Function over fit

[islandphish]

Common advice on forums, "Shoot them all and decide which feels best for you."

Now that is great if we are treating our guns like couches. Most of us are not.

We would most like to have the gun that shoots the tightest groups, is most effective for a determined task, etc. That will often have little to do with how good a gun feels.

For instance, an inexperienced shooter goes to the range and rents two guns. One gun feels great in the hand the other feels like a Glock(it is a Glock). Now when the inexperienced shooter goes bang with both the groups look about the same. Let's say someone put a comfy rubber grip over a Hi-Point C9. So the Hi-Point feels better and shoots just as good as the Glock subjectively, but no one is gonna say the Hi-Point is the better choice. Obviously the Glock would have the greater potential for that inexperienced shooter. This would hold true for many different gun comparisons.

So what "feels good" may be deceptive, especially to the inexperienced.

I am coming around to the idea that you choose your platform based on how it compares on paper; accuracy, reliability et al. Once you have significant proficiency you can start to move towards the what "feels good" method of choosing a firearm. If you don't know enough to be able to know what you are "feeling" for, then making a decision based on what you feel is pretty silly.

 

[bogie]

Theoreticians...

It's all about ergonomics. If it feels natural, and points naturally, you're going to overall shoot better with it, because you won't be fighting it to make it do something it doesn't want to do.

For a handgun, accuracy basically means squat. Worry about fit and reliability.

 

[Cellar Dweller]

Everything equal except the name? Then...

If both groups are 12" at 10ft, then the more comfortable one will be shot more and groups should decrease. If both groups are 0.5" at 100 yards, then the more comfortable one is the better choice, regardless.

Why should one put up with (not a Glock-exclusive list) a too-fat or too-short grip, top-heaviness (or an unbalanced feeling), "spongy" recoil from a plastic frame (if steel is your preferred choice), FTF/FTE from too-tight tolerances, a long/heavy/gritty trigger, controls in awkward places, right-handed-only controls if one is a southpaw, a grip conducive to limp-wristing, a too large- or heavy-to-CCW design, a too-light design (ex. lightweight Magnums) or hammer bite? Status? Gunsnobbery?

Would that newbie be better served by a "comfortable" Hi-Point, putting 200 rounds downrange every week, or an "awkward" Glock that he hates shooting, is gathering dust, and is offering for sale/trade with 50 rounds down the pipe after a year of ownership? After taking a beating on trade-in or sale, maybe he should drop $2k + on a custom 1911 jam-o-matic that needs 500 or so rounds to break-in that he can't stand either, so the other guys at the range will still be impressed. After another beating, he'll swear off guns forever...

Do you think that kids, ladies, the elderly (or disabled) should start with a .500 S&W because it has "greater potential" or a lowly .22LR revolver?

 

[mike101]

You can make just about anything feel good, with the right grip.

 

[1911 guy]

Fit is important, especially for newbies.

Handgun fit is very important, the newer you are to handguns, the more important it is. An experienced handgunner can work around things he finds hard or uncomfortable to deal with. A neophyte often can't, or is discouraged by the work it takes. My own preference is for 1911 pattern handguns, they fit me very well. I'm not going to tell someone to avoid Glocks, Rugers or such because it's not a 1911. My job as "the gun guy" is to inform beginners as best I can and help them when they need it, not shove my opinion down their throats. If the person in question likes the Hi-Point and it suits their needs, I'd bring a few things to their attention, but it's ultimately their decision. Their money, their decision. It might be all they can afford. I know a lot of folks who started with what they knew were second rate handguns because they had financial obligations that prohibited more expense. Don't get your shorts in a bunch because someone didn't go nuts over a Glock.

 

[hso]

Nope.

The fit if the gun is the most important thing for a new shooter as long as they are purchasing a quality firearm. Length of reach to trigger, grip angle, grip width are the critical issues in fit. A poorly fitting firearm isn't comfortable or accurate to shoot. A properly fitting handgun is.

