What makes a Glock so shootable

[GJM]

As Gio just pointed out in another thread, and USPSA and IDPA (the Vogel games) results confirm, a Glock is no disadvantage in high level competition in Production, Limited, Carry Optics and whatever the IDPA equivalents of these divisions is. Consider that a $500 hunk of plastic that weighs about half as much and costs 1/2 to a 1/10 of a metal pistol, can run with those dedicated competition guns.

So why is this so? It certainly is not because of the Glock trigger. While we make them work, no one designing an optimal interface between the shooter and the pistol, would design a Glock trigger. It certainly isn’t because of the inherent precision of Glock pistols. While the Gen 5 pistols are pretty good in this area, no one would pick a Glock to compete in bullseye competition. It certainly isn’t because of the weight of the Glock pistol, as the trend in competition is towards heavy pistols. It certainly isn’t because of polymer, because many pistols are polymer.

My theory is what makes the Glock so shootable is the very thing many people despise about the Glock. I believe the Glock grip angle is a big part of the secret sauce. If a Glock points high for you, you are not taking advantage of what is the most important shooting attribute of the Glock. To make the Glock point right, requires you to set the proper wrist angle and tension, and that proper wrist angle and tension are what I believe is the key to shooting a Glock fast and accurately.

A related consideration is finger grooves, and how that relates to your strong hand control over the pistol. I used to think recoil control was all about support hand grip, but lately I have come to believe that the strong hand is the key for me, and that finger grooves allow me to more effectively C clamp with my strong hand. If you put a finger groove Glock in your hand, and then do the same thing with a Gen 5 or model with no finger grooves, you may notice that the finger grooves add control over the grip.

So, my guess is those that are getting the best results out of a Glock believe it points naturally, and those that do not believe the Glock points naturally for them, are leaving a lot on the table.

Discuss!

[TGS]

When I was new to shooting pistols I disparaged the Glock grip angle.

I chose the P2000 because I was a child of the 90s and had an obsession with HK, it looked nice, and I thought the grip was awesome.

Over the course of the P2000 I learned that the USP actually had more effective ergos for the actual use of a handgun, as opposed to how good it feels in your hand at the gun counter.

So here I am with a year and a half on my G19M, and when I pick up guns with a "regular" grip angle it feels weird and as if I'm shooting with a broken grip. I don't know if it has done anything for my splits, but it definitely feels weird. The improvements to my shooting performance that I can quantify on timer/scores is due to other attributes.

[Bergeron]

I can be sold on this.

I’ve got a G19, a B92, and a 1911 at hand while I type this. I can rotate my weak hand wrist further forward in the Glock than the other two, and I have read of others demonstrating that rotating the wrists forward allow for more tension and strength in the wrist.

[LOKNLOD]

I agree. Nothing else feels as recoilcontrolly as a Glock.

[JBP55]

I have owned quite a few Glocks and other pistols and none ever shot high for me.

[Alembic]

Glock shooter mind set is another attribute. Practical dedication to a practical firearm let one focus on what matters.

I agree with grip angle supporting wrist lock.

I thi k the finger grooves provided an opposing surface against upward rotation, but the grooves do not fit all hands.

So, IMHO, Glocks allow you to shoot well because they let you focus on the target not the gun.

edited to remove blah, blah, blah.

[TGS]

I agree. Nothing else feels as recoilcontrolly as a Glock.

It's how I feel too, but what does the timer say?

No different for me.

[MGW]

I think you’re assuming that they are more shootable than other pistols. For me they’re not.

They do cycle extremely fast and flat. They do have a lot of room on the grip for the off hand. They do reload very fast. They are extremely reliable and more common that just about anything. The square grip does make for a very consistent draw. They are cheap to buy and maintain. They are accurate enough for government work.

Hell, maybe they are more shootable than other guns.

[GJM]

I think you’re assuming that they are more shootable than other pistols. For me they’re not.

They do cycle extremely fast and flat. They do have a lot of room on the grip for the off hand. They do reload very fast. They are extremely reliable and more common that just about anything. The square grip does make for a very consistent draw. They are cheap to buy and maintain. They are accurate enough for government work.

Hell, maybe they are more shootable than other guns.

I would say they are not less shootable than other pistols, as opposed to they are more shootable.

[Doc_Glock]

I don’t know what to add other than I have tried a lot of other guns in search of something better but find I shoot a Glock as well as anything and better than a heck of a lot of other guns. I started my pistol shooting journey with Glock and am pretty much full circle back to them now.

What makes it shootable?

1. Grip angle feels locked in. Agree.
2. Low bore axis. Maybe not important but it doesn’t hurt.
3. Trigger isn’t great but it is pretty short to stroke
and reset.
4. Flexy polymer I think soaks you some harshness.
5. Rectangular cross section grip has abundant space for both hands.

[Robinson]

I'm mostly a 1911 shooter, but I've always liked the Glock grip angle. It's probably the thing I like most about Glocks, aside from their (mostly) robust utility.

[stomridertx]

I've thought the same thing about the Glock grip, but find few who agree with me. I think it's because most people have a different idea of what a locked wrist is when throwing a punch. I've studied martial arts since I was 19 and was always taught to lock my wrist forward when punching to align the bone structure with the first 2 knuckles. I didn't start shooting until I was 30, and my first pistol was a Glock. It pointed naturally for me from day one, probably because the grip angle matched my idea of a locked wrist from previous training. Most people have a different definition of a locked wrist and the Glock angle feels weird to them.

[cheby]

I like glocks... However, I am not sure if the angle is what is responsible for its shoot ability. I actually believe that the angle could cause the grip and elbow injury because it is not natural . I still tend to grip all my pistols similarly to glocks because I shot them for a quite while but I am currently working on changing my grip to make it more natural. As a matter of fact, I would gladly switch to glocks if they change the damn angle

[JRB]

It's how I feel too, but what does the timer say?

No different for me.

I found the exact same thing. With a G19, Beretta 92 or M9, HK USP, or 1911, I suck equally with all of them.

[AKDoug]

I gave a VP9 a fair shake for several thousand rounds. Man it sure felt comfortable, seemed to point "better" than a Glock, but I never did end up shooting it as fast or as accurate as my G19. Plenty of guns feel "comfortable" but I've learned feeling good in the hand does not equate to speed and accuracy.

I was not an easy convert to the Glock world. I went from a 1911 to my first plastic gun, a XDm in .40. I shot the XDm better than my 1911 and I liked the capacity increase. I bought into the whole idea that Glocks were junk and they pointed weird. Then in 2011 I went to my first formal class. I actually won an award for the most accurate shooting with the XDm, but I was introduced to the G19 in that class. (I know, late bloomer).. It only took a week and I was shooting my newly purchased Gen3 G19 better than any of my previous handguns.

8 years later I'm still shooting G19's, but am experimenting with an MR918. Funny enough, I shoot the MR918 best with it's "high" backstrap, the one that is virtually the same as the Glock grip angle.

[YVK]

I like glocks... However, I am not sure if the angle is what is responsible for its shoot ability. I actually believe that the angle could cause the grip and elbow injury because it is not natural . I still tend to grip all my pistols similarly to glocks because I shot them for a quite while but I am currently working on changing my grip to make it more natural. As a matter of fact, I would gladly switch to glocks if they change the damn angle

Part of it is because you switched to 2011 but if we looked at CZs and Tanfos, with their dominance in certain places, we'll see that what they do with their grips is very close, although more refined, to Glock's. When I get a few draws with a Glock and then draw my Shadow 2 just by the index, I get a lot less vertical misalignment between the two than Glock and, say, Beretta. I even noticed that 2011s started doing that. Your PT EVO angles the wrist a little more than conventional 1911s, and Cheel2 E2 is almost like CZ.
We all know that we should be able to lock the wrist at any angle; I do think that Glocks make it a little more effortlessly.


I am trying hard to get this argument going in such a way so you'll get sucked into posting that pic of your dots target...

[spyderco monkey]

I don’t know what to add other than I have tried a lot of other guns in search of something better but find I shoot a Glock as well as anything and better than a heck of a lot of other guns. I started my pistol shooting journey with Glock and am pretty much full circle back to them now.

What makes it shootable?

1. Grip angle feels locked in. Agree.
2. Low bore axis. Maybe not important but it doesn’t hurt.
3. Trigger isn’t great but it is pretty short to stroke
and reset.
4. Flexy polymer I think soaks you some harshness.
5. Rectangular cross section grip has abundant space for both hands.

I think the soft polymer Glock uses is a huge factor, and that it does absorb a good amount of recoil sharpness/ vibration.

The PPQ I had had a much sharper / snappier recoil impulse then the Glock. For no reason that I could explain - comparable weight slides, comparable recoil spring weights, identical ammunition.

The only main difference I could find is that the PPQ uses a much more rigid / less 'flexy' polymer. And I suspect that this more rigid polymer is less able to absorb / dissipate the recoil impulse.

From firing an all steel CZ75, with my support thumb pressing against the frame, I was really surprised by how much recoil vibration was transmitted to my support thumb from the metal frame.

[spyderco monkey]

As Gio just pointed out in another thread, and USPSA and IDPA (the Vogel games) results confirm, a Glock is no disadvantage in high level competition in Production, Limited, Carry Optics and whatever the IDPA equivalents of these divisions is. Consider that a $500 hunk of plastic that weighs about half as much and costs 1/2 to a 1/10 of a metal pistol, can run with those dedicated competition guns.

My theory is what makes the Glock so shootable is the very thing many people despise about the Glock. I believe the Glock grip angle is a big part of the secret sauce. If a Glock points high for you, you are not taking advantage of what is the most important shooting attribute of the Glock. To make the Glock point right, requires you to set the proper wrist angle and tension, and that proper wrist angle and tension are what I believe is the key to shooting a Glock fast and accurately.

Discuss!

I'm a big believer in "there's no 'correct' grip angle."

There's too much variation in hand sizes (not to mention, palm thickness and musculature) for a one angle for all.

This chart doesn't even cover palm thickness, yet you can already see how many variables there are in the hand beyond "small medium and large."

https://i.ibb.co/z2SmD8Z/e03899e2d5cf856bd79f0c9b4aae6824.jpg

As such, I really feel that the future of pistol ergonomics is not in adjustable size grip backstraps, but in adjustable grip angle backstraps to suit each persons natural point of aim.

90% of the rounds I've fired down range have been with Glocks. Glocks are my primary pistols.

But when I first pick up a Glock after a long trip abroad and press out - it's pointed high. It takes a fair amount of reps to re-learn to point it slightly lower.

Whereas while I have maybe 1% of my shooting done with CZ pistols, I can pick one up, press out, and the sights will be aligned and flat first time. Likewise, with a 1911, another 1% of my shooting, press out, and it's pointed a bit low.

Meanwhile, my shooting buddy's natural angle is the opposite - Glock is flat, CZ is low, 1911 is very low.


Getting back to competition, its worth noting that the 3 handguns that seem to be dominating are Glocks, CZ variants, and 1911/2011 variants. All with different grip angles (and different everything elses.)

I think the easiest explanation for why we're seeing Glock's represented with $2-3k pistols is that for a high level, world class shooter, the gun is only a small factor in their performance.

Obviously the gun can't be trash, but once 'good enough' has been achieved, the rest of the success is a function of shooters skill and practice.

As for why we're seeing Glock's instead of M&P's or VP9's etc, the answer is likely that Glocks are just more popular polymer handguns with better aftermarket infrastructure.

[JRB]

I found the exact same thing. With a G19, Beretta 92 or M9, HK USP, or 1911, I suck equally with all of them.

After thinking about this some more, I've one thing to add.

For some reason, I've always been more confident with my marksmanship and felt more precise with a big revolver, especially something like an N-frame.
For reasons I can't articulate or justify, the only semiauto that gives me that same immediate feeling of precision and confidence is a Glock 21.

My actual empirical performance with a G21 indicate somewhat more precision (so long as I do my part) but a slight reduction in speed vs a G19 or M9. If I deliberately shoot the G21 faster it gets sloppy, and if I deliberately slow down with a G19 or M9 I can usually tighten up my shooting to match.

So performance wise I'd call it a wash, but there is something about a G21 that just naturally lines up for me. I can't explain it.

[Bucky]

Glocks shoot well, and I’ve always thought that grip and low bore axis really did well to control recoil. However, what also controls recoil well is weight. I’ve shot Glocks in Production, Limited, and now Carry Optics. I personally feel there are better options, but they come at greater cost and sometimes higher maintenance.

By the time spring is here, I’ll have a Shadow 2 carry optics gun, and I just had a match fit barrel done on my 34 to fix its horrid accuracy. I’m also adding the thug plug and pure tungsten guide rod per recommendations I’ve gotten here. I’ll be shooting both in competition and will see which works better for me.

