How Much Improvement With A New Limited Gun?

[Ron Ankeny]

I agree with Big Dave and EricW. Some guns are just more shootable than others. A large part of shootability can be the ergonomics. I am guessing the ergos of a Glock suit guys like David Sevigny just fine. I shot a Glock over a fairly long period of time, but they just point unnaturally high for me and my arthritis made it very difficult to change my shooting platform. I switched to a CZ (Production) and things got a lot easier in a hurry. My scores didn't go up over night, but better ergonomics allowed me to shift my focus away from arm wrestling with the gun. Having said all of that, the last Production classifier I shot was with a borrowed Glock 19 and a Blade Tec holster with about 5 dry draws in the safe area before the buzzer.

[cactus299]

I may be in the minority but, after 20+ years of shooting this sport I know the gun does make a difference. I still have and carry my original series 70 Colt in 45acp. I just bought a Charles Daley M5 high cap 45. I like it a lot. I can shoot my old Colt a good second and a half faster on El presidente than the C.D. even after putting 2000 rounds thru it. If I use my son’s STI Limited gun I can shave more than a second off the Colts time. For me, the gun does make a difference.

[spook]

The only thing that can hold you back in equipment is unreliability.

And perhaps a very low magazine capacity.

Note that these are also the things you can't improve by training

[Loves2Shoot]

If you spent $1500 on training you would be better off than buying a new blaster.

I'm training a guy right now who spent several years shooting and not improving, buying guns, ammo and gear didn't help him (he has some nice stuff too.) In 2 weeks of private training he's already increased his skill to another level.

When we first went over goals, he said he knew he wouldn't get to M by just buying gear and ammo (he had already tried that route,) so he decided to invest the $ in training. I know if he's willing to do the work he can spend much less than the cost of a new gun and get much better results.

Now, finding folks that are willing to provide a good path and direction aren't super easy to find, but if you want to really get better, it takes time and direction.

Weekend classes have a purpose and are better than nothing, but it is much better to get training, direction, and correction over a longer period of time IMO.

[AZ38super]

The only thing that can hold you back in equipment is unreliability.

And perhaps a very low magazine capacity.

Note that these are also the things you can't improve by training

Reliability....yes I agree, the rest no way do I believe this.

Sorry, but when the TGO kicks my butt shooting a six shot revolver against my hi-cap open gun it all becomes the indian at that point.

As others have said already some guns work better for others for whatever reason it may be, feel, fit, function or just plain mental.

I started out building a Glock open gun from a 17C with lots of extras and did alright for a new shooter. When I had the chance to upgrade in my mind to a STI 38 Super open gun seven months ago I took it even though it was a pricey move when you add up all the changes I made from gun, mags, holster, press, brass and so on.

But I will say it took a little bit longer than I thought to transition over to the 1911 from the Glock but I can say I am shooting much better now and others have told me this as well.

I have gone from a low C shooter to being .7 away from going into B class. Now that was probably not 100% from just a different gun but it helped a lot for me at least. Heavier gun, longer barrel, larger comp and so on.

Like golf and many other sports, there is no miracle club/gun to make you the best out there but if you have doubts in your mind it will show up in your scores on it's own.

Find someone with a spare they will loan you and give a go for a little while and see how you feel about a new gun then.

[Putty]

If you spent $1500 on training you would be better off than buying a new blaster.

You charge $1500 for lessons?? Man, you better make me dinner when I come down

With me its starts with esthetics. If I like the look and the coolness factor then I am happy to practice and shoot. Just one less thing to think about given the gun runs. So am I really a shallow person thats more into bling than sting? Maybe I am just drawn bad. Its all in yur head.

I think this could be a typical progression of a new shooter. The bling syndrome..."gun spendy, shoot bettah". Yah I am living it on the cusp but riding it out into B where hopefully it diminishes and the practical lords grant me succor in their growly bowels of wisdom.

[Ron Ankeny]

So basically the difference between a Brazos and a Hi-Point won't show up on the score card? I'll still take the Brazos.

[Flexmoney]

But what would you shoot if the winner got to keep the guns?

[Loves2Shoot]

So basically the difference between a Brazos and a Hi-Point won't show up on the score card? I'll still take the Brazos.

Huh? If you want to improve, are you saying buying Brazos is the way to go? I'd take a week with TJ, Travis and Max, Frank G, or TGO with a High Point over blasting rounds on my own through a high zoot Limited gun ANY DAY.

