View Full Version : Weighing PPQ vs M&P9
Down to one centerfire semi-auto, a Talon II in 9mm - feel the need to add something with more than 10-round capacity.
I have some experience with the M&P9 but it was pre-Apex parts - I wound up selling it because the weak trigger reset was so annoying. The ergonomics, though, were absolutely fantastic.
So I'm now weighing a G&R kitted out M&P9 (fitted barrel, DCAEK, sights) vs. a PPQ w/ Dawson Precision sights. Price difference is ~$200, all told, I'm just going to call it small enough to not matter to me.
M&P9 - whole lotta aftermarket parts installed, which makes sending it in for warranty service a little more questionable if I needed to, but it seems like it should shoot tight groups and run well straight out of the box
PPQ - less aftermarket support (but holsters/etc. are more available now), apparently S&W warranty support is slow now but Walther will take over directly next year, but word is that the trigger is excellent right out of the box. As I recall, paddle mag release works well for me.
Uses will be indoor range shooting, hopefully some IDPA and if I can get the chance, a class or two in 2013.
High Tower
10-15-12, 18:03
Can't go wrong with either one. Try to find a place to shoot both and base your decision on that.
Apricotshot
10-15-12, 18:12
Considering what a pot luck the M&P seems to be, I'd try the PPQ. Sights and aftermarket is pretty slim with the Walther though.
Magic_Salad0892
10-15-12, 18:16
PPQ with Dawson sights.
Well, I tried both..( M&P9, PPQ) I still have the PPQ...
Considering what a pot luck the M&P seems to be, I'd try the PPQ. Sights and aftermarket is pretty slim with the Walther though.
what potluck? I think he said he's getting the storm lake barrel which is more accurate than the stock PPQ barrel.
both the m&p and PPQ have been reliable for me (No problems at all) so that's a draw.
trigger definitely goes to the PPQ, but with Apex parts the m&p is no slouch (the stock m&p is getting better too though, my 2012 m&p has a Clean break and tactile reset). the PPQ trigger is clean and the reset is short
ergos are a toss up and are pretty subjective.
m&p recoil is lighter to me (probably the lightest of all my 9mms) but it's still 9mm, so recoil isn't an issue. I do like the lower bore axis of the m&p, makes me feel like I have a better grip on the gun and have more control over it.
mags and parts definitely favor the m&p
cheapest PPQs around me are over $550 and grant has the m&p at $420, but that advantage is erased when you add a $200 barrel (it is match grade though, and the stock m&p barrel will net you some money back on the EE)
I have only dry fired the M&P to get a feel for it's trigger. I've put a few hundred rounds through a PPQ.
What I like about the PPQ is it's crisp for it's class trigger, short and positive reset, how it feels in the hand, that it's easy to shoot, no mag safety, no thumb safety, the balance either empty or loaded, mag release, ease of mag insertion even when fully loaded and the slide is in battery, smooth shape and efficient size.
What I don't like is the overly large (but easy to use) slide release. I haven't figured out where to place my thumbs. I like the design of the sights, but don't like that they are made of plastic. They can be deformed when bumped hard.
Overall, there is much more I like about the PPQ than I dislike. It has quickly become a favorite pistol
I own a PPQ. I own a full custom M&P with a fitted SL barrel. I like many things about the PPQ (trigger, slide release, mag release and accuracy).
The M&P with a fitted barrel and an Apex Tactical FSS or AEK trigger is second to none I think. The ergo's are fantastic, the CT lasergrips fit into it better than any other gun IMHO, sight options are abundant, mags are cheap, parts are available and cheap.
If I couldn't make any of the changes to the M&P, the PPQ would be it for certain.
C4
Hogsgunwild
10-16-12, 07:52
I have over 5K into my M&Ps and PPQs presently.
Bought four of my five M&Ps one year ago and decked them all out with the Apex FSS and trigger kits and Ameriglo sights. Earlier this year I started down the PPQ path and now have two 9MMs and one .40 S&W.
I have spent a lot of time going back and forth between the two in order to figure out which one really fits my needs better. Here are a few observations that made me comfortable leaving the M&P camp and calling the PPQ camp home:
1.) I have found that even with the FSS and trigger kit on my M&P 9 fullsize (as good, crisp and light of a trigger as it is), I have come to substantially prefer the pull, break and even the very positive reset of my PPQs' triggers over my M&Ps'. In all fairness to the M&P, perhaps if I had installed the Apex DCAEK kit or perhaps even just left them stock and let them break in, it might be a different story (and more of an apples to apples comparison). It is interesting that my next favorite trigger to the PPQ's is the one on my Shield. It is stock and I have found that it leaves nothing to be desired for me. I will note that the FSS triggers are the lightest of all of these triggers as well.
I will also point out that the stock M&P triggers that are produced today are supposed to be an improvement over the stock triggers on the older ones like mine.
2.) Ergonomics. Highly personal and subjective. No right or wrong here, just which works best for each individual.
I was very impressed with the M&P's ergos, in the beginning.
Of all of my M&Ps, I have realized that the 9MM fullsize's ergos work the least well for me. In my case I have found that the M&P 9MM FS's grip never quite gets small enough (front to back) and the length in this direction affects my lateral stability with hits on target. With the smallest backstrap on my PPQs, I am in heaven. It took me half of a year to realize this small but very important point. After spending so much time with my PPQs, I now feel that the M&P 9MM FS grip is just incorrect for me in several minute areas. For the longest time, my M&P felt perfect at home but when at the range, the subtle detractors were more apparent.
3.) Thumb safety. I have them on my M&Ps. I believe in the use of thumb safeties and have gone with and without them over the years. On 1911s they never seemed to detract from my grip. The M&P
thumb safety is similar to the 1911 style but I have come to believe that my grip with the use of the M&P thumb safety is hindered by just a small amount. My fault. If I knew this before, I may have ordered all of my M&Ps without the TS. You may not use them or care about this point.
Ordering a recently manufactured M&P 9MM FS is probably a safe bet as far as getting an improved trigger and not having to worry about the accuracy issues of the past that I had to deal with. My PPQs are everything and more that I had hoped that my 9MM M&Ps would have been.
It really took me a long time to split all of these hairs. None of the things that I discovered above amount to very much on their own, but, when added together, I had my "lightbulb moment" and clearly decided that the M&Ps were to be replaced by PPQs. Once again I'll mention that the Shield is a different story and has been my preference over the PPS for me, to date.
I have shot both and i would go with a tricked out M&P from Grant.
Army Chief
10-16-12, 09:55
I'm always left to wonder about cases like this; especially when a fully-upgraded M&P can almost put you in P30 territory. (I mean, a fully-upgraded 1911 is a thing of beauty, too, no?)
The question to me is how much upgrading are we talking about? There is a lot of goodness to keeping any CCW piece in a fairly box stock configuration for liability purposes, and the PPQ obviously shines without a lot of enhancements -- while doing so for well under $600.
I also took a look at spec'ing a full-on M&P from Grant a while back, and while I do consider these to be excellent guns, there is no escaping the fact that you have to spend a fair amount of money getting the gun to where you want it, and that end state results in a different gun in some respects.
AC
I'm always left to wonder about cases like this; especially when a fully-upgraded M&P can almost put you in P30 territory. (I mean, a fully-upgraded 1911 is a thing of beauty, too, no?)
The question to me is how much upgrading are we talking about? There is a lot of goodness to keeping any CCW piece in a fairly box stock configuration for liability purposes, and the PPQ obviously shines without a lot of enhancements -- while doing so for well under $600.
I also took a look at spec'ing a full-on M&P from Grant a while back, and while I do consider these to be excellent guns, there is no escaping the fact that you have to spend a fair amount of money getting the gun to where you want it, and that end state results in a different gun in some respects.
AC
I agree with you in some respects, but to me, each gun has their draws and limitations, with m&p accuracy being the most discussed
stock m&ps are over $125 dollars cheaper. Add a couple extra mags and it's another $100 (m&p mags $25, PPQ mags $46)
that already pays for the storm lake match barrel, and if you can't stand the stock trigger (which has gotten much better) you can sell the original m&p barrel and buy Apex parts.
If the trigger is that important to you, it only takes a little extra work to even things out money wise.
Apricotshot
10-16-12, 10:45
Who's going to buy a barrel that is inaccurate from the factory?
Who's going to buy a barrel that is inaccurate from the factory?
I would think an unused factory barrel will sell for $50-60 without a problem. not all barrels have issues, not all shooters can shoot well enough at 25 meters to tell a difference, and most instances where firearms are used for self defense occur at much shorter distances than 25 meters.
Hogsgunwild
10-16-12, 11:08
Who's going to buy a barrel that is inaccurate from the factory?
I did. A lot of us did. Not everyone could tell.
Once again, the current generation barrels are supposed to have fixed the accuracy issues.
I would feel like a smuck selling my older stock barrel to anyone.
Is there someone that you don't like at your local bullseye match that you could sell it to?
Urban_Redneck
10-16-12, 11:09
Notwithstanding my appreciation for the aftermarket (1911 owner :secret: ) and with the exception of hard to find holsters, there is something very right about shooting a gun as is, without the nagging "maybe if I change the ____ or get that ____" whisper in your ear. In the words of one of my deceased shooting buddies, "Just shoot the *&%$#@'n thing".
YMMV
Hogsgunwild
10-16-12, 11:20
Notwithstanding my appreciation for the aftermarket (1911 owner :secret: ) and with the exception of hard to find holsters, there is something very right about shooting a gun as is, without the nagging "maybe if I change the ____ or get that ____" whisper in your ear. In the words of one of my deceased shooting buddies, "Just shoot the *&%$#@'n thing".
YMMV
Exactly. The PPQ experience was so refreshing after the M&P fiasco.
My 9MM M&Ps needed: the sear housing blocks. A new barrel. A better trigger. Sights (optional). Stippling (debatable).
My PPQs needed: sights (optional).
After all that swapping crap out, I find the PPQ still shoots better (for me).
Apricotshot
10-16-12, 11:28
I have a 2012 9mm VTAC that shoots high left at 25 yards in the prone. I have to aim at the target's left hip to hit them in the chest. That to me is unsatisfactory. I'm glad that those on here who use the reasoning most gunfights happen in less than 10 yards or so have the precognitive powers of where and at what ranges thier gunfight will occur. It chaps my ass that I have to send my slide to Grant and get a match barrel just to have the gun shoot straight at a resonable distance.
I have a 2012 9mm VTAC that shoots high left at 25 yards in the prone. I have to aim at the target's left hip to hit them in the chest. That to me is unsatisfactory. I'm glad that those on here who use the reasoning most gunfights happen in less than 10 yards or so have the precognitive powers of where and at what ranges thier gunfight will occur. It chaps my ass that I have to send my slide to Grant and get a match barrel just to have the gun shoot straight at a resonable distance.
If it consistently shoots high and to the left might it be a sight problem instead of a barrel problem?
Apricotshot
10-16-12, 11:48
If it consistently shoots high and to the left might it be a sight problem instead of a barrel problem?
Sights are in spec. I moved the rear sight so the left problem is gone. The VTAC sights are already tall, so I haven't been able to find one that is taller. So I'm left with it being a barrel problem. A lot of others have posted of this anomaly as well.
brickboy240
10-16-12, 12:01
I have looked hard at both the PPQ and the full size M&P9.
Here is what I have noticed...
Problems with the M&P9 full size:
The trigger and it's lack of noticeable re-set - this means I would need a 100 dollar Apex fix.
There are some M&P9s that have accuracy problems. If mine had it...there is another 100-200 bucks in a replacement barrel.
Problems with the PPQ:
Mags are hard to find and expensive. They SAY that you can run some other mags (Magnum Research or P99) but some report iffy feeding.
The selection of holsters is less than for the M&P.
The mag release is ass-backwards from any other pistol I own.
These things may or may not bother you about the PPQ or the M&P9.
I am still trying to sort out if I want to dump my odd-ejecting G19 for the PPQ or the M&P. So far....I lean towards the PPQ, but I am also toying with spending a little more and going for a P-30 with the LEM trigger.
Like you...I am just not sure yet. This sucks that Glock had to take a dump and lost it's spot as the "go to" polymer 9mm pistol in the gun world. Most of the others are a mix of compromises.
-brickboy240
I just wanted to make sure you were aware of this recent development. Myself, I would give the new Apex Gen 3 specific extractor a try before I would dump the Glock platform. From the manufacturers section of this forum.
Brickboy and to those gen 3 owners who are still having problems, even with our current extractor. I understand your level of frustration completely.
If our current extractor isn't improving your ejection, call our office and talk to Steve. He will arrange to have you return the part for refund or credit (As long as the part hasn't been altered).
We are fast tracking the new extractor. In a nutshell, the main problem with the Gen 3 is that the locking block sits at a different height relative to the slide than the Gen 4. Our current extractor was designed around the Gen 4 dimensions and only anecdotally tested in Gen 3s.
For those in the know, I have a question: When did the LCI extractor first show up? Was it on the Gen 3 first? or the Gen 4? The reason I ask is because I suspect that the LCI extractor was designed around the Gen 4, and it was assumed that it would be backwards compatible with the Gen 3.
The new extractor is designed to compensate for the dimensional differences in the Gen 3, and for the extreme end of the tolerance stack. We are fabricating the prototypes now, and have a machine on standby so that when I sign off on the part, production will begin immediately. I expect that the Gen 3 specific extractor will be ready to release in about 6 weeks.
In a few weeks, we will post some video of the new design in a couple of problem G17s that we have here in the shop. Both exhibited weak, erratic and BTF in every single magazine regardless of ammo used. They are the guns that customers tried every possible fix (including our current extractor)to no avail. Further, I designed the extractor to work with EITHER the 336 or the 30274 ejector.
