BillGarlandJr

When it comes to disengaging the safety I don't think there is really one way that will work for all. For instance, I have pretty large hands, and if I wait till I have established my two hand grip to disengage the safety the "drumstick" of my hand gets in the way of the lever. So, for me the safety comes off once the pistol is clear of the holster and pointed down range. Then I establish my two hand grip and place my trigger finger on the trigger as I extend towards the target. Ultimately, all we need to do to find the right answer is look to two of the four cardinal firearms safety rules. When the safety is disengaged make sure the pistol is not pointed at anything we do not intend to destroy, and make sure we are not placing our trigger finger on the trigger until we are ready to fire. I think as long as those two rules are adherred to anytime is ok to disengage the safety.....my 2 cents worth.

When I first read this topic I thought it would be good, but never in a million years did I think there would be so much input. I've been tracking this topic for the last three days and since so many others have shared their insights I figure I'll share mine as well....FWIW I guess to first qualify myself....I am a pretty fair M shooter in Prod, Limited, and L10. That being said, as far as how much dryfire a person should do....set goals for yourself and put in the time necessary to achieve those goals. And when you do dryfire, do it for as long as you are able to give it 100% concentration. Somedays that might be 10 minutes, and on other days it might be hours. Once a goal has been achieved, set another. That is what has worked for me. Keep in mind that whether you dryfire for 10 minutes per day or for 2 hours a day, it is your desire and the consistency of your effort that will help you achieve your goals. As for the debate of dryfire vs. livefire.....both are important. There are many skills I can work on and develop through dryfire (draws, reloads, movement, transitions...just to name a few) however, for me the only way to test the skills I have been working on is through livefire. I kind of look at the whole thing academically. The dryfire I do at home are my study sessions. Then when I want to see if I have been studying the correct things, or if there are other things I need more work on I give myself a quiz by going out and doing some livefire practice. The quizes are also beneficial for me because there is no replacement for actually shooting the pistol and actually calling shots and tracking the sights when firing the pistol. Finally, matches are the tests....if I have been studying as much as I should, and have been studying the correct things I can usually expect good results. So for me one is as important as the other. I don't think I would progress much in IPSC without some dryfire, but I also think livefire is important to show that what I am doing in dryfire is translating well into the actual act of shooting the pistol. Where training law enforcement vs. IPSC shooters is concerned I think there are some things that should be considered. First, when you compare the average cop to the average IPSC shooter you are often looking at two different kinds of shooters. The average cop is someone who doesn't necessarily enjoy shooting, but does it because he needs to for his job. The average IPSC shooter is someone who enjoys shooting, and shoots because they want to. I think everyone reading about this topic would agree that dryfiring is an activity engaged in most often by shooters who enjoy shooting and have a desire to improve. Now, of the two kinds of shooters just mentioned, who do you think is most likely to do any dryfire. Probably not the average cop. So, as law enforcement firearms trainers that leaves us with livefire as our best option. In my experience (I'm also a cop, and a part-time firearms instructor at our state police academy btw) livefire allows us as instructors to most quickly identify and fix problems with an officer's shooting technique. We actually have some time dedicated to dryfire at our academy, but in most cases the recruit officers just go through the motions because they are eager to get to the livefire part of the training. They can't appreciate the benefit of dryfire because most of them are not shooters of the same vein as IPSC shooters are. So, is dryfire an effective means of training and learning how to shoot? It absolutely can be, but the person doing it has to have the desire to improve, otherwise they may just go through the motions and not realize the potential benefit. But in the absence of that desire to really be a better shooter, livefire practice under the watchful eye of a good firearms instructor is the best bet....just my 2cents worth.

I think one important thing to keep in mind when selecting shoes for ISPC style courses of fire is what the shoes are designed for. Hiking boots and running shoes are designed with the idea the person wearing them will mostly be moving forward, not laterally. I've found with hiking boots its the tread design that is at fault for poor footing, and with running shoes it is the support. It seems my ankles are more prone to rolling over in running shoes when moving laterally. Football cleats, soccer cleats and shoes like those are made not only with forward movement in mind, but also lateral movement as well. The tread design, and the design of the uppers is designed in a way to give a good deal of support and stability regardless of the direction you are moving......So, with all that being said, I bought a pair of UA Hammers last summer and have moved more efficiently, and have not slipped when charging into a shooting position since. They fit my foot well (14). They are snug enough that my foot does not move around inside when moving about, but they are all day comfortable. I highly recommend them!

I too have not been very impressed with CGR's business practices. I ordered a guiderod from him over a month ago, and of course my credit card was charged right away, but as I sit here typing this I still do not have a guiderod. I've done some business with CGR before and had no problems, but I'm of the opinion that if a business is going to charge my credit card and take my money right away they owe me the product I ordered, or at least an explaination of why the product has not been shipped yet. Just my thoughts

+1 on loading your 9mm rounds longer. I shoot a Glock 17 in production and have been shooting the MG 147gr bullets loaded to an OAL btwn 1.160 and 1.165 with great success. The Glock mags accomodate this length of round with no problems.

My experience with the coated bullets such as Precisions vs.jacketed bullets has been this: With jacketed bullets you can run a heavy bullet with a faster powder and get the soft recoil we all want and still maintain good accuracy. With the coated bullets such as Precisions (of which I am a big fan) you get a very soft recoiling load by running a heavy bullet over a fast powder, but in my pistols I have often sacrificed too much accuracy with those types of loads. Clays is a very fast powder, and while I think you will definitely like the feel of the load, you are likely to be unhappy with the accuracy you get. One of the great things about the Precisions is that in general they are a soft shooting bullet, so you can run lower charges of slower powders than you would with jacketed bullets, get the velocity you need to make the required power factor, and still enjoy the benefit of a soft recoiling load. A load I messed around with and kind of liked was 3.7gr of WSF under a 147gr Precision. It felt good and if my memory serves me it made about a 130pf out of my Barsto barreled G17. If you give this load a try start a little lower and work your way up. Good luck with your load development.

I think you will have better luck with the N330. My limited experience with the molly bullets in 9mm showed they did not really like the faster burning powders very well. Have you chrono'd the 3.2 TG load yet? You might be able to drop the charge a bit. I've heard some people claim to get a 130ish pf with charges of TG ranging from 3.2 to 3.4 with jacketed and plated bullets. When I shot the Precisions in Limited and L10 I found them to be a bit faster than jacketed bullets, and therefore required a smaller charge. Good luck with your load development. Please let us know how it works out.

First let me say thanks for everyone's input on this matter. We did try the same loads through two other pistols. One was my Glock 17 with the factory barrel, and the other was a GLock 34 with a BarSto barrel. All of the factory loads I mentioned before shot into groups between 2 and 3 inches at 25 yards out of the Glock 17, and were a bit tighter still out of the Glock 34. All groups were fired from sandbags. As for the reloads, the 147gr load over N320 shot 2 1/2 to 3 inches out of the Glock 17. (Still at 25 yards) Out of the Glock 34 with the BarSto the groups were of a similar size. The 147gr load over 3N37 gave similar results out of both pistols. The 124gr. over N320 shot about 5 inches out of the GLock 17 and about 3 1/2 inches out of the Glock 34. The groups I got from the M&P9 I am certain have something to do with the pistol, and not the shooter. I'm actually not a bad shot and if the pistol can shoot decent sized groups I usually can get good results from it. As far as getting used to the pistol....I also have an M&P40 that I was able to get groups of 2 to 3 inches at 25 yards first time out. I agree with everyone who reminded me the M&P9 is not a bullseye pistol. It certainly is not, but neither is the Glock, and the Glock is a bit more accurate out of the box. For me accuracy is very important. That might have to do with my days in the USMC, or it may have to do with being taught how to shoot by my PPC Grandmaster Dad. Its been a couple of years since I shot a match outside the NW, so I don't know what kind of distance targets and steel are set elsewhere, but up here (in our section in particular) they have been known to stick some tagets out at around 50 yards. With those kinds of shooting challenges you have got to have a pistol that it capable of decent accuracy. For me decent accuracy is at least 3 inches at 25 yards. I really like the M&P9. The way it handles and feels in my hand is superior to my Glocks, and I would really like it to replace my trusty old Glock17 for IPSC. But I can't afford to give up some of the points I would lose due to this pistol's lack of accuracy (Shooting against Lawman in club matches up here I need all the points I can get). Thanks again for everyone's input....I think I'll start bugging S&W and see what they have to say about this. One other bit of info: my M&P9 has a Burwell trigger job.

