S&W J-Frame VS. LCP Range test

[David E]

Now I think these are pretty good short range groups.

Considering I was shooting with my eyes closed

How, exactly, did you fire those groups?

Did you visually align the sights then close your eyes a second before firing each shot? Or did you align them ONCE and fire all five without opening your eyes until after shot #5?

The latter is far more impressive than the former.

 

[M2 Carbine]

How, exactly, did you fire those groups?

On those two targets, sight then close eyes and squeeze trigger for each shot.
I do the exercise several ways.

Sorry to get off the subject,
but this (old) TX concealed carry target was "shot by the book, timed fire" starting with the gun pointed down and eyes closed before each shot and eyes kept closed during each shot string.
I passed.

 

[shockwave]

What's the rationale for firing a string with eyes closed? I don't the question the usefulness of the exercise, I'm merely curious as to what it is. My current "x-count" shooting program focuses on grip, sight picture, and breath control. Actual shot placement is used as a diagnostic tool. Because you wouldn't close your eyes during a CQC situation, how does this work as a range exercise?

 

[MCgunner]

What's the rationale for firing a string with eyes closed? I don't the question the usefulness of the exercise, I'm merely curious as to what it is.

Perhaps night blindness from the flash of the first shot?

 

[MCgunner]

On those two targets, sight then close eyes and squeeze trigger for each shot.
I do the exercise several ways.

Sorry to get off the subject,
but this (old) TX concealed carry target was "shot by the book, timed fire" starting with the gun pounted down and eyes closed before each shot and eyes kept closed during eash shot string.
I passed.

Well, that does prove it. I've always said that Stevie Wonder could qualify for a Texas CCW.

 

[M2 Carbine]

What's the rationale for firing a string with eyes closed? I don't the question the usefulness of the exercise, I'm merely curious as to what it is. My current "x-count" shooting program focuses on grip, sight picture, and breath control. Actual shot placement is used as a diagnostic tool. Because you wouldn't close your eyes during a CQC situation, how does this work as a range exercise?

Mostly, just to see if I can do it. I have a couple home ranges, so can safely do most any weird thing that comes into my head, that you wouldn't/shouldn't do on a public range.

While not claiming any benefit at all from the exercise, except it's a cool parlor trick, some new and old shooters have said it helped their trigger control and accuracy and confidence in being able to hit under less than ideal conditions.

 

[WC145]

Just imagine what you could do if you shot with your eyes open!!!

 

[Mad Chemist]

I have had the exact opposite results as the OP when comparing overall accuracy of a sw 642-2 to a ruger LCP.

Both guns have relatively high round counts for their respective roles. The j frame is somewhere bt 2-3000 and the LCP is at about 1K. Trial and error has shown that the J frame is more sensitive to ammo weight when matching POA to POI. Bullets below 135gr in weight WILL shoot low for my gun. GD 135gr+P SB, 158gr SWC and 148 WC will all match POI to POA in this revolver.

Factory ammo for .380 has much less variance. Most loads range from 90-95gr with the occasional 100gr. Velocity spread is also much lower. For my reloads, I stick with 90-95gr lead.

So, when I optimize for both guns and use the loads that have proven most accurate for both, there really is no comparison. The J is much more accurate in both slow and rapid fire and from ranges from 7-50yds. Ringing a gong at 50tds slow fire is easy with the J and nearly impossible with the LCP. Shooting from a rest also confirms these results.

The only way to definitively prove my conclusion would be to fire both guns from a vise and eval the groups. I suspect that a test of this nature would confirm my results.

Outside factors that may contribute to discrepancies between observations.

I think the primary factor is likely the heavy double action trigger of the Smith. I learned how to shoot a handgun with a double action revolver and have less of an issue with a heavy gritty trigger than others may.

Whether or not accuracy is compromised, +P ammo is going to create considerably more felt recoil than any std .380 load through the LCP. Felt recoil is subjective and its effects on shooters are highly variable.

 

[MCgunner]

The only way to definitively prove my conclusion would be to fire both guns from a vise and eval the groups. I suspect that a test of this nature would confirm my results.

It's called a machine rest and I doubt Ransom makes inserts for the LCP. I just shoot 'em off bags at 25. That's not a real good judge of intrinsic accuracy, though, with tiny sight radii.

 

[wrs840]

I own both, and always (pants on) have either a LCP or a S&W 442 snub in my pocket. As such, one of the two is always with me on a range-trip, so I'll habitually put 20-or-so rounds downrange with whichever is on me every time I go (once a week these days, weather permitting). FWIW, I'm considerably better with the 442 at 21 ft, and way better with the 442 at 50 ft. I realize this proves nothing about the "intrinsic accuracy" of the two designs. It's just my individual experience.

Les

 

[m2steven]

"The idea that an LCP is more accurate than a J-frame is ludicrous".......

The intrinsic accuracy of the LCP has been established by many experienced shooters and this evidence can be found easily. My 632 S&W is at least as accurate as my LCP and is a much greater pleasure to shoot.

I pretty much drill my first shot with my LCP. After that, my inclination is to throw the pistol at the target rather than pull it's horrid trigger again. It IS a great carry gun though.

 

[M&PVolk]

The LCP is light years easier FOR ME to conceal than any snubby because of the thickness of the cylinders on the snubby's.

That fact means absolutely NOTHING to anyone, but ME..

For those others who find more accuracy and ease of concealment in the revolver than the LCP, more power to ya.

No offense to anyone, just expressing my personal opinion.

For me, the biggest advantage of the revolver is reliability and basic immunity to pocket lint. I have seen the semi's fail in the pocket environment. It's great if you can shoot one better than a revolver, but if it is only good for one shot, I hope your an extremely good shot with it.

 

[Ankeny]

I have an LCP and I am impressed with the accuracy of the little pistol. I shoot mine as well as any of my snubbies and I prefer the auto for carry. I pack it around in a pocket holster so lint doesn't seem to be an issue. Use the one you prefer. Either will do in a pinch.

 

[jon_in_wv]

Whatever you carry practice, practice, practice. I took my LCP to the range yesterday and I learned a quick lesson. If you don't practice with these small weapons your skills drop off FAST. West Virginia has had a worse winter than usual (global warming you know) and I haven't had my LCP on the range for months. My accuracy and speed were way off. Time to load up some more 380.

 

[MCgunner]

For me, the biggest advantage of the revolver is reliability and basic immunity to pocket lint. I have seen the semi's fail in the pocket environment.

Never seen that, myself. Of course, I carry in a pocket holster and clean my guns routinely if carried.

 

[easyg]

For me, the biggest advantage of the revolver is reliability and basic immunity to pocket lint. I have seen the semi's fail in the pocket environment.

The only way that I could see a semi fail, due to lint, would be if that semi had an external hammer that was cocked.
But for an internal hammer or a striker fired semi, I don't see how it could ever be fouled by lint.

 

[Girodin]

Do they not teach the scientific method and things like variables and controls in school anymore? I am amazed at the number of post I see on here that assert conclusions simply not even remotely supported by the testing that was done. The OP's test proved he shoots his LCP more accurately than his J frame with the particular loads used. Even if it is true the LCP is more accurate than the J frame the methodology of test conducted does not allow one to use that test to assert as much.

It is very good to know which of one's guns one shoots best but other people cannot extrapolate too much from it.

For me, the biggest advantage of the revolver is reliability and basic immunity to pocket lint. I have seen the semi's fail in the pocket environment.

Some people must have more lint in theirs pockets than I do. I carry daily a BUG in my pocket. I carry in a pocket holster (as I believe anyone pocket carrying should). I'll start to notice some lint on parts of it after a month or longer. It is far from anything that would cause the pistol to not fire and takes 30 seconds or so to clean off. I am pretty sure I would have to carry it and never wipe it off for far longer than I ever would go without bothering to shoot a carry gun (even a BUG). If you go months on end without shooting your carry gun(s). Pocket lint is very unlikely to be you biggest issue should you ever need to use that gun.

 

[chihuahuatn]

Do they not teach the scientific method and things like variables and controls in school anymore? I am amazed at the number of post I see on here that assert conclusions simply not even remotely supported by the testing that was done. The OP's test proved he shoots his LCP more accurately than his J frame with the particular loads used. Even if it is true the LCP is more accurate than the J frame the methodology of test conducted does not allow one to use that test to assert as much.

It is very good to know which of one's guns one shoots best but other people cannot extrapolate too much from it.

Cheers to that comment!

 

[M&PVolk]

Some people must have more lint in theirs pockets than I do. I carry daily a BUG in my pocket. I carry in a pocket holster (as I believe anyone pocket carrying should). I'll start to notice some lint on parts of it after a month or longer. It is far from anything that would cause the pistol to not fire and takes 30 seconds or so to clean off. I am pretty sure I would have to carry it and never wipe it off for far longer than I ever would go without bothering to shoot a carry gun (even a BUG). If you go months on end without shooting your carry gun(s). Pocket lint is very unlikely to be you biggest issue should you ever need to use that gun.

I can only relay my experience on the matter. After about two weeks worth of carrying a small semi auto in the pocket, there was very little visible lint on the gun. I had changed out the mag for a different load and when I racked the slide, the gun did not go all the way into battery. I removed the slide and discovered that light amounts of lint had gathered to create a significant amount of resistance allong the frame rails. Perhaps under an actual firing of the gun this would not have been a problem, but it was enough to make me realize the advantages of a revolver in this mode of carry.

If you pocket carry a semi-auto, that is your choice and hopefully your experience will be different than mine. I would recommend a good holster and weekly cleaning to ensure reliability. For me, a j frame is a much better solution. YMMV.

 

[David E]

What's the rationale for firing a string with eyes closed?

It's called "The Blind Swordsman" drill. (eyes closed for the string, not for each shot fired individually)

The real reason is to check your body alignment. This ensures that you're not fighting your own body to align the gun for the shot.

When you can get a perfect shooting platform, it's nice to know what "perfect" feels like, as confirmed by the Blind Swordsman.........but it's a seldom thing indeed to ever get a perfect shooting platform in a defensive sitution.

 

[M2 Carbine]

It's called "The Blind Swordsman" drill. (eyes closed for the string, not for each shot fired individually)

Thanks for putting a name to it.
I've heard of some instructors using it but didn't know the name of the exercise.

What distance? 5-7 yards?