The Importance of Recoil Control to Shooting Performance

[Doc_Glock]

I have been shooting a .22 (G44) quite a bit lately. I am pretty astonished at how much better I shoot this gun compared to my carry G19. When comparing hit factor on several drills, my HF with the G44 is around 50% better than my best with a G19. That is nothing to sneeze at.

I think the improvement comes from several factors:
1. Shot to shot recovery is much faster. Sight tracking is much easier.
2. Less beating from the recoil/blast leads to less recoil anticipation/flinch, plus I can focus carefully on trigger fundamentals without flaws being hidden in the recoil cycle.
3. I can shoot a lot more in any one session without getting overly fatigued which leads to more learning.

I have generally poo-pooed the importance of the gun in a shooter's performance. For most off the shelf service pistols, my performance is within a few percentage points if it is even measurable and not just random "noise." The difference in my performance with a rimfire is measurable and undeniable, however.

This has me thinking of the usefulness of things like the "Roland Special" or the STI gun with the comp. I had previously thought these things were gimmicks, but now I am not so sure. If I had a 9mm that recoiled like a rimfire, would not my shooting performance improve significantly? I guess there is a reason for open guns run in a different category in competition.

[Gio]

I have been shooting a .22 (G44) quite a bit lately. I am pretty astonished at how much better I shoot this gun compared to my carry G19. When comparing hit factor on several drills, my HF with the G44 is around 50% better than my best with a G19. That is nothing to sneeze at.

I think the improvement comes from several factors:
1. Shot to shot recovery is much faster. Sight tracking is much easier.
2. Less beating from the recoil/blast leads to less recoil anticipation/flinch, plus I can focus carefully on trigger fundamentals without flaws being hidden in the recoil cycle.
3. I can shoot a lot more in any one session without getting overly fatigued which leads to more learning.

I have generally poo-pooed the importance of the gun in a shooter's performance. For most off the shelf service pistols, my performance is within a few percentage points if it is even measurable and not just random "noise." The difference in my performance with a rimfire is measurable and undeniable, however.

This has me thinking of the usefulness of things like the "Roland Special" or the STI gun with the comp. I had previously thought these things were gimmicks, but now I am not so sure. If I had a 9mm that recoiled like a rimfire, would not my shooting performance improve significantly? I guess there is a reason for open guns run in a different category in competition.

Recoil control makes a huge difference, and it is why you see such outstanding recoil control and focus on improving recoil control from top shooters. I would argue that you'll get more bang for your buck adding weight to a gun than you will with a roland special style comp. I notice a much bigger difference adding a weaponlight, brass grip insert, and tungsten guide rod (for competition), than I ever did adding a comp. I don't think the typical 9mm factory ammo, 9mm minor reloads, or 9mm service ammo has enough gas to effectively run a comp like a 9mm major or .38 special open gun.

[RJ]

+1 on brass plug and tungsten guide rod (on my G19). I still make Production weight (barely) so it's legal.

They absolutely afford a noticeable decrease in my shot to shot sight picture acquisition time (I still need to remember to press the damn trigger to the rear without disturbing the sights though) in matches.

[YVK]

This has me thinking of the usefulness of things like the "Roland Special" or the STI gun with the comp.

I've looked at all reports on these and I still don't know what those comps do, if anything, in 9 mm guns.

[GJM]

With the caveat that my 44 is stock and my CO Glock pistols are not stock, my experience is that I shoot my 9mm Glock pistols better than my Glock 44. To have a full discussion on this topic, it would be interesting to hear what others experience in terms of results between the G44 and their 9mm Glock pistols.

[joshs]

I've looked at all reports on these and I still don't know what those comps do, if anything, in 9 mm guns.

I think they do make a noticeable improvement with certain ammo, but that's seriously outweighed by the negatives (the gun can be more ammo sensitive, need resprung, and the added complexity for disassembly).

I also agree with @Gio that weight makes a much more noticeable improvement with most 9mm and adding weight to the frame should, if anything, help reliability.

[willie]

Shooting a Colt Light Weight Commander side by side with the all steel version will convince anyone that felt recoil is a significant factor in achieving marksmanship goals. In the heyday of bullseye shooting this fact was known even to those shooting the .22 rimfire in competition. Muzzle devices to lessen felt recoil were available. The shooter with a .357 Mag revolver will notice that shooting smaller groups is easier with standard .38 Spl ammo.

[YVK]

I have not been able to shoot a comped gun against a non-comped gun, so I am speaking out of my ass here. The questions that I've hoped to answer, but haven't gotten to so far (applies to 9 mm only)

- It seems like they need hot 9 mm to see the advantage. 147 gr standard pressure HST, or even 135+P HST feel pretty mild out of my G19 or even G48, so why not shoot that vs some +p+ stuff just so the comp gets to play.

- How much the extra weight bolted down to the end of the barrel contributes to the effect, vs the expansion chamber effect.

- I saw those angular deviation Ransom rest results, that many degrees up with comped vs non-comped etc. Where they stopped with that was figuring out how much effort is required to bring the muzzle flip of a non-comped to the one of a comped gun.


All of my G19/19x have brass plugs these days.

[Doc_Glock]

With the caveat that my 44 is stock and my CO Glock pistols are not stock, my experience is that I shoot my 9mm Glock pistols better than my Glock 44. To have a full discussion on this topic, it would be interesting to hear what others experience in terms of results between the G44 and their 9mm Glock pistols.

How do you shoot your G44 compared to an iron sight G19?

[GJM]

How do you shoot your G44 compared to an iron sight G19?

I shoot an iron sighted 17 significantly better than the 44, but haven't shot an iron sighted 19 enough lately to say.