# SW 986 accuracy problems



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

I just bought this 9 mm revolver. The accuracy from sandbags at 25 yards is disappointing to say the least. A 50 round group creates a 10 inch shotgun pattern. Five shot groups are 5 to 6 inches. Does S&W have problems with these guns?


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

Here is a fifty shot "pattern " fro 25 yards off of sandbags. I can under two inch groups with my Walther PPQ Q5 Match


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

Two inch five shot groups


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

How many different types and brands of ammo have you tried? The cheapest ammo rarely shoots anywhere near the best groups, so if accuracy is important to you, be prepared to spend a little bit more. Of the bargain 9mm ammo I've tried, I've had the best accuracy results with Remington/UMC 115 JHP (note these are jacketed hollow points, not FMJ; the Rem/UMC FMJ loads shoot poorly in my pistols) in the tall, 100 round double-stacked-50-round-tray boxes; the Winchester 147 JHP white-box (50-round box); Speer Lawman 124 gr FMJ; and any NATO-spec 124/125 grain weight FMJs. You can get the first two types at many gun or sporting goods stores, and my local Walmarts carry them, too. The Speer Lawman and NATO-spec stuff might be harder to find, it seems to come and go around here (shops carry it for a while, then drop it; this may be price-related, they only carry it when they can get it cheaply).


----------



## Blackhawkman (Apr 9, 2014)

Trigger control is also a factor. Barrel length, how you grip the gun, ammo. Cheap ammo doesn't work well. jmho


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

If a Glock shot an 11inch group at 25 yards from sandbags with Tula I would send it back! Under the same circumstances, I can shoot sub 2 inch 5 shot groups with my Walthe PPQ Q5 Match. Ammo is not a factor for 11 inch groups. I was able to find a defect in the rifling at the muzzle. The gun will be returned


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

Here is the defect


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

Jolr said:


> If a Glock shot an 11inch group at 25 yards from sandbags with Tula I would send it back! Under the same circumstances, I can shoot sub 2 inch 5 shot groups with my Walthe PPQ Q5 Match. Ammo is not a factor for 11 inch groups. I was able to find a defect in the rifling at the muzzle. The gun will be returned


Based on many years of pistol shooting experience, I would disagree. Even high-quality ammo can have occasional bad production runs. I would NEVER judge a handgun's accuracy based on groups shot with only one load of ANY type or brand.

I am glad, however, that you seem to have found the problem with your handgun's accuracy, and I hope you get satisfaction from the seller or manufacturer.


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

DJ Niner said:


> Based on many years of pistol shooting experience, I would disagree. Even high-quality ammo can have occasional bad production runs. I would NEVER judge a handgun's accuracy based on groups shot with only one load of ANY type or brand.
> 
> I am glad, however, that you seem to have found the problem with your handgun's accuracy, and I hope you get satisfaction from the seller or manufacturer.


Are you suggesting that if this 50 round 11inch pattern were shot with Tula, that if I used Asym or Lapua target ammo that I would get a 3 inch group?


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

Jolr said:


> Are you suggesting that if this 50 round 11inch pattern were shot with Tula, that if I used Asym or Lapua target ammo that I would get a 3 inch group?


I am suggesting exactly what I said; I would never judge a firearm's accuracy potential by testing it with only a single load. I've seen far too many large variations in accuracy between different loads to make a final call without extensive testing with AT LEAST 5 to 10 different loads. That gives a person a MUCH better idea of the gun's overall accuracy potential.

I've seen many handguns in my life that shot groups 4 times smaller with loads they "liked" than with loads they "didn't like" (for instance, 2-inch groups vs 8-inch groups). Based on that alone, it is possible that if you randomly selected a single load for accuracy testing that turned out to be that particular firearm's "least favorite" load (the one that shot the poorest), then yes, what you describe is possible. The odds of you randomly selecting the worst possible load for accuracy testing your pistol are not very high, but every gun has loads it likes and dislikes, accuracy-wise, so it IS possible, however unlikely.

That's why we actually accuracy test our handguns and other firearms, vs trying to predict or guess how well they will shoot.

Just curious: why do you shoot 50-shot groups for handgun accuracy testing? That seems to me to be more a test of shooter concentration/skill than handgun accuracy. Is there something you will be using these handguns for that requires a high level of accuracy over a long string of shots?


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

And you didn't really accuracy-test an eleven-hundred-plus-dollar Performance Center revolver with Tula 9mm ammo, did you?
Seriously?

I mean, possible barrel problem aside, that's like taking the cheap 87-octane leftover gasoline you found in the tank of your lawnmower from last summer, putting it in a highly-tuned racecar, and wondering why the car ran poorly and didn't break any track records.


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

DJ Niner said:


> And you didn't really accuracy-test an eleven-hundred-plus-dollar Performance Center revolver with Tula 9mm ammo, did you?
> Seriously?
> 
> I mean, possible barrel problem aside, that's like taking the cheap 87-octane leftover gasoline you found in the tank of your lawnmower from last summer, putting it in a highly-tuned racecar, and wondering why the car ran poorly and didn't break any track records.


I did not use Tula. I was just using that as an example of one extreme of the spectrum. Why 50 shot groups? Why not 3 shot groups as some rifle shooters use? The more rounds fired in a group the better the indication of a guns inherent mechanical accuracy, presuming of course a good rest and shooter skills. If someone can't concentrate for 50 shoots they might have ADHD! Lol!


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

Jolr said:


> I did not use Tula. I was just using that as an example of one extreme of the spectrum. Why 50 shot groups? Why not 3 shot groups as some rifle shooters use? The more rounds fired in a group the better the indication of a guns inherent mechanical accuracy, presuming of course a good rest and shooter skills. If someone can't concentrate for 50 shoots they might have ADHD! Lol!


I think the reason many use 5 or 6 shot groups, as that was a "full gun-load" back in the revolver days, and keeping it as the common standard made it easier to compare revolver and pistol accuracy.

Once you have to break-out of position to reload, it's very difficult to get back into the exact same position, with the same arm and grip tension, even when using sandbags. Even a slight variation can affect the POI of the subsequent sub-group(s) within the larger group.


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

DJ Niner said:


> I think the reason many use 5 or 6 shot groups, as that was a "full gun-load" back in the revolver days, and keeping it as the common standard made it easier to compare revolver and pistol accuracy.
> 
> Once you have to break-out of position to reload, it's very difficult to get back into the exact same position, with the same arm and grip tension, even when using sandbags. Even a slight variation can affect the POI of the subsequent sub-group(s) within the larger group.


This might be your personal experience but not mine. Statistically speaking, the larger the sample size, the more significant are the findings. More shots in a group give a more statistally significant result! Case closed


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Joir, have you had anyone else shoot the pistol, might be an option. Likewise, if I were going for the smallest groups I'd bring it in to 10-15 yards to see where I was shooting. At first I'd use UMC, WWB or the like would be my suggestion.

If the barrel's crown is damaged, that indeed would affect accuracy. I shot Tula brass ammo once and found the round to be inaccurate compared to others with Perfecta 170 grain 40S&W being absolutely the worst, that crap even choked up a Glock 22 gen 3 if you can beleive it.:smt1099


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

Here is my group. No this want done with shotgun. How would shooting at 10 yards tell me anything. There is literally metal missing from the rifling at the muzzle


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Jolr said:


> Here is my group. No this want done with shotgun. How would shooting at 10 yards tell me anything. There is literally metal missing from the rifling at the muzzle


How prey tell did that happen? Was the pistol bought used, did you do it, or do you believe it came from the factory in that condition?


----------



## rustygun (Apr 8, 2013)

Talk to S&W. If it is their problem they will make it right.


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

I bought the gun new. This was my second time shooting it. It is now on the Fed Ex truck going back to S&W.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Jolr said:


> I bought the gun new. This was my second time shooting it. It is now on the Fed Ex truck going back to S&W.


I'd say a major oversight with quality control on this one. I've bought numerous revolvers made by S&W and never an issue. Let us know how it goes.


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

I shot my Canik TP9SFX with Wolf ammo at 25 yards from a solid rest.


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

Here is the result on a 5.5 inch target


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

Here are 50 round of Asym Precision 147 grain ammo


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

Compare these to groups with those from the 986. Wolf was surprisingly accurate


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

Did you have an optical sight on the 986, too?


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

DJ Niner said:


> Did you have an optical sight on the 986, too?


Are you saying that iron sights are responsible for an 11 inch group at 25 yards?


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

I didn't think it was that hard of a question. But from your response, I'll deduce the answer is "no".

You seem compelled to compare the accuracy of two very different firearms, indicating you think one should shoot as well as the other (or at the very least, it should shoot far better than it is currently shooting). Yet you are talking about two firearms that are different action types, shooting a very small selection of ammo types/brands, and now (apparently) one is optically-sighted while the other is being shot only with iron sights. A good optical sight does make it easier for most shooters to shoot smaller groups and/or hit smaller targets. I shouldn't have to explain the advantages of optical sights to you, as you already have at least one optically-sighted handgun, and you (apparently) shoot it very well. If you didn't think that optical sights would improve your shooting, you wouldn't use one, and yet, you do own/use at least one of them.