[BigD]

I think GJM is correct. The grip angle is a plus. (The 'Glocks point high' idea goes away after enough practice, and then you can say '1911s point low.)

Matt Burkett does a demo with you holding a rod or 2x2 a couple of feet long. With you holding the rod in your hand with it perpendicular to your forearm, he can grab on end and easily manipulate it. Then you add a cant to your wrist, and it immediately becomes harder for Matt to manipulate the rod. It's biomechanics.

The point of the demo is to show why you should cant your support hand (fingers pointed down roughly 45° when fingers are extended, rather than to the horizon.) But it stands to reason that if canting is good for the support hand it's also good for the strong hand.

[JHC]

I'm mostly a 1911 shooter, but I've always liked the Glock grip angle. It's probably the thing I like most about Glocks, aside from their (mostly) robust utility.

Me too. I really don't find a conflict with the two. BTW one of the best illustrations and explanations of GJM's point about using the grip angle and wrist leverage with a Glock was Surf 's youtube video of some years back focused on this aspect specifically. I don't think that vid is available anymore.

[fixer]

I think GJM's question, given the information in the OP, could be re-arranged to be: How is the Glock platform so prevalent for so many, including top-tier shooters?

Yes its shootability.

But think there are some "statistics" here, if you will. The design is the "80% solution" for everything and everyone. It doesn't do anything poorly, in other words. And it does this for many different people and their hand sizes and shapes.

The platform has the shortest learning curve. The corollary here is that with a shorter learning curve there is a shorter learning curve for all other tiers of shooters trying to accomplish their goals.

The simple trigger is predictable, durable, reliable. Its design isn't bulls eye quality yet when shooting at speed it's characteristics allow for fast shot placement.

The ergonomics allow for steady and consistent handling under high stress conditions--again allowing for consistently high performance at speed.

[JHC]

Big Glock fan across decades. As Mr. White has noted, get it set up simple and one can forget about everything but developing software.

GJM - did I not see a post just very recently - possibly in the long STI thread, where a USPSA competitor observed that the prevalence of G34s at higher levels of the sport is declining distinctly vs a few other competition oriented striker guns and the Euro steel guns? If that is so what does that suggest?

Again, GJM, you have previously observed correctly in my view that the Glock is pretty easy for getting a shooter up to good performance but fairly challenging to get to high levels of excellence. Do you think that is still a valid observation?

Isn't that mostly attributed to factors around the grip and trigger that leads to hits creeping left with near any mistake?

Finger grooves - boom. Yep, never have complained about them ever. My G45 and 19X shooting got me to thinking I prefer the grooves albeit I really only see that manifest for tighter shots at greater ranges and I can't really tell if its locking in the grip with the grooves or trigger characteristics. Chuck Haggard ;) I remember.

I've introduced a three small handed females in my family to running a pistol and each of them has been able to turn in very nice new shooter performance quickly with Gen 3 and Gen 4 G19s so I don't think they can be bad in shootability.

[cornstalker]

The grip angle may be the least of the problems for some shooters. The thick, square backstrap and trigger reach combine for a situation where some shooters like me have to do the Glock reach-around. Reach-around to the trigger, reach-around to the mag release... Not an ideal grip for pushing the limits.

(Truth be known, my wrist doesn't really like to bend that way anymore anyways)

The Glock is still easy to be proficient with, but maybe not always optimum for pushing the edge of your performance. That of course, being viewed from the paradigm of a short-fingered individual.

[ccmdfd]

You certainly may be on to something regarding grip tension.

Back in the 90's I hung out with a club of IDPA shooters who used P7's. They often felt that one of the things which make the P7 shoot so well is the fact that the squeeze cocker forces you to use appropriate grip tension.

Of course that's all theory on their part.

cc

[spinmove_]

In my experience, I’ve always done best with whatever platform I’ve had the most experience and trigger time with at the time. I think Glocks are good enough to where they functionally aren’t holding the shooter back in terms of practical shooting so long as they’ve put the requisite time in to do well with it.

Individual skill is, IMHO, far and away the deciding factor. The hardware is merely the vehicle with which to get there. A Glock can certainly be taken to the highest levels of performance as we’ve seen. I do think, however, the reason why you see fewer Glocks at the top than CZs/Tanfos and 1911/2011s is because Glocks can make it a bit more DIFFICULT to be more CONSISTENT with.

What I mean by that is, if you’re having an “on” day with regards to properly executing the fundamentals, the Glock isn’t going to be any more of a deciding factor than any other platform. If you’re having an “off” day, I’ve found other platforms are more forgiving in terms of smoothing out those “lower than some of the other lows” while actually shooting.

Again, that’s my opinion, but it’s a trend that I experience personally as I continue my journey.

[YVK]

@GJM (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?u=410) - did I not see a post just very recently - possibly in the long STI thread, where a USPSA competitor observed that the prevalence of G34s at higher levels of the sport is declining distinctly vs a few other competition oriented striker guns and the Euro steel guns? If that is so what does that suggest?



Most of those guns are taking Glock's market share because of considerable out of box weight advantage, much better triggers, from factory or through aftermarket, and, in some instances, better accuracy. I don't think that they are gaining because of their superior ergonomic design that may be lending to better results, except in those cases where a person just doesn't like Glocks. Plus, as I had already mentioned in post # 16, a number of those guns set their grips in such a way that the ulnar deviation (medical for wrist angle) is similar to Glock's.

One of those guys who's currently on top of the competition pyramid and has only shot metal guns in his formal career said that it were not the USPSA where Glocks were disadvantaged. I took it as he could've been fine with a Glock in USPSA if he hadn't been shooting IPSC too.






Again, GJM, you have previously observed correctly in my view that the Glock is pretty easy for getting a shooter up to good performance but fairly challenging to get to high levels of excellence. Do you think that is still a valid observation?



I think that's true, and I think that somebody has already alluded to a reason. High levels of performance are nearly synonymous with "consistency". At a normal level of shooter's performance Glock vs non-Glock is a non-issue. You just don't get nearly as wide margin of error with a Glock (or any lightweight gun) if you fuck up your grip. Same goes for trigger press that's much easier to screw up with a Glock.

[JRV]

Chiming in for a brief counterpoint: within reason, grip angle and bore axis have little to do with shootability or recoil control, so long as they are within reason. Grip technique (strength/consistency) and an appropriate relationship between the “hotness” of the ammo and recoil/main springs allow pretty much any pistol to achieve a properly-timed recoil stroke.

As a matter of personal opinion, Glock ergos are terrible, especially on the 19 and 26 frames. I have a very high support hand grip, which, with a Glock, forces an unnaturally-extreme cant on my wrists. There are two reasons why it doesn’t work for me:

(1) It disrupts my ability to crush the gun. Make a fist with your wrist straight, and squeeze as tight as you can. Try to keep the same tension in the first while rolling the wrist forward. With my left hand, the forearm engagement needed to roll my wrist weakens the squeezing force in my fist, especially across the index and middle fingers.

(2) Rolling my wrist to the extent required forces my elbows up and out, which forces my shoulders up, which engages my delts and traps unnecessarily. It causes a lot of tightness in my shooting, which is fatiguing and makes fast transitions more difficult.

It looks like that’s not everyone’s experience, which is cool. There are guns for everyone.

[psalms144.1]

I concur that nothing controls recoil better than the Glock grip angle - Gaston was on to something there. I totally disagree that that equals "equivalent shootability" to other platforms, at least for me. I have a number of injuries to my support hand and wrist, so I can't take advantage of that grip angle to get the aggressive forward break that is optimal for control with the Glock. I can attest that, after not having even touched one for nearly four years, my first trip to the range with a 5" all steel 1911 in .45 resulted in significantly better accuracy, and minimal loss of speed on timed drills (less, of course, the need to reload a lot more!).

I'm still carrying my G19 as my primary duty gun, mostly for capacity reasons, given the recent spate of active shooters on Navy bases. But, when the Staccato C2 and/or DWX compact hit the market, I might finally have my "Glock Killer"

[okie john]

I think that the Glock has a combination of features that land it in some kind of mystical sweet spot. I’ve tested pistols with better triggers and pistols that were more accurate in slow fire at longer ranges, but I keep coming back to the Glock.


5. Rectangular cross section grip has abundant space for both hands.

I suspect that the Glock’s flat sides help orient the pistol in the hand during draws at speed. I got that idea from a post that Darryl wrote about knife handles. A couple of years after I read that post, I went down the HK rabbit hole (P30LS, VP9, VP40, USP). All were more accurate in slow fire at longer ranges and I shot some of my best times and scores on The Test with the VPs. But when I really hit the gas, I was much more likely to throw a flyer—and I mean REALLY throw it—with a VP than with a Glock. Not sure why that is, but I keep coming back to how the flat sides helped to orient the pistol in my hands at an almost subconscious level.


Okie John

[cornstalker]

I think that the Glock has a combination of features that land it in some kind of mystical sweet spot. I’ve tested pistols with better triggers and pistols that were more accurate in slow fire at longer ranges, but I keep coming back to the Glock.



I suspect that the Glock’s flat sides help orient the pistol in the hand during draws at speed. I got that idea from a post that Darryl wrote about knife handles. A couple of years after I read that post, I went down the HK rabbit hole (P30LS, VP9, VP40, USP). All were more accurate in slow fire at longer ranges and I shot some of my best times and scores on The Test with the VPs. But when I really hit the gas, I was much more likely to throw a flyer—and I mean REALLY throw it—with a VP than with a Glock. Not sure why that is, but I keep coming back to how the flat sides helped to orient the pistol in my hands at an almost subconscious level.


Okie John

I have to agree with your assessment.


I also recall JodyH stating the same thing about the flat sides of the USPc.

I did notice that for me the Glock sights tracked straight up and down at speed, whereas my P30L looked more like a rabbit running in the headlights.

[M2CattleCo]

I don't think Glocks are shootable so much as they're workable.

USPSA/IDPA type competition doesn't require an above average level of mechanical accuracy. Any gun on the market is good enough.

Glock doesn't put obnoxious slide stop levers, decockers, safeties in the wrong place.

Glock sights are easy to change.

Glocks doesn't make the grips overly ergonomic. Guns that fit the hand perfectly are difficult to control for strings.

Bore axis is a thing. Especially with lightweight plastic frames and no hammer/mainspring for the slide to overcome.

Glocks are easy to tinker with. If you have low standards you can have your very own 'trigger job'. :D

Glocks are 'serious' guns. They're in LE and mil holsters world-wide and people like shooting serious guns. Perception is reality.

A talented shooter can run anything well. Talent makes it to the top.

[NETim]

When working Bill Drills for instance, the dot never leaves the window of the sight during recoil, which encourages me to go faster. (And yes, I'm shooting loads that are above minimum minor PF enough to be confident on any crono.)

I like that I can get a lot of meat on grip of a Glock with the large backstrap installed. I would like to try an "XL" version if it were ever produced. I just feel like I can grab the gun hard and I don't have to worry about interfering with any knobs, switches or doodads.

[pew_pew]

Chiming in for a brief counterpoint: within reason, grip angle and bore axis have little to do with shootability or recoil control, so long as they are within reason. Grip technique (strength/consistency) and an appropriate relationship between the “hotness” of the ammo and recoil/main springs allow pretty much any pistol to achieve a properly-timed recoil stroke.

As a matter of personal opinion, Glock ergos are terrible, especially on the 19 and 26 frames. I have a very high support hand grip, which, with a Glock, forces an unnaturally-extreme cant on my wrists. There are two reasons why it doesn’t work for me:

(1) It disrupts my ability to crush the gun. Make a fist with your wrist straight, and squeeze as tight as you can. Try to keep the same tension in the first while rolling the wrist forward. With my left hand, the forearm engagement needed to roll my wrist weakens the squeezing force in my fist, especially across the index and middle fingers.

(2) Rolling my wrist to the extent required forces my elbows up and out, which forces my shoulders up, which engages my delts and traps unnecessarily. It causes a lot of tightness in my shooting, which is fatiguing and makes fast transitions more difficult.

It looks like that’s not everyone’s experience, which is cool. There are guns for everyone.

I’m glad you posted this. I’ve felt this exact way for a long time and kind of force myself to shoot Glocks but all this mirrors my experiences perfectly.

[SecondsCount]

I have a couple Glocks, all stock as they came from the factory, and agree on the grip angle. It is an advantage. They shoot well enough for defensive uses but when I get done shooting one, I feel like I just finished driving an old truck. Recently I tried a CZ P10C and it feels the same way. The G19.5 that I shot feels better than any Glock that I have shot so they are making progress.

