My G17...not quite there yet.

I really enjoy shooting the roland, unfortunately more than my 17. :-(

How much of the performance improvement is the dot and how much is the comp?

[SLG]

How much of the performance improvement is the dot and how much is the comp?

I have not done any dot only shooting for the last month or so (some, but nothing I wrote down to reference). I would say that for me, the dot does more than the comp, but that is a ratio that likely changes from one type of target to the next.

I'm saying that based on my past performance with a dot. I've always found it to help, and the comp does too, but to a lesser extent. I am tempted to get a comp for a .40 and see how that goes.

[spinmove_]

I'd really like to hear how a comp'd G23 does.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[DocGKR]

Much like what SLG is describing above, as noted in the first post here (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?15857-G19-with-RMR06-and-KKM-compensator), testing otherwise identical RDS equipped G19's demonstrated that those with the KKM compensator were consistently faster to shoot--particularly at longer ranges, generally offered better accuracy, and had noticeably tighter groups.

[GRV]

Shot my Roland today back to back with my duty 17. I have been doing this once or twice a week for the last month or so, but I don't always write anything up.

With the Roland, on any target at any distance, I am at least as fast to the first shot, if not faster. I am always more consistent, that is, I have a higher percentage of hits every time. On index cards at 7 yards, I typically save .15 to a first shot hit vs. my G17. That equates to 1.20 with the Roland, and 1.35 with the 17. These are averages.

On things like Bill drills, I get much more centered hits, with less effort. Again, more consistency on target. I also shave a small amount of time on the splits and the first shot, enough that I can clean Gabe White's standards with the gun. Using my G17, I can clean all but the Bill Drill, which is just outside my ability to do with any consistency. This looks like 2.20 with the roland, and 2.35-2.40 with the 17.

The magwell definitely contributes to my ability to draw the gun fast. Normally I can't draw a 19 quite as fast as a 17, but the magwell makes them equal (afaict). I did get a mag stuck today though, and was unable to pull it out. With the Zevpro, there just isn't enough room to access a factory mag.


At 25 yards, bill drills on paper plates look like 3 secs, all hits. My G17...not quite there yet.

I really enjoy shooting the roland, unfortunately more than my 17. :-(

Have you tried playing with the X400 again? I'm curious how the laser stacks up to the Roland.

The only thing on my SHOT-show Fairy List this year is a dead nuts reliable Surefire light/green-laser combo in an XC1 or better form factor, with a DG switch for bonus points :rolleyes::cool:

[Mr_White]

Shot my Roland today back to back with my duty 17. I have been doing this once or twice a week for the last month or so, but I don't always write anything up.

With the Roland, on any target at any distance, I am at least as fast to the first shot, if not faster. I am always more consistent, that is, I have a higher percentage of hits every time. On index cards at 7 yards, I typically save .15 to a first shot hit vs. my G17. That equates to 1.20 with the Roland, and 1.35 with the 17. These are averages.

On things like Bill drills, I get much more centered hits, with less effort. Again, more consistency on target. I also shave a small amount of time on the splits and the first shot, enough that I can clean Gabe White's standards with the gun. Using my G17, I can clean all but the Bill Drill, which is just outside my ability to do with any consistency. This looks like 2.20 with the roland, and 2.35-2.40 with the 17.

The magwell definitely contributes to my ability to draw the gun fast. Normally I can't draw a 19 quite as fast as a 17, but the magwell makes them equal (afaict). I did get a mag stuck today though, and was unable to pull it out. With the Zevpro, there just isn't enough room to access a factory mag.


At 25 yards, bill drills on paper plates look like 3 secs, all hits. My G17...not quite there yet.

I really enjoy shooting the roland, unfortunately more than my 17. :-(

Many thanks for posting those results SLG. Very interesting!

[SLG]

Have you tried playing with the X400 again? I'm curious how the laser stacks up to the Roland.

The only thing on my SHOT-show Fairy List this year is a dead nuts reliable Surefire light/green-laser combo in an XC1 or better form factor, with a DG switch for bonus points :rolleyes::cool:

I find that lasers in general are as fast for me as dots. A limiting factor is my trigger speed. Todd used to shoot laser guns faster than sights, but I have relatively slower splits. I'm waiting on some new light laser stuff to arrive, and will do more precise testing then.

As for SHOT, I'm told that some interesting stuff will be coming out...

[GJM]

All this talk by SLG caused me to drag out my G4 17 with the RMR this afternoon. I knew it was zeroed for my reloads, so I shot five rounds of Gold Dot to see where they hit at 25 yards. Here she be:

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/IMG_5175_zpswnnj7vxa.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/IMG_5175_zpswnnj7vxa.jpg.html)

[Luke]

Have you been dry firing? Looks like you might be milking that grip a little or maybe too much trigger finger. The group is "ok" but way right. Little disappointed.

[LOKNLOD]

Have you been dry firing? Looks like you might be milking that grip a little or maybe too much trigger finger. The group is "ok" but way right. Little disappointed.

All that tape and he still managed to drop one shot off of it. Tsk, tsk.

[45dotACP]

I thought Glocks shot to the left?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[GJM]

When you have a dot, with a Glock you can actually notice things like "my reloads shoot two inches higher and left" compared to my carry ammo. :)

I can now visualize Luke at the gun counter. :)

[MSparks909]

All this talk by SLG caused me to drag out my G4 17 with the RMR this afternoon. I knew it was zeroed for my reloads, so I shot five rounds of Gold Dot to see where they hit at 25 yards. Here she be:

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/IMG_5175_zpswnnj7vxa.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/IMG_5175_zpswnnj7vxa.jpg.html)

2017 Goal: Shoot like GJM. Likelihood? Sad Panda...

[GJM]

2017 Goal: Shoot like GJM. Likelihood? Sad Panda...

Aim for much higher than that.

[Mr_White]

Great shooting GJM!