LeontheProfessional
Member
Got to go with the Glock on this one. I own two and they both have been completely reliable and perfectly accurate Out of the Box.
Which semi-auto pistol would you bet your life on out the box?
- Thread starter CZ223
- Start date
- Status
LiveLife
Member
I will base my vote on personal experience - we had the same discussion for years at the range while we waited to shoot our match stages. I will add to the discussion not just what the "hand gun" will do out of the box, but what the actual real world combat environment will do to the hand gun.
During the last 15 years of match shooting, I have seen a lot of magazine caused jams, failure-to-feed/chamber, failure-to-fire, failure-to-cycle, stove-pipe, and no round in chamber due to magazine not fully locked in during live match sessions and during practice sessions. And these were all well broken-in, highly maintained and superbly lubed high end open/limited class pistols/custom magazines and high end factory production pistols/magazines. For us, pistol malfunction is a part of match shooting reality and we incorporate fast/reliable clearing of pistols into our shooting practice. Even a brand new out of the box pistol will experience stoppage due to external environmental factors in combat situations.
I started out shooting modified 1911 limited class then moved to production class shooting stock Glock 22 on a dare from the range master to see if we could go against the limited shooters. After shooting the production class for some time, I bought another brand new Glock 22 as a spare.
To test the discussions we had regarding which pistol would be the one to take to combat, at the next match, I threw the brand new Glock 22 (that was never shot) into the dirt pile at the range and kicked it around thoroughly to make sure it was full of dirt and sand to duplicate a soldier having dropped his pistol in the sand during a sand storm (and having no cleaning kit accessible due to the immediacy of a fire fight).
After racking the slide several times and shaking off the dirt/sand, I shot my match stages without any malfunction that day (my accuracy did not suffer with the new Glock either). The offer was extended to everyone present at the range (There were about 20 shooters) to do the same to prove the reliability/functionality of their pistol, but no one took on the challenge. They questioned whether their pistols would be functional after the dirt/sand bath.
We all knew Glocks had 4 self-cleaning frame rails that cleared the dirt/sand out of the slide rails when the slide was racked. Any pistol that has full-length slide/guide rails (1911, Beretta 92, Browning HP, CZ, etc.) would trap dirt/sand in between the rails and cause the slide to malfunction. S&W Sigma is built with the same 4 self-cleaning frame rails and Springfield XDs have similar but longer frame rails.
We no longer had the "Which pistol would you take to combat?" discussion after that day. To my surprise, many 1911 shooters quietly disclosed that they put their match pistols in the safe but slept with their loaded Glocks close by.
Mind you, I love my 1911s - natural point grip and produce the smallest group sizes of semi-autos I own. But the thread question was not the best or the most accurate pistol - just the most reliable "out of the box" pistol you never fired before to take to combat.
So, my choices would be:
1. Glock
2. S&W Sigma (why not M&P? I have one and it requires actuating a small lever in the magazine well to field strip - in low light field situations, this is difficult)
3. Springfield XD
During the last 15 years of match shooting, I have seen a lot of magazine caused jams, failure-to-feed/chamber, failure-to-fire, failure-to-cycle, stove-pipe, and no round in chamber due to magazine not fully locked in during live match sessions and during practice sessions. And these were all well broken-in, highly maintained and superbly lubed high end open/limited class pistols/custom magazines and high end factory production pistols/magazines. For us, pistol malfunction is a part of match shooting reality and we incorporate fast/reliable clearing of pistols into our shooting practice. Even a brand new out of the box pistol will experience stoppage due to external environmental factors in combat situations.
I started out shooting modified 1911 limited class then moved to production class shooting stock Glock 22 on a dare from the range master to see if we could go against the limited shooters. After shooting the production class for some time, I bought another brand new Glock 22 as a spare.
To test the discussions we had regarding which pistol would be the one to take to combat, at the next match, I threw the brand new Glock 22 (that was never shot) into the dirt pile at the range and kicked it around thoroughly to make sure it was full of dirt and sand to duplicate a soldier having dropped his pistol in the sand during a sand storm (and having no cleaning kit accessible due to the immediacy of a fire fight).