As much time as I spend shooting, I would much rather spend that time with something I love to shoot :cool:

[HopetonBrown]

I They shoot well enough for defensive uses

What does that mean?

[blues]

What does that mean?

Sounds like he's saying that they get the job done...but he doesn't particularly enjoy shooting them. No different than cars or motorcycles I guess. Most will reliably get you from point A to point B but most will have a preference for one or another.

[spinmove_]

What does that mean?


Sounds like he's saying that they get the job done...but he doesn't particularly enjoy shooting them. No different than cars or motorcycles I guess. Most will reliably get you from point A to point B but most will have a preference for one or another.

This. It’s kind of like driving a mid to late 2000’s Chevy Aveo. Can it get you from point A to point B? Sure. It’s hell on my knees regardless of where I put the seat for distances longer than across town and especially going completely across the state of Michigan. Ask me how I know. Fortunately I wasn’t the one who bought it.

[HopetonBrown]

Sounds like he's saying that they get the job done...but he doesn't particularly enjoy shooting them. No different than cars or motorcycles I guess. Most will reliably get you from point A to point B but most will have a preference for one or another.Isn't defensive use the most demanding and important use?

[blues]

Isn't defensive use the most demanding and important use?

Preaching to the choir, brother. The only semi-autos I own and carry are Glocks. I've carried and shot several others, primarily on the job.

I don't dispute that for many folks the ergos of other guns may fit them better and perhaps lead to better and more reliable shooting. Or that the other guns may be more attractive to them.

For me, I only care that the gun functions when I need it to and that I shoot it well enough for what I consider to be my purposes. The simplicity of the Glock combined with the lack of a manual safety and its reliability makes it "beautiful" to me. I consider it the gun I want with me if I get into a gunfight.

But I am not a gun collector and my purposes are purely defensive as opposed to recreational shooting. (The new Glock 44 might lead me toward some more recreational shooting in the future.)

To each his own. I'm happy with my choice and take no offense with what others may prefer.

[Robinson]

Isn't defensive use the most demanding and important use?

Arguably the most important, but probably not the most demanding in terms of "shootability". Most demanding in some aspects certainly.

[HopetonBrown]

Arguably the most important, but probably not the most demanding in terms of "shootability". Most demanding in some aspects certainly.Didn't some cops just shoot a bystander and a hostage?

I'm not getting how "shoot ability" is further down the ladder for a life saving tool.

[miller_man]

As Gio just pointed out in another thread, and USPSA and IDPA (the Vogel games) results confirm, a Glock is no disadvantage in high level competition in Production, Limited, Carry Optics and whatever the IDPA equivalents of these divisions is. Consider that a $500 hunk of plastic that weighs about half as much and costs 1/2 to a 1/10 of a metal pistol, can run with those dedicated competition guns.

So why is this so?

I think - Because high level competitors. These are the guys/gals who out train most folks and know how to train to squeeze every ounce of performance out of their gear and themselves. The glock is not at any real disadvantage. I don't think the weight difference and especially the cost difference isn't enough to really matter, the fundamentals and skill matter far more. "its the Indian not the arrow". Put any somewhat decent pistol in the hands of one of the top 5 national finishers hands, give them a year to train with it and they will still be in the top of the pack.

The glock is fine. Didn't Leatham do pretty well with an XD? JJ with a Caracal?

[spinmove_]

I think - Because high level competitors. These are the guys/gals who out train most folks and know how to train to squeeze every ounce of performance out of their gear and themselves. The glock is not at any real disadvantage. I don't think the weight difference and especially the cost difference isn't enough to really matter, the fundamentals and skill matter far more. "its the Indian not the arrow". Put any somewhat decent pistol in the hands of one of the top 5 national finishers hands, give them a year to train with it and they will still be in the top of the pack.

The glock is fine. Didn't Leatham do pretty well with an XD? JJ with a Caracal?

Matt Hopkins went from shooting Shadows and Shadow 2s for years to shooting a P-10F this year. He stated that, while there was a learning curve, once he was up to speed the P-10F didn’t really hold him back. The gun was just different in that the pros and cons of the platform were not the same as the pros and cons of a Shadow 2.

My takeaway from that is: the hardware essentially doesn't matter so long as it doesn’t suck. Just stick with it and make yourself better.

[Robinson]

Didn't some cops just shoot a bystander and a hostage?

I'm not getting how "shoot ability" is further down the ladder for a life saving tool.

Just my opinion, the most critical things in a defensive shooting are going to be the person's readiness, willingness, and ability to act quickly, appropriately, and decisively when the moment presents itself. The technical shooting problems that need to be solved in most (most, not all) defensive shootings are probably not as demanding as say a highly technical stage in a shooting match.

Attending training by a qualified instructor and consistent practice will probably make more difference than the type of gun a person is carrying. But I will concede your point if you mean to say that the "shootability" of a particular gun in a given user's hands will lead to a higher level of proficiency and confidence within the context of a defensive shooting.

I like Glocks and find them shootable. But I really like the trigger, weight, and redundant safeties on the 1911. And I find it shootable too.

[pew_pew]

Matt Hopkins went from shooting Shadows and Shadow 2s for years to shooting a P-10F this year. He stated that, while there was a learning curve, once he was up to speed the P-10F didn’t really hold him back. The gun was just different in that the pros and cons of the platform were not the same as the pros and cons of a Shadow 2.

My takeaway from that is: the hardware essentially doesn't matter so long as it doesn’t suck. Just stick with it and make yourself better.

I just listened to a recent podcast and he said the p10 wasn’t as good. Even though he put 10s of thousands of rounds through it, wasn’t as good and he’s back to the shadow 2.

[nwhpfan]

I shoot a Glock and I've done OK shooting one. If it has any advantage it's that it allows a person to focus on themselves; their training, their performance. When you are not very good and you have a Glock, you can watch videos of this person or that doing 1.80 bills, winning championships, etc. They are doing it wtih a Glock, the same gun you have, not some 7k SVI. So it's not the gun, it's you. And "all" they did was put in the work. Dry fire. I don't think the Glock has any "advantages" or features that make it perform better than other guns available.

[miller_man]

I just listened to a recent podcast and he said the p10 wasn’t as good. Even though he put 10s of thousands of rounds through it, wasn’t as good and he’s back to the shadow 2.

I heard that too. I had thought he was more saying he never completely got used to it, but I didn't think it was as much about the gun just "wasn't as good".

Either way, I probably don't have to shoot thousands of rounds through either gun to reach that conclusion. I doubt many shooters would say any plastic pistol is as good or better in pure shooting than a shadow/stock 2 or 2011 type guns ??

[QuickStrike]

Is that what makes those stupid things easier for me to shoot, than my preferred guns? :mad:



I really do need a couple more gen5’s...

[Obelisk]

I used to absolutely hate Glocks. But it was for a whole host of reasons, some valid and some because I needed training and practice. So some of the blame was I associated my poor handgun skills with the Glock instead of getting instruction and practicing. My duty weapon of 22 years has been a Glock 17. My gen 2 was a worn out weapon by the time I got it. Probably 15+ years old and I didn’t like the feel of it. But I shot decent with it. Then we got the gen 3s. I actually liked the gen 3 and I shot great with it. But honestly I didn’t train or practice. Then I got issued the gen 4. I don’t know what trigger is on it but it feels heavy like snapping a tree branch. I’m not the only one, I’ll go to the range and pass it around and other shooters are like “dude this sucks”. Even with 8k through it, it still has a meh trigger. Due to policy I can’t modify it or take it apart.

So I got training from a competition shooter. I asked him to train me like I’ve never shot a gun before. Before long the faults of the Glock faded. The trigger could still be better, but it doesn’t really matter. I go shoot my other handguns and I just can’t get as high as a grip or as good a grip. Maybe it’s the fact I’ve shot Glocks more, but I’m used to the grip now. Trigger aside it’s the shooting characteristics. After really practicing with around 4K rounds with the gen 4 I don’t get slide bite anymore as I have large hands.

I was considering buying another plastic wonder pistol with a better trigger, but this forum convinced me to buy a gen 5. There are as you know tons of other plastic wonder pistols out there with better grips and triggers. Deficiencies aside that I can modify, I can really get a great grip on it. My supporting hand thumb has a nice home on the side. My goal is shooting steel plates fast and I want a gun that shoots fast thus getting a 34. It won’t have the ability to get like a cocked striker fired gun, but it’s more than just the trigger. Nicer plastic wonder pistols do not mean they're going to run fast. Does the gun feel great in the gun store and shooting it is not conductive to speed? Personal preference I guess. I might go buy a Shadow 2 in 2020 or the DWX. Maybe for some the Glock just hits all boxes for speed. But I’m still learning.

[Surf]

Me too. I really don't find a conflict with the two. BTW one of the best illustrations and explanations of GJM's point about using the grip angle and wrist leverage with a Glock was Surf 's youtube video of some years back focused on this aspect specifically. I don't think that vid is available anymore.Thanks for the @ quote or I would not see this. You are correct that I spent quite a bit of time on this topic when it came to the Glock. As some older enough to remember I was a big steel frame 1911, P226 DA/SA guy prior to my acceptance of the Glock.

Circa early 2000's, my research found that top shooters in competition were killing it, and the Glock became a tool of choice. The Mid 2000's was a revelation for me and my early days of fusing "competition meets tactical." As a farily recoginized guy from the tactical world, I got more shit for having a timer on the range and implementing "competition" types of drills/stages of fire in tactical training circles. Around the late 200X time frame, I was pretty much shunned in the tactical community for my choices of drills and timers, get ya kilt yak now. Right up until the point where our shooters were crushing the "tactical" world. Now we are much more educated and many outlier techniques and training methodologies are standard fares these days. It just progress.

We were doing things with Glocks that were unheard of, pioneering trigger jobs, and frame modifications, that have become boxed drop in products or even stock features on modern Gen 5's. It took Glock long enough, but they are catching on, ever so slowly. Glock still can't do it as well as the top aftermarket guys, but progress none-the-less. Hell, we were making Gen 7 Glocks 10 years ago, and Glock is only at Gen 5. If you look at the Gen 5, where did you first hear about, and see these types of upgrades? ;)

Yes, I had more than extensive discussions on youtube about the Glock, including the grip angle, wrist cam benefits, etc, etc. I appreciate that almost a decade later people still remember the channel and videos. There were only a few of us talking about these things back then, and only until some of the more well-known competition shooters started supporting these ideas, did they gain credibility and have become mainstream and accepted as best practice with the Glock.

Knowledge is often circular, and it is not surprising that others are coming to conclusions that have been discussed for many of us years ago. Heck just look at the training community and the modern youtube gun people that are given more serious consideration. They are often speaking about revelations that have been discussed years ago. Training groups and youtube, there is no shortage of hacks out there, and many are hard to digest, but all-in-all the firearms training community is much more knowledgable than a decade ago.

[JTQ]

We were doing things with Glocks that were unheard of, ... and frame modifications, that have become boxed drop in products or even stock features on modern Gen 5's. ... If you look at the Gen 5, where did you first hear about, and see these types of upgrades? ;)

When I first saw the Gen 5 magwell, the first thing that popped into my mind was either a post here or a video I'd seen of you showing how you did your Glock magwells.

Since the thread is the shoot-ability of Glock's...

Knowledge is often circular, ...
Over the years and over a couple of forums I've seen some of your comments concerning the G17 vs G34. I believe some of the older stuff showed your preference for the G34, but I think it is more recent stuff showed a preference for the G17? True?

[TCFD273]

I would say they are not less shootable than other pistols, as opposed to they are more shootable.

It’s pretty disappointing when you can clear a plate rack faster with stock Gen 5 19 than your 6k custom 9mm 1911. [emoji23]



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spinmove_]

I just listened to a recent podcast and he said the p10 wasn’t as good. Even though he put 10s of thousands of rounds through it, wasn’t as good and he’s back to the shadow 2.

It’s a gun literally built for USPSA/IPSC Production vs a polymer Glock clone. Of course the P-10 isn’t going to be viewed to be “as good as” a Shadow 2. I don’t think anyone is saying that. And if I were Matt, I’d most likely go back to the optimized platform of my sport too. But he also did say that the time spent with the P-10 was a valuable learning experience and how he grew as a shooter by trying something new for a season. So it wasn’t a loss by any stretch. He still shot roughly on par with his ability on a new gun.

[M2CattleCo]

It’s pretty disappointing when you can clear a plate rack faster with stock Gen 5 19 than your 6k custom 9mm 1911. [emoji23]



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Crisp triggers aren't for handguns. At least not people who can shoot.