[Steve Moneypenny]

I honestly feel it may hurt your performance for the first few months as you are tuned into this gun... maybe save up and win some stuff this season.. this is the beginning of the season... a very bad time to change guns, however i did it anyway but i think it was for the better in my case... will you have time to get your gear to gether i am rushing to get mine that's for sure.

[AikiDale]

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

One of the well known GM trainer/competitors was overheard to say something like "Thank God Sevigny shoots a Glock"

[EricW]

From: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...pic=13915&st=25

2004 Bianchi Cup Results:

11 ROBERT LEATHAM 471 30 474 27 480 39 480 48 1905 144

12 JENS BORK 474 38 480 47 480 34 470 47 1904 166

13 TONY HOLMES 474 34 480 45 480 33 470 47 1904 159

14 GEORGE MOWBRAY 480 29 480 45 464 23 480 48 1904 145

15 WOLFGANG NOTHNAGEL 467 23 480 44 476 29 480 48 1903 144

16 JOHN PRIDE 478 34 480 45 474 33 470 47 1902 159

17 KEVIN ANGSTADT 478 27 472 28 470 28 480 48 1900 131

18 ROY BANNISTER 474 25 480 45 474 26 470 47 1898 143

19 KIM BECKWITH 466 27 480 32 470 32 480 48 1896 139

20 ROLAND CROES 480 33 480 46 474 25 460 46 1894 150

21 PAT PRUDHOME 460 21 480 41 474 30 480 48 1894 140

22 JERRY MICULEK 470 24 469 23 474 27 480 48 1893 122

23 CRAIG GINGER 480 31 480 43 480 33 450 45 1890 152

24 JENS TIGGES 472 24 480 43 478 30 460 46 1890 143

25 JASON KOON 472 29 472 32 465 15 480 48 1889 124

26 LEE WEBB 470 31 480 47 476 30 460 46 1886 154

27 VERA KOO 472 30 480 38 474 22 460 46 1886 136

28 DAVID GLENN 462 25 480 34 474 26 470 47 1886 132

29 JAY DELLABELLA 476 26 480 46 469 29 460 46 1885 147

30 TOMOUKI HASEGAWA 472 30 480 46 472 30 460 46 1884 152

31 ENRICO HOOVER 478 29 480 39 476 24 450 45 1884 137

32 ROBERT VADASZ 464 29 460 23 480 31 480 48 1884 131

33 KARL PIPER 473 24 480 47 474 29 450 45 1877 145

34 DAVID GIARRATANO 469 25 475 30 463 25 470 47 1877 127

35 MARK OWENSBY 467 29 468 22 472 27 470 47 1877 125

36 CHUCK THOMEY 462 28 480 42 464 27 470 47 1876 144

37 RICHARD GONSMAN 462 24 478 36 476 29 460 46 1876 135

38 STEVE WEATHERSBY 474 22 470 39 472 27 460 46 1876 134

39 FABIO GUERRA 470 25 480 35 465 26 460 46 1875 132

40 JACK RAGSDALE 470 28 480 40 474 34 450 45 1874 147

41 ROBYN ESTREICH 478 24 480 39 476 28 440 44 1874 135

42 D FLAGLER 455 22 480 41 468 18 470 47 1873 128

43 GREG HOWARD 470 22 470 35 471 28 460 46 1871 131

44 ANDREW BARKSDALE 468 26 478 30 462 19 460 46 1868 121

45 HELEN JEAVONS 469 23 457 30 470 23 470 47 1866 123

46 JORDAN DICK 457 23 480 38 478 34 450 45 1865 140

47 GREG DAVIS 464 27 468 22 472 24 460 46 1864 119

48 MICHAEL M. 469 31 480 47 474 29 440 44 1863 151

49 KENNETH HEWETT 453 20 476 33 474 29 460 46 1863 128

50 IAN LOCHORE 476 30 480 38 465 21 440 44 1861 133

51 THOMAS LANGLEY 467 24 472 32 472 24 450 45 1861 125

52 THOMAS NOTO 470 26 480 36 470 27 440 44 1860 133

53 GREG DICK 463 28 480 36 476 31 440 44 1859 139

54 ANDREW RIXON 465 24 478 34 463 25 450 45 1856 128

55 RICHARD SIEBERT 460 24 480 39 463 21 450 45 1853 129

56 THOMAS KWASNIEWSKI 470 22 480 36 460 19 440 44 1850 121

