Gun performance comparisons

[JCN]

@cheby that’s why when vetting carry gun performance I usually try and make it mainly recoil control, trigger and transition dependent.

Draw is holster dependent and reloads for civilians (especially slide lock) don’t come into my calculus at all.

[breakingtime91]

Interesting. I should do something similar to decide between the 26 and 48 when my pinky is cleared to allow me to shoot. I was having a mental exercise the other day debating irons/rds. I wonder what my performance increase is using red dots. Gonna have to do this, thanks cluster

[JHC]

@cheby that’s why when vetting carry gun performance I usually try and make it mainly recoil control, trigger and transition dependent.

Draw is holster dependent and reloads for civilians (especially slide lock) don’t come into my calculus at all.

Yes! From ready. A few years ago when Drill of the Week (DOW) was a thing, I think there was a DOW that had a fairly simple course of fire to shoot with multiple carry gun options. I think I had at least four on the table and a target for each and just ran down the line. It was great fun.

It's possible I just did this on my own and it wasn't a DOW and I'm imagining that part but it was a riot.

[Noah]

@Clusterfrack I’ll just spell out definition of terms early on so that people don’t talk past each other (not you and me, others that might wander in).

“Significant” splits into:

“Statistically significant”

and

“Functionally significant”

The more reproducible someone’s mechanics, the more easily they’re able to tease out statistically significant differences that others may not notice.

Whether that’s functionally significant, hard to say.

So when vetting carry guns, I test against a full points standard like 100 point Bakersfield or 50/50 FBI and make the assumption that anything performance wise above that standard is not functionally significant while it might be statistically performance different.

Hence discussions of “carry rotation.”

If someone can exceed a reasonable functional standard, I don’t care if their gun matches their shoes.

If they can’t, I don’t care if it’s their only gun.

The shooter matters more than the gun most of the time, IMO.

I've long been a "stick to 1 gun or extremely similar guns" preacher, and like many others, often think about what's "good enough" vs chasing pure performance /competition.

I think what you lay out here is a really good place to start for those discussions/lines of thought.

[JCN]

I've long been a "stick to 1 gun or extremely similar guns" preacher, and like many others, often think about what's "good enough" vs chasing pure performance /competition.

If you haven't, check out this thread:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....o-see-training

Chase for performance...

I chase performance religiously... IN MYSELF.

I pick equipment that is optimized for division, but I don't mind that it's a Shadow 2 rather than an Open gun. I'm not chasing the maximum performance overall, just within the division I'm competing in.

I AM chasing performance in my performance. Always. But how do I gauge my performance if I don't use the same equipment that the people setting the high hit factor standard are using? So I do and that takes that fudge factor off the table.

And then I can gauge my performance based off my performance.

[Noah]

If you haven't, check out this thread:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....o-see-training

Chase for performance...

I chase performance religiously... IN MYSELF.

I pick equipment that is optimized for division, but I don't mind that it's a Shadow 2 rather than an Open gun. I'm not chasing the maximum performance overall, just within the division I'm competing in.

I AM chasing performance in my performance. Always. But how do I gauge my performance if I don't use the same equipment that the people setting the high hit factor standard are using? So I do and that takes that fudge factor off the table.

And then I can gauge my performance based off my performance.

I've been following it!

[GAP]

@Clusterfrack I’ll just spell out definition of terms early on so that people don’t talk past each other (not you and me, others that might wander in).

“Significant” splits into:

“Statistically significant”

and

“Functionally significant”

The more reproducible someone’s mechanics, the more easily they’re able to tease out statistically significant differences that others may not notice.

Whether that’s functionally significant, hard to say.

So when vetting carry guns, I test against a full points standard like 100 point Bakersfield or 50/50 FBI and make the assumption that anything performance wise above that standard is not functionally significant while it might be statistically performance different.

Hence discussions of “carry rotation.”

If someone can exceed a reasonable functional standard, I don’t care if their gun matches their shoes.

If they can’t, I don’t care if it’s their only gun.

The shooter matters more than the gun most of the time, IMO.

Random thought… If you are well versed in Minitab, you may wish to run a DoE with the results of various testing methods to see which factors specifically measure your actual performance, and narrow your testing to one specific testing method using those factors.

For those not familiar:

Design of experiments (DOE) is a systematic method to determine the relationship between factors affecting a process and the output of that process. In other words, it is used to find cause-and-effect relationships. This information is needed to manage process inputs in order to optimize the output.

[JCN]

Random thought… If you are well versed in Minitab, you may wish to run a DoE with the results of various testing methods to see which factors specifically measure your actual performance, and narrow your testing to one specific testing method using those factors.

For those not familiar:

Design of experiments (DOE) is a systematic method to determine the relationship between factors affecting a process and the output of that process. In other words, it is used to find cause-and-effect relationships. This information is needed to manage process inputs in order to optimize the output.

That to me seems like engineering speak haha.

With a very in tune shooter you can tease out differences immediately without having to do a large sample volume.

It’s very easy for me to tell the difference in ease of recoil management and vision recovery between guns.

So while I can split 0.15 with a G22.5 shooting 40SW it really is more equivalent 0.18 split to the ease of splitting a 9mm S2 at 0.15.

[GAP]

That to me seems like engineering speak haha.

With a very in tune shooter you can tease out differences immediately without having to do a large sample volume.

It’s very easy for me to tell the difference in ease of recoil management and vision recovery between guns.

So while I can split 0.15 with a G22.5 shooting 40SW it really is more equivalent 0.18 split to the ease of splitting a 9mm S2 at 0.15.

I work with them everyday! I’ve recently adventured into the realm of a dot equipped P365XL. I’ll be running a few comparisons against my G26 that I’ve carried and shot for years. I may use your chosen drills as a comparison.

I read an earlier comment about competition shooters still winning and doing well regardless of the division. This is because the competitors are all experiencing the same decrease or increase in performance depending on which class of weapon they can use. The constant is the shooter and his or her abilities.

For carry, my opinion is that enthusiasts should run a series of timed and accuracy driven tests to collect meaningful data (splits, draws, slow fire accuracy, etc.) then choose the highest performing gun he or she can conceal comfortably.

It may be worth evaluating the average response time in self defensive shooting videos to land on a realistic goal for draws, first shots on target, etc.

[JCN]

For carry, my opinion is that enthusiasts should run a series of timed and accuracy driven tests to collect meaningful data (splits, draws, slow fire accuracy, etc.) then choose the highest performing gun he or she can conceal comfortably.

It may be worth evaluating the average response time in self defensive shooting videos to land on a realistic goal for draws, first shots on target, etc.

Totally agree with the first part with the added wrinkle of: train more if you can’t meet a minimum standard

But we know that’s tough to implement, we can’t even get that happening for LEO.

I also think that above a certain performance threshold of shooter and gun, more probably doesn’t change the outcome of a gunfight in 99.9% of situations.

The second part I don’t think is useful because it’s training for average and a higher standard gives more options and better hits. For an average scenario, a 22LR single shot revolver would suffice but we don’t want to train to that standard.

I did a combatives class with handguns and it was very clear how increased skills improved options. Guns don’t solve all problems though, of course.

So I think better is better but diminishing returns.

Doing something like the SWYNTS drill will matter more than the particular gun you carry.