Were your 2 down on the bill drill with the comped pistol high? Does that pistol have an aftermarket barrel? I’m guessing you haven’t had time to play musical components to trouble shoot yet. Ie different rmr or a different barrel.Originally Posted by Archer1440
im strong, i can run faster than train
HK threaded barrel, and they were a bit left and level with COM on the Gunsite option target (which has a somewhat smaller A zone than an IPSC target). Honestly I think that was a grip issue on that particular run. I should mention all the pistols have identical backups that time and shoot the same, but I haven’t logged all the times.
The real head scratcher for me is the high group with the compensated pistol at 25 at speed, benched or freehand it’s dead on, but under time pressure I shoot it high. As in, tight group in the actual target carrier. Weird.
Last edited by Archer1440; 02-26-2021 at 09:07 PM.
One possible issue is the Gunsite target strikes me as a “hide the scoring zone” target. Going fast, part of the problem is finding where to shoot. I wonder what would happen with a USPSA target or a B8, where the scoring zones are obvious.
I don’t shoot those targets enough to have the scoring zones burned in, and have to look for the intersection of the four thingees to find the zone.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
Drifting here but I also have an preference about grips in regards to accuracy and speed. With Gen 4 and 5 Glocks I'm quicker out of the holster and "on target" with no backstrap. This is close in work, 7-10 yds and under out of an ALS holster, call it "combat accuracy". For accuracy at longer distance I definitely shoot better with a medium backstrap. I also prefer the medium backstrap when shooting more than a hundred rounds or so. My forearms and hands get fatigued with no backstrap and shooting a few hundred rounds. Most of my experience is with G22, we have had the Gen 5 G17 for less than a year now. There are allot of variables with shooting. I've had similar results with my P320s medium vs large grip frame but not as much as a difference as I get with Glock.
Last edited by Sammy1; 02-26-2021 at 09:14 PM.
Yeah, but after the revision of the scoring zone to the gumdrop from the old 8” circle, aiming at the “intersection of the four thingies” will really screw you over. Found that out the hard way at GAS the first time they deployed those.
Interesting point though, it might be worth running again with a DHS target just to see if it makes any difference. Will do on my next range trip.
I find myself wondering about whether the higher gas pressure of the shorter barrel/slide combinations has a real impact on felt recoil characteristics. For example, the VP9L has about the same overall mass in the slide as the regular VP9, same recoil spring and similar reciprocating mass, but demonstrably shoots a bit smoother and flatter.
The gas pressure out the muzzle is something on the order of ~20% less due to the longer barrel. Now, there is slightly more overall mass at the distal end of the pistol due in part to the extra barrel length, but I do wonder about the gas pressure differential providing for that discernible difference in felt recoil.
Maybe I’ll pull my accelerometer rig out and run some tests...
Actually, I just realized I have an accelerometer app for my Apple Watch. Buckle up, this could be interesting.
Last edited by Archer1440; 02-26-2021 at 10:15 PM.
Weights:
Glock 45 MOS: 21.73oz
Glock 17 MOS: 22.05oz
--> Weight savings of 0.32oz / 9.07grams
I'd be shocked if this weight savings is having any appreciable difference in recoil; 9 grams is about the weight of a set of Steel Pistol Sights. Ie a 17 with factory polymer sights would then shoot as flat as a G45 with steel sights, if that level of weight was a factor.
RMR 2 = 1.2oz
SRO = 1.6oz
507c x2 = 1.5oz
If a 9 gram/ 0.32 oz weight change were a factor, I imagine we'd see people commenting on how their RMR shoots flatter then their SRO or 507. And of course, we'd see people commenting about how much 'less flat' their pistols shoot now that they've added optics to them.
Personally, I like my rifles short, and my pistols long.
Beyond the published timing drills, I would say drills with a single target, longer strings of fire, and ideally starting at a closer distance like 5-7yrds could potentially work for or be modified for this purpose. A common one that could work well for this is a bill drill. Six rounds is a decent number where you are at least moving past the comfort zone of doubles or triples. IMO, longer strings beyond ~4-5rds are more effective since you end up with several seconds of visual confirmation about the effects of tweaking a given technique.
If using a Bill drill for this purpose, you might consider modifying it. Maybe try removing the draw as a variable and start gun in hand, possibly even at full extension. Run it on a shot timer so you have a reference point for your splits, even though times would not be relevant with a standard Bill drill. One great thing about a standard Bill drill for this purpose is the wealth of existing measurements out there to benchmark yourself against.
Administrator for PatRogers.org
Are you familiar with the Sage Dynamics Cadence drills? Gun in hand, sights on target, 7 rounds. Different par times for a reduced A zone at 3, 5, and 7 yards. It is an isolation drill which would measure the factors being discussed.
It's a question with a simple and self evident answer, which is why people are not answering it. The person who bought the weapon and used it, is the person is paying for the defense. The cost of that defense will vary based on how intelligent their use of that weapon was.
What is and is not intelligent use of a firearm in terms of a defensive shooting is not up for debate in this thread. What we're discussing is the overall recoil dynamics of pistol grip and slide and slide to grip ratio. If you have content relevant to that topic, please share it. Otherwise you're acting like the kid in class who can't shut up and is distracting everyone else.
I humbly suggest if you have not - to read this book: https://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Force-...4400673&sr=8-3
Mr. Ayoob is a deadly force expert, he has served as an expert witness in numerous criminal and civil trials, he served as a law enforcement officer, is a respected trainer in the use of firearms for self-defense, is currently president of the Second Amendment Foundation, and a member of this forum. He has kindly taken the time to write about his expertise in an easy to grasp and understand format. You can purchase this book from Amazon or elsewhere. But I highly recommend it. I think you will find it eye opening and it may well answer a number of the questions you have posed here and in other threads.
Reply With Quote