Hand Length to Gun Fit: A Case Study: RFI for Data on Pistol Size (Part 2)

[RJ]

Since I started shooting approximately 10 years ago, I have not seen a good way to select a pistol based on ones physical hand size.

As far as I am aware, there is no industry standard numeric values for "small", "medium" or "large" handguns. Pistol manufacturers attempt to offer features to adjust to different hand sizes, such as grip panels, backstraps, or grip modules.

The methodology I plan to apply is first to gather anonymous information on hand sizes (Part 1). Part 1 was posted as a separate thread, here:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....-Size-(Part-1)

This thread is Part 2, in which I will ask for input on handgun sizing, using a consistent method of measurement. Finally, in Part 3, I will attempt to compare/contrast the data on hand size, with the information on handgun size, and try to draw some conclusions, about placing commonly available handguns could be grouped in terms of Small, Medium, and Large.

I appreciate that this may be a fools errand, as handgun fit is not necessarily a significant indicator to how well one performs, shooting. I have learned that the hard way, with several costly mistakes. If you agree, feel free to ignore this thread. Nonetheless, I find this kind of numerical analysis interesting, and in particular, how/whether this might aid someone new to handguns, select a pistol for first use.


On to the pistols: I have owned a few pistols but not as many as all of you combined obviously. Since this Part 2 is about gathering empirical data on pistols, I only have a few that I can measure.

I have been thinking a good bit about how to relate the hand size measurement (hand length) gathered in Part 1, 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.

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.

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

P365XL showing a Grip Circumference of 168mm, using cloth tape:


1911, showing an alternate method of measuring Grip Circumference (length of cord), suggested by @JCN. In this case, instead of a direct measurement, I wrapped a bright yellow paracord around the grip, and sharpied two marks where the paracord intersected. Then I took the cord off and measured between the marks, flat on my desk.



What I asking for is if you would, please take one or more of your pistols and provide me with the model or type, any notes you want to make in re modifications that would affect Grip Circumference, and the Grip Circumference, in mm or inches.

I will enter the data anonymously, and only record the pertinent details into the data table. At the moment, I have two entries (my P365XL parts gun, and my Garrison), and the table looks like this:




So: If you would like to participate in this case study, please comment back in this thread, or by private message, the Grip Circumference for any pistols you would like to measure:

DATA REQUESTED

Model
Modifications (if any, that would affect GC)
Grip Circumference (inches or mm)


Don't worry about "Pistol", that's just an identifier I'll assign in the table for later use. "Notes" is also for my use, but feel free to add any information you wish. I appreciate it! Thanks!



Footnote: It occurred to me folks might wonder about the color convention I use on spreadsheets - Generally, yellow is a computation, and green is a data entered value i.e. a constant. I have tried to have some kind of convention like this since the days of Lotus 1-2-3, which probably explains why I feel old sometimes. Geez I even used Visicalc on an Apple IIe. Oh and get off my lawn!

[Chuck Whitlock]

Rich,

I'll have to get to this after the work week is done.

You might want to include your LCR, too.

[RJ]

You might want to include your LCR, too.

Good point.

I just realized I could also "make" a P365 out of parts, not that I'd expect much difference. But I'll add the data off both; thanks for the suggestion.

[JTQ]

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.

That is the measurement I find the most useful on a pistol. Some will use calipers from the backstrap to the trigger face, but that doesn't take into account the grip width. Good choice on your measurement choice.

Either e-stern or stimpee grabbed some Beretta numbers for me a couple of years back

APX 6 13/16

PX4 FS 7 1/4

M9A3 7 1/16


my measurements

Colt Combat Elite (original era) 6 5/8

S&W 4506 7 3/8

S&W 686 (with Hogue rubber mono-grips) 6 6/8

[JTQ]

A consideration for the small handed is also trigger type. While my 686 and 1911 have similar circumferance numbers, the 10-ish pound DA trigger pull on the 686 requires more trigger finger than the 5-ish SA trigger pull on the 1911.

