How Much Improvement With A New Limited Gun?

[boo radley]

Aaaggh...getting a bit of new gun fever. I've been shooting a G35 for not quite a year now, and really have mixed feelings about staying with it, or getting a new/used S*I, or something.

The Glock has been reliable, outside of a bad period with a spring and recoil rod issue, and magazines are cheap. It's pretty accurate, and the only thing that truly bugs me is the trigger (I have a Sotelo kit). I can't say the Glock has helped or hurt me, but I also feel at a crossroads: I've moved into B-limited, but I don't have the sense I did previously that I can improve in big chunks, anymore; I think gains will be tighter and more granular. For example, recently shot a classifier that just felt great. I don't see how I could have shot it better, yet it will still be *maybe* 70%. This is where I think a new gun could possibly help; get a fraction here and there, and there, and....

So I read many glowing reviews here, of various high-end Limited guns, and statements such as "improved a class, just from this gun!", etc., and I wonder how much is true. I've shot a couple STI's briefly, and they certainly are nice; no doubt. That said, I also know there are plenty of top-level shooters using a Glock, and at least *some* GM's, like Flex?, using one in Limited, although it's clearly not a favored platform. I realize it's the "Indian, not the arrow," but I could maybe justify new arrows if I thought they'd truly help.

I've tried timing Bill Drills with my Glock, then 1911, and I'm still faster on my Glock, but that's because I'm so used to it, at this point.

Think it's worth a change? Or should I keep shooting what I have, and maybe take what an STI would cost, and fly to some big matches I wouldn't normally go to, and/or get some more instruction....

[dirtypool40]

I'll be the first of hundreds to tell you the obvious; it's the indian not the arrow. Good results can be had with several different platforms. That being said I'd still get the S_I if you've shot them and like them.

Pick one and polish.

[Jake Di Vita]

No one improves because of a gun.

The secret to improving when you start using a new gun is that when guys get new toys...they like to play with them. Hence you are practicing more and get better.

I would definetely try and get some instruction but a new gun could help you regain your interest in practicing as well.

[38superman]

I don't know if I would buy an S_I soley with the idea that it will be a vehicle for improvement.

That may happen if you shoot it enough to get comfortable with it and discover that the feel / balance etc. suits your style better.

However I wouldn't expect it to make such a difference that you can jump up in class overnight.

Assuming you can afford it, I can't see why you shouldn't take that step if you want to.

Getting from where you are to where you want to be as a shooter is a journey of exploration.

You may discover that you and 2011's were made for each other.

If not, they are pretty easy to sell.

Tls

Edited March 23, 2006 by tlshores

[boo radley]

No one improves because of a gun.

The secret to improving when you start using a new gun is that when guys get new toys...they like to play with them. Hence you are practicing more and get better.

I would definetely try and get some instruction but a new gun could help you regain your interest in practicing as well.

Jake - that's an excellent point, but I don't think my practice would change; at least not right now. In other words, I don't think I would suddenly do *more* practice with a shiny new pistol. Seriously. In fact, one concern is that right now I dry-fire in my garage, and don't think twice about dropping the mags on the hard concrete floor. Who cares -- a 10-rounder is $10ea, used, for a Glock.

However, I'm not sure what kind of abuse a metal double-stack mag could take?

The thing that has me mostly thinking is this: I can grab my 1911, and shoot nice tight groups, free-style, taking my time. With the Glock....twice, now, I've run to the range after a match, to "revalidate" the sights. Of course they weren't off, but I still shoot the other frame more accurately (though when I concentrate, the G35 is certainly accurate, if that makes sense).

[Catfish]

Dittos to what everyone else has said. It ain't the gun.

To build on something you did mention though - the better you get, the harder it gets to get better. After a point, it's all about refinement and then you're just looking at the little things.

[Vlad]

I'm no expert but in my experience the things have made big differences in my shooting have been (in the order they happened): quiting smoking, getting new rx glasses, working out. This are the things that tend to give me medium bumps up the scale. Actual trigger time is what gives me the small but all important small bumbs. The gear seemed to make the least difference, though I also improved that over time.

[BigDave]

People are tricked into thinking that the gun is the improvement. Depending on what you were shooting before (both in terms of ergonomics, weight, calibere and power factor), a new gun might allow you to do the same things you were doing with less effort, or greater ease than before, which may result in better results (faster times, points, etc.).

Your new gun, for example, might have a fiber optic front sight where your old gun didn't. That bright, vivid front sight bouncing up there my help you to place more focus in a place where you weren't before. That huge Dawson ICE magwell might make your previously sloppy reloads a bit easier.

But, Jake is correct. The gun isn't magically going to give you something in terms of ability that you didn't before*. You already have it - the question is, are you now using the right tool for the job?

[*internal voice: I was reminded there of a sceen from Monty Python's Holy Gail: "Look. Supreme executive power comes derives from a mandate from the masses, not some farcical aquatic ceremony!!!

[EricW]

A gun may not make you shoot better, but having a gun whose ergonomics fits yours sure as hell makes learning easier and faster. I tried to go back to the Glock because I got tired of playing gunsmith. It didn't work. The ergonomics of the STI are better for me. That makes practice much less of a struggle and thus, I am MUCH more likely to practice. When I started out with the Glock, I was literally having to stop in the middle of shooting sessions because the web of my hand was sliced open, my gun covered with blood, and blood was spraying everywhere when I pulled the trigger. I'm sorry, but the gun was a problem.

The strong preference for the STI is more than the CDI factor. It's because people can make it fit them. There's too many people going onto the STI/SV platform and raising hell with them at matches to not think that gun fit plays a substantial factor in performance. BJ Norris comes immediately to mind with going to Brazos from his Glock. I'm not saying BJ didn't work like hell, but the right tool sure didn't hurt his performance any.

Caspian is supposed to solving the magazine issue. Take a hard look at it as well. I prefer it to the STI and will probably jump over if the opportunity presents itself.

Edited March 23, 2006 by EricW

[38superman]

I'm no expert but in my experience the things have made big differences in my shooting have been (in the order they happened): quiting smoking, getting new rx glasses, working out. This are the things that tend to give me medium bumps up the scale. Actual trigger time is what gives me the small but all important small bumbs. The gear seemed to make the least difference, though I also improved that over time.

+1

If your improvement is starting to slow, work on the shooter not the blaster.

Unless you are already in great physical shape, you will be surprised how much the gym will help your game.

Tls

Edited March 23, 2006 by tlshores

[Loves2Shoot]

You don't have to drop your mags on the ground. You can make a cheap mag catcher out of a few fittings, pieces of pvc pipe, and some old cloth.

Edited March 23, 2006 by Loves2Shoot

[davidball]

Ditto all of the above, especially the Indian stuff . . . HOWEVER, do not underestimate the psychological factor. If you think your gun is holding you back, then it is. For you Bassham acolytes out there, recall the lesson that if you think there is someone at the match whom you can't beat, then you are pretty much already defeated. I think this applies to equipment as well.

You don't have to drop your mags on the ground. You can make a cheap mag cather out of a few fittings, pieces of pvc pipe, and some old cloth.

. . . card table with a folded up quilt on it for padding. For moving reloads, start with an empty gun and just practice insertion.

[benny hill]

After learning how to shoot fast & accurate , as most do, it's the economy of movement that seperate's the top shooters.

[JFD]

Differences I've noticed between my new "fully loaded" G35 and my not new Para Limited guns:

a) The Para is 100% more stable shooting on the move than the Glock. I can get much better hits moving faster with the Para.

The Glock doesn't track worth a crap compared to the Para. Might be more tweaking needed, but right now it's not as good.

c) With the lighter weight, the Glock is not as controllable as the Para. With minor loads this is not a problem, but who wants to give up the points?

d) The only way I can shoot a stage with an equal or better hit factor with the Glock is to shoot minor ammo. I'll usually shoot faster and transitions are faster with the lighter gun, but the points loss makes the Para the clear winner.

I'll note that the Glock with the KKM barrel is ungodly accurate and I WANT it to perform as well as the Para, but so far it hasn't Lucky that it's really for my wife and she just wants to have fun, so she could care less if she loses a few points as long as the gun shoots sweet.

The arrow has a hell of a lot to do with it, but I still can't see jumping up a class by switching guns. You should do better (I'm guessing a hair more consistent), but the major gains will always be "Indian related" IMHO.

I agree that if you think the gun is holding you back, it definitely will.

[boo radley]

Good points, all, and I read each reply carefully.

A purchase like this truthfully is a pretty major whack on the discretionary spending, and that's another factor. My wife and I don't have children, but $1.5-3k (a pretty accurate range?) for a Limited set-up isn't a trivial expenditure.

So I think my plan for attack will be patience and flexibility. I'll set up a gun fund (starting with selling some guns/parts I don't use -- look for a G34 to be on the classifieds, shortly), and otherwise save some money, but go ahead and splurge on flying to a big match or two I wouldn't otherwise shoot, later in the summer/fall, and plan on taking a course if I start feeling "stuck."

At least for now. Good d*mn thing I'm not really interested in 3-gun.

Steve

[Brian Payne]

I shot a Glock 34 for several years. Was not real big into competition but did a lot of Law Enforcement shooting. Started USPSA and 3-gun. In short order I decided that I wanted/needed a handgun better suited to my needs. Never could get used to the unnatural (for me) grip angle. I really did like the longer slide and barrel of the Practical/Tactical Glocks (34, 35).

After much research and trial and error, I decided to have Benny Hill build me a 6" Super Fat Free .40 S&W. You can see the picture of it in the Gallery.

I chose this gun because of the way the STI style guns fit my hand. But I really liked the extended sight radius and pointability of the 6" slide and barrel. Kind of like the Glock 34 over the Glock 17.

Will it make you a better shooter? Never know until you try I guess.

[Newguy]

I've done better -- sometimes much better -- with a new gun for the first few matches. It's a new toy that temporarily changes my focus. Not sure why. After a few matches old habits creep back and my scores are about the same as before. At least that's my experience.

Equipment changes seem to have the most impact on shooters at the top of the heap, where shooting ability is so closely matched that minute changes can make a difference. The vast majority of IPSC shooters lose their time (or accuracy) because of a lack of technique not because of equipment. No C class shooter ever won a match because they gained 2/10 of a second from their $200 race holster.

There's lots of money to be made on the belief that equipment will make a big difference in performance. I spent thousands trying to get better through equipment. Didn't work. I finally got better -- at least for me -- with good instruction. A reliable gun with decent sights, good accuracy, a good trigger and reasonable ergonomics is enough for most competitors.

[caspian38]

get the Sti...

I used to shoot with a guy that was better than I was ,but he shot a Glock... and he never beat my STI. last time i shot with him he had fallen way behind ...and he was practicing more than me yet he still couldn't pull ahead or even keep up! he lost interest i think .. or burned out ?

It's time to introduce the Indian to Bow-Tech and carbon fiber arrows!

C-38

some people work harder or just click with Glock...you have to decide if that's you ... the STI won't help you make A class ... but it won't hold you back ! maybe the Glock won't either ,you will have to decide that for yourself .

[Flexmoney]

As I went from D-class to Grand Master. All along the way...at each 5% step...I wondered and wondered where the next 5% would come from. When I made B-class, A-class seemed a mile away. When I made A-class, Master seemed like Mt. Everest.

I have always been of the mind that...when something isn't working...I force myself to assume that it's me, and not the equipment. (that can bite you in the backside, but it is right more often than it is wrong) Not to pick on JFD, but going from a heavy gun (Para) to a light gun (Glock) like he did means that he doesn't have the weight of the gun to mask some of his issues. My immediate read on his earlier post was that he could stand to address his grip and stance some.

Of course, all the up to and through Grand Master, people always thought I should be shooting <insert their "idea" of the perfect gun here>.

I always asked (myself) what brand X could do better than my Glock. After I went through the list (draws, splits, transitions, reloads, accuracy, reliability, etc.) I just never found the Glock to be lacking.

[chp5]

No one improves because of a gun.

The secret to improving when you start using a new gun is that when guys get new toys...they like to play with them. Hence you are practicing more and get better.

This is an insightful comment IMO. Nope - the gun doesn't make you improve, but renewed interest and focus CAN help you improve. If a new gun does that for you, then great – do it.

Also, if a certain gun points better and more naturally for you, then it could help improve your presentation, recoil management and transitions. Those are all good things.

[MARKUSEJ]

I would say it is not the gun. I am an A class limited shooter. Ever since i have started in 97 I have shot a Para P1640. Recently i bought a Glock20 just to play/carry/hunt with. I started shooting it in matches for fun. Well guess what, I placed in matches just where I did before with the tricked out para. The glock now has magwell, a .40 barrel and a grip reduction from Jim Shanahan, and Ralph's trigger. I find that although the trigger is not as good, it tends to make me call shots better. if the trigger is not so easy i am trying to see the sights and be more exact on aiming. The other thing I have noticed is that the bore axis is much lower, I think it makes the gun recoil less and point more naturally. I too agree that as you rise in class it does get harder to improve as quickly.

[38superman]

Perhaps you will find this useful.

I have a standard practice drill which I have run many times with different guns.

It is 16 rounds fired at 2 IPSC paper targets 5 ft apart from 30 ft. distance.

This is the same distance as El Prez

The drill is draw and fire 2 rds ea target

reload, 2 rds ea target

reload, 2 rds ea target

reload, 2 rds ea target

I thought this up as a way to practice draws, splits, index, and reloads in one drill.

I use it as a benchmark to track my progress, but it also helps me in making comparisons in my own performance with different guns.

Here are the results.

Draw your own conclusions.

Tls

Practice_Drill_1.txt

Edited March 24, 2006 by tlshores

[boo radley]

As I went from D-class to Grand Master. All along the way...at each 5% step...I wondered and wondered where the next 5% would come from. When I made B-class, A-class seemed a mile away. When I made A-class, Master seemed like Mt. Everest.

I hear ya'. I certainly don't feel stymied yet, but the next jump does seem *enormous.* I didn't have that feeling moving from C-> B, which was mostly about internalizing some truths about speed and sight-picture, and developing a little consistency; for me, anyway.

But now, for example....as I said, recently shot "Works for Me" classifier. Did two runs (which I never do, normally) shooting one in L10 at 8.5sec 54pts, and the second in Ltd at 7.6 54pts. So I'm thinking, I shot it as smoothly as I could, was even "warmed-up" on it, and it still isn't even borderline "A".

I guess it's now a matter of little bit faster on the draw, little bit quicker transitions, reload...12 shots, if I could improve my splits by just .05, that's a half-second right there!

But I don't see any large chunks of wasteful time that can be eliminated. *

Which is where the thinking-of-new-gun started.

I always asked (myself) what brand X could do better than my Glock. After I went through the list (draws, splits, transitions, reloads, accuracy, reliability, etc.) I just never found the Glock to be lacking.

I've been practicing my draws and reloads like a fiend, recently. I don't think I'd gain much there from a new gun. Accuracy -- my G35 is probably accurate *enough*. But it's the splits I mostly wonder about.

One big problem with changing platforms, though, is a back-up. Throw a 2nd-hand G22 in the bag, for a couple hundred, done. Instant replacment, at a match. I don't see doing that with a 2011, or equivalent.

Anyway, kinda fun to ponder over. Who knows, maybe if I go the new gun route, I'll get an Open gun, which probably really does offer bang-for-buck over an Open Glock....

* If you want a smile, I found this small video, shot with a digi-cam. I think it was my 2nd ever IPSC match from last spring. I chuckle when I look at it, because I see about 8 "wrong" things I was doing, including sticking myself with a reload in the port.

5mb Video

[Jake Di Vita]

If anyone ever says a Glock is holding them back, I tell them to look at Dave Sevigny.

[Adam B]

Not to be the devlis advocate but I used to shoot Glocks exclusively and thougth that I should buy a STI becasue it would make me better. It didn't, hell I have never been a worse shot!

I have never shot as well as I did with my glock, dont know why, maybe the weird glock grip angle fit my hand better than the 1911 angle, I practiced equally with both guns. I am actually going back to glock for limited/prodcution. This is just my experience, everyone will have a diffrent story. Good luck.