Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Shorter pistols more accurate? 43 vs 48 and 19 vs 17?

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Southeastern IN
    In my experience I shoot my Gen5 G17 and G48 far better than I shoot my older Gen 3 models. Not sure I can explain why but they seem to be laser beams in my hands, and I love them. Lol

  2. #22
    Site Supporter Mjolnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Not sure, really
    Quote Originally Posted by Rex G View Post
    Mechanical accuracy, with shorter-barreled weapons, can be real. It can depend upon the weapon system. There is nothing new about this. Plenty has been written, since before the internet was a common thing. I seem to remember that “baby” Glocks, in more than one model series, have been credited with better mechanical accuracy. I never saw any reference that indicated the larger Glocks provided “poor” accuracy, in comparison. Notably, these examples were with prior-generation Glocks.

    P-F member @Mas Ayoob may have written on this subject.

    Let’s keep in mind that Glocks are not famous for being the most accurate pistols, compared to some other platforms.

    A short grip can mask some faults, such as a milking motion with the pinkie finger, as the pinkie finger is removed from the equation.

    If you want best answers, however, provide more figures, such as distances, group sizes, abd descriptions or images of point of impact versus point of aim.

    Personally, my eyes can aim a longer-barreled weapon better, and, for orthopedic reasons, I have stopped shooting Glocks with grips shorter than G17-length.
    I used to think that Glocks weren’t that accurate until I got my Gen 5s. They are plenty accurate.

    Here is a G45 MOS w/ 3.25 MOA RMR sandbagged at 25 yards. One shot pulled because the clown next to me opened up with his Draco pistol.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanch View Post
    I own a 19, 17, 43, and 48. I got them at different times in life and I don’t want to sell them but if I were starting over now with what’s available I may just standardize on g48.

    But what I’ve noticed is I shoot the shorter one better of the pairs. My groups with the 43 are a lot tighter than the 48. And my 19 groups are much tighter than my 17. I owned a 34 a long time back and sold it because that also was less accurate for me.

    So I’m wondering which of the following are to blame:

    My specific 48 and 17 got the glock factory crapshoot and they aren’t great guns. And my 43 and 19 I got lucky with.

    I haven’t shot the 48 and 17 enough to break them in. I shoot them poorly so that makes me not want to shoot them and I tend to ccw a 43 or a 19 anyway. The 48 I bought as a proof of concept gun to test and replace my 19 in the carry rotation but I shoot my 48 terribly. My performance is 19 > 43 > 17 > 48. Maybe forcing myself to push 1k rounds through them will polish out any kinks?

    I haven’t shot the 48 and 17 enough to get used to them and it’s all user error. The recoil impulse feels very different and it feels like I’m jerking the shot. It feels like there’s a dwell time for lack of a better word almost like a black powder rifle where you are waiting patiently for the gun to go off. Of course it’s not really that slow but it subjectively feels slow and objectively makes sense the bullet has a longer barrel to pass through but really at like 1200 feet per second the time difference is in the ten thousandth of a second which must be imperceptible.

    I’m screwing myself psychologically because I think I’d shoot them worse and it’s a self fulfilling prophecy.

    Might be some harmonic resonance issues? I’ve heard shorter rifle barrels can be more accurate due to less vibration of the barrel as the gun shoots.

    When I first got my 43 I shot it like crap compared to the 19 and today with some new fiber optic sights in them, I was shooting it as good or better than I shoot my 19 which is crazy. But I’ve done a ton of dry fire on the 43, and have been shooting it live fire a bit so maybe I’ll get better with the 48 and 17 if I dry fire and live fire them more.

    Is there any technical reason the 43 would our perform a 48 and a 19 would a 17?
    Still waiting to hear about the Glock factory crapshoot?

    Could you articulate the differences between the crapshoot guns that are good and the ones that are not good and how we might be able to tell that.

    Thanks in advance.

    PS. I believe this question came up a couple months ago.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •