View Full Version : Gen 4 G19 or PPQ???
Need quick advice: I've HELD a PPQ - wow! But, don't know that much about it other than internet third party.
I also have a shot at an LE priced G19 - 'but' Gen4. I can get it with night sights over $50 less than the PPQ.
While the PPQ has a sweet trigger, and is a bit more exotic, do folks here think it is proven enough? I also like the wt/sz of the G19.
My first plastic 9. Carry and carbine backup.
Thanks.
I would go for the Glock. Even in Gen 4. Some have had issues, but many more have not had problems. When you factor in holster selection, parts availability, spare mag price and availability, I think you will come out ahead with the Glock 19.
That is not to say a PPQ is a bad pistol, but it would not be my first choice given your options.
Whichever one you choose, practice practice practice....
Having owned both I would say they both have pros and cons to consider.
PPQ Pros:
- Best trigger I have ever felt on a pistol.
- Outstanding ergonomics.
- Completely ambidextrous.
- Easiest pistol to shoot quickly and accurately.
Cons:
- Magazine prices and availability is horrendous.
- I have no background in any kind of engineering but the barrel lugs and locking block on the PPQ LOOK more fragile than other semi autos I've owned. This is probably a moot point and more than likely means nothing
- The pistol is warranted by smith and Wesson in the US I believe so I don't know how parts availability will be long term.
- Night sights are not common and I don't like how the Meprolights and Trijicons rear sights install on the adjustable rear sight.
Glock 19 gen 4 pros:
- Flattest shooting 9mm I've ever shot besides a sig p226 and m9
- Extemely abundant supply of parts and extremely easy to service yourself.
Cons:
- Ergos could be better
- ejection issues still persist
I think you should actually shoot both before you decide if you can. Holding the PPQ is great, but shooting both will give you the best feel for which one you like better.
The Glock is a fantastic gun, so you can't go wrong with that choice, but I would personally recommend the PPQ. I have shot both guns a lot, and I would take a PPQ over the Glock any day. I think it is more accurate, has a better stock trigger, and the ergonomics are much better.
That is just my .02, and your opinion might be different. That is why you should shoot both and then decide.:smile:
Own both a PPQ, and a G19 (gen3),The G19 has alot going for it in the way of support, (holsters, parts, sights, etc) The PPQ is'nt a slouch, alot of the parts for it come from the P-99, which is a proven design. I've got over 2000rnds on my PPQ,with no problems,Frankly I would'nt worry about parts..you have to break something first, and honestly that's one thing I haven't seen alot posted about.One thing I can say about the PPQ, it dosen't throw brass in your face like alot of the current production Glocks do. Out of the box, about all it needs are night sights. Mags however, are expensive, Sight selection is limited at present, So basically, it boils down to choosing between one with excellant support, but at present has problems with it's ejectors, or one with expensive mags and limited support, But has no other problems, and is known to be accurate and reliable.. To be fair, the ejector problem will be solved soon as soon as Apex gets their Glock ejectors out, which should render the ejector problem a moot point.But until then, you'll have to wait like the rest of us....
I have never owned a G19 (I do own a G26) but I have shot one quite a bit. It is a very soft-shooting and controllable pistol.
I do own a PPQ. I prefer the feel of the PPQ (with the medium backstrap installed) in my hand. This is subjective, of course.
I am more accurate with the PPQ, despite the fact that the PPQ has a tiny bit more perceived recoil. I also prefer the trigger on the PPQ. To echo and reinforce what has already been said, the PPQ has the best stock trigger I have ever experienced on a striker-fired, polymer pistol. Period. The crisp pull, coupled with the absurdly short reset, are some of the reasons why I shoot it so well. Well, that and practice. :)
You can't go wrong with either choice.
Recently I had something unfortunate happen to me. I was put into a position where I needed money really fast. I had to choose between selling my G19 and my PPQ. If it wasnt for all the support equipment I already had such as mags and holsters for the g19 I sold not have sold the PPQ.
Now that I have gotten past that situation and am in a good financial position I am going to be buying a PPQ in 9MM again really soon.
It was either going to be a PPQ or a P30. After shooting both and shooting a couple hundred rounds through the P30 it has solidified my decision to get another PPQ. The trigger and Ergos on that little pistol are unparalleled.
Hogsgunwild
06-25-12, 23:59
My PPQ is amazing for the price. I have owned seven Glocks and still own four H&Ks. The PPQ has made all of the other pistols obsolete for me. Nearly two cases of ammo through mine and not a single malfunction. More accurate and ergonomic than any other plastic pistol that I have owned and it weighs half an ounce more than my M&P 9MM compact when both are fully loaded ( 15+1 in the PPQ, 12+1 in the M&P). That is impressive.
I like my five M&Ps but the PPQ is way more accurate than my fullsize and compact 9MM M&Ps.
$40.00 is too much to pay for a magazine? To feed a quality gun like this, I think it is well worth it.
I rented the .40 S&W PPQ and a .40 M&P VTAC this weekend and put the M&P back in it's case after five rounds. The PPQ was just so much more accurate for me. I have been trying ween myself away from the .40 S&W caliber but now I must have a .40 PPQ, it was just that good.
I have been a long time Glock owner. I just sold my G19 to replace it with a PPQ. That is my position, you will have to ultimately make this decision for yourself.
PPQ has more felt recoil and muzzle flip compared to the G19
I personally like the way the Glock shoots compared to the PPQ, despite the sweet trigger on the PPQ
gtmtnbiker98
06-26-12, 08:09
I just topped 11,000 rounds through my primary PPQ 9mm, no issues. The only part that I've replaced was the RSA and I used a P99 RSA for that, since the parts are the same.
It always makes me chuckle how some get so hung up on parts availability. Folks, if you have to replace that many parts that often, perhaps the platform needs to be reconsidered.
As the PPQ grows in popularity, more support will be realized. Magazines will remain expensive, that's just the nature of the beast. But I only own Walther's and HK's so I'm rather used to it.
I own a PPQ and 2 G19's (Gen2 & Gen3), along w/ a Gen4 G23.
The PPQ is the easiest to be accurate with. As others have mentioned, the trigger is outstanding and the ergo's are excellent. Also, I'm a huge fan of the newer Euro style mag release (think HK and Walther). I was pretty hot on getting a Gen4 G19, but am now contemplating getting a 2nd PPQ. I don't shoot as much as most on this site, but for me, the PPQ has proven itself after 1000 rounds or so. I do have to get night sights for it at some point, but other than that, it needs nothing.
I won't be getting rid of my Glocks, but my desire for more has been quenched by the Walther.
re: PPQ sights
PPQ sights are plastic and adjustable. I am a bit old fashioned about such things, but I think few would argue that steel, non-adjustable are more durable.
The Mepro and Trijicon replacement sights are metal but utilize the adjustable base.
However there are steel, fixed replacement sites available from Walther that are about $50. These rear sights actually blend better with the frame than the stock adjustable sights.
Also, PPS sights will fit the PPQ, without utilization of the adjustable base. The dovetail of the PPS and PPQ are the same. So aftermarket night sights for a PPS should also work for the PPQ. (Will let you know how that works out by the end of this week... provided FedEx delivers as scheduled.)
Hogsgunwild
06-26-12, 10:41
re: PPQ sights
PPQ sights are plastic and adjustable. I am a bit old fashioned about such things, but I think few would argue that steel, non-adjustable are more durable.
The Mepro and Trijicon replacement sights are metal but utilize the adjustable base.
However there are steel, fixed replacement sites available from Walther that are about $50. These rear sights actually blend better with the frame than the stock adjustable sights.
Also, PPS sights will fit the PPQ, without utilization of the adjustable base. The dovetail of the PPS and PPQ are the same. So aftermarket night sights for a PPS should also work for the PPQ. (Will let you know how that works out by the end of this week... provided FedEx delivers as scheduled.)
I totally agree with you. The standard models' sights are the weakest link on the platform. I need to have them replaced with all steel non-adjustables as well.
Neither. The Caracal C is better than both. Its got the accuracy and nice trigger of the PPQ with the low recoil of the Glock. The price is right too.
my advice has always been if you're going to buy a gun to fight with, buy the one that is known for durability and reliability. Once you've got your fighting guns, you can venture off buying other things for whatever reason you want.
I went Glock. (I have 4 CZ's).
I DO LIKE the feel of the PPQ, and it gets more for ergos, coolness, etc.
But, the proven ruggedness of the Glock, along with it being slightly smaller, lighter are factors. The Gen 4 texture is about perfect for gripping, and the grip shape is a tad more comfotable than the Gen3 (sure wish they would loose the finger grooves). All this, and I got it with Trijicons and three mags for $60 less than the PPQ.
Also, while I'm not worried about parts, having cheap excellent mags available everywhere is a huge factor.
Also, for a combat handgun, the PPQ trigger is a tad light for me in a gun with no manual safety. With adrenaline pumping a little heavier is better.
I think the PPQ is infinitely preferable to anything produced by Glock over the last two years.
That may be true, but the new G21's my son's police department has seem to perform exceptionally well.
Hogsgunwild
06-26-12, 20:32
I went Glock. (I have 4 CZ's).
I DO LIKE the feel of the PPQ, and it gets more for ergos, coolness, etc.
But, the proven ruggedness of the Glock, along with it being slightly smaller, lighter are factors. The Gen 4 texture is about perfect for gripping, and the grip shape is a tad more comfotable than the Gen3 (sure wish they would loose the finger grooves). All this, and I got it with Trijicons and three mags for $60 less than the PPQ.
Also, while I'm not worried about parts, having cheap excellent mags available everywhere is a huge factor.
Also, for a combat handgun, the PPQ trigger is a tad light for me in a gun with no manual safety. With adrenaline pumping a little heavier is better.
I will have to respectfully disagree with "the proven ruggedness of Glock" statement. Walther has been around about a century longer than the Glock and Gaston's creation has taken a nosedive in the quality / reliability department lately.
beschatten
06-27-12, 00:12
I was faced with the same dilemma, PPQ or Gen4 glock?
I chose the PPQ for several reasons:
-better egro
-better trigger
-better accuracy (at least for me, i shot better with it)
although the mag costs are higher than what i'd like, the PPQ fit me like a glove. I believe the lifespan of the PPQ is about 50,000 rounds before a few parts break. Then its a free fix on S&W's end.
The glock has less muzzle flip, but it's a 9mm... I think we can all handle that.
Urban_Redneck
06-27-12, 05:39
I almost bought a PPQ, but, ended up buying sight unseen, a Caracal F. I have no regrets.
YMMV
Hogsgunwild
06-27-12, 06:27
OK, so, first I was on the Glock and 1911 bandwagons, then the H&K bandwagon, then the M&P bandwagon, now the Walther (and still M&P) bandwagon, and you guys are now trying to sway me over to the Carcal bandwagon?
Will it ever end? I was happy with all of them, at one time...
I keep trying to stick with one type but they keep making better and better stuff. Expensive and a bit frustrating but it is nice to find better and better choices out there. I cannot see replacing my PPQ but I have said that about some of my other guns in the past.
I wiil say what a pleasure it was at the range this weekend. I took my M&P midsize 45, my 9MM Shield and my PPQ. All of these guns allow you to shoot to your full potential.
We live in interesting times for these polymer pistols. I hope in the coming years they keep evolving. My only concern is I want to pick up one platform I can shoot really well and afford all the support equipment for such as magazines before this fall. I have a feeling things might get a lot harder to find soon.
It always makes me chuckle how some get so hung up on parts availability. Folks, if you have to replace that many parts that often, perhaps the platform needs to be reconsidered.
As the PPQ grows in popularity, more support will be realized. Magazines will remain expensive, that's just the nature of the beast. But I only own Walther's and HK's so I'm rather used to it.
I never understood the magazine issue. Just how often are you buying magazines? I have 20 mags for my HK45's and I've used them well, never had a problem.
To the OP, good luck with your Glock.
OK, so, first I was on the Glock and 1911 bandwagons, then the H&K bandwagon, then the M&P bandwagon, now the Walther (and still M&P) bandwagon, and you guys are now trying to sway me over to the Carcal bandwagon?
Will it ever end? I was happy with all of them, at one time...
I keep trying to stick with one type but they keep making better and better stuff. Expensive and a bit frustrating but it is nice to find better and better choices out there. I cannot see replacing my PPQ but I have said that about some of my other guns in the past.
I wiil say what a pleasure it was at the range this weekend. I took my M&P midsize 45, my 9MM Shield and my PPQ. All of these guns allow you to shoot to your full potential.
the caracal is a nice shooter and feels great in my hand, but I really disagree with others who like the trigger. I think it's severely overrated and the ppq trigger is much better. Make sure you try one out before you buy it
Hogsgunwild
06-28-12, 00:02
the caracal is a nice shooter and feels great in my hand, but I really disagree with others who like the trigger. I think it's severely overrated and the ppq trigger is much better. Make sure you try one out before you buy it
Thank you. You saved me some time or money. I am fine with my PPQ and really don't want to keep dicking around.
the caracal is a nice shooter and feels great in my hand, but I really disagree with others who like the trigger. I think it's severely overrated and the ppq trigger is much better. Make sure you try one out before you buy it
The only thing better about the PPQ trigger is the reset is shorter than the Caracal. The Caracal trigger is smooth as silk. The PPQ and Caracal trigger's are quite similar. The Caracal is a much softer shooting pistol though.
Tomorrow's thread;
"Which gun to buy, Caracal or PPQ?"
It really is a great time for other manufacturers to capitalize on Glock/M&P's current lack of consumer confidence.
I am one of the many currently wanting to choose a direction in terms of platform to get into for training/carry etc. While the problems with M&P and Glock are known and pretty fixable, its still really frustrating to plop down money on a gun that may or may not have issues - particularly those issues that may not present until 1500+ rounds.
As to the Walther and the Caracal, from all the threads I've read where both come up it seems to shake down like this;
Caracal is softer shooting/less muzzle flip due (in part) to a lower bore axis.
PPQ has a better trigger (due to a shorter reset).
Both are very accurate, and so far seem to be reliable.
Ergos are good on both, which is a bit personal anyways.
For me, having not had the opportunity to shoot either (no rentals) but looking hard at both, I end up thinking; Walther is a well known, proven company with past designs that have been proven. The PPS is a solid gun with same manual of arms as PPQ and the P99 seems to have a great rep and known high round count examples offering different configurations. While the PPQ is a relatively new entry, it is quickly amassing high round count examples, and is coming from a very reputable company. The company has also shown long term economic viability, I don't think Walther will close its doors tomorrow.
The Caracal is much more of an unknown in all of those areas, so far as I know.
That difference pushes me towards the PPQ with a likelihood of picking up a PPS/P99 at some point.
As too the the Glock, it only seems to have two advantages over the PPQ; marginally softer shooting (I really wish I could feel this one for myself) and parts availability.
Am I missing anything?
Hogsgunwild
06-28-12, 11:42
Sums it up well Cazwell.
I will throw this in since you brought it up; After renting a PPQ in .40 S&W last weekend, I decided this week would be a good week to shoot my Glock 23 at the range to see how it felt in comparison.
Yesterday I brought my G23 to the range along with several others that have been gathering dust in the safe just to see if I could live without them all. Me feelings regarding the recoil of Glock vs PPQ in .40 S&W:
G23: Tends to hammer my hand a bit more than the PPQ. Pushes the gun more directly aft during recoil.
PPQ: While it is more "flippy" than the Glock, it comes back on target very fast and very nicely for me. Since day one, my own 9MM PPQ has reminded me of how the single action cowboy revolvers (like a Colt Single Action Army) was specifically designed to roll in the shooter's hand, allowing the gun to rock upward thus dispersing the recoil versus how a modern double action revolver tends to pound the shooters hand in a straight back motion. Probably quicker shooting going straight back in a revolver vs rotating up. Don't know about the automatic but it seems to me that the semi-auto's snappy little rounds with fast burning powders are back on target by the time the action is done cycling anyhow. Shooting on a timer would ultimately answer this but, for now, I am very happy with the speed that I can shoot these PPQs at.
I will add that I am much more (consistently) accurate with the PPQs than I ever was with either the G19 or G23.
Thats pretty much it Cazwell.
