# New pistol purchase



## jhicks999 (Feb 16, 2014)

I own a .357 magnum revolver and a couple of rifles. I have never owned a semi-auto pistol. I have shot a number of pistols and find my accuracy substantially better with them. I have been doing some research and would like to purchase a pistol in the near future. I am considering one of the following handguns in 9mm.

Glock 17 Gen 4
Springfield XDM
Beretta 92fs Inox

I am open to suggestions including other handguns not listed. Please let me know what any of you would suggest. As I indicated this will be my first pistol purchase.

Ps. I am not afraid of the Glock 17 without an external safety because revolvers are similar in this way. You pull the trigger and the gun fires.


----------



## qwiksdraw (May 11, 2012)

Stay away from 1911s. You will seduced by the trigger and it's magical action, the grip will make the gun feel like a natural extension of your arm and sight picture will make you think the holes in the center of the target is an optical illusion. Don't do it. Remember, I warned you first.

The semis you shot so far are great guns too, you are definitely starting out right.


----------



## jhicks999 (Feb 16, 2014)

Thanks. I really don't like the 1911s. I am not accurate with them.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

From the handguns you have listed, any one of them will serve you well for years to come. 

If someone happens to mention Taurus, just smile and move on.

BTW.....I'm not quite sure why, but I've kind of come to like the polymer frames as of late. Easier on the ole wallet as well.


----------



## AdamSmith (Dec 18, 2013)

qwiksdraw said:


> Stay away from 1911s. You will seduced by the trigger and it's magical action, the grip will make the gun feel like a natural extension of your arm and sight picture will make you think the holes in the center of the target is an optical illusion. Don't do it. Remember, I warned you first.
> 
> The semis you shot saf are great guns too, you are definitely starting out right.


Yah and then you will further want something even better than a 1911A1 like a Sig or a CZ or a Ruger, which gives you double and single action, unlike the 1911A1 which is only single action. Those are irresistible guns, once they get you hooked.

Before you buy a Glock or a Glock-knock-off, you should try them out. You should also try out the non-Glock's, which have external hammers on them.

One of these two schools of pistols will likely suit you better than the other.

For the confirmed Glock-aholics, the Glock 17 is the one that is most often recommended, for starters. 9mm is a good choice in caliber. JHP's (hollow points) are the best choice in ammo.

If you shoot a pistol more accurately than a revolver, then you are doing something really wrong. Revolvers normally have barrels twice as long as a pistol, therefore revolvers normally fire groups half the size of pistols. Don't know what you are doing wrong, but someone needs to help you fix it.

Of course, if your revolvers are all snubbies, then no wonder their accuracy is crap.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

jhicks999 said:


> Thanks. I really don't like the 1911s. I am not accurate with them.


Because I find that to be an interesting statement, I'd like you to explain further, if you don't mind.

You say, about the 1911 platform, "I am not accurate with them."
Does that mean:
• That you cannot keep all of your shots in a relatively small area on the target?
• That you can keep your shots in a small area, but can't hit the center/vitals of the target?
• That you cannot consistently hit the target at all?
• Or is it something else? (Please explain in as much detail as you can.)

Thanks!


----------



## jhicks999 (Feb 16, 2014)

4" barrel on the revolver. I don't care for the sights. I can place 7 rounds on the target at 20 feet or so but the grouping is not tight.


----------



## jhicks999 (Feb 16, 2014)

I can hit the target at 15 feet. There is no real grouping on multiple shots, just hits somewhere on the target. It might be the 1911 I shot was not in good shape because the owner of it did worse than I did and he is an ex-marine that has experience with them.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Because I find that to be an interesting statement, I'd like you to explain further, if you don't mind.
> 
> You say, about the 1911 platform, "I am not accurate with them."
> Does that mean:
> ...


Maybe the OP is a vet, and old enough to have shot the Colt 1911's in the military.

The ones I shot were so loose, they literally rattled when you ran.

That was my first experience with a Colt 1911. Justified or not, it took me a while to get past that and look at a 1911 to buy once I got out of the military.


----------



## AdamSmith (Dec 18, 2013)

jhicks999 said:


> I can hit the target at 15 feet. There is no real grouping on multiple shots, just hits somewhere on the target. It might be the 1911 I shot was not in good shape because the owner of it did worse than I did and he is an ex-marine that has experience with them.


