Which pistols shoot well for you in rapid fire only?

[albanian]

Do you have or have you ever shot a pistol that was accurate in rapid fire but nothing special in slow fire? I assume this is a common thing. I know there are plenty of guns that shoot well in slow fire but not so well in rapid fire.

I know it has a lot to do with your hand shape, grip, ect. Not all of these pistols are going to behave the same for everyone. For example, I can shoot a 1911 slow fire and pretty much shoot close to the accuracy potential of the gun. When I go rapid fire with a 1911, I am spraying my shots all over the place. The gun has not become less accurate of course, I have. That is my point. Which guns can YOU shoot better in rapid fire than slow fire? I think it is much rarer to find a gun like this than one that shoot better in slow fire. I am not talking about acutally getting smaller groups in rapid fire than in slow fire of course, that is just plain stupid. I hope nobody here is that stupid to think that is what I am talking about. I am talking about relatively more accurate not actually smaller groups.

The first pistol I noticed this happen with was my Ruger P-95. As a plinker and a target gun, it was average to below average in terms of accuracy. 6" groups at 25 yards slow fire if I did my part. As a rapid fire pistol, it was great. It was easy to dump all 15 rds in a 3-4" group at 10-15 yards. For me that is good. That is pulling the trigger about as fast as I can. If I did that with a 1911, I wouldn't even hit the target with half my shots. I have seen my shots go off by miles when the 1911 starts flipping around in my hand. I am talking about one handed as well as two handed shooting here people. It is important to practice both types of shooting. Even I could stay on target if I can use a solid two hand hold with a 1911.

I mention the 1911 because I think most people are better at it in rapid fire than I am. I think it is stange that I can't shoot them as well as other designs. That is probably why I am not a huge fan of the 1911. I tend to shoot DA/SA autos the best in rapid fire and SA auto the best in slow fire.

Some other pistols I have noticed this with have been my S&W 59, Beretta 92fs, Beretta 92G. There are a few others but you get the idea. Some really stand out as being better in rapid or slow fire. Some are good at both (SA XD-9). Some are bad at both (Glock 36).

 

[45R]

All my service and target pistols rapid fire fine.

The whole thing comes down to technique and being able to prep the trigger and align the sights for the next shot.

 

[thorazine]

Indeed. Trigger technique and recoil management.

What are sights?

 

[f4t9r]

mine shoot well either way, depends on the shooter Im better slow fire my son is better rapid fire.

 

[osteodoc08]

I am proficient with most of my guns when it comes to rapid firing, however, my wife's P230 is very, very easy to control no matter how fast I get the shots off. Following up with another magazine is another story, due to the magazine release.

 

[OH25shooter]

All autos rapid fire. It's the holder who controls the rapid fire.

 

[Furncliff]

What do you consider rapid fire?

 

[albanian]

Wow! I thought I would get at least one good answer. Everybody seems to be missing the point of my question.

 

[Silent Bob]

5-inch steel-frame Government Model 1911s

 

[Kramer Krazy]

Best two I've fired for rapid fire has been my Ruger P89-DC and my wife's S&W 5903. My Ruger is nothing special for slow fire, and not actually any life-changing event for firing. My wife's 5903 is a great gun for anything and everything. Shoots better than most guns I've shot, under any condition, and it will fire anything you put in it.

 

[PO2Hammer]

For some reason I can rapid fire any H&K USP better than my Glock or Sig (shooting over the sights).
I never had much luck in the accuracy department with my H&K USP .40 and ended up selling it.
My Sig P226 .40 is very accurate and more ergonomic, but not as instinctive under rapid fire.
I shot a USP 9mm recently and it shot VERY accuratly for me, so I ordered one. Maybe it will be both fast and accurate.

 

[Ankeny]

Wow! I thought I would get at least one good answer. Everybody seems to be missing the point of my question.

That ought to tell you something. FWIW, if you are shooting a 15 round group into 3-4 inches at 15 yards you are either the hottest pistolero going, or our definitions of rapid fire are considerably different. I would consider rapid fire something like a Mozambique Drill in under 1.5 seconds from the holster.

 

[albanian]

"FWIW, if you are shooting a 15 round group into 3-4 inches at 15 yards you are either the hottest pistolero going, or our definitions of rapid fire are considerably different. I would consider rapid fire something like a Mozambique Drill in under 1.5 seconds from the holster."

No, I am not very good in rapid fire, that is why some pistols work better for me than others. Rapid fire for me is probably quite slow for some people. I am talking about aiming at a target and shooting as fast as I can while still being able to control the gun. I shoot full sized 9mms so recoil is not a factor. There are a lot of people that can do that with no problem.

