Conditional accuracy and follow up shots with an open mind

This is a discussion on Conditional accuracy and follow up shots with an open mind within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I prefer bigger bullets, but I continually read comments about how there is little difference in the actual effect of modern HP ammunition between 9mm, ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18
Like Tree17Likes

Thread: Conditional accuracy and follow up shots with an open mind

  1. #1
    Senior Member Array CDW4ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,174

    Lightbulb Conditional accuracy and follow up shots with an open mind

    I prefer bigger bullets, but I continually read comments about how there is little difference in the actual effect of modern HP ammunition between 9mm, 357 Sig, 40, and 45. I can easily understand how a millimeter or two of diameter is not as important as an inch or two of exact shot placement.

    Given the understanding that shot placement trumps caliber and follow up shots may be required, accuracy and speed of follow up shots are both important. Since we are not going to count on a “one shot stop” and could be faced with more than one assailant, a 6 + 1 or 7 + 1 capacity is unfavorable; I am including capacity as a factor in my choice of carry pistol.

    Using my Glocks, I decided to obtain some fresh data with carry ammo.

    First, I fired each 8 – 10 shots slow fire at 7 yards to make sure the horizontal adjustment was good, if needed I tweaked it. I prefer to aim right on that small red dot and have the bullet POI either right on or up to about 1’’ high. Satisfied with POI, next was double taps.

    My emphasis is on 1st – 2nd shot follow up time. I want both the first and 2nd shot to hit a 6’’ circle. I put several 6’’ circles on a larger target at 7 yards. I had not used the shot timer in about a year, so I gave myself a couple of warm-up runs with the Glock 19 prior to data collection.

    This is the method I used for my data: I would shoot 4 pairs (8 shots) then check to see if any shots missed the circle, after covering any misses I repeated with 4 additional pairs. In order to obtain what I considered to be a fair representation of performance, I eliminated the greatest (slowest) time from each of the four pairs; if a shot missed then I also eliminated the quickest time. The result was at least 4 pairs that remained (for each pistol) and they got averaged.

    I use the flush fitting magazines in the 30SF but all subcompacts (26, 27, 33) have Pearce +0 bases.
    All of the pistols have Meprolight night sights except the 33 which has XS Big Dots.

    Results:
    Glock 19 using Federal 124 gr. HST +P: average .26 sec with 13/16 hits.
    Glock 32 using Winchester Ranger T 125: average .26 sec with 13/16 hits.
    Glock 23 using Remington Golden Saber 165: average .27 sec with 13/16 hits.
    Glock 30 SF using Federal 230 gr. Hydra-Shok: average .28 sec with 13/16 hits.
    Glock 27 using Federal 180 JHP*: average .29 sec with 15/16 hits*
    *I was skeptical with this result and Federal 180 JHP is not my carry ammo so I ran it again.
    Glock 27 using Federal 180 gr. Hydra Shok: average .30 sec with 14/16 hits.
    Glock 26 using Federal 124 gr. HST +P: average .30 sec with 15/16 hits.
    Glock 33 using Winchester Ranger T 125: average .35 sec with 13/16 hits.

    I was most pleased with the total cumulative POI from the 19, 23, 26 and 27.

    I did not include my 29 SF in the test, because when I shot the initial 8 rounds slow fire to check POI it was higher than I prefer, even with light 155 gr. ammo and recoil was noticeably stiffer than the others.

    Conclusion: Take what you want from this, but I am surprised by the slight to non-existent difference in follow up times (9mm vs. 40) with similar pistols and hits on target.

    doubletaps.jpg
    DJC7, bmcgilvray and Sap03 like this.
    No internal lock or magazine disconnect on my pistols!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array camsdaddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    720
    I find it interesting that while your times are a fraction slower you are more accurate with the subcompacts.
    DJC7 likes this.

  4. #3
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,666
    It's too bad you didn't use a good 147 gr. HST or Ranger T round for your 9mm. It'd be interesting to see those results go head to head with your 124 gr. +P 9mm results.
    NRA Life Member

    "I don't believe gun owners have rights." - Sarah Brady

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array smolck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,868
    I appreciate you posting this. Very good info indeed! Nice shooting!
    tcox4freedom and CDW4ME like this.
    As Benjamin Franklin left the hall in Philadelphia, he was asked, “What kind of government have you given us, Dr. Franklin?” He replied: “A republic, if you can keep it.”

  6. #5
    Senior Member Array USM1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    856
    What all this seems to show me is that if the gun fits your hands (comfortable without excessive pressure) and you have a proper sight alignment, one should be able to make multiple strikes within a specific radius....yours being six inches. With practice, which I believe is key to any shooting, that circle will get smaller.