-Randy
__________________
www.apextactical.com
Reply With Quote
I have looked hard at both the PPQ and the full size M&P9.
Here is what I have noticed...
Problems with the M&P9 full size:
The trigger and it's lack of noticeable re-set - this means I would need a 100 dollar Apex fix.
I hear this a lot. I shoot to trigger recovery (not reset) so in this instance, the lack of a hard reset matters not. In fact I can make a valid argument that a hard reset is a NEGATIVE for shooters (as they always look for it and never get into a rhythm when shooting). This is a very common problem I see in Glock shooters.
Have you checked out a new production M&P? It has a trigger reset much like the PPQ. If an M&P does not have a hard reset, you can add an APEX RAM for $21 dollars (not $100).
Problems with the PPQ:
The mag release is ass-backwards from any other pistol I own.
While different, it is actually superior (if you take the time to learn it).
C4
brickboy240
10-16-12, 13:27
Good to know that they changed the M&P's trigger. Admittedly, I shot an early one and the trigger was terrible.
The mag release on the PPQ is different to ME...but not to anyone that owns any HK pistol. If you have a USP, P2000 or P-30, you will be right at home. But yeah, for someone with SIGs, 1911s, Glocks and a Hi-Power...it seems odd. Never said it was bad...just different and something I would have to "learn" but not a deal breaker.
In fact...I am really leaning hard towards the PPQ. Everyone talks about it's high bore axis, but I have never been bothered by the recoil of my P220, P228 and P225 and supposedly those have a high bore axis. Its a 9mm service sized gun....how snappy could it be?
-brickboy240
Larry Vickers
10-16-12, 13:37
No gun is perfect as we know but if I had to pick between the M&P 9mm and PPQ it would not even be a close call;
PPQ hands down
Cheers
LAV
brickboy240
10-16-12, 14:26
Well...theres your real answer! LOL
Seriously, when considering an alternative to my problematic G19, I was looking at either the PPQ or stepping up to the HK P-30 with the LEM trigger.
I never considered an M&P.
-brickboy240
Well...theres your real answer! LOL
Seriously, when considering an alternative to my problematic G19, I was looking at either the PPQ or stepping up to the HK P-30 with the LEM trigger.
I never considered an M&P.
-brickboy240
I agree, it's hard to argue with LAV, but when you consider the total cost of each platform, the m&p offers more to me
PPQ mags are almost double the cost, sight selection is very limited (the stock plastic sights aren't the best), and the base gun is around $125 more expensive
edit: I also really like the PPQ mag release, I use my index finger similar to on an AR. I don't consider it a drawback. I also prefer it over hk's design
brickboy240
10-16-12, 14:57
Expensive?
I have seen the PPQ selling for about 475 on the web in some places and locally, it is about 525-570 bucks.
In April, I paid 480 for a Glock 19.
Sorry...that is not too much more expensive. Not in the P-30 price range....now THAT is a jump from the 500 dollar guns and a bit harder for most to swallow.
Yes, with Glocks we get spoiled by cheap mags, but SIG mags usually run about 35-45 bucks a pop and HK mags are 50 bucks plus in most places so the mag cost on the PPQ is not that stiff. Especially if they last a long time like the SIG mags.
- brickboy240
I hear this a lot. I shoot to trigger recovery (not reset) so in this instance, the lack of a hard reset matters not. In fact I can make a valid argument that a hard reset is a NEGATIVE for shooters (as they always look for it and never get into a rhythm when shooting). C4
Agreed. I have a May 2010 model Smith with the older size sear and plunger. I was going to send it Apex to get it opened up/repositioned for the larger plunger but then realized ,why ? My gun works great. Only thing done to it was the Apex DCAEK and thats it mechanically. I actually bought and tried out the FSS and after 1000 or so rounds I just could not get used to it.
Lack of reset, etc can be fixed with money but also the sensation of not feeling it as well as other pistols can be overcome with practice. Like Grant said I don't search for the reset. My trigger finger knows the amount of pre travel, travel, overtravel and the break and reset point b/c of all the time spent working that particular gun and trigger. When I first bought the gun the first thing I did was run out and shoot it. Coming from 1911s I could not shoot the broad side of a barn with the M&P. "What's wrong?" I asked myself. Ah....it must be the trigger b/c yeh it did suck to me. Break and reset were terrible. So I ordered the DCEAK and it did improve it but the 'barn' did not get any smaller. ;)
2.5 years and about 8K rounds later through the gun with the same setup and I love that trigger now. Others will try it out and say its just ok but to me its my favorite trigger out there. Why? Not b/c its the crispest or smoothest but b/c I know how it works.
That horrible trigger at first I am convinced made me a better shooter. And that's not saying I was Jerry Miculek when I started to shoot M&Ps. Point is that all those little faults I blamed on the gun at first and thought would make me a worse shooter actually improved my shooting. I LEARNED to run that trigger and I am a better shooter for it.
-Jax
Expensive?
I have seen the PPQ selling for about 475 on the web in some places and locally, it is about 525-570 bucks.
In April, I paid 480 for a Glock 19.
Sorry...that is not too much more expensive. Not in the P-30 price range....now THAT is a jump from the 500 dollar guns and a bit harder for most to swallow.
Yes, with Glocks we get spoiled by cheap mags, but SIG mags usually run about 35-45 bucks a pop and HK mags are 50 bucks plus in most places so the mag cost on the PPQ is not that stiff. Especially if they last a long time like the SIG mags.
- brickboy240
I was thinking more m&p vs PPQ. grant has m&ps for $425 and the PPQ is $550 (out of stock) locally PPQs are over $575.
m&p mags can be had for around $20 and the cheapest I've seen PPQ mags is with grant, and they're $46.
between the cost of the gun and 5 extra mags you're looking at a $250 difference
brickboy240
10-16-12, 15:32
But the PPQ does not need a trigger upgrade to get a re-set you can feel.
To some...that is worth it.
Besides, have they cured the inaccuracy problems with the full size M&P9? I saw some groups on threads here that looked like shotgun patterns.
Fixing the M&P's trigger and accuracy could easily place the gun in the PPQ's price range. The PPQ seems GTG right out of the box with no real warts.
(psst....that used to be the Glock's big drawing point....oh how we long for the good ol days! LOL)
-brickboy240
Hogsgunwild
10-16-12, 15:42
No gun is perfect as we know but if I had to pick between the M&P 9mm and PPQ it would not even be a close call;
PPQ hands down
Cheers
LAV
My PPQs and I will be attending your courses in Phoenix on December 6th, 8th and 9th. Can't wait!
Thanks for all of your great input on this forum.
I have both and recommend the platform that requires the least amount of aftermarket modifications for shooters who only want to train on one handgun. That is because I believe in owning at least 3 identical models of your carry weapon. It is my belief is that you are going to get the most consistent performance in the guns that come from the factory without extensive modification.
But the PPQ does not need a trigger upgrade to get a re-set you can feel.
To some...that is worth it.
Besides, have they cured the inaccuracy problems with the full size M&P9? I saw some groups on threads here that looked like shotgun patterns.
Fixing the M&P's trigger and accuracy could easily place the gun in the PPQ's price range. The PPQ seems GTG right out of the box with no real warts.
(psst....that used to be the Glock's big drawing point....oh how we long for the good ol days! LOL)
-brickboy240
I'm not disagreeing that the PPQ is still great gun (I own 3). but all things considered, to me the m&p is superior.
If you have accuracy issues with your barrel (my compacts and FS haven't had any problems), grant has a match grade storm lake barrel that will out shoot the PPQ's.
The PPQ trigger is hands down better than any other striker fired handgun, but I'm just as proficient with the stock m&p trigger
gtmtnbiker98
10-16-12, 16:54
If you have accuracy issues with your barrel (my compacts and FS haven't had any problems), grant has a match grade storm lake barrel that will out shoot the PPQ's.
And you state this as fact, right? I say you don't know shit.
Army Chief
10-16-12, 17:04
And you state this as fact, right? I say you don't know shit.
Negative, Ghost Rider -- we are NOT going to let this devolve into a personal confrontation under any circumstances.
Adjust course and speed, time now. Thanks.
AC
And you state this as fact, right? I say you don't know shit.
I guess you're right, I personally don't know shit since I don't own one of the barrels (my stock barrels have been fine) but going by what grant has said and the fact that it's a fitted, match grade barrel, I think it would be more accurate
let me know if you have info saying otherwise though
Apricotshot
10-16-12, 17:09
I'm not disagreeing that the PPQ is still great gun (I own 3). but all things considered, to me the m&p is superior.
If you have accuracy issues with your barrel (my compacts and FS haven't had any problems), grant has a match grade storm lake barrel that will out shoot the PPQ's.
The PPQ trigger is hands down better than any other striker fired handgun, but I'm just as proficient with the stock m&p trigger
I think you are missing the point. Most of us want a pistol that is good to go right out of the tupperware box. Not dumping $500 into a $500 pistol.
M&P setup for trigger and barrel= $1000 all said and done to make it equal to a Gen3 Glock (with $20 disconnector) and a Walther right out of the box. It's a shame too as I really wanted to like the M&P.
Thanks for all the input, guys.
Heckuva recommendation from LAV here, and the extensive modification argument is what made me question the M&P9 initially.
I think I'm going to pick up a PPQ when I arrange funds and get on the list somewhere for a good Kydex holster. I get along well with paddle mag releases and the DP sights available are almost exactly my preference (prefer a U-notch but square is fine).
I like the concept of the M&P9, and I'll probably end up with a kitted-out one down the road, but I can't see a big advantage to it over a PPQ right now.
I think you are missing the point. Most of us want a pistol that is good to go right out of the tupperware box. Not dumping $500 into a $500 pistol.
M&P setup for trigger and barrel= $1000 all said and done to make it equal to a Gen3 Glock (with $20 disconnector) and a Walther right out of the box. It's a shame too as I really wanted to like the M&P.
I'm not going to argue with you there, it's a good point and you're definitely right. my PPQs have exceeded my expectations right out of the box.
but if you're willing to put some money into the platform ($1000 seems a little high) then you'll have a really nice gun
Thanks for all the input, guys.
Heckuva recommendation from LAV here, and the extensive modification argument is what made me question the M&P9 initially.
I think I'm going to pick up a PPQ when I arrange funds and get on the list somewhere for a good Kydex holster. I get along well with paddle mag releases and the DP sights available are almost exactly my preference (prefer a U-notch but square is fine).
I like the concept of the M&P9, and I'll probably end up with a kitted-out one down the road, but I can't see a big advantage to it over a PPQ right now.
good choice, it's a quality firearm. I'd strongly recommend a rental session with both guns too
But the PPQ does not need a trigger upgrade to get a re-set you can feel.
To some...that is worth it.
Besides, have they cured the inaccuracy problems with the full size M&P9? I saw some groups on threads here that looked like shotgun patterns.
Fixing the M&P's trigger and accuracy could easily place the gun in the PPQ's price range. The PPQ seems GTG right out of the box with no real warts.
(psst....that used to be the Glock's big drawing point....oh how we long for the good ol days! LOL)
-brickboy240
Out of curiosity, can you feel the trigger reset point when you're shooting at speed? By that I mean shooting something like the FAST drill or a Bill drill, Ihack; anything like that. I ask because I see a lot written about tactile/audible reset, but to be honest, I don't know where it is when I'm shooting at speed and I shoot a Glock. In fact, to look for it would slow me down and I'm not that fast to begin with, so i don't even worry about it. And when I read about it, I wonder if people can consistently find it at speed.
This is just me being curious. I'm not saying in any way that the M&P 9 is a better gun than the PPQ or the opposite for that matter, just curious about this one aspect.
Out of curiosity, can you feel the trigger reset point when you're shooting at speed? By that I mean shooting something like the FAST drill or a Bill drill, Ihack; anything like that. I ask because I see a lot written about tactile/audible reset, but to be honest, I don't know where it is when I'm shooting at speed and I shoot a Glock. In fact, to look for it would slow me down and I'm not that fast to begin with, so i don't even worry about it. And when I read about it, I wonder if people can consistently find it at speed.
This is just me being curious. I'm not saying in any way that the M&P 9 is a better gun than the PPQ or the opposite for that matter, just curious about this one aspect.
It's a good point and I actually agree. I think an audible reset is highly over rated unless you're shooting slowly. In fact, the glock reset is so strong, I sometimes find it distracting since it resets so strongly into my finger
What I think is cool is that we are discussing pistols that are good alternatives to Glocks and one is US made
What I think is cool is that we are discussing pistols that are good alternatives to Glocks and one is US made
Well said. I had thought of reaquiring another M&P but glad I waited until the PPQ came on scene.
Can anyone comment on how the APEX FSS trigger compares to the PPQ's trigger? I've fondled a PPQ at the LGS, but I don't know anyone who has an M&P with an FSS.
Can anyone comment on how the APEX FSS trigger compares to the PPQ's trigger? I've fondled a PPQ at the LGS, but I don't know anyone who has an M&P with an FSS.
I have a .45 mid with a FSS and a PPQ, As we all know, the PPQ's trigger is excellant..IMO the FSS is even better..Gets rid of the hinged trigger, take up is short and breaks around #5. I feel the FSS breaks cleaner. The FSS is very 1911esq..Between the two, the Walther is no slouch, But, the FSS is just a better trigger.. On a M&P.45, which is already laser accurate, this makes it that much better..They're expensive, but I feel they're worth every dime.
