VP9 and the PPQ M2

[GJM]

I was asked, in the VP9 - Sig 320 thread, to post some comments on the PPQ and VP9.

Eager HK fan boy that I am, I got an early VP9 last summer, with the help of a forum leader. I sent it right off for installation of HD sights. A week ago, on the recommendation of Bill Wilson, I got a PPQ M2 for my wife. I shot the VP9 last summer, occasionally since, and then side by side today with the PPQ.

First, the dimensions:

Barrel PPQ 4.0 VP9 4.09

Mag capacity 15 each pistol

Height PPQ 7.1 VP9 7.34

Width PPQ 1.3 VP9 1.32

Weight PPQ 24 VP9 25.26

(dimensions/weights from manufacturer websites)





I left both out, next to each other, the last few days. They are so close, it is hard to tell which is which, with the lights off.

Lots of similarity. Both are accurate. Both seem reliable. Both grips feel good, and both grips can use some texture at the top of their grips. Magazines both look good. On one hand you have HK P30 mags. With the Walther you have Mec-Gar made factory magazines. The Walther 15 rounder is a tad shorter than the HK 15 round magazine, and there is the option of easily available 17 round mags for the PPQ. Both pistols feel high quality, although I would give the slight edge to HK, since I have owned and loved their products for years.

Based on my experience with HK customer service over the years, and Walther CS when I had a P99 problem, I give the edge to HK on CS.

In terms of appendix carry, they seem about a wash. The Walther has more initial take-up than the VP9, but then shorter reset. Neither striker can be blocked like the PPS.

Now the subjective. In shooting characteristics, they seem very much different to me. While they are close, I can get higher on the PPQ. When I draw, I try to get as high as I can, and if I am a tad high on the PPQ, I just slide down into place like on a Glock. With the VP9 that overhang in back is pronounced enough, I have to get under there. The big difference is the trigger (at least on my two copies). The PPQ has the best stock trigger I have felt on any striker pistol. It is light, with some roll, and a very short reset. The VP9 has more of a wall, and in this regard is Sig 320 like.

Shooting a one inch square at 7 yards, I put the first three rounds out of the VP9 into one hole. When I try to go fast, though, with the VP9, like with Garcia dots, or shooting an 8 inch steel at 30 yards, the wall on the VP9 really makes the PPQ trigger head and shoulders better. When I pulled my Gen 4 19 with minus connector out, it was amazing how much easier the PPQ trigger is to hit with on low prob targets.

Finally, even though the dimensions are very close, the PPQ seems to carry more like a Glock 19 sized pistol, and the VP9 carries more like a short barrel Glock 17.

They are both great pistols, but the PPQ is especially impressive. If HK had licensed this design from Walther five years ago, when Glock was stumbling with reliability, the M&P was dealing with accuracy, and the 320 was still a Sig 250, it would be interesting to see how much market penetration it would have by now.

I am not sure my wife is going to get the PPQ back.

[SecondsCount]

Interesting.

I have only shot a rental PPQ next to my P30 and I found the PPQ to have a cheap feel to it. Recoil was snappier from what I remember.

Hopefully soon I will get to try a VP9.

[Sasage]

I traded my PPQ M2 for a LE VP9.

I find the break better on the PPQ but prefer the reset of the VP9.

[JBP55]

The trigger may be slightly better on the PPQ but overall I prefer the VP9.

[Super77]

GJM I don't have much to add to your observations other than I came to very similar conclusions. I was on the fence between these two pistols and went with the PPQ M2 mainly for the 1911 style mag release and better trigger. After shooting it for awhile I've started to appreciate some things that weren't immediately apparent. One is that the somewhat rounded profile of the PPQ makes it the most comfortable pistol of this size I've ever carried. Second it that the trigger could be easily adjusted for widely varying weight ranges with just a spring change as that's just about the only resistance you're feeling in the trigger. Third this is the only pistol I've owned where I bought new sights, installed them dead center in the slide with a dial caliper and came out perfectly zeroed at 25m, no adjustment necessary. I'm not sure if that signifies anything important but I take it as a sign of precise manufacturing. I'll echo your comment that the PPQ is very accurate, more so than any other poly-striker pistol I own and it's easy to wring out the inherent accuracy with the great trigger and ergos. If I wasn't forced to run a Glock at work I'd probably start getting rid of Glocks and buy a backup PPQ.

[JSGlock34]

I also directly compared these two pistols, yet I personally gave the edge to the VP9. I found that any advantage the PPQ trigger may have granted in speed was negated by the PPQ's comparatively snappy recoil. There is no question that the PPQ has a terrific trigger, but it was a bit 'sporty' for my taste. This is what I've written previously in other threads...

It is really no wonder that whenever the PPQ is brought up the HK VP9 is not far behind. The PPQ and VP9 are unquestionably very similar pistols and therefore invite direct comparisons. In terms of dimensions, controls (especially the PPQ M1), capacity, style - they resemble each other closely. I even used a Raven Phantom molded for the PPQ as a range holster until I acquired a dedicated holster for the VP9. It was these very similarities that drove me to eliminate one so as to focus my efforts on improving with the other.

From that perspective, I sold my Walther PPQ in favor of focusing on my VP9. I found the VP9 more 'shootable' than the PPQ. Both pistols are very accurate and come out of the box with terrific triggers (in both categories they are a cut above Glock), but I find the VP9 trigger better suited for carry. The PPQ trigger is very light with an extremely short reset - and little margin for error. The PPQ felt top heavy in comparison to the VP9. I also found the PPQ somewhat 'snappy', whereas the VP9 is unremarkable in recoil. While the PPQ grip is excellent, there is no question that the VP9/P30 grip is the best available.

Both the PPQ and VP9 are high quality pistols and merit consideration.

[lightning fast]

I bought the PPQ in 2013. My father purchased the VP9 a few months ago. Having shot them both a fair amount, I'm glad I kept my M1. Very comparable, but I like the trigger and mag release of the PPQ better.

[GJM]

They are both great pistols, and to borrow an analogy -- I wouldn't kick either of them out of bed.

I agree the PPQ feels abrupt in recoil, but the flip side per the timer is it cycles back onto target very fast. I only shot one Bill drill with it, but it was fast and I could cover the group with my fist.

What I like most about the PPQ is that it has a trigger approaching the SA on my CZ, or the Canyon Creek XDM, in a Glock 19 sized package. I prioritize reach out for a carry gun, on account of the areas I frequent, and for me, the PPQ is plain easier to shoot low prob targets fast compared to the VP9. That is with the stock VP9 trigger -- no idea what a Gray Guns trigger would feel like.

HD sights for the PPS arrived today, as I wanted a rear sight on the PPQ without the windage adjustment feature. The PPS HD is a loose fit in the dovetail, and Trijicon left the screw out of the package. I guess I could red loctite it, but there must be a better answer?

[JSGlock34]

Totally agree - I'd be happy with either a PPQ or VP9 on my hip.

And Bond should totally rock a PPQ in Spectre as it pairs really well with an Omega watch...



...wait a minute?! Oh no!



Well, the VP9 vs. PPQ argument is now totally over.

[WilsonCombatRep]

Finally, even though the dimensions are very close, the PPQ seems to carry more like a Glock 19 sized pistol, and the VP9 carries more like a short barrel Glock 17.
.

This is a very salient observation. Not sure why this is.

The PPQ is a neat gun. Kind of a gun nerds Glock.