A Valid Viewpoint or Psychological BS?

[GardoneVT]

In summary, I've noticed I have a preference to metal frame, hammer fired pistols. In my last shooting session, I felt much more comfortable making long distance shots with my Beretta 92 then an M&P9 Smith. Why?

Because I feel like I can control the precise movement of the trigger much more precisely then I can any stock striker fired handgun . Even a Walther PPQ, as good as it feels, seems "uncommunicative" compared to my Beretta 92s bang lever.With striker fired weapons, it's like driving a 1990s Cadillac compared to a Lotus Elise- no steering feel vs max steering feel in cars is the closest analogy I can offer.

As someone who shoots 300 rounds a month, is that an accurate perspective....or am I full of it and psychologically justifying a Beretta bias ?

As a shooter, I'm not only trying to improve my performance at the range, but also dispensing with unhealthy mindsets and rigid notions regarding firearms-hence the question.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

I would GUESS that it's psychological, simply because regardless of the trigger feel, it's totally possible to shoot some of the plastic guns with accuracy at distance.

I think the only way for this to be absolutely true would be if trigger feel was itself essential to making accurate shots. But I don't think it is.

But you may well prefer making long shots on guns with good trigger feel. I do too. And if you personally perform better with a gun with good trigger feel, then even if it is psychological, that doesn't jump out at me as a reason to ignore the performance gains.

If it was me, I'd just be saying "I personally perform better with X, for reasons that may be largely psychological. But since I'm only concerned with the performance, the fact that it's giving me a psychological edge instead of a physical one is unimportant."

[45dotACP]

Well, I find that my press outs are significantly better with a TDA hammer fired gun. That said, I think shootability being based on a trigger system is mostly something you can get over. But a parting query: I have two reliable guns, but I can shoot one better than the other, which one do you think I would choose?

[LSP972]

But a parting query: I have two reliable guns, but I can shoot one better than the other, which one do you think I would choose?

There's more to it than just the shooting. As an example...

I have recently purchased a couple of Sig P229s, in a fit of "retro-ism", if you will. I really like the SRT trigger, and actually do a bit better with it overall... Particularly on distance shots fired from SA.

But it's going back in the safe... because it doesn't CARRY as well as my HK45C (due to being a bit thicker and having a slightly longer butt), and I have some moderate difficulty hitting the mag release button. That latter was never an issue for the ten-plus years I carried and shot a P228, so I figure that the past ten years using that excellent HK paddle has ruined me?

To reiterate, I SHOOT the P229 better. But the HK45C is a better overall defensive package for me. Both pistols are boringly reliable.

.

[GJM]

Triggers are very subjective, and it can be hard to even discuss them, as people use terms describing triggers so differently. Depending upon the shooting task, I might prefer different triggers. For example, I find a Glock trigger outstanding on "quick and dirty" type shooting, the Beretta 92 my favorite on long range steel, and the Mink'd CZ trigger the best on Bill drills. I have also found, over time, my taste in triggers changing.

I wouldn't worry too much about it, and just enjoy each different pistol for what it is.

[JM Campbell]

In summary, I've noticed I have a preference to metal frame, hammer fired pistols. In my last shooting session, I felt much more comfortable making long distance shots with my Beretta 92 then an M&P9 Smith. Why?

Because I feel like I can control the precise movement of the trigger much more precisely then I can any stock striker fired handgun . Even a Walther PPQ, as good as it feels, seems "uncommunicative" compared to my Beretta 92s bang lever.With striker fired weapons, it's like driving a 1990s Cadillac compared to a Lotus Elise- no steering feel vs max steering feel in cars is the closest analogy I can offer.

As someone who shoots 300 rounds a month, is that an accurate perspective....or am I full of it and psychologically justifying a Beretta bias ?

As a shooter, I'm not only trying to improve my performance at the range, but also dispensing with unhealthy mindsets and rigid notions regarding firearms-hence the question.

I know we don't/haven't seen eye to eye before GVT....

I think it's in your head some and part of a trigger issue with the M&P. I find the hinged trigger of the M&P flexes way to much giving *me* a feel I hate and have found difficult to consistently pull straight back on the trigger.

$39.99 on a APEX polymer AEK trigger and the flex issue is gone. All stock springs and sear with the AEK polymer trigger yields 6.13lbs trigger in my sample of one.
Try one out, If you don't like it you can sell it for little loss.

[LSP552]

Every platform has good and bad points. It's easy to focus on one, such as the trigger, and not look at the whole. I've been guilty of this more than once in my gun toting life. It's not uncommon to do better with a new gun just because we focus more because it is different (or new). That increased focus is often the reason for short term performance gain.

I'm at the point of giving up a better SIG trigger and going back to all Glock for reasons other than just the trigger.

Ken

[Wheeler]

Leaving aside the differences in the triggers mentioned in the OP, there are several other considerations such as grip, grip angle, pointability, sight picture and so forth between the various platforms the OP mentioned.

[orionz06]

Get a timer and make some data. Add the objective with the subjective and determine from there.

[GardoneVT]

Get a timer and make some data. Add the objective with the subjective and determine from there.

This is where things get squirrely.

After running back to back FAST drills against the M&P9, I was slower with my trusty 92FS by half a second on average.I FELT like I was shooting better with my 92 then the Smith, but the shot timer had other plans .

Which brings to mind a question: should I yield to the scientific data , bury my personal preferences, and pursue an equipment change to the striker fired M&P henceforth? Or should I defer to my intangible preference for the Beretta?