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array matthew03's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    S.W. VA
    Posts
    1,740
    This is one of the best "caliber" debates I've witnessed. Good analysis and excellent data. From your results you arrived at with the G27, I would like to see the results of the 180 grain load run in your G23, I actually prefer the heavy .40's due to their being less snappy.
    CDW4ME, USM1976 and smolck like this.

  8. #7
    Senior Member Array Sap03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    America
    Posts
    725
    Excellent shooting and interesting findings, I need to practice more lol. I would really like to run a timer when I shoot but I would have to be the only one on the range which Never happens. I would like to see a follow up with some other pistols with the same ammunition if they are available to you.

  9. #8
    Senior Member Array CDW4ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,174
    Quote Originally Posted by camsdaddy View Post
    I find it interesting that while your times are a fraction slower you are more accurate with the subcompacts.
    Slower shooting = more accuracy?

    Quote Originally Posted by USM1976 View Post
    What all this seems to show me is that if the gun fits your hands (comfortable without excessive pressure) and you have a proper sight alignment, one should be able to make multiple strikes within a specific radius....yours being six inches. With practice, which I believe is key to any shooting, that circle will get smaller.
    I'm 46 and don't shoot as much as I use to; the circle is not getting smaller. May not be long until I need glasses to see the front sight.

    Quote Originally Posted by matthew03 View Post
    This is one of the best "caliber" debates I've witnessed. Good analysis and excellent data. From your results you arrived at with the G27, I would like to see the results of the 180 grain load run in your G23, I actually prefer the heavy .40's due to their being less snappy.
    I actually shot the Federal Hydra-Shok in the 23 for the initial "check sight" and also shot the Golden Saber which had the same POI. Since they had the same POI I went ahead and used the GS for the drill in order to save a few of the Hydra-Shok. I prefer the Federal Hydra-Shok, part of that is because Federal primers display a more positive impact than Remington. The Golden Saber is not as snappy as some of the 165 grain loads (Ranger T) and produces a power factor PF nearly the same as the 180 gr. I do not think it would have changed the result if I had used the 180 HS instead of the 165 GS.

    Glock 27: (chrono average for 5 shots)
    Federal Hydra-Shok 180 @ 930 fps / 167 PF
    Golden Saber 165 @ 1,018 fps / PF 168

    Quote Originally Posted by Sap03 View Post
    Excellent shooting and interesting findings, I need to practice more lol. I would really like to run a timer when I shoot but I would have to be the only one on the range which Never happens. I would like to see a follow up with some other pistols with the same ammunition if they are available to you.
    Thanks.
    No internal lock or magazine disconnect on my pistols!

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,584
    The only difference in follow up shot time there is per caliber is directly proportional to the time and work you put into mastering it. Of course the preference in platform can make a difference too.

    In the real world I doubt it matters much.
    But thank you for the test. It's always interesting to see what people find for themselves, which in my opinion is more reliable info than baseless banter.
    CDW4ME, Ghost1958 and Aceoky like this.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  11. #10
    Distinguished Member Array Doghandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    West Branch
    Posts
    1,923
    Those targets look familiar. Practice makes perfect. If I were to teach "the concept of follow up shots" it would start on a sporting clays range with shotguns.
    There is a solution but we are not Jedi... not yet.
    Doghandler

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array searcher 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    4,151
    Good work with the Glocks, would like to see same test with Glock 45acp ESP G36 and 1911s using 230 gr. ammo.

    I find I am faster and more accurate with follow up shoots with G36 than 5" 1911 tactual.

    IMO your test is a great way to get some needed info, thank you!!!!!
    NOT LIVING IN FEAR, JUST READY!!!
    I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness,
    nor the arrow for its swiftness,
    nor the warrior for his glory.
    I love only that which they defend.
    -J.R.R. Tolkien

  13. #12
    Senior Member Array CDW4ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,174
    Quote Originally Posted by searcher 45 View Post
    Good work with the Glocks, would like to see same test with Glock 45acp ESP G36 and 1911s using 230 gr. ammo.

    I find I am faster and more accurate with follow up shoots with G36 than 5" 1911 tactual.

    IMO your test is a great way to get some needed info, thank you!!!!!
    I included a 30SF (45 acp) in this past weekends "test"; it was .28 sec. average with no place for my pinky, using 230 gr. ammo.

    The last time I used the timer was early last August, almost a year ago.
    I did shoot a 1911 that day, along with a couple Glocks; I have less detail, but I do have some average 1st - 2nd shot times.