Can anyone comment on how the APEX FSS trigger compares to the PPQ's trigger? I've fondled a PPQ at the LGS, but I don't know anyone who has an M&P with an FSS.
The FSS is fantastic, but I don't think that it is the best idea for a carry gun.
I would do that Duty/Carry spring kit and then the AEK. This is the best trigger on the market and closely emulates a 1911 trigger.
C4
And you state this as fact, right? I say you don't know shit.
PPQ fanboy.
Hogsgunwild
10-17-12, 11:18
Can anyone comment on how the APEX FSS trigger compares to the PPQ's trigger? I've fondled a PPQ at the LGS, but I don't know anyone who has an M&P with an FSS.
FSS: 3.5 pound pull with little take-up. Very crisp. No reset. Grant's advice is a good way to go.
PPQ: 5.5 pounds. Very crisp with more take-up than the above. Excellent reset.
At speed I do not bother with using resets. Doing slow fire accuracy work they are handy and can save some time at the very least.
Without using the reset during slow fire 25 yard accuracy work, I have found that I can break a well executed (proper technique-wise)
shot sooner with my PPQs (I have three) than with my FFS equipped
M&Ps (have four). It is interesting that I prefer a 5.5 pound trigger to a 3.5 pound trigger. That is how clean the PPQ trigger is. I would never have guessed that it was 5.5 pounds. Mine are broken-in, so, they may be lighter than 5.5 now, I don't know.
I made some comments on page one of this thread regarding the triggers.
gtmtnbiker98
10-17-12, 11:56
PPQ fanboy.No. Just can't stand absolute unfounded claims being made. A match barrel does not make a pistol more accurate.
Oh, and in fear of being banned, I'll hold my reply to your post.
No. Just can't stand absolute unfounded claims being made. A match barrel does not make a pistol more accurate.
Oh, and in fear of being banned, I'll hold my reply to your post.
Nothing to attack someone over, eh?
gtmtnbiker98
10-17-12, 12:15
Nothing to attack someone over, eh?
Nope.
No. Just can't stand absolute unfounded claims being made. A match barrel does not make a pistol more accurate.
Oh, and in fear of being banned, I'll hold my reply to your post.
If you get a chance, read this thread about first hand accounts of the storm lake barrel
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=104659
to me it makes sense how a hand fitted, match grade barrel, with a longer length would be more accurate than a shorter, factory manufactured barrel.
If you get a chance, read this thread about first hand accounts of the storm lake barrel
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=104659
to me it makes sense how a hand fitted, match grade barrel, with a longer length would be more accurate than a shorter, factory manufactured barrel.
The word "match" barrel means many things to different people. Many manufacturers make "match' barrels that are drop in (no fitting). In this instance, there is most likely NO noticeable upgrade in accuracy.
We hand fit SL barrels (with oversized hoods) to M&P slides. The increase in accuracy CAN BE huge. For instance, my M&P with factory barrel shot 7-8" groups. I installed a match (non-fitted) barrel in it and my accuracy improved to about 6" groups. My hand fitted barrel created some 1" groups.
C4
Adding a DCAEK and a fitted Storm Lake barrel certainly made my M&P 9L capable of better accuracy in my hands. As of yesterday I have a PPQ 9 on the way, so I'll be very interested in the subsequent head-to-head comparison.
Adding a DCAEK and a fitted Storm Lake barrel certainly made my M&P 9L capable of better accuracy in my hands. As of yesterday I have a PPQ 9 on the way, so I'll be very interested in the subsequent head-to-head comparison.
Cool. Come back and let us know your findings.
My M&P 9L is basically a range gun. It's accurate, but not that much more accurate than my Gen 3 Glock 19. My motivator for getting the PPQ is the unreliability of the Glock (extraction/ejection) and to replace it as a carry gun.
My M&P 9L is basically a range gun. It's accurate, but not that much more accurate than my Gen 3 Glock 19. My motivator for getting the PPQ is the unreliability of the Glock (extraction/ejection) and to replace it as a carry gun.
I am of the opinion that with Combat Oriented Sights, there is only so much accuracy one can squeeze out of a gun. As an example, I can put a gun in my Ransom rest and get it to shoot .5" groups. I, on the other hand can only get 2.5-3" groups off a rest (as I have to use the sights).
One of the reasons I put the Triangle RMR on my M&P is that I can zero the tip of the triangle and get MUCH better accuracy than I could with combat sights.
C4
The word "match" barrel means many things to different people. Many manufacturers make "match' barrels that are drop in (no fitting). In this instance, there is most likely NO noticeable upgrade in accuracy.
IMO, unless each barrel is cut to fit each slide, it is not a "match" barrel.
The 99-series pistols have always been some of the most mechanically accurate polymer pistols out there. Walther seems to pay attention to barrel to slide fit in the assembly process to insure that their pistols are as accurate as can be without going as far as fitting each barrel to each pistol.
On the G&A review of the PPQ, where the author was flown to Ulm, Germany to visit the Walther plant where the PPQ is made, he stated this:
One of the attributes of computer-controlled machining is that you can make parts to exacting precision and not have to hand-fit them. Well, Walther takes that a step further. I watched one of the assemblers, sitting at his bench with a bin of slides on one side and a bin of barrels on the other. He would snatch out a slide, grab a barrel and check for fit. If he didn’t like the way it would pop in and out of battery, he’d pull it out of the slide and set it on his bench. (He was careful to set barrels down ranked according to fits.) He’d try another, or a barrel off the bench, until he had one fitting the way he liked. Then he’d put that assembled slide and barrel on a frame and check striker movement with a special gauge. After adjusting things, he’d then cycle and dry-fire it until it felt “proper.” Then, and only then, would it go into the “done” rack.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/reviews/new-wave-walther-walther-ppq-review/
Walther does not consider their barrels to be "match" barrels, but their pistols can outshoot pistols that claim that their barrels are.
We hand fit SL barrels (with oversized hoods) to M&P slides. The increase in accuracy CAN BE huge. For instance, my M&P with factory barrel shot 7-8" groups. I installed a match (non-fitted) barrel in it and my accuracy improved to about 6" groups. My hand fitted barrel created some 1" groups.
There are reports of PPQ pistols getting 1.5" groups with factory loads.
There are reports of P99 pistols getting 1.5" groups with factory loads.
7"-8" groups is ridiculous with today's technology. Nobody, including S&W, should find this acceptable, IMO. The fact that a custom fit match barrel only gives the M&P a .5" edge in accuracy over a stock PPQ with factory loads, is ridiculous IMO.
As far as mechanical accuracy, the PPQ is much better than the M&P.
IMO, unless each barrel is cut to fit each slide, it is not a "match" barrel.
I agree, but this is not how every company views it.
There are reports of PPQ pistols getting 1.5" groups with factory loads.
There are reports of an Ape like creature running in the woods in the Canadian. Folks up there call him sasquatch. ;)
I have a PPQ and have shot it for groups. Multiple sets of 5rd groups and 10rd groups. Best I have got mine to shoot is 2" to 2.5". This is of course excellent and no complaints.
Could there be PPQ's out there that shoot 1.5" groups? Sure, but I have never seen one and or personally known one to do it and really question if if "common."
7"-8" groups is ridiculous with today's technology. Nobody, including S&W, should find this acceptable, IMO. The fact that a custom fit match barrel only gives the M&P a .5" edge in accuracy over a stock PPQ with factory loads, is ridiculous IMO.
As far as mechanical accuracy, the PPQ is much better than the M&P.
Don't argue this fact (is ridiculous). No, it is NOT a .5" edge. More like (on average) a 1.5 to 2" edge as I have shot .5" groups from my M&P.
Question for you, do you own a PPQ or P99? If so, please post pics of your groups at 25yds.
C4
IMO, unless each barrel is cut to fit each slide, it is not a "match" barrel.
The 99-series pistols have always been some of the most mechanically accurate polymer pistols out there. Walther seems to pay attention to barrel to slide fit in the assembly process to insure that their pistols are as accurate as can be without going as far as fitting each barrel to each pistol.
On the G&A review of the PPQ, where the author was flown to Ulm, Germany to visit the Walther plant where the PPQ is made, he stated this:
http://www.gunsandammo.com/reviews/new-wave-walther-walther-ppq-review/
Walther does not consider their barrels to be "match" barrels, but their pistols can outshoot pistols that claim that their barrels are.
There are reports of PPQ pistols getting 1.5" groups with factory loads.
There are reports of P99 pistols getting 1.5" groups with factory loads.
7"-8" groups is ridiculous with today's technology. Nobody, including S&W, should find this acceptable, IMO. The fact that a custom fit match barrel only gives the M&P a .5" edge in accuracy over a stock PPQ with factory loads, is ridiculous IMO.
As far as mechanical accuracy, the PPQ is much better than the M&P.
I see what you're saying, and the information about the PPQ manufacturing process is interesting (and very encouraging about the type of products Walther produces) but the difference between 1 inch and 1.5 inches in a consistent and reproducible test seems significant to me, especially at 25 yards with combat sights
There is a difference between a "match grade" barrel and a "match" barrel
Question for you, do you own a PPQ or P99?
Yes.
If so, please post pics of your groups at 25yds.
I don't have a rest, and I'm not that good of a shot to test the pistol's mechanical accuracy at 25 yards.
This wasn't taken out of thin air though. There have been threads on the P99 section in the Walther forum in the past, reporting that they have been getting some very good results with these pistols. I doubt all of them are lying.
I'll have to look to see if I can find some of them so that I can put up some links, but until then, here is one for the PPQ from the link in my last post:
http://i1138.photobucket.com/albums/n524/balance740/waltherspecs2.jpg
Here is one for the P99 from Gun Tests magazine:
http://www.lenaburgs.net/images/p99%20vs%20USP/p99%20vs%20USP%209mm%20Gun%20Tests%20May%2098.jpg
Here is another:
http://www.lenaburgs.net/images/p99%20vs%20USP/p99%209mm%20GWLE%20May%2098.jpg
There have been reports of 99-series pistols getting 1.5" groups at 25 yards with factory loads. Are you saying that the average group size from your M&P with this match barrel with most factory loads is 1" at 25 yards?
Yes.
I don't have a rest, and I'm not that good of a shot to test the pistol's mechanical accuracy at 25 yards.
You don't need to be (which is why you use a rest or sand bags).
This wasn't taken out of thin air though. There have been threads on the P99 section in the Walther forum in the past, reporting that they have been getting some very good results with these pistols. I doubt all of them are lying.
Yes, I understand that. I have shot some groups where all the rounds were inside of one hole. I figured chit happens and I got very lucky that day. If you look at the test, the majority of the groups shot are in the 2 + side. I think this is much more realistic (with 2.5"-3" groups being the norm for most folks).
The test target that came with my PPQ had a 5rd group of 2.5 inches at 15M (16yds).
Are you saying that the average group size from your M&P with this match barrel with most factory loads is 1" at 25 yards?
When we fit our barrels, I find that the guns mechanical accuracy is about .5-.75 (on average). Due to LARGE combat sights (that are geared toward speed and not accuracy), people will commonly be able to shoot somewhere between 2"-2.5" with CHEAP 115gr ammo (at least from the reports I have gotten back).
I am always hesitant to say what groups someone can get because I simple do not know what the ammo is that they are going to use and quite honestly, how good of a shooter are they?
For me, I have yet to shoot any "match" ammo through my gun to measure its capability (or even anything made by Hornady/Blackhills) so who knows what kind of accuracy my M&P is capable of. I do know that with 115gr UMC ammo (which I consider "OK" at best), I can consistently produce some 1" groups. With some Magtech 147gr (again not match), I have been able to shoot .5" groups.
Back to the PPQ, mine has ZERO side to side play in the hood and maybe .003 play in the length (guess from eyeballing it). So I think it is 100% possible that Walther can control this critical dimension to the point where it is almost like a match fit barrel! This is of course excellent.
One note about the article in G&A. I know this will come as a shock to some people, but it is ENTIRELY possible that Walther sent a custom fit barrel to the reviewer. This is a pretty common occurrence in the firearms world and why I kind of take these reviews with a grain of salt. YMMV
C4
No idea how this happened and I shouldn't be spending money or buying other platforms but:
I not only just bought 7 10 rd mags for the PPQ but then I also turned around and bought a stock M&P9 with the addition of Ameriglos and 5 10 rd mags.
Ill eventually try both but I will be trying a few thousand rds through the M&P first, while my HK45s will jealously sit around.
Yes, I understand that. I have shot some groups where all the rounds were inside of one hole. I figured chit happens and I got very lucky that day. If you look at the test, the majority of the groups shot are in the 2 + side. I think this is much more realistic (with 2.5"-3" groups being the norm for most folks).
I agree, but I assumed that you were speaking of your best groups when you mentioned that your M&P shot 1" groups at 25 yards, so I mentioned the best of what I've seen from reports of people who have shot the PPQ.
The test target that came with my PPQ had a 5rd group of 2.5 inches at 15M (16yds).
The test target that comes with these pistols is usually not what the pistol is capable of as far as mechanical accuracy. I don't know if the test shooters are in a rush or what, but the majority of people who have put these pistols in a rest have been able to get better groups than what was on the test target.
I assume it is done just to prove that the pistol will put 5 rounds within that circle. With the reports of accuracy issues with the M&P, I'm sure prospective buyers would like S&W to offer something similar as well. Personally, I think all manufacturers should do this, though out of the pistols I have owned, Walther, H&K, and CZ are the only manufacturers that have put one in the box.
When we fit our barrels, I find that the guns mechanical accuracy is about .5-.75 (on average).
This is excellent accuracy. Custom 1911 territory.
Does this prove that the accuracy issues were coming from a loose fitting barrel?