How can you reasonably compare the accuracy of these two firearms, when they are about as different as possible? This isn't apples and oranges; it might be far closer to say apples and hotdogs. 

And to answer your question; no, iron sights by themselves (assuming a competent and experienced user) cannot be responsible for an 11-inch grouping. But could iron sights, in combination with random ammo selection, long strings of fire (50-shot groups) and a user who apparently doesn't know all that much about accuracy-testing handguns, be responsible for an 11-inch group? Yes, definitely.

If you are serious about accuracy testing two different handguns, here is a partial list of things you should be concerned about. These are all about leveling the playing field, and removing the shooter as a variable to the extent that is possible. You're not testing the shooter, or even the ammo; you're testing the firearm.

- Start by accuracy-testing each firearm under similar conditions, with 5-10 different loads, and selecting the 3 most accurate loads for each firearm for final testing. Yes, buying this much ammo will be expensive; if accuracy is truly important to you, then the money is well-spent.

- Use the same style of sighting equipment on each firearm; if you only have one optic, move it from one firearm to the other, so results are comparable.

- Test the firearms from the same shooting position and conditions; ideally, on the same day. Alternate between the firearms when shooting groups, so one firearm is not fired when you are fresh and alert, and the other fired later in the day when you are getting tired/bored/stiff.

- If testing different types of firearms (such as revolvers and autopistols), shoot groups that are the max number of shots for the firearm with the lower capacity. If it's a 6-shot revolver up against a 15-shot autopistol, shoot 6-shot groups. Breaking out of position to reload introduces variables that should (and easily can) be avoided; reloading just to shoot more shots in a group is testing the shooter's skill at getting back into an identical position and using identical grip pressure, not the firearm's accuracy.

- Always use all chambers in a revolver, as one chamber could have a problem that affects its accuracy. If you see a possible trend of one shot being out of each group, test the revolver chambers for consistency by numbering each chamber, and shooting several single-chamber groups (hang 6 targets, number them 1 through 6, and fire chamber #1 on target #1; chamber #2 on target #2, etc.; reload 5 times, to get a five-shot group for each chamber, being as careful as possible to get back into identical positions and use identical grip pressure). If a single chamber seems to sling bullets out away from the shots from the other chambers, consider marking that chamber and not using it for serious accuracy uses (hunting, target-shooting , etc.).

- Some autos have a tendency to sling the first hand-chambered shot out away from the firearm-cycled shots fired later in the group. You may choose to include or exclude that first shot in group testing, based on your projected use for the firearm. If you choose to exclude it from testing, load with 7 instead of 6 shots, and fire the first shot into the backstop without passing it through the target (a clean and deliberate miss), then fire the remaining shots for accuracy without changing position.


----------



## Jolr (May 21, 2017)

DJ Niner said:


> I didn't think it was that hard of a question. But from your response, I'll deduce the answer is "no".
> 
> You seem compelled to compare the accuracy of two very different firearms, indicating you think one should shoot as well as the other (or at the very least, it should shoot far better than it is currently shooting). Yet you are talking about two firearms that are different action types, shooting a very small selection of ammo types/brands, and now (apparently) one is optically-sighted while the other is being shot only with iron sights. A good optical sight does make it easier for most shooters to shoot smaller groups and/or hit smaller targets. I shouldn't have to explain the advantages of optical sights to you, as you already have at least one optically-sighted handgun, and you (apparently) shoot it very well. If you didn't think that optical sights would improve your shooting, you wouldn't use one, and yet, you do own/use at least one of them.
> 
> ...


You completely correct! One gun is a gamer gun with a striker fired trigger shooting Tula ammo costing 500 dollars and the other gun is a thousand dollar work of art with a trigger that breaks like a proverbial pane of glas using brass ammo. The Smith should obviously be more accurate! I was using that to show that I am capable of shooting small groups from a bench, nothing more. For ultimate accuracy testing, obviously, a variety of loads should be tested. That is not the objective of this comparison. By the way I shot these groups today with the Canik using Tula ammo.







These are two inch targets and the smallest group measures 1.65 inches! The Canik loves the cheapest ammo that money can buy! There was not one single bobble in shooting 400 rounds today


----------

