[Rhodie2]

Is there another manufacturer other than Glock that makes a gun with a low bore axis? Thanks...

 

[LeanHard]

Many. My FNS has a comparable bore axis along with M&P pistols. XD handguns have a higher bore axis and most hammer fired gun are higher due to the design. The strike one pistol seems to have the lowest by a small margin. CZ pistols are a great option for a hammer fired gun due to the inner running slide.

 

[RolandD]

Kath's all have a low bore axis. My S&W SD9VE also has a low bore axis.

 

[flintlock62]

Walther
CZ
Steyr
M&P
FNS

Believe it or not, Glock doesn't sport the lowest bore axis!

 

[bmcgilvray]

The Chiappa Rhino revolver has a very low bore axis.
Chiappa Firearms

Back in the 1920s, the Helfricht Model 3 6.35mm (.25 ACP) had an unusually low bore axis.

Heh!

 

[VBVAGUY]

Many people hate this manufacture and their guns, but I am going to throw it out there anyways.......Diamondback FS9. God Bless :smile:

 

[Coconut]

Arsenal Strike One probably has the lowest bore axis of any semiauto pistol with magazine inside the grip.

 

[lee n. field]

Is there another manufacturer other than Glock that makes a gun with a low bore axis? Thanks...

Steyr.

(I'm one that wonders if the concern isn't overblown. I shoot an XD, widely regarded as "top heavy". Mine's also in the punishingly powerful "too snappy" .40. (</sarc>) I don't mind the high bore axis at all.)

 

[hardluk1]

Don't think a low bore axis means that much till you have shot some different pistols . P320's not low bore axis but extremely controllable even to glock shooters . Beretta PX4 storm full size - 4.1" barrel is controllable do to the rotating barrel design . CZ's have low bore axis and there copy cat designs .

 

[Coconut]

Don't think a low bore axis means that much till you have shot some different pistols . P320's not low bore axis but extremely controllable even to glock shooters . Beretta PX4 storm full size - 4.1" barrel is controllable do to the rotating barrel design . CZ's have low bore axis and there copy cat designs .

Low bore axis reduces muzzle flip, which in turn reduces the time between shots. Unless you're a top competition shooter trying to shave the last hundreth of a second of split time, it doesn't matter. For the average folk who can barely place accurate shots every half second, low bore axis makes no difference.

 

[wondering]

Someone that knows the specs better than I do may correct me, but going off of my visual ruler...I think the Springfield XDs and Mod 2.0 pistols have a fairly low bore axis too.

CZ's are notoriously accurate...and on my wish list.

 

[ghost tracker]

Rhino Revolvers, but don't shoot thumbs-forward or the cylinder-gap blast will cost you a...distal joint! :biggrin2:

Whoever convinced you bore axis was a BIG DEAL is more theoretical...than practical. If that weren't true, EVERY pro speed-shooter in the world would shoot a Hammerli Rapid Fire in .22 short. :image035:

 

[ritepath]

Ruger, CZ, M&P....to name a few.

 

[hardluk1]

coconut A low bore axis on its own does not mean and handguns going to be a flatter, quicker shooter . Takes an over all design package to make it work .

 

[Nmuskier]

Almost anything but Sig. :tongue:

 

[Coconut]

coconut A low bore axis on its own does not mean and handguns going to be a flatter, quicker shooter . Takes an over all design package to make it work .

Of course. The unspoken assumption is "everything else being equal".

One very easy experiment can be done with gen 4 Glocks. The backstrap with the beaver tail increases the bore axis height, but I have yet to hear anybody complains that it increases his split time.

 

[jrockin629]

Of course. The unspoken assumption is "everything else being equal".

One very easy experiment can be done with gen 4 Glocks. The backstrap with the beaver tail increases the bore axis height, but I have yet to hear anybody complains that it increases his split time.

Wait, what?

I'm a n00b, but that doesn't make any sense. Isn't the bore axis the measurement of the centerline of the barrel, relative to where it sits in the frame/slide?

 

[marcclarke]

Wait, what?

I'm a n00b, but that doesn't make any sense. Isn't the bore axis the measurement of the centerline of the barrel, relative to where it sits in the frame/slide?

I have always heard the bore axis defined as the height of the center line of the barrel above the shooter's hand.

I'll also note that the HK P7M8 (no longer manufacturred) has the lowest bore axis of any pistol I have ever handled or shot.

 

[jrockin629]

I have always heard the bore axis defined as the height of the center line of the barrel above the shooter's hand.

I'll also note that the HK P7M8 (no longer manufacturred) has the lowest bore axis of any pistol I have ever handled or shot.

Ok. So does that mean the latter is true? That adding a beaver tail insert would change the bore axis on of a gen 4 glock? Seems to me that they are flush horizontally?

 

[marcclarke]

Ok. So does that mean the latter is true? That adding a beaver tail insert would change the bore axis on of a gen 4 glock? Seems to me that they are flush horizontally?

If adding the beaver tail insert lowers the top of the shooter's hand (increasing the distance between the top of the shooter's hand and the center line of the bore) then yes, adding the beaver tail insert would change (increase) the bore axis.

Sorry, I would need to see a picture of the add-on beaver tail to give a better answer.