Most accurate handgun platform...for noobs
- Thread starter Idahou
- Start date
What is a "platform?" I never understood the use of that term when it came to firearms. Does it refer to the action of firearm (ex: SA revolver, SA/DA semi-auto pistol, lever action rifle)? A specific brand (Glock, Colt)? A model? Something else (1911 style, striker fired polymer style)? I have heard the term used in all of these many different ways.
OP
OP
Idahou
Member
As i see it "platform" means operating mechanism with concrete properties. For example Glock 19/17 with tilting barrell is one platform, something like PX4 with rotating barell would be probably variation of that platform while 1911 or Alien is diffrent platform with similiar controls and "gun gloves fired by mind command" would be completly diffrent one.
AR15 is difftent platform than AK
Basicly i was just thinking if there is better (accuracy wise) way how to make gun without directly asking if we can think better design (because everybody would just say no) and without going completly bannanas (hence that scenario)
So far what i gathered is more about ergonomics than actuall mechanics how to deal with recoil and semi-auto function + probably overall blast reduction
Would be interesting to have more input on things like Rhino which have diffrent trigger hand angle and was mentioned few times (in reviews) that it lowers how shooters push to sides
Or mayabe trigger blade coul be angled for specific hand to diminish such a movement, but that would be also "slippery" and wouldnt help with hand twitching (others fingers pushing while pressing trigger)
Its really just mind excercise
Last edited:
CapnMac
Member
This is complicated.
Realistically, I'd get them all trained up on a lightweight M4 to a minimum standard, as I want them engaging at 100-300m ranges, not 10 to 30m.
The best scoring of that group would be further tested, and the top third issued a DMR rifle.
Realistically, an Army only "needs" about 10 pistols per 800 troops, and that's combat troops not supporting arms forces. And a Glock 44 would suffice for those 10. To be fair to OP, the logical, military answer is likely a Glock 19, as what is wanted is a "service sized" open-carry arm of simple utility.
In military use, you cooed swap pout 90% of the carried pistols for Demix replicas and not affect military outcomes in the slightest (and measurable net gains in avoided ND, and not having to supply ammo and training time).
Those are very military needs, and that's not really what OP was asking. For en masse training, what is likely wanted is simple, and with few parts and not wanting a lot of complicated maintenance. Thus the Glock looms large (other than the take-down issues), so, perhaps a SIG or Beretta migh tbe a better choice.
Mind, a person could make an argument for a Tokarev here--leave all the "fiddly" bits off--but the large "you" as to be acceptable to the notion of Training via Darwin, to really make that work.
Personally, I'd much rather presume that only those motivated to seek out the skills wanted by a handgun, will consider their own, specific, needs (concealment, weight, round counts, etc.) and choose what's best for themselves. I'm fairly convinced there is not a one-size-fits-most answer to this.
heh... methinks this could be the general icon for a lot of these gun & shooting forums
I have a very good friend who has more money than he knows what to do with.
We jokingly call him a gear q***r, and he's a good sport but, the fact is, while he has a lot of "stuff" he's very good with everything he has.
I subscribe to the old adage "beware the man with only one gun, because he probably knows how to use it!" for everyone except my friend.
He's simply a "natural" (and, since I'm a poor, I get to live vicariously through him
)Many days, we would take our .22's out for a day of plinking and hang targets, before I had a chance to load my mags, he would shoot the tacks out of mine, dropping my target to the ground!
wesmonster
Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2019
- Messages
- 392
I vote S&W EZ380 if we're not including rimfire.
This is a pretty easy gun to operate and fire. Good accuracy and REALLY minimal muzzle jump. Very forgiving of sloppy technique, easy to shoot reasonably well with non-dominate hand only.
This is a pretty easy gun to operate and fire. Good accuracy and REALLY minimal muzzle jump. Very forgiving of sloppy technique, easy to shoot reasonably well with non-dominate hand only.
Probably I stole it, @someguy2800 used it in another thread.heh... methinks this could be the general icon for a lot of these gun & shooting forums
someguy2800
Member
If I did I don't remember it, but I'm very much guilty. I have way too many guns and don't shoot them all enough but I can't help but keep buying the shiny new thing that catches my eye.
Oops sorry I had to go look again it was South Prairie Jim
wcwhitey
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,814
Your mind went to the same place as mine. Well explained. The real need for a whole force issued pistol is more of a LE function or a tertiary self defense concern of a military force. Understanding that the KISS Principle fully applies. Simple, accurate and reliable while being pretty accurate is kind of why Glock is in all the holsters it is. Add to that the low relative cost of a Glock and 9mm ammo it makes sense. But like you mention Darwin is always a factor.
It's a fashionable buzzword. In some isolated instances like AR:s it has some limited substance as numerous manufacturers build compatible guns, parts and accessories, but other than that, it's rather irrelevant.
It's a gun. Calling it a gun is the intellectually honest choice. End of story.
OP
OP
Idahou
Member
Sorry to disagree but its not. Gun is overall cathegory and that carry almost no information at all. If i say i have a rifle, you will know its some kind of long gun and thats it.
Sure in some media its simplier and more elegant, but since we all here know a little bit more about this topic and disscussion is ment to be more rechnical focused its important to give more information
I'm sorry but unfortunately I can't follow your logic right now. "Platform" is even far more ambiguous (and often pretentious) word for what may or may not be specified in further detail. The whole word can be associated with anything from a gun in mall ninja firearm terminology to an area where you board a train - and everything in between. It has dozens of meanings hence it doesn't mean anything without a context.
The whole "operator harvesting whitetails with a bolt action platform" -vocabulary cracks me up, big time.
For any new shooter the limiting factor probably isn't the firearm. Assuming they can fit their hand around the grip and reach the trigger, the gun is probably not the issue.
Like many others have recommended, I'd start with a .22. For a 9mm I'd go with my Sig P210, or CZ 75, or even my Star Super model B is a good gun for someone learning.
Like many others have recommended, I'd start with a .22. For a 9mm I'd go with my Sig P210, or CZ 75, or even my Star Super model B is a good gun for someone learning.
rabid wombat
Member
Ahhhh…the ‘tack driving’ thread comes back!
As for the thread here….start with the basics, 22 cal semi auto or revolver, go from there…
Corpral_Agarn
Member
There's this ancient semi auto...
Called...
"Shooting fundamentals"... [Proper training]
I was having a discussion of similar nature with another instructor. He was complaining that a student brought a gun he'd never shot before to a class and was having trouble getting the student to pass a shooting qual.
New gun was a Sig 2022. He's used to shooting Glock 17.
I said "shouldn't be a problem. The fundamentals are the same."
He did not like that idea.
It's long been my belief that a competent instructor should be able to guide you through picking up any normal sized semi auto and shoot it fairly well.
But if I had to choose a gun for a brand new shooter right this instant it would be either:
Glock 19
CZ 75 (variant)
Ahhhh…the ‘tack driving’ thread comes back!
As for the thread here….start with the basics, 22 cal semi auto or revolver, go from there…
Sounds like I might've uncovered a old topic of discussion.
You feel like getting me up to speed?
(Do it in a PM so we don't derail the OP)
Risky buisness
Member
For a .new shooter, accuracy isnt the most important aspect, being able to manipulate it, the controls the trigger, an understanding the sights. Finding a practical caliber, a safe variety and the appropriate holster or carry method. Once thats been accomplished professional training in the use of that particular handgun would be the most beneficial item. Whether a .22 or 9mm, 38 special revolver is almost a mute point, unless purchased specifically as s defensive measure. Purchase something with a good track record, feels and fits good and learn it, accuracy will come sooner or later
Trigger control and sight picture are the foundations of accuracy. And IMO, these fundamentals (and safety) are the most important aspect for a new shooter.
I don't recall this thread having anything to do with carry.
Accuracy just doesn't happen. Marksmanship is the product of quality practice and commitment, and from what I've seen, most shooters could use a lot more of it.
Yep - to a large degree, shootin's shootin'.
True story #1: When I was competing, I competed almost exclusively with a revolver. At some point, I needed a change, so I picked up a semi-auto, practiced a day or so with it, then shot a single sanctioned match with it to get my master card in that division. Shootin's shootin'.
True story #2: I once took an archery class with my kids. I never shot archery before, but once I got a few details figured out, I was dropping the arrows with their rental recurve right into the 10-ring. The instructors never asked me my background, but just chalked it up to me being "a natural". I'm not a natural, and push back on the idea of "naturals". The truth is that I had put a lot of time into "the fundamentals"; and as I've often told folks, put in the time on the fundamentals, and the shooting world is your oyster, no matter the "platform". Blow the fundamentals off, and whether you know it or not, you'll struggle with everything you do.
Risky buisness
Member
Well dang.... I dont remember this thread having anything to do with competing. Or archery either.
True story
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,958
Offering my experience to the contrary - I’ve taught and have helped teach handgun classes of various sorts for the last 20yrs, and have witnessed numerous new shooters which bring their DAO or sub-compact/snubby to a class, then with it fail the qualification CoF. Hand them a Ruger Mark II/III, and it’s done. Even to the extent that upon the inception of these “combat style” 22LR’s like the S&W M&P22 and Ruger SR22, students would bring those as I always recommend bringing a 22Lr if they have them… and subsequently fail the qualification CoF. It even happened in an instructor course a few years ago which I RSO’d the range/live fire portion, one of the students failed the CoF to certify with an SR22 and then was allowed to reshoot with a Mark III.
I chalk it up to the same principle as the old yarn: “if you don’t measure it, you can’t manage it.” And when new shooters are struggling with some challenging aspect of the firearm design - like struggling with a long & heavy DAO trigger or iron sights or small grips or especially struggling with poor sights or a short sight radius - their results suffer on target. When someone is spraying bullets all over a wall, it’s impossible to measure which fundamental technique is the culprit. The signal is lost in the noise. So isolating variables, such as using a moderate weight pistol with good muzzle balance and a great grip size, and a clean, lightish single action trigger, and a red dot sight (about as new-shooter-friendly as a pistol can get) REALLY helps new shooters leap forward in the other aspects of marksmanship. Then we can transition smoothly into more challenging attributes like tiny grip frames and terrible sights on a pocket 380, or long DAO triggers, tackling absorption of as few variables at one time as possible.
but the gun is not the problem in these scenarios - the lack of training is the issue. Buying a more accurate handgun isn’t going to help if you’re shootings 6” groups at 7 yards. OP doesn’t want a .22 even though it is a logical option…
Similar threads
- Locked
