Accuracy questions

[Chetc]

was at the range today trying out a few loads in my glock 17 and my Ruger SR9C, i am a little under the weather on the results, at 12 15 yds both guns shoot identical standing off hand shooting, i went back to 25 yds off the bags and the ruger was almost shooting half the group size as the Glock 17, what am i missing, i sure thought it would be the other way around. any ideas

Chet

 

[Zerodefect]

Trigger control and sight quality most likely.

Mechanically, the Glock can out shoot a 1911, but it hasn't the great trigger that's needed for such. Try this, also try it with a Lonewolf 3.5 connector and the stock connector as well:
http://zevtechnologies.com/Products...-Trigger-Ultimate-Kit-4th-Gen-40-Blk-Blk.html

 

[Chetc]

about the triggers, the ruger is a bit harder and is a stock trigger, the Glock, which has the Ghost Evo Elite set at a smooth pull around 3 or 4 lbs

Chet

 

[ljnowell]

Trigger control and sight quality most likely.

Mechanically, the Glock can out shoot a 1911, but it hasn't the great trigger that's needed for such. Try this, also try it with a Lonewolf 3.5 connector and the stock connector as well:
http://zevtechnologies.com/Products...-Trigger-Ultimate-Kit-4th-Gen-40-Blk-Blk.html

I'm curious where you get the info that "mechanically a Glock can outshoot a 1911?"

What 1911 are we comparing this to? I would love to see the story behind this.

 

[tarosean]

I'm curious where you get the info that "mechanically a Glock can outshoot a 1911?"

What 1911 are we comparing this to? I would love to see the story behind this.

+1

Although he is probably alluding to the fact that a glocks locking lug has more surface area on lockup than a 1911's. Yet, that is only part of the equation.

None of my Glocks can touch my 1911's and the Glock's have 2# competition triggers and real sights, even benched!

There is a reason the term "Combat Accuracy" emerged with the popularity of poly pistols.

 

[Bobson]

the ruger was almost shooting half the group size as the Glock 17, what am i missing, i sure thought it would be the other way around

Without practice to change it, most everyone will shoot some guns better than others. What size groups are we talking about, exactly? I mean, if you're shooting 1.5" groups with the Ruger and 3" groups with the Glock, I'd say you're in good shape. OTOH, if they're 5" and 10" respectively, something can be done to remedy both groups.

I'm not sure what either gun is capable under perfect conditions (say, from a vice), but they should be very close to equal in terms of accuracy. I would expect a slight edge to the Glock. A full mag on a 3"x5" notecard from 25 yards should be possible with practice, from both guns, when firing reasonably slowly and with controlled aim.

 

[Bobson]

There is a reason the term "Combat Accuracy" emerged with the popularity of poly pistols.

No disrespect, but this is a silly thing to say.

I'm not aware of any polymer pistol from any reputable manufacturer that isn't capable of very respectable accuracy. Certainly far and away greater than "minute of man" at any normal pistol range.

Do you have any specific examples of a popular poly pistol that's only "combat accurate?"

 

[Zerodefect]

+1

Although he is probably alluding to the fact that a glocks locking lug has more surface area on lockup than a 1911's. Yet, that is only part of the equation.

None of my Glocks can touch my 1911's and the Glock's have 2# competition triggers and real sights, even benched!

There is a reason the term "Combat Accuracy" emerged with the popularity of poly pistols.

Exactly. I can put the exact same site setup on 4 different Glock 35's or 42's and they'll each be accurate. (with a lighter striker spring of course)

If the Glock had a 1911 trigger, it would be more accurate. The modern barrel locking is just plain better. I'm startled noones tried to build a "1911ish" pistol with a modern linkless barrel.

None of my Glocks will out shoot my 1911's from a rest or vise. But it's the trigger, every time.

I'll bet the OP will drastically improve accuracy with some Warren Sevigny Comp sights and a good trigger setup tuned to his preferred feel.

 

[Zerodefect]

No disrespect, but this is a silly thing to say.