Okay, I've read the posts about the M&P9 and how great they are shooting for everyone...so I went out and bought one. Till today I had not had an opportunity to really put it through its paces and see what it could do. I went out and did some familiarization fire with it a couple of times, and I was very pleased with the way the pistol felt and handled, and I had high hopes for its potential. Today the weather was great and I had the day off so I went out to the range with the M&P9, and several loads of factory ammo, and some of my reloads as well. My goal was to get a good zero on the pistol and to shoot some groups with it to see what kind of accuracy potential it had. I have to say that some of the hope i had for the pistol diminished today based on the groups it was shooting. The best group I was able to shoot with the M&P9 was a little over 4 inches. The rest of the groups ranged from 5 to 10 inches. Out of 6 shots the pistol would put three or four within three inches and then there would be some flyers. Some of the flyers were high, some low, some left, and some right. Here is a list of some of the loads I shot through the pistol: WWB 115gr Federal American Eagle 115gr Remington Yellow Box 115gr. 147gr. Extreme over 3.2gr N320 147gr. Extreme over 4.5gr 3N37 124gr. Extreme over 4.2gr N320 The best of the factory loads was the Federal with an avg groups size of about 5 1/2 in. The best of the reloads was the 147gr bullet loaded over the N320 with a group size of about 4 1/4 in Three inches is about as large as I like to see my groups out of a pistol used for duty or competition. I'm curious as to what kind of accuracy other people are getting out of their M&P9s. I also have an M&P40 and it will shoot anything I feed it under three inches...so what gives with the 9mm? I guess I should mention the groups were shot from 25 yards. I should also mention that my dad has an M&P9 as well and we got similar results out of it. Ultimately I am looking to replace my aged GLock 17 with this pistol for IPSC, but till I can get some better accuracy out of it I am hard pressed to do so. Thanks in advance for everyones info, advice, etc.

I've been shooting some reloads out of my M&P 40 recently and ended up having some light primer strikes. For primers I was using some Winchester small rifle primers. Upon inspection it appeared all the primers were well seated, but when I fired the ammo I would get 2 or 3 light hits per 100 rds. So, I went home and loaded 300 more rounds and took extra care to make sure I was completely seating the primers....next practice I had no problems. I had been using small rifle primers originally for my limited pistol, and then for my Glock. I think with the Glock the stock striker springs are so strong you can get away with a primer that is not fully seated. It would seem the M&P is not so forgiving of that matter. So, my solution will be to switch to Federal small pistol primers, and make sure I don't get lazy on the ole' 650 and make sure I am fully seating the primers.

I just bought a couple M&Ps (one in 9mm and .40) and just from handlling them I am very impressed. Seems Smith and Wesson has hit it with this pistol. I am looking forward to getting my M&Ps to the range some time this week. I do have a couple of questions though, and thought maybe some of you would have the answers or know which direction to steer me to get them. Here are my questions. 1. How is the zero with the Novak sights that come on the pistol? Do the pistols shoot to the sights or is a little adjustment necessary? I will probably start out shooting 115gr WWB in the 9mm and various factory loadings of 165 and 180gr loads in the .40. 2. While I am on the subject of sights, I have read Warren Tactical is working on a set of sights for the M&Ps. Anyone have an idea when those are due to be released? Is anyone working on a set of adjustable sights for them? (Dawson maybe?) 3. The 9mm I purchased has the magazine safety while the .40 does not. I noticed through dry firing them a bit that the 9mm trigger with the magazine safety seems to be "grittier" than the .40 without the magazine safety. In your experience is the "grittier" feel of the trigger in the pistol with the magazine safety due to the safety, and can it be remedied by taking out the magazine safety using the method described by Dan Burwell. If I sent my pistols to Burwell could he eliminate the "grittiness" all together. I know...a lot of questions. But I figured this would be a good place to ask them since it seems the people on this forum have more experience with these pistols than anyone I have run into locally. Thanks in advance for your responses.

