What handgun should I get?

[Ed L]

I really don't want to be a jerk here, but what accuracy criteria did I set??? Where did I outline it?

You state below that accuracy can be a litmus of quality.

If you take the time to actually read and digest my post here, you will see that I say accuracy can be a litmus for quality. I even said there are exceptions to the rule. However, you seem to be incorrectly assuming that I hold accuracy paramount. I didn't think what I wrote was all that obtuse, but let me state it again: accuracy is an indicator of quality. It indicates the manufacturer spent the time and money to ensure design geometries were adhered to during production. Which, while not without exception, implies in spec parts were used throughout. An inaccurate gun tells me that, for example, the crown was cut off center, or the chamber reamed off center, etc. Which would then imply the machines were not properly maintained and/or quality control isn't doing its job. I would then suspect poor materials, other parts out of spec or fitted incorrectly. That is a different argument than "I need a gun to shoot 1.5" groups at 25yrds with Golden Sabers out of a Ransom rest for me to carry it."

I'm using my Kimber Warrior experience as an example of a gun that certainly wasn't. The gun was very accurate. I could shoot it more accurate than any other handgun I had at the time, but it lacked quality given its shoddy reliability and the fact that it could not be made to run by several gunsmiths (the first of whom I am willing to concede did not do a good job).

As to your gunsmithing experience: so now we are at 3 sets of eyes failing to find/diagnose/remedy the problem? Surely you can see my hesitation with this? Getting a 1911 to run isn't black magic.

I'll respond to your Kimber comment in the appropriate thread.

If you follow the link that I posted, it leads to a thread where both Hilton Yam and Larry Vickers conclude that the Kimber Warrior model has fleas.

[SecondsCount]

I think everyone here makes some valid points on accuracy vs. reliability.

For an average Joe like myself, I figure most confrontations are going to be really close and dependability is paramount. The issue is that I shoot my handgun in all kinds of scenarios besides self defense and for those purposes I want as much accuracy as I can get.

I can completely see what blr is saying. If the gun manufacturer is not taking the time to build an acceptably accurate gun, what other corners are they cutting?

Getting a 1911 to run isn't black magic.

Truth.

[BLR]

Ed, again, I'm not trying to be an ass here, but I think I originally used the term necessary but not sufficient. I would suggest reviewing the meaning of that term. You seem to want me, for whatever reason, to say "Accuracy = Done Right." I'm not saying that, I have not said that, and I'm not going to say that. Your argument is somewhat sophomoric in its concept and structure.

Maybe your Kimber is/was junk. That's fine too. Since you seem to be having trouble understanding my comment on them, let me help you. I, as someone who has just slightly more than zero interest in Kimbers and arguing about Kimbers, have difficulty believing they built a successful, profitable company by producing guns that won't run right. Maybe I was totally off the mark. Maybe they can't put together. I don't know.

I'm visiting my local Kimber Master Dealer (Olde English) to get the lowdown on what's up before I insert my foot further into my mouth.

[JHC]

It is pretty simple to me really. The PPQ is awesome, but I just had to pay $80 for a gunsmith to work on the gun AND find a spare part. The gun was down for 3 weeks with a simple issue dealing with the rear sight. The lack of a compact size gun means I am having to compete and train with a gun that I don't always carry (in the summer, I usually wear t-shirts and shorts, in the other seasons I am at college). The sights are fine for close range stuff, but the stock sights and night sight options leave A LOT to be desired at 25m. I plan to eventually instruct, and I want to master a gun that will be used by a large portion of my students, I have heard too many students in classes say things like "if I had a gun like that...I could do that", etc. Also, I am in ESP division in IDPA with the PPQ when my ideal goal was to make Master in the next 2 years in SSP. Primarily, though, the lack of a compact PPQ made me want to switch to another platform so I could carry exactly what I compete with. With the M&P, I can have a full line of pistols from pocket to 5" with extreme aftermarket support, very solid reliability, great ergonomics (the gun feels better than others, though I know that is way overrated), and that eventually will be more accurate than even the PPQ if the G&R and Apex barrels produce 1-2" groups as preliminary reports suggest. I'm 22, so I'm in this for the long run. Much like the Glock series, I have no doubt that the M&P line will be here long term. Walther, well, still is a tiny presence in the US gun market and is almost non-existent in the competition world. I've had an M&P40 in the past, and my speed won't suffer much at all with the M&P series. In fact, my weapons manipulation will probably get even faster with the M&P because of how much I like the controls (I'm a lefty, and I hated the HUGE slide release on the PPQ).

I still own a PPQ and all the accessories, so if this doesn't work out like I expect, I'll just go back to the PPQ like nothing ever happened.

That's an F'in plan kid!!!! Carry on!!!

[GOP]

That's an F'in plan kid!!!! Carry on!!!

Thanks JHC! I hope it works out like I hope, all I can do is try. If not, I can always blame it on the M&P's

[JAD]

No snark intended in any way, GOP, but I'm surprised one of your reasons isn't your preferred carry location -- I remember you mentioning AIWB in another thread and I've seen SMEs express caution about the suitability of the Walther for that carry mode. Will your M&P have a thumb safety?

[Carraway]

This is a great discussion. After following it, it sounds I'm wondering if many of those commenting are eschewing new pistols and would instead favor, say, second generation Glocks and older Sigs.

[DocGKR]

9 mm Glocks up to 2010 and classic 9mm Sigs prior to the Cohen era are good to go in my book...

[David Armstrong]

This is a great discussion. After following it, it sounds I'm wondering if many of those commenting are eschewing new pistols and would instead favor, say, second generation Glocks and older Sigs.

I've said it before....yes, Gen 2 Glocks. I haven't seen anything new come along that would cause me to change.

[David Armstrong]

That assertation simply does not juxtapose with my experiences and knowledge. There have been numerous announced and unannounced/incrimental changes implimented by Glock, both from generation to generation, and within specific generations. Some were due to operational issues experienced, others were engineering and/or manufacturing changes. In a non-fingergroove model, for example, I would MUCH rather have a late second-generation Glock as opposed to any first generation one, and overall I think that the pre-MIM/dip extractor Gen 3 9mm guns (particularly the G17 and G19) represent the apogee of Glock fit, parts improvement, reliability and accuracy.

My general rule of thumb, at least prior to the dip/MIM extractor in the Gen 3 guns, and the Gen4 introduction (at least initially) is the later the production gun within a generation, the better the gun (relatively speaking), as it should incorporate any announced and unannounced running changes/improvements.

In the Gen4 lineup, the G21 seems to be performing flawlessly to date, and I think represents a valid improvement over previous G21s-although I've personally felt no compelling need to divest myself of my Gen 3 G21.

Best, Jon

Sure, as I said it is like every second or third supposed improvement takes us away from what was an exceptional design. Some make things better, some have come along because competitors have wanted something, some are to address a once in a million event, some have been the result of some very unusual combinations of things. My point is that we often start out with a very good design and then in an attempt to tweak it we often cause problems.