I'm not aware of any polymer pistol from any reputable manufacturer that isn't capable of very respectable accuracy. Certainly far and away greater than "minute of man" at any normal pistol range.

Do you have any specific examples of a popular poly pistol that's only "combat accurate?"

They way I think of "combat accuracy" is simple. I know my 1911 is wicked accurate. But if I run an IDPA course with my Glock 23, and treat the course like a real scenario using real techniques, not just racing through, then my Glock 23 scores about the same.

It get's the job done perfectly, but we know it's not as accurate.

 

[Bobson]

^ Ok, well if that's what Tarosean meant (seems it probably is), then I guess I just misunderstood; my bad.

I agree they aren't going to be as accurate as a tuned 1911, I just think of combat accuracy in a different way. When I think "combat accurate," I think of a gun that's actually inaccurate - like, it simply can't keep shots within a group much tighter than a human torso at a given range.

For instance, many say the M1A is combat accurate out to about 500 yards (generally capable of 3 MOA or so from the factory, which means roughly one torso (~15" across) at 500 yards). For "combat," that's sufficient, because that's your target... Maybe that's not what anyone ever means when they say combat accurate, but that's always what I assumed it meant lol.

 

[tarosean]

like, it simply can't keep shots within a group much tighter than a human torso at a given range.

I dont know of many guns that cannot do that and Ive owned poly from all the major players.

Zero is on the right track... They work, but wont be bringing home the gold at Camp Perry. Nor were they ever intended too.

It is a term that seems to have coincided with the domination of poly guns over the last 15 years or so. I certainly don't recall ever hearing it 30yrs ago.

With that said, there is a lot of internet slang that didnt exist back then either!!

 

[Bobson]

Gotcha... my bad for callin you out on it. Foot thoroughly inserted into mouth.

 

[jmr40]

I'm curious where you get the info that "mechanically a Glock can outshoot a 1911?"

What 1911 are we comparing this to? I would love to see the story behind this.

Most Glocks leave the factory with a pretty crisp (after take-up) 5-6 lb trigger pull. Almost identical to most common 1911's. The mistake many make with a Glock trigger is to use it like a DA. If you take up the slack and think of it as a SA trigger exceptional accuracy is possible.

I'd say accuracy potential at least comparable to common 1911's. But a lot of guys never master the Glock and can't do it. If you have a 1911 designed at the factory as a target pistol or modified so, it will always be more accurate. But out of the box for most common pistols, not much difference.

One of my G-19's at 50'. I can do as well with my 1911, but no better.

 

[ljnowell]

Exactly. I can put the exact same site setup on 4 different Glock 35's or 42's and they'll each be accurate. (with a lighter striker spring of course)



If the Glock had a 1911 trigger, it would be more accurate. The modern barrel locking is just plain better. I'm startled noones tried to build a "1911ish" pistol with a modern linkless barrel.



None of my Glocks will out shoot my 1911's from a rest or vise. But it's the trigger, every time.



I'll bet the OP will drastically improve accuracy with some Warren Sevigny Comp sights and a good trigger setup tuned to his preferred feel.

If ifs and buts were candies and nuts we would all have a merry Christmas.

You are woefully off in your logic. I recommend reading a book on the 1911.

Then take a trip to a bullseye match and watch the 50 yard slow fire. See if you notice what traits are common on the pistols being used.

 

[Zerodefect]

Bullseye match? You mean that thing olde guys do with pistols? Might be the extreme end of the accuracy spectrum, but nearly useless outside of hobbyland.

Yeah, that's applicable.

 

[ljnowell]

Bullseye match? You mean that thing olde guys do with pistols? Might be the extreme end of the accuracy spectrum, but nearly useless outside of hobbyland.



Yeah, that's applicable.

We are talking about accuracy. The statement was made that the Glock is more accurate. I didn't realize we were in "mall ninja land."

I guess it's easier to blow off a post then address it, especially when you are wrong.

