What budget ammo does your G17 like?

[Trey Veston]

None of this changes the fact you are giving poor advice based on false premises.

Poor advice?? To make sure your carry pistol is accurate at 25 yards is poor advice?? Now I've heard everything.

 

[jmr40]

I can get Magtech, S&B, and Fiocchi 115 gr for $8/box OTD from 2 different local gun shops. I buy whichever they have in stock at the time and it all shoots equally well in all of my 9mm pistols.

 

[WVsig]

Poor advice?? To make sure your carry pistol is accurate at 25 yards is poor advice?? Now I've heard everything.

Nothing wrong with making sure your carry pistol is accurate at 25 yards. That is not the poor advice I am referring to. This is:

I've had a couple of incidents in which either a pistol or the ammo couldn't do better than 8" at 25 yards. I don't like the idea of carrying a pistol or ammo that I could not rely on to hit a human-sized target at 25 yards away, off-hand and under stress..... So if a pistol that can do an inch at 25yds opens up to 10" under mild stress, how much would a pistol that barely does 8" at 25yds open up to under stress? The point that I'm trying to make is that the more accurate the pistol is, the more accurate it is going to be in a defensive shooting. And we can't guarantee that whatever horrible scenario we find ourselves in is going to be at the proverbial 7yds or less.

The idea that the avg citizen is going to find themselves in a scenario where they are going to need to take a 25 yard shot in a defensive situation as you are implying here is not realistic. It is not advisable and IMHO is reckless to suggest it. Telling people they should train to take a 25 yard shot on a moving target that is shooting back at you in public is poor advice. Sounds great as you pound it out on your keyboard but in real life you are putting yourself and others at risk advocating for that type of action.

A gun that can't do better than 8" at 25 yards out of a mechanical rest is defective IMHO. To the OP every Glock 17 with any factory fresh 115 or 124gr 9mm should be able to do that. If not something is out of spec. It is is also bad advice to to tell someone that a pistols inherent mechanical accuracy is what is going to win a gun fight. The pistols absolute mechanical accuracy does not directly translate to real world accuracy in most shooters hands. 99.999% of shooters can't outshoot their pistol. As I stated before the reason a group under stress goes from 1" to 8" has nothing to do with the gun. You are drawing a false conclusion. A gun that shoots 3" groups at 25 yards is not going to open up to 24" because it is the shooter not the gun causing the group to spread. The pistol that groups 3" @ 25 is under stress is going to pattern the same in the same shooters hands at self defense distances as the 1" gun because the flaws that the shooter brings to the table under stress are what is causing inaccuracy not the gun.

The other main point missing in your advice is that for combat gunfight accuracy you are not looking to shoot tiny groups. You are looking to shoot accurately enough and fast enough to win the day. Being able to shoot at speed at real world defensive pistol distances, 10 yards and under, and keep all the shots in a the black on a B8 NRA target is they type of accuracy you need. None of this takes away from the idea that a more accurate gun is better than an inaccurate one but the inherent accuracy of the pistol has to be looked at in a proper context. I believe you have gotten that context wrong. YMMV

 

[WVsig]

I'm going to give polymers one last try. Out of all of the ones I've shot or owned, aside from the HK P30L, the Gen 4 G17 was my favorite.

I know each barrel is different and this and that but how different can a Gen 4 G17 barrel from gun to gun really be to effect preference of grain/brand of ammo? Not much I'd guess.

So what budget ammo and grain does your Gen 4 G17 group best with? I believe Gen 4 G19 owners could chime in as well since the 1/2" length difference probably wouldn't effect much if anything.

I know these aren't "target guns". Just wondering what groups best in yours.

Thanks.

I think most factory ammo is going to give you satisfactory results out of a Glock 17 if you do your part. Some guns will like some ammo better but there can also be differences lot to lot with factory ammo. The biggest problem with factory ammo is consistency run to run. This is why a lot of people who are really worried about consistency and accuracy reload. For me there is really no "best" factory ammo but these days the best value in 9mm in terms of price to quality is Geco 115gr and 124gr. This stuff is available in the $.16 per round range plus shipping if you buy it in case loads. High quality brass that is consistent all my guns.

https://www.outdoorlimited.com/hand...115-grain-full-metal-jacket-case-1000-rounds/

 

[Trey Veston]

Thank you for the reasonable and detailed reply. I don't think we are too far off in our assumptions and line of thinking.

In years past, the vast majority of self defense shootings involved a person that was being victimized for the purpose of robbery, rape, or assault. Most of those are up close and personal and being able to draw and fire quickly and accurately at ranges of usually less than a few feet. This is what most CCW holders anticipate and train for. Your stance and points are perfectly in line with such a scenario. I was in two such scenarios in which I had to draw my weapon but did not have to fire, thank God.

But today, there is an increase in what is referred to as an "active shooter" scenario, in which someone goes into a public place such as a church, a bar, a mall, or school, and his intent is to kill as many people as possible. Sometimes with a rifle, sometimes with a shotgun, and sometimes with a pistol.

In nearly every one of those scenarios, the shooter was in an open area and a greater distance away from his victims. This is why I practice at greater distances. A couple of years ago, in my hometown, in the Arby's restaurant where my family and I occasionally go to eat, there was an active shooter situation. A mentally ill young man used a S&W SDVE to kill a few people. He went to his apartment managers office and shot and killed him and wounded another tenant. Then he drove to the Arby's and walked in and started shooting the manager, who tried to crawl out the drive-thru window. Then he drove to his mother's house and shot and killed her before he gave up. My brother worked the scene at the home as primary Detective.

I checked the distance from the booth where my family and I usually sit to the counter where the shooter was. 50'. If I had been there and been armed with one of my carry guns that I am absolutely confident with, then I could have saved that woman's life, and the life of the mother.

Now I know the typical gun owner says that they will run and hide in such a scenario rather than attempt to engage the shooter and end the incident. That is their choice, and based on the attitude and abilities on display in threads in which people shoot a 3" group at 7 yards and announce that the gun is "incredibly accurate", is probably best for everyone.

I know that for myself, as former military and law enforcement, that if I was in such a situation and decided to run and take cover rather than try to save innocent lives, then I would hate myself for the rest of my miserable life. Of course you don't take the shot if you don't have a clear backdrop, or if there is a chance of hitting an innocent bystander. I'm not advocating reckless firing of a weapon in public. But if some sick bastard is walking along and shooting civilians, then you do everything you can to stop it.

The chances that I will ever have to fire my weapon in either an up close and personal, or an active shooter at distance scenario is slim to none. But I like to be prepared for both, and I think others should be prepared as well.

That is why I advocate verifying your pistol's and carry ammo's accuracy at 25 yards. A pistol that is more accurate at 25 yards is going to be more accurate in your hands than one that is not. It is a simple matter of physics. If a pistol is 50% more accurate shooting off the bench at 25 yards, then it is 50% more accurate once you factor in human error.

 

[WVsig]

I agree with almost everything you are saying. The part that the avg CCW holder will miss is the amount to time you personally put in to be confident in making a 15 yard shot under stress and hitting a bad guy who is already shooting a gun. 99.999% of CCW holders put in very little time into learning how to shoot well. Keep up the good work but try to remember that lots of people will miss the work part of the equation and think that it is their "duty" to act in a situation that is above their skill level and make things worse not better. For me every scenario will be different. The idea that we can plan it out is a false narrative but one many of us still do. I try to be realistic about my skillset and abilities. I know what I am capable of and I know where my priorities fall. My #1 duty is not to come home to my wife in a wooden box. I am willing to protect others within my skill set but I am not going to violate that #1 duty. I think every CCW holder should think about those things. Clearly you have and I commend you for that.

That is why I advocate verifying your pistol's and carry ammo's accuracy at 25 yards. A pistol that is more accurate at 25 yards is going to be more accurate in your hands than one that is not. It is a simple matter of physics. If a pistol is 50% more accurate shooting off the bench at 25 yards, then it is 50% more accurate once you factor in human error.

This is the only part I disagree with. The accuracy %s do not have a 1 to 1 ratio relationship. If I take 2 Glock 17s. One shoots 1" groups at 25 yards and the other shoots 2" out of rest this does not mean in my hands one is going to shoot 4" and then 8" respectively under stress. The mechanical accuracy part of the equation is a starting point not and does not contribute to the variance in accuracy introduced by human error. Now the in this example I am never going to be able to make the pistol shoot more accurately than the rest but the amount of error I can introduce is unlimited. The error introduced by the shooter is exponential while the pistols mechanical accuracy is fixed. The human error part is the wild card. It will vary shot to shot. Scenario to Scenario. There is no way to calculate it and there is no limit to its effect. It truly is the unknown variable. So I agree it is best to start with as accurate a pistol as possible but that accuracy does not "necessarily" or "inherently" translate to more accurate shots on target. IMHO

 

[94045]

Thank you for the reasonable and detailed reply. I don't think we are too far off in our assumptions and line of thinking.

In years past, the vast majority of self defense shootings involved a person that was being victimized for the purpose of robbery, rape, or assault. Most of those are up close and personal and being able to draw and fire quickly and accurately at ranges of usually less than a few feet. This is what most CCW holders anticipate and train for. Your stance and points are perfectly in line with such a scenario. I was in two such scenarios in which I had to draw my weapon but did not have to fire, thank God.

But today, there is an increase in what is referred to as an "active shooter" scenario, in which someone goes into a public place such as a church, a bar, a mall, or school, and his intent is to kill as many people as possible. Sometimes with a rifle, sometimes with a shotgun, and sometimes with a pistol.

In nearly every one of those scenarios, the shooter was in an open area and a greater distance away from his victims. This is why I practice at greater distances. A couple of years ago, in my hometown, in the Arby's restaurant where my family and I occasionally go to eat, there was an active shooter situation. A mentally ill young man used a S&W SDVE to kill a few people. He went to his apartment managers office and shot and killed him and wounded another tenant. Then he drove to the Arby's and walked in and started shooting the manager, who tried to crawl out the drive-thru window. Then he drove to his mother's house and shot and killed her before he gave up. My brother worked the scene at the home as primary Detective.

I checked the distance from the booth where my family and I usually sit to the counter where the shooter was. 50'. If I had been there and been armed with one of my carry guns that I am absolutely confident with, then I could have saved that woman's life, and the life of the mother.

Now I know the typical gun owner says that they will run and hide in such a scenario rather than attempt to engage the shooter and end the incident. That is their choice, and based on the attitude and abilities on display in threads in which people shoot a 3" group at 7 yards and announce that the gun is "incredibly accurate", is probably best for everyone.

I know that for myself, as former military and law enforcement, that if I was in such a situation and decided to run and take cover rather than try to save innocent lives, then I would hate myself for the rest of my miserable life. Of course you don't take the shot if you don't have a clear backdrop, or if there is a chance of hitting an innocent bystander. I'm not advocating reckless firing of a weapon in public. But if some sick bastard is walking along and shooting civilians, then you do everything you can to stop it.

The chances that I will ever have to fire my weapon in either an up close and personal, or an active shooter at distance scenario is slim to none. But I like to be prepared for both, and I think others should be prepared as well.

That is why I advocate verifying your pistol's and carry ammo's accuracy at 25 yards. A pistol that is more accurate at 25 yards is going to be more accurate in your hands than one that is not. It is a simple matter of physics. If a pistol is 50% more accurate shooting off the bench at 25 yards, then it is 50% more accurate once you factor in human error.

We will have to agree to disagree. With a 6" target zone I personally think a full magazine within 1.5" of center and half of those within 0.5" is more effective than 1 round within 0.5" within the target zone. That's the difference between shooting for 3" Groups and 1" Groups.

 

[uzimon]

Handloads 124gr truncated cone coated over to titegroup
A little smoky tho