I agree that it's a VERY subjective thing. I do ok with a 1911 but I pretty well grew up shooting one and adapted to IT. The Sigma feels very good to me; a BHP with Spegel delrins is very usable. I can't hit anything with a Glock, and a SIG isn't much better.
Seems to me, though, that a K frame Smith is the best chassis for stocks that suit the widest range of shooters (that would include the old Ruger Service/Security Sixes). a long time ago I got a Smith Model 13 for a work gun but couldn't stand the stock grips. I sold it and tried the Ruger with the same results. At the time I was shooting a fair amount of IPSC and got aquainted with Craig Spegel who was just getting started making handgun stocks. We took a set of K frame stock blanks and modified them for the Ruger, and then started fitting them to my hand. We wound up with a minimalist set of stocks that left the backstrap bare, had a filler, and no finger grooves. We wound up with a design that works perfectly for me, with a smooth Tru-Oil finish. I've used that basic pattern now for over 30 years, and everyone that tries them likes them. They point like the finger of God. The GP-100 grips are sufficiently like them to where I have no need to change them, and Hogue's Monogrips work well for me in spite of the finger grooves, which I normally hate. I just put a set on an old Model 10 that had been wearing Goodyear rubber grips, and my high and left groups abruptly moved to dead center where they should have been.
The longer I shoot handguns the more I believe that fit is critical; and once you have that right sheer familiarity and muscle memory makes you better yet. Same general principles apply to holsters and their use. Cynics might call it age and treachery, but I prefer to call it wisdom and experience.