Dan, What size are your hands? Berettas are a bit large in the grip and it seems people with medium to small size hands tend to have trouble controlling the pistol in recoil with the thumbs forward grip. From talking to some people who have had that problem with Berettas I have learned many of them feel like their grip is more "locked down" with a thumbs down grip. In addition to the grip being large, the reach to the trigger is a bit long too, which also contributes to the pistol wiggling around with a thumbs forward grip. Ultimately, I really believe a thumbs forward grip is a better way to go in most cases. However, if that is not going to give you the most control over the pistol you are shooting then I think you should make whatever adjustments you need to in order to exercise the most control over the pistol. You mentioned you shot a Glock and the thumbs forward grip worked with it. If you are not too attached to your Beretta you may want to consider getting a Glock. Not only may it be a better fit for your hand, but in my experience they are a bit easier to shoot than the Berettas. Just a thought.

Thank you all for your feedback on this matter. Just some additional info....when I was shooting my XD9 for groups it was off of sandbags at both of the distances I named. Thinking I might have been the reason for the poor results, I asked my dad to shoot some groups with it as well. Being an active IPSC shooter, and PPC grandmaster he is a guy who knows a thing or two about shooting a pistol for accuracy. Unfortunately he got similar results. So, I am inclined to think this may be a pistol problem and not a shooter problem. Seems to me, based on everyone's repsonses, accuracy results vary with the XD9. Some people are very happy and others not so much. My personal standard for a production / duty pistol is that it shoots at least 3 inches at 25 yards with whatever decent ammo I feed it. If I can get it, I like them to group tighter than that but 3 inches is the standard. Over the years I have had the good fortune to own several GLOCKS and all of them have met that standard without fail. That's out of the box! I have to say that kind of consistent quality has made me a believer. So, all that being said, I think the XD9 experiment is over. Which isn't entirely bad....I hear Smith & Wesson has a new production / duty pistol out that deserves some looking at!

About a month ago I bought an SA XD9. I've been a GLOCK shooter for some time but I was curious about the XD's potential as a Production division pistol, and as a duty / concealed carry pistol so I picked one up. Like a lot of other people I was really pleased wtih the way the XD handled, and its ergonomics. I dry fired it some at the house and was looking forward to getting it on the range and putting some rounds through it. Well, I finally had a chance to shoot it today. I set up a couple of bullseye targets (one at 25 yards, and one at 40 yards) and tried shooting some groups. I very disappointed to find the XD was not up to standards in the accuracy department. At 25 yards my groups were 6 to 8 inches, and at 40 yards they opened up to 12 to 14 inches. I was shooting Winchester 115gr white box ammo, which shoots great out of my Glocks. I'm curious as to what kind of accuracy other XD9 owners have been getting out of their pistols. Are these things normally capable of better accuracy out of the box, or did I possibly get a lemon? I really had high hopes for this pistol when I bought it and based on how it handles and points I kind of like it. But, being kind of a stickler for accuracy, I need to get better results than I was in the accuracy department.

When I first put a Sotello trigger in my G35 I noticed a little creep at a certain point in the trigger pull. I repeatedly pulled the guts out of the pistol and examined them to see if I could identify what was causing the creep, but I didn't see anything. Then one day when I was dry firing the pistol I noticed the bottom of the trigger safety was dragging on the inside of the trigger guard. I installed a stock trigger spring and that cured the problem, though I imagine a person could remedy the problem by kissing the bottom edge of the trigger safety with some fine emory paper. I have no idea how common this problem might be, but it might be worth looking at.

Some of you who are looking for a fitness regimine for IPSC ought to check out a book titles Combat Conditioning written by a gentleman named Matt Furey. There are is no weightlifting prescribed, just body weight calisthenics. Does wonders for speed, quickness, and flexibility...check it out!

I agree with many of picks everyone has made for top five finishers at this years Production Nationals, but Chuck Anderson's name deserves mention as well. If he shoots the kind of match he is capable of shooting top five or even top three is a very real posibility for him.