I said 10-15 yards not 15 yards only. I have no doubt I can shoot 15 shots into 3-4 groups at 10 yards rapid fire with a gun that works for me. It is not 1.5 seconds but it is a lot faster than I shoot when I shoot Bullseye.

 

[Ankeny]

Rapid fire for me at 10 yards would be splits on the low to mid teens. For most folks, the faster they shoot the faster the fundamentals erode. In order to shoot fast, a person must have good grip, balance, stance, vision, and fire control. Some of those elements are greatly enhanced by the ergonomics of the gun. Frankly, I don't see how anyone could shoot a pistol better at speed than they do at a more leisurely pace. I guess the concept just escapes me.

 

[albanian]

"Frankly, I don't see how anyone could shoot a pistol better at speed than they do at a more leisurely pace. I guess the concept just escapes me."

I get the feeling that a lot of concepts must escape you.

I guess when I took the time to write this out, I had you in mind.

"I am not talking about acutally getting smaller groups in rapid fire than in slow fire of course, that is just plain stupid. I hope nobody here is that stupid to think that is what I am talking about. I am talking about relatively more accurate not actually smaller groups."

You read my post right? You didn't just read the title and jump in like you knew what you were talking about did you? It is responses like yours that make me want to throw up my hands in defeat. I am speaking English right? I am not talking to two year olds am I? Why is it so hard to understand what I am asking? My question was simply, which pistols do YOU shoot relativly better rapid fire than slow fire. I am not the only one that has noticed that some pistols come into there own in rapid fire am I?

My example was my Ruger P-95. It was very average at slow fire but it is pretty good at rapid fire. My groups were not smaller at rapid fire but they were not a whole lot larger either. That is what impressed me. I can take 10 pistols and fire them slow fire and I will be able to tell you that some are more accurate than others. If I take the same 10 pistols and shoot them rapid fire, some will be easier to shoot well than others. My point is, the top three slow fire pistols may not be the top three rapid fire pistols. It may turn out that the top three rapid fire pistols are the least accurate at slow fire. That is what surprised me about the Ruger P-95. It was not very accurate in slow fire but it was one of the best rapid fire pistols I have shot. For whatever reason, I could hit well with it fast. I can't say the same for a 1911 for example. I can shoot 1911s slow fire well but when I try rapid fire, I would be better off with a Ruger P-95 if I actually wanted to hit my targets.

 

[bdutton]

Shooting rapid fire is all about trigger control. You have to maintain constant pressure on the trigger during the recovery/recoil.

1st shot breaks, release trigger, begin consistent trigger pressure, recover sight picture, bring sights back onto target all the while maintaining that (increasing) trigger pressure, BANG! shot goes off in target area if all goes well.

This is true for whatever gun you shoot.

 

[saltydog452]

I can put more holes in the paper, quicker, and in a smaller group with the BHP.

salty.


Edited: I assumed that you weren't talking about the 'Slow, Timed, and Rapid Fire' events of NRA Outdoor Pistol.

sd.

 

[bluto]

Great question! I know ex-actly what you're talking about. FWIW, I shoot a variety of pistols from 1911's, BHP, SIG's, Glocks, S&W/Colt/Ruger revolvers. I go to the range 1 to 2 times per week. My stance, grip, sight and trigger control have all settled-in. I'm no IDPA, IPSC pistolero, but I'd say that I'm a pretty consistant shooter with all my handguns except one.

I shoot a lot of slow fire for accuracy and follow up with some faster (1 shot/sec. - maybe a little better) drills. In every case my groups expand, as you'd expect. But I'm not throwing flyers all over the place or anything. The groups stay in the same area, just bigger.

However, my G22 just defies my ability to be consistant. I'm always getting flyers in a 10 shot group when I'm trying to get really tight groups at, say 15 or 25 yards. When I shoot that pistol faster, my groups are not necessarily smaller, but they're not bigger either. And they're generally patterned more evenly.

So, with my G22 (Glock .40) I'm just as good shooting fast as I am shooting slow.

 

[Moonclip]

Someone once told me that with a HK VP70 he had he was able to easily rapid fire it well but I did not ever see him do it. I had a handgun I was able to do rapid fire well withalmost as good if not better than slow DA fire,but it was a revolver and in 22lr and took a lot of practice.

 

[Ankeny]

I am talking about relatively more accurate not actually smaller groups.

Flame away, but with comments like that it's pretty easy to tell which of us is out to lunch. FWIW, anyone who truly knows what it takes to shoot fast and accurately will read your posts and simply :banghead:

Why don't you just forget trying to redefine the accepted notion of accuracy and simply ask if the ergonomics of one platform vs. another can enhance the overall "shootability" of a pistol at speed? In any event, most folks would be better served to learn and master the fundamentals of shooting instead of arguing rhetoric on the Internet. That reminds me, time to dry fire.

