Hand Length to Gun Fit: A Case Study: RFI for Data on Hand Size (Part 1)

[RJ]

Thanks for the data updates, I appreciate it.

I have Part 2 drafted and ready to post the thread, but I wanted to stop and ask. I have owned a few pistols but not as many as all of you combined obviously. Since Part 2 is about gathering empirical data on pistols, I only have a few that I can measure.

Moreover, I have been thinking a good bit about how to relate the hand size measurement (hand length) to gun size, in terms of something I could easily and quickly do myself, before asking for input for others. After pondering this the last two days, I'm going to go with Grip Circumference. I define this as follows:

Grip Circumference is defined as the distance around the entirety of the grip, including the trigger (trigger not depressed), using cloth tape, stretched without slack, located at the “web of hand” position.

Here are two examples I measured just now; my P365XL "part bin" gun, and my 1911:

P365XL showing a Grip Circumference of 168mm:


1911 with a short pad trigger showing a Grip Circumference of 162mm:


I went with trigger "not" depressed, since initial reach is part of just getting on the trigger. Circumference, because it would include the effect of stocks/grips, whether thick or thin. "Web of hand" location because it is where you typically see instructors say to place their hand on initial fitment, and a cloth tape because I have one, and it is fairly easy to get repetitive measurements.

Thoughts?

Assuming I went with this definition, the data table for Part 2 would look like this.


Unless there's a yuge reason not to go this way, I'll probably post Part 2 in the next day or so, if not earlier. Meanwhile, please, continue to add data to Part 1, if you haven't already.

It's interesting, the trend for larger than average hand length on p-f is continuing; the current average hand length in the table is now 7.79", or 71% centile.

[JCN]

@RJ I’m just spitballing here but I wonder if two measurements matter:

1. Grip circumference middle of grip (3rd-4th finger)

2. High backstrap to trigger break / reset (because some guns have very little resistance in the take up).


If I were to ask my brain what pertinent dimensions for gun shoot ability ergos, those would be them.

The circumference high on the grip doesn’t matter to me as much as lower down. But the lower down grip circumference matters in how I stabilize the trigger. Both those dimensions seem to matter to me for a gun’s shootability to me.

Measuring to the trigger, I would use a string and then go to a tape measure because some triggers are very curved like a CZ75 and if you tape to the outer curves, it can overestimate the actual trigger finger position by 1/2 inch.

Just some of thoughts to try and help with the data collection.

[the Schwartz]

Now this my kinda thread.

Male
7.625''
Medium

[RJ]

Appreciate the input, @JCN. I will defer to your determination on shooting and what part of the grip makes the most sense for you, for sure..

To help me conceptualize on this tonight, I made a quick graphic with the locations on pistols I am considering. The images are from Handgunhero.com, which I'm sure most of you are familiar with. It is a couple common handguns, a 5" 1911 and a Glock 19 Gen 5. The double ended arrows show roughly where I am putting the cloth tape, i.e. defining "Grip Circumference" (GC).



After pondering this some more, I'd like to use, not the effect of the grip (i.e. performance) but the cause (i.e. the gun). Measuring GC, at the 'web', around the grip and over the trigger, seems to me to be the best single data point that I can see, getting off a gun. And it relates to Hand Length, since the longer Hand Length is, the more the user can accomodate a particular Grip Circumference. Since this measurement can be taken off the gun, is simple to do, and can be objectively collected, I am going to stick with Grip Circumference when I ask for input on guns in Part 2.

Thanks for the comment, though, it made me think. I do like your suggestion of a rope to measure GC. I will give that a try with some paracord I have and see if that is easier than a cloth tape (I think it will be).


One last thing, it's been suggested to use more than one data point, either for the anthropometric data, or for the guns themselves. I don't think I'd like to do that; as originally conceived, I just wanted to see whether / if there was any correlation between hand size and gun size (I mean, besides the obvious, like, you are not going to hand a Mk23 to a petite 5'2" female and expect them to grip it efficiently, just like you are not going to give Hickock45 a Ruger LCP without a couple layers of grip tape.). I'm kinda sorta thinking this out as I go, so not all of this is fully fleshed out. Basically the idea is not to open too much of a can of worms by adding more than one data point, for each. Certainly maybe down the road, but for now I am trying to keep this (reasonably) simple.

[JCN]

@RJ I’m not sure this will help but I hope it does.

These are the two guns for example: PM9 versus P365.

Grip size is similar, gun size is similar but the trigger wall and reset is very different.

I’m not sure how this can be accounted for and calculated.

[jeep45238]

Just need a Doctor Sholl's style insole picker machine, but for guns.

Stick your hand in, a few moments later, a printed list of the most likely to fit handguns. Kinda neat to think about.

[Kanye Wyoming]

Gender: M
Hand length (57): 8.125 in.
Current Preferred Glove Size: L (sometimes XL depending on the brand,

[Chuck Whitlock]

Here I come to wreck the curve!

Gender: Male

Hand size (57): 6.75"

Glove size: M (Mechanix Fastfit)
6C (USMC issued leather gloves, 1987)

[MGW]

G: Male
HS: 8.375”
Preferred Glove size: XL

[BN]

Male
7 1/4'
Large Mechanix

Glocks, K-Frames and CZ75s point well for me. A lot of others point low.

Are you considering SA/DA pistols too?