H
Handy
Guest
It is commonly held, and usually true, that revolvers are more accurate than semiautos. But this is not the case BECAUSE of the revolver design. It's actually the fault of the common recoil design of 95% of combat type handguns, starting with John Brownings designs.
The revolver produces good accuracy despite having up to 8 different chambers, 1/2" of free bore, a cylinder gap, timing play and a forcing cone. None of those things are good, just necessary. The revolver wins because there is a direct relationship between the sights and the bore.
On Browning and most other recoil pistols, the bore is "floating" in it's slide or frame clearances; nothing is fixed. The ability of the barrel to re-seat is fought by breachface friction, extractor tension and fouling.
But semiautomatics are not inaccurate! The other 1911 test piece, the Luger, is very accurate. While the barrel does recoil, it is in direct contact with the frame and the sights are attached to the barrel. There are plenty of other combat guns before and after the turn of the century Luger that also display great accuracy. Some work like the Luger: Lahti, Nambu, Broomhandle. Others have fixed barrels and rely on blowback or delayed blowback; P9S, P7, GB, Hi Point, Astra. All are basic production combat guns; mass produced and mass issued to police and military. Yet hand fired test targets of most of these guns rival revolver Ransom rest tests. Why? Because chamber, bore and sights all have a very direct and repeatable relationship. There is no reason they shouldn't be quite accurate.
This all isn't Browning's fault. Given the materials of the time, he produced excellent weapons that were simpler, sturdier and cheaper than Lugers and the like. In 1911, the Colt was the best pistol for point shooting at horses and men in combat conditions.
But the 1911's success has stymied all efforts to get BACK to the accuracy that should be found in every autoloader. The fixed barrel Desert Eagle shoots tighter groups than the revolvers it borrows ammuntion from.
The HK P9S, which continues to see combat use, also offers 1" at 25m groups, yet retains the reliability and durability of its big brother, the G3 rifle. It takes little use of this piece to make a believer out of any decent shooter.
In summary, the autoloader "community" has saddled itself with sub par accuracy for the sake of nostalgia. A recoil action that encloses the barrel in a slide is an immediate disadvantage. There are lots of ways of producting simplified, truly accurate auto actions if we would only demand them.
The Brownings, Sig and Glocks are all decent enough guns, but basically handicapped in regards to accuracy. If you could have your cake AND eat it, why wouldn't you?
The revolver produces good accuracy despite having up to 8 different chambers, 1/2" of free bore, a cylinder gap, timing play and a forcing cone. None of those things are good, just necessary. The revolver wins because there is a direct relationship between the sights and the bore.
On Browning and most other recoil pistols, the bore is "floating" in it's slide or frame clearances; nothing is fixed. The ability of the barrel to re-seat is fought by breachface friction, extractor tension and fouling.
But semiautomatics are not inaccurate! The other 1911 test piece, the Luger, is very accurate. While the barrel does recoil, it is in direct contact with the frame and the sights are attached to the barrel. There are plenty of other combat guns before and after the turn of the century Luger that also display great accuracy. Some work like the Luger: Lahti, Nambu, Broomhandle. Others have fixed barrels and rely on blowback or delayed blowback; P9S, P7, GB, Hi Point, Astra. All are basic production combat guns; mass produced and mass issued to police and military. Yet hand fired test targets of most of these guns rival revolver Ransom rest tests. Why? Because chamber, bore and sights all have a very direct and repeatable relationship. There is no reason they shouldn't be quite accurate.
This all isn't Browning's fault. Given the materials of the time, he produced excellent weapons that were simpler, sturdier and cheaper than Lugers and the like. In 1911, the Colt was the best pistol for point shooting at horses and men in combat conditions.
But the 1911's success has stymied all efforts to get BACK to the accuracy that should be found in every autoloader. The fixed barrel Desert Eagle shoots tighter groups than the revolvers it borrows ammuntion from.
The HK P9S, which continues to see combat use, also offers 1" at 25m groups, yet retains the reliability and durability of its big brother, the G3 rifle. It takes little use of this piece to make a believer out of any decent shooter.
In summary, the autoloader "community" has saddled itself with sub par accuracy for the sake of nostalgia. A recoil action that encloses the barrel in a slide is an immediate disadvantage. There are lots of ways of producting simplified, truly accurate auto actions if we would only demand them.
The Brownings, Sig and Glocks are all decent enough guns, but basically handicapped in regards to accuracy. If you could have your cake AND eat it, why wouldn't you?
