I recall from an Armorer course years ago that comment about pre Gen 5 26s. I have demoed a 26 on a steel silhouette at 50 yards and beyond and hit; did the same with a snub revolver.Originally Posted by HCM
I’ll look forward to your project with interest…
I had three Gen 1 M&Ps with atrocious accuracy, circa 2009 - 2010 IIRC. The best one was a 6" gun.
Now I've got a SS DR 920 that's about as bad as the M&Ps. Absolutely terrible lock up and a wonky frame to slide fit.
On the good side of things, I'm continually impressed by the CZ 75 I have with a first gen Accu bushing installed. My P365XL is pretty impressive for it's small size as well. I can't shoot it fast, but in slow fire it's really respectable.
I too had several (more than I want to admit) of those M&P 9's (the JG version no less). Needless to say I don't own them anymore.
"Specialization is for insects." -Robert A. Heinlein
It’s funny because I recall @JHC mentioning (maybe from KevB?) that Glocks varied in slide to frame fit and that one way to get a more accurate Glock was to find a dealer with several, look at the rear of the slide to frame interface and press down on the top rear of the slide. The less slide to frame movement when pressed, the more mechanical accuracy.
I don’t claim to understand the engineering of that but my limited anecdotal experience has indicated there’s something to it.
Slide to frame fit is part of the total picture for sure.
First on the list though, a tight lockup is key, both in the hood area and bottom lug. If you have good lockup there, the gun will almost always be acceptably accurate. My best Glock has a hood tolerance so tight I can't fit any feeler gauge I own between the hood and the slide. None. There's also almost imperceptible movement between the frame and slide when in battery in any location, front, center or rear. It's good for about 2" at 25 yards for 10-rounds with ammo it likes, if I am capable that day.
The rear slide to frame fit on a Glock I would agree plays a role, but I've seen it make a bigger difference in trigger pull consistency than outright mechanical accuracy. There used to be folks offering to tighten the slide where it sits in battery with the two sets of frame rails and I've shot guns with it done. It made a difference, but I've never been brave enough to try it as it involves peening the slide rails with a hammer to compress that dimension, without going too far.
My Shadow Systems DR 920 is basically a trampoline. Press down on the hood and it'll drop significantly. Begin to pull the trigger and it'll lift the rear of the slide from the frame as the striker is cocked. Plus the front rails are undersized, so it will never lock up consistently as the slide doesn't track well in the frame.
Like I said I don’t know if it’s the rear slide to frame fit itself or that is just a sign of other things.
I do wonder if a fit barrel and or a new locking block would help with the problematic guns.
I don't know if that comment is a "myth" so much as it is the type of blanket advice that's normally given to new shooters that might be tempted by aftermarket upgrades before they have their fundamentals down pat.
For the average rangegoer (the type of guy that's just happy to land headshots on a 7-yard B27), it's a "true" statement more often than not.
The problem is that it's obnoxious to hear it from folks that have no idea what your experience or ability is, but they want to volunteer their "advice."
Well, you may be a man. You may be a leprechaun. Only one thing’s for sure… you’re in the wrong basement.
Eh, let the newbies get a match grade barrel tho.
When someone asks "should I get a match grade barrel fitted on my gun?" Loads of dudes will immediately say "Most shooters cannot shoot better than a stock barrel." Rather than asking the shooter how well they can shoot with the stock barrel.
That advice is unhelpful and also incorrect.
I would wager that many people, with a reasonable amount of practice, can shoot better than a stock M&P9 is mechanically capable of.
Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk
This is also where I don’t know why shooting off a bench is less common in the pistol world. Everybody would laugh if somebody claimed that their rifle sucked because they were getting 10” groups shooting off hand, but for some reason in the pistol world we default to pistols are hard you must just suck. Except for magazine articles back when those were a thing. In almost all of the pistol reviews in print magazines accuracy results were exclusively shot from a rest, and with good reason. That gives a base line with less outside influence, just like with a rifle.
If I can’t hit with a new gun offhand, but I shoot off a table with my wrists nicely supported on some bags and it suddenly starts grouping then I know I’m the one who sucks that day.
On the other side of that coin I once bought a used g17 that had the NY1 trigger spring and 3.5 connector that I couldn’t hit shit with out past 20 yards. I bagged it and saw that 6-8” is all it was good for at that distance. I changed back to a standard truggerspring and it still wouldn’t group, that gun eventually got traded on something else.
ETA: Aaron Cowan is one of the few contemporary dudes who specifically shoots from a rest, using good ammo, when he’s reviewing pistols and pistol red dots it’s one of my favorite thing about his videos.
My groups were roughly half the size after I fit an apex barrel to my M&p 2.0 compact.
Reply With Quote