    1911: .23 average 1st - 2nd shot time.
    Glock 23: .24 average 1st - 2nd shot time.
    Glock 32: .25 average 1st - 2nd shot time.
    Glock 27: .29 average 1st- 2nd shot time.

    Given that a 1911 weighs about 39 oz +- versus about 24 oz +- for a Glock it's not a surprise that it could be a little quicker.
    bmcgilvray and Aceoky like this.
    No internal lock or magazine disconnect on my pistols!

  14. #13
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    9,895
    Fun test to read. Thanks for posting it. Seems like realistic results.

    "I prefer bigger bullets, but I continually read comments about how there is little difference in the actual effect of modern HP ammunition between 9mm, 357 Sig, 40, and 45. I can easily understand how a millimeter or two of diameter is not as important as an inch or two of exact shot placement."

    That's why the .25 ACP is so important. After all, it's only a mere tenth of an inch smaller than the 9mm, which is only a tenth of an inch smaller than the .45. Really, the .25 ACP ought to be used and carried more often. One could probably get 35-40 of the little buggers in a full-sized automatic. Just think: then you'd have "lotsa bullets."
    CDW4ME and Aceoky like this.
    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array StormRhydr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Music City, USA
    Posts
    2,869
    Quote Originally Posted by CDW4ME View Post
    Slower shooting = more accuracy?



    I'm 46 and don't shoot as much as I use to; the circle is not getting smaller. May not be long until I need glasses to see the front sight.



    I actually shot the Federal Hydra-Shok in the 23 for the initial "check sight" and also shot the Golden Saber which had the same POI. Since they had the same POI I went ahead and used the GS for the drill in order to save a few of the Hydra-Shok. I prefer the Federal Hydra-Shok, part of that is because Federal primers display a more positive impact than Remington. The Golden Saber is not as snappy as some of the 165 grain loads (Ranger T) and produces a power factor PF nearly the same as the 180 gr. I do not think it would have changed the result if I had used the 180 HS instead of the 165 GS.

    Glock 27: (chrono average for 5 shots)
    Federal Hydra-Shok 180 @ 930 fps / 167 PF
    Golden Saber 165 @ 1,018 fps / PF 168



    Thanks.
    Perhaps XS Big Dot Sights would be worth consideration. Links below to two good videos on them

    XS Sight Demo - Part 1 - YouTube

    XS Sight Demo - Part 2 - YouTube

  16. #15
    Senior Member Array CDW4ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,174
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    Fun test to read. Thanks for posting it. Seems like realistic results.

    "I prefer bigger bullets, but I continually read comments about how there is little difference in the actual effect of modern HP ammunition between 9mm, 357 Sig, 40, and 45. I can easily understand how a millimeter or two of diameter is not as important as an inch or two of exact shot placement."

    That's why the .25 ACP is so important. After all, it's only a mere tenth of an inch smaller than the 9mm, which is only a tenth of an inch smaller than the .45. Really, the .25 ACP ought to be used and carried more often. One could probably get 35-40 of the little buggers in a full-sized automatic. Just think: then you'd have "lotsa bullets."
    I see what you did there.

    Trying to sew seeds of doubt in my fickle mind.

    I commented, "I was most pleased with the total cumulative POI from the 19, 23, 26 and 27.", but I never said which one I intended to carry.

    The point of the test was for me to see if there was a "combat" accuracy difference in those pistols, or if I was at a speed disadvantage for using a 40 instead of a 9mm; I proved to myself that I was just as "combat" accurate with the 40 and there was essentially no difference in my ability to place a follow up shot quickly (one or two hundredths of a second is nothing).

    A 40 may not be a 45, but it begins with a 4 (Col Cooper would approve) and sacrifices little capacity to the 9mm's I tested.

    23 & 27


    Quote Originally Posted by StormRhydr View Post
    Perhaps XS Big Dot Sights would be worth consideration. Links below to two good videos on them

    XS Sight Demo - Part 1 - YouTube

    XS Sight Demo - Part 2 - YouTube
    I like XS Big Dots, have them on the 33.
    I have felt like they held an edge in my little test before, but when I went to shoot them over the weekend the Big Dot may have actually contributed to the slightly slower time of the 33 compared to the 26 & 27. I had been looking at Meprolights for the entire drill, the 33 was shot after those and I think the change / difference was a factor.

    Having to hit a 6'' circle at 7 yards at the speed limits of the shooters ability will quickly reinforce this one basic idea:
    front sight, front sight, front sight, front sight.
    Aceoky likes this.
    No internal lock or magazine disconnect on my pistols!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

glock 27 follow up shots

Click on a term to search for related topics.