I am of the opinion that with Combat Oriented Sights, there is only so much accuracy one can squeeze out of a gun. As an example, I can put a gun in my Ransom rest and get it to shoot .5" groups. I, on the other hand can only get 2.5-3" groups off a rest (as I have to use the sights).
One of the reasons I put the Triangle RMR on my M&P is that I can zero the tip of the triangle and get MUCH better accuracy than I could with combat sights.
C4
I only need combat accuracy but I like to be confident that the gun is always capable of doing better than I can. If I shoot a 6 inch group from 10 yards or if I'm missing plates, I'd like to be certain that it's due to my lack of skill rather than wondering if it's the gun. I was willing to pay $200 for that certainty on my M&P and I don't regret it.
- Are the new M&Ps different in terms of accuracy? I've read errornet posts of some pretty accurate MPs recently.
- The BIG slide lock is unnecessary, and has me wondering. I HAVE heard a couple of people having premature lock on occasion. I know that in handling one, my support hand thumb side is right up against it, and it would be worse with gloves. The ONLY way I would ever know is to put 500 rds through it. If it ever happened at the wrong time, it would not be good.
- Handled a new MP and a new PPQ side by side today. Ergos are awesome on the PPQ - no doubt. The trigger on the PPQ, to me, with no safety, feels way too light. The MP was almost as crisp and a tad heavier - to me better for a combat gun - not a range pistol.
Just my thoughts.
I only need combat accuracy but I like to be confident that the gun is always capable of doing better than I can. If I shoot a 6 inch group from 10 yards or if I'm missing plates, I'd like to be certain that it's due to my lack of skill rather than wondering if it's the gun. I was willing to pay $200 for that certainty on my M&P and I don't regret it.
Agree and me too.
C4
- Are the new M&Ps different in terms of accuracy? I've read errornet posts of some pretty accurate MPs recently.
Many M&P's are accurate so it is luck of the draw.
- The BIG slide lock is unnecessary, and has me wondering. I HAVE heard a couple of people having premature lock on occasion. I know that in handling one, my support hand thumb side is right up against it, and it would be worse with gloves. The ONLY way I would ever know is to put 500 rds through it. If it ever happened at the wrong time, it would not be good.
This is really a training and or technique issue. Roll your thumb over & out of your support hand thumb.
- Handled a new MP and a new PPQ side by side today. Ergos are awesome on the PPQ - no doubt. The trigger on the PPQ, to me, with no safety, feels way too light. The MP was almost as crisp and a tad heavier - to me better for a combat gun - not a range pistol.
Just my thoughts.
The PPQ is above 4LBS so it is fine for CCW.
C4
The PPQ is above 4LBS so it is fine for CCW.
Who determined that, Grant? Since when and under whose authority 4 lbs became an acceptable safety threshold for a trigger pull on a concealed carry pistol?
If you looked at the Apex webpage, the DCAEK is intended for "consistent 5-5.5 lbs pull".
Glock states 5.5 lbs nominal pull with a standard connector, even though many samples give a higher pull, especially Gen4.
One needs to change a lot of springs on P30 to get slightly under 5 (with LEM). Mine, after Gray trigger work, was still at 6 lbs.
Seems like majority of industry wants the service triggers be above 5.
The only times I remember number "4" factoring in a trigger pull on carry weapons, those weapons were 1911s - that majority of people carry cocked and locked and with functional grip safety.
Carrying a 100% pre-cocked polymer gun with a short take up on a 4+ lbs trigger is no different than carrying a 1911 with thumb safety off and grip safety pinned.
...Carrying a 100% pre-cocked polymer gun with a short take up on a 4+ lbs trigger is no different than carrying a 1911 with thumb safety off and grip safety pinned.
Wrong. It's like of carrying a 1911 with thumb safety off and the grip safety fully functional along with a firing pin block and a two stage trigger. The PPQ has a trigger safety as does the Glock. It also has a safety plunger to block the striker from setting off a round unless the trigger is pulled and the slide fully in battery. Trigger pull for the PPQ is set to be 5.5lbs.
In fact, the thumb safety of the 1911 was added at the request of the Army as Browning fully intended the pistol to be carried loaded and hammer back, the shooter only needing to obtain the proper grip during the draw to de-activate the grip safety and press the trigger to fire.
4lbs is probably on the light side, however. Back in the day, a 4.5 trigger was considered the minimum safe and reliable pull weight for a 1911. A 5.5lbs trigger was considered to be better.
If I recall right, the military specification for the 1911, Garand and M14 called for a minimum trigger weight or 4.5lbs
Wrong. It's like of carrying a 1911 with thumb safety off and the grip safety fully functional along with a firing pin block and a two stage trigger. The PPQ has a trigger safety as does the Glock. It also has a safety plunger to block the striker from setting off a round unless the trigger is pulled and the slide fully in battery. Trigger pull for the PPQ is set to be 5.5lbs.
PPQ has an external safety that requires appropriate grip pressure to deactivate like 1911?
No PPQ has been reported to have 5.5 lbs pull. all I've heard is sub-5, as low as 4.25.
I don't see how trigger safety is relevant here. It takes 4+ lbs of trigger pressure to discharge that gun without doing anything else other than applying said pressure. Conventionally, such trigger pull weights have been seen in guns with active safeties dissociated from trigger such as thumb, grip or squeeze locker safeties. if 4+ lbs triggers with short take up and no trigger-dissociated manual safeties are cool, then I am decidedly uncool dude.
I got rid of my M&Ps for the PPQ
I don't have nearly the empirical evidence that most of you have, but I do know this
My M&Ps had the DCAEK and RAM in them...the one I carried also had a storm lake barrel in it
The Walther I carried is bone stock, save the added night sights
For me, personally, I achieved equal or better accuracy in my drills with the Walther....was it close? Yes...and it wasn't like the M&P was crap...The last class I took with Ernest Langdon my M&P performed great...I think the M&P is a fantastic gun....
However, to get the same result from the M&P I was getting from the Walther I had to spend an additional $400....almost the cost of buying another PPQ
I now have 3 9mm PPQs and carry them almost exclusively....l need more trigger time with the gun...I had tens of thousands of rounds through Glocks and M&Ps....getting my prosthetic shoulder has prevented me from replicating that pace with the PPQ..but I will get there...and certainly any difference right now in my results can be partially attributed to time with the platform....
Personally, though, to me I think it's important to compare apples to apples...and the box stock PPQ, in my highly unqualified and nowhere close to expert opinion, is much better than the M&P....and having to spend money to change the trigger, barrel, etc on the M&P to get it to where the PPQ practically is by itself just isn't a practical decision to me
Having said all that, maybe it is practical now, though, since you can't find any 9mm PPQs practically
(if someone has a source for them, I would like to buy a fourth)
PPQ has an external safety that requires appropriate grip pressure to deactivate like 1911?
No PPQ has been reported to have 5.5 lbs pull. all I've heard is sub-5, as low as 4.25.
I don't see how trigger safety is relevant here. It takes 4+ lbs of trigger pressure to discharge that gun without doing anything else other than applying said pressure. Conventionally, such trigger pull weights have been seen in guns with active safeties dissociated from trigger such as thumb, grip or squeeze locker safeties. if 4+ lbs triggers with short take up and no trigger-dissociated manual safeties are cool, then I am decidedly uncool dude.
Not to be argumentative, but who decided 5.5lbs was safe?
Back when Glock came out, people had these same discussions, until the pistol became popular enough. Even now, some people don't carry a Glock because of the "unsafe" trigger.
Hogsgunwild
10-18-12, 07:28
Not to be argumentative, but who decided 5.5lbs was safe?
Back when Glock came out, people had these same discussions, until the pistol became popular enough. Even now, some people don't carry a Glock because of the "unsafe" trigger.
+1.
What makes it safe is between your ears.
gtmtnbiker98
10-18-12, 07:37
Not to be argumentative, but who decided 5.5lbs was safe?
Back when Glock came out, people had these same discussions, until the pistol became popular enough. Even now, some people don't carry a Glock because of the "unsafe" trigger.You just have to be "professional enough."
This is really a training and or technique issue. Roll your thumb over & out of your support hand thumb.
C4
My shooting hand thumb does NOT give me a problem here. The fleshy part of my support hand/thumb joint is up against the big lever when holding the weapon properly. With the Glock or MP, and even the XD, it is close, but NOT like it is with the PPQ. This is my beef.
I can fix an accuracy problem in the MP with a barrel, or a BTF issue with the Glock with an extractor. You cannot fix this IF it is/would be a problem.
Apricotshot
10-18-12, 07:42
If you keep your booger picker off the trigger until you have sights on target and have decided to shoot, it shouldn't be an issue.
Not to be argumentative, but who decided 5.5lbs was safe?
Back when Glock came out, people had these same discussions, until the pistol became popular enough. Even now, some people don't carry a Glock because of the "unsafe" trigger.
Obviously, any notion of a "safe" pull weight would be arbitrary. Eventually though some parameter is going to be considered as a threshold. if Grant here says that over 4 lbs is safe, then why not over 3 or 2.5 lbs? I mean, even 18 oz. should be just fine, if "safety between ears" works and "booger is off the trigger", right?
I've no clue how Glock came up with 5.5. I've also heard that Glock has had a solid lead in number of NDs - now this maybe a BS, or maybe a function of high prevalence of Glocks. it does seem though that industry as a whole has accepted "about 5.5 for service". Even Walther itself rates PPQ at over 5, except it doesn't seem to reflect a reality. Lacking any knowledge of scientific proof, one can turn to a historical data and find that 4+ triggers have always been accompanied by manual safeties.
Could "over 5 for service striker pistols" be a dogma? It certainly can be. Well, it seems like there are a lot of volunteers ready to disprove it by carrying 4+ lbs striker fired pistols like PPQ. I'll be watching with interest from the sidelines.
Sights are in spec. I moved the rear sight so the left problem is gone. The VTAC sights are already tall, so I haven't been able to find one that is taller. So I'm left with it being a barrel problem. A lot of others have posted of this anomaly as well.
I have the same issue and am waiting for grants next batch of barrels. I am so effective with this platform and the fss kit that the price of the fitted barrel does not concern me one bit. Frankly I shoot it better than high end 1911s and don't foresee my self changing the platforms. I have never shot a platform that points so naturally to me.
During my first training session with the fss installed my my speed accuracy under 15 yards improved so drastically i pulled my g19 put of the bag just for comparison and saw my accuracy go back to my norms and my speed slow. I decided to try an iPsc tourney just for fun and realizes several times when I would try and speed up my hammered pairs i would take a short glance at the target not even sure if I had an actual sight picture and found my groups to be nearly touching afterwards. This platform works for me, to a point where I feel confident enough to defend myself in what will most likely in my situation be multiple armed attackers in the 10-15 yd range.
Obviously, any notion of a "safe" pull weight would be arbitrary. Eventually though some parameter is going to be considered as a threshold. if Grant here says that over 4 lbs is safe, then why not over 3 or 2.5 lbs? I mean, even 18 oz. should be just fine, if "safety between ears" works and "booger is off the trigger", right?
I've no clue how Glock came up with 5.5. I've also heard that Glock has had a solid lead in number of NDs - now this maybe a BS, or maybe a function of high prevalence of Glocks. it does seem though that industry as a whole has accepted "about 5.5 for service". Even Walther itself rates PPQ at over 5, except it doesn't seem to reflect a reality. Lacking any knowledge of scientific proof, one can turn to a historical data and find that 4+ triggers have always been accompanied by manual safeties.
Could "over 5 for service striker pistols" be a dogma? It certainly can be. Well, it seems like there are a lot of volunteers ready to disprove it by carrying 4+ lbs striker fired pistols like PPQ. I'll be watching with interest from the sidelines.
I agree with most of this, only I would point out that historically, before the Glock 17 was released, any pistol with a 5.5lb trigger came with a manual safety as well, and now, a Glock is considered "safe enough" for many people.
It is not easy to argue this topic. I'll just say that I don't personally find the PPQ unsafe for carry, in my case, and I don't see many scenarios where a PPQ would fire, and a Glock wouldn't, due to the (around 1lb) difference in the trigger pull weight between a PPQ and a stock Glock.
I wouldn't want a 2lb or 3lb trigger on my PPQ though, and if I felt the PPQ was unsafe, I wouldn't carry it no matter what the consensus was on this topic.
Who determined that, Grant? Since when and under whose authority 4 lbs became an acceptable safety threshold for a trigger pull on a concealed carry pistol?
Vickers and Hackathorn will often be found stating that a carry gun needs to have a trigger STARTING at 4LBS. I would agree with them.
If you looked at the Apex webpage, the DCAEK is intended for "consistent 5-5.5 lbs pull".
Glock states 5.5 lbs nominal pull with a standard connector, even though many samples give a higher pull, especially Gen4.
One needs to change a lot of springs on P30 to get slightly under 5 (with LEM). Mine, after Gray trigger work, was still at 6 lbs.
Seems like majority of industry wants the service triggers be above 5.
The only times I remember number "4" factoring in a trigger pull on carry weapons, those weapons were 1911s - that majority of people carry cocked and locked and with functional grip safety.
Carrying a 100% pre-cocked polymer gun with a short take up on a 4+ lbs trigger is no different than carrying a 1911 with thumb safety off and grip safety pinned.
Those companies are run by lawyers. So that is why they are constantly pushing the 5.5-6.5 weights.
Honestly, you should be comfortable carrying a 2.5LBS pull weight. Why? Because it is IRRELAVANT if the pull weight is 1LBS or 12LBS. Under stress (like someone trying to kill you), you won't notice either way. If you keep your finger away from the trigger, you never have anything to worry about. ;)
C4
Not to be argumentative, but who decided 5.5lbs was safe?