 

[albanian]

Bluto wrote:
"Great question! I know ex-actly what you're talking about. FWIW, I shoot a variety of pistols from 1911's, BHP, SIG's, Glocks, S&W/Colt/Ruger revolvers. I go to the range 1 to 2 times per week. My stance, grip, sight and trigger control have all settled-in. I'm no IDPA, IPSC pistolero, but I'd say that I'm a pretty consistant shooter with all my handguns except one.

I shoot a lot of slow fire for accuracy and follow up with some faster (1 shot/sec. - maybe a little better) drills. In every case my groups expand, as you'd expect. But I'm not throwing flyers all over the place or anything. The groups stay in the same area, just bigger."

Bingo! That is what I am talking about. There are certain pistols that just click for some people in rapid fire. I thought it was a common thing but now I think that it is not as common as I first thought. It took me about 15 years to find a pistol that was really good at rapid fire for me. For the first 10 years I didn't have many pistols but in the last 5-6 years, I have been buying and trying as many as I could. What I have found is, there are certain pistols that really do work a LOT better for me in rapid fire than others.

The first one I found was the Ruger P-95 but since then, I have had a few others that did just as well. Right now, my SA XD-9 is just as good as my P-95 ever was at rapid fire but it is also accurate at slow aimed fire as well. It is a nice bonus.






Ankeny wrote:

"Why don't you just forget trying to redefine the accepted notion of accuracy and simply ask if the ergonomics of one platform vs. another can enhance the overall "shootability" of a pistol at speed?"

Sounds like most people know what I am talking about now. Ankeny, I think you may have to go to the back of the class and study until you catch up with the rest of us. Your going to have to wear the Dunce hat for the rest of the day as well. Seriously, are you trying to not understand or do you really not know what we are talking about? Either way, you are not getting it and you are making yourself look foolish.

 

[HSMITH]

Man, if you haven't figured out by now that Ankeny is among the elite of pistol shooters in the US you are mistaken. With just a little homework his skill is well defined, against a national contingent. Are there better, sure on some days. Are you going to find an equal or better shooter at your club? Damn unlikely.

Very few among the readers understand what a Master card in USPSA means, let alone a master card in more than one discipline......

I am a relatively hotshot shooter on the narrow local scene, I have bet money on anyone present and any situation. I am a high C low B class USPSA shooter. Find a range comando and I am all over that............

Ankeny strikes me as one of the guys that will feed you out of your own lunchbox for a week before he tells you that you need to listen.

Substitute 'old age and treachery' for 'I told you so'. I don't know what happens. I know who and what to listen to......

 

[Navy joe]

Looks like the devil is in the details, or the definition. First off, rapid fire. If we are talking Bullseye 5rd/10 sec, that is not rapid fire. Someone mentioned 1 shot per second, still not. .15-.25sec/shot? That's rapid fire.

So we have established that we are going for "relatively more accurate not actually smaller groups." I think a better description is the shooter is less bad with whatever pistol for some reason. Maybe it suits their hand, maybe they shoot that one most often, whatever. The end result is a "rapid fire" grouping that does not display the flagrant lack of skill the user displays with other pistols. Not more accurate, less bad.

The only example I can think of would be a reverse, my stock SR70 MKIV is fine slowly fired, but when shot rapidly the slippery wood grips, smooth frontstrap, and stock beavertail conspire to worm it around in my hands. Add the disappearing diminutive front sight and I cannot hit squat rapidly with that gun.

A fast shooting gun for me that will yield desirable hits is one that stays in my hand, recoils straight back, has a snappy recoil/high slide speed, and a visible front sight. Right now(well not now, I am exiled to the ocean) that is a Glock 17 griptaped all to heck. Cannot shoot a Glock with fingergrooves near as fast as I can a smooth one. Maybe it is the gun, maybe it is my cool little front sight, maybe the ammo I load well over required power factor(because IPSC dudes use puff loads) or maybe, just maybe that is the gun I carry and shoot every outing, no matter what. Practice, who knew?....

Meanwhile, I return to the sidelines and watch OP continue to poke an well accomplished shooter with a stick

 

[cookekdjr]

5-inch steel-frame Government Model 1911s

I have not shot 1911's often, but when I have I've felt compelled to fire off several rounds at once, and they group better than almost anything else does in slow fire.
My S&W 617 is very similar. I find it shoots much better in double-action. Much, Much better, even though the single-action pull is divine, and the balance of the gun is perfect.

I have no explanation for this...just observations.
-David