[pew_pew]

It’s a gun literally built for USPSA/IPSC Production vs a polymer Glock clone. Of course the P-10 isn’t going to be viewed to be “as good as” a Shadow 2. I don’t think anyone is saying that. And if I were Matt, I’d most likely go back to the optimized platform of my sport too. But he also did say that the time spent with the P-10 was a valuable learning experience and how he grew as a shooter by trying something new for a season. So it wasn’t a loss by any stretch. He still shot roughly on par with his ability on a new gun.

He’s literally paid by CZ. He’s careful what he says about any of their products in public.

[JAH 3rd]

So my one and only dalliance into the Glock world has been with the G21. I have had 3 of them over the years. While not uncomfortable, there are other platforms (M&P 45) which I much prefer due to the fact feels so much better in the hand, especially the 2.0's grip texture.

So the other day I purchased a Gen 5 Glock 17 with Glock night sights. I did this after shooting a friend's Gen 5 Glock 19 with Glock night sights. The trigger was great.......much improved over the 21s I have had. The grip texture and overall of things just working together on this pistol. No frills, just the things you need for a shootable pistol and nothing you don't need.

So........if the rain ever lets up and that coincides with a day of nothing planned, then to the range I am headed. Hopefully sometime this weekend. I will shoot Winchester NATO and HST 147 jhp ammo. Eight mags topped off and ready to go. For a 17 round magazine, do I dare say they are compact? But like I said, G21 is my only Glock history, so these G17 mags are a breath of fresh air size wise.

[spinmove_]

He’s literally paid by CZ. He’s careful what he says about any of their products in public.

I get that, but what he’s getting at is the same thing that Ben has said on the podcast in several previous episodes when he goes out and shoots his Glocks. I’m not sure why this concept is difficult to accept.

[pew_pew]

I get that, but what he’s getting at is the same thing that Ben has said on the podcast in several previous episodes when he goes out and shoots his Glocks. I’m not sure why this concept is difficult to accept.

Lol, don’t be a d*** about things and people won’t call you out.

[spinmove_]

Lol, don’t be a d*** about things and people won’t call you out.

Um...what? Are you reading the same thread I am? Where am I being a dick? I’m simply interpreting what I heard on a podcast.

[Surf]

When I first saw the Gen 5 magwell, the first thing that popped into my mind was either a post here or a video I'd seen of you showing how you did your Glock magwells.

Since the thread is the shoot-ability of Glock's...

Over the years and over a couple of forums I've seen some of your comments concerning the G17 vs G34. I believe some of the older stuff showed your preference for the G34, but I think it is more recent stuff showed a preference for the G17? True?I started with G27 as a BUG in the early 90's. I didn't get serious with Glock until I got into a Gen 3 G34 as that was the competition shooters Glock of choice. I did well with it, however, I did not prefer the grip size of the Gen3's and I hated the finger grooves, still do. With not large hands, the trigger reach sucked and the finger grooves exacerbated the issue, so what do you do to a cheap piece of polymer? Fix it. I got deep into Glocksmithing, frame mods, trigger enhancements, moving trigger pin placement, reshaping engagement angles, etc. Years later and to this day some guys really took the frame mods into an art form.

I was excited about the Gen4 primarily due to the reconfig of the grip size. So I got one of the first serial run Gen4 G17's which most of my past videos highlighted. Over thousands upon thousands of rounds fired, video analysis, tracking results on the accuracy, timer, etc, I noticed a distinctive pattern, even comparing pistols back to back. It was clear that for me the G17 stayed flatter on its recoil phase, primarily on the negative camber or downward dip of the muzzle vs the G34. I took the extended mass of the G34 slide length as a negative and the G34 had more downward or negative dip and the 17 performed better, for me.

I took this one step further with the G19 in that I felt the shorter slide was more controllable, but the big negative was the size of the grip and the incorrect or terrible placement of the hump on the backstrap. Relatively speaking the G17 and G19 hump is in a different location on the palm. Even hacking it up and reshaping, I could never get it as good as the 17 sized frame. I was asking guys at Glock for a G19 slide on a G17 frame for years. Better late than never.

I worked on several products that went to the aftermarket, and I had close ties to certain Glock people. We continuously bounced ideas around and many of us harped on finger groove and magwell improvements and cleaning up the molding process and how that affected the magwell area when it cooled. I know the complexities of Glock production and the feasibility of new products and models, so Glock moves slowly for a reason.

[JTQ]

... so what do you do to a cheap piece of polymer? Fix it.
Since a forum member asked me, some may not have seen the video's. Here are two I found. If you have more, the folks would probably enjoy them.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b9M3UGkgDI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLTs0gIaSt4

[GJM]

I started with G27 as a BUG in the early 90's. I didn't get serious with Glock until I got into a Gen 3 G34 as that was the competition shooters Glock of choice. I did well with it, however, I did not prefer the grip size of the Gen3's and I hated the finger grooves, still do. With not large hands, the trigger reach sucked and the finger grooves exacerbated the issue, so what do you do to a cheap piece of polymer? Fix it. I got deep into Glocksmithing, frame mods, trigger enhancements, moving trigger pin placement, reshaping engagement angles, etc. Years later and to this day some guys really took the frame mods into an art form.

I was excited about the Gen4 primarily due to the reconfig of the grip size. So I got one of the first serial run Gen4 G17's which most of my past videos highlighted. Over thousands upon thousands of rounds fired, video analysis, tracking results on the accuracy, timer, etc, I noticed a distinctive pattern, even comparing pistols back to back. It was clear that for me the G17 stayed flatter on its recoil phase, primarily on the negative camber or downward dip of the muzzle vs the G34. I took the extended mass of the G34 slide length as a negative and the G34 had more downward or negative dip and the 17 performed better, for me.

I took this one step further with the G19 in that I felt the shorter slide was more controllable, but the big negative was the size of the grip and the incorrect or terrible placement of the hump on the backstrap. Relatively speaking the G17 and G19 hump is in a different location on the palm. Even hacking it up and reshaping, I could never get it as good as the 17 sized frame. I was asking guys at Glock for a G19 slide on a G17 frame for years. Better late than never.

I worked on several products that went to the aftermarket, and I had close ties to certain Glock people. We continuously bounced ideas around and many of us harped on finger groove and magwell improvements and cleaning up the molding process and how that affected the magwell area when it cooled. I know the complexities of Glock production and the feasibility of new products and models, so Glock moves slowly for a reason.

What is interesting, is when shooting a Glock with a dot, I find the short slide visually seems to shoot flatter than a longer slide. However, I do much better in matches shooting a 34 with a dot, that a shorter slide Glock. In addition, the best Glock shooters, with and without a dot, like Shane Coley, Dave Sevigny, Robert Vogel and many others, all use a 34/35 length slide Glock in competition.

[HCM]

45845

[TGS]

This thread is surely interesting given the explosion of interest in the Staccato-P as if it's the gun hitting the market is akin to the discovery of a new primary color.

[HCM]

This thread is surely interesting given the explosion of interest in the Staccato-P as if it's the gun hitting the market is akin to the discovery of a new primary color.

One thing the 1911/2011 and the Glock share in the “shootability” Department is a grip with flat sides. Likely a a factor in the USPC vs P2000 shootability as well.

The 2011 is strong in one of the Glocks weaker areas - the trigger. No just the weight, but the shape /movement of a sliding trigger in attack vs a fulcrum trigger.

[gomerpyle]

The flat sides allow for ease of indexing, the flat front strap encourages a grip where pressure is directed from the front strap to the backstrap, and the sheer volume of the grip itself easily fills the hands, minimizing the possibility of slippage during recoil. I see the perceived disadvantages of the 2X4 grip as favorable features.

What's more, the ease of maintenance and breakdown allows the user to install a better trigger:)

[Surf]

What is interesting, is when shooting a Glock with a dot, I find the short slide visually seems to shoot flatter than a longer slide. However, I do much better in matches shooting a 34 with a dot, that a shorter slide Glock. In addition, the best Glock shooters, with and without a dot, like Shane Coley, Dave Sevigny, Robert Vogel and many others, all use a 34/35 length slide Glock in competition.I am not a competition shooter, so I don't have that exact frame of reference, but I run all the qualifiers for about everything not too mention many skills drills continuously and use these benchmarks to help track performance. I have been revisiting the red dot and running one on a G19 for about the past 6 months. Getting the hang of the dot. I just started playing with the G45 and I am running that pistol very well, and I am planning on picking up an MOS version shortly.

This is just for me, but I have found over the years that my performance numbers (splitting hairs) is better with the 17 over the 34, and the G19x and G45 that I have been shooting, and the 19 with a dot has been crushing many of my benchmarks, even back to back with all models.

This is one example, that may not be as relevant in competition, but where I see the biggest difference in 19 to 17 to 34, is in longer very rapid strings of fire, in say a bill drill. When pushing top speeds in longer strings of fire, I get much more muzzle whip and negative camber on recoil the longer the slide gets. I do better with the 45 over the 19 which is no doubt due to the tuning of the Gen5 but also the G17 grip size. Again this may not be as relevant in competition.

No questioning top Glock shooters like Sevigny and Vogel and the slew of guys/gals running 34's in competition and my opinion is not along those lines. Sevigny is who got me into the Glock game and the G34, so I definitely admire the skills. I know Shane is Glock but he has an interesting take on the G45 that mirrors my experience. I don't think he will start competing with it any time soon however.

[MGW]

I am not a competition shooter, so I don't have that exact frame of reference, but I run all the qualifiers for about everything not too mention many skills drills continuously and use these benchmarks to help track performance. I have been revisiting the red dot and running one on a G19 for about the past 6 months. Getting the hang of the dot. I just started playing with the G45 and I am running that pistol very well, and I am planning on picking up an MOS version shortly.

This is just for me, but I have found over the years that my performance numbers (splitting hairs) is better with the 17 over the 34, and the G19x and G45 that I have been shooting, and the 19 with a dot has been crushing many of my benchmarks, even back to back with all models.

This is one example, that may not be as relevant in competition, but where I see the biggest difference in 19 to 17 to 34, is in longer very rapid strings of fire, in say a bill drill. When pushing top speeds in longer strings of fire, I get much more muzzle whip and negative camber on recoil the longer the slide gets. I do better with the 45 over the 19 which is no doubt due to the tuning of the Gen5 but also the G17 grip size. Again this may not be as relevant in competition.

No questioning top Glock shooters like Sevigny and Vogel and the slew of guys/gals running 34's in competition and my opinion is not along those lines. Sevigny is who got me into the Glock game and the G34, so I definitely admire the skills. I know Shane is Glock but he has an interesting take on the G45 that mirrors my experience. I don't think he will start competing with it any time soon however.

I’m still subscribed to your new YouTube channel. I would love it if you would start putting out videos again. Any chance of seeing something from you on the G45?

[Cool Breeze]

This is a really interesting thread. I enjoyed reading it.

Could you test this theory by using a grip force adapter or chopping the bottom half of the oem backstrap and checking your splits/accuracy with a timer?

[JHC]

The flat sides allow for ease of indexing, the flat front strap encourages a grip where pressure is directed from the front strap to the backstrap, and the sheer volume of the grip itself easily fills the hands, minimizing the possibility of slippage during recoil. I see the perceived disadvantages of the 2X4 grip as favorable features.

What's more, the ease of maintenance and breakdown allows the user to install a better trigger:)

Indeed and I've found it so also. Begs the question what is actually ergonomic vs what numerous newer, curvier designs have claimed to be ergonomic.

[JAH 3rd]

Agree with JHC and gomerpyle.........it's the actual user that defines ergonomic. One persons 2x4 is another persons ideal grip. This week I bought a Glock 17 gen 5 after shooting a friend's 19.5. The larger grip of my G21 for years colored my opinion of the whole Glock lineup. Now I am about to take a deep breath, hold my nose, and jump into the Glock platform like I never envisioned.

[Gio]

Regarding triggers, I don't think a crisp single action trigger contributes to being able to shoot action pistol types of stages or drills. A finely tuned 1911 trigger is great for shooting slow fire accuracy, and people love to pick up a gun like that and dry fire such a nice crisp trigger, but when you start running the gun fast, you are susceptible to the same mistakes in your trigger press that will pull the sights off target before the shot breaks. On drills like FAST drills, bill drills, distance change up drills, blake drills, and el presidente, groups and hits are not statistically different between a finely tuned single action trigger and a Glock trigger.

Also, regarding ergonomics, I don't find something that "feels good in the hand" in the gun store translates into shoot-ability on the range. The H&K P30 is a great example. Gripping it feels like a well fit glove, but I can get better contact with my hands in the right spots on a Glock to control recoil than I can on a P30.