Let's even use the Glock as an example. A person with a smallish hand will not fit the grip on a Glock 21 while they may fit the Glock 17 just fine. What if the LOP is too far for them because they have short fingers or that the grip is too wide because they have a slightly smaller hand? What if the grip angle is different from their natural grip? They need to find a different gun that fits them. That may be a SA CZ-75 or a BHP or even an 9mm 1911. But that's why there are folks that shoot those well. Because they fit them.

Mushy grips on crappy guns are not the same as getting a gun that fits the individual.

 

[islandphish]

Ok, just want to make it clear that I chose Glock only b/c of their rep as "uncomfortable" and their rep as being quality.

Here's another example, a guy goes rifle shopping. He picks out a rifle that has the most comfortable feel for him. A beautiful gun with finger grooves and a leather pad for the cheek to rest on. But this gun has a scope on see-through rings so getting a good cheek weld is pretty darn difficult.

He's inexperienced so when he blasts away with this gun and a Savage 110 with a decent scope on low rings from the STANDING position at 40 yards in the indoor range he sees no difference. He decides on the finger grooves and leather cheek rest.

So when he goes out in a few weeks and decides to shoot at 400 yards he's at a disadvantage. He didn't know what was best for him, and picking comfort didn't mean a whole lot.

Now the argument against what I'm saying here can be made by taking things to the extreme, but that isn't intellectually honest. I'm not advocating a McMillan .50bmg for a newbie. Just that what seems wrong or uncomfortable to a newbie might be just what is needed.

If you were buying a sports car would you pick the one that had the most comfortable ride? Or would you want the one with the tight suspension?

I am not saying eliminate comfort altogether either. If you can't work the controls then the gun is no good to you. But really, just how uncomfortable is one gun over the other, especially with handguns? I doubt that someone will not shoot altogether, especially a relatively ignorant newbie, based upon a lack of finger grooves on a rifle stock or a non-1911 grip angle or whatever.

 

[Justin]

If you don't know enough to be able to know what you are "feeling" for, then making a decision based on what you feel is pretty silly.

Here's the basic test I've always used:
Pick the pistol up and get a good grip on it. Go to low ready.
Close your eyes.
With your eyes closed, bring the pistol up as if you were aiming it at a target.
Open your eyes and see if the sights are aligned.

Do this two or three times.

If the sights aren't aligned, or close to aligned, then try a different pistol.

 

[Cellar Dweller]

For me, the two most accurate handguns I own are a .32 Walther PP (slip-on, finger grooves) and a 7.62x25 CZ-52 (slip-on), and I'm just a shade behind with my Glock 20 (molded grooves). Three VERY different pistols, and I have 20+ in my collection. To some, these were designed by Satan on a bad day; to me, they're just different...and they all pass Justin's test too, at least when I've kept the coffee consumption low that day.

In the 2nd hypothetical it's the same model rifle, only different accessories, right?
The cheek rest is removable; if the high rings are for a large diameter
scope a smaller one and low rings can be fitted - not exactly a dealbreaker - accessories don't count except to a Significant Other.

Things that can't be easily changed though - ex. some can't stand slide-mount safeties, no matter how "good" the pistol may be otherwise...or the Sig decock is in the "wrong" position...are better off getting what feels right to THEM.

 

[Black Adder LXX]

Here's the basic test I've always used:
Pick the pistol up and get a good grip on it. Go to low ready.
Close your eyes.
With your eyes closed, bring the pistol up as if you were aiming it at a target.
Open your eyes and see if the sights are aligned.

THAT is the kind of stuff I come here for... I've never heard that before and it sounds like a good idea. I guess I'll have to buy another gun so I can try it out...

To the Op's question: When dealing with quality handguns, there are so many good options out there, everyone has an opinion on what is best. For that reason alone, I will not buy a gun that does not fit me well or feel good in my hand. I know for a fact that I shoot Glocks well, but hate to shoot them. I love my M&P and my Beretta, though, and they're accurate guns as well. There are a lot of good guns out there that I do not own. There are some good guns that I do own. If I have the ability to make a choice, I'll make the choice that I like best.

 

[oldgold]

Justin is 100% right.

If it doesn't point it is not something to trust your life with. Very inportant for a new gun owner to understand. When the 'event' comes to you, often times, your response is to point and shoot. You should be able to get your gun out, ready and on target in one smooth motion. To me this eliminates any slide mounted safeties. Pushing up with your thumb is not a natural motion!

I use this drill in CCw classes. One target at ten feet, gun on table between you and target. Touch gun, close eyes ,fire one round with eyes still closed. Repeat with as many different guns as possible. This is a real eye opener.
JMHO

 

[gbran]

My son in law bought a Sig 226 because he thought it was kool. He even liked the feel. But, he soon came to find that he couldn't hit the wall of the barn, even if he were inside. He later bought a HK USP and shoots it pretty darn good. Go figure.

 

[Feanaro]

I think you have a good point but you've got it backwards. As with buying a guitar, at first you won't know what you want or need. If you find that you want to be Wes Montgomery, a Dean won't do you much good. So, ignoring humbucker versus single coil and ashwood versus alder, you buy something that is comfortable for you to practice with.

There is one major difference though. With a few exceptions, the difference between big brand pistols is practically NOTHING but fit.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Blind Draw

I call Justin's technique a "blind draw."

I do it just a little differently.

I stand with the gun in strong hand down at my side, close my eyes, bring the gun up to a two-handed grip with eyes closed, open eyes, check the sights.

The difference in natural sight alignment was what made me choose the Taurus PT911 (that's a 9mm) over the CZ P-01.

I actually started out to buy the CZ, but tested both for "blind draw" natural sighting. They both feel fine in the hand, have good ergonomics. The Taurus lined up every time while the CZ didn't.

I have a ways to go before I shoot as well as the gun does.

 

[striker3]

But really, just how uncomfortable is one gun over the other, especially with handguns?

It is the most important with handguns. With such a short sight radius, small errors cause a great decrease in accuracy.

Here is an example from personal experience. I have small hands and small fingers. Every year when I qualify with the M9 (Beretta 92F) I blow the rapid fire shots. It is not that I cannot shoot, I can tear out the kill zone with rapid fires from my XD. The problem is that the M9 DOES NOT FIT ME. The grip is to wide, and the LOP to long for me to comfortably and accurately manipulate the trigger. Top that off with the safety being mounted on the slide and, well, I hate that gun.

I had the same problem with a Para 14.45 LDA. I bought it without actually shooting it and hated the thing. Now, I have owned two different XDs and loved both of them. The grip fits perfect, they line up just right, and I can shoot from a draw accurately every time. In other words, comfort and fit of the pistol make me a better shooter.

 

[sm]

hso and Justin are both spot on.

Now- Hackathorn's little test. You have narrowed it down to a few guns, maybe both semi's and revolvers.

-Fold a pc of typing paper in half, then half again. Place at 5 yards.
-Load only 5 rounds into these guns.
-Prefer from concealment, still low ready works.

At the buzzer acquire and fire 5 rounds, the paper and timer don't lie.

THE gun that fits YOU with "those" loads, will be that evident.

What is also revealed, is holster, carry position, and caliber/loadings.

It does NOT matter what anyone else shoots for loads, if the loads do not run the gun, gun is not designed to run those loads, loads do not go to point of aim/point of impact [POA/POI] and for sure if YOU cannot shoot them loads.

BHP /Glock/Sig/Ruger...in .40 cal, might not work for YOU as well as same gun in 9mm.
Model 19 and .357 loads do not work, but 38spl do for YOU.

Neat thing about this test, it works as one gets older, and more experienced.
One may find they can shoot 230 gr 45ACP "now" when before the 185 gr worked best for them.

Also, one gets Arthritis, recovers from a injury, surgery - and suppose one changes "physically".
Platform might have to be changed - like someone that used to shoot 1911, and now does best with a Colt Detective Special.

Arthritis, worsens and the 158gr is too much, back it on down to a lighter loading for Them...

*grin*