 

[sixguns]

A Glock out of the box is more accurate & precise than a out of the box non-custom 1911. And a whole lot more reliable but we don't care about that in this thread. It's not until a lot of work and dollars are put into a 1911 will it pull ahead. Otherwise it's just combat accurate (aka able to hit something).

 

[ljnowell]

Awful lot of talk with nothing to back it up going on in here.

Quite funny really.

 

[ljnowell]

A Glock out of the box is more accurate & precise than a out of the box non-custom 1911. And a whole lot more reliable but we don't care about that in this thread. It's not until a lot of work and dollars are put into a 1911 will it pull ahead. Otherwise it's just combat accurate (aka able to hit something).

You do realize how many people shoot NRA Bullseye with production guns, right? I'll let you in on a secret, A LOT! I see at least a dozen SA Range Officers at most every big match. Not to mention factory, unaltered Colts and other manufacturers. This myth of having to put big money into a 1911 is a joke.

With all of the super duper triggers out there Glock should be dominating bullseye competitions by now with all that amazing mechanical accuracy.

 

[sixguns]

SA Range Officer is a custom gun. Reread my post about custom 1911 and production aka run of the mill.

 

[Coyote3855]

SA Range Officer is a custom gun. Reread my post about custom 1911 and production aka run of the mill.

I'd like to hear more about your definition of "custom" and "run of the mill." If the SA Range Officer is a custom that can be purchased for under $800, then why are people spending $2,500 and up for top of the line true customs from Les Baer, Wilson, etc.?

The Range Officer, in my opinion, is a "production, run of the mill" handgun although it has many features that we or our gunsmith had to add to 1911s back in the day.

I agree with ljnowell. Lots of cheap talk and opinions with little backup. I do own both 1911s and Glocks. All of them are more accurate than I am at 70 with failing eyesight.

 

[george burns]

Everyone shoots different guns differently. Some shoot Glocks well, some don't, it's a good day when you find one that you shoot better than the rest. I would stick to what you shoot best, instead of trying to duplicate the results of the better shooter with other guns that you don't shoot as well.

 

[sixguns]

Opinions and cheap talk is most of what forums are if you haven't figured that out yet. People do like to change definitions on the fly. I to have Glocks, 1911s and do my own custom gunsmithing.

What I hear is just cheap talk & opinions as usual from a internet forum. The last few posts are just a joke to me.

 

[rsrocket1]

How a bout helping the guy instead of watering the lawn?

I have the same experiences you do Chet. The frustrating thing is it can be with the same gun on different days. My most consistently accurate guns are ones where the trigger breaks at the back with no overtravel. My Ruger revolver in SA and 1911 do this as well as my 22A-1. My Shield 9 and M&P 40 full size out of the box had considerable overtravel and sometimes my shots would fit nicely in a 1.5" circle @ 10 yards and other days the group would be twice as big and grow from there as the session went on.

I installed an Apex FSS trigger kit in the M&P40 and the overtravel was reduced considerably. My groups have also been more consistently good with that gun so I have a feeling that my follow through with the trigger was the culprit. As a test, I put the old trigger back in and when I was super conscientious about pulling straight back on the trigger, the groups were as good as any. As I started to get back into bad habits, the groups opened up both sideways and vertically. With a gun that has no or little overtravel, any bad habits of not pulling straight back are masked.

That's just one person's experience with good/bad accuracy with different guns. Try to see/feel what is different between the guns. If you know both are accurate enough from sandbags and can determine what is causing the difference in your shooting, maybe you can practice to overcome it.

Good luck.

 

[Zerodefect]

Blah, blah, blah. The only thing accurate about a 1911 is it's trigger and caliber.
Modern barrels and slides lock up more consistently than the 1911's olde fashioned mechanical mess. If a Glock had a nice 1911 trigger, it would be right up there with a 1911, easy.

The only thing holding the OP back is piss poor factory Glock sights, an excessively stiff trigger, and some practice. Maybe some help with modern grip techniques, which are absolutely critical, IMO, to the Glock. All easy fixes mentioned above.


/thread.