57 BRUNO KAPPELER 441 21 480 34 478 30 450 45 1849 130

58 JOHN DOWELL 463 20 462 31 474 18 450 45 1849 114

59 CHARLES KERNER 465 20 480 37 472 28 430 43 1847 128

60 DOMENICO CADEDDU 456 21 478 36 453 22 460 46 1847 125

61 FRANK REICHE 462 20 458 21 466 23 460 46 1846 110

62 NATHAN TAIT 469 23 480 46 476 23 420 42 1845 134

63 MARTIN GILLMAN 463 24 478 34 467 26 430 43 1838 127

64 THOMAS BLIZZARD 461 26 480 31 472 22 420 42 1833 121

65 TROY MATTHEYER 455 21 450 20 467 20 460 46 1832 107

66 VANCE SCHMID 457 23 450 25 474 23 450 45 1831 116

67 MIKE HARRIS 467 23 480 40 463 22 420 42 1830 127

68 RANDY HOLLOWBUSH 465 29 478 32 466 26 420 42 1829 129

69 HUNTER PILANT 440 18 472 31 476 30 440 44 1828 123

70 DHON HAUSERMAN 462 20 461 23 472 24 430 43 1825 110

71 ADAM LENNERT 470 26 480 35 461 17 410 41 1821 119

72 CLAY TIPPIT 431 25 445 18 474 28 470 47 1820 118

73 JASON PETTITT 455 23 462 28 472 25 430 43 1819 119

74 JOHN CAMERON 446 21 480 42 459 19 430 43 1815 125

75 GRAHAM COOMBS 459 19 476 39 468 22 410 41 1813 121

76 G VALENTINO 472 19 480 41 430 20 430 43 1812 123

77 MARC KLESER 458 21 443 21 450 17 460 46 1811 105

78 ICHIRO NAGATA 456 18 478 34 454 21 420 42 1808 115

79 DANIEL CLARK 465 25 463 30 468 29 410 41 1806 125

80 DENNIS MARROCCO 450 21 480 38 466 22 410 41 1806 122

81 PHIL STRADER 440 21 464 26 462 21 440 44 1806 112

82 CHARLES PUTMAN 451 24 465 18 459 19 430 43 1805 104

83 IAN COATES 439 22 480 34 454 27 430 43 1803 126

84 TAKEO ISHII 460 20 480 38 462 32 400 40 1802 130

85 FRANK GLENN 468 23 430 11 474 21 430 43 1802 98

86 MICHAEL CUMMING 452 14 480 43 438 17 430 43 1800 117

87 DORIS SIEBERT 450 21 468 36 470 24 410 41 1798 122

88 BRIAN HARDY 426 15 480 40 442 16 440 44 1788 115

89 CARROLL PILANT 460 26 424 12 446 9 450 45 1780 92

90 VINCENT CUMMING 426 14 474 33 459 14 420 42 1779 103

91 DEBORAH TRAVIS 422 14 476 26 443 15 430 43 1771 98

92 ALLEN PARSONS 440 13 451 18 446 12 430 43 1767 86

93 ALAN STRAWN 430 12 472 29 463 20 400 40 1765 101

94 GRANT JEAVONS 442 20 430 40 470 25 420 42 1762 127

95 PAUL MC KINLEY 452 24 454 19 422 6 430 43 1758 92

96 HAROLD ANDERSON 407 9 463 24 468 15 420 42 1758 90

97 DAVE SEVIGNY 430 16 460 12 448 19 420 42 1758 89

[BigDave]

Translation of EricW's post:

Rob was shooting a metallic sight gun. Everyone who finished higher did so with an Open gun (wings, shrouds, dots, etc.). Jerry M. finished 2nd Metallic and Vance Schmid finished 3rd (not 100% on that one, but I'm positive Jerry was 2nd).

Sevigny and Goloski both shot stock G35's. Rob? 6" 1911 9mm, Jerry 8 3/8" 686 38 Spl

Edited March 25, 2006 by BigDave

[the duck of death]

I can still remember coming home from the match when I switched from a SVI to a Glock. I told my wife in amazement--I didn't have any malfunctions!!!! Then it happened again, and again and again..............

[Ron Ankeny]

If you want to improve, are you saying buying Brazos is the way to go?

Nope. What I am saying is there are circumstances where a change in gear can make it easier for a person to improve more rapidly. To ignore that fact does an injustice to the shooter who may genuinely need to make changes in ergonomics. That's all.

[HSMITH]

I went from a basic Para in 45 to an STI in 40. First match out of the box I moved up about 5%. The new gun had no capacity disadvantage to the competition, the new gun has a great set of sights on it, and the new gun is a little more accurate. I think these three things are the reason, and that 5% stuck with no 'work' from me.

Since then I have picked up another 5% or maybe even more. I attribute that to dry fire work that I wasn't doing with the old gun.

A new gun can make big inprovements right out of the box, but I don't see it happening when the old blaster was well suited to the game.

[boo radley]

Ron and HSMITH make some interesting points....

Went to the range yesterday, in fact, with my Glock 35 wanting to try some Montana Gold 180's I'd loaded up. Set up some paper plates at 25y with one of those tiny orange stickers as an aiming point. Shot -- didn't see the hole. Shot again, no hole. WTF? Grabbed my binoculars, and both shots were clipping the edge of the 1" sticker.

This gun is so dialed-in right now it's frightening.

I'm also now so used to ergonomics of the Glock that anything else feels really strange. It did point a little funny at first, but now when I grab, say, my 1911, I'll draw and have to wiggle it around to find the sights. That would change with practice, but I'm not sure now is the time to go changing things....

Truthfully, the craving for a new pistol doesn't have a whole lot of basis in necessity. Maybe I'm just drawn bad, too (still chucking over Sandoz's reply), but there's a little ugly lust for something shiny, new and expensive going on.

But not yet.

[Loves2Shoot]

Cool factor is the best "reason" to buy new guns IMO

There is a point when new gear does help a fraction, as Ron pointed out, but the fraction is generally very small compared to the other things that the $ could be spent on to gain bigger percentages. I think Ron is a good example of that, especially with the Bill Drill post.

[38superman]

I can still remember coming home from the match when I switched from a SVI to a Glock. I told my wife in amazement--I didn't have any malfunctions!!!! Then it happened again, and again and again..............

There's nothing wrong with a Glock. They have a reputation for being fine guns.

However, I can't see them as more reliable than SV.

If you were having issues with your SVI it needs to visit the gunsmith.

I have put at least 10,000 rounds through mine since I started shooting it a little over a year ago and it has never malfunctioned.

Not once.

How can you get any better than perfect?

Tls

P.S. If you want be rid of that SVI that won't run, maybe you can sell it to Boo.

Edited March 26, 2006 by tlshores

[Ben Stoeger]

I would say that you (within the division you shoot) should constanty strive to have the best equipment possible. I am constantly trying new things. Mag pouches, belts, holster position, whatever. If you think you need a new gun, you probobly do. Of course, you don't want to be one of these people that changes guns constantly, because that will hold you back. If you have shot with your current setup for awhile and feel you could do better somewhere else, try it. To me it isnt a matter of "would I be better off spending my money on training" or whatever. You need to train like hell, and make sure you have the best gear you can get your mitts on.

Oh, and don't let people cite a complete freak of nature (Dave Sevigny) and tell you that you can kick ass with a glock.

News flash: you aren't Dave Sevigny.

If you aren't happy with your glock anymore, get something else. Conversly, just because most guys at the top shoot S_I's does not mean the a Glock isn't your ticket.

Edited March 26, 2006 by Ben Stoeger

[the duck of death]

*QUOTE*

If you were having issues with your SVI it needs to visit the gunsmith.

It"s a $2000 gun and has been to the premier GS in my area.

*QUOTE*

How can you get any better than perfect?

By shooting a $450 G23 65,000 times and having 5 malfunctions, 4 of which were ammo related.

AND

Shooting a $450 G17 5,000 times and having 1 malfunction, a dead primer.

But hey, the G17 is only 6 months old and it's been cold out so I haven't shot it much.

[Jake Di Vita]

Whether he is Dave Sevigny or not....that means nothing towards your performance with the type of gun you are using.

Edited March 27, 2006 by Jake Di Vita

[Steve Moneypenny]

I personally don't consider dave a freak of nature... only someone who trained harder and marter than everyone else.

[Steve Moneypenny]

also in defense of the bianchi cup results didn't they have a stock division that the glocks competed in where you HAD to have a minimum of 5 pull or something like that?

[chp5]

A gun that fits the individual well will serve him better than a gun that does not.

That concept is NOT mutually exclusive with the "it's the Indian, not the arrow" philosophy.