As too the the Glock, it only seems to have two advantages over the PPQ; marginally softer shooting (I really wish I could feel this one for myself) and parts availability.
Am I missing anything?
In my opinion, the Glock shouldn't have ANY advantages over a new pistol that's being proclaimed to dethrone Glock.
Glock has been the shining example of a modern defensive pistol done properly for what - almost 30 years? So when a company puts out a pistol in "Glock Territory" - I think it should do all things better than Glock to be proclaimed "better".
Because if not, the mass availability of parts, trained users, and prevalence in the market will outweigh any slight performance differences.
This isn't to take anything away from the PPQ. I'm sure it's an excellent gun.
I remember life before Glocks. The only thing Glocks brought to the table for shooters was consistent manufacturing which lead to better reliability out of the box.
The only other "advantages" it had were things that made the bureaucrats happy such as it's "safe action" that gave it a crappy trigger pull. The striker is just another ignition system, but being internal (and easier to make internal than a hammer), society could pretend the nice police officer isn't carrying a cocked pistol (or three quarters cocked, in the case of the Glock), unlike the 1911 with it's exposed hammer. At least the Glock has the same trigger pull with each shot, unlike a DA/SA.
The trigger isn't the only advantage the PPQ has over the Glock. The mag release is much easier to use and the controls are fully ambidextrous. (I'm not so sure about the slide release. On the PPQ, it's easier to use but it's also easier to accidentally active/deactivate while shooting.) The Glock with it's trigger and 3/4 cocked striker, is not what I would call a "shining example" of what a handgun should be, but overall, it was a step in the right direction. The PPQ is a step beyond the Glock
(I am picking nits here. I don't think the Glock is going to explode or get it's user killed in a gunfight or is hard to shoot well or anything silly like that. Glock did better than their competitors supporting LE agencies that bought their pistols, leaving the other pistol companies to play catch-up. That was Glock's main strength. But like any other pistol design, it has it's flaws)
In my opinion, the Glock shouldn't have ANY advantages over a new pistol that's being proclaimed to dethrone Glock.
Glock has been the shining example of a modern defensive pistol done properly for what - almost 30 years? So when a company puts out a pistol in "Glock Territory" - I think it should do all things better than Glock to be proclaimed "better".
I take your point, however, of the two advantages we gave to Glock (less muzzle rise / greater parts availability) one is subjective (muzzle rise) and if there is more muzzle flip, but the gun is faster back on target/more accurate, as reported by several, than its a moot point.
That leaves parts/accessories availability. Eventually this becomes a diminishing return.... the M&P line still isn't as prolific as Glock in this regard, but has reached a threshold where I doubt anyone is concerned. A gun with growing popularity like the PPQ and a long-time viable company like Walther behind it ought to make that threshold before too long.
I don't currently shoot enough to weigh in, but many here have suggested that the need for rapidly available spare parts is overblown anyhow.
Lastly, this comparison (and others like it) probably wouldn't have been made if Glock was at the same level of reliability that it used to be, and if the M&P was consistently accurate. Glock as the "shining example" for the last 30 years may be the case, but current problems have left many feeling like it just isn't anymore.
Something I haven't heard discussed here is the grip size. For most people, either the Glock or the PPQ will work. However, my girlfriend is about 5' 4" with little hands. She cannot get the second knuckle of her thumb around any of the Glocks. (That is, the gun is recoiling into her thumb, not her hand/web of thumb.)
Both the PPQ and the CZ-75 will work fine for her.
The PPQ does feel like it has snappier recoil, due to the high barrel and slide mass, but it doesn't seem to be a problem. My girlfriend doesn't notice it at all.
One note on PPQ (and PPS) sights--all of them have a very wide rear notch, which a lot of people like but which I dislike. I ended up using steel epoxy to narrow my rear sight notch. I'm still testing it, but it seems to work OK.
This thread has cover a lot, and I can only add by following up on something I mentioned in my previous post.
I ordered a set XS Sights Big Dots for my new PPQ. Instead of ordering the PPQ specific site (which if I understand correctly incorporates into the base of the stock plastic adjustable rear sight), I instead ordered the PPS Big Dot sight.
The PPQ and PPS share the same rear dovetail.
The PPS Big Dots mount into the dovetail direct, for a solid fixed setup with no plastic involved. (in fact, I destroyed the plastic front sight getting it off)
Went to the range this morning and Point of Impact to Point Aim was right on.
So, PPS Big Dots are a viable alternative for a PPQ, and mount directly and securely into the dovetail.
I can only add that I shot my PPQ better today than any other pistol I have owned since my custom 1911.
My PPQ is my new girlfriend.
mrosamilia
06-29-12, 21:44
This thread has cover a lot, and I can only add by following up on something I mentioned in my previous post.
I ordered a set XS Sights Big Dots for my new PPQ. Instead of ordering the PPQ specific site (which if I understand correctly incorporates into the base of the stock plastic adjustable rear sight), I instead ordered the PPS Big Dot sight.
The PPQ and PPS share the same rear dovetail.
The PPS Big Dots mount into the dovetail direct, for a solid fixed setup with no plastic involved. (in fact, I destroyed the plastic front sight getting it off)
Went to the range this morning and Point of Impact to Point Aim was right on.
So, PPS Big Dots are a viable alternative for a PPQ, and mount directly and securely into the dovetail.
I can only add that I shot my PPQ better today than any other pistol I have owned since my custom 1911.
My PPQ is my new girlfriend.
I have the XS on my PPQ and just love the setup myself.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Alaskapopo
06-29-12, 21:53
Need quick advice: I've HELD a PPQ - wow! But, don't know that much about it other than internet third party.
I also have a shot at an LE priced G19 - 'but' Gen4. I can get it with night sights over $50 less than the PPQ.
While the PPQ has a sweet trigger, and is a bit more exotic, do folks here think it is proven enough? I also like the wt/sz of the G19.
My first plastic 9. Carry and carbine backup.
Thanks.
Shot both and like my 19 better overall. The PPQ does have a nice trigger but you can get one just as good and much better with just a little work. The PPQ has an excellent grip. The problem with the PPQ is the high bore axis which slows down fast accurate shooting. That and high priced mags. Not a bad gun but not a Glock Killer. The mag release is funky and not easier to use than a Glock. Both are good pistols but I say go with the Glock its a better pistol.
Pat
beschatten
06-29-12, 22:31
I think the whole low vs high bore-axis is kind of bullshit. I mean any mediocre shooter will be fine as long as they have a strong grip and stance.
It definitely shouldn't be a deterrent for purchasing the PPQ
Alaskapopo
06-29-12, 22:54
I think the whole low vs high bore-axis is kind of bullshit. I mean any mediocre shooter will be fine as long as they have a strong grip and stance.
It definitely shouldn't be a deterrent for purchasing the PPQ
Its not bullshit its physics. There is no way around it the high up the bore sits the more leverage it has on your hand and the more muzzle flip you will have. The better you shoot the more you start to notice stuff like this. And yes it is a deterrant from purchasing any pistol.
Pat
I think the whole low vs high bore-axis is kind of bullshit. I mean any mediocre shooter will be fine as long as they have a strong grip and stance.
It definitely shouldn't be a deterrent for purchasing the PPQ
the physics behind it may be real, but until actual numbers are calculated, the differences in muzzle flip between similar modern handguns is subjective as far as I'm concerned.
alaskanpopo pushes the glock hard in most of his posts, but glock has issues of its own which should definitely be considered.
to me a gun with slightly more perceived recoil (to him), or a gun that prints 5" groups at 75 feet, presents with less issues than a gun that throws brass at your face.
Also, the caracal pistols I own have a trigger break that is much different than say a glock's or m&p's. I just recommend you try it out before you buy it
This is all just my opinion. I don't think it's right to call into question someone's experience with handguns because you perceived more recoil in one gun than they do.
Also, there is a lot more than bore axis that goes into the recoil a gun produces. The glock may have a lower axis, but the ppq is more ergonomic (to me) which may be why I don't notice a significant difference
Alaskapopo
06-30-12, 00:03
the physics behind it may be real, but until actual numbers are calculated, the differences in muzzle flip between similar modern handguns is subjective as far as I'm concerned.
alaskanpopo pushes the glock hard in most of his posts, but glock has issues of its own which should definitely be considered.
to me a gun with slightly more perceived recoil (to him), or a gun that prints 5" groups at 75 feet, presents with less issues than a gun that throws brass at your face.
Also, the caracal pistols I own have a trigger break that is much different than say a glock's or m&p's. I just recommend you try it out before you buy it
This is all just my opinion. I don't think it's right to call into question someone's experience with handguns because you perceived more recoil in one gun than they do.
Also, there is a lot more than bore axis that goes into the recoil a gun produces. The glock may have a lower axis, but the ppq is more ergonomic (to me) which may be why I don't notice a significant difference
It is a difference that helps you shoot faster which is always a good thing. I hate pistols like Sigs, HK's and Walthers that have a high bore axis and I have ditched them from my collection. If you like the PPQ because of the ergonomics thats fine, I however recommend the Glock 19. I push Glocks because they work and work well. As Larry Vickers once said we live in a Glock world. My 19 does much better than 5 inch groups at 25 yards.
Pat
...As Larry Vickers once said we live in a Glock world...
Very true and very sad
I try to stay away from subjective "arguments" on the internet.
And I must say very quickly that I have never shot a Glock. Which is in and of itself very odd, since I am a self avowed "gun nut". If not for the issues of the last few months, I was set to buy a Glock a few months ago. However I have owned and shot many Sigs and HKs.
But yesterday when I shot the PPQ for the first time, recoil was the last thing on my mind and not in the least noticeable. I had to choke myself back from doing double taps and strings too fast so as not to get called on by the range officer.
Only from reading forums afterward did the issue of recoil even enter my mind. No question the moment of a higher axis is more. That's physics. How much is another question, and likely in the realm of "picking the dust out of the pepper". I just doubt the "average person" (whatever that is!) is even going to notice a difference.
All I know is what I said previously. I (repeat: I) shot this pistol better than any other pistol I have shot in recent years, excepting a custom 1911 I once owned. If I had to say why, I'd say ergos and trigger.
It is a difference that helps you shoot faster which is always a good thing. I hate pistols like Sigs, HK's and Walthers that have a high bore axis and I have ditched them from my collection. If you like the PPQ because of the ergonomics thats fine, I however recommend the Glock 19. I push Glocks because they work and work well. As Larry Vickers once said we live in a Glock world. My 19 does much better than 5 inch groups at 25 yards.
Pat
about 7 or so years ago, I'd agree with you completely. trust me I was one of the biggest glock fans, and will not sell the 8 I have, but their recent problems (which I have witnessed first hand) combined with the improvements seen in other brands, makes it hard for me to continue to recommend glock.
I also think you're missing out on a lot of quality handguns because of your "hate" for a higher bore axis. There is a lot more than barrel height that goes into deciding the handguns I like.
The 5" at 75 feet was a knock on the FS m&p9 series
Alaskapopo
06-30-12, 13:39
about 7 or so years ago, I'd agree with you completely. trust me I was one of the biggest glock fans, and will not sell the 8 I have, but their recent problems (which I have witnessed first hand) combined with the improvements seen in other brands, makes it hard for me to continue to recommend glock.
I also think you're missing out on a lot of quality handguns because of your "hate" for a higher bore axis. There is a lot more than barrel height that goes into deciding the handguns I like.
The 5" at 75 feet was a knock on the FS m&p9 series
Not missing out at all. I have shot and owned a lot of those so called high quality handguns. But at the end of the day I want the pistol that allows me to shoot with the greatest speed and accuracy and a high bore axis gun is counter productive to that. Also recent problems with Glocks are greatly exagerated.
Pat
Alaskapopo
06-30-12, 13:40
Very true and very sad
Actually its a great thing. Glocks rule because they are the best. (My opinion but one shared by the majority)
Pat
Not missing out at all. I have shot and owned a lot of those so called high quality handguns. But at the end of the day I want the pistol that allows me to shoot with the greatest speed and accuracy and a high bore axis gun is counter productive to that. Also recent problems with Glocks are greatly exagerated.
Pat
it's always exaggerated until it's your gun. at the end of the day, in today's gun market there are many other (and to many, better) options than glocks.
i'd tell any new buyer to give them all a try. they all have pros and cons (the majority of which are subjective). saying something as closed minded as "glocks rule because they're best" is ignorant at best
Actually its a great thing. Glocks rule because they are the best. (My opinion but one shared by the majority)
Pat
That majority seems to be slipping as of late. It has slipped by at least one this week (me).
Here is an interesting article I think explains alot.
http://pistol-training.com/articles/trust-no-one-an-insiders-perspective
Alaskapopo
06-30-12, 14:45
it's always exaggerated until it's your gun. at the end of the day, in today's gun market there are many other (and to many, better) options than glocks.
i'd tell any new buyer to give them all a try. they all have pros and cons (the majority of which are subjective). saying something as closed minded as "glocks rule because they're best" is ignorant at best
Yea right. I have yet to see a Gen 4 fail. I know there were some problems early on but that seems to have passed. Saying Glocks rule is an opinion and no more ignorant that you saying they suck.
Pat
Yea right. I have yet to see a Gen 4 fail. I know there were some problems early on but that seems to have passed. Saying Glocks rule is an opinion and no more ignorant that you saying they suck. Come off your high horse.
Pat
i never said they suck, in fact I said earlier that I own 8 9mm glocks that I wouldn't part with. my point is that there are plenty of other firearms that offer just as much and more than glocks.
I also never said I had a Glock fail. I do own a later production gen 3 and gen 4 19 that both throw brass back into my face. I wouldn't consider that "failing" because it still fires, but it causes me to flinch in anticipation of being hit at times
Yea right. I have yet to see a Gen 4 fail. I know there were some problems early on but that seems to have passed. Saying Glocks rule is an opinion and no more ignorant that you saying they suck.
Pat
I'll go back and re-read, but I don't recall him saying they suck. In fact, didn't his last post say he recommends a buyer try them all, and that each have pros and cons?
Come off your high horse.
Whats that old adage? Something about pointing a finger... Three pointing back at you?
Alaskapopo
06-30-12, 15:43
i never said they suck, in fact I said earlier that I own 8 9mm glocks that I wouldn't part with. my point is that there are plenty of other firearms that offer just as much and more than glocks.
I also never said I had a Glock fail. I do own a later production gen 3 and gen 4 19 that both throw brass back into my face. I wouldn't consider that "failing" because it still fires, but it causes me to flinch in anticipation of being hit at times
That would be annoying and that is an issue Glock should fix. There are new recoil spings assemblies from Glock to address this issue. Its annoying but it can be fixed. I have shot XD's M&P's the PPQ etc and while they are viable options I still believe Glock is the best one of the bunch. You disagree thats fine. But calling someone ignorant because they disagree with you is simply rude. This is not worth fighting over. Take care.
Pat
That would be annoying and that is an issue Glock should fix. There are new recoil spings assemblies from Glock to address this issue. Its annoying but it can be fixed. I have shot XD's M&P's the PPQ etc and while they are viable options I still believe Glock is the best one of the bunch. You disagree thats fine. But calling someone ignorant because they disagree with you is simply rude. This is not worth fighting over. Take care.
Pat
I'm sorry if I came across as being rude, I assure you that wasn't my intention. I merely wanted to point out that saying "glocks rule because they are the best" is an ignorant statement (to me). I didn't mean for it to sound like a personal attack
also, I've sent the two glock 19s in question back to glock a couple times, but the issue remains
Alaskapopo
06-30-12, 15:53
I'm sorry if I came across as being rude, I assure you that wasn't my intention. I merely wanted to point out that saying "glocks rule because they are the best" is an ignorant statement (to me). I didn't mean for it to sound like a personal attack
also, I've sent the two glock 19s in question back to glock a couple times, but the issue remains
No hard feelings. We all tend to have strong feelings on our firearms choices. I do plan on doing a range report when I get time comparing my 19 to my friends PPQ (that I got him for Christmas). It will have to wait until some matches are over however.
Pat
Actually its a great thing. Glocks rule because they are the best. (My opinion but one shared by the majority)
Pat
The majority doesn't always vote for what's best. Glocks rule because they were the right pistol for the right bureaucrats during that particular political climate. They have had staying power because they are reliable and they have good factory support. They are good gunfighting pistols. They also do well with the herd mentality
I chose the PPQ over the Glock because of the trigger. I have no regrets. Pat, your choice of the Glock was based on felt recoil. I know you have no regrets either
(I still don't think the Glock is the best pistol! :D)
Alaskapopo
06-30-12, 17:46
The majority doesn't always vote for what's best. Glocks rule because they were the right pistol for the right bureaucrats during that particular political climate. They have had staying power because they are reliable and they have good factory support. They are good gunfighting pistols. They also do well with the herd mentality
I chose the PPQ over the Glock because of the trigger. I have no regrets. Pat, your choice of the Glock was based on felt recoil. I know you have no regrets either
(I still don't think the Glock is the best pistol! :D)
Not quite your forgetting about a lot of tests that the Glock won over the competition in the past. My choice on the Glock is based more than on just muzzle flip. Felt recoil and muzzle rise are different animals by the way. I chose Glocks for dependability, durability, accuracy, large market support, good trigger which can be made even better. Its an overall good package. The PPQ has some things going for it as well which I covered before namely good trigger and good ergonomics. Things going against it is lack of market support (high cost mags etc) and a high bore axis. To each his own.
pat
People change and evolve.
I remember a certain poster in this thread who was a huge (some would say rabid) .357Sig fan...
There's more to felt recoil and "muzzle flip" than just bore axis.
There's surface area and design of the of the grip, there's slide velocity and weight, recoil spring weight, mechanical differences slide to frame weight ratios, frame material, etcetera ad nauseum.
To try and narrow it down to just bore axis is overly simplistic and making assumptions based on very limited understanding of the whole picture.
As to Glock.
IMO they are the Craftsman tools of the gun world.
They get the job done for a decent price.
But they are not the same company they were 15 years ago.
...Felt recoil and muzzle rise are different animals by the way...
Just sayin' your reasons for choosing a Glock are real and legitimate
I don't think some are quite understanding what I mean. Glock is most certainly the "shining example" of what a combat handgun should be, and has been for over two decades.
Maybe you don't like Glocks, Walthers, HKs, Sigs, etc. on an individual level, but you as an individual means little in the grand scheme of things. And that is where Glock shines. It doesn't matter if they fit your hand well, or such and such trigger is slightly better, etc.
Glock introduced a low cost duty grade pistol. They made popular a trigger design that lends itself to VERY easy shooting. It created a grip angle that lends itself to more natural fundamentals at an amateur level. Glock made a pistol that is plenty accurate, but extremely reliable. Controls are all well placed, magazines are lightweight, and many different sizes / calibers are offered.
But Glock took it a step further. They made sure there were plenty of parts available - including their own in-house competition based parts. Then they made their armorer program easily available to individuals at an agency, unit, and individual level.
This all lends itself to (IMHO) Glock's strongest attribute - the simplicity of the design. You can detail strip a Glock in minutes with just a ball point pen. Completely. And every one of the parts (though few) are cheap and readily available to replace. Through different connectors and springs, there are endless combinations of different trigger characteristics that can be easily changed by the user in a matter of minutes.
No other design has quite reached all of these goals. So while the PPQ may have a better trigger out of the box, and be more accurate out of the box, and maybe even reach under the covers and give you a quick handjob, - it doesn't trump the above. Maybe it does at an individual level, but not at any sort of large level.
If there was a service pistol that did all things better than Glock, I'd be all for it. I'm not pro or anti Glock. I own a whopping One Glock at the moment. But you can argue pricing when it comes to certain LE agencies - but that's not the whole story. And what is the argument for Glocks prevalence in the Special Operations community? You have operators putting down the custom grade 1911s in favor of a plastic pistol.
It's because of everything above. Until a handgun design comes out that can match or beat Glock in all things - the big picture stuff - it just won't catch on or beat out Glock. A certain design may make more sense on an individual level to us civilians, but we cannot kid ourselves about the importance of the Glock autopistol.
Again, this isn't to take anything away from the PPQ as I'm sure its a phenomenal handgun.
Alaskapopo
06-30-12, 21:02
The good news is there are a lot of good choices today on the handgun market. My pet peeve is when people come along and declare a pistol a Glock killer (not saying anyone in this thread just in general).
The reality is like it or not Glock is still the yard stick by which all other polimer pistols are judged and for good reason. Thats not taking away from the PPQ, which I think is a viable choice. I personally put down and sold a custom Wilson CQB for my Glock 17 and have never looked back.
Pat
Good post Steve,
Agreed Glock still holds a majority grip on the LE market, however things are starting to slip for Glock. There are numerous threads/posts here delving into the problems of late production Glocks, both Gen4 and Gen3. I used to advise most people who asked for advice to simply buy a Glock and worry no more. I no longer give such advice. I just sold my last Glock which was a Gen3 19 with a test fire date from Dec '08. Although it never failed to function it would, however, plunk me in the head with nearly every standard pressure load I used in it. It left it's tell tale brass marks on the inside edge of the ejection port as a hint that something wasn't quite right. I don't mind making mods to a weapon based on my individual tastes/desires, however it pisses me off to spend money on a new weapon out of the box just to find a combination that will simply allow it to function as it should have to begin with. I WILL NOT do that.
That said, I certainly hope Glock gets things ironed out, I have owned 25+ different Glocks over the years and miss having such a realible brand at any local shop to fall back on. And not to just beat on Glocks, but I think the same can be said for Sig as well others. Again, the link I provided ealier says alot about today market.
All this leads to this, I do not have a problem with any choice anyone makes for any reason. I begin to have a problem when someone tells me that their choice is the best and only choice and everything else is shit.
We live in a time when many designs are hitting the market, we also live in a time that, I think due to economic reasons, quality is becoming more suspect than before. Make your best choice the best way you can.
IMHO, there is currently no striker fired 9mm pistol that is "really" head and shoulders above the others in all areas. One may excel in some areas but fall a little short in others. Glock is still chasing perfection and trying to get it right after all these years, S&W is supposedly tweaking their M&P 9's for better accuracy and the Walther PPQ 9mm, while probably having the best trigger and accuracy of the three from the factory, also has the highest price mags and bore axis,(which means a little more muzzle flip). I believe, outside of maybe H&K offering a low bore axis 9mm striker fired pistol, it will be very hard for pistols like the PPQ, FN-FNS, Caracal, or any others to break the stranglehold Glock and S&W have on the law enforcement and civilian market. IMHO, with 9mm pistols like the Glock and M&P or PPQ being pretty much equal in reliability and durability it just comes down to ones personal preference, kind of like Ford or Chevy.
beschatten
07-01-12, 02:49
I can understand the high bore-axis concern, but the PPQ in a 9mm really isn't much... The short reset also allows you too shoot fast as well.
H&K's have almost no muzzle flip, as well as Sig's. There really must be more to it than just a bore axis, I can throw guesses out but I'm no engineer and I have nothing to back it up with except my own personal experiences.
The PPQ is a mighty fine gun (no disrespect to Glock), and it definitely deserves a look at if it hasn't. Since I've started shooting in the past year, I bought the following:
PPQ 9mm
1911
226 .22/9mm
USP 9
G4 Glock 9mm
Out of all the 9mms, I'd say Sig is my favorite and has the least amount of muzzle flip/felt recoil. Personal experience. Just sayin.
I haven't tried/fired the SP2022 but I heard great things about it as well. For 410$ online price, it definitely does compete with all mentioned plymer framed guns.
Alaskapopo
07-01-12, 05:23
I can understand the high bore-axis concern, but the PPQ in a 9mm really isn't much... The short reset also allows you too shoot fast as well.
H&K's have almost no muzzle flip, as well as Sig's. There really must be more to it than just a bore axis, I can throw guesses out but I'm no engineer and I have nothing to back it up with except my own personal experiences.
The PPQ is a mighty fine gun (no disrespect to Glock), and it definitely deserves a look at if it hasn't. Since I've started shooting in the past year, I bought the following:
PPQ 9mm
1911
226 .22/9mm
USP 9
G4 Glock 9mm
Out of all the 9mms, I'd say Sig is my favorite and has the least amount of muzzle flip/felt recoil. Personal experience. Just sayin.
I haven't tried/fired the SP2022 but I heard great things about it as well. For 410$ online price, it definitely does compete with all mentioned plymer framed guns.
As an owner of a P226 I beg to differ and as a previous owner of a HK USP I also beg to differ. These designs have a lot more muzzle flip than a low bore axis gun like the Glock or 1911.
Pat
As an owner of a P226 I beg to differ and as a previous owner of a HK USP I also beg to differ. These designs have a lot more muzzle flip than a low bore axis gun like the Glock or 1911.
Pat
I knew that if we hung around long enough we'd find something that we agreed on.
mrosamilia
07-01-12, 07:46
As an owner of a P226 I beg to differ and as a previous owner of a HK USP I also beg to differ. These designs have a lot more muzzle flip than a low bore axis gun like the Glock or 1911.
Pat
I can't explain why, but I also feel no flip at all in my 226's. My wife is 5'2" 105 and carries a 2007 G19, but also says she is more accurate and can control the 226 better than her Glock. Now on the other hand she believes my PPQ jumps terribly.
My 2 cents are as follows. I was a Glock man from the day I turned 21. I am now 39 and have migrated to HK, Sig, Walther after having 4 very troublesome Gen 4's. My wife's 19 has been totally reliable and has about 3000 rounds through it. My mistake was in selling my Gen 2's and 3's to jump on the newer is better bandwagon. I am glad that my wife decided to not trade her gun. Long story short I am still today much more accurate and smooth with a 226 than I am with any other gun. I feel it has the least movement of any of our guns in the hand. Could be ergonomics who knows??
Check out this vid at the 7 minute mark where Hickok45 is shooting the PPQ fast. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_QhiTa-7OA He doesn't seem to be having any problem controlling the PPQ's muzzle flip at all, and the most important thing is, he is getting hits while doing it. If he can shoot the PPQ like that, with a good grip/technique and practice, so can you. If you need to shoot or miss faster than this, then yeah you probably need to look at the M&P or the Glocks once they get it together again. While my Gen 3 9mm Glock 17 and 19 have less muzzle flip than my PPQ it also has less accuracy. I have always heard that while being close, the G17 is more reliable than the G19 and gives you a slight edge in that department. Likewise, I have heard that the Glock Gen 4 nines are a little more accurate and have a little less muzzle flip than the Gen 3 9mm pistols, so if you are into edges, chalk up two for the Gen 4 Glocks. Whatever pistol you choose, just remember the Vickers Tactical website motto of, " Speed is fine but accuracy is final "
Alaskapopo
07-01-12, 12:15
Check out this vid at the 7 minute mark where Hickok45 is shooting the PPQ fast. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_QhiTa-7OA He doesn't seem to be having any problem controlling the PPQ's muzzle flip at all, and the most important thing is, he is getting hits while doing it. If he can shoot the PPQ like that, with a good grip/technique and practice, so can you. If you need to shoot or miss faster than this, then yeah you probably need to look at the M&P or the Glocks once they get it together again. While my Gen 3 9mm Glock 17 and 19 have less muzzle flip than my PPQ it also has less accuracy. I have always heard that while being close, the G17 is more reliable than the G19 and gives you a slight edge in that department. Likewise, I have heard that the Glock Gen 4 nines are a little more accurate and have a little less muzzle flip than the Gen 3 9mm pistols, so if you are into edges, chalk up two for the Gen 4 Glocks. Whatever pistol you choose, just remember the Vickers Tactical website motto of, " Speed is fine but accuracy is final "
What? he did a mag dump and hit with about 1/3 of his shots. No knock on the PPQ his his using but hits demonstration proves exactly nothing. Accuracy and Speed are both equally important. If you can't hit what your aiming at your screwed however if the other guy hits you before you hit him your screwed. You need to be fast and accurate. One is not more important than the other. With all due respect to our SME. This last weekend I use my Glock 17 in my duty rig to take the top LEO award for a state steel match and I got 11th overall out of 50 shooters. 6 of the people that beat me were shooting open guns (red dot and comps). So I am feeling pretty good with my Glocks. No polimer pistol shooter came in ahead of me.
Pat
Alaskapopo
07-01-12, 12:25
I can understand the high bore-axis concern, but the PPQ in a 9mm really isn't much... The short reset also allows you too shoot fast as well.
H&K's have almost no muzzle flip, as well as Sig's. There really must be more to it than just a bore axis, I can throw guesses out but I'm no engineer and I have nothing to back it up with except my own personal experiences.
The PPQ is a mighty fine gun (no disrespect to Glock), and it definitely deserves a look at if it hasn't. Since I've started shooting in the past year, I bought the following:
PPQ 9mm
1911
226 .22/9mm
USP 9
G4 Glock 9mm
Out of all the 9mms, I'd say Sig is my favorite and has the least amount of muzzle flip/felt recoil. Personal experience. Just sayin.
I haven't tried/fired the SP2022 but I heard great things about it as well. For 410$ online price, it definitely does compete with all mentioned plymer framed guns.
I think you need to purchase a shot timer and a video camera and film yourself. I think your confusing felt recoil with muzzle flip. The Sig definately has a lot more muzzle flip than a Glock. You would see that if you watch a video of yourself shooting and record the split times. I used to be a huge Sig fan before their quality went to crap. They have some strong points but having low muzzle flip is not one of them.
Pat
Bore axis effect on fast, accurate shooting is negligible in the grand scheme of things.
Target: upper 1/2 of a IPSC body A-zone (6"x6")
Distance: 7 yards
Average splits for 6 shots (100% accuracy):
Glock 17 9mm - 0.21
H&K P2000 9mm LEM - 0.22
Walther PPQ 9mm - 0.20
S&W 640 - 0.25 (5 shots, .38spcl.)
btw: the fastest splits I've ever personally shot were 5 sub 0.15 splits on a "Bill Drill" with a first generation Walther P99AS 9mm.
beschatten
07-01-12, 14:28
Will do the filming to see what's going on.
Aside from the 1911 (with those fatass hogue grips), I am the smoothest with a 226. It barely rises when I fire, and it naturally just falls back down for me. I dunno, it could be my grip/size of my hands. If it wasn't for Glock's reliability I probably would not have bought one as the grip does not feel natural to me and it's grip is slightly angled. I'm also not a huge fan of striker fired (for concealed carry). Not knocking on Glock -- I could just be a strange one and find it difficult to adjust to it. PPQ does have more muzzle flip, but once again I can't really say it's much because it is a 9. Unless shooting +P ammo, that's a different story. If I had to pick, I would naturally gravitate towards the PPQ because it is fully ambi (and I am a south paw) and the egros.
I do agree with Sig's QC being lower than before, going from exceptional to on par with the rest of the industry standards, however I can't get over how right it feels in my hand. USP comes second with it's fatass grips, just wished it was less brick-ish.
Before I rant any further, I can say I've had no issues with both Glock and the PPQ, both are great (based on your preferences), but the whole muzzle flip seems a bit moot to me. PPQ does have more, but I can't say it's much more, and it doesn't bother me.
What? he did a mag dump and hit with about 1/3 of his shots. No knock on the PPQ his his using but hits demonstration proves exactly nothing. Accuracy and Speed are both equally important. If you can't hit what your aiming at your screwed however if the other guy hits you before you hit him your screwed. You need to be fast and accurate. One is not more important than the other. With all due respect to our SME. This last weekend I use my Glock 17 in my duty rig to take the top LEO award for a state steel match and I got 11th overall out of 50 shooters. 6 of the people that beat me were shooting open guns (red dot and comps). So I am feeling pretty good with my Glocks. No polimer pistol shooter came in ahead of me.
