What performance level do you demand from your carry gun?

[45dotACP]

Performance I demand from my carry gun is being able to produce a hit in the down zero part of an IDPA target at 25 yards in two seconds. For a belt carried gun.

My Ruger LCP isn't subjected to the same standards.

The inherent accuracy of the gun is something I enjoy chasing on principle. I like 1911s, CZs and Berettas and on a good day, I can hold the black of a B3 (about 3 inches) shooting freestyle at that distance, but that takes a much deeper level of focus. Getting that to two seconds would take a lot of work that I probably ought to use chasing a more efficient draw.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Pistol Pete 10]

Easy answer. It must fire every time the trigger is pulled and it has to hit the mark. Everything else if just fluff to me.

[JCN]

it has to hit the mark. Everything else if just fluff to me.

But that’s exactly what we are talking about here.

If your “mark” is anywhere on a man sized target at 25 yards, pretty much any modern gun will work.

If your “mark” is MUST HIT within a 5.5” circle at 25 yards off a concealed draw in 2 seconds... you might need either better vision / sighting system or a better barrel / gun. And of course your shooting mechanics can’t be the gross weak link.

It just depends on where your expectations and training are at.

[JSGlock34]

Larry Vickers, the tactical luminary that he is, argues for a handgun capable of a 2.5" mechanical accuracy in a 10 shot group: http://www.vickerstactical.com/accuracy.html

I do think that's not a bad standard to meet.

I also think the Vickers standard makes a great deal of sense. It also explains why the tuned 1911 was popular in those circles for such a long time. I found it interesting that conventional wisdom was that an adjustable rear sight had no place on a combat 1911, yet they were widely used on the custom 1911s in that community. I suppose when unit standards include graded accuracy at the 25 yard line on a B8, the ability to fine tune your zero is valuable. Pistol mounted MRDS offers an obvious capability progression.

[JCS]

I want all the accuracy I can get and all the reliability I can get. The struggle is trying to find the balance in that. Then there is also the factor of cost.

For defensive purposes I have a small area I need to hit to get an immediate incapacitation. Whether that comes from my skill, the mechanical accuracy of my gun, or a combination of the two, I don't care. It's one reason why I have no issues with swapping parts in a carry gun. I'd imagine there are some dead people who could've benefited from their shot placement being 1/4" different.

[JCS]

it has to hit the mark.

But what does that mean? It has to hit the exact point you aim at?

I think this thread is aimed at defining "hitting the mark" and what's acceptable to you.

[revchuck38]

I also think the Vickers standard makes a great deal of sense. It also explains why the tuned 1911 was popular in those circles for such a long time. I found it interesting that conventional wisdom was that an adjustable rear sight had no place on a combat 1911, yet they were widely used on the custom 1911s in that community. I suppose when unit standards include graded accuracy at the 25 yard line on a B8, the ability to fine tune your zero is valuable. Pistol mounted MRDS offers an obvious capability progression.

IME, most police service revolvers from 50 years ago were capable of meeting that mechanical standard. Getting Officer Schmedlapp to do it from the 25-yard line was a different story.

For me at this point in my life (69 years old), <8" at 25 yards DA from a carry gun is about it. I can cut that down with a longer barrel or on a good day. I'm interested to see how/if that changes when I get my PX4 slide back from LTT and mount the Holosun 507c on it.

[Pistol Pete 10]

But that’s exactly what we are talking about here.

If your “mark” is anywhere on a man sized target at 25 yards, pretty much any modern gun will work.

If your “mark” is MUST HIT within a 5.5” circle at 25 yards off a concealed draw in 2 seconds... you might need either better vision / sighting system or a better barrel / gun. And of course your shooting mechanics can’t be the gross weak link.

It just depends on where your expectations and training are at.

Anywhere on a man size target ain't near good enough. If you have a head shot you gotta make it, chest area 6 or 8" may be good enough. 5.5 at 25 in 2 second from a draw is pretty good for most people.

[JCN]

Anywhere on a man size target ain't near good enough. If you have a head shot you gotta make it, chest area 6 or 8" may be good enough. 5.5 at 25 in 2 second from a draw is pretty good for most people.

I agree with you, but some other people don’t think that stringent of a performance standard is necessary... or they’re not willing to put in the time / effort / cost to attain the vision / skill / mechanical accuracy to achieve that with a carry gun.

I’d even go so far as to say: “If your vision / skill are lacking consider picking a carry gun system with better mechanical accuracy and shootability to compensate.”

When picking a carry gun, I vet it through full size gun qualification standards and tests. If I couldn’t pass the highest standards with it, it wouldn’t be my carry gun. It’s harder to shoot a micro compact as fast and accurately as a Roland Special so unless I could hang with the best of them skill wise, I wasn’t going to take the hit in equipment.

The EDC X9 crushes the P365X in shootability, speed and accuracy. It’s not that large and heavy, so that would be my choice of carry gun if I couldn’t personally perform as well on standards with a micro gun. But thankfully with a barrel upgrade on the Sig I’m able to hit my minimum standards.

[Catshooter]

JCN,

For my money, you're 100% correct. I've always wanted more, and never wanted the equipment to be the limiter. My first carry piece ('74) was a 1911 made in '17 that had been worked over so that it would put an H&G 200 grain semi-wadcutter over 6.8 grains of Unique into an inch and a half at 50 yards. Reliably. That corrupted me forever after.

Last summer I started running some 3/4 silhouettes at 90 yards. That's fun and very educational. I don't shoot like I used to, that's for sure! The gun that I can (so far) do my best work with at that distance is a Glock 39 in .45 GAP. Stock with Trijicons. Weird. It even beat a Clarke .45 Sofballer. Double weird. I'm not shooting against the clock at that range, not yet. My best group so far is three in three inches with two flyers that open it out to about 13 inches.

I'm having a ball, but it also has a practical use, or at least could. Especially in these crazy days we're living in.


Cat