[Irelander]

I shot Glocks for several years and always struggled with them. I think most of my struggle is due to my trigger finger bone structure. My trigger finger bows toward my middle finger. The Glock grip angle positions the web of the hand slightly higher than the trigger. This grip angle places my trigger finger at the bottom of the trigger and rubs against the bottom of the trigger guard and made it uncomfortable to shoot. G19 finger grooves also do not fit me so I grind them off.

I now carry a P2000SK V2 and the grip angle feels so much better to me. Even with the shorter grip and barrel I'm seeing better scores than I ever did with my G19 Gen3.

While I still greatly respect the Glock design and still shoot my G19 once in a while, I feel more comfortable with a more traditional grip angle.

[Alpha Sierra]

This grip angle places my trigger finger at the bottom of the trigger and rubs against the bottom of the trigger guard and made it uncomfortable to shoot.
That right there is why I sold my first and last Glock (17G4). I could not find a way to keep my trigger finger from dragging on the bottom inside of the guard. Went to CZ and never looked back.

[RJ]

Also, regarding ergonomics, I don't find something that "feels good in the hand" in the gun store translates into shoot-ability on the range.



There is so much truth in this.

Us noobs have to learn this the hard way. I finally did, but it took me like 5 gun swaps to understand. I’ll never buy another gun without shooting it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[M2CattleCo]

I shot Glocks for several years and always struggled with them. I think most of my struggle is due to my trigger finger bone structure. My trigger finger bows toward my middle finger. The Glock grip angle positions the web of the hand slightly higher than the trigger. This grip angle places my trigger finger at the bottom of the trigger and rubs against the bottom of the trigger guard and made it uncomfortable to shoot. G19 finger grooves also do not fit me so I grind them off.

I now carry a P2000SK V2 and the grip angle feels so much better to me. Even with the shorter grip and barrel I'm seeing better scores than I ever did with my G19 Gen3.

While I still greatly respect the Glock design and still shoot my G19 once in a while, I feel more comfortable with a more traditional grip angle.

My trigger finger is somewhat the same and the middle joint pushes on the frame above the trigger. Makes it very difficult to pull the trigger without disrupting the sights.

[GJM]

I think setting the proper wrist angle and tension is way more important than how much finger and how it is placed on the trigger. Messing with trigger finger is like the tail wagging the dog.

A friend of mine, excellent shooter, was struggling with shots going left and right while shooting one hand with his a Glock 48. We fixed his grip angle, and all of the sudden shots were centered.

Hold a Glock, very the amount of trigger finger, and observe. Then hold a Glock, adjust your wrist angle left and right, and observe, and I think yiu will see what I am talking about.

[john c]

With respect to the G34 used by high level shooters, it’s my understanding (and please correct me if I’m wrong) that part of the reason was being able to shoot major with +p+ loads out of the longer barrel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[john c]

I think setting the proper wrist angle and tension is way more important than how much finger and how it is placed on the trigger. Messing with trigger finger is like the tail wagging the dog.

A friend of mine, excellent shooter, was struggling with shots going left and right while shooting one hand with his a Glock 48. We fixed his grip angle, and all of the sudden shots were centered.

Hold a Glock, very the amount of trigger finger, and observe. Then hold a Glock, adjust your wrist angle left and right, and observe, and I think yiu will see what I am talking about.

I need this sort of instruction. Do you know of an instructor who can teach this?

I’m a “pretty good” shooter, but I think that subtle issues like this (and probably 20 other issues) are holding me back by 1-2%. These are the hard issues to work on, because there’s not a lot of info out there on subtle techniques.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spinmove_]

Then hold a Glock, adjust your wrist angle left and right, and observe, and I think yiu will see what I am talking about.

Maybe I missed it. Can you expound further on adjusting wrist angle left or right?

[blues]

Maybe I missed it. Can you expound further on adjusting wrist angle left or right?

Glad you asked. I tried doing just that but all I seem to accomplish is ruining my sight picture, or making it awkward to achieve.

[Mr_White]

I really think a part of what makes the Glock 'so shootable' is the grip angle. So many folks profess to hate it, but I think it preloads the wrists for mitigating recoil (feels stronger to me, but no I couldn't cite any numbers on that), and the fact that it 'points high' I think helps counteract the perpetual issue of low shots from anticipation, jerking, etc. I think that second part is really huge in the far larger picture than PF. There is a lot of trigger jerking and anticipating and low shots going on out there in the world, and the Glock grip angle is doing good work to mitigate that issue.

[GJM]

Hold an imaginary Glock in your hand, and press your imaginary trigger. Then vary your wrist position left and right, and observe its effect on the trigger press. The goal is to set your wrist angle so the trigger is coming straight back. One hand really shows this as you don’t have the other hand to mask imperfection in your press.

Leaving aside the mental game, which is a whole different story, every bit of progress I have made in technical shooting the past year has come from refinement of my fundamentals. That progress with fundamentals has come from self examination and reflection. Almost all has been from my elbows all the way out to the pistol. My issues are probably not your issues, so you need to identify weaknesses and fix them.

[Irelander]

My trigger finger is somewhat the same and the middle joint pushes on the frame above the trigger. Makes it very difficult to pull the trigger without disrupting the sights.

Yeah...I get that too.

[Duelist]

I really think a part of what makes the Glock 'so shootable' is the grip angle. So many folks profess to hate it, but I think it preloads the wrists for mitigating recoil (feels stronger to me, but no I couldn't cite any numbers on that), and the fact that it 'points high' I think helps counteract the perpetual issue of low shots from anticipation, jerking, etc. I think that second part is really huge in the far larger picture than PF. There is a lot of trigger jerking and anticipating and low shots going on out there in the world, and the Glock grip angle is doing good work to mitigate that issue.

IIRC, I pulled plenty of shots low with my Glock in your class, Gabe. But that’s probably because I suck. LOL!

[cheby]

With respect to the G34 used by high level shooters, it’s my understanding (and please correct me if I’m wrong) that part of the reason was being able to shoot major with +p+ loads out of the longer barrel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wrong. The major scoring does not apply to 9mm unless in Open division (Where there is no use for G34) . If you shoot Limited and want to shoot major PF, it has to be minimum 40SW (Or 357Sig for that matter) according to the rules

[Cool Breeze]

Hold an imaginary Glock in your hand, and press your imaginary trigger. Then vary your wrist position left and right, and observe its effect on the trigger press. The goal is to set your wrist angle so the trigger is coming straight back. One hand really shows this as you don’t have the other hand to mask imperfection in your press.

Leaving aside the mental game, which is a whole different story, every bit of progress I have made in technical shooting the past year has come from refinement of my fundamentals. That progress with fundamentals has come from self examination and reflection. Almost all has been from my elbows all the way out to the pistol. My issues are probably not your issues, so you need to identify weaknesses and fix them.Any chance you can post a Pic of a few different options? I'm having a hard time understanding the explanation.

Are you literally changing the grip around the gun to achieve this? 1 version of your grip has middle knuckle directly under trigger guard causing wrist to be more flat while version two middle knuckle is to right of trigger guard causing it to be bent?

Or are you keeping grip same and just bending wrist from varying degrees of flat to towards your forearm? Thank you!

[Alpha Sierra]

No amount of grip angle changes are going to fix the fact that the Glock trigger guard is smaller than it needs to be and that some people can't press the trigger (no matter how they grip the pistol) without their finger dragging somewhere inside the trigger guard. This fucks up your sight alignment when you least can afford it and led to untold frustration until I sold the gun.

If it weren't for that, I'd probably still have that 17 and possibly a 19 as well.

[spinmove_]

No amount of grip angle changes are going to fix the fact that the Glock trigger guard is smaller than it needs to be and that some people can't press the trigger (no matter how they grip the pistol) without their finger dragging somewhere inside the trigger guard. This fucks up your sight alignment when you least can afford it and led to untold frustration until I sold the gun.

If it weren't for that, I'd probably still have that 17 and possibly a 19 as well.

Unless my grip is just about perfect, I do suffer from this. I’m either dragging my trigger finger across the bottom of the trigger guard or along the top of the trigger well. I don’t have this issue with any other pistol frame.

[Surf]

Since a forum member asked me, some may not have seen the video's. Here are two I found. If you have more, the folks would probably enjoy them.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b9M3UGkgDI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLTs0gIaSt4Thanks, those video's are from my current youtube page. I am just not active on youtube these days.

[GJM]

Any chance you can post a Pic of a few different options? I'm having a hard time understanding the explanation.

Are you literally changing the grip around the gun to achieve this? 1 version of your grip has middle knuckle directly under trigger guard causing wrist to be more flat while version two middle knuckle is to right of trigger guard causing it to be bent?

Or are you keeping grip same and just bending wrist from varying degrees of flat to towards your forearm? Thank you!

I would have to look to determine, but I have no idea how much finger I am using, and where my middle knuckle is. No idea whether my finger is dragging in the trigger guard. What I do know is how I am setting my wrist angle, up and down and side to side, and the tension in my wrist. That allows me to move the straight trigger back, regardless of whether my finger is rubbing in the trigger guard or how much finger I have on the trigger. Here is a short video showing it, shooting support hand. (BTW, the screenshot of the video, is demonstrating the “wrong way.”


https://youtu.be/peE_fGKfQxY

[Surf]

I’m still subscribed to your new YouTube channel. I would love it if you would start putting out videos again. Any chance of seeing something from you on the G45?Thanks for being a subscriber. I am just not as active on youtube anymore. I lost a lot of the desire and I find that I am extremely busy with work. When I do get the 45MOS set up complete I will shoot some video when I do my normal back to back comparisons, and maybe give some thoughts. Thanks again for the interest!

[Surf]

I need this sort of instruction. Do you know of an instructor who can teach this?

I’m a “pretty good” shooter, but I think that subtle issues like this (and probably 20 other issues) are holding me back by 1-2%. These are the hard issues to work on, because there’s not a lot of info out there on subtle techniques.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkThe small nuances of shooting technique make for huge differences. When you look at the vast number of "instructors" out there from LE, Military, and the private sector, there is a very small percentage of those who are experts at diagnostics and intimately understanding what each shooters issue truly is.

Negative results on target can be manifested by a number of factors, some small and many in conjunction. There are still fewer instructors that can take the correct diagnosis and have the ability to conduct remediation in the most effective and correct step process to most effectively fix the shooter.

There are tons of instructors who can run a line and teach base methodology, but the true fixers are harder to find. Also, much of those who can truly teach and remediate at these high levels get paid to do it.

Mention your preferred area and some may be able to give suggestions.

[Cool Breeze]

I would have to look to determine, but I have no idea how much finger I am using, and where my middle knuckle is. No idea whether my finger is dragging in the trigger guard. What I do know is how I am setting my wrist angle, up and down and side to side, and the tension in my wrist. That allows me to move the straight trigger back, regardless of whether my finger is rubbing in the trigger guard or how much finger I have on the trigger. Here is a short video showing it, shooting support hand. (BTW, the screenshot of the video, is demonstrating the “wrong way.”


https://youtu.be/peE_fGKfQxY

The wrist moves in 3 directions so I was just trying to get an understanding the type of wrist movement you are referring to when you say "setting your wrist side to side"?

According to your video you are more referring to the specific angle of supination or pronation of the wrist/forearm - or what shooters generally call cant. In the video, it seems you are actually canting the gun very slightly reverse of the usual "gangsta style" method some people use with one handed shooting. Do you do this with 2 hand shooting too?

I originally thought you were talking about setting the amount of flexion (bowing) or extension (cupping) of the wrist. If that were the case I was trying to understand how you were accomplishing that either rotating hand around gun grip or just keeping your grip the same while independently changing wrist angle somehow.

Obviously vertical setting of the wrist on a Glock requires more ulnar deviation (vs radial deviation) due to the increased grip angle of the Glock.

[Cool Breeze]

The small nuances of shooting technique make for huge differences. When you look at the vast number of "instructors" out there from LE, Military, and the private sector, there is a very small percentage of those who are experts at diagnostics and intimately understanding what each shooters issue truly is.

Negative results on target can be manifested by a number of factors, some small and many in conjunction. There are still fewer instructors that can take the correct diagnosis and have the ability to conduct remediation in the most effective and correct step process to most effectively fix the shooter.

There are tons of instructors who can run a line and teach base methodology, but the true fixers are harder to find. Also, much of those who can truly teach and remediate at these high levels get paid to do it.

Mention your preferred area and some may be able to give suggestions.1,000,000% on everything mentioned. If you are lucky to find one, stick with them.

[Surf]

Here is a quick take on how I will set my wrists with my two-handed grip. My one-handed grip and stance vary.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARNC259a7to&feature=youtu.be

[Doc_Glock]

The small nuances of shooting technique make for huge differences. When you look at the vast number of "instructors" out there from LE, Military, and the private sector, there is a very small percentage of those who are experts at diagnostics and intimately understanding what each shooters issue truly is.