Back when Glock came out, people had these same discussions, until the pistol became popular enough. Even now, some people don't carry a Glock because of the "unsafe" trigger.
Right. NYPD would tell you that you need a 12LBS trigger in order to NOT shoot someone that you don't want too. Oh wait.......
Just sayin............
C4
My shooting hand thumb does NOT give me a problem here. The fleshy part of my support hand/thumb joint is up against the big lever when holding the weapon properly. With the Glock or MP, and even the XD, it is close, but NOT like it is with the PPQ. This is my beef.
I can fix an accuracy problem in the MP with a barrel, or a BTF issue with the Glock with an extractor. You cannot fix this IF it is/would be a problem.
Hmmm, do you have large (not to sound rude, but fat hands)?
C4
No matter what some experts says, I am pretty comfortable with a fairly long trigger pull AND a 5+ lbs trigger, a la glock. For ME, both trigger pull weight AND trigger travel distance are very important in a gun that has a DAO/safe action trigger. And the fact that the glock striker is only partially cocked before trigger pull is a very welcomed icing on the cake.
I KNOW I can shoot vey well, fast and accurate with this type of trigger. It just takes some practice. Of course it is easier to shoot accurately with a tuned 1911 trigger, or a glock with a 3.5 trigger, or a similar striker gun. But for a carry gun I like the added insurance, YMMV.
NO WAY I would carry a pistol with 2.5 lbs trigger, be it in a 1911 or a striker pistol.
It is not as simple as keeping your finger off the trigger, with striker pistols without a safety, since a bit of clothing can cause a ND when reholstering. My understanding is that Gunsite no longer allows the use of IWB holsters with Glocks (not sure if all striker pistols without a thumb safety) during courses, because of the number of draws and reholsters in a training environment, and the number of ND's they have had reholstering. At a Gunsite alumni shoot several years ago, a woman shot herself with her Glock when the corner of her shirt got in the triggerguard when reholstering.
With appendix carry, that obviously becomes a bigger concern, as what might be a superficial wound IWB on, or behind the hip, can be fatal with an appendix holster.
As much as trigger weight, I think trigger travel is a big factor, and, for example, would never carry a FSS M&P without a thumb safety in an appendix holster. My preference is an HK LEM, where you can positively ride the hammer with your thumb when reholstering, and look forward to the Gadget for the Glock which will allow a functionally equivalent method. I like the PPS in this regard, as you can use your thumb on the back of the slide in a similar fashion.
Of course, each person gets to make their own assessment, and their own rules. Just as I run a Glock OWB in a training environment, and will not appendix until the Gadget arrives, others may be happy running a PPQ appendix. Sure would have been nice if they made a PPS style arrangement so you could positively block the rear of the slide when reholstering.
It is not as simple as keeping your finger off the trigger, with striker pistols without a safety, since a bit of clothing can cause a ND when reholstering. My understanding is that Gunsite no longer allows the use of IWB holsters with Glocks (not sure if all striker pistols without a thumb safety) during courses, because of the number of draws and reholsters in a training environment, and the number of ND's they have had reholstering. At a Gunsite alumni shoot several years ago, a woman shot herself with her Glock when the corner of her shirt got in the triggerguard when reholstering.
True. When I teach new shooters how to draw and holster, I tell them to LOOK into the holster every time they put their gun away. Nothing wrong with that and doesn't make you lame or incompetent because you don't know exactly where your holster is.
With appendix carry, that obviously becomes a bigger concern, as what might be a superficial wound IWB on, or behind the hip, can be fatal with an appendix holster.
I am not a fan of AIWB carry for this very reason. Things go bad all the time. Do I want shot in my hip/leg or in my UNIT???
Of course, each person gets to make their own assessment, and their own rules. Just as I run a Glock OWB in a training environment, and will not appendix until the Gadget arrives, others may be happy running a PPQ appendix. Sure would have been nice if they made a PPS style arrangement so you could positively block the rear of the slide when reholstering.
Ditto and agree that follks need to go with their own comfort level on this stuff.
C4
Vickers and Hackathorn will often be found stating that a carry gun needs to have a trigger STARTING at 4LBS. I would agree with them.
Carry guns in general, I don't see a problem with the above. Nobody has complained about 1911 or P7 having 4 lbs triggers.
Specific carry guns...last I shot with Vickers, his G19 had a bone stock trigger, not even "-" connector. Take it as a clue, no?
BTW, even with "-" connector, both of my Glocks are above or at 5.
Honestly, you should be comfortable carrying a 2.5LBS pull weight. Why? Because it is IRRELAVANT if the pull weight is 1LBS or 12LBS. Under stress (like someone trying to kill you), you won't notice either way. If you keep your finger away from the trigger, you never have anything to worry about. ;)
C4
This is a hall of fame stuff. Even though we're talking about margins of safety, not feel of weight under duress, I give up, you win by a TKO.
Personally, though, to me I think it's important to compare apples to apples...and the box stock PPQ, in my highly unqualified and nowhere close to expert opinion, is much better than the M&P....and having to spend money to change the trigger, barrel, etc on the M&P to get it to where the PPQ practically is by itself just isn't a practical decision to me
Obviously that's a personal decision. But for me, if I end up with the pistol I want on the other end and spend less than $1000.00, I'm good with it. Because I would have spent a $1000 on an HK or over that for a 1911, so a Glock that does everything I want it to do for $800.00 is fine for me.
Also, what hasn't been mentioned much in this thread is availability of parts and after market support for the PPQ. I haven't looked that deeply into the pistol, but it seems like Glock, M&P and 1911s have more parts and after market components available for them as compared to any other gun. If you need parts, and you will at some point, can you get them quickly and for a reasonable price? What is the cost of magazines? Sight options are limited, so what if you want a particular sight that isn't available for your gun? What if you want a particular holster that isn't available for the gun?
I'm not saying it's a bad or wrong choice, but I am saying that there are a lot of considerations that some never include in their thought process until the gun is in hand.
True. When I teach new shooters how to draw and holster, I tell them to LOOK into the holster every time they put their gun away. Nothing wrong with that and doesn't make you lame or incompetent because you don't know exactly where your holster is.C4
Excellent point Grant. I think we talk and work a lot on finger on or off the trigger, but sometimes glance over this point.
I read a piece once that argued that length of trigger pull, more than weight, is related to NDs - the difference between 4, 5 and 6 pounds is fairly negligible.
I read the light-trigger carry concerns about the PPQ, but I feel that as its trigger doesn't measure all that much shorter than the M&P/Glock (vs a competition model or 1911) it isn't 'unsafe' when handled properly.
Carry guns in general, I don't see a problem with the above. Nobody has complained about 1911 or P7 having 4 lbs triggers.
Specific carry guns...last I shot with Vickers, his G19 had a bone stock trigger, not even "-" connector. Take it as a clue, no?
BTW, even with "-" connector, both of my Glocks are above or at 5.
LAV has guns in the 4 range (like the PPQ) so....
This is a hall of fame stuff. Even though we're talking about margins of safety, not feel of weight under duress, I give up, you win by a TKO.
Honestly, it isn't that big a deal. I know many folks in the industry that CARRY a 1911 with a 2.5LBS trigger. Would I do it, no, BUT with the gun sittin in your holster + keeping your finger out of the trigger guard until ready to fire, nothing bad will ever happen. Point is, if you are an unsafe person, no trigger pull weight will ever save you. If you are very competent in your gun handling skills, the trigger pull is also irrelevant (as you will never shoot yourself or someone else).
C4
I read a piece once that argued that length of trigger pull, more than weight, is related to NDs - the difference between 4, 5 and 6 pounds is fairly negligible.
I read the light-trigger carry concerns about the PPQ, but I feel that as its trigger doesn't measure all that much shorter than the M&P/Glock (vs a competition model or 1911) it isn't 'unsafe' when handled properly.
I think that is viable for two main reasons. A longer trigger pull allows the brain to POSSIBLY kick in and change what the finger is doing.
If there is a piece of clothing caught in the triggerguard as you holster, the longer trigger pull could POSSIBLY stop the gun from going off.
Since I have read reports of people shooting themselves with Glock's while holstering, I don't think it will actually save you.
Is a 4LBS trigger with a long pull safer than a 6LBS trigger with a shorter pull?? Can't say for sure. What I do know is that (typically) guns with longer trigger pulls are hard to shoot (for most people).
YMMV.
C4
I know many folks in the industry that CARRY a 1911 with a 2.5LBS trigger.
C4
I would really want to know who, mainly so I can stay away. Frankly, I'd be surprised if somebody truly "in industry" needed a 2.5 lbs 1911 to get good hits; maybe they need to take a class with LAV, he has awesome trigger control drills. On the other hand, being "in industry" doesn't guarantee immunity from wrong judgements. I know of somebody who were in industry, made a mistake (and the finger wasn't anywhere close to trigger), NDd and killed himself. There is a substantial difference between being reasonably safe and getting away with shit.
I would really want to know who, mainly so I can stay away. Frankly, I'd be surprised if somebody truly "in industry" needed a 2.5 lbs 1911 to get good hits; maybe they need to take a class with LAV, he has awesome trigger control drills.
LOL, well I can understand that. I have shot next to this person and have also shot their firearm. Not a big deal honestly. Keep your finger out of the trigger guard and look the gun into the holster. No worries for me.
The shooter is an excellent one (also).
On the other hand, being "in industry" doesn't guarantee immunity from wrong judgements. I know of somebody who were in industry, made a mistake (and the finger wasn't anywhere close to trigger), NDd and killed himself. There is a substantial difference between being reasonably safe and getting away with shit.
This is true. I believe that defensive handgun trigger pulls START at 4LBS.
My point though is that you should be always be safe (no matter the trigger pull weight). In fact, I bet if we could look into a crystal ball, more people have either shot themselves or innocent people with guns that have a 5LBS-6LBS trigger pull than guns that have BELOW a 4LBS trigger pull.
Food for thought...
C4
My point though is that you should be always be safe (no matter the trigger pull weight). In fact, I bet if we could look into a crystal ball, more people have either shot themselves or innocent people with guns that have a 5LBS-6LBS trigger pull than guns that have BELOW a 4LBS trigger pull.
Food for thought...
C4
To your last point the same perspective is analogous the rationale behind having properly sharpened knife. Your more apt to cut yourself with dull blade then you are a sharp one. Add in to that ones level of competency or lack their of rather, and you have a recipe for disaster. Its about the shooter, not the tool being utilized.
Lots of good info in this thread.
Obviously that's a personal decision. But for me, if I end up with the pistol I want on the other end and spend less than $1000.00, I'm good with it. Because I would have spent a $1000 on an HK or over that for a 1911, so a Glock that does everything I want it to do for $800.00 is fine for me.
Also, what hasn't been mentioned much in this thread is availability of parts and after market support for the PPQ. I haven't looked that deeply into the pistol, but it seems like Glock, M&P and 1911s have more parts and after market components available for them as compared to any other gun. If you need parts, and you will at some point, can you get them quickly and for a reasonable price? What is the cost of magazines? Sight options are limited, so what if you want a particular sight that isn't available for your gun? What if you want a particular holster that isn't available for the gun?
I'm not saying it's a bad or wrong choice, but I am saying that there are a lot of considerations that some never include in their thought process until the gun is in hand.
Valid points. The PPQ sounds like a well executed pistol by Walther. Having an accurate pistol with a nice trigger that needs nothing more than sights out of the box--very appealing. But for me there are additional considerations, and because of those, the M&P is still my platform. I don't mind having to upgrade the barrel and trigger, and the end result is a carry pistol that in my book is 2nd only to a tuned/quality 1911 for shootability and accuracy, and exceeds 1911's in areas like reliability, weight, capacity, affordability, and ease of user maintenance. Plus as mentioned, wide aftermarket parts support and availability. Overall, I prefer an accurate M&P with a good trigger to a PPQ, and I don't mind spending a few $$ extra to get there (as long as we're still sub $1K for a complete equipped pistol).
Also, the cost difference for a real-world pistol setup is not that significant and IMHO, should not greatly influence your decision. A PPQ plus night sights at G&R Tactical run $690, plus 4 PPQ 17rd mags (at about $56 each) is going to run around $914 total. An M&P plus night sights, DCAEK trigger, and a fitted SL barrel at G&R Tactical is $830, plus 4 mags ($20 each some online retailers like Botach), would run about $910 total. To me, these are both real-world setups for these pistols and the cost difference is NOT really significant.
The PPQ really sounds like a great pistol (and ready to go out of the box), but I still see some advantages in the M&P platform.
Valid points. The PPQ sounds like a well executed pistol by Walther. Having an accurate pistol with a nice trigger that needs nothing more than sights out of the box--very appealing. But for me there are additional considerations, and because of those, the M&P is still my platform. I don't mind having to upgrade the barrel and trigger, and the end result is a carry pistol that in my book is 2nd only to a tuned/quality 1911 for shootability and accuracy, and exceeds 1911's in areas like reliability, weight, capacity, affordability, and ease of user maintenance. Plus as mentioned, wide aftermarket parts support and availability. Overall, I prefer an accurate M&P with a good trigger to a PPQ, and I don't mind spending a few $$ extra to get there (as long as we're still sub $1K for a complete equipped pistol).
Other than sight options, what aftermarket parts made for the 1911, Glock, or M&P, would you like to see available for he PPQ?
I'd argue that the PPQ doesn't need extended controls, aftermarket barrels for accuracy, trigger modifications, etc.
I'd argue that the lack of aftermarket parts does not effect the PPQ as much as it does other pistols that don't have much aftermarket support. Other than sights, what part of the PPQ needs improvement?
A PPQ plus night sights at G&R Tactical run $690, plus 4 PPQ 17rd mags (at about $56 each) is going to run around $914 total.
There have been people getting PPQ pistols for less than $500 (with some as low as $472). Night sights from Trijicon, Meprolight, Dawson Precision, XS, etc. all cost less than $100 (most are around $80), with only the factory night sights costing around $150.
You can get MR mags for around $32 each. I have found factory Walther mags online for as low as $42 last I checked a few months ago.
I'd personally prefer ALL parts on a pistol to be available (both factory and aftermarket) for purposes of maintenance and upgrades.
Also, it would be nice to see current sources/links to where you could get all these claimed prices for a PPQ, today, as you can for the M&P pistol and mag prices I cited that are actually available.
Even if better PPQ prices are eventually available, it's missing the point to focus strictly on price. My point was that the price difference is still not going to be that large and should not be a primary factor in your decision between these pistols. Even with the great prices you cited (if actually available), we are talking less than $200 of total difference for a PPQ with night sights and 6 mags versus a fully decked out G&R M&P with same + DCAEK and barrel. If the M&P gives you a reliable pistol that you can shoot well and maintain over the long haul (as mine does), I'd argue that this type of price difference should not be the main factor driving your decision between these pistols. There's already too much harping about the price difference of adding a custom trigger and barrel, and you don't even need the DCAEK trigger to shoot an M&P accurately.
Valid points. The PPQ sounds like a well executed pistol by Walther. Having an accurate pistol with a nice trigger that needs nothing more than sights out of the box--very appealing. But for me there are additional considerations, and because of those, the M&P is still my platform. I don't mind having to upgrade the barrel and trigger, and the end result is a carry pistol that in my book is 2nd only to a tuned/quality 1911 for shootability and accuracy, and exceeds 1911's in areas like reliability, weight, capacity, affordability, and ease of user maintenance. Plus as mentioned, wide aftermarket parts support and availability. Overall, I prefer an accurate M&P with a good trigger to a PPQ, and I don't mind spending a few $$ extra to get there (as long as we're still sub $1K for a complete equipped pistol).
Also, the cost difference for a real-world pistol setup is not that significant and IMHO, should not greatly influence your decision. A PPQ plus night sights at G&R Tactical run $690, plus 4 PPQ 17rd mags (at about $56 each) is going to run around $914 total. An M&P plus night sights, DCAEK trigger, and a fitted SL barrel at G&R Tactical is $830, plus 4 mags ($20 each some online retailers like Botach), would run about $910 total. To me, these are both real-world setups for these pistols and the cost difference is NOT really significant.
The PPQ really sounds like a great pistol (and ready to go out of the box), but I still see some advantages in the M&P platform.
Why would you want 4-17rnd mags? Have you ever seen them? I have 2 for my PPQ...Believe me, you would'nt use them for CC..As they add at least a 1/2" to the length of the grip...Really, what you'd want is 4-15 rnd mags that fit flush...and are at least $10 cheaper....So that brings the price of a PPQ down to $874.... about a $44 difference in price...
Why would you want 4-17rnd mags? Have you ever seen them? I have 2 for my PPQ...Believe me, you would'nt use them for CC..As they add at least a 1/2" to the length of the grip...Really, what you'd want is 4-15 rnd mags that fit flush...and are at least $10 cheaper....So that brings the price of a PPQ down to $874.... about a $44 difference in price...
many would argue that even 6 magazines is too few to own on a firearm that you hope to be proficient with and carry/use in a self defense situation.
I think he used the 17 round magazines as a comparison since the m&p has 17 round mags?
I'd personally prefer ALL parts on a pistol to be available (both factory and aftermarket) for purposes of maintenance and upgrades.
S&W as well as Earl's Repair Service sell parts for 99-series pistols. I don't know about all the parts, but they have a selection available.
If you argue that there are more aftermarket parts available for the M&P, and that this is a good reason to go for an M&P, I would like to know what aftermarket parts for the M&P you would like to see available for the PPQ.
Also, it would be nice to see current sources/links to where you could get all these claimed prices for a PPQ, today, as you can for the M&P pistol and mag prices I cited that are actually available.
Cheaper Than Dirt was selling PPQ pistols for $472 not too long ago. Buds also sold them for around the same price. They don't seem to have any in stock at the moment, but (according to the website) neither does Grant.
http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=WAP00Q90&reference=/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi%3Fsearch%3Daction%26keywords%3Dppq%26searchstart%3D0%26template%3DPDGCommTemplates/FullNav/SearchResult.html
Walther is transitioning to becoming their own importer in the US at the moment, so availability of their products here will be short until they get things together.
Even if better PPQ prices are eventually available, it's missing the point to focus strictly on price. My point was that the price difference is still not going to be that large and should not be a primary factor in your decision between these pistols. Even with the great prices you cited (if actually available), we are talking less than $200 of total difference for a PPQ with night sights and 6 mags versus a fully decked out G&R M&P with same + DCAEK and barrel. If the M&P gives you a reliable pistol that you can shoot well and maintain over the long haul (as mine does), I'd argue that this type of price difference should not be the main factor driving your decision between these pistols. There's already too much harping about the price difference of adding a custom trigger and barrel, and you don't even need the DCAEK trigger to shoot an M&P accurately.
I'd suggest picking up the pistol that fits best, regardless of price.
But a stock PPQ is cheaper than a decked out M&P. It is up to the buyer to decide if this is important.
Other than sight options, what aftermarket parts made for the 1911, Glock, or M&P, would you like to see available for he PPQ?
I'd argue that the PPQ doesn't need extended controls, aftermarket barrels for accuracy, trigger modifications, etc.
I'd argue that the lack of aftermarket parts does not effect the PPQ as much as it does other pistols that don't have much aftermarket support. Other than sights, what part of the PPQ needs improvement?
I don't think the PPQ needs any upgrades (less sights). What you do need to be able to do is buy parts for wear items (guide rod assembly, trigger return spring and mag springs). These are all 5,000rd items. At this point, it is nearly impossible (as far as I can tell) to get any of these parts.
C4
many would argue that even 6 magazines is too few to own on a firearm that you hope to be proficient with and carry/use in a self defense situation.
I think he used the 17 round magazines as a comparison since the m&p has 17 round mags?
Correct on both counts. Also, as in previous posts, the main point was that relatively minor price differences should NOT be a major factor in deciding between two good pistol platforms.
Army Chief
10-18-12, 16:52
I've been trying to follow the logic on this from the very beginning, but I guess I am rapidly arriving at the point where I'm inclined to toss up my hands and say "who cares?"
I'm not a Glock guy -- wasn't really a polymer guy in any form, quite honestly. For me, that left the P30, which is a great (if costly) gun with a trigger than you constantly have to make excuses for; the M&P, which is a great gun that is something of an acquired taste, and one which you will likely want to tweak quite a bit before you find just the right balance; or the PPQ, which is a great gun that doesn't seem to need much of anything, save for a pair of night sights at some point.
The PPQs trigger is what sold me on it, though I also appreciate its inherent accuracy. I do not expect the Walther to become everyone's go-to gun, but there is something to be said for a pistol that offers exceptional performance without any need to engage in a lot of tinkering, extra-cost parts substitutions, and other "corrective" smithing techniques to get it to shoot consistently, accurately and without "feeling weird."
That's not really a slap at the M&P, but if I know that I'm going to have to spend x-hundred dollars on upgrades after-the-fact, then why wouldn't I just go out and buy an old Colt Commander, put it through a trusted smith's carry package, and call it a day? I thought the whole point of a modern polymer was that you could get something that works right from Day One. I think the PPQ meets that bar, but I'm not seeing much else out there that does right now.
AC
I don't think the PPQ needs any upgrades (less sights). What you do need to be able to do is buy parts for wear items (guide rod assembly, trigger return spring and mag springs). These are all 5,000rd items. At this point, it is nearly impossible (as far as I can tell) to get any of these parts.
I haven't checked for the availability of the trigger return spring or mag spring, but they don't need to be changed at such a short interval. The Magnum Research clone of the P99 uses the same recoil spring assembly as the P99/PPQ. They sell them for around $4 each, and were in stock as of last month.
Hopefully the supply of pistols and parts will pick up after Walther's import and service center gets up and running in the beginning of next year.
I've been trying to follow the logic on this from the very beginning, but I guess I am rapidly arriving at the point where I'm inclined to toss up my hands and say "who cares?"
I'm not a Glock guy -- wasn't really a polymer guy in any form, quite honestly. For me, that left the P30, which is a great (if costly) gun with a trigger than you constantly have to make excuses for; the M&P, which is a great gun that is something of an acquired taste, and one which you will likely want to tweak quite a bit before you find just the right balance; or the PPQ, which is a great gun that doesn't seem to need much of anything, save for a pair of night sights at some point.
AC
While it is an acquired taste, some think the LEM trigger is absolutely the best thing about the P30.
Correct on both counts. Also, as in previous posts, the main point was that relatively minor price differences should NOT be a major factor in deciding between two good pistol platforms.
Not a problem..I was just pointing out, that if you've ever seen the 17rnd mags in the gun, you probably would'nt use them for CC.. while not impossible to carry, they don't help anything either..
I haven't checked for the availability of the trigger return spring or mag spring, but they don't need to be changed at such a short interval. The Magnum Research clone of the P99 uses the same recoil spring assembly as the P99/PPQ. They sell them for around $4 each, and were in stock as of last month.
Hopefully the supply of pistols and parts will pick up after Walther's import and service center gets up and running in the beginning of next year.
Basically ALL guns need to have those items changed out in 5k or less.
C4
Basically ALL guns need to have those items changed out in 5k or less.
This may be a preference, but I don't think it is a necessity on all pistols. There are a few manufacturers that I know of that have recommended longer intervals for these parts.
As for the PPQ, I disagree about the TRS and mag spring.
Walther doesn't recommend anything other than recoil spring replacements at every 5k rounds. There have been very few reports of TRS breakages on the P99, and all of the ones that I've heard of have been of high round count examples with tens of thousands of rounds through them. The TRS on the PPQ is both thicker and heavier, so personally, I'd assume that it would last longer.
The mags/mag springs are pretty well designed, in that very rarely do people report of having one that has gone bad. Thinking about it now, I honestly can't remember the last time I've heard of someone that has had a mag spring go bad on one of them. These mags were originally designed to hold 16 rounds, but they downloaded them by one round in a revision to the mag design a few years after the P99 was released.
I've had a discussion with a 99-series armorer who has seen examples of these pistols get up to over 50k rounds, and the only recommendation he made as to parts replacement was to replace the recoil spring every 5k rounds.
This may be a preference, but I don't think it is a necessity on all pistols. There are a few manufacturers that I know of that have recommended longer intervals for these parts.
Glock used to say never and then went to 10k then of 5k and now are around 2-3k. PM basically extends the life of your pistol, reduces wear and tear and makes it as reliable as possible.
I cannot think of a single gun manufacturer that advocates NOT changing out springs and if they do, they are making an error IMHO.
C4
The common P30 LEM is heavy but shootable, but I'd want to convert it to a lighter version.
... The PPQ has an external safety that requires appropriate grip pressure to deactivate like 1911?
Are you saying the PPQ has a pinned grip safety? If I apply your logic to the following statement, you are-
...Carrying a 100% pre-cocked polymer gun with a short take up on a 4+ lbs trigger is no different than carrying a 1911 with thumb safety off and grip safety pinned.
It's plainly ridiculous to think you meant the PPQ has a "pinned grip safety". I used your example of comparing the PPQ to the 1911, not to imply the PPQ has a grip safety, bit to more accurately reflect how they compare-
Wrong. It's like carrying a 1911 with the thumb safety off and the grip safety fully functional along with a firing pin block and a two stage trigger. (corrected grammar errors for clarity.)
The trigger safety is relevant because that's what the PPQ (and other pistols) use. If that trigger safety is not pressed, the trigger cannot be pressed to release the striker. It performs the same function as the grip safety as the 1911 with one difference. Unlike the grip safety, the trigger safety isn't deactivated until the finger is placed on the trigger.
...No PPQ has been reported to have 5.5 lbs pull. all I've heard is sub-5, as low as 4.25.
Do more research. Several folks have reported that their PPQ triggers break consistently at 5.5lbs. The pull of the PPQ I've been shooting is definitely heavier than the 4.5lbs service rifle trigger I have. Yes, there have been reports of lighter pulls. One owner sent their PPQ back and the factory restored the pull to 5.5lbs. Not all are reporting lighter triggers
I thought the whole point of a modern polymer was that you could get something that works right from Day One. I think the PPQ meets that bar, but I'm not seeing much else out there that does right now.
AC
This, x 10. Well said AC, well said indeed.
Are you saying the PPQ has a pinned grip safety? If I apply your logic to the following statement, you are-
It's plainly ridiculous to think you meant the PPQ has a "pinned grip safety". I used your example of comparing the PPQ to the 1911, not to imply the PPQ has a grip safety, bit to more accurately reflect how they compare-
(corrected grammar errors for clarity.)
The trigger safety is relevant because that's what the PPQ (and other pistols) use. If that trigger safety is not pressed, the trigger cannot be pressed to release the striker. It performs the same function as the grip safety as the 1911 with one difference. Unlike the grip safety, the trigger safety isn't deactivated until the finger is placed on the trigger.
Do more research. Several folks have reported that their PPQ triggers break consistently at 5.5lbs. The pull of the PPQ I've been shooting is definitely heavier than the 4.5lbs service rifle trigger I have. Yes, there have been reports of lighter pulls. One owner sent their PPQ back and the factory restored the pull to 5.5lbs. Not all are reporting lighter triggers
What I said was that 1911 had two active mechanical safeties dissociated from a trigger, while PPQ had none of those.
Every report that I read that used a trigger scale reported pulls below 5, and as low as 4.25. Just reading this thread seem to support this, as there are multiple references and admissions of it being below 5. Many other reports never used anything objective, which is I guess is OK. My personal experience is highly subjective: the first time I handled one in LGS, I "NDd" it in dry fire, having just finished a practice session with a stock G19.
I applaud that single PPQ owner who sent his gun for a trigger pull increase. Seems like he and I have the same preferences; I just recently put a heavier connector in my Glock and Mass-compliant trs in my M&P.
Magic_Salad0892
10-19-12, 00:36
I thought the whole point of a modern polymer was that you could get something that works right from Day One.
To me it's always meant a pistol that was lighter, cost less, could go longer with less maintenence, and smaller in dimentions.
I don't understand why people keep bitching about having to tinker to get their pistols to run. Why are people willing to do it on a 1911, but not a Glock? After you get the gun to run, it'll still be lighter, hold more ammo, have less recoil, be more reliable suppressed, and actually work right when chambered in 9x19mm.
And at the end of the day you'll still have a cheaper gun than most 1911s.
Plus, the parts that'll get a Glock to function 100% (Gen4 guns) all together cost less than $100. M&P about the same, even though of late they've a much better chance of working right from the factory from what I understand. (My Glocks have been fine. Consistent strong ejection. Even though I do want my ejection port wall lowered at some point.)
And just for the sake of doing so I'll throw this comparison in.
Custom barrels:
Glock, M&P, and 1911 barrels all seem to cost the same (Jarvis, and Storm Lake) and all require a bit of fitting.
Extractors:
M&Ps don't need these fixed. Also keep in mind a Glock extractor doesn't need to be tuned (just needs to be the right generation apperantly) but
$60 for the APEX Glock kit. A Wilson Combat bulletproof 1911 extractor runs about $32 on Midway. Needs to be tuned.
Ejectors:
A Glock ejector is about 7 bucks from Glockmeister, isn't part of the frame, is easily removed, and doesn't need to be tuned. You also don't have to worry about it being glued or pinned.
Trigger work:
A Glock has a quite servicable trigger for about $10.
Apex parts for M&P run from $22-$160 or so.
A 1911 would be about the same, and needs to be tuned/fit.
So to be honest. You're not really LOSING anything by going with a Glock, or M&P. But you still GAIN a lot by putting in the work.
Plus a Glock is still easier to conceal than a 1911 IMHO), because 1911 grips are thicker than shit, no matter what anybody says.
...I don't understand why people keep bitching about having to tinker to get their pistols to run. Why are people willing to do it on a 1911, but not a Glock?
What put Glock on the map in the first place is that it was supposed to run right out of the box and didn't need tinkering. 1911s don't need as much tinkering as most folks think.
Plus a Glock is still easier to conceal than a 1911 IMHO), because 1911 grips are thicker than shit, no matter what anybody says.
Man, what kind of grip panels are you using that makes the 1911 so dang thick??
What I said was that 1911 had two active mechanical safeties dissociated from a trigger, while PPQ had none of those...
The trigger safety is an improvement over the grip safety. With the finger off the trigger, the PPQ is safer than the 1911. With the finger on the trigger, the PPQ shooter still has to take up the first stage before firing. The trigger safety is is more positive. If the hand of the shooter is off on some 1911s, the grip safety may not be deactivated.
The PPQ is not a dangerous design and is safe to carry
I don't understand why people keep bitching about having to tinker to get their pistols to run. Why are people willing to do it on a 1911, but not a Glock?
I'm not willing to do it on a 1911.
I don't think it should be acceptable to have brand new "broken" products that the consumers have to fix. Products that have an important purpose. I don't want to play guess-and-check to find out issues on a brand new product.
I don't understand why this is acceptable to some people with their brand new pistols, but not their vehicles, hand tools, home appliances, etc.
It is not the consumer bitching, it the manufacturer putting out substandard products. This should not be acceptable, IMO.
Apricotshot
10-19-12, 07:24
I'm not willing to do it on a 1911.
I don't think it should be acceptable to have brand new "broken" products that the consumers have to fix. Products that have an important purpose. I don't want to play guess-and-check to find out issues on a brand new product.
I don't understand why this is acceptable to some people with their brand new pistols, but not their vehicles, hand tools, home appliances, etc.
It is not the consumer bitching, it the manufacturer putting out substandard products. This should not be acceptable, IMO.
Agreed.
Urban_Redneck
10-19-12, 08:12
I'm not willing to do it on a 1911.
I don't think it should be acceptable to have brand new "broken" products that the consumers have to fix. Products that have an important purpose. I don't want to play guess-and-check to find out issues on a brand new product.
I don't understand why this is acceptable to some people with their brand new pistols, but not their vehicles, hand tools, home appliances, etc.
It is not the consumer bitching, it the manufacturer putting out substandard products. This should not be acceptable, IMO.
Like Detroit in the 80's... until it measurably affects sales I expect little change.
I'm not willing to do it on a 1911.
I don't think it should be acceptable to have brand new "broken" products that the consumers have to fix. Products that have an important purpose. I don't want to play guess-and-check to find out issues on a brand new product.
This really depends on the 1911 you buy. As a general rule, a WC built 1911 (especially currently produced ones) will run right out of the gate. If you are going to buy an $800-$1500 1911, the possibility of having to mess with it goes up dramatically IMHO.
If we change the subject back to the M&P, I started shooting this gun right after it came out. Trigger was gritty, no reset and shot minute of barn (past 15yds). Honestly speaking, coming from high end 1911's, the trigger tried my patience. I forced myself (via lots of training classes and practice) to overcome it and am now glad I did because it taught me to shoot guns to RECOVERY and NOT reset.
In regards to the accuracy, most training and practice is done inside of 15yds so the accuracy never really bothered me UNTIL we would do walk back drills or shot for accuracy past 15yds. I was generally the first one out. Good ego check and made me a better shooter.
C4
I'm not willing to do it on a 1911.
I don't think it should be acceptable to have brand new "broken" products that the consumers have to fix. Products that have an important purpose. I don't want to play guess-and-check to find out issues on a brand new product.
I don't understand why this is acceptable to some people with their brand new pistols, but not their vehicles, hand tools, home appliances, etc.
It is not the consumer bitching, it the manufacturer putting out substandard products. This should not be acceptable, IMO.
is this in reference to ejection problems with Glocks? because if so, I agree. I've sent my 12 o'clock ejecting glock's back to glock with no change in outcome.
I'll continue to use/buy m&ps and PPQs, until my late gen 3 and gen 4s get fixed. I thought a FDE glock 19 gen 4 purchased in august would be free of ejection problems, but it's not the case...
it taught me to shoot guns to RECOVERY and NOT reset.
C4
I'm not familiar with the term. can you tell me what you mean by this?
The trigger safety is an improvement over the grip safety. With the finger off the trigger, the PPQ is safer than the 1911. With the finger on the trigger, the PPQ shooter still has to take up the first stage before firing. The trigger safety is is more positive. If the hand of the shooter is off on some 1911s, the grip safety may not be deactivated.
The PPQ is not a dangerous design and is safe to carry
Using the framework of appendix carry, the trigger safety may be better than a grip safety at making the pistol fire when you want it to, but a grip safety is better at avoiding the gun firing when you don't want it to, like when reholstering and a bit of clothing gets in the trigger guard. Of course, there is a better solution yet -- called a hammer.
I'm not familiar with the term. can you tell me what you mean by this?
I cannot take credit for the phrase. I heard it from a retired LE armorer and it made perfect sense to me.
When you shoot to trigger reset, you are LOOKING for the point where the sear resets. Shooting to trigger recovery basically means that you AREN'T trying to find the exact spot where the sear resets. This allows you to shoot in a more rhythmic manner which means that you can shoot faster AND more accurately.
As I have stated many time on here, I am at the point where I believe that hard reset of the Glock trigger is a detriment to new shooters ability to run their guns at a faster/more accurate pace. I see it in every single class I attend or teach.
This is of course just my opinion so take from it what you will.
C4
FWIW, as far as spare parts go, I have ordered spares from Earl's Repair service...I've gotten spare recoil spring assemblies, trigger return strings, firing pin assemblies, and extractor springs from them...
My understanding is, also, that the recoil assembly for the magnum research MR9 also fits the PPQ...the MR9 is a p99 clone
The trigger safety is an improvement over the grip safety.
Still debatable. The purpose of safety is to reduce a possibility of an ND. Outside of drop safety issues, the NDs come from inadvertent finger-triggering or from obstruction/object getting into a trigger guard. With a complete grip on a gun, neither trigger safety nor grip safety will prevent a discharge due to either of the above. With an incomplete grip, trigger safety still will not help, while grip safety might. One can use the properties of 1911 grip safety to gain additional active control. Pushing up on a beavertail with thumb engages grip safety and allows shooter to have an active control over it - which is what I do when reholster 1911 without ambi safety in an appendix position.
The PPQ is not a dangerous design and is safe to carry
I never said PPQ was a dangerous design. From safety standpoint, I don't see it being different from a Glock that I had carried for 2 years. It is an execution of a design in regards to an actual trigger pull weight that concerns me.
I cannot take credit for the phrase. I heard it from a retired LE armorer and it made perfect sense to me.
When you shoot to trigger reset, you are LOOKING for the point where the sear resets. Shooting to trigger recovery basically means that you AREN'T trying to find the exact spot where the sear resets. This allows you to shoot in a more rhythmic manner which means that you can shoot faster AND more accurately.
As I have stated many time on here, I am at the point where I believe that hard reset of the Glock trigger is a detriment to new shooters ability to run their guns at a faster/more accurate pace. I see it in every single class I attend or teach.
This is of course just my opinion so take from it what you will.
C4
Grant is absolutely right. When I was shown to shoot this way, it really helped in speed and accuracy.
I was explained it as relaxing the trigger finger after the shot just enough to allow you to "skip" the reset and you are automatically back at the wall, ready to break the next shot.
In this (better) shooting style, a tactile reset is completely irrelevant.
I will say that I find Glocks the easiest to shoot this way though. To me, I think it has to do with the amount of force with which the trigger returns to the point of reset. My M&Ps (old trigger) are a bit weaker in this aspect, which seems to make me slower.
On my APEXd M&P, the lighter trigger break can be tricky when going back to shooting it, but I love the short reset and light break when taking quick shots. Speed and accuracy follow. I could see the APEX FSS being the cream of the crop. I absolutely do not question that Grant is probably correct that a tricked out M&P is the best choice.
As far as Glocks, when I changed my shooting style, I found I was perfectly fine with (and actually slightly prefer) the earlier (2pin) Gen 3 triggers with some break in or polish over a fancy trigger kit. My EDC G19 with this trigger is my most consistent shooter in all styles of pistol shooting, with the APEX DCAEK M&P9fs being a close second. I am faster with the M&P, but can get "reckless" a little easier compared to the Glock.
Don't own a PPQ, so I won't get into that. I do have and shoot often enough a good amount of Glocks and M&Ps - all in 9mm or .45 in different sizes / models. Some have trigger work, but most are OEM or only a slight polish.
The new M&P triggers are a definite step in the right direction, and it has absolutely nothing to do with a more tactile reset, but instead the stronger trigger return spring and a less mushy trigger break is what makes it a nice upgrade.
Way too much info above (hope it helps someone though), but in short - I'd catch a class with Grant or any other VSM instructor (where I learned it) to learn this style of shooting if you can. There are some easy ways to practice it with dry fire, and it's quite easy to learn. It can just be hard to break that habit of waiting on the reset when first learning it. I can totally see why Grant believes it is hardest for Glock shooters to learn because of the very tactile reset they are so use to. But once it is learned, I personally prefer the heavier trigger return on Glocks for this shooting style.
Magic_Salad0892
10-19-12, 20:28
I'm not willing to do it on a 1911.
I don't think it should be acceptable to have brand new "broken" products that the consumers have to fix. Products that have an important purpose. I don't want to play guess-and-check to find out issues on a brand new product.
I don't understand why this is acceptable to some people with their brand new pistols, but not their vehicles, hand tools, home appliances, etc.
It is not the consumer bitching, it the manufacturer putting out substandard products. This should not be acceptable, IMO.
I get what you're saying. That may have been what put Glock on the market, but most guns will STILL be better with a little bit of tinkering. No matter the brand. But the way I see it, even if I have to put a little work in... if the end product is still better than anything else out there for me.... then I'll gladly do it.
Earlier today I picked up the PPQ that my LGS found for me ($525 +tax). Nice gun. I haven't shot it, only have about 50 dry-fire pulls on it. Then I took some measurements with my Lyman electronic trigger gauge:
M&P 9L w/DCAEK (stock trigger return spring) - 4 lb 6 oz
Glock 19 with LW 3.5 conncector (about 1000 rounds) - 5 lbs 9 oz
Stock PPQ 9mm (50 dry fires) - 5 lb 7 oz
Some observations:
The grip on the PPQ makes the G19 grip feel kind of blocky. It makes the M&P feel even more so.
I find that with my normal grip, my thumb rests below the slide stop lever
Takedown of the PPQ is conventional, unlike the M&P which is a little wonky.
The PPQ "feels" like a more substantial gun than either the Glock or the M&P. Very subjective, but related (for me) to how much it rattles, smoothness of action...stuff like that.
The PPQ does indeed have a nice crisp let-off. The Glock is quite a bit creepier by comparison. Neither one is as good as the M&P with the DCAEK. That pistol has a lighter trigger because I elected not to install the heavier trigger return spring that came with the Apex kit.
PPQ without magazine weighs 1 lb 5.2 oz. My Glock 19 weighs 1 lb 5.4 oz. The M&P (long slide) weighs 1 lb 9.2 oz. This kind of surprised me. The PPQ feels like it would be heavier than the Glock.
I found a nice De Santis Speed Scabbard at Amazon for $52, no tax or shipping. It fits the PPQ well, retains it well too, for a leather holster. I'll probably make a Kydex holster for it this weekend.
The gun comes with two magazines and some kind of hokey loader that looks like the one that came with my Glock. It will have to work pretty damn well for me to throw away my MagLuLa. I have a couple of 17-round mags on the way.
Just first impressions without having shot the PPQ at all.
Magic_Salad0892
10-19-12, 20:42
Earlier today I picked up the PPQ that my LGS found for me ($525 +tax). Nice gun. I haven't shot it, only have about 50 dry-fire pulls on it. Then I took some measurements with my Lyman electronic trigger gauge:
M&P 9L w/DCAEK (stock trigger return spring) - 4 lb 6 oz
Glock 19 with LW 3.5 conncector (about 1000 rounds) - 5 lbs 9 oz
Stock PPQ 9mm (50 dry fires) - 5 lb 7 oz
Some observations:
The grip on the PPQ makes the G19 grip feel kind of blocky. It makes the M&P feel even more so.
I find that with my normal grip, my thumb rests below the slide stop lever
Takedown of the PPQ is conventional, unlike the M&P which is a little wonky.
The PPQ "feels" like a more substantial gun than either the Glock or the M&P. Very subjective, but related (for me) to how much it rattles, smoothness of action...stuff like that.
The PPQ does indeed have a nice crisp let-off. The Glock is quite a bit creepier by comparison. Neither one is as good as the M&P with the DCAEK. That pistol has a lighter trigger because I elected not to install the heavier trigger return spring that came with the Apex kit.
PPQ without magazine weighs 1 lb 5.2 oz. My Glock 19 weighs 1 lb 5.4 oz. The M&P (long slide) weighs 1 lb 9.2 oz. This kind of surprised me. The PPQ feels like it would be heavier than the Glock.
I found a nice De Santis Speed Scabbard at Amazon for $52, no tax or shipping. It fits the PPQ well, retains it well too, for a leather holster. I'll probably make a Kydex holster for it this weekend.
The gun comes with two magazines and some kind of hokey loader that looks like the one that came with my Glock. It will have to work pretty damn well for me to throw away my MagLuLa. I have a couple of 17-round mags on the way.
Just first impressions without having shot the PPQ at all.
I must have missed something. You're saying a PPQ is LIGHTER than a G19?
I've never weighed the two, so if you're right...
That's amazing.
I must have missed something. You're saying a PPQ is LIGHTER than a G19?
I've never weighed the two, so if you're right...
That's amazing.
I re-weighed...
http://SSEquine.net/g19 weight.jpg http://SSEquine.net/ppq weight.jpg
Magic_Salad0892
10-19-12, 21:47
I re-weighed...
http://SSEquine.net/g19 weight.jpg http://SSEquine.net/ppq weight.jpg
Wow... The size of a G19. Weighs less. More accurate (from factory). Less tinkering. 17 round magazines available. Dawson sights available...
... Goddamn...
Earlier today I picked up the PPQ that my LGS found for me ($525 +tax). Nice gun. I haven't shot it, only have about 50 dry-fire pulls on it. Then I took some measurements with my Lyman electronic trigger gauge:
M&P 9L w/DCAEK (stock trigger return spring) - 4 lb 6 oz
Glock 19 with LW 3.5 conncector (about 1000 rounds) - 5 lbs 9 oz
Stock PPQ 9mm (50 dry fires) - 5 lb 7 oz
Some observations:
The grip on the PPQ makes the G19 grip feel kind of blocky. It makes the M&P feel even more so.
I find that with my normal grip, my thumb rests below the slide stop lever
Takedown of the PPQ is conventional, unlike the M&P which is a little wonky.
The PPQ "feels" like a more substantial gun than either the Glock or the M&P. Very subjective, but related (for me) to how much it rattles, smoothness of action...stuff like that.
The PPQ does indeed have a nice crisp let-off. The Glock is quite a bit creepier by comparison. Neither one is as good as the M&P with the DCAEK. That pistol has a lighter trigger because I elected not to install the heavier trigger return spring that came with the Apex kit.
PPQ without magazine weighs 1 lb 5.2 oz. My Glock 19 weighs 1 lb 5.4 oz. The M&P (long slide) weighs 1 lb 9.2 oz. This kind of surprised me. The PPQ feels like it would be heavier than the Glock.
I found a nice De Santis Speed Scabbard at Amazon for $52, no tax or shipping. It fits the PPQ well, retains it well too, for a leather holster. I'll probably make a Kydex holster for it this weekend.
The gun comes with two magazines and some kind of hokey loader that looks like the one that came with my Glock. It will have to work pretty damn well for me to throw away my MagLuLa. I have a couple of 17-round mags on the way.
Just first impressions without having shot the PPQ at all.
Good info, I'd have no problem carrying PPQ with a 5 lb7 oz trigger.
One thing that got my attention: G19 with 1000 rounds trigger job and 3.5 LW connector still comes in over 5.5 lbs? That must be one of heaviest pull Glocks I've heard of.
Using the framework of appendix carry, the trigger safety may be better than a grip safety at making the pistol fire when you want it to, but a grip safety is better at avoiding the gun firing when you don't want it to, like when reholstering and a bit of clothing gets in the trigger guard. Of course, there is a better solution yet -- called a hammer.
When reholstering a 1911, you are pressing the grip safety and it's ready to fire if the trigger is pressed unless you activate the thumb safety.
When reholstering the PPQ, the finger is off the trigger and there is a layer of safety. Yes, clothing can get caught and press both the trigger safety and the trigger. Should not the shooter make sure the holster is clear and that it is safe to insert the pistol? I suppose the shooter could forget. I suppose the shooter could also forget to activate the thumb safety of a 1911 as well. Or the thumb safety could get wiped off. Or it could fail. Or the shooter could lower the hammer which could lead to an ND. Or The shooter could call Central Control to be walked through a pistol specific check list before drawing, get cleared to engage bad guys, and get walked through yet another check list before reholstering.
Or shooters can realize every handgun has it's pros & cons and take steps to ensure safe responsible use
Good info, I'd have no problem carrying PPQ with a 5 lb7 oz trigger.
One thing that got my attention: G19 with 1000 rounds trigger job and 3.5 LW connector still comes in over 5.5 lbs? That must be one of heaviest pull Glocks I've heard of.
No trigger job on the Glock, only the drop-in Lone Wolf connector. It's a little lighter pull, but is crisper than when it was stock. I don't recall what the starting pull weight was. Something over 6 lbs but I can't remember the number with the stock Glock connector.
Trigger pull notwithstanding, I have no trouble shooting that Glock as well as the M&P with the Apex kit.
KiloSierra
10-20-12, 03:40
Good info, I'd have no problem carrying PPQ with a 5 lb7 oz trigger.
One thing that got my attention: G19 with 1000 rounds trigger job and 3.5 LW connector still comes in over 5.5 lbs? That must be one of heaviest pull Glocks I've heard of.
Our old G35's had the factory 4.5 lb connectors in them. After a few thousand rounds they changed from a measured 4.75-6 lbs to anywhere between 8-20 lbs measured.
When reholstering a 1911, you are pressing the grip safety and it's ready to fire if the trigger is pressed unless you activate the thumb safety.
When reholstering the PPQ, the finger is off the trigger and there is a layer of safety. Yes, clothing can get caught and press both the trigger safety and the trigger. Should not the shooter make sure the holster is clear and that it is safe to insert the pistol? I suppose the shooter could forget. I suppose the shooter could also forget to activate the thumb safety of a 1911 as well. Or the thumb safety could get wiped off. Or it could fail. Or the shooter could lower the hammer which could lead to an ND. Or The shooter could call Central Control to be walked through a pistol specific check list before drawing, get cleared to engage bad guys, and get walked through yet another check list before reholstering.
Or shooters can realize every handgun has it's pros & cons and take steps to ensure safe responsible use
My point was a trigger safety offers almost no additional protection in avoiding a ND from clothing getting in the trigger guard when reholstering. I prefer a hammer, to ride with my thumb, like on the HK LEM, the upcoming Gadget for the Glock, or even the PPS arrangement. Risk in an actual shooting is unavoidable, but shooting yourself training is a bad thing.
Everyone is free to make their own choices as to what is acceptable to them. You may find the PPQ acceptable to carry AIWB, but no thoughtful person would consider its relatively short, light trigger without a hammer, thumb safety or Gadget feature the ideal arrangement for AIWB.
Everyone is free to make their own choices as to what is acceptable to them. You may find the PPQ acceptable to carry AIWB, but no thoughtful person would consider its relatively short, light trigger without a hammer, thumb safety or Gadget feature the ideal arrangement for AIWB.
I measure a 7mm pre-travel and a 5 lb 7 oz trigger pull on my PPQ. This makes it unsafe for AIWB carry? (In your opinion?)
Given the potential consequences of an ND when appendix carrying, I wouldn't try to answer that for anyone else. Since I am carrying the P30 and HK45 appendix now, I have the benefit of a relatively long, heavier first pull with a hammer to positively ride when reholstering. In the past, I carried a Glock appendix, but tried to mitigate risk by practicing with a OWB holster worn conventionally. Someone described appendix as being like handling a poisonous snake. On day one, you are terrified, and get progressively more accustomed to handling the snake -- until it bites you.
I'll admit to missing the appendix carry part. I'm not sure I'd do so even with a DAO revolver with a manual safety. Regardless of pistol type, when there is a discussion about appendix carry, I think of the story of my Uncle who bragged how the ladies loved a man who packed his pistol Mexican carry style, that is appendix IWB sans holster. Until the fateful day he had a negligent discharge showing off to a redhead. Now he can't get a date because he has a reputation for going off half cocked
I'll admit to missing the appendix carry part.
Ah...me too. Never mind. Irrelevant concern to me. If I were going to carry IWB without a holster, I'd do it SOB.
I measure a 7mm pre-travel and a 5 lb 7 oz trigger pull on my PPQ. This makes it unsafe for AIWB carry? (In your opinion?)
As this thread has already shown, opinions what's safe and what isn't are highly personal and subjective. For those dudes who carry Glocks with negative connectors in AIWB, and I know of many who do, the 7mm 5.5 lbs PPQ shouldn't present any concerns.
Then there are dudes like GJM, myself and others who want hammer-fired guns, or their striker "equivalents" - Gadget, protruding partially cocked strikers a'la PPS - for the "junk" carry.
I find AIWB to be a great litmus test of one's beliefs what constitutes "safe enough gun". I found myself changing to heavier connectors and bending the leaf springs forward in no time. YMMV.
In my opinion, finding a pistol safe enough to be comfortable with appendix carry is like trying to find a car safe enough to be comfortable driving north on I-5 south through L.A.
Apricotshot
10-20-12, 20:41
Holy **** this thread got off track.
mikelowrey
10-20-12, 23:46
Right. NYPD would tell you that you need a 12LBS trigger in order to NOT shoot someone that you don't want too. Oh wait.......
Just sayin............
C4
Tell me about it, I feel my finger is going to drop every time I pull the trigger... I wish I could have a 5.5 lbs trigger pull.
I got out to shoot the PPQ today. I shot it with my Glock 19 (5.5 lb trigger pull) and my M&P 9L (4.5 lb trigger pull). By no means should anyone consider this any kind of "review". They're just my non-expert observations.
After some slow fire with the PPQ to warm up, I found it to be extremely accurate from 7 yards and easy to keep within a 4 inch circle. I put it on par with the G19 and slightly better than the M&P. I attribute that largely to the crappy stock sights I have on the M&P.
I tried to pay close attention to muzzle flip with each of the three guns. Maybe I could perceive a little more with the PPQ, but I didn't find it in any way intrusive. I found it easy to control, comfortable grip. A lot has been made of the pre-travel and reset on that gun. I noticed nothing. I confess I don't feel for the reset when I shoot, I just let it out to the end of its travel trying to remember to not let my finger come off the trigger.
So, another thread here on M4C prompted me to try some rapid shooting for time. I've never shot IDPA or USPA, and that style of shooting is foreign to me. I've never shot accuracy for time. I do practice rapid shooting, but have always been satisfied with "that seemed pretty fast". Below is representative of what I (inexpertly) achieved. 7 yards, 6 shots from low ready. Timed from Surefire app on iPhone.
PPQ -- 2.85 seconds
http://SSEquine.net/ppq.JPG
M&P 9L -- 2.75 seconds
http://SSEquine.net/smith.JPG
Glock 19 -- 2.39 seconds
http://SSEquine.net/glock.JPG
Picked up a PPQ9 today at Academy Sports - only place I've been able to find one. Not the cheapest option ($559) but not terrible.
Love the way it feels and the trigger in dry-fire, even the stock sights are not an abomination. The large backstrap seems like it will keep my strong-hand thumb from accidentally activating the slide release. Trigger did not feel particularly light vs. Glocks, seemed heavier than the M&Ps (if only because those triggers were rather mushy) I've shot.
No pictures, I dropped it off to let my father see how it feels for him, range visit tomorrow.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.