Joined
·
740 Posts
In an earlier thread, I discussed my anxiety over making a selection between a Sig and a H&K, before and after I ordered the H&K. Well, I received the USP 40 and took it to the range. WOW!! This is one fantastic weapon. I fired 200 rounds without any hint of a problem. The gun shoots better than I do. I did slow fire and rapid (for me) sets, mostly at 7 yds.
I had taken my CZ 40P along to try again. I have had problems with the CZ failing to chamber a round. I had polished the feed ramp, changed the recoil spring and had several types of .40 S&W to try. The gun has consistantly been a problem with hollow points, and mixed results with metal jackets. No improvement this go round. After shooting the H&K, I was very disgusted with the CZ. I know they have a good reputation, but I think now that they are better designed for the 9mm pointed bullets than the .40, with the flat points. I am tired of trying to make a shooter out of a gun that is supposed to be well designed. Therefore.................
I dumped the CZ and ordered another H&K, this one the USP compact 40. Now, I have two H&K's, both in .40 S&W, one full size and one compact.
I wish I knew earlier what I know now. I have a Ruger 944 that is a great, reliable shooter, and the two H&K's, which I consider the best semi auto pistol on the market. There are so many choices available that it is hard to know what's best. I am certainly not trying to insult anyone elses choices or start a contraversial thread on who has the best choice. What I have found out is that what is best for me is the H&K in the higher end selections and the Ruger in the more economical range. Both H&K's carry well concealed for me. The Ruger is a bit large, but I can carry it nicely in a fanny pack, which I use on my motorcycle when I go to work, which is a private school, where I cannot carry inside. I can lock the fanny pack in a carrier that I have on the back of the bike. The H&K's carry well in an IWB with a vest over them.
I apologize for the length of this thread, but I wanted to share my experience with you folks.
I had taken my CZ 40P along to try again. I have had problems with the CZ failing to chamber a round. I had polished the feed ramp, changed the recoil spring and had several types of .40 S&W to try. The gun has consistantly been a problem with hollow points, and mixed results with metal jackets. No improvement this go round. After shooting the H&K, I was very disgusted with the CZ. I know they have a good reputation, but I think now that they are better designed for the 9mm pointed bullets than the .40, with the flat points. I am tired of trying to make a shooter out of a gun that is supposed to be well designed. Therefore.................
I dumped the CZ and ordered another H&K, this one the USP compact 40. Now, I have two H&K's, both in .40 S&W, one full size and one compact.
I wish I knew earlier what I know now. I have a Ruger 944 that is a great, reliable shooter, and the two H&K's, which I consider the best semi auto pistol on the market. There are so many choices available that it is hard to know what's best. I am certainly not trying to insult anyone elses choices or start a contraversial thread on who has the best choice. What I have found out is that what is best for me is the H&K in the higher end selections and the Ruger in the more economical range. Both H&K's carry well concealed for me. The Ruger is a bit large, but I can carry it nicely in a fanny pack, which I use on my motorcycle when I go to work, which is a private school, where I cannot carry inside. I can lock the fanny pack in a carrier that I have on the back of the bike. The H&K's carry well in an IWB with a vest over them.
I apologize for the length of this thread, but I wanted to share my experience with you folks.
