Which handgun has the fattest grip?
- Thread starter Justaman
- Start date
- Status
While I own 3 of them, the double stack SiG P series, (226 & 229), has the "fattest" grip to me. My berettas and H&Ks are more comfortable to grip. I love the SiGs but I'm constantly looking for thinner grips. I can't use any wood grips because they make the already thick grip of the SiGs thicker. Great shooters but they aren't as comfortable for me as my other handguns.
I'd say the Glock 21. I have fairly large hands, but mine still feels kind of like trying to palm a basketball. I thought it was an unavoidable consequence of double-stacking .45ACP, until I got my XD-45.
thats either an amazingly narrowminded view, or a worryingly unimaginative one. or both.
my wife took my 50AE to the NRA handgun introduction class she attended recently, with 2 of her friends. all three ladies are under 5'8". all have small hands.
they had a fantastic time. the instructor was especially pleased as at the end of the day, everyone who had taken a turn shooting the Desert Eagle agreed there was no 'myth' or mystery, or reason to 'fear' something so seemingly powerful.
yes, it is heavy. yes, it has stout recoil. yes, it is impractical as a CCW choice. yes, it definitely has a large grip circumference.
none of that mattered though, because all those who took a turn of shooting it, had FUN. even her two friends who had never handled - let alone fired - a gun until that day.
furthermore, because the instructor was diligent enough to show them a proper two-handed grip to use with the gun, none of them suffered brass in the face, nor a front sight post in the forehead.
they wanted more, and complained about me not sending them out with more ammo ..
see above.
Kieran my point was not that they are totally useless. If you want one just for fun at the range so be it. I am however fed up with listening to "Gun Store Heros" discussing how the D.E is gods greatest gift to man, and how anyone who doesnt own one must be a sissy. I think these types own a D.E to compensate for other "short commings" . The D.E doesnt do anything that any other sanely priced auto pistol or magnum revolver doesnt do. If you want a gold plated, oversized, phallus gun, with pearl grips to play dress up with more power to you. Just dont try to convince those of us who know better that a obese paper puncher surely must be the most effective killing tool since the first machinegun. And I still stand by my statement that the ergonomics of this glorified paper weight are better suited to a three armed Arnold Schwarzeneger than your average Joe Sweatsock.
The Sig Pro 2002 with the wide grip. I can handle a pretty big grip, but on my 2340 (an earlier version in the PRO series - nearly the same gun) the wide grip was huge. I now have the smallest grip installed - fills my hand completely.
I held a Desert Eagle years ago and found the whole gun to be big and heavy, and the grip was large. Not inherently a bad thing...the gun was designed to be big. Someone mentioned S&W 59 series having a big grip. I carry a 5906 on duty, am 5'9" and have normal to smallish hands. I don't consider the grip size to be too big but that's just my opinion.
MachIVshooter
Member
First off, there are a host of "normal" autoloading handguns that cost substantially more than the Desert Eagle. The Desert Eagle .50 happens to be the most powerful autoloader manufactured in the world today. Additionally, it will rival a long arm accuracy-wise, though it is difficult to shoot a handgun that well. I can consistently pull off sub-3 inch 5-shot groups at 100 yards with my scoped 6" .50 from a rest. A better pistol shooter could probably close those groups up.
And yes, I do hunt with mine and am fully confident pulling the trigger on a deer 200 yards off if I have a steady rest, though I prefer a closer shot.
As for the DE vs. S&W 500 argument, there is one to be made. I'm not knocking the .500, but one must consider that it's 800 ft/lb energy increase over the .50 AE comes at the price of a heavier and much larger platform that holds 3 less rounds and is more difficult to fire in rapid succession. I have enjoyed the S&W 500, but it is definitely more cumbersome to carry in any type of holster than the DE. Furthermore, when you reduce the 500's barrel to the 4" model (making it similar in overall size to the DE), that muzzle energy gap closes a great deal. The .500 Mag needs a long barrel to acheive the performance that makes it attractive. Same goes for the .460.
And none of these big magnums make good defensive handguns for predators of the 2 legged variety.
I'm not trying to persuade anyone, but 99 times out of 100 negative opinions on the DE come from A) heresay, B) very limited experience, thus not having time to get used to the very different handling techniques required for this pistol or C) trying to justify not owning for other reasons because they can't/won't cough up the green to get one.
The DE is in a class all it's own, and people who own/have owned DE's tend to give glowing reviews.
Of the more common guns, the Beretta/TaurusPT92 and the Ruger P series seem to take the cake in most complaints about "too big handle".
Both fit my hand well, but with marked preference for the Taurus. A 1911's handle is too skinny for me, which makes shooting a .45 less comfortable than it could be with a larger grip. However anything bigger than the Taurus's would be too much.
Bashing the DE because it does not suit everybody is a bit unfair, isn't it?
Both fit my hand well, but with marked preference for the Taurus. A 1911's handle is too skinny for me, which makes shooting a .45 less comfortable than it could be with a larger grip. However anything bigger than the Taurus's would be too much.
Bashing the DE because it does not suit everybody is a bit unfair, isn't it?
- Status
Similar threads