Pat
Maybe his video proved nothing for you, but for me it shows the PPQ's slightly increased muzzle flip is easily controlled by anyone that knows what they are doing. I also think his hit total was more like 80% or more. IMHO what the PPQ gives up to the Glock in the muzzle flip department is made up for in the accuracy department. Also my M&P 9mm pistols seem less snappy and have less muzzle flip than my Gen 3 Glock 17 and 19. Congrats to you on your skill and placing in the match. While the weapon and equipment are very important it just goes to show that its still the persons skill using them and their tactics along with a little luck that will usually get them through and win on the two way range. Shooting a match or vid is one thing but when the bullets are coming back at you I can only imagine it is a whole different thing. Remember the Wilmington shootout with the Kehoe brothers where Shane Kehoe fired on the troopers. In this case it didn't matter how fast the officer fired his weapon because he was aiming at center mass and Shane Kehoe threw on a vest before it started. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bl3MgW8y0jo
Alaskapopo
07-01-12, 17:58
Maybe his video proved nothing for you, but for me it shows the PPQ's slightly increased muzzle flip is easily controlled by anyone that knows what they are doing. I also think his hit total was more like 80% or more. IMHO what the PPQ gives up to the Glock in the muzzle flip department is made up for in the accuracy department. Also my M&P 9mm pistols seem less snappy and have less muzzle flip than my Gen 3 Glock 17 and 19. Congrats to you on your skill and placing in the match. While the weapon and equipment are very important it just goes to show that its still the persons skill using them and their tactics along with a little luck that will usually get them through and win on the two way range. Shooting a match or vid is one thing but when the bullets are coming back at you I can only imagine it is a whole different thing. Remember the Wilmington shootout with the Kehoe brothers where Shane Kehoe fired on the troopers. In this case it didn't matter how fast the officer fired his weapon because he was aiming at center mass and Shane Kehoe through on a vest before it started. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bl3MgW8y0jo
My roommates PPQ did not group any better than my 19.
As for the shooting you mentioned it does not prove anything. Speed and accuracy are both equally important. Plenty of officers have died because they did not react fact enough. You need to be accurate and you need to be fast.
Pat
Alaskapopo
07-01-12, 18:00
Bore axis effect on fast, accurate shooting is negligible in the grand scheme of things.
Target: upper 1/2 of a IPSC body A-zone (6"x6")
Distance: 7 yards
Average splits for 6 shots (100% accuracy):
Glock 17 9mm - 0.21
H&K P2000 9mm LEM - 0.22
Walther PPQ 9mm - 0.20
S&W 640 - 0.25 (5 shots, .38spcl.)
btw: the fastest splits I've ever personally shot were 5 sub 0.15 splits on a "Bill Drill" with a first generation Walther P99AS 9mm.
7 yards is not the best place to measure for muzzle flips effect on shot to shot speed because the target is close and forgiving. Try it at 20 yards. While shooting stage 3 of the IDPA classifier I notice a much larger difference than at 7 yards when it comes to guns with more muzzle flip. I just got through doing a bill drill with my 17 from my duty rig with all A zone hits in 2.68 Forgot to write down the splits.
Pat
My roommates PPQ did not group any better than my 19.
As for the shooting you mentioned it does not prove anything. Speed and accuracy are both equally important. Plenty of officers have died because they did not react fact enough. You need to be accurate and you need to be fast.
Pat
Here again, to me the vid proves you can be faster than your opponent, be it in match or in real life, but unless you can get good accurate hits you may not always win. Yes, "Speed is fine but Accuracy is final", and yes they are both equal IMHO, which has been my point all along.
I can shoot my PPQ 9mm quite a bit more accurate than my Gen 3 G-17 or G-19, and a whole lot more accurate than my 2009 FS M&P 9mm "with all types and weights of ammo", and from what I hear I am in the majority. Unfortunately, plenty officers have also died because of the inaccuracy of their return fire.
7 yards is not the best place to measure for muzzle flips effect on shot to shot speed because the target is close and forgiving. Try it at 20 yards. While shooting stage 3 of the IDPA classifier I notice a much larger difference than at 7 yards when it comes to guns with more muzzle flip. I just got through doing a bill drill with my 17 from my duty rig with all A zone hits in 2.68 Forgot to write down the splits.
Pat
6"x6" (upper half of an IPSC A) at 7 yards is much more difficult than a Bill Drill (which is considered "the" drill for gauging shot to shot speed).
Shot difficulty is determined by the distance to target size ratio, not just distance.
A 2" dot at 5 yards is just as tough of a shot as a IDPA -0 at 20 yards.
I'm classified IDPA SSP Expert, IPSC B Limited. Both done with stock H&K LEM triggers (P2000 and P30) neither of which are known for their low bore axis.
My "Bill Drills" with all three (PPQ, P2K, G17) are sub 2.5 sec., from concealed (daily carry leather AIWB).
My FAST times with all three (PPQ, P2K, G17) are all sub 7 seconds with my best being a 4.63 from my P2000, again all from my daily carry AIWB.
Muzzle flips effect on speed and accuracy with 9mm's in negligible unless your grip sucks.
I can run sub 6 second FAST and 2.5 sec Bill Drills all day with a H&K P2000SK LEM 9mm. And the SK is not known for it's lack of muzzle "flip".
I think LAV's point of "Speed is fine, Accuracy is final" is to focus on accuracy first, then increase the speed. You can't miss fast enough and all that.
I view it more as a stepping stone. Think of it like someone getting in shape. It's easy to say "strength and endurance are equally important". But to someone building their skills (or fitness in this example), its probably a good idea to start with cardio and then introduce strength training.
At least that's how i view Larry's slogan on Accuracy and Speed.
Sorry for the thread drift.
I think LAV's point of "Speed is fine, Accuracy is final" is to focus on accuracy first, then increase the speed. You can't miss fast enough and all that.
You can also take too long to get a hit.
Accuracy without speed can be just a bad for your health in a gunfight as speed without accuracy.
It's all a balance.
You can also take too long to get a hit.
Accuracy without speed can be just a bad for your health in a gunfight as speed without accuracy.
It's all a balance.
Well that's the idea, go as fast as you can while still maintaining hits. The VSM just is tougher on accuracy standards, so as to take into account the degradation of accuracy under stress. Which I agree with. If you look at shootings, squeezing rounds off fast isn't usually a problem, but accuracy is. So the VSM approach is to turn down the throttle on speed until you can insure solid hits.
There's a lot of truth to the "Give a shooter a silhouette, they shoot the whole thing. Give them a fist sized target, and they focus their shooting." The speed will come, but the accuracy has to be there first or it's for nothing.
That's obviously just one instructor's point of view, and it comes from his SF background. But looking at real life gunfights, accuracy is usually what stands to be improved.
Like my last post said, I think its just a training Mantra that Larry uses. It's not that he doesn't think speed is important (I'm sure he had "speed, surprise, violence of action drilled into him), it's just a motto for his training curriculum that has high accuracy standards.
Alaskapopo
07-01-12, 23:16
Here again, to me the vid proves you can be faster than your opponent, be it in match or in real life, but unless you can get good accurate hits you may not always win. Yes, "Speed is fine but Accuracy is final", and yes they are both equal IMHO, which has been my point all along.
I can shoot my PPQ 9mm quite a bit more accurate than my Gen 3 G-17 or G-19, and a whole lot more accurate than my 2009 FS M&P 9mm "with all types and weights of ammo", and from what I hear I am in the majority. Unfortunately, plenty officers have also died because of the inaccuracy of their return fire.
Again if you are slower than the bad guy and he hits you before you can take your shot you lose. Accuracy and Speed are two equally important parts. You can not stress one over the other and if you do its at your own peril. Accuracy is not final if you dead before you get to pull the trigger because you took too long. The reason I feel strongly about this is because in our line of work frankly cops are too slow. We don't require fast enough speeds. For example an average person can cross 21 feet in 1.5 seconds while the average officer takes 2 seconds or more to draw and fire at 21 feet. We need to stress speed and accuracy as a balance. I have seen both lacking but overall I see speed lacking more than accuracy with LEO's.
Pat
Alaskapopo
07-01-12, 23:18
Well that's the idea, go as fast as you can while still maintaining hits. The VSM just is tougher on accuracy standards, so as to take into account the degradation of accuracy under stress. Which I agree with. If you look at shootings, squeezing rounds off fast isn't usually a problem, but accuracy is. So the VSM approach is to turn down the throttle on speed until you can insure solid hits.
There's a lot of truth to the "Give a shooter a silhouette, they shoot the whole thing. Give them a fist sized target, and they focus their shooting." The speed will come, but the accuracy has to be there first or it's for nothing.