Negative results on target can be manifested by a number of factors, some small and many in conjunction. There are still fewer instructors that can take the correct diagnosis and have the ability to conduct remediation in the most effective and correct step process to most effectively fix the shooter.

There are tons of instructors who can run a line and teach base methodology, but the true fixers are harder to find. Also, much of those who can truly teach and remediate at these high levels get paid to do it.

Mention your preferred area and some may be able to give suggestions.

I wonder it part of the improvement is that as your wrist extends, the arm needs to come
more to your center lint to maintain sight alignment?

[Tokarev]

I agree. Nothing else feels as recoilcontrolly as a Glock.Have you shot a Glock 17 side by side with a full-size M&P with thumb safety?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[GAP]

Here is a quick take on how I will set my wrists with my two-handed grip. My one-handed grip and stance vary.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARNC259a7to&feature=youtu.be

Excellent! I was going to mention recoil management coming from the legs and hips. Humans naturally want to fight everything with their arms. I saw this in wrestling all the time, which is why I always recommended supplementing the training with Judo.

I carry and practice with a Glock 26 about 90% of the time and I also notice that the shorter two finger grip keeps my wrist locked in a stronger angle. If I put an extension on a magazine it changes the angle and forces the grip down. This is the biggest reason why I am firmly against their use. I do not have the same problem with a Glock 19 or any other full grip pistols.

Finally, the Glock pistols do everything relatively well and allow the user to focus on what really matters to shoot well, themselves.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Surprised it has not been mentioned yet...

The Glock grip angle is in actual fact the Luger grip angle, with possibly a slightly different exact degree measurement, but virtually identical. Also, consider the Luger did in fact have the hump on the backstrap pretty much identical to Glocks. The Luger AFAIK has long been considered to be one of the most naturally pointing pistols of all time.

I had found this information in the old video 'Making Glock's Rock' with T.R. Graham "The Glocksmith", for anybody interested in watching the video.

[spinmove_]

I would have to look to determine, but I have no idea how much finger I am using, and where my middle knuckle is. No idea whether my finger is dragging in the trigger guard. What I do know is how I am setting my wrist angle, up and down and side to side, and the tension in my wrist. That allows me to move the straight trigger back, regardless of whether my finger is rubbing in the trigger guard or how much finger I have on the trigger. Here is a short video showing it, shooting support hand. (BTW, the screenshot of the video, is demonstrating the “wrong way.”


https://youtu.be/peE_fGKfQxY

Ah, so THAT’S what you’re referring to. That makes a ton of sense and I’ve found that this is definitely beneficial IME as well. I’m definitely more consistent in keeping shots centered up in keeping a vertical cant with the pistol than I am canting at an angle.

[spinmove_]

Here is a quick take on how I will set my wrists with my two-handed grip. My one-handed grip and stance vary.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARNC259a7to&feature=youtu.be

I want to say that I think I’ve seen another one of your videos where you allude to maintaining bore to forearm alignment as not actually being optimal, but the way you’ve explained it here details actually rotating the gun in the web of the hand so that you’re NOT imparting forces upon the gun in order to maintain alignment with your dominant eye while also not maintaining alignment with your forearm. This concept is probably simply and straightforward for many here, but this particular nugget is a fundamental change and “ah-ha” moment for me.

I’m totally going to be trying this to see what it does for me. This may very well be the solution that I’ve been looking for for literally years now. Thank you VERY much for posting this.

The only tricky part with this for me is, as you mentioned with smaller hands, I should get much better trigger reach. However, the web of my hand is such that I think one of the rounded off corners on the tang of the Glock frame is going to create a hot spot at the base thumb knuckle. I’ll have to play with it to see what happens.

[modrecoil]

Here is a quick take on how I will set my wrists with my two-handed grip. My one-handed grip and stance vary.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARNC259a7to&feature=youtu.be

This is great, thank you. I've always disregarded that forearm bone alignment dogma but never articulated exactly why as clearly as you. I always assumed it was a vestigial technique from bullseye shooting stances. It's still widely taught in context with a freestyle grip but I think many instructors don't understand why it's wrong and just ignore it when their students don't comply with it.

[mistertwo]

I picked up that "tip" about aligning the pistol with your forearm about a year ago and had been looking for a pistol that I could comfortably do that with since. It's been a challenge with my small hands. I recently picked up a P365 XL and had been gripping it with an emphasis to align it perfectly with my forearm. I found that this was actually more uncomfortable for me but was confused as to why at first.

Last night I held the gun and thought maybe I should just try gripping it with it canted in like I normally do. A minute later I watch Surf's video discussing this and realized that I had wasted a year chasing something pointless. For years I had thought the way I was gripping the gun by slightly canting the butt in wasn't optimal and had been searching for an answer that wasn't ever needed. Thank you to Surf and everyone here for helping me see the light.

[blues]

Surf Thanks for the great info, as always.

[Alpha Sierra]

I need this sort of instruction. Do you know of an instructor who can teach this?

Two of the best in the business when it comes to shooter analytics and diagnostics: https://www.practicalshootingtraininggroup.com/

[JTQ]

I've always disregarded that forearm bone alignment dogma ...
It is dogma, and I've tried to follow it, for the most part. However, trigger reach really limits gun choices.

Disregarding it and following Surf's recommendations really opens up the gun options.

I saw Ernest Langdon on a podcast somewhere comment on the Beretta M9/92 standard vs Vertec grip and he mentioned the standard grip is a better option even if the Vertec may initially seem better for those with smaller hands. Ignoring the forearm bone alignment, I can see how this could work.

[Alpha Sierra]

Here is a quick take on how I will set my wrists with my two-handed grip. My one-handed grip and stance vary.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARNC259a7to&feature=youtu.be

I wish I had seen your video a few years ago. I ended up with the same conclusion but it would have been much faster and easier to get there had I watched your video then.

[Pistol Pete 10]

I could learn to shoot it if the trigger didn't eat my finger.

[Doc_Glock]

I realized shooting today that my G4 G19 has a protruding dingus, serrated trigger face, and my finger drags on the bottom of the trigger guard.

I honestly never noticed any of these things before and never would have noticed in regular shooting had I not been told they are problems. I also don’t feel any of them affect my shooting at all.

[pew_pew]

Excellent! I was going to mention recoil management coming from the legs and hips. Humans naturally want to fight everything with their arms. I saw this in wrestling all the time, which is why I always recommended supplementing the training with Judo.

I carry and practice with a Glock 26 about 90% of the time and I also notice that the shorter two finger grip keeps my wrist locked in a stronger angle. If I put an extension on a magazine it changes the angle and forces the grip down. This is the biggest reason why I am firmly against their use. I do not have the same problem with a Glock 19 or any other full grip pistols.

Finally, the Glock pistols do everything relatively well and allow the user to focus on what really matters to shoot well, themselves.

Except that shooting in competition or a real gun fight you aren’t going to be in perfect position with the feet and body ever. I can’t think of a top level trainer that says the lower body matters at all. In fact, most say it doesn’t.

I think Bob Vogel is probably the best guy to listen to on how to shoot a Glock.

https://youtu.be/688tyvWxaYg

[Duelist]

I realized shooting today that my G4 G19 has a protruding dingus, serrated trigger face, and my finger drags on the bottom of the trigger guard.

I honestly never noticed any of these things before and never would have noticed in regular shooting had I not been told they are problems. I also don’t feel any of them affect my shooting at all.

After about 800 rounds in one weekend, my trigger finger let me know that it wasn’t best pleased with all the dragging on the bottom of the trigger guard. The class lasted another 200 rounds or so, and that blister was worn right through. A couple hundred is still no big thing, but if I decide to run another case through a Glock in one weekend, I may do some trigger guard sculpting first.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

So the whole forearm alignment thing really seems less than ideal for a two handed hold, but assuming a pistol that has the correct trigger reach for your hand size.... would this still apply in this regard? I mean you are giving up a good bit of support from the off hand, has anybody experimented with this one handed?

[TGS]

I carry and practice with a Glock 26 about 90% of the time and I also notice that the shorter two finger grip keeps my wrist locked in a stronger angle. If I put an extension on a magazine it changes the angle and forces the grip down. This is the biggest reason why I am firmly against their use.

What does the timer say?

[GAP]

Except that shooting in competition or a real gun fight you aren’t going to be in perfect position with the feet and body ever. I can’t think of a top level trainer that says the lower body matters at all. In fact, most say it doesn’t.

I think Bob Vogel is probably the best guy to listen to on how to shoot a Glock.

https://youtu.be/688tyvWxaYg

Wow, really? Do you hover in midair as you move in a dynamic situation? Your statement supports what I stated, you just don’t get it...


What does the timer say?

The timer says mostly turbo and light on Gabe’s standards, how about you?

[Vandal320]

Except that shooting in competition or a real gun fight you aren’t going to be in perfect position with the feet and body ever. I can’t think of a top level trainer that says the lower body matters at all. In fact, most say it doesn’t.

I think Bob Vogel is probably the best guy to listen to on how to shoot a Glock.

https://youtu.be/688tyvWxaYg

Love the Honk Honk sound I heard periodically in the video.:D

[Surf]

Except that shooting in competition or a real gun fight you aren’t going to be in perfect position with the feet and body ever. I can’t think of a top level trainer that says the lower body matters at all. In fact, most say it doesn’t.

I think Bob Vogel is probably the best guy to listen to on how to shoot a Glock.

https://youtu.be/688tyvWxaYgAhh yes, the old adage of "well son, your stance doesn't matter, you won't be standing still in a gunfight" analogy. I think perhaps you are missing the forest for the trees.

Proper stance teaches good fundamental mechanics, teaches leverage. This turns into footwork, footwork leads to effectively moving in and out positions, primarily effectively setting yourself up for the next position. Accomplished footwork, turns into the ability of effective improvisation in any dynamic situation. "Boy, I wish I had less training on my stance and footwork", said no one ever in a gunfight, or competition for that matter.

Your body builds off of prior learned skills. This is not restricted to shooting. What do we do with kids or anyone new to any sport? Yep basics, stance, footwork, quick movement and throwing the ball on the move, or throwing punches from varied positions. The stance seems to be a common thing taught at any novice level in almost all sports. I would argue that there are about nearly zero professional athletes who didn't learn correct mechanics. They didn't get to the pros without understanding and mastery of base fundamentals that led them to make a diving catch and to throw a ball sideways while sitting on their ass in game 7 of the world series.

I would not give much credence to a "top level trainer" that says the lower body does not matter at all. It matters less as a shooter skill increases, but it isn't all about recoil management. That may be where it starts but that isn't where it ends. Your feet are what connect you to the earth. Your ability to do more with less than ideal earth contact should have been borne from a good beginning. Either that or that person is a Michael Jordan or a savant. Very few exist.

Hard to argue with Bob Vogel, but some nuances exist in his technique that others have a hard time or are not capable of mimicking, or gasp, perform differently. He is, after all, Bob Vogel. Kinda like telling anyone who picks up a basketball to just be like Mike.

[TGS]

The timer says mostly turbo and light on Gabe’s standards, how about you?

The timer definitely says my splits are definitely slower with a two finger grip instead of using a three finger grip on the G26.

I'm unsure what you mean by "turbo and light on Gabe's standards"....do you mean you shoot light on a 3 finger G26, and turbo on a two finger G26?

ETA: To be clear, my splits are slower, as well as my draw.

[GearFondler]

All I want to say is that this has been an extremely interesting thread with a lot of great contributions... Please carry on.

[GAP]

The timer definitely says my splits are definitely slower with a two finger grip instead of using a three finger grip on the G26.

I'm unsure what you mean by "turbo and light on Gabe's standards"....do you mean you shoot light on a 3 finger G26, and turbo on a two finger G26?

ETA: To be clear, my splits are slower, as well as my draw.

Two finger grip always, and depending on the drill I usually score turbo or light.

F2S turbo, Bill Drill Light, for example.

You can train to be fast with a two finger grip if you are putting in thousands of rounds with it. It becomes “normal.”

[TGS]

You can train to be fast with a two finger grip if you are putting in thousands of rounds with it. It becomes “normal.”

I imagine so, and shooting Turbo on Gabe's standard with a two-fingered Glock 26 is nothing short of amazing that would without doubt put you in the top .1% of shooters worldwide. That's incredible performance that most people are using customized compact-to-fullsize guns to attain. Not a single one of Gabe's Turbo Pins has been awarded to someone shooting a two-finger gun, for instance, and not even any subcompact guns at that.

Still, even with your performance putting you in a group of people in the US that could be counted on one or two hands:

Your assertation was that you were against using a three fingered grip, as it reduced your wrist lock and, I'm inferring, would make you shoot worse.

So, if you've established a performance baseline with two fingered Glock 26, what's that performance with a Glock 19 (or Glock 26 with an extension)? Is it worse on the timer? The question wasn't about your truly astounding overall performance, but rather the difference in your performance with two vs three fingers on the grip.

Besides me, my entire agency shoots worse on two fingered Glocks vs the Glock 19. I'm not omniscient, but I haven't met a single person that can shoot a Glock 26 as well as the Glock 19 on our newer COF, and feel fairly confident in the observation that people don't shoot as well with two fingers as three. Never heard of someone win a trophy with a two fingered gun in a match, for instance.

[Duelist]

I imagine so, and shooting Turbo on Gabe's standard with a two-fingered Glock 26 is nothing short of amazing that would without doubt put you in the top .1% of shooters worldwide. That's incredible performance that most people are using customized compact-to-fullsize guns to attain. Not a single one of Gabe's Turbo Pins has been award to someone shooting a two-finger gun, for instance, and not even any subcompact guns at that.

Still, even with your performance putting you in a group of people in the US that could be counted on one or two hands:

Your assertation was that you were against using a three fingered grip, as it reduced your wrist lock and, I'm inferring, would make you shoot worse.

So, if you've established a performance baseline with two fingered Glock 26, what's that performance with a Glock 19 (or Glock 26 with an extension)? Is it worse on the timer? The question wasn't about your truly astounding overall performance, but rather the difference in your performance with two vs three fingers on the grip.

Besides me, my entire agency shoots worse on two fingered Glocks vs the Glock 19. I'm not omniscient, but I haven't met a single person that can shoot a Glock 26 as well as the Glock 19 on our newer COF, and feel fairly confident in the observation that people don't shoot as well with two fingers as three. Never heard of someone win a trophy with a two fingered gun in a match, for instance.

Forgive me if I’m stepping outside of my lane, but I think you may be reading too much into GAP’s comment about the G26: it sounded more to me like he was against using magazine adapters on G19 or G17 magazines used as reloads for the G26 because they screw up his grip on the G26.

I think. I don’t use adapters on them, either, but that’s because they pinch on reloads where the naked longer magazines don’t.

[TGS]

Forgive me if I’m stepping outside of my lane, but I think you may be reading too much into GAP’s comment about the G26: it sounded more to me like he was against using magazine adapters on G19 or G17 magazines used as reloads for the G26 because they screw up his grip on the G26.

I think. I don’t use adapters on them, either, but that’s because they pinch on reloads where the naked longer magazines don’t.

I guess we'll find out when he answers, but he specifically said that a two-finger grip keeps his wrist locked at a stronger angle in Post 101 (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?39745-What-makes-a-Glock-so-shootable&p=966826&viewfull=1#post966826), nothing about reloading.

FWIW, I agree with you on the adapters. I have a 12 round PMAG for the Glock 26, but wouldn't carry them as reloads. I even like using 17 round reloads even for a 19, basically for the same reason.

[Cool Breeze]

Going back to GJM's video about setting wrist angle by rotating/canting gun towards his outboard side (supination of the wrist) - I just found a video where Bill Bowers of P&S does this also with his two-handed grip. He said he attributes this to what he does with grip, elbows, and shoulders. If interested, it's at 1:15 in vid.

I found it interesting because I have never heard of anyone doing this intentionally until this thread.

https://youtu.be/xwiyVkSBXJs

[pew_pew]

Going back to GJM's video about setting wrist angle by rotating/canting gun towards his outboard side (supination of the wrist) - I just found a video where Bill Bowers of P&S does this also with his two-handed grip. He said he attributes this to what he does with grip, elbows, and shoulders. If interested, it's at 1:15 in vid.

I found it interesting because I have never heard of anyone doing this intentionally until this thread.

https://youtu.be/xwiyVkSBXJs

Me either. John McPhee is really against doing this.

[pew_pew]

Going back to GJM's video about setting wrist angle by rotating/canting gun towards his outboard side (supination of the wrist) - I just found a video where Bill Bowers of P&S does this also with his two-handed grip. He said he attributes this to what he does with grip, elbows, and shoulders. If interested, it's at 1:15 in vid.

I found it interesting because I have never heard of anyone doing this intentionally until this thread.

https://youtu.be/xwiyVkSBXJs

That canting is coming from this weak hand elbow rotating out to apply inward pressure on the gun. It’s the same thing Vogel is big on. It’s not from how he grips it with the strong hand.

[GAP]

I imagine so, and shooting Turbo on Gabe's standard with a two-fingered Glock 26 is nothing short of amazing that would without doubt put you in the top .1% of shooters worldwide. That's incredible performance that most people are using customized compact-to-fullsize guns to attain. Not a single one of Gabe's Turbo Pins has been awarded to someone shooting a two-finger gun, for instance, and not even any subcompact guns at that.

Still, even with your performance putting you in a group of people in the US that could be counted on one or two hands:

Your assertation was that you were against using a three fingered grip, as it reduced your wrist lock and, I'm inferring, would make you shoot worse.

So, if you've established a performance baseline with two fingered Glock 26, what's that performance with a Glock 19 (or Glock 26 with an extension)? Is it worse on the timer? The question wasn't about your truly astounding overall performance, but rather the difference in your performance with two vs three fingers on the grip.

Besides me, my entire agency shoots worse on two fingered Glocks vs the Glock 19. I'm not omniscient, but I haven't met a single person that can shoot a Glock 26 as well as the Glock 19 on our newer COF, and feel fairly confident in the observation that people don't shoot as well with two fingers as three. Never heard of someone win a trophy with a two fingered gun in a match, for instance.

I think you’re responding in a bit of an emotional and condescending way. I never compared a G26 vs a G19. I never said a G26 two finger grip is faster than a G19. I said the two finger grip does lock my wrist in an angle that results in better accuracy. You brought the timer in as a “gotcha,” but I am fast with it, too.

I shoot a G19 a hair faster even with most of my training on a G26. But it doesn’t change the fact that ~7/10 times I can score a light or turbo time of any of the drills.

Here are times I posted in Gabe’s thread from 2017 (including concealment bonus):

Bill Drill
2.04
2.09

F2S
1.71
1.76

2H
1.65
1.73

4B2H
2.55
2.75

Thanks.

[WobblyPossum]

GAP, there seems to be some confusion regarding what you meant. Just to clarify, my understanding of your posts was that you were specifically referring to the G26 and that you were able to achieve a more solid/correct grip on a G26 with flush 10 round magazines than one with extended baseplate mags like the OEM +2 or Magpul. I didn’t take it as you were comparing two finger grips to three finger grips in general, as in G26 vs G19, just that there was something specific about how most G26 mag extensions were designed that messed up your grip. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

Also, how are your results when using G19 or G17 magazines in a G26? Are they closer to your results when using 10 rounders or closer to your results with the extended baseplates?

[11B10]

In my admittedly small sample, I've never had the same "connection" with my G19.5 that I experienced with previous Glocks. Don't get me wrong, I like the Gen5, but I must say that in my relatively inexperienced hands, I miss the grooves. I've no data to compare them, I just felt like I had better control with the grooves. I believe hand size is key (I have long fingers). As I still have an HK (P30SK), I definitely need to make adjustments going back and forth.

[HopetonBrown]

I've no data to compare them, I just felt

Try to avoid using feelings to guide gear choices. Get a shot timer, shoot some standard drills, compare data.

[GJM]

I would like to throw a penalty flag whenever “the timer” gets brought up, often in conjunction with on demand performance, in an internet discussion. “X” technique yielded “Y” result, so X is better.

First, on demand performance is mostly an internet concept. The very best shooters in the world make mistakes all the time, and while the goal is consistency, it is a goal not an absolute. National championships are often won by the shooter making the fewest mistakes, not the shooter making no mistakes.

Second, times that are reported in words on the internet, are missing context. Did the results really happen, did they happen just once, was it after five attempts, was it by yourself, or one attempt in a formal competition. While video is better, it is still low risk and low stress compared to in front of a group one attempt, because you don’t have to post your crappy videos.

[GAP]

GAP, there seems to be some confusion regarding what you meant. Just to clarify, my understanding of your posts was that you were specifically referring to the G26 and that you were able to achieve a more solid/correct grip on a G26 with flush 10 round magazines than one with extended baseplate mags like the OEM +2 or Magpul. I didn’t take it as you were comparing two finger grips to three finger grips in general, as in G26 vs G19, just that there was something specific about how most G26 mag extensions were designed that messed up your grip. Please correct me if I’m wrong.


Exactly.


I would like to throw a penalty flag whenever “the timer” gets brought up, often in conjunction with on demand performance, in an internet discussion. “X” technique yielded “Y” result, so X is better.

First, on demand performance is mostly an internet concept. The very best shooters in the world make mistakes all the time, and while the goal is consistency, it is a goal not an absolute. National championships are often won by the shooter making the fewest mistakes, not the shooter making no mistakes.

Second, times that are reported in words on the internet, are missing context. Did the results really happen, did they happen just once, was it after five attempts, was it by yourself, or one attempt in a formal competition. While video is better, it is still low risk and low stress compared to in front of a group one attempt, because you don’t have to post your crappy videos.

Exactly.

[cornstalker]

I would like to throw a penalty flag whenever “the timer” gets brought up, often in conjunction with on demand performance, in an internet discussion. “X” technique yielded “Y” result, so X is better.

First, on demand performance is mostly an internet concept. The very best shooters in the world make mistakes all the time, and while the goal is consistency, it is a goal not an absolute. National championships are often won by the shooter making the fewest mistakes, not the shooter making no mistakes.

Second, times that are reported in words on the internet, are missing context. Did the results really happen, did they happen just once, was it after five attempts, was it by yourself, or one attempt in a formal competition. While video is better, it is still low risk and low stress compared to in front of a group one attempt, because you don’t have to post your crappy videos.

Isn't "on-demand" performance just the speed at which you can produce the results that are within range of your best averages? Bordering on "guaranteed hit" speed? (Maybe not in USPSA) Of course, the added stress of 50 pairs of eyeballs and an SO can change that number.

How else do you differentiate between what feels fast and what is fast?

Of course, people are going to lie and twist the truth to protect their ego. You could apply the erroneous reporting theory to everything that has ever been discussed on the internet.

[GJM]

I think the timer is essential for vetting technique and performance. Where the timer is problematic is when results get reported on the internet, without the context that comes from being there.

[TGS]

I think you’re responding in a bit of an emotional and condescending way. I never compared a G26 vs a G19. I never said a G26 two finger grip is faster than a G19. I said the two finger grip does lock my wrist in an angle that results in better accuracy. You brought the timer in as a “gotcha,” but I am fast with it, too.

The timer isn't a gotcha, it's a necessary tool to compare actual performance to "what we feel", and there's a lot of "feels" in this thread vs quantifiable performance. It wasn't about dick measuring, I was asking about measured performance between a two finger and three fingered grip, and you responded with dick measuring insteadm that was your choice.

FWIW, you never said you were more accurate with the G26's two fingered grip until this post.

Thanks for clarifying.

[RJ]

All I want to say is that this has been an extremely interesting thread with a lot of great contributions... Please carry on.

Ditto. I am hanging on but only by my fingernails. Great stuff to digest here.


Going back to GJM's video about setting wrist angle by rotating/canting gun towards his outboard side (supination of the wrist) - I just found a video where Bill Bowers of P&S does this also with his two-handed grip. He said he attributes this to what he does with grip, elbows, and shoulders. If interested, it's at 1:15 in vid.

I found it interesting because I have never heard of anyone doing this intentionally until this thread.

https://youtu.be/xwiyVkSBXJs

Very useful video. I had my Glock 19.5 out when I was watching this. I was sheepishly surprised to see my thumb "drop" one handed EXACTLY as Mr. Bower's demonstrated as the "wrong" technique. As I did some dry presses with the video, I started to press my thumb against the frame, not down, as I reflexively had been doing. It seemed to me the front sight moved far less than normal. Win.

The other item Mr. Bower's mentioned was to ball your opposite fist and bury it into your shooting shoulder to help stabilize. That also had not ever occurred to me, either.

Looking forward to putting both these tweaks into practice next opportunity.

[TGS]

The other item Mr. Bower's mentioned was to ball your opposite fist and bury it into your shooting shoulder to help stabilize. That also had not ever occurred to me, either.


This one struck me as odd.

If we're practicing one handed shooting, it's because we need some competency at shooting one handed in real life when we lack functionality of a given hand for whatever reason (injury, entangled, etc).