After racking the slide several times and shaking off the dirt/sand, I shot my match stages without any malfunction that day (my accuracy did not suffer with the new Glock either). The offer was extended to everyone present at the range (There were about 20 shooters) to do the same to prove the reliability/functionality of their pistol, but no one took on the challenge. They questioned whether their pistols would be functional after the dirt/sand bath.
We all knew Glocks had 4 self-cleaning frame rails that cleared the dirt/sand out of the slide rails when the slide was racked. Any pistol that has full-length slide/guide rails (1911, Beretta 92, Browning HP, CZ, etc.) would trap dirt/sand in between the rails and cause the slide to malfunction. S&W Sigma is built with the same 4 self-cleaning frame rails and Springfield XDs have similar but longer frame rails.
We no longer had the "Which pistol would you take to combat?" discussion after that day. To my surprise, many 1911 shooters quietly disclosed that they put their match pistols in the safe but slept with their loaded Glocks close by.
Mind you, I love my 1911s - natural point grip and produce the smallest group sizes of semi-autos I own. But the thread question was not the best or the most accurate pistol - just the most reliable "out of the box" pistol you never fired before to take to combat.
So, my choices would be:
1. Glock
2. S&W Sigma (why not M&P? I have one and it requires actuating a small lever in the magazine well to field strip - in low light field situations, this is difficult)
3. Springfield XD
Last edited:
dogngun
Member
The ones I carry mostly every day - ARMSCOR-made 1911's.
I have 2 now, had one before this-an earlier version.
I love them both, carry the compact version most days and the full size on occasion. Both are VERY accurate and always reliable.
I started shooting 1911's in the '70's, and only own Armscor (RIA or older Charles Daly) made 1911's now...they have proven themselves to me for years now.
mark
I have 2 now, had one before this-an earlier version.
I love them both, carry the compact version most days and the full size on occasion. Both are VERY accurate and always reliable.
I started shooting 1911's in the '70's, and only own Armscor (RIA or older Charles Daly) made 1911's now...they have proven themselves to me for years now.
mark
g17 +1
Best out of box? Ammeters' opinion? Sig Sauer -- take your pick -- P220 (45ACP), P225, P226 (9mm), and P239 (40SW) have all been rock solid for me, and none have had any work done. All seem to get good reviews. My P226 has had many more rounds (several thousand) fired than the others, especially the nearly new P239 in 40SW. When I practice in earnest (not often enough) and shoot 100's of rounds, it is the 9mm I shoot, just because of the cost of the ammo and the amount of 9mm ball I have on hand. But the new Custom Shop P239 with night sights is a very fine weapon, especially if you have large hands. Just wish it were cheaper to shoot 40SW. 
BDS good post
I never realized why the rails were designed like that before. Now that I know it does make good sense. I probably wont throw my Glock into a sand pit to test the theory, though if I get into three gun matches I will probably drop it into one at some point.
I pretty much agree with your choices across the board though I did put the XD in second place to the Glock.
I never realized why the rails were designed like that before. Now that I know it does make good sense. I probably wont throw my Glock into a sand pit to test the theory, though if I get into three gun matches I will probably drop it into one at some point.
I pretty much agree with your choices across the board though I did put the XD in second place to the Glock.The M&P has a similar feature, as well.
I've been told that M&Ps that do not have the magazine safety/disconnect can be field stripped by dry-firing, as well. Perhaps somebody who has one can verify this claim. When I get a chance, I'll try this with mine with an empty magazine inserted to see whether it works.
LiveLife
Member
Manco, if S&W M&P drops the mag safety/disconnect lever, I would make it #2 (it shoots well and very comfortable in hand - unlike a Glock).
So why did I favor Glock with uncomfortable grip as #1 choice? This is why (sorry to M&P and XD fans in advance):
M&P and XD to me are essentially match grade pistols with tight tolerances. They have good ergonomics, function well, and shoot very well (They truly have made many improvements over the Glock).
However, this thread's original question was,
Glocks were not made to be the most accurate pistols. They are very loose in tolerance by design. Of these, the most significant is the loose chamber. We experienced partially sized cases that fit comfortably in Glock chambers that did not fit the M&P or XD chambers. The loose tolerance helps cases feed/extract better in and out of the chamber. Also, Glocks have very large extractors that look like scoops (and perhaps this is the reason why 40 to 9mm conversion barrels do not require extractor change to work reliably).
What if, things went really bad and the only available ammunition you had was your friend/neighbor's reloads and he did not full-length size the cases (accidentally or intentionally). Chances are they will chamber better in a Glock.
We tested this at the range using cases that weren't quite full-length sized. Glocks chambered these cases better, even if you had to hammer the slide in with your palm the last 1/8 inch. M&P and XD chambered about 1/2 to 2/3 way in and you could not hammer the slides in with your palm.
The thread's original question was out of the box pistol to a gun fight. If you are not sure, check the chamber measurements. If fact, Glock cut their barrel ramp into the chamber so deep that bottom of the cases are not supported as much as other make barrels (and that's the reason why I practice with better supported barrels from Lone Wolf to minimize bulged cases and to extend case life for reloading).
If the thread's question was the most comfortable, naturally pointing, most accurate pistol with the maximum terminal damage that was broken in and well lubed, then we would not be having this discussion (I would be reaching for my modified 1911).
So why did I favor Glock with uncomfortable grip as #1 choice? This is why (sorry to M&P and XD fans in advance):
M&P and XD to me are essentially match grade pistols with tight tolerances. They have good ergonomics, function well, and shoot very well (They truly have made many improvements over the Glock).
However, this thread's original question was,
Glocks were not made to be the most accurate pistols. They are very loose in tolerance by design. Of these, the most significant is the loose chamber. We experienced partially sized cases that fit comfortably in Glock chambers that did not fit the M&P or XD chambers. The loose tolerance helps cases feed/extract better in and out of the chamber. Also, Glocks have very large extractors that look like scoops (and perhaps this is the reason why 40 to 9mm conversion barrels do not require extractor change to work reliably).
What if, things went really bad and the only available ammunition you had was your friend/neighbor's reloads and he did not full-length size the cases (accidentally or intentionally). Chances are they will chamber better in a Glock.
We tested this at the range using cases that weren't quite full-length sized. Glocks chambered these cases better, even if you had to hammer the slide in with your palm the last 1/8 inch. M&P and XD chambered about 1/2 to 2/3 way in and you could not hammer the slides in with your palm.
The thread's original question was out of the box pistol to a gun fight. If you are not sure, check the chamber measurements. If fact, Glock cut their barrel ramp into the chamber so deep that bottom of the cases are not supported as much as other make barrels (and that's the reason why I practice with better supported barrels from Lone Wolf to minimize bulged cases and to extend case life for reloading).
If the thread's question was the most comfortable, naturally pointing, most accurate pistol with the maximum terminal damage that was broken in and well lubed, then we would not be having this discussion (I would be reaching for my modified 1911).
Last edited:
Depending on your state's laws, I believe that you can get M&Ps without the mag disconnect from the factory, since they're listed on S&W's website:
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...angId=-1&parent_category_rn=15711&isFirearm=Y
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...angId=-1&parent_category_rn=15711&isFirearm=Y
Oh crud, I just realized that you're in California, like me.
Sorry, I think that this fringe state requires that all handguns that originally came with a mag disconnect, like the M&P, must include it. Mine has one and I don't really mind the fact myself, but I can definitely understand the drawbacks from the perspectives of others. At least in free states, people have more options.On the bright side, I did manage to field strip my M&P by dry-firing. First I removed the magazine and locked the slide back as usual to allow me to rotate the take-down lever (I have to make sure that the chamber is empty anyway), which I then do. Then while controlling the slide, I allow it to move forward to the in-battery position, insert an empty mag, pull the trigger, remove the mag, and finally remove the slide. Yes, it's not quite as simple as field stripping a Glock, which was designed to be field stripped after pulling the trigger, but it pretty much verifies that it can be done, and it would be less cumbersome without a mag disconnect to work around (there would be no need to insert an empty mag, of course).
By the way, those disturbed by having to insert an empty mag should note that I let the slide come back into battery before inserting it. For a negligent discharge to occur, you'd have to reverse the steps by inserting the mag first and the mag would have to be loaded. Make both mistakes at once, and BANG!
You did point the gun in a safe direction, didn't you? I hope so. Of course, the whole reason for S&W's design in the first place is that people sometimes neglect to check the chamber of their easy-to-field-strip Glocks, pull the trigger, and get the same BANG! result anyway. 
It's happened before, and it'll happen again. People just have to pay attention and be careful.Yeah, I don't know about others, but every M&P I've held in my hand has virtually no rattle when I shake it (I don't do this with every gun I've held, but I am a curious person
). Obviously, the molded polymer parts can only be so precise, but the steel parts seem to be fairly tight fitting for a service pistol. I've shot a couple of filthy M&Ps that haven't been cleaned for thousands of rounds and they still functioned perfectly, but I haven't put any through harsh environmental tests. That said, there are other tight-seeming pistols that work fine under most every condition, and the limited contact between the slide and slide guide rails of the M&P should help.I see your point, although the M&P hardly has a tight chamber (it's all relative) and also has a reliable, durable extractor that does not have to be changed in order to work with both .40 S&W and 9mm, either (in fact, I've seen more extractor issues with Glocks, at least while perusing various forums around the Internet).
OK, you've beaten me into submission, although I will say that I'd have to be pretty desperate to resort to a Glock
, not because it isn't a great gun overall, which it is, but I'm just not as comfortable with it. Loose tolerances can also have drawbacks, one of which is a greater likelihood of case failure (I don't think that Glock's reputation for more frequent "kabooms" is a myth but the result of engineering trade-offs). Also, if random expanded brass is less likely to fit in tighter chambers, then brass that expanded in Glock chambers may not reliably feed even in Glock chambers! Better size those cases properly if you want to live.
Last edited:
LiveLife
Member
Manco, mind you, I am a fan of Glock, but here's my take:
I believe the majority of the Glock bulged cases related to G22/G30. Browsing through the Glock forums on this topic, it appears that newer Glock barrels have better supported chambers. http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13858847
I do not have an older Glock barrel to make a comparison, but my newest G27 seems to have a better supported chamber than the comparison picture on the web. If Glock did improve the chamber support on newer barrels, replacement Glock barrels would address this one issue.
I believe the majority of the Glock bulged cases related to G22/G30. Browsing through the Glock forums on this topic, it appears that newer Glock barrels have better supported chambers. http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13858847
I do not have an older Glock barrel to make a comparison, but my newest G27 seems to have a better supported chamber than the comparison picture on the web. If Glock did improve the chamber support on newer barrels, replacement Glock barrels would address this one issue.
Last edited:
TexasBill
Member
FNP-9. It's dependable, tolerant of ammo and comes with three magazines, giving me a total of 49 rounds with just magazine changes. Many of the other pistols mentioned come with just one or two and, as I understand it, what's in the box is all you get. I figure if we're going to party, I need to have plenty of treats.
A more interesting topic might have been: "If you have to pick up a brand new semi auto "HANDGUN" unlike any that you own and go to a gunfight..."
LiveLife
Member
Now that would be an interesting thread.
perhaps we should start one, but follow with what you like/dislike about your handgun and what you have done to address/fix them to enlighten/educate those of us not familiar with each handgun in case we may have to reach for them in a gunfight.
Last edited:
Zerodefect
member
Glock 23
Lost count at 3000+ rounds since I tuned it up and gave it a good trigger. Modifying it was supposed to be bad mojo as well. It's by far my most reliable autopistol with no failures at all. Even more reliable than my revolver!
Lost count at 3000+ rounds since I tuned it up and gave it a good trigger. Modifying it was supposed to be bad mojo as well. It's by far my most reliable autopistol with no failures at all. Even more reliable than my revolver!
I wouldn't trust my life to ANY make/model semi-auto brand new . . . right out of the box.
Heck, I wouldn't even trust a new revolver right out of the box either . . . or even a great used one!
Shtuff happens on an assembly line and there will always be a few horror stories of guns out there by every maker that got out the shipping door with problems.
Nawwww . . . a little range time never hurt anybody, and it is nice to know exactly where a "new" (to you) handgun shoots, at the various distances, before you run the chance of having to use it at various distances against someone else bent on terminating your life.
Heck, I wouldn't even trust a new revolver right out of the box either . . . or even a great used one!
Shtuff happens on an assembly line and there will always be a few horror stories of guns out there by every maker that got out the shipping door with problems.
Nawwww . . . a little range time never hurt anybody, and it is nice to know exactly where a "new" (to you) handgun shoots, at the various distances, before you run the chance of having to use it at various distances against someone else bent on terminating your life.
ol' scratch
Member
My experence- CZ 75B.
sammy
Member
I am a Glock lover at heart because of the simplicity. No saftey, no DA/SA/ no mag disconnect, aftermarket parts and accuracy. My G19 goes with me to the range every visit along with a Baer TRS but the most reliable gun I own is an HK P2000 9mm V3. It has never had a failure of any kind in all the time I have owned it. Not sure how many rounds I have through it but it is quite a few. It would be the perfect pistol if it had a trigger system like the Glock. Out of the box the P2000 is my choice. For the range and competition it is Glock all the way.
Hk p7m8
Shot from out of the box with NEVER a single problem.
NEVER
Not one problem.
I have owned my HK P7M8 since 1985 and never had a jam, failure to feed, stove pipe, failure to eject or anything like that, and I've used all sorts of crazy ammo in it.
The magazine release is the easiset I've ever used.
It's completely ambi-dextrous for firing.
I also think the sqeeze-cocking mechanism is the most ingenious thing ever invented for a handgun, BASICALLY giving my P7M8 a smooth single-action trigger pull.
I can't say enough about the HK P7M8, I wish they still made em.
Shot from out of the box with NEVER a single problem.
NEVER
Not one problem.
I have owned my HK P7M8 since 1985 and never had a jam, failure to feed, stove pipe, failure to eject or anything like that, and I've used all sorts of crazy ammo in it.
The magazine release is the easiset I've ever used.
It's completely ambi-dextrous for firing.
I also think the sqeeze-cocking mechanism is the most ingenious thing ever invented for a handgun, BASICALLY giving my P7M8 a smooth single-action trigger pull.
I can't say enough about the HK P7M8, I wish they still made em.
Last edited:
MidwestRookie
Member
beretta 92fs
I was going to post, but, I realized I would NEVER buy a gun, carry it into harms way, without matching ammo to the gun.
That said:
Guns that have been Flawless out of the box:
Check that:
I don't think I've ever taken a new auto to the range, without having a pistolsmith check it.
When I was young, I reloaded for people. They bought lots of guns, and wanted ammo.
I found that certain guns required certain types, and combinations of powder and bullets to shoot well.
My favorite out of the box guns are probably Sig Sauers. That said, I don't own one, since many times, when new, they required ammo that kicked super hard to cycle the action.
I currently own a Kahr PM9, the only gun I haven't called the maker for ammo recommendations, other then revolvers.
That said:
Guns that have been Flawless out of the box:
Check that:
I don't think I've ever taken a new auto to the range, without having a pistolsmith check it.
When I was young, I reloaded for people. They bought lots of guns, and wanted ammo.
I found that certain guns required certain types, and combinations of powder and bullets to shoot well.
My favorite out of the box guns are probably Sig Sauers. That said, I don't own one, since many times, when new, they required ammo that kicked super hard to cycle the action.
I currently own a Kahr PM9, the only gun I haven't called the maker for ammo recommendations, other then revolvers.
- Status