Trigger characteristics -- Glock vs VP9

[JHC]

Gabe's standard is 2.0 from open, and 2.25 concealed.

Interesting to me is that this morning shooting from concealed AIWB (Dark Star!) I was hitting 90% in the 2.35 second area on a VERTICAL 3x5 but only about 30% at that same speed on a horizontal 3x5. The most combat experienced pistol fighting dude I have ever known thinks the vertical 3x5 makes more sense than horizontal. I agree largely because my hits are better on a vertical 3x5.

[breakingtime91]

Interesting to me is that this morning shooting from concealed AIWB (Dark Star!) I was hitting 90% in the 2.35 second area on a VERTICAL 3x5 but only about 30% at that same speed on a horizontal 3x5. The most combat experienced pistol fighting dude I have ever known thinks the vertical 3x5 makes more sense than horizontal. I agree largely because my hits are better on a vertical 3x5.

Is vertical stringing more previlent then horizontal? Interesting

[JHC]

Is vertical stringing more previlent then horizontal? Interesting

For me, I'll miss a skosh low a lot more than a bit left. So the taller target gives me better odds.

[taadski]

Correct on the extractor. I don't think Sig currently produces a 229 with a short extractor. I don't like the idea of searching the used firearm market to find multiples of a carry pistol....Looked back through my notes. It had 8 FTE's in just under 2,000 rounds. Haven't put a many rounds through it lately. No failures in the last 500 rounds though. Maybe I've beem to quick to lose confidence in it?

Didn't we discuss this in you journal back in June or July? The extraction issues aren't going to go away without fixing the problem. There isn't a "break in period" with these pistols. The long extractor guns have had a few teething problems. But they've been largely eliminated via extractor spring replacement. Or more rarely, by replacing the extractor itself. Get that thing fixed so you can enjoy the perfect solution it is!

Send the 229 back to Sig. Make them make it right. Then use it all the time.

This, yes, this!


FWIW, Sig still produces short extractor guns, both in the 226 and 229 profiles. Search '229 legacy' and there are plenty NIB iterations of the short extractor pistols available. You can even buy a legacy top end for the pistol you own if you were so motivated. As an aside, the only Sig I've personally ever had extraction issues with is a short external extractor model. So they're not necessarily an end all be all.



t

[GJM]

I've said here before that I find Glocks harder for me to maintain a skill level compared to a TDA SIG. I'm also more consistent with the SIG, while an occasional WTF happens with a Glock, even when I'm shooting them a lot.

I have personally come to value consistency just behind accuracy. A .10 here and there or faster split just isn't as important as consistently placing bullets where they need to go, IMO.

Send the 229 back to SIG and make them get it right. Then make it your constant companion.

Have said for a while that a Glock is easier to shoot OK, and harder to shoot very well, compared to some other platforms. BTW, I don't know anyone shooting .10 splits, leaving aside faster. I think there are differences in splitting ability, with shorter/lighter triggers obviously easier to shoot fast. That doesn't remove the need to align the sights before executing that awesome split. Plus, for people splitting crazy fast, how often do they get trigger freeze, using their technique?

I personally believe that consistency is 2nd only to accuracy. Inconsistency that shows on the range will likely pop up even more under stress. Instead of fighting to overcome a platform, why not put the extra effort into skill building with a pistol that you don't have to work as hard to maintain an acceptable level?

If your goal is to become a better shooter, it is a journey, and every platform offers something. Competition, whether USPSA or timmie games, like DOW, is designed to magnify very small differences in performance. I bet the differences between most platforms would be immaterial in the food court.

Is vertical stringing more previlent then horizontal? Interesting

Depends on what you are doing. Horizontal is often grip/stance, or in the case of the Glock the finger/trigger interface. High is often triggering the shot before the sights settle, and low something to do with recoil/anticipation.

This is very much the reason why the Dot Torture drill is the bane of my existence and why I've yet to clean one. I will say though that because of this drill, it's forced me to really work on my Gabe-O-Vision to push my precision on small targets up close while tracking the sights. I'm close to cleaning my first DT drill, might even be this next range trip.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

Dot torture is a test and not a drill. If I had my way, I would allow a sub set of it, five shots freestyle, left and right hand, and abolish the rest. Whether you shoot USPSA/IDPA or shoot for defense, tell me how shooting the same shot over and over, without a time limit, is likely applicable?

[SLG]

I hate to say this, but Dot Torture, imo, has been way overblown on this site. I showed it to Todd as a one time, "hey lets try this." He REALLY liked it, though I'm still not sure why. It is a very basic test of fundamentals, nothing more. Not useful for practical shooters in anyway, except as a step in their VERY early development. Sure, you can do it at 10 yards and make it almost impossible to clean, but that is great once. Then it's just a waste of ammo, afaic.

If you are not able to clean it as it is layed out, then you need to practice your fundamentals more. In this case, accuracy. That is best accomplished in ways other than shooting dot torture.

[LSP552]

. BTW, I don't know anyone shooting .10 splits, leaving aside faster. I think there are differences in splitting ability, with shorter/lighter triggers obviously easier to shoot fast. That doesn't remove the need to align the sights before executing that awesome split.

Me either . Perhaps I could have worded that better, but a .10 here or there OR faster split was meant to convey shaving a .10 on things (draw, transition, etc) or split wasn't as important to me as the consistency.

[spinmove_]

Dot torture is a test and not a drill. If I had my way, I would allow a sub set of it, five shots freestyle, left and right hand, and abolish the rest. Whether you shoot USPSA/IDPA or shoot for defense, tell me how shooting the same shot over and over, without a time limit, is likely applicable?

Fair enough and this is why I need a timer and hoping Santa gets me one for Christmas. Again, unfortunately around where I am, even when I do get a timer, it won't be used as much as I'd like it to be as my only options for practice that can involve speed are at indoor ranges. The only outdoor range I have available to me is ridiculously draconian and frown upon speed and having more than 6 rounds in any magazine I may have on me.

I'd love to know where there is a public range where I could really get some proper practice in with being able to record some measurable metrics.


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[LSP552]

Double tap....

[spinmove_]

I hate to say this, but Dot Torture, imo, has been way overblown on this site. I showed it to Todd as a one time, "hey lets try this." He REALLY liked it, though I'm still not sure why. It is a very basic test of fundamentals, nothing more. Not useful for practical shooters in anyway, except as a step in their VERY early development. Sure, you can do it at 10 yards and make it almost impossible to clean, but that is great once. Then it's just a waste of ammo, afaic.

If you are not able to clean it as it is layed out, then you need to practice your fundamentals more. In this case, accuracy. That is best accomplished in ways other than shooting dot torture.

What would you suggest for working on accuracy fundamentals? I'm a rather inexperienced guy as well just trying to get better. Totally digging everyone's responses to Rich's posts and I'll be putting a lot of that wisdom towards my own progress.