That's obviously just one instructor's point of view, and it comes from his SF background. But looking at real life gunfights, accuracy is usually what stands to be improved.
Like my last post said, I think its just a training Mantra that Larry uses. It's not that he doesn't think speed is important (I'm sure he had "speed, surprise, violence of action drilled into him), it's just a motto for his training curriculum that has high accuracy standards.
I used to believe that but I have found it to be false. Yes accuracy has to come first. But the speed will not come unless they train for it and push themselves. People get into a comfort zone and stop progressing. Speed does not just come it takes work.
Pat
Again if you are slower than the bad guy and he hits you before you can take your shot you lose. Accuracy and Speed are two equally important parts. You can not stress one over the other and if you do its at your own peril. Accuracy is not final if you dead before you get to pull the trigger because you took too long. The reason I feel strongly about this is because in our line of work frankly cops are too slow. We don't require fast enough speeds. For example an average person can cross 21 feet in 1.5 seconds while the average officer takes 2 seconds or more to draw and fire at 21 feet. We need to stress speed and accuracy as a balance. I have seen both lacking but overall I see speed lacking more than accuracy with LEO's.
Pat
You continue to fail to see this has been "my" original point all along and you are just parroting what I said in my above post, if you read it. Getting back a little more to helping the original poster of choosing between the PPQ or G19, I would start by having him shoot both pistols at a range if available and as much as possible before making a decision. They are both fine weapons and when mastered will get the job done, and the bad guy will not know or care which one you used to put his lights out.
Alaskapopo
07-02-12, 00:15
You continue to fail to see this has been "my" original point all along and you are just parroting what I said in my above post, if you read it. Getting back a little more to helping the original poster of choosing between the PPQ or G19, I would start by having him shoot both pistols at a range if available and as much as possible before making a decision. They are both fine weapons and when mastered will get the job done, and the bad guy will not know or care which one you used to put his lights out.
Being able to try both pistols would be good. But it would take more than just slow firing at most typical ranges to get a feel for what the guns are really like. You need to run them through some skill drills to get a real idea of how it will work for you. As for parroting what you said you keep coming back and parroting things like speed is fine and accuracy is final. That statement in and of itself minimizes the role of speed in winning fights. You seem to think that speed is secondary to accuracy and thats false. Nor is accuracy secondary to speed. You need both. I have seen both extremes in real life. Those that shoot way faster than their ability to hit and those that shoot accurately but at a rate that even a sloth could escape from their sight picture before they squeezed the trigger.
Pat
Accuracy is not final if you dead before you get to pull the trigger because you took too long. The reason I feel strongly about this is because in our line of work frankly cops are too slow. We don't require fast enough speeds. For example an average person can cross 21 feet in 1.5 seconds while the average officer takes 2 seconds or more to draw and fire at 21 feet. We need to stress speed and accuracy as a balance. I have seen both lacking but overall I see speed lacking more than accuracy with LEO's.
Pat
I know it's kind of degrading into more a discussion of semantics, since I'm pretty sure most are on the same page ( accuracy should be trained first, then push shooters outside of their comfort zones to get them faster).
However, if you look at shootings, even LEOs have a very low hit rate. Honestly, I think officers are just under trained as gunfighters overall (not all, obviously, just as a whole).
And this is not a shot at LEOs at all, not in the tiniest bit. If you look at the average officer and the amount of firearms training he / she receives, it's very low. Through no fault of their own. The ammo allocations are extremely low in many departments. It can be a very bad situation for officers who don't have that drive or lifestyle to seek outside training.
Which, to bring this thread full circle, it is VERY important for departments to save a dollar where they can. Glock made it easy for departments by offering a great gun at an insanely low price. Which is a win - win, because the police get good weapons and the heads free up some change for things like more training ammo.
Alaskapopo
07-02-12, 00:27
I know it's kind of degrading into more a discussion of semantics, since I'm pretty sure most are on the same page ( accuracy should be trained first, then push shooters outside of their comfort zones to get them faster).
However, if you look at shootings, even LEOs have a very low hit rate. Honestly, I think officers are just under trained as gunfighters overall (not all, obviously, just as a whole).
And this is not a shot at LEOs at all, not in the tiniest bit. If you look at the average officer and the amount of firearms training he / she receives, it's very low. Through no fault of their own. The ammo allocations are extremely low in many departments. It can be a very bad situation for officers who don't have that drive or lifestyle to seek outside training.
Which, to bring this thread full circle, it is VERY important for departments to save a dollar where they can. Glock made it easy for departments by offering a great gun at an insanely low price. Which is a win - win, because the police get good weapons and the heads free up some change for things like more training ammo.
Great post I pretty much agree with every thing you said. One thing I will add is in my opinion the reason why police hit ratios are poor is often more to do with surrounding circumstances vs just skill and training. An officer who is ambushed on a traffic stop is going to have a very poor hit ratio generally because they are generally way behind the power curve and simply trying to get lead between them and the bad guy. Now take a SWAT situation where officers are going in with gun in hand and a mental prepardness knowing the possiblity for hostile activities is very high. Here in Alaska our police hit ratios in the mid 90's were very high in the 90% range. However they have been declining of late to where I think its 60% or so now. The reason being in my opinion is that back then attacks on officers were more rare and most shootings were man with a gun type call or SWAT call outs. Now there are more patrol officers getting in shootings that they were not mentally ready for. Its becoming a more violent world. My point is your mental game is more important than your physical skills.
Pat
beschatten
07-02-12, 00:35
Fairfax County PD uses Sigs. :)
Again if you are slower than the bad guy and he hits you before you can take your shot you lose. Accuracy and Speed are two equally important parts. You can not stress one over the other and if you do its at your own peril. Accuracy is not final if you dead before you get to pull the trigger because you took too long. The reason I feel strongly about this is because in our line of work frankly cops are too slow. We don't require fast enough speeds. For example an average person can cross 21 feet in 1.5 seconds while the average officer takes 2 seconds or more to draw and fire at 21 feet. We need to stress speed and accuracy as a balance. I have seen botoh lacking but overall I see speed lacking more than accuracy with LEO's.
Pat
Question then; much of your argument here seems to revolve around getting that first shot off fast AND accurate, in which case, doesn't muzzle flip have virtually no impact? Speed of follow up shots it obviously becomes an issue, but does that tend to happen more often on one target or when transitioning between multiple targets? If transitioning, I can't see the minor increase in muzzle flip from the ppq to the g19 making a difference. Even on one target it seems minimal. I'm genuinely trying to see where, in a real SD/Leo shooting situation the muzzle flip between the two is going to effect speed enough to matter.
-sent via droid
Alaskapopo
07-02-12, 01:31
Question then; much of your argument here seems to revolve around getting that first shot off fast AND accurate, in which case, doesn't muzzle flip have virtually no impact? Speed of follow up shots it obviously becomes an issue, but does that tend to happen more often on one target or when transitioning between multiple targets? If transitioning, I can't see the minor increase in muzzle flip from the ppq to the g19 making a difference. Even on one target it seems minimal. I'm genuinely trying to see where, in a real SD/Leo shooting situation the muzzle flip between the two is going to effect speed enough to matter.
-sent via droid
You can't think in terms of single shots when it comes to fighting with a handgun. You will shoot the suspect multiple times to get him to stop or simple because he has not had a chance to hit the ground before you fired 4 rounds into him. Rapid accurate follow up shots (violence of action) is what is needed to put a determined threat down. Especially with a handgun. I am not saying the difference between the rate of fire will be huge. Its more likely just a small speed edge between .03 and .08 but I will take any edge I can get. It also matters when transition from target to target.
Pat
Allow me to re-orient the thread. With the plethora of posts on the error net, and the possibility of a problematic G19, is the ppq a better choice overall than the Glock? Both are "trainable" to me. I have even run across of issues with new gen 3's. Now, the more I look the more I find.
Again, I like the lighter weight and the slightly smaller profile of the g19, and the already great sights (trijicons), and the price. But, the ergos, controls, and reported accuracy and trouble free reports of the ppq are very attractive.
At this pointan my experience is not the issue.
I will say anecdotally that my son's service G21, and that of his 33 colleagues seems to be very good in the reliability and accuracy department. Gen 3 of course.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.