If I have enough functionality to ball up a first and force it into my shoulder, I'm going to use it to support my gun instead. A compromised two handed grip beats a one handed grip.

I still pull my arm up across my chest when practicing.....but the idea of using functionality of your disabled hand to increase your single handed shooting strikes me as odd.

[RJ]

This one struck me as odd.

If we're practicing one handed shooting, it's because we need some competency at shooting one handed in real life when we lack functionality of a given hand for whatever reason (injury, entangled, etc).

If I have enough functionality to ball up a first and force it into my shoulder, I'm going to use it to support my gun instead. A compromised two handed grip beats a one handed grip.

I still pull my arm up across my chest when practicing.....but the idea of using functionality of your disabled hand to increase your single handed shooting strikes me as odd.

Understood, and that makes sense.

“My” context is shooting better one handed in USPSA Classifiers. So no need to simulate an injury; I’ll take whatever I can get in terms of bettering my score in gun games. I’ll give it a try next chance I have at live fire.

[TGS]

Understood, and that makes sense.

“My” context is shooting better one handed in USPSA Classifiers. So no need to simulate an injury; I’ll take whatever I can get in terms of bettering my score in gun games. I’ll give it a try next chance I have at live fire.

Try flagging the thumb, and during another practice session try curling the thumb down.

I used to flag my thumb with my P2000, but had just figured it out myself at the time. Todd suggested curling the thumb, which I now use as I'm shooting the Glock 19 and it gives better results than flagging the thumb.

I did them both for accuracy reasons and trying to stabilize the gun throughout the trigger pull, however, not for recoil management.

[GAP]

The timer isn't a gotcha, it's a necessary tool to compare actual performance to "what we feel", and there's a lot of "feels" in this thread vs quantifiable performance. It wasn't about dick measuring, I was asking about measured performance between a two finger and three fingered grip, and you responded with dick measuring insteadm that was your choice.

FWIW, you never said you were more accurate with the G26's two fingered grip until this post.

Thanks for clarifying.

Come on. If I replied “yes,” your next question would have been about splits. Just because you cannot, doesn’t mean someone else cannot.

You really went back to edit your post 20 minutes later to add the gibberish about “dick measuring?”

Yes, the two finger grip and the short hump create better leverage (for me) than a pinky extension that is too far back from the rest of the grip. The only disadvantage of the shorter grip are reloads, but it’s for CC, not law enforcement or gun games. The draw isn’t even a disadvantage for me anymore. Its splitting hairs and not worth it to me. I’d rather carry the same gun all year and practice the same way all year.

So relax, there’s no contest.

[JHC]

GAP I only recently bought a few Glock G26 extended mags and used to only carry with the flush. You got me thinking and I think my best 26 work was with the flush. I don't shoot them often so not a lot of data logged . I will be looking into this.

[blues]

never mind

[M2CattleCo]

I know with a 26 and a 43, slow fire accuracy has always been a little easier for me with a flush mag.

I carry with a +0 base plate because I get a better grip on the draw with it.

Never thought to compare them on a timer.

[GAP]

I know with a 26 and a 43, slow fire accuracy has always been a little easier for me with a flush mag.

I carry with a +0 base plate because I get a better grip on the draw with it.

Never thought to compare them on a timer.

I used to think that too and tried a few different extensions in the process. However, when I looked at my draw I realized that I really jam the web of my thumb hard into the top curve of the back strap. That motion is what secures my draw and initial grip, not my pinky. Hard to explain I suppose, but I push down pretty hard initially, then pull up.

[GJM]

Some years ago, I heard that the Glock 26 was the most accurate non 1911 pistol at fifty yards the FBI had tested. Speculation was that the short/stiff barrel of the 26 was responsible for that precision. Interestingly, before the Gen 5, I found 26/19/17 pistols to be more accurate in my hands than the Gen 3 and 4 34, which would support the short and stiff versus long barrel theory. When I was going through my M&P 9mm accuracy issues, I would use a Glock 26 as my daily “control pistol” to make sure accuracy issues were the pistol and not me. Lots of discussion on this thread about great precision from the G26 on B8’s and other accuracy oriented drills.

The other part of the analysis is the Glock 26 is near universally considered to be harder to shoot than a larger Glock in time oriented drills. That should be no surprise as the 26 is harder to draw, harder to reload, and harder to control in recoil shooting fast with its smaller grip which allows you less hand on the pistol.

[HCM]

Try flagging the thumb, and during another practice session try curling the thumb down.

I used to flag my thumb with my P2000, but had just figured it out myself at the time. Todd suggested curling the thumb, which I now use as I'm shooting the Glock 19 and it gives better results than flagging the thumb.

I did them both for accuracy reasons and trying to stabilize the gun throughout the trigger pull, however, not for recoil management.

Also try stretching the thumb straight forward. It’s weird but once you get the hang of it it works surprisingly well.

Also, don’t be surprised if you find one technique works better strong hand and one works better offhand .

[Alpha Sierra]

The other item Mr. Bower's mentioned was to ball your opposite fist and bury it into your shooting shoulder to help stabilize.

Makes zero biomechanical sense. I think I'll pass.

[M2CattleCo]

Makes zero biomechanical sense. I think I'll pass.

That's an oooold bullseye trick. It actually works.

[BigT]

When I had the 26 it always felt like I drew it better and shot better with a +2 mag. But in back to back drills I would draw it faster, and my hits were generally better with the same splits with the flat mag.

I shoot a 19 better than either so for me at least its more than two or three fingers making the difference, I shoot a 45 almost identically to a 19, but shoot a 17 substantially better than either of them.

[JHC]

That's an oooold bullseye trick. It actually works.

Relevant to a fight or not I've got to try this! I assume the offhand fist is pressed into the shooting side shoulder pocket like a rifle's stock?

[spinmove_]

Relevant to a fight or not I've got to try this! I assume the offhand fist is pressed into the shooting side shoulder pocket like a rifle's stock?

My understanding of the concept is that taking your fist and bringing your arm across your chest helps “do something” with your arm that isn’t being used and keeps your balance close to your core instead of having a free arm waggling about. I find it useful and typically see consistently better shots vs letting that arm do whatever it wants.

[M2CattleCo]

I have found that squeezing the empty hand about as hard as I'm gripping the gun with makes handling the gun more intuitive/natural.

I've always used a chest index when drawing without concealment/entanglement, and my weak hand goes to the same general place when drawing, Sur, and deliberate one-hand shooting.

I've considered it a relic from the old days of bullseye and speed-rocks, and it's probably not sexy, but I haven't shot my other hand. So I have that goin' for me...

[spinmove_]

I want to say that I think I’ve seen another one of your videos where you allude to maintaining bore to forearm alignment as not actually being optimal, but the way you’ve explained it here details actually rotating the gun in the web of the hand so that you’re NOT imparting forces upon the gun in order to maintain alignment with your dominant eye while also not maintaining alignment with your forearm. This concept is probably simply and straightforward for many here, but this particular nugget is a fundamental change and “ah-ha” moment for me.

I’m totally going to be trying this to see what it does for me. This may very well be the solution that I’ve been looking for for literally years now. Thank you VERY much for posting this.

The only tricky part with this for me is, as you mentioned with smaller hands, I should get much better trigger reach. However, the web of my hand is such that I think one of the rounded off corners on the tang of the Glock frame is going to create a hot spot at the base thumb knuckle. I’ll have to play with it to see what happens.

So, I’ve been practicing this new strong hand index on the pistol since this post and even shot match this way yesterday. Observations so far is that it’s way easier for me to reach and work the trigger subconsciously and it also seems to allow the sights to track easier. I didn’t seem to have any issues with pushing shots left, so that’s kinda nice. The grip hump doesn’t seem to be annoying at all nowThe only negatives I can find so far is that not only does my Glock Knuckle still get irritated, but there’s there’s now a new hotspot at the base thumb knuckle of my strong hand where the corner of the tang can dig into it thanks to the size and shape of my hands. So I guess on high round count days/sessions I might need to just start taping those hotspots up or something.

So far this is a net win. I’ll post more as I discover more. Thank you again Surf. This has been extremely helpful.

[Surf]

So far this is a net win. I’ll post more as I discover more. Thank you again Surf. This has been extremely helpful.Good to hear that it was helpful.

Play with the hand placement, but a natural point of aim and lining up the sights with the dominant eye in relation to your grip is critical to fast first shot to target and best neutral tracking of the pistol during recoil for follow up shots. I didn't discuss the best way to set this up and practice it, as there is a process that we use to teach shooters, but keep working it.

[spinmove_]

Good to hear that it was helpful.

Play with the hand placement, but a natural point of aim and lining up the sights with the dominant eye in relation to your grip is critical to fast first shot to target and best neutral tracking of the pistol during recoil for follow up shots. I didn't discuss the best way to set this up and practice it, as there is a process that we use to teach shooters, but keep working it.

I have been. The more I play with it (phrasing?), the more I find my strong hand rotating counterclockwise on a Glock frame. Functionally this is getting the sights in front of my eye quicker and more naturally. Comfort-wise, it’s definitely an adjustment. Particularly with my middle finger middle knuckle and the base thumb knuckle. Although I do find that my trigger finger no longer drags like it used to on the bottom of the trigger guard nor does it rock up against the top of the trigger well.

Lots of dry draws both on the timer and slow and methodical is how I’m gradually making changes and/or mylenating the new grip. Getting my support hand in place and locked in on my strong hand also seems easier with this.

[Alpha Sierra]

there’s there’s now a new hotspot at the base thumb knuckle of my strong hand where the corner of the tang can dig into it thanks to the size and shape of my hands.

I've had that same callus for the better part of a year. I just naturally gravitated towards the strong and placement discussed by Surf because of my hand size/finger length and with it came that hot spot then callus between the web of the right hand and the base of the right thumb.

[spinmove_]

I've had that same callus for the better part of a year. I just naturally gravitated towards the strong and placement discussed by Surf because of my hand size/finger length and with it came that hot spot then callus between the web of the right hand and the base of the right thumb.

It’s not the callouses that I mind. I just don’t want some of those joints going arthritic before others prematurely. I use my hands for a lot more than just shooting.

[Alpha Sierra]

It’s not the callouses that I mind. I just don’t want some of those joints going arthritic before others prematurely. I use my hands for a lot more than just shooting.
Well, duh. You're not the only one who depends on his hands to do more than just hold a pistol.

Is there any link between shooting and arthritis, even?

[BehindBlueI's]

Didn't some cops just shoot a bystander and a hostage?

I'm not getting how "shoot ability" is further down the ladder for a life saving tool.

Would a different pistol have mattered? If not, it's irrelevant. For a duty pistol, the ability to not shoot when you don't want to is a huge consideration. Everyone draws a lot more often then they shoot, and cops point a lot more than they shoot. Hence things like DAK and LEM that aren't the most shootable triggers but help manage risk in no-shoots.


Except that shooting in competition or a real gun fight you aren’t going to be in perfect position with the feet and body ever.

I'm not a big fan of never and always. I was able to set my feet and lean into my gun several times during my real gun fight. Sure, sometimes it was modified to roll out from behind cover, sometimes I was on the move, but when I set and fired at the end I was exactly how I trained on the square range. I won't say it mattered. Maybe I could have been balancing on one foot and had the same results.




My understanding of the concept is that taking your fist and bringing your arm across your chest helps “do something” with your arm that isn’t being used and keeps your balance close to your core instead of having a free arm waggling about. I find it useful and typically see consistently better shots vs letting that arm do whatever it wants.

I *think* it was Mas who told me this, but I can't recall 100%. The "t-rex arm" posture simulates a specific injury to your arm so that your bicep has contracted due to the lack of resistance after your upper arm bone has been broken. You can still close your fist but can't uncurl your arm. Latching on to your own clothing helps stop the arm from swinging around upsetting your balance, etc.

It's definitely proven that tightening your off hand helps your strong hand grip tighter simultaneously. I don't recall the name for why, but it's got to do with the way the nerves tell the muscles to fire.

[SiriusBlunder]

<snip>


It's definitely proven that tightening your off hand helps your strong hand grip tighter simultaneously. I don't recall the name for why, but it's got to do with the way the nerves tell the muscles to fire.

In the medical literature, I've seen it called "Interlimb Interaction" and in the firearm community referred to as "sympathetic squeeze reflex".

[RJ]

In the medical literature, I've seen it called "Interlimb Interaction" and in the firearm community referred to as "sympathetic squeeze reflex".

Paging Nephrology


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nephrology]

In the medical literature, I've seen it called "Interlimb Interaction" and in the firearm community referred to as "sympathetic squeeze reflex".


Paging Nephrology


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've never heard that term before but I probably wouldn't be the person to ask anyway. @Enel might know however.