Yes, it might be the gun. Sounds like a burned out barrel to me.


----------



## AdamSmith (Dec 18, 2013)

jhicks999 said:


> 4" barrel on the revolver. I don't care for the sights. I can place 7 rounds on the target at 20 feet or so but the grouping is not tight.


Then maybe it's the sights. Accuracy is normally determined by barrel length and trigger pull. Longer barrel and softer trigger equals greater accuracy.


----------



## berettatoter (Sep 1, 2011)

jhicks999 said:


> I own a .357 magnum revolver and a couple of rifles. I have never owned a semi-auto pistol. I have shot a number of pistols and find my accuracy substantially better with them. I have been doing some research and would like to purchase a pistol in the near future. I am considering one of the following handguns in 9mm.
> 
> Glock 17 Gen 4
> Springfield XDM
> ...


Nothing wrong with either of the three. It comes down to which one you would prefer, after you shoot each one to see how you like them. Personally, I'm partial to Berettas, but I am also a little bias about that too. :mrgreen:


----------



## AdamSmith (Dec 18, 2013)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Because I find that to be an interesting statement, I'd like you to explain further, if you don't mind.
> 
> You say, about the 1911 platform, "I am not accurate with them."
> Does that mean:
> ...


Mr Hicks, allow me to introduce to you Mr Steve.

He is one of our genius professorial contributors. He actually knows more than I do about guns and history -- which is extremely difficult to achieve!

He will take good care of you.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

AdamSmith said:


> ..._f your revolvers are all snubbies, then no wonder their accuracy is crap._


_
Don't ever go up against my wife, Jean. Her accuracy with her 2"-barrel, .38 Special, Airweight Bodyguard is quite acceptable.
It's not her favorite pistol. She finds it uncomfortable to shoot. But she easily makes quick center-of-mass and head shots out to about 15 yards.

In the case of modern revolvers and semi-autos, a short barrel is no impediment to accuracy.
However, a short barrel frequently causes unpracticed shooters to feel discomfort and to flinch._


----------



## AdamSmith (Dec 18, 2013)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Don't ever go up against my wife, Jean. Her accuracy with her 2"-barrel, .38 Special, Airweight Bodyguard is quite acceptable.
> It's not her favorite pistol. She finds it uncomfortable to shoot. But she easily makes quick center-of-mass and head shots out to about 15 yards.
> 
> In the case of modern revolvers and semi-autos, a short barrel is no impediment to accuracy.
> However, a short barrel frequently causes unpracticed shooters to feel discomfort and to flinch.


Not only that, but the 7th Commandment, by Moses, in the Bible, says to stay away from other guys' wives as well !!!

And Jesus said don't even think about it.


----------



## jhicks999 (Feb 16, 2014)

I can hit the target center mass but no groupings. The hits are from the upper chest to the groin on a silhouette. I really don't like the sights on my revolver. When I shoot rifles the groupings are tight with iron sights. I know they are different but I would like to see some form of grouping with a handgun.

I have shot a couple of 9mm handguns and I am getting decent groupings. I aim for the chest there is a hole there.


----------



## AdamSmith (Dec 18, 2013)

jhicks999 said:


> I can hit the target center mass but no groupings. The hits are from the upper chest to the groin on a silhouette. I really don't like the sights on my revolver. When I shoot rifles the groupings are tight with iron sights. I know they are different but I would like to see some form of grouping with a handgun.
> 
> I have shot a couple of 9mm handguns and I am getting decent groupings. I aim for the chest there is a hole there.


When you compare guns, you need to sandbag them at the range. Then you need to watch your sight picture and be careful about your trigger squeeze.

Firing off-hand tells you nothing.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

jhicks999 said:


> I can hit the target center mass but no groupings. The hits are from the upper chest to the groin on a silhouette...


Tell me your handedness: Right or left?

Tell me the direction of the hits-spread: Center upper chest down toward the lower left?

(The problem is your pistol-shooting technique, not the gun.)


----------



## WilliamDahl (Feb 10, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> If someone happens to mention Taurus, just smile and move on.


I have a Taurus PT92 and a Beretta 96FS. The Taurus is just as dependable as the Beretta from what I've been able to determine. I also own a PT111, PT140, and PT145 and have never had a problem with any of them. The only complaints that I had on those last three were that mags were not as readily available (i.e. less competition = higher prices).

I have also had good luck with my Para Ordnance P14.45.

The normal carry condition for a Glock is Condition-0. Some people will *claim* that it is Condtion-1, but they are mistakenly considering the split trigger a "safety". Sure, that's the same condition level as a revolver, but the trigger pull is much lighter. If you decide to carry a Glock, it is important to have a good holster that fully covers the trigger so that it is less likely that you will get an AD. Personally, I'm not sure that I would recommend a Glock as a person's first semi-auto even though I own a few Glocks. Now, you *can* increase the Glock's (5.5 lb) trigger pull with the NY1 (8 lb) or NY2 (12 lb) triggers.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

WilliamDahl said:


> I have a Taurus PT92 and a Beretta 96FS. The Taurus is just as dependable as the Beretta from what I've been able to determine. I also own a PT111, PT140, and PT145 and have never had a problem with any of them. The only complaints that I had on those last three were that mags were not as readily available (i.e. less competition = higher prices).
> 
> I have also had good luck with my Para Ordnance P14.45.
> 
> The normal carry condition for a Glock is Condition-0. Some people will *claim* that it is Condtion-1, but they are mistakenly considering the split trigger a "safety". Sure, that's the same condition level as a revolver, but the trigger pull is much lighter. If you decide to carry a Glock, it is important to have a good holster that fully covers the trigger so that it is less likely that you will get an AD. Personally, I'm not sure that I would recommend a Glock as a person's first semi-auto even though I own a few Glocks. Now, you *can* increase the Glock's (5.5 lb) trigger pull with the NY1 (8 lb) or NY2 (12 lb) triggers.


We're all entitled to our opinions.

It's just that some are just a wee bit crazier than others.............


----------



## WilliamDahl (Feb 10, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> We're all entitled to our opinions.
> 
> It's just that some are just a wee bit crazier than others.............


Have you ever even owned a Taurus? Some people like to badmouth Taurus because they are not as expensive as some other firearms. Price does not necessarily correlate with quality though. Glocks are cheaper than Colts, but it doesn't make them less reliable.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

WilliamDahl said:


> Have you ever even owned a Taurus? Some people like to badmouth Taurus because they are not as expensive as some other firearms. Price does not necessarily correlate with quality though. Glocks are cheaper than Colts, but it doesn't make them less reliable.


I actually currently own one. It's a .22LR revolver, SS, 4" bbl., still NIB, that I purchased about 5 yrs. ago for my grand-son. He's 14 now, and will get the revolver in a few years. I think it's a model 85, but could be wrong.

And I have shot plenty of Taurus's in the past. I also know quite a few others that own more than one. I'm also aware of the problems and issues that seem to follow Taurus.

For target shooting, plinking or hunting, Taurus is sufficient. But, I'd never trust my life to one. I was in LE for almost 30 yrs. I met countless numbers of others in LE during that time. Not a single dept., or agency issued, or fellow officer carried, *ANY *Taurus as a sidearm.

Taurus never has been, or ever will be, a top-rated firearm. And, the most value any Taurus will ever command, will be the exact time you purchase it. From that moment on, it will never appreciate in value. There's a very good reason for that. Just ask anyone that has been around firearms for a good length of time.

There's a place in the market for Taurus. Nothing wrong with that. But, don't try to make it something more than it's not.....or ever will be.


----------



## Glock Doctor (Mar 14, 2011)

jhicks999 said:


> ....... I am not afraid of the Glock 17 without an external safety because revolvers are similar in this way. You pull the trigger and the gun fires.


Yeah, but when a revolver fires it doesn't do it by releasing a 75 or 80 percent pretensioned striker. Neither does a revolver (usually) have a 4 1/2, or 5 1/2 lbs. trigger.


----------



## rustygun (Apr 8, 2013)

I think with practice a person can LEARN to shoot any quality firearm accurately.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

rustygun said:


> I think with practice a person can LEARN to shoot any quality firearm accurately.


Or.....even a poor quality firearm accurately. It's all about learning how it performs (or doesn't) for that matter, and adjusting from there.

Poor quality guns are just as deadly as quality ones.


----------



## jhicks999 (Feb 16, 2014)

Right handed, lower right hits. But everyone that fires the gun left or right handed gets the same approximate hits. Right and low.



Steve M1911A1 said:


> Tell me your handedness: Right or left?
> 
> Tell me the direction of the hits-spread: Center upper chest down toward the lower left?
> 
> (The problem is your pistol-shooting technique, not the gun.)


----------



## jhicks999 (Feb 16, 2014)

Right handed, lower right hits. But everyone that fires the gun left or right handed gets the same approximate hits. Right and low.



Steve M1911A1 said:


> Tell me your handedness: Right or left?
> 
> Tell me the direction of the hits-spread: Center upper chest down toward the lower left?
> 
> (The problem is your pistol-shooting technique, not the gun.)


----------



## jhicks999 (Feb 16, 2014)

Using modified weaver stance right handed lower right. Everyone that fires the gun gets spread right and lower center mass.


----------



## jhicks999 (Feb 16, 2014)

The same person that owns the 1911 also has a 38 SA pistol. I fired that and placed 6 rounds dead center then 6 rounds center forehead on a silhouette at 20 feet without a problem.


----------



## qwiksdraw (May 11, 2012)

jhicks999 said:


> Thanks. I really don't like the 1911s. I am not accurate with them.


I think you missed the humor (attempted) in my reply.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

jhicks999 said:


> Using modified weaver stance right handed lower right. Everyone that fires the gun gets spread right and lower center mass.


I retract my opinion that the problem might be your technique...unless everybody who is firing this pistol is a rank novice. :mrgreen:

If the pistol groups within a six-inch circle, but the group is right-and-low, then the problem is its sights.
If the pistol spreads a trail of hits from center-mass downward and toward the right, then the problem is probably the barrel bushing. It's easy enough to remove it, and replace it with another one that fits better. Check to see whether the barrel is loose in the bushing, and whether the bushing is loose in the slide.
It is also possible that the slide is loose and sloppy on the frame, but normally the recoil spring and the barrel link take care of this looseness on their own. I suggest also checking to see that the barrel link is properly captured by a pin at its barrel end, and the slide stop at its bottom, and that the link is neither a sloppy fit nor broken.

The problem you have experienced with the 1911 to which you refer is pretty unusual, even with a worn and sloppy pistol. It is not diagnostic of all 1911s, and should not form the basis of your entire judgment of the 1911 system.
Indeed, the 1911 is designed to be a little sloppy on purpose, and it still will fire with effective save-your-life accuracy.


----------



## Glock Doctor (Mar 14, 2011)

jhicks999, it appears that you're having these accuracy problems while you're standing right on top of the target! On the assumption (and I'm not trying to be rude) that, '_Birds of a feather flock together._' I'm inclined to have no more confidence in the accuracy results your friends are getting than I do in your own.

Who knows what you're doing wrong? Neither do I know if these off-center results have anything to do with the gun, itself. (I'd have to actually have the gun in my hands in order to figure out which component might be defective.)

Your comparison between firing an SA revolver, and a semi-automatic pistol is meaningless. In fact it's what I would expect from a modestly experienced pistol shooter. I've got the sneaking suspicion that, like most novice pistol shooters, you're having both grip and trigger control problems.

I suspect that, for the most part, you're squeezing the pistol too hard, pushing forward as you prepare to pull the trigger, jerking the trigger rather than simply pressing it straight to the rear, and flinching when you do.

These grip and trigger mistakes with a semiautomatic pistol are extremely common, and would account for both the vertical stringing of your shots, as well as the consistent low right hits. (You're, all, NORMALLY right-handed; aren't you? Because, if not, this could get much too complicated to analyze via the Internet.) If you were shooting a striker-fired pistol with a polymer frame I daresay your shots would start hitting low left.

Here's the ever-popular pistol shooting mistakes pie-chart:










Here's a YouTube link for George Harris' 'Wall Drill' which I think you (and, perhaps, your friends) would benefit from practicing.


----------