[JTQ]

Either e-stern or stimpee grabbed some Beretta numbers for me a couple of years back

It was stimpee at post #98 in the Beretta APX thread

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....tta-APX/page10

[RJ]

That is the measurement I find the most useful on a pistol. Some will use calipers from the backstrap to the trigger face, but that doesn't take into account the grip width. Good choice on your measurement choice.

Either e-stern or stimpee grabbed some Beretta numbers for me a couple of years back

APX 6 13/16

PX4 FS 7 1/4

M9A3 7 1/16


my measurements

Colt Combat Elite (original era) 6 5/8

S&W 4506 7 3/8

S&W 686 (with Hogue rubber mono-grips) 6 6/8

Thanks. I've slotted these six data points into my Part 2 table. One clarification; the value listed for the 686; 6 6/8. Is that really correct? 6/8 would be more commonly listed as 3/4, so I just wanted to be sure the value was meant to be 6.75.

I've also started to populate it with commonly available guns from the big manufacturers, in order to try and represent a cross section of pistols, say from a Seecamp .32 to a Texas Walker 1847. I've also decided to assign a "Size index" to each pistol, in a range of unitless integer values. Something along the lines of shoe size, perhaps, to give people something to relate to. So a gigantic pistol would get size index = 15, a baby gun would get a size index 2 or 3. A regular duty gun might be size 10. I will put up a copy of the working Part 2 table after I finish tinkering with it, and perhaps collect data on a few more pistols.

Appreciate the info. It's interesting Grip Circumference came up in that APX thread in 2018.



Leaning forward in the saddle a bit to Part 3, what's emerging from staring at this working table is that I'll probably end up comparing where guns rank in terms of Grip Circumference (objective), with how they stack up against "Size Index" (subjective.) Then I can perhaps take the hand sizes from from Part 1, group them logically by size ranges (perhaps using glove size range values?) to compare with gun GC/SI. I'm not sure just yet.

[JTQ]

Thanks. I've slotted these six data points into my Part 2 table. One clarification; the value listed for the 686; 6 6/8. Is that really correct? 6/8 would be more commonly listed as 3/4, so I just wanted to be sure the value was meant to be 6.75.

Yes, that is correct. It would be, 6 3/4. I wasn't really thinking, just counting ticks off the tape measure, and I guess it kept all measurements in 8th's which is probably why my brain left it as it was.

It's interesting Grip Circumference came up in that APX thread in 2018.

One of the long time knocks against the Beretta 92 (non-Vertec grip) has been the fat grips and long trigger reach. It is usually a tough gun for those with small hands to get comfortable with. The APX has a really trim grip, and relatively short trigger reach for a double stack gun, which seemed noteworthy for the company, and garnered some interest.

[Crazy Dane]

I'm not gonna duplicate the P365 or 1911

Ruger SP101, stock grips - 6 5/8"
Ruger GP100, stock grips - 7 1/8"
Colt Python, stock grips - 7 1/18"
Colt Python, Open back Pachmayer - 7 1/8"
S&W M69 Altai grips - 7"


Looking at these measurements of the 4 medium frame guns and knowing how each of the above feel different, I am providing a second measurement. The grip circumference under the trigger guard, this is where your second finger would lie.

Ruger SP101 - 4 5/16" not medium frame, I know.
Ruger GP100 - 4 3/4"
Python SG - 4 5/8"
Python Pachs - 5 1/4"
M69 - -4 3/4"

The other figure that matters the most to me is Pull Length. Copying how pull length is measured for long guns, trigger to the end of the stock parallel with the bore, all 4 medium guns have a pull length of 3 1/4" and the SP101 is 2 3/4". To many this is called trigger reach.

I apologize for getting carried away and hope I don't convolute what you are doing.

[RJ]

Thanks for the inputs so far, much appreciated.

Ok, first pass at an attempt to compile the Part 2 "Pistol Size" Grip Circumference data.

First, the columns